Quote from: Pauws99 on June 22, 2013, 22:09
Well done for apologising a rarity indeed on this (or any other forum)

Definitely a breath of fresh air.  Good to see.

Very cool!  Congrats!

Your vote in the FAA contest for these 3 images would be much appreciated.  Thank you. 

http://fineartamerica.com/contests/national-tv-photo-contest-2.html?tab=vote&artworkid=6617670

http://fineartamerica.com/contests/national-tv-photo-contest-2.html?tab=vote&artworkid=6617923

http://fineartamerica.com/contests/national-tv-photo-contest-2.html?tab=vote&artworkid=6673462

I would like a plugin that would give me 100 sales a week.   

Quote from: CCSMedia on June 13, 2013, 22:01
My top request at this point would be for an extended license plugin.

And RM.

Quote from: Sean Locke Photography on June 08, 2013, 18:20

Quote from: Beach Bum on June 08, 2013, 17:28

Quote from: Sean Locke Photography on June 08, 2013, 16:48
It doesn't help to keep saying "Lets say that you are using a few Google Images", like any image online is owned by Google.

I only saw that quote one time in the post.  He wasn't saying, or even implying, that the images were owned by Google."

"I think it's safe to say that we have all been tempted to use Google Images on our website "
"what you may not realize is that Google Images are not free to use"
"Lets say that you are using a few Google Images on your website"
"So stop using Google Images and start taking your own."

What he needs to say is "images you've found through a Google Image search", not "Google Images".

Okay, maybe that wording should have been different, but if someone reads the post in it's entirety and one of the statements is "Google doesn't even own them. They are just the aggregator and are showing you images", why would they think otherwise?  The post is clearly an opposition to unauthorized image use.  I see that as a good thing.  I don't see the point in over analyzing it. 

Quote from: Sean Locke Photography on June 08, 2013, 16:48
It doesn't help to keep saying "Lets say that you are using a few Google Images", like any image online is owned by Google.

I only saw that quote one time in the post.  He wasn't saying, or even implying, that the images were owned by Google.  The whole post was to the contrary.  I don't see how anyone who read the post could conclude that Google owned the images.  Here's another quote from the post: "Google doesn't even own them. They are just the aggregator and are showing you images. Those images are copyrighted, and Google even tries to warn you."

Quote from: Ron on June 08, 2013, 14:38

QuoteRoyalty-Free does not mean that you are free to use the images. You must pay for the image, but once you do you have the right to use the image without additional royalty payments.

Maybe they need to change that phrase once and for all to Royalty-Paid or something.

Yeah.  I never understood that terminology.  Very confusing to the general public.

http://www.mediacrazed.com/google-images-for-your-website/

Quote from: Ron on June 08, 2013, 12:15
Holy mother.... Bluehost worth its money already.

I've had to do the same thing before.  Bluehost definitely worth it.

Quote from: Tinny on June 08, 2013, 10:16
Google search - site:mysite.com   then click on images and counted them, I meant to do this the other day but this prompted me into it

You can also do this with Google Webmaster Tools if you've submitted a sitemap.  WordPress SEO automatically creates sitemaps for you to submit if you have that plugin.

Quote from: cascoly on June 07, 2013, 23:26

Quote from: Ron on June 07, 2013, 19:33
What happens if the title is the same as on the micros? I am changing some titles, as some images do not have titles, my older ones, and then the description is taken as title, which I then amend. So there are slight differences. What about new work? That work is submitted at the same time to all agencies as my own work? So the indexing happens at the same time. Would it be better to submit work to my own site first and then to the agencies?

Anyhoo, I will change titles then, if it makes that much difference.

I don't know that anyone has actually SHOWN it is effective -- we have some anecdotal evidence of it happening.  I've gotten 1900 pages indexed on google for my site and about 200 images indexed out of 1500 images.  no  one's reported getting more than 20% of their images indexed yet

otoh, my images that I find online -- like my 'moose walking' appear multiple times from different agencies, even though the captions, etc are identical

one positive note -- warmpicture had a pretty good record of getting images listed in the first few rows of images, beating out agency images that had been online longer.

another factor to consider -- unlike previous sites like smugmug, sym creates a unique, detailed page for each image, and this may be why there's been such success in getting sites indexed on google.

so, for me, I've got thousands more images to upload before I do much tuning on individual images;  if people keep reporting their progress here we'll all benefit. 

another place to enter your image info is the combined image & keyword db's l've set up at http://cascoly.com/symbio/testsymbio.asp  once I get it debugged and have more interactive searching i'll starting promoting it more, but alrerady you can get the images, categories and other information for various sites

I've had 3470 pages indexed out of 3974 and 327 images indexed out of 618.  Before submitting I edited each image individually, changing the title, description, and URL when needed.  I'm using WordPress SEO by Yoast.  I make sure that the focus keyword is included in the Article Heading, Page Title, Page URL, Content, and Meta Description.  My relatively small portfolio made this a not too difficult task.  It could be daunting for someone with a large portfolio, but might be worth it in the long run.

Quote from: CrackerClips Stock Media on June 08, 2013, 01:26

Quote from: Ron on June 07, 2013, 19:33
What about new work? That work is submitted at the same time to all agencies as my own work? So the indexing happens at the same time. Would it be better to submit work to my own site first and then to the agencies?

Hi Ron - That's exactly what I plan to do.  New work will get submitted to our site first.  I'll experiment a bit to see how long to let it age (and hopefully get indexed) before uploading to other agencies.  My understanding is that the earliest date the image was indexed holds some weight as well as the size of the image itself (bigger is better).  Our symbiostock sites have larger previews than most agencies which is good for ranking (of course using a strong watermark for some protection is advisable).

Bryan

That's what I'm doing.

Quote from: sharpshot on June 07, 2013, 22:34

Quote from: Beach Bum on June 07, 2013, 22:03

Quote from: leaf on June 07, 2013, 21:46
I think the power is still really with the contributor and when/if a good alternative ever comes along (good commissions, good sales) people will jump ship extremely quickly. It's only a matter of time before it happens.

Fully agree.  Hopefully, Picturengine or Symbiostock (or both) will be that alternative.

Hopefully Symbiostock.  When will Picturengine launch properly?  Weren't we told it would be very soon sometime last year?  I have had enough of sites not being straight with me, unfortunately Picturengine will have to do a lot to prove to me that is isn't as bad as istock.  Symbiostock is different, no BS just a lot of hard work by Leo.  I see some real potential there.

Justin said that Picturengine is very close to full launch.  I would rather he did it right than did it fast.  Hopefully, both of them will succeed.

Quote from: leaf on June 07, 2013, 21:46
I think the power is still really with the contributor and when/if a good alternative ever comes along (good commissions, good sales) people will jump ship extremely quickly. It's only a matter of time before it happens.

Fully agree.  Hopefully, Picturengine or Symbiostock (or both) will be that alternative. 

Quote from: Ron on June 07, 2013, 12:28
Contact support, they should be able to help you.

Thanks, Ron.

Quote from: Ron on June 07, 2013, 12:12

Quote
Can one bank account be used on two different PayPal accounts?

    You can add a bank account to one PayPal account at a time. However, if approved, you may be able to add the bank to a second PayPal account. You will be informed when linking the bank to the second PayPal account if you have been approved.

https://www.paypal.com/helpcenter/main.jsp;jsessionid=05z9Rx1MK5QRhvWTT9rjdjYT0T2y4t7ybpnDC7mh5hvKhDWYQ5CJ!68009712?locale=en_US&_dyncharset=UTF-8&countrycode=CA&cmd=_help&serverInstance=9010&t=solutionTab&ft=browseTab&ps=solutionPanels&solutionId=1204948&isSrch=Yes

That's interesting.  When I tried recently to add my bank to a second PayPal account, it was simply denied stating that only one PayPal account can be linked to a bank account.  I didn't notice any kind of approval process.  I must have missed something.

Quote from: Pilens on June 03, 2013, 22:27
When I started my microstock business end of 2009 I wanted a second paypal account just for that to make bookkeeping/tax filing easier. No, I couldn't. Paypal refused to open a second account with my name and linked to the same bank account.

If they changed their policy I'd be interested to know, too.

Nope.  Hasn't changed.  I tried it.

Quote from: Neo_ on June 01, 2013, 17:09

Quote from: cclapper on June 01, 2013, 16:57

oh dear. not good. does bring up some interesting visuals in my head though. 

girls volleyball shots?





looks more interesting than poker 

Wow!

Can't wait to see their images from the Bears, Bulls, Cubs, and White Sox games.  Would be funny to see them on the sidelines with their Iphones.

Quote from: gillian on June 01, 2013, 07:04
lol at you guys, when did i say kissing is euwww. I said those images of the kissing are a bit icky.

perhaps look at The Notebook for a wonderful kissing shot that is full of far more emotion that the one up the other day. s'ok, it's gone now. DT certainly does have an interesting style about it, so not my style.

Have to agree.  For some reason, that particular image had me quickly clicking to something else.  They could've picked a much better kissing image. 

I'm guessing that SS and IS are looking at this as a good thing, at least for now.  It's serving to eliminate the competition from the lower tier agencies.  Maybe when the big 3 or 4 are the only ones left will they band together and legally challenge this change.

It's working for me.

Name: Danny Hooks
Site: www.hookstockimages.com
Contribution: Beta Tester
MSG Profile: http://www.microstockgroup.com/profile/?u=456

Very impressive!