|
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 - Tabimura
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11
226
« on: December 09, 2011, 14:20 »
Also check the memory card, it might be faulty. I don't think you can recover this image, you got the first case right because it's the embedded jpeg from NEF file.
227
« on: December 09, 2011, 09:26 »
I Now Medium Setting One Image Illustration To Send To My Canstockphoto.
I'm Hoping To Get Sales.
Stripped out the army of emoticons because of claustrophobia. Now: if your canstockphoto is the same as my canstockphoto, then no. Not very many anyway.
228
« on: December 09, 2011, 09:20 »
Sorry but I do mind it. I am checking my stats several times per day (with good reason) and it's the only website where seeing your earnings is a pain in the behind. If other agencies could make stats / earnings pages without overloading their servers, I don't understand why 123RF can't.
229
« on: December 08, 2011, 17:19 »
It was 25% when they started, but now it is 33%.
See official announcement here:
http://www.microstockgroup.com/photodune/photodune-non-ex-rate-increase-from-25-to-33/
Thanks for the clarification.
So - are we really so eager to undercut new sites like GL, which pays double that amount?
true but there is no comparison between them, I am talking about buyers/sales
It's the amount of money you get in the end, that matters. I'll take the monthly payout and 100+ sales at Photodune over 3 sales / year at GL anytime.
230
« on: December 08, 2011, 17:16 »
Fotolia? I've had this in the past and nothing was returned.
231
« on: December 07, 2011, 09:47 »
Don't worry. Dreamstime has a well known record to reject the best shots in a series, on the reason of what they call "too similar to others". In my previous job (science) mentioning "well known" in a submitted article meant "I was too lazy to research the facts". I'm not aware of that "well known" fact. All I know is that if you submit only the best in a series, taking the decision process out of the hands of the "illiterate" reviewer, you won't have your best sellers elsewhere rejected on DT. You forgot about the level system. Your revenue on DT will not come from loads of level ones, but from a few level 3-4-5's. Competing with yourself on DT is very unproductive. On other sites without a level system, it might work fine.
Don't take this the wrong way but the similars issue has been discussed soooo many times on this board and the notion of "competing with yourself" is a bit silly. Buyers (such as designers) will search for and buy the image or images that best suit their needs and they don't give a rat's arse who the photographer is. Furthermore, designers (like myself) can be very specific about what they want because they get an idea in their heads sometimes fully blown and they try to reproduce it. I have often looked at a shot and thought it works but would be better if...(insert slight variation).
Therefore to limit the available imagery (and buyer's options) simply to avoid "competing with yourself" by spreading sales over a set of pics (keeping one image from reaching a higher level) seems to go against the point of the stock industry which is supposed to be to serve the image needs of buyers. Here DT is saying this is your only option, take this one or take nothing.We don't care if you prefer a slight variation we want higher levels.
EDIT: Just to complete the thought: DT's problem is their poor handling of similars. Many people on this board have suggested ways to deal with similars and series to make them benefit the site and buyers needs but those suggestions have been ignored. It's a shame.
Exactly. I had a series with one of my most popular models and I received an email from a Dreamstime client (she found me via my website) asking if I have more variations from that theme. Of course I have and I directed her to Shutterstock. It always appeared to me that DT is trying to solve their search results problems (displaying too many similars) by imposing this rule. And I continue to believe that it's to their loss.
232
« on: December 07, 2011, 09:21 »
blah-blah-blabbity-blah Jeez... pump up the valium, dude! Chill. I feel like I already gave you too much attention, therefore I'm not going to re-quote and amend every aberration produced by your overclocked intelect  ...
233
« on: December 07, 2011, 08:56 »
We are still taking submissions.
Hi Chelsey, Speaking of submissions, any plans of reducing the review time from the very large amount of time you currently take, to something more close to the average of other agencies? I have files pending since almost 2 weeks.
234
« on: December 07, 2011, 06:50 »
Don't worry. Dreamstime has a well known record to reject the best shots in a series, on the reason of what they call "too similar to others". In my previous job (science) mentioning "well known" in a submitted article meant "I was too lazy to research the facts". I'm not aware of that "well known" fact. All I know is that if you submit only the best in a series, taking the decision process out of the hands of the "illiterate" reviewer, you won't have your best sellers elsewhere rejected on DT. You forgot about the level system. Your revenue on DT will not come from loads of level ones, but from a few level 3-4-5's. Competing with yourself on DT is very unproductive. On other sites without a level system, it might work fine.
if you're not too lazy, do a search on this forum and you'll find enough information to vanish any doubt you might have, regarding absurd "too similar" rejections. But you ARE very aware of this, and you know it. Even if you submit 3 shots in a series, significantly different one from another, you have a good chance to get at least one rejection. It's not about competing with oneself. They take this to the extreme and this is not good, they're exaggerating. As are you, I noticed that after being dropped from SS you came back with a strong love for DT, defending them in every possible topic. Things are not that rosy 
235
« on: December 07, 2011, 05:30 »
Don't worry. Dreamstime has a well known record to reject the best shots in a series, on the reason of what they call "too similar to others". That says a lot about how clueless are DT reviewers in terms of what's selling. Soon you'll get this kind of rejections if in the same batch you uploaded the daughter and the mother, because they're kinda similar... typical DT nonsense. Contesting the rejection will send you back to the same reviewer so you won't have any chance - so it's no use, it has happened to many.
236
« on: December 07, 2011, 05:15 »
I think you won't find anyone interested, especially at these prices. The vast majority of contributors do themselves the keywording and uploading. If you're an image factory and you have a team, like Yuri, then you simply assign this task to 1-2 employees.
I have about 8500 images and I didn't find it difficult to do it myself, I certainly won't pay someone to keyword my files. Bandwidth is also cheap nowadays, I just drop them in Filezilla and finish the uploads when I have time at the agencies' websites.
237
« on: December 07, 2011, 03:09 »
@Tabimura, sorry as well for the delayed reply. Things have been a bit hectic I'm afraid but Jarel will get with you soon.
So, what exactly does "soon" mean? It's been a week since then and everyone at photodune seems to be in holiday.
238
« on: December 05, 2011, 03:51 »
Good ELs month in November, until about 18th. Since then I had only 2 ELs, one in December.
239
« on: December 02, 2011, 04:30 »
Welcome to the forum, Marius. It's great to have someone from Depositphotos here. I also like the way my sales are progressing, almost every month is a BME.
240
« on: November 30, 2011, 06:38 »
Don't know about anybody else but I've been getting quite a few "image is not in focus........etc" rejections recently, and all of the files are perfectly in focus and have been accepted at every other agency, I'm wondering if the reviewers are allowing enough times for the files to load.
Sent an email to support but got the usual response i.e. none. 
They HATE shallow DoF, it's rarely "where we like it to be".
That's absolutely not true. They accept shallow dof even at very wide aperture settings and I only had problems when the supposedly sharp zone was fuzzy (camera shake or something - I also have only good primes). However, a resize to 12 or 8 MP and a bit of smart sharpen on the dof area could be helpful.
241
« on: November 30, 2011, 04:59 »
One good move would be to reduce the size of the previews. Those are the largest I have seen in any agency, there is no need for that.
242
« on: November 30, 2011, 04:18 »
There should be a folder for MRs, the path is /bulk_import/photos/model_releases.
However, there are still problems with this. I wrote them twice but they didn't answered - I have lots of files in "Hidden" category because of "no release attached" which is of course not true, I put all the releases for the uploaded photos in the above mentioned folder. Sent emails to Collis and Jarel about this - they never answered back.
243
« on: November 24, 2011, 17:35 »
Good to hear that. And while they're at it, how about some news like "you'll get your funds cleared sooner than 2 months since the sale"? I have uncleared funds since FEBRUARY!!
244
« on: November 23, 2011, 16:28 »
Congrats Elena! I joined recently, got to 20-ish rank, soon to change the paw to red LE: oops, not that soon - I thought it was at 500.
245
« on: November 18, 2011, 19:00 »
They don't "represent" Shutterstock, the link assigned to that text is a referal link to Shutterstock. I've seen this kind of sites before, they make galleries of SS images and when you click on the thumbnail, they send you to SS via their referal code. Pathetic way to hunt for referal earnings...
246
« on: November 16, 2011, 16:39 »
2. We are working on a new display for your convenience that will not load the servers as much, and you can be assured that no captcha PITA will be experienced after that. Do give us about a month to launch this new feature.
Alex, any news about this feature? The captcha is sooooooooo annoying!
247
« on: November 05, 2011, 17:22 »
Well, Fotolia DOES have a reputation and it's all the time up to it.
248
« on: November 02, 2011, 06:53 »
"nudity" is not among the keywords here. I think you're having it in the address because it's a search parameter, whether or not images are adult content filtered.
249
« on: November 02, 2011, 04:58 »
If you're in this forum often enough, you may take notice of how professional and polite responses are given by representatives of other agencies here.
A lot of sweet words have been given here by various agencies over the years. Learn to see through it.
I am in this longer than you think and I know very well what can lie behind a pretty dressed post from a representative. I wasn't saying anything about whether agency employees are speaking the truth or not, my post was only about the temper of the DT person. Rolmat's response has quite a different flavour, that's something to be appreciated.
250
« on: November 02, 2011, 01:51 »
Hi WarrenPrice, what is childish and irresponsible in my response? Cause I can't see it, thanks.
@juscommune - I'm pretty sure that you will receive an answer from support and things are gonna work out. I don't know what "reasonable time" means to you, but usually it takes 24-48 hrs.
The poor attempt to sarcasm in your response to Grandpa is very unprofessional. If you're in this forum often enough, you may take notice of how professional and polite responses are given by representatives of other agencies here.
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
