|
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 - ManicBlu
26
« on: August 06, 2007, 19:43 »
I have 61 images there and just as many rejected. My rejected folder looks like my port on the other sites. I've made 5 sales and haven't uploaded anything new recently. There are more profitable pastures out there.
27
« on: August 04, 2007, 15:18 »
And my payment came through today (via PayPal)
I'm not surprised. Unlike a lot of new sites I think this one is going to be a good one. I'm working on my uploads now but it will take me awhile to reach 1000. I'm going under a different name this time. Don't ask me why. It's just something I'm trying.
28
« on: July 29, 2007, 17:14 »
I agree you need to improve your keywords. You have a really nice stock portfolio that should be making you a few sales by now.
29
« on: July 29, 2007, 17:08 »
I rate when I think an image is really special and I do very little of that these days. High ratings will get you in the highest rated list which does mean more exposure but doesn't guarantee sales. A lot of really pretty, art shots get a lot of ratings but these generally don't sell well. Of course, there is always the exception.
30
« on: July 29, 2007, 16:59 »
I'm guessing that the problem may be that the images are no longer selling well due to either increased competition or unfavorable keyword weighting.
With certain sites I think there is a bit more to it than this and they keep it a secret for a reason.
As far as my expertise in aircraft goes, this is not so correct - I began shooting this stuff only six months ago, after I began shooting stock exclusively and noticed that the existing imagery in this area was for the most part 'amateury' and 'snapshottish'. Prior to my involvement with microstock I specialized in studio portraiture and live performance photography. The reason I don't shoot and post that kind of stuff is that the market is already very flooded with it, and I'd rather compete in an area that's visibly weaker. Better to be a big fish in a small pond than vice versa, I think. On a related note, I think I've taken the airplane thing about as far as it can go, and will be changing specialties soon ...
I'll be very interested in seeing what you do next. 
31
« on: July 26, 2007, 13:54 »
I apologize but as I said I didn't mean my comment to be taken personally. I say things like I mean them and in this format it's easy to be misconstrued. That said..I don't think the things you are suggesting work in the scenario we're looking at at iStock. All one has to do is read the forums to see everything is screwed up for most as far as views and sales are concerned even some of the big players. I just don't think there is any way to predict sales right now. Out of the few who actually voice there opinion on forums there is the occasional one who will say sales are steady but the majority find sales are way down and too much for it just to be a seasonal thing. My sales at SS remain consistent even though the time of year is a slow one. iStock continues to plummet to the extent that I limit my visits there to once every other day. Sharply has a super portfolio and I think I said that. I have a few of his images in my lightbox in fact. That said..I made an EL on Fotolia today with the only plane I have in my port. LOL It's crappy compared to Sharply-done's but I guess they didn't see his. I'm glad. 
32
« on: July 26, 2007, 05:48 »
IS has been picking up for me lately. Not a huge amount ($100+/month), but the trend is definitely there.
I don't think that your "canister level" (as IS refers to it) is a factor in their search routine. Given that you have a small portfolio, why not take the time to investigate why images that were selling no longer are?
Hi..no disrespect intended believe me but I have to ask how you would investigate why certain images aren't selling anymore especially when your area of expertise is a port full of airplanes, skies and photoshop? Gosh, I know this sounds like I'm being catty but I really don't mean it to be. You're doing well no doubt because you have a large super collection of planes on different backgrounds and from different viewpoints. I just don't see how you would make such an investigation. I think many contributors at iStock would be interested in what you think is the problem with diminishing sales including some exclusives I know.
33
« on: July 26, 2007, 01:07 »
I like the site and am uploading there. Since I have no intention of going exclusive anywhere the time limit for leaving my images there doesn't bother me nor does the price. Digital images are a dime a dozen and if I don't make the money someone else will. If I turn out images that I think are worth hundreds I will give them to someone as RM. I don't have anything that cannot or is not already duplicated by many other photographers. Just to be clear, I'm not talking about copying when I say duplicated.
It's very easy to get caught up in how wonderful we think our images are and how much we think they are worth but really, except for a few who turn out high quality studio model shots, the rest of us are many fish in a barrel.
I've been credited with my $25 and continue to upload. The site shows real promise as far as I'm concerned.
34
« on: July 07, 2007, 12:37 »
I don't believe it's totally summer slowdown. I wanted to believe this but as each week has passed and I've watched my sales drop to half of what they were before the new best match I've changed my mind.
My sales continue on SS at a rate that would be compatible with summer slowdown i.e. not totally stopped. I have days at IS now with no downloads at all something that hasn't happened to me in a very long time. I continue to upload and what you will see when looking at the first few pages of my portfolio are 0 downloads. It's so awful I try not to look more than once a day. For awhile it effected me so badly I thought about giving up.
35
« on: July 07, 2007, 12:04 »
I certainly have my problems with DT, but not with the inspections. I shoot mostly nature and always will. I upload what I have and let them choose what they want. I expect rejections from all the sites. I do like that they will generally accept my artsy, processed work. They don't sell a lot but they make me feel good.
36
« on: June 25, 2007, 13:50 »
Very disappointing month. I am not having fun at iStock these days.
37
« on: June 25, 2007, 13:41 »
Such beautiful work and a well deserved win. Such beautiful creatures to be used in such a way.
38
« on: June 25, 2007, 13:29 »
I'm sure they'll have plenty content when the UPS parcels of dvds arrive there from iofoto, yuri, andresr etc!
]\[*--
hehe..you got that right. On another note...I like the image of the little girl on the front page. I'm really tired of all the perfect perfectness. Looking through my latest European image magazine 'Chasseur d' Images' there are award winning images that wouldn't make it onto the top micro-stock sites except maybe 1 but they would * sure sell as stock and probably will for large amounts of money. The little girls image is not of the quality I'm speaking of but there's nothing wrong with it accept everyone is getting conditioned to no noise, no artifacts, perfect white balance etc. etc. It's boring. Since most of these images are bought in small version and any PS user can manipulate the contrast etc. it's a worthy stock shot. I wish it were mine.
39
« on: June 11, 2007, 09:55 »
Sales are down everywhere during this vacation time and as many have pointed out it's a usual occurence. I would rather them make these changes now rather than during the busy season.
40
« on: May 27, 2007, 00:10 »
Yes, I read them when I visit here. They're always great and much appreciated. It's nice when folks share their talent with others.
41
« on: May 15, 2007, 03:30 »
You're wasting your valuable life time. If you're ticked, let 'em know by pulling your own plug. Just keep in mind, they aren't going to miss you. On the other hand, .......you won't miss them either and your life will be a lot less aggravating.
I agree and that's what I'm in the process of doing right now.
42
« on: May 15, 2007, 02:47 »
Great job! I learned something new. Thanks very much.
43
« on: May 15, 2007, 02:32 »
You did a great job and I like the "stumbling". Newbies will find it easy to follow and learn. Too many tutorials are done so quickly that only those who already know how to get around in photoshop have any idea what's going on.
Very nice!
44
« on: May 09, 2007, 04:05 »
Well, as much as I like the site and have been one to give them a chance I've stopped uploading as well until they get realistic. You cannot on the one hand expect the best of the best..different from all the rest for .25.
45
« on: April 29, 2007, 15:11 »
It's nice to see some of you are having good results with StockXpert. I started out well but I'm now getting way too many of the "We're not accepting these types of images now" on some of my best images so it's no longer worth the time to upload. It also begs the questions..does this mean they will be accepted in the future and if so when? Why are these types of images not accepted this week when they were last week? These are not images that need critiques as they are on all my sites and I'm a decent nature photographer..no beginner. Maybe they can send out email when they decide they will again 'accept these types of images'. My time is valuable as I'm sure is the reviewers so I want be wasting either for awhile. I did post on the browse page a bit ago in hopes it will get me some views and sales. This is my first time trying this feature and I hope it helps espcially with none of my recent newest uploads being accepted. For any interested they can be found on iStock, DT and SS just to mention a few.
46
« on: April 29, 2007, 14:45 »
I do occasional keywording for hire and Sharply Done has the right idea. I also agree with Stockmaniac about including parts that are naturally a part of a bird etc. when the entire animal is in the image.
The added suggestion I would make is when I keyword for a client I give them all the keywords that are relevant to the image but stipulating that they should decide first how they want to sell the image then choose the ones out of the list that fit. It's rare that I cannot come up with over 100 esoteric keywords for many images but with the new controlled vocabularies all will not work even if that many were acceptable. I recently keyworded an image of a single man standing looking out on a beach scene. The photographer had keyworded this image negatively i.e. lonliness, sad, depressed etc.
I suggested selling the image in a positive manner using keywords such as vacation, travel, pleasure, which tend to be more in demand than negative imagery. She was pleased and decided to leave it as it was for awhile and if it didn't sell this way she would then change the keywords to fit a new perspective.
Shoot your image with a idea in mind of how you want to sell it. Many people just shoot and then try to figure out how to make it useful.
I'm not saying never to mix and match when you just can't come up with enough keywords. I've done this when it was necessary. But, it's better if you can shoot and keyword an image to meet a specific market.
47
« on: April 29, 2007, 14:16 »
I don't have a problem with this and in fact, just deleted and image in the queue of a little girl playing in the garden. Her hair covered her face and she was definitely undentifiable. But, I know the mother when I see her so will try to get her to either release this image and possibly give me some other ones. If not nothing is lost and I'll feel better.
Things are always changing in business. You can be sure iStock wouldn't be doing this if they didn't feel it was necessary.
I have to say I have never felt good about images accepted of people with problems such as overweight, homeless etc. that they have not give a model release for. I realize there is a place for these kinds of images but in these circumstances it's better to find an overweight person who is willing to have her image used. Homeless people need help and a few dollars would probably easily get you a signed model release.
48
« on: April 24, 2007, 15:38 »
I'm smiling. SS is the one site I have no complaints about. It just keeps getting better.
49
« on: April 24, 2007, 15:22 »
I have 50+ images there with only 4 sales but I like the site layout and as long as they keep trying I'm going to stick with them. It's a great looking site and if they are able at some time in the future to find their groove I'm going to be there. It doesn't take long for me to upload a couple of images to them at the same time I'm uploading to my other sites. The rejections no longer bother me. I look at Crestock as a challenge. I'm certainly going to try for that Canon although I don't know a thing about shooting speed shots. I guess I'm about to learn.
50
« on: April 22, 2007, 15:56 »
I haven't found this to be a problem. I use the same nickname at all the sites so buyers can easily find me if they are looking for my images. This also lets them see that I have other images that they haven't seen at one or more of the other sites.
I somehow don't see many buyers taking the time to shop around. The difference in price is usually too minimal and time is money.
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
