|
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 - Digital66
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 15 ... 23
226
« on: September 25, 2012, 16:39 »
Copycats or just working for the same boss?
*removed*
Among many others.
Sniff, sniff... It smells fishy
admin edit: we shouldn't link to other's portfolio pointing fingers.
227
« on: September 24, 2012, 23:17 »
Yuri, It's funny how you complain about some guy who has nothing but a few crappy images, and who's not even close to being able to copy your work. Yet, you've never complained about laflor, kupicoo, Squaredpixels, Steex, Annebaek , etc, etc, etc... (All of them iStock exclusives) Come on.... Tell us what's the difference... 
228
« on: September 21, 2012, 13:33 »
I would never ever create a situation where I was depending on micro stock as my main income.
That's easy too say when your microstock earnings are just a few bucks!
229
« on: September 20, 2012, 20:31 »
I'm curious since a lot of people are saying IS is losing sooo many buyers and about to become irrelevant have your sales elsewhere gone up a lot? People still need images even if they don't buy from IS so I would expect to see huge gains on other sites if that was true.
Some people in this forum have been wishing the fall of Istock for a long time. Everytime sales are down for some, they start talking about how buyers and suppliers are leaving in droves, and how iStock will fall soon.
230
« on: September 19, 2012, 08:30 »
This is an old, horrible, and annoying ad. I've seen it in DVD's and movie theatres.
231
« on: September 17, 2012, 23:39 »
It seems Mr. Cody Johnston has not paid for using these images.
I didn't find it funny at all.
232
« on: September 10, 2012, 16:23 »
Don't forget that quality trumps quantity every time __ and by a long way too. I have seen lots of people uploading like crazy but with painfully few sales. Pointless. They are just being busy fools.
True, true, true... Quantity without variety, high quality, and innovation will take you nowhere at iStock.
233
« on: September 04, 2012, 23:12 »
They said restart your browser and try again.
I've done that. three different computers and a tablet.... nada.
234
« on: September 04, 2012, 22:56 »
Could someone please post a message in iStock forum and let them know some of us see nothing but a blank page?  Thanks.
235
« on: September 04, 2012, 22:50 »
I see nothing. Firefox, Google Crome, Explorer.... Nothing , nada... 
236
« on: September 04, 2012, 22:39 »
Jay is gone. Just a blank page now 
237
« on: August 29, 2012, 13:20 »
gyllens? A Lagereek's alter ego?  Funny people here. A few months ago many would have recommend Shutterstock. Today they support Warmpicture, tomorrow...
238
« on: August 26, 2012, 22:33 »
I'll address sherlock's (digital666) conspiracy revelation. My partner (wife) started this thread no one ever said "Hi, my name is Mark and I'll be answering all your questions". When she was asked "are you Mark?" she said no without feeling it was necessary to explain.
HAHAHA! Yeah sure! Cheers, Digital66's secretary
239
« on: August 21, 2012, 20:53 »
Is this yours http://www.shutterstock.com/gallery-3613p1.html ?
One thing you should know is that big agencies don't like contributors who own an agency. So, they will probably close your account if your site www.incolorphotos.com starts working as an agency.
No. That's not me.
Do you still insist this is not you?:
INCOLORPHOTOS.COM
Registrant: Mark Bernard
1309 35th Street
Sacramento, CA 95816
US
Mark Bernard's portfolios:
Shutterstock: http://www.shutterstock.com/gallery-3613p1.html
iStock: http://istockphoto.com/user_view.php?id=1709548
You are not being honest here. And you expect people to trust you?
Hi, Digital66, Mark here. What's your real name and address? And why does it matter that the person working on this thread is not the same person listed as the registrar? I'm doing other things or would you feel better if it we me you were talking to? Don't forget to search all the other stock sites and report back...thanks.
HAHAHA! Now you are being ridiculous! What a way to start an agency! ROFL
244
« on: August 21, 2012, 18:05 »
Do you have lots of money for marketing, like a couple million bucks?
No, not a couple million. Frankly, if I had a couple million I probably wouldn't be looking into starting another business venture.
I realize marketing is important and expensive. Do you have any thoughts on the marketing subject?
Well, after having read your posts, it's evident you are not a business person and this project has no future. You are just trying to make some easy money.
245
« on: August 21, 2012, 18:00 »
I would appreciate any/all feedback from everyone with some time to do so. Good, bad and indifferent...it's all good...and you can't hurt my feelings.
You asked for feedback from everyone... That's what you are getting. 
246
« on: August 21, 2012, 11:33 »
I had that problem. I noticed the contact of the remote trigger was not reaching the contact on the top of the camera. I applied a very very little bit of solder wire to the remote trigger contact and problem solved! Be careful!
But maybe your problem is different. I never use live view mode.
247
« on: August 12, 2012, 00:30 »
Paying retouchers $4.63 per hour is abusive. Funny how Yuri complains about the low royalties paid by the agencies, and look at peanuts he pays.
It's why he moved to RSA; the same reason as so many UK companies outsource to India.
For example, minimum legal wage for a domestic worker in RSA is R8.34 per hour:
According to XE, R8.34 is equivalent to US$1.033.
Which would you rather be? A retoucher or a domestic? (Apart from the fact that sitting at a computer all day is unhealthy).
Paying such wages is exploitation. And that's what Yuri is doing in SA. He's exploiting people and want everyone to see him as the great benefactor.
248
« on: August 12, 2012, 00:23 »
And what's your definittion of "living fairly well"?
i can give you the example of Bangkok, a big city, expensive by thai standards.
- small apartment for around 100$/month with tv/fridge/washmachine/hot water, eventually a couple fans or aircon.
- a honda scooter
- a smart phone
- cheap chinese clothes
- 1$ meals, anywhere at any corner of bangkok, 24hrs, always someone selling food around take away.
- weekend : getting drunk with friends on cheap beers (1.5$ for 66cc bottles) or Thai rum (Sang Som) or Thai whiskey (2-3$/bottle)
or even the awful Mekong Whiskey (1$/bottle !!).
THAT's what they call a normal life and believe it or not they can make it with 150-200$ per month
and with great fun (sanuk) in the spare time !
Rather than living fairly well, it sounds like surviving in a big city with no family.
249
« on: August 10, 2012, 18:24 »
And how are contributors to Thinkstock to be compensated for the images that end up being picked in this collection?
I guess there will be no compensation. Users will get them for free.
250
« on: August 10, 2012, 08:14 »
Paying retouchers $4.63 per hour is abusive.
Let me educate you about the real world. This doesn't even compare to the abuse I get from my girlfriend or some despicable MS agencies.
According to my calculations, getting paid $4.63/hr for sitting in a warm place one could make $37.12 for eight hours of work. Not counting other benefits. That's substantially more than most microstock contributors make in one day.
Why haven't you left your girlfriend?
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 15 ... 23
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
