|
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 - maunger
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11
226
« on: October 03, 2006, 14:28 »
Lenspen $9 - can't beat it. Why mess with liquids and all that other muck?
227
« on: October 03, 2006, 14:25 »
Yes I'm uploading less. I'm both waiting for the dust to clear and for ImageManager to get another fix. Right now, when i try to use it to upload it wipes out all my commas between keywords so it thinks i only have one keyword phrase... a dang long one  I still think the whole thing is a big mistake on IS's part, but maybe i'm just getting old and hate change... I'm also doing very well on the other sites and IS isn't keeping up.
228
« on: October 01, 2006, 07:05 »
My question to the list is, why would you want LO to succeed? So they can take business away from StockXpert or Dreamstime which pay much better commissions? Quite simply, if LO succeds, then you lose money. Am I missing something? Please let me know if so.
So, by that logic, we should hope that SS and IS and all the other biggies that pay less than SX or DT would fail too eh? I don't think there's any evidence that there isn't room in the vast market for many players in the microstock world. There will be some falling out along the way sure... that is already happening with some vendors going away. However, as in any free market, new players come along all the time and try to make their spot. There's a vast market out there and I'd rather play with more vendors and possibly gain more volumen that way than to keep all my eggs in one basket. Oh, and one more thing... it is very obvious to me that different photos sell differently in each site. I have some that have sold a ton over on SS but yet on IS they languish at the bottom of my sales. And those are two of the biggest fish in the sea. If i were exclusive to one site, then i'd be missing out on a whole different bunch of buyers. So again, i'm preferring to go after more buyers.
229
« on: September 28, 2006, 12:49 »
I'm using Apple's Aperture (and impatiently waiting for the 1.5 upgrade due "any day") Many of my changes to levels, saturation, rotation (horizon), cropping, sharpening, etc are done in Aperture. When I need to, i let Aperture export to Photoshop Elements and i use neatimage for noise and sometimes some other filters. Then closing PE puts me back to Aperture where my photos reside (even the .psd). Then I keyword and drop a shortcut into the 1/2 dozen different folders to do exports to the micros. So, many are comparing Aperture to Lightroom and the answer is pick one - I am staying with Aperture because it works very well for me and i've got time and money invested in it. I haven't tried Lightroom because it just doesn't make sense for me to spend the time looking at 2 tools when i own one. I've seen several reviews lately tho that like Aperture over Lightroom - but then again if you don't have a mac in the first place it won't matter. Update: Just found this comparison on the two products: http://www.digitmag.co.uk/news/index.cfm?email&NewsID=6211it says neither one is 'the' best 
230
« on: September 25, 2006, 16:58 »
I got a lenspen before our trip to Sanibel and the beach and i did some snooping around and everyone seemed to say it was safe so i've used it with success on both lenses and my sensor. Wouldn't go anywhere without it now!
231
« on: September 19, 2006, 12:09 »
and they lock the thread... the final word being (and excerpt from EvilClown's answer...) "These are just keywords, nothing else." I bet the Pope thought that his comments about Mohammed were "nothing" too
232
« on: September 19, 2006, 11:59 »
The thing that really bothers me the most (and yes i'm being negative and yes, i'm trying to see the positive side of this) is that IS dumped a boat load of things on their providers without having proper information at the time - now, they're in scramble to recover mode... example: RogerMexico posting about how they've got projects going on to try to help with this issue and that... why didn't they have those things ready in the first place? Did they not see the impact of these changes?  They shouldn't release something like this without much more testing and documented solutions to most of the changes. They just cannot seem to grasp that - they think we're all just a bunch of complainers and they do not respect us it seems from this side. I've offered to be a beta tester before - but they don't seem to want to even take me up on that. Oh, I forgot to add that now it seems like they're trying to tell us that the people doing the searches should use the right words in the first place... right - like they're gonna teach the buyers to do searches "right".
233
« on: September 19, 2006, 09:21 »
lisafx gave a very supporting post - maybe she is on the payroll??
Maybe they fixed all her keywords for her?
234
« on: September 19, 2006, 09:20 »
Actually the beta tester at Istock is a fictional being.
Heck, "beta tester" isn't even IN their dictionary! Note: IN would be translated to "Indiana" anyway so watch out with your words
235
« on: September 19, 2006, 06:33 »
oh why did i bother trying to get at least 25 keywords on each photo? heehee
i am just completely dumbfounded by this change. I understand the purpose and i admire it - i just am continuously amazed at the way IS implements (or should i say doesn't implement) things. If I were a buyer, I'd be really really concerned.
236
« on: September 18, 2006, 21:23 »
I also have been thinking about joining Lulu.com http://www.lulu.com/ and publishing a book on there and a calendar to see how that goes. Anyways, if you know of any more sites like starvedartists.com holler at me
That's an interesting site - i'll have to dig more I'm trying to do my own calendar as well - http://web.mac.com/maunger/iWeb/SanibelCalendar/Welcome.htmlSales aren't going so well right now  I'm buying from printpelican.com and the more you can buy the lower the price per unit... we'll see how it goes.
237
« on: September 18, 2006, 17:27 »
I liked the concept in totallyphoto.com when you uploaded you had to 'define' the keywords and they built it up as they went along - so the data in the database was built by the photogs as they uploaded - and it seems to me to be a bit 'awkward' (to use my 11 year old's favorite word) to try to do that after the fact to 1,000,000 images - no offense istock, but this seems to be a mistake to me.
The worst part of it to me is that again, they didn't take the time to explain it and be prepared with the 'how to' guide with many of the answers in advance. If they'd just take the time to let people know what is going on and what to do to be ready and how to work it after it is implemented, they'd (and all of us) would be a lot better off.
238
« on: September 13, 2006, 09:41 »
developer replies:
Thanks for the heads up. FTP had a built-in measure to make sure it would refuse uploads after the disk got to 90% full. We're presently at 91% full, but we're getting a new disk in today or tomorrow. I removed the restriction and it should work now.
239
« on: September 13, 2006, 07:16 »
i'm not getting any message - but FTP does report that it cannot upload
i've reported it to the developer
240
« on: September 07, 2006, 17:25 »
slightly slower than august here i'm afraid - holiday weekend in US took wind out of sails (or is it sales? heehee)
241
« on: September 07, 2006, 13:45 »
i'm a mac guy and am using aperture to manage all my images
i create folders for each site i submit to...
1) to export
2) in queue
3) accepted
4) rejected
so i can move the images as i edit them to each 'to export' folder, then for all sites that accept FTP, i do an export at the end of the day to their individual finder folder where during the night, an Automator process kicks off and logs into FTP and uploads the files from that folder and then throws them to the trash. The next morning, i log in to each site and (waste my time) add the categories. Then I move the images to the 'in queue' folder. Finally, when i hear back from the site about the images, i move them either to the accepted or rejected folder.
it is all very easy to do in Aperture and i have a record of which files have been submitted to whom etc. That makes it a very visual way to deal with it - i tried the spreadsheet thing and it was impossible for me to remember what images were what and numbers sure don't do it for me.
242
« on: September 06, 2006, 16:31 »
it is very frustrating... i understand completely. This is the reason i've chosen not to be exclusive - that and the fact that some of my photos sell very well on one site and not on another - each seems to draw its own crowd.
243
« on: September 06, 2006, 06:13 »
Well, since most sites have categories we can make an assumption that it does... however LO has decided to go without them completely so we'll see how that goes for them. IS doesn't have them as a main way to search any more (not at least on their main screen tho you can get to them from individual images) so maybe we'll eventually see the death of them.
244
« on: September 04, 2006, 20:03 »
No offence to the photographer but i wouldn't use this image for a world wide launch, or am i imagening the long hairs on the females tshin(don't know the spelling, but it sounds like that)
http://www.crestock.com/admin/uploads/exIII.jpg
Nope... i sure wouldn't pick that either
245
« on: September 02, 2006, 07:45 »
I think maunger you should stop acting like a moderator in a free speech democratic forum. If anyone has the right, it would be Leaf.
Thanks for your comments... tho i'll use my right to free speech if i may About the LOAF package... I think it's meant to be a gag. Considering I currently reside in the middle of fiddle sticksing nowhere it would cost Lucky Oliver about $400 to send that bologna sandwitch to me by UPS Global Priority before it went off...
I'm guessing from the lack of entries in this contest that people aren't too impressed with the gag part of the prize. I'm thinking they'll have to rethink the gag part of the future contests in order to get more participation I'm partially hoping I don't win - don't know if i want all that stuff delivered to my house because most of it won't get used.
246
« on: August 31, 2006, 10:50 »
Anyone else having a run of EL sales today? I just had SEVEN in about ten minutes. Needless to say I am running around the house jumping for joy when not posting here.
I'm running around the room looking for my voodoo doll I've had a whopping zero EL sales I bow at your feet!
247
« on: August 29, 2006, 21:29 »
Dang, I musta been close - they said it was approved around 4:30... about that time i was whining to a friend of mine about how i'd submitted 33 images to SS and only 13 were approved! Maybe i was close to winning I am not going to complain that all of those 33 had been approved at other sites... i've been there and done that before heehee i will say tho that the approver's monitor may need some adjustment (of course mine is perfect! because almost all the rejections were for lighting - they look great on my mac monitor
248
« on: August 28, 2006, 09:01 »
i voted shutterstock, but if i was going $/picture/year, then it would be istock by a long shot which is interesting since they have the lowest payout scale... If only it was more conveniant to get images onto the site.
leaf, have you ever tried the pro version of ImageManger? very convenient for uploading to IS - other than the pure FTP to luckyoliver, it is the easiest to use of all the other sites i'm on. i spent time over the weekend uploading a bunch of stuff to SS, DT, Fotolia, LO and IS - i really wish all of them would just drop this "category" organization... although maybe they keep those so that they limit the number of uploads we make? heehee - I really would like fotolia to make theirs easier - i really can't find what i'm wanting in their categories.
249
« on: August 28, 2006, 08:46 »
Hi y'all i bookmarked this site some time ago photogenesis.comwas wondering if anyone's been in contact with them? i know when i first found the site it said they'd be up in late spring... then late summer... now it says fall 2006. just curious. Mitch
250
« on: August 28, 2006, 08:40 »
WoWsers That's amazing! I hope the person who posted that note on DPreviw sends him a note telling him that he'll get his lawyer after him for stealing images
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
