|
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 - Tryingmybest
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 ... 23
251
« on: June 09, 2014, 12:50 »
I didn't find a Vivozoom category, so here goes... I received this email from Vivozoom today ( I haven't uploaded there since 2007 and thought they were out of business)  "I am pleased to announce that we have licensed the Vivozoom images through 99cimages.com, a new image licensing site targeting the latent consumer market for licensed images.
99cimages is a market place where image owners license their images directly to image users. The standard license template provides the buyer with a single use, limited print run (just 50,000 compared to the standard 250,000) license for 99c. 99cimages charges a 39c service charge, Photographers and Illustrators therefore generate 60c per license.
As an early supporter of 99cimages, through being a contributor on Vivozoom, you will receive 100% of this income namely 99c, through your Vivozoom account, for the first 6 months of operation, and thereafter this will revert to 60c.
We expect that this new initiative will expand the market considerably for images by providing an affordable image price through a simple purchase and download process, by providing a real alternative to non-professional image users otherwise tempted towards copyright infringement.
As the owner managers of both 99cimages and Vivozoom, we wanted to share this news with you, before launch of the service tomorrow. Please feel free to check out the site 99cimages.com and please let us know if you have particular images you wish not to be licensed through 99cimages.
Our plan for Vivozoom is, in due course, to build on this relationship and provide a complimentary high value, warranted service alongside 99cimages for the more professional image buyer.
Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions.
Regards
Lawrence Gould
CEO Vivozoom "
252
« on: June 08, 2014, 09:13 »
Are you using Deepmeta? They make it soooo easy to do that. This iStock website submission process is excruciatingly slow and complex. I have been trying to correct/fine tune my keywords in IS. When I try to edit an image, other than the standard tabs "Keywords" and "Detailed Categories" a third tab "Copy Tags" appears. If I select the tab, I see a list of keywords and it appears that it is the list post disambiguation. BUT, there is a button "update" that appears at the end of the keywords. Could anyone please tell me:
1. What are these "Copy Tags" and why do they appear only during "Edit" ?
2. What is the purpose of the "update" button in the "Copy Tags" tab ?
Thanks in advance for any responses 
253
« on: June 06, 2014, 18:31 »
Indeed. What's so crazy is I have 1,000+ images on that site that are isolated white background objects and people. In fact they just accepted some with those keywords and "1". When I opened the file on their site, I saw some of the KWs repeated almost 10 times (a bug on their site). So I thought that was the problem. I deleted them and resubmitted. Nope. Same rejection notice. I'll just reupload and resubmit. Thanks for offering your suggestions. 
254
« on: June 06, 2014, 07:07 »
This imageand other window and curtain drawingswas rejected due to irrelevant keyword, title and description. Please help me understand what the heck that means.  Here's the drawing on another site: https://www.mostphotos.com/8883766/broken-windowHere's the metadata: Broken Window Broken glass window with yellow curtains cartoon illustration isolated vector concept cartoon yellow nobody one single hand drawn clip art glass white background cut out window damaged broken 1 problem cracked hole accident crash shattered curtains freehand liability
255
« on: May 30, 2014, 20:20 »
Agreed. Coercive is an appropriate word in this instance. My main complaint about this is that we have to opt out of all Alliances, if we don't want to participate. That feels more coercive than an e-mail saying 'let us know if you don't want to participate'. By being one of the 'lucky' chosen ones, we have to give up existing sales to not participate - in effect punishing those with the images they want to use for the trial by imposing a financial penalty if we don't participate...
Sort of like if my boss came to me and said "Hey, we have an exciting new opportunity that could really help our company take off. We need a few volunteers to help out with a few extra hours - don't worry: nothing out of pocket for you. We can't pay you for your time but if things work out you could be in for a raise (or not!). If you aren't interested, that is not a problem, but we'll dock your pay by <whatever portion of sales I get from the partner program>."
256
« on: May 30, 2014, 08:17 »
An excellent and reasonable suggestion of which DT should consider...(in a future program, that is) In business there are such things as Non Disclosure Agreements. DT could send out an email with minimal details with a link to log in to DT and accept an NDA where they would see the details.
Start the Beta with exclusives only that have a significant investment in DT (hopefully ensuring the NDA will be adhered to and severe consequences if not). If you treat your contributors as professionals and understand we are in business together and we both need to make profits for such things as equipment, bills, and taxes then professionalism is what you will get back. If there is no interest in opting-in into the beta opportunity then DT knows there is going to be a problem and the Contributor knows what he is getting into and can make an appropriate decision.
Once the Beta is completed advertise (with details) the opportunity to all contributors as an opt-in option to make more revenue. Advertise how the Beta program went and the results seen in increased revenue during the Beta.
Just my two cents and that seems to be the way professionals work.
257
« on: May 29, 2014, 11:18 »
Wow. This is definitely a case for keeping anonymous on this forum. Sorry to read about that... 
anonymous is okay as long as we don't troll.
Agreed.
258
« on: May 29, 2014, 10:38 »
Wow. This is definitely a case for keeping anonymous on this forum. Sorry to read about that...
259
« on: May 29, 2014, 10:37 »
I suggest you allow us to uncheck specific partnerships (such as this new exciting offer), so we can choose. That would be the best approach and leave us feeling less taken advantage ofor forced to do something we don't want to do. The email we sent was created by our legal department and our partners'. It's still our email and I won't pass the guilt on someone else: I'm sorry if it doesn't provide the information you want. This is what we were allowed to share. We tried to say more, but this thread is the sad proof that things can't be kept confidential.
Is this deal good? Yes, if it works well, it will be very good. If it doesn't or it's unfair, then it will not be allowed to run any further. If it goes well, everyone gets paid. If it doesn't, then it means the potential was not there, end of story.
How long it will run? Probably a few weeks, maybe more, maybe less. How large it is and why we didn't support it ourselves? Look at the size of our database, envision a larger partnership. Try to put things into perspective.
As for Dreamstime and its royalties. We still award 60% royalties to our exclusives like in day one.
Again, nobody is forcing you to participate. Feel free to opt out if the deal is not for you. Be respectful and you will be respected.
260
« on: May 28, 2014, 14:42 »
Maybe so. However, a "good agency" is relative. It depends on one's opinion. For example, I believe a "good agency" pays the artist at least 50% of the sales. Let's all take a breath...
The email said "small scale beta test program."
When anything in the IT world is being rolled out it gets beta tested to a small group before it goes to the masses. And typically the people beta testing the software do not pay for it.
This is an evaluation period. Picture an ice cream supplier giving one of those tiny taster spoons to the food buyer at Wal-Mart. The supplier isn't going to ask Mr. Purchasing Executive to pony up a quarter before he gets his taste. The supplier knows that if Wal-Mart likes what it tastes, it could result in an enormous, game-changing order.
I believe in DT. They have been good to me over the years (and of course, I have been good to them.) If this came from an agency I believe is shady, I would take a skeptical view of this.
DT has a BIG fish on the line, trying to reel it in and create an potentially enormous payday for all of us. Think for a moment before you try to cut that line.
As for me, DT selected a HUGE amount of my images to run in this test, and I'm ALL IN.
The rest of you can demand your quarter for the taster spoon.
I agree. We should look at the history of the agency to make a decision. It's certainly bad time as we are all too jumpy after recent events. I must be one of the most jumpy one, deleting my port from both FT and DP, so fast that i practically donated to DP about 30$ that got stuck as unpaid payment even though i could just wait for a few days to get to the payout threshold, but i couldn't wait. But this is because they both have very shady, abusing history.
Dreamtimes on the other hand has so far been a fair agency. And the tests like this, i am sure those shady agencies have been doing all the times without us even know about them. DT could have just kept silence about it. How would you even find out?
I am afraid that our reaction may actually push those few good agencies to the point to hide from us. Things like DPC is bad enough for good agencies to stay in business. We should fight bad agencies by supporting the good ones. I am not saying that this test will turn out to be something good for us, but i am willing to give them the benefit of doubt.
261
« on: May 28, 2014, 14:33 »
Well-stated Goofy! That's what they need to do. Ask us our opinion. We should be treated as equals if they want us to respect them.  Why not post this concept/idea to us in the first place- than use our 'Feedback' to decide if the venture is worth it for both us and your company. You will be surprised how smart we are and fair!
262
« on: May 28, 2014, 10:35 »
Well stated. EXCITING news would be an increase in pay!!! What the ... A broken link for the opt-out?
Only one image is selected from my library, but how does this benefit me? How is this "EXCITING NEWS"?
263
« on: May 28, 2014, 10:29 »
Kind of P.O'd from this.  I'm flattered, but there is no information on beta test time limit nor can I opt out of this one program. Highly annoying. Fine. I'll click out of ALL alliances. Again, I need money badly, but I don't like being strong-armed or taken advantage of!!!!
264
« on: May 23, 2014, 12:47 »
I found this one the MOST annoying:
Q: What is a common mistake that you find vector contributors making?
A: A mistake I see vector contributors making is submitting source images as required for hand-drawn and auto-traced artwork, with artwork that was clearly built straight in the software. Contributors take a small JPG of the finished item as the source on a property release, which is not necessary and takes the reviewer time to evaluate. If you've built your vector in software without any reference materials, you don't need to submit sources. You may even wish to write to the reviewer, no source materials used, I drew this in the software without references or something along those lines. The reason we ask for sources on artwork is to prevent copyright infringement.
Nowadays I do 90% of my work in the computer and am always rejected without a source JPG. It doesn't matter what I write. So I give JPG source files ALL the time. When I send paintings, then I do a property release.
265
« on: May 22, 2014, 11:55 »
stockfuel.com Cant remember the last time I had a sale on Stockfuel .. so emailed last week to close account and try and get the $42 that's been there forever and today its a go daddy holding page
Darn. Not connecting here either. But FTP connects fine. I'd hate to see them go. Good royalties (but low sales). A seamless submission process for illustrators. I like the independents like Stockfuel. I have even bought RF music from them for personal videos. 
266
« on: May 18, 2014, 08:36 »
My son finished a unit in school about the European Middle Ages. What you wrote reminds me of the feudal system. We are the serfs. Fotolia and the agencies (big ones) are the lords.  This is called SCAM or FRAUD , in spanish ESTAFA
More than 23 dollars to fotolia...
Less than 2 for contribuitor...
Huge increse...? or end of the SCAM?
267
« on: May 15, 2014, 18:44 »
If I understood their announcement correctly, there was an increase even for those who opted out of the dollar club. Is this correct?
Yes. But the increase is only for sales in their monthly subscription packages, not for regular subs. Until now there was no way to know where a subscription sale came from. Now, if a subs royalty is different then your usual one, you know it is via a monthly pack.
Wow. What a convoluted mess. One big problem is they have a very confusing pricing model for contributors to understand.
268
« on: May 15, 2014, 11:47 »
When did the DPC officially go online?
Looking at my stats from January 1, 2014 through today, I see my sales have doubled at FT starting in mid-March. However, that was when I went full-time with microstock illustration and have quadrupled my submissions. So I'm hoping my increase is from my hard work and not the DPC 
I've seen no noticeable decrease in sales more than 2 week after opting out
It looks like they launched in January: http://techcrunch.com/2014/01/15/fotolia-launches-dollar-photo-club-an-exclusive-club-for-heavy-stock-photo-clients/and... http://www.microstockgroup.com/fotolia-com/fotolia-launches-dollar-photo-club/Yeah, it looks like DPC may have some effect on the increase. However, I am inclined to believe that my increased submission rate is the cause. I'm averaging 10 new illustrations uploaded 5 days a week as opposed to 1 or 2 a day before mid-March (tried to make an attachment with chart, not sure if worked). 
269
« on: May 15, 2014, 11:42 »
I just opted out of that thing. God knows I need money more than ever now. However, it sounds like the consequences are bad for all of us in the long-term. I want to keep doing microstock work for the long-termand not hurt myself or others in the future for short-term gain.
Thanks for keeping the momentum going !
Thanks for educating us on this important issue. We need to send a signal to the industry.
270
« on: May 15, 2014, 11:35 »
When did the DPC officially go online? Looking at my stats from January 1, 2014 through today, I see my sales have doubled at FT starting in mid-March. However, that was when I went full-time with microstock illustration and have quadrupled my submissions. So I'm hoping my increase is from my hard work and not the DPC
271
« on: May 15, 2014, 11:16 »
I just opted out of that thing. God knows I need money more than ever now. However, it sounds like the consequences are bad for all of us in the long-term. I want to keep doing microstock work for the long-termand not hurt myself or others in the future for short-term gain.
273
« on: May 15, 2014, 11:11 »
Thanks PhotoBomb  Go to your Contributor page
Under My Account, select My Profile
Select Contributor Parameters
Find Sell my files on DPC and click Modify.
274
« on: May 15, 2014, 11:05 »
How does one opt-out of the DPC (Dollar Photo Club)? I looked on my Fotolia account and was unable to find anything. Sorry if this was already mentioned elsewhere. I just missed it. 
275
« on: April 23, 2014, 11:38 »
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 ... 23
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
