MicrostockGroup Sponsors
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - pancaketom
Pages: 1 ... 82 83 84 85 86 [87] 88 89 90 91
2151
« on: November 28, 2010, 16:03 »
I think the "system" has shown it can screw it up for most everyone without any help.
re: the article, he seems to mix up complaints about stock, RF stock, and microstock. The biggest problem I see with microstock and stock in general is the push to lower commissions lately.
As far as IS being unsustainable - well, I personally don't buy it. I bet they could still make money at 40% for all, but I bet the profits and bonuses wouldn't be as high as they are supposed to be.
2152
« on: November 27, 2010, 11:30 »
last month was good for me (I think it beat 123 and BigStock but not them combined), the DFC was awesome, this month is less though (< than 123 and BigStock) - maybe some ebb and flow, but after they followed through with the DFC I'm willing to give them some time. I'd love to see them join the big 4 or whatever number you pick.
--=Tom
2153
« on: November 26, 2010, 11:49 »
looks like a bit of an arcane way of telling what your royalties would be and a multi level marketing scheme for the referrals.
That's cool that they can tell how well I know my way around photoshop by looking at an image - or maybe it isn't photoshopped at all and I know my way around a camera?
I would like to see more transparency on how much you would get per sale of various image sizes if you were in the lowest group (because that is where they will probably stick the majority), what are the usages allowed etc. etc.
a one year lock in seems rather long for .15 - especially if they reserve the right to tweak royalties and costs and everything else (like most sites seem to these days).
Maybe this information is in there somewhere, but I didn't see it with a quick look. EG how much does a 4 MP image cost the buyer and how much would I get for that sale?
excuse me for being skeptical, but I am.
2154
« on: November 24, 2010, 15:32 »
I wasn't trying to suggest some big conspiracy, although I still wouldn't be surprised if a site switched from a really boring pic to one more interesting from the same batch or something if that is what they came up with first - with multiple reviewers all over the world I am not sure exactly how they would measure the magic number anyway...
BUT
looking at DT's page it says:
" You're a photographer. What do you have to do in this contest? There are no entry fees or extra registration required. The only things required of you are to upload pictures, to be an active part of the community by helping other users on the forums and contributing to the site's action.
To maximize your chances you need to: - upload the maximum amount allowed of pictures each day - increase your approval percentage ratio - provide quality (be selective) - be active on the site and message boards "
So how exactly does anything other than uploading a lot of images that are going to get accepted help you get the 10,000,000th accepted image? That was my main question. I guess I would also expect that submitting 100 images with a 50% acceptance ratio would be better for winning the contest than submitting 10 images with 100% acceptance ratio, but they suggest that this is not so.
(and I also wanted to commiserate with those that had no DL on that day)
DT didn't have to do this, and although I think it is a small gesture, it is way better for contributors than something like the "stockys". I'd really like my flat 50% across the board though.
--=Tom
2155
« on: November 23, 2010, 20:55 »
doesn't look like I am going to get any DL at DT today, which is a shame. I did have some images "under review" when they hit the number, but obviously not at the perfect time. curiously enough when I went and looked at the page showing the winner, it said photographers needed to upload pictures and contribute to the forums and blogs to win, I thought it was all about hitting the magic number - well, I bet if the number turned out to be some boring texture background or something they would pick another one, so why not pick one from a busy active contributor too?
In any case, this shows more goodwill for contributors than others have shown lately, although I am still a little bitter about the % age drop.
I suppose there are a few hours left, so hopefully I will get at least one DL (preferably an EL)
2156
« on: November 22, 2010, 17:37 »
Here is an interesting possible reason for some lousy noise with tiny pixels... http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/an_open_letter_to_the_major_camera_manufacturers.shtmlbasically with large f-stops (large openings) the light comes to the sensor at an angle, but the sensors don't "see" this light, so the camera makers cheat by essentially boosting the gain at those f-stops so you end up with more noise, and maybe not as much shallow DOF and bokeh as you might expect... I'd really like to see something like the 7D with around 13 or 14 MP or a FF with around 18. --=Tom
2157
« on: November 18, 2010, 17:23 »
No
that is the short answer.
The long answer is that sales seem to decrease for most older files along some sort of curve. Also the total number of new images seems to be outpacing the total number of downloads. This is offset somewhat in income by an apparent increase in ODDs lately, but in general I think increasing your portfolio by X will not increase your income by X. (at least that is what I have found).
as far as how are you doing WRT average - I have no idea, that is about the numbers I had with about that number of images in my port.
2158
« on: November 18, 2010, 16:20 »
last month was pretty good for FP (better than bigstock which isn't saying a whole lot). This month started with an EL - something over 40$ for me (getting 50% is nice), which is nice. I hope this continues, but it is sporadic enough there that I can't really tell if it is a trend or just a few lucky hits.
2159
« on: November 09, 2010, 21:56 »
The poster is right - ultimately voting with our feet and walking is our final recourse.
BUT
when some agency decides to change things to our serious detriment, first we are going to try to complain. When that doesn't work, we will possibly try to influence buyers.
Meanwhile expect the people getting shafted to spend a lot of time complaining to each other. That is what we are doing here.
Starting up a site isn't really a very viable option for most of us.
And when we see BS, we will call BS here where we won't get thrown out (hopefully).
If the site managers want to start up a site where they can complain about the submitters, they should do it. I'd love to read some of their posts.
2160
« on: November 02, 2010, 20:14 »
This isn't a new practice either. Sears used to do that with its suppliers back when my grandfather was in business (at least 60 years ago). They would lure them in with large enough orders that they had to increase, then start lowering the prices they would pay, but the suppliers were stuck because of the recent expansions. Grandpa was smart (and not too greedy) enough to tell them to take a hike.
One wonders what would happen if the suppliers could say - sure we have this product that is the hot new toy for the year, but for you, the price will be X higher because of what you did last year.
2161
« on: October 25, 2010, 20:56 »
That happened with my laptop (win 7) a bunch of times recently as it was waking up. I think the culprit was a mistaken high temp reading (it was sitting sleeping all night so quite cool) causing it to try to hibernate continuously. Also it was resetting the clock and then getting confused. Maybe some other problems too. It is sort of sporadic, so I am not sure I have eliminated the problems. In searching online a lot of people reported something similar being fixed be reinstalling the video drivers, so that is something maybe worth looking into. It sure is frustrating when it happens. good luck with a fix.
2162
« on: October 23, 2010, 23:41 »
I got an e-mail notice from Veer saying I had been paid, but nothing in my Paypal account. I sent a query to Veer on Fri morning about this, but have not heard back. I am concerned that it got sent somewhere, but not to me.
2163
« on: October 07, 2010, 17:09 »
instead of working on useless twitter stuff, please just e-mail us information if we want it.
Also please please please put the # of downloads and the $ earned from our images visible to us somewhere on the site. (or if it is there somewhere, please tell us by some means other than twitter or facebook) (and no, going through month by month and adding it all up ourselves is not acceptable). by the way, I can't even lot on to the site right now.
2164
« on: September 11, 2010, 11:35 »
IS figured they could get away with shafting us partly because FT got away with it so many times.
FT lead the charge and DT and IS gladly followed. Thanks FT.
2165
« on: September 10, 2010, 12:23 »
tough one, I would have said Dreamstime for sure except for their odd similars position and their lowering our percentage earlier. FT - no way, they pull similar crap and don't even tell us about it.
SS - They have been reasonably honest w/ us and haven't dropped anything (except sales in my case)...
oh well, anyone but IS right now.
--=Tom
2166
« on: September 09, 2010, 16:51 »
I just had a .16 sale there, I guess next year maybe I'll be getting .12 sales or something like that. ouch.
What is unsustainable is the bonuses for the executives. If they can't run their business with 80% of the take, that is pathetic. They really should be able to be profitable with 60%. I'd gladly trade with them... I hope they get reamed by their suppliers and buyers over this nonsense.
--=Tom
2167
« on: September 07, 2010, 23:42 »
I can't really see any good in this for most of us. It is a bit of a Fotolia move really. Quite a kick in the teeth, BOHICA sort of thing. I too expect after a week or more they will make it just slightly more palatable, at least for exclusives, and they will breathe a sigh of relief, and Getty will continue to milk the IS cash cow dry.
15% that is pathetic. That means if you make $1,500 on there in a year, Getty has pocketed $8.500 at the same time - and I thought 20% was poor.
I really hope that this comes along with a massive price increase and the buyers go somewhere we get a better shake.
On a happier note, I had my BDE at SS today.
--=Tom
2168
« on: August 29, 2010, 17:44 »
I got 400 accepted with plenty still more in the queue, so as long as they actually payout, I'm pretty pleased with them.
2169
« on: August 13, 2010, 12:48 »
DT is actually ahead of IS for me so far this month. I think that says more about how dismally IS is doing than that DT is doing well for a change. They have been performing pretty poorly for me since March or so.
2170
« on: August 13, 2010, 12:39 »
Well, I checked out your twitter page as requested and all I can say is I hope I won't be doing that again.
You really should post relevant information somewhere on your site even if you don't want to have a forum.
If you do read this, please make some way we can see the sales stats for our images (views would be nice too). When I am trying to decide what images to "fave", that is useful information, and please don't tell me to just go through the monthly sales and add them up.
--=Tom
2171
« on: July 17, 2010, 14:12 »
I think people pics can to get overdone because with a model people tend to get large series - different poses and expressions. Then the sales are spread out over all of them. How many expressions can you get with that apple? Also if you are going for the beautiful people sorts of shots, then they really do need to be beautiful people, and if you are going for everyday people shots, then they need to be doing something useful or in an interesting location. I think the tightening down on model releases will decrease submission of the amateur's friends and family sorts of pics over time.
An outstanding people pic can do quite well but I am always amazed at how many people's best sellers are some sort of completely everyday background or object though.
2172
« on: June 24, 2010, 17:10 »
Don't forget to charge them at least 5 times what you would make through an IS sale (adjust accordingly if you are exclusive).
2173
« on: June 23, 2010, 22:53 »
here is a cut and paste...
Uploads will be turned off on Wednesday, June 23 from 8am until Thursday, June 24 at noon (all MST). During that time Contributor Applications, Moo Cards and Prints will also be unavailable.
The downtime is necessary for us to replace some of our servers. The team will work hard to make sure it runs smoothly.
modified to say that means that uploads will be down 'til 6 pm MST (or whenever they get around to getting it working again).
2174
« on: June 23, 2010, 14:15 »
they announced the uploads would be off wed-thurs. I didn't see it until I couldn't upload and went searching though. Now I can't find when it is supposed to be back up.
2175
« on: June 23, 2010, 11:02 »
USA - down to the wire vs. Algeria - glad to see that it wasn't another bad call by a ref that made the difference this time.
Pages: 1 ... 82 83 84 85 86 [87] 88 89 90 91
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|