|
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 - berryspun
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13
226
« on: November 08, 2006, 14:25 »
Got it, thanks CJ !
I had more than 20. The 'mark as public' only shows up if there is another photographer's picture in the lightbox. Good to know. Again, thanks.
227
« on: November 08, 2006, 11:17 »
Good so far. My best-selling pictures are the ones other photographers have generously included in their own lightboxes which seem to generate a lot of traffic. Sometimes the picture chosen isn't the best one from a serie, but sure that specific picture sells very well that way.
I created some lightboxes, with the understanding that when we have more than 20 files in them, they automatically become public. It has not been the case. And I don't see an option to change from private to public. So... zero traffic up till now with my own. Maybe I misunderstood the lightbox concept: should the 20 files come from 20 different photographer's work? or is it simply an incentive privilege reserved for exclusive IS photographers? In the meantime, to make use of the lightboxes, I put them into my profile.
Did I miss something?
228
« on: November 02, 2006, 16:11 »
Just had my images reviewed a few hours ago, all the batches in one stroke (the oldest one was from Oct.1, one month ago).
Last week I emailed the person in charge, just to try to have a better sense of the future direction of the site. At this point it's mainly a one-man university project, doing it with his own personal resources for a good outreach cause, there is no finance available for any marketing plan, but the site is there as a free platform for photographers to attract their own clients/designers, free of charge. Thus it is considered as a service for the photographers who would like to advertise without having to create their own website. I will personally continue to support it, knowing that the sales may however remain very low. I will stop if I see that it becomes to much of a burden for the person in charge. Here is the message that the owner would like to convey to the photographers:
Dave Bailey said the following on 25/10/2006 4:14 PM:
I really appreciate your help
What I need to communicate is that as a free service I can't sell pictures for people, I can only offer the tools. If photographers like the site, I'm relying on them to tell people their work is available on the site to buy. The site has actually had a lot of exposure - BBC radio 2, WebUser magazine, several photography journals etc but always from a seller's perspective. I need help from photographers if I am to stimulate sales, just filling the site with photos is no longer enough
Hope you see what I mean
Fingers crossed for the future
Dave
229
« on: October 31, 2006, 00:00 »
TGT, I took the liberty to email Chad Bridwell who is the Director of US Operations to let him know of your situation.
230
« on: October 30, 2006, 23:53 »
Just checked my account, everything is fine. I have been with FL for the last 8 months, never had a problem. Very friendly customer service. I hope that everything will get clarified for you tomorrow. Let us know.
231
« on: October 28, 2006, 18:17 »
Well, I spoke too quickly... a few hours wait for today, but they were still one of the the first sites to review 
232
« on: October 28, 2006, 08:18 »
Yes, same for me for the last few batches, not even a few minutes. And it's a very good feeling when they are approved at the same time the sales are catching up too, which is great.
233
« on: October 26, 2006, 09:01 »
Same here - deleted all my pictures last month after 6 months without sales. And yes, they were picky! and that robotic rejection answer didn't help.
234
« on: October 25, 2006, 09:50 »
Thanks everyone! Very useful information.
235
« on: October 23, 2006, 17:36 »
For monitor calibration, I am using Adobe Gamma, but would like to get at least another independent comparison check-up without having to pay for another software. I googled 'monitor calibration', and found quite a few pages of free calibration, so there is a good support for this topic. Would you know which ones are the most reliable and practical ? Any advices I should be aware of ? Thanks. madeleine
236
« on: October 20, 2006, 09:24 »
If you are relying on a stock site as a backup, then there is something amiss. A backup procedure/plan should be a part of every computer that has information on it that is irreplaceable. If your photos are valuable, then set up a backup plan. If you don't, I guarantee that you will regret it...
Definitely! And, with the help of an expert, I opted for the external hard drives which slid into the computer box and backs-up everything in one stroke. Very convenient as well as reliable. Here are the elements: MOBILERACK TRAY IDE KF-22-IT R - (Price=$11.89 each) MOBILERACK IDE KF-22-IPF BEIGE - ($16.29 each) HD 320G|ST 7K 16M SATA2 ST3320620AS - ($94.99 each)
237
« on: October 19, 2006, 22:07 »
Wow, very friendly feature. Nice to know, thank you Jake!
238
« on: October 19, 2006, 10:26 »
Yes, it's part of their upgrading transition:
shutterstock
Joined: 22 Oct 2004
Posts: 1708
Location: New York, NY
Post Posted: Wed Oct 18, 2006 11:57 pm
Apologies to everyone. We are working on fixing this. We are in the process of adding a significant amount of new infrastructure -- you are seeing related hiccups while we get the new machines up and running and sharing the workload.
Please give us another 12 hours, and if the problems have not been resolved, continue to post here...
239
« on: October 17, 2006, 17:20 »
Does anyone get any acutal sales there?
Yes, very regular sales, about 1/10th of the SS sales, which represents about 1/5 of SS in terms of revenue. It adds up. But sure they are becoming very picky about acceptance. Messages like: " the same or similar photograph was already submitted to Fotolia.", or "Fotolia has received an overabundant amount of high quality images similar to this photo and does not have need of more photos like it." ...messages which are not completely true when doing a search on their site. They just know the kind of pictures they want to focus on.
240
« on: October 16, 2006, 23:47 »
On the "Current Search Issues" topic, page 28, I found an interesting comment made by qingwa, which would favor first the 5-star rating as first choice in the searches. What do you think? Here is the comment:
"Just noticed that rating appear to still play a significant part in determining best match. I searched on "orchid" and sorted by age to see what was new. My newest file appears on the 20th spot of the first page. If you search on "orchid" by best match, you find that same image shows up at number 12 on the first page. Why is that? I did notice that all the images before it have a least one 5 camera rating.
One thing that is very interesting is there is a newer file in the age sort that has a download, that does not show up until page 14 of the best match sort. I could not understand why this would be, newer then mine, and it has a download, so it should be a better match I would think. After some investigation, I realized that all the images on the proceeding 13 pages have one thing in common, they all have a rating of 5. On page 14, you start with images that have no rating, but are newest. I would conclude the best match is sorting in something like the following order: Matching tag>rating of 5, sorted newest first> no rating, newest first. Maybe other tags sort differently, but I'm not sure how else to interpret these results.
Jim"
241
« on: October 15, 2006, 09:29 »
(...)
242
« on: October 12, 2006, 23:18 »
They are hiring reviewers and should be getting better soon. The sales are picking up for me there.
fred
...definitely picking up, with a few views at my portfolio, they have doubled for me, from 1 to 2  They also hired a person for the business development: http://www.luckyoliver.com/blog/110/A+Few+New+IntroductionsSo with more exposures and a team who wants to be here for the long run and which seems to have a strong positive leadership, the site is on a good track.
243
« on: October 12, 2006, 10:06 »
Yes! congratulations Pixart! and it's not a stroke of luck...
244
« on: October 12, 2006, 08:02 »
It's the number of entries (lines) on the left side, any entry can have one of several keywords, whose result end up with any numbers of tabs, even more than 50 if you choose several appropriate definitions.
The entries on the left side ARE the keywords.
Sorry for the confusion, I wasn't clear enough. OK, I'll try again. You can have more that 50 words in your keyword entry list, as many as you want (several per line, even repetitive keywords), as long as you have no more than 50 lines altogether. For example, for repetitive keywords iif you have a picture of a toast, one keyword can be 'toast', another one 'french toast', another one ''stuffed french toast', another one 'continental breakfast' (I wish...!). The total for this example is 4 keywords. GeoPappas, I hope it makes sense now
245
« on: October 12, 2006, 07:42 »
It's the number of entries (lines) on the left side, any entry can have one of several keywords, whose result end up with any numbers of tabs, even more than 50 if you choose several appropriate definitions.
246
« on: October 09, 2006, 20:40 »
Are you speaking per # of picture or per $ ?
In my case, DT and BS remain almost stagnant, while SX is on the rise and SS cruises.
But... my portfolio is still quite small, and I don't do portraits, so this may affect the results too.
247
« on: October 09, 2006, 18:04 »
shutterstock also gives out the name of the photographer
FT gives the name and organization of the buyer. I've used that for searches. Haven't found one yet, but it's nice to know.
I only found one, after a google search for finding who the FL buyers were, then I emailed them to thank them for buying the picture, and they were kind enough to send me the link of their site (a martial art club) where they used a cropped picture on top of their home page club news. They even showed me the templates with the before and after rendition. Indeed, very nice anglo-saxons..! Here it is: http://www.kernowkarate.co.uk/Note: it's my children's tae kwon do belts, not mine... I don't try to reach people anymore, but still check once in a while to see who buys the pictures.
248
« on: October 09, 2006, 16:32 »
FT? Is that Fotolia?
Yes, Fotolia is either FT or FL
249
« on: October 09, 2006, 09:19 »
I have passed 100 USD in the middle of September but nothing happened yet.
I think there is no reason to include "123rf" to the "Big 5". StockXpert works MUCH better for me (almost as good as Dreamstime) and it shoud take it's place. Leaf - my vote for StockXpert!
Same for me, StockXpert has 4 times more sales than 123rf, and to be fair should be ranked accordingly.
250
« on: October 08, 2006, 20:37 »
Very nice pictures, rachell, and I agree that having this sale number without doing portraits is quite good!
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
