|
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 - incarno
26
« on: January 10, 2013, 08:02 »
thats bad Adobe Bridge should have known better :-(
27
« on: January 10, 2013, 07:25 »
Do these 4 images SS ignored have "Ready to upload" status in SS?
Otherwise it won't upload them.
yes
On the microstocksubmitter software it says it uploaded 46 images but if I look at each image individually (all 50 of them) all their status' say 'uploaded'.
Yes, SS will not mark images as submitted for shutterstock because of some technical limitations.
It submitted 33 of the uploaded images and left 16 in the 'unfinished area' on SS
Did you try to leave SS running for a while to let it submit remaining 16?
Yes, I left it for several hours (overnight once I believe)
Today, another batch of 50 and it only recognized 40 of the images. Could it have anything to do with a bracket in the file name? There is more than 10 images with brackets in the file name so I'm not sure how that could be the cause.. I'll try to trouble shoot it a little more and see if i can find the pattern.
ouch I have no idea if this problem in this case but as a general rule neverever use an additional character with the exception of the underscore in a filename (unicode), tip of the day ;-). As a sidenote I don't have any upload problems to SS (Shutterstock) using SS (Stocksubmitter).
28
« on: January 10, 2013, 05:51 »
Introducing subs is lowering prices and there are many agencies that did introduce subs and now these sales are the majority on these sites for example FL and DT.
'Introducing subs' can hardly be described as 'lowering prices' being as SS has been offering them since 2004.
Of course the worse paying sub site, by some margin, is actually Istock's PP. If any agency is guilty of erroding contributors' income by their own actions, it is most definitely Istock.
I don't defend istock actually I stopped submitting and deleted my port there long time ago never liked their attitude and their cumbersome upload process nor I like Thinkstock , but introducing subs on a site that before only offered per image sale is lowering prices.
29
« on: January 10, 2013, 04:29 »
But I am even more disgusted by the continuing lowering of prices and royalties on other sites.
Seriously __ which sites have lowered prices? Other than FT being forced to wind their neck back in on price increases by customer resistance, I'm not aware of any other instances. At least FT did have the wisdom to recognise the issue rather than 'doing an Istock' and ignoring their customers' concerns entirely.
Introducing subs is lowering prices and there are many agencies that did introduce subs and now these sales are the majority on these sites for example FL and DT.
30
« on: January 10, 2013, 03:16 »
What is your overall RPD from all microstocksites? (RPD: Royalty per download, if you have earned 2000,- Dollars in a given period and 3000 files have been downloaded during this period your RPD is 2000 divided by 3000 = 0.667 )
My overall RPD is 0.76 what is yours?
If you are an exclusive please feel free to post your RPD too but let us know that you are an exclusive because your RPD must be significant higher.
31
« on: January 09, 2013, 18:15 »
Fotolia sucks! Sales maybe okayish!
32
« on: January 09, 2013, 15:50 »
Not traced but inspired, I think it's enough different and follows a different concept (dark black mask versus pink flower mask)
33
« on: December 27, 2012, 10:12 »
Wow, look at his stuff on Fotolia. It's all based on 3-credit pricing. He must sell a LOT there as well.
If he wasn't such a thief, I would actually feel sorry for this guy. He seems to have good skills, and he clearly makes a lot of money in microstock, and if justice is served, his whole world is about to come crashing down.
I wonder if he supports a family from this income. He's about to lose it all. Very sad. I'm very curious to see how this plays out.
How did he get 3-credit pricing on FT? He's only at Silver rank. I wonder if he's tried to claim that those images are exclusive to FT (which they are not).
Exactly he claims his stuff or even more probably himself as an exclusive photographer that will not going to work in the long term he will banned for that!
34
« on: December 22, 2012, 12:33 »
Great response. It would be even better if it made sense.
I does make sense!
35
« on: December 22, 2012, 12:10 »
Sorry to burst your bubble, but I didn't tell you anything....
but to be dependant on one agency isn't very smart
I'm dependent on one agency, I am therefore, according to your quote above, not very smart.
So what! Maybe I told myself you can't know, again I didn't tell you anything...
36
« on: December 22, 2012, 07:24 »
I love it when people tell me I'm not very smart.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but I didn't tell you anything....
37
« on: December 22, 2012, 03:55 »
I usually do not comment much on forums but.. you people are crazy. Have you any idea how much quality content there's is on iStock? If those exclusives decide to transfer their portfolio to SS your earnings will suffer. Big time. It's just that the content on iStock is of higher quality as a whole.
quality is realative everyone has a different opinion here. But stock isn't about quality it's about buyers need. I don't care if exclusive stay exclusive, but to be dependant on one agency isn't very smart regardless how big the short benefits might be.
38
« on: December 21, 2012, 12:07 »
The sub model has been even more harmful to the industry than RF, though it was probably an inevitable consequence of RF/digital cameras. [/quote] +1
39
« on: December 13, 2012, 17:15 »
I use the microstock keyword tool to help find keywords then individually add them to images in Adobe Bridge. I also add the description and title in bridge (or sometimes Photoshop)
Uploading I do with Microstock Submitter
I love how Microstock Submitter keeps the data in the photos and not in a separate database! It's generally a very useful piece of software for Independents highly recommended!
40
« on: December 04, 2012, 13:58 »
Thanks Sue for clarification!
41
« on: December 03, 2012, 15:08 »
Buying the Pentax 645D!
42
« on: November 20, 2012, 10:13 »
Requesting exclusivity is something that doesn't attract me, though. Do they require exclusivity for all images in a series or just the ones they pick?
Something in-between: only the one they pick, but you cannot sell elsewhere photos which are too similar.
You can however still use the photos to sell physical items such as on Zazzle for example.
that is not correct, Getty requires session exclusivity!
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
