|
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 - ap
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 ... 21
251
« on: April 07, 2010, 11:34 »
having a small port, the numbers will probably seem wacky:
is - 1.1
ss - .74
123 - 4.1
dt - .77
v - 1.05
pc - 4.5
(photocase)
252
« on: April 07, 2010, 01:46 »
that's a really good idea, simsi. i've often seen hanging photographic prints without much info, only sales price. did you approach only one cafe, or will you contact more in the future?
253
« on: April 03, 2010, 13:29 »
IS is a strong performer for me and it's growth pretty much reflect how much i upload. so, i give it tops for consistency. however, i have just a slightly larger port on ss, not being a quantity person and its $ performance is just shy of is, in terms of downloads. but ss really blew is out of the water in the last two months with many el's, of which i have not gotten a single one at is. so, if the el performance continues at ss (fingers crossed), then, it's about 3-500% better.
254
« on: April 03, 2010, 13:21 »
Did you notice which date the blog post was written?
"Disclaimer: This article was published on April 1st and we kindly ask you to read it accordingly. While it may convey some true data, it also contains false info that was meant only as a pun, joke, trick. We have decided to write it in a more believable manner but truly hope we have not hurt anyone's feelings. Some of the points above are real facts and others are pure invention. "
haha, i thought that explained everything about dt's tanking performance in the past few months. too be quite honest, even if it is true, i'm not about to waste precious time making positive remarks on their forum in order to get a better search placement. total messages posted: 1. however, i'm happy to report that dt has come back alive for me in march, making it bme (which is not saying much). however, it was bme at quite a few other sites as well. april is looking to be slow...
255
« on: March 26, 2010, 23:34 »
Have you noticed that there are more and more $0.35 and even $0.27 lately? I used to have a few subs but lately there are more subs than regular sales and don't remember last time I had an ES.
Kone
only .35 subs and they account for 28% of all sales. my rpd is $.91, which is on the decrease.
256
« on: March 26, 2010, 23:25 »
It's moot anyway, because independents only get 50% on level 5 images now. How many level 5's to you have? The rest are between 30-45%.
not many...i meant, if any.  but, back to the op's original question, it's pretty sad that they're heading ft's way of reimbursing contributors. even though 123's sales volume sucks, at least, on a similar web el, i got 42% of the $50 and there are no levels. i think levels suck too.
257
« on: March 26, 2010, 23:20 »
Err no. Independent prices go up to 25 credits for XXXLarge on IS compared to 7 credits for maximum on DT.
i have a 12 mp camera and i can get maximum sizes sold at dt. however, with 12 mp, the largest size i can sell at IS is extra large, which is $15 for indies. that's in theory. in practice, when i downsize and the resultant size is large at IS (at $10), i can still sell it at maximum at DT. until i get a 24mp camera, this is the best i can do at IS. oh, just pity us poor indies, will ya...or i'm gonna start passing a collection box amongst you exclusives.
258
« on: March 26, 2010, 17:04 »
They don't just get away with it because they have more sales. Their prices are much higher as well. 20% of $25 is better than 50% of $7.
I'll take Istock's 20% with high sales volume and higher prices over Dreamstime's 50% with less sales and lower prices.
but for us indies, it's 20% of $10 vs. 50% of $7. i'll take the latter's pricing but the former's sales volume.
259
« on: March 26, 2010, 13:34 »
it's been a downward trajectory for me, even though they were very good to me in the beginning and my approval rate has always been very good. so, i wonder if they're just for beginners? in comparison, IS is highly consistent, reflecting the growth of my portfolio to the t. ss is a rocket, leaping by over 100% each month. ft is just weird. i'm sure this can all change within the wink of the eye. **even as we speak, just got an extra large dl on dt. maybe whining helps.
260
« on: March 25, 2010, 18:43 »
You had me excited there for a minute. After browsing through the MediaBakery images, spot checking about 80 pages, the images are all RM. So just because we have RF images on BigStock, doesn't mean we will automatically show up on Alamy.
One of these days I need to jump into the RM fray.
lol. i'm sure you can get into alamy all on your own. just a bit more work, rm or rf.
261
« on: March 25, 2010, 14:48 »
i don't think this is a bad thing. they are a featured contributor on alamy's front page. so, they're not only legit but it's a backdoor entry for those who want to be on alamy without passing the test or uploading. http://www.alamy.com/showcase/default.asp
262
« on: March 24, 2010, 23:01 »
it was never alive...
263
« on: March 23, 2010, 14:34 »
The latest one is "quality". Which is ridiculous. Which is why I started all this:) If they say "we don't need this at this time", well it's their call. But my quality I am pretty sure about.
so far as i know, there are three different declined messages. one for either "quality", "technical", or "type". if you received the "quality" message, it doesn't mean that it failed on technical grounds. it seems to be their catchall for stylistic rejection. i'm sure you've never received the "technical" rejection for this is where focus, noise, contrast, saturation, etc. are listed as the problems. anyways, let us know how chad is responding to this!
264
« on: March 23, 2010, 13:42 »
hi elena:
sorry this is happening to you too at ft. great portfolio and track record so i'm sure it's a rogue reviewer on the loose.
but, i'm kind of curious as to what declined message are you getting? is it the ubiquitous "not up to our aesthetic standard" that they give to the rest of us, or is it "your photographic work is excellent, but not needed, blah, blah blah?"
265
« on: March 18, 2010, 17:41 »
delete.
266
« on: March 17, 2010, 22:36 »
this is an interesting trend. all my sales are of older images. it wasn't the case when i joined a few months ago, when my images were still new. so, it's kind of like the same old photos that were selling from the beginning. it's like they just didn't move on, or something.
267
« on: March 17, 2010, 20:02 »
the reason we like pc is that when there are real sales, they're good. the rpi and rpd are great. but i'm really not encouraging you to join...
268
« on: March 17, 2010, 18:21 »
actually, i found one of my images used on a highly commercial, not so cool, sunglass online sales site. it was one of those free credit downloads by one of the members. the cool thing about photocase is that you know exactly who downloaded your photo.
269
« on: March 17, 2010, 17:19 »
know the feeling...seems like they tightened up photo selection even more! so, i'm not gonna tell anymore people how great they are and invite all this competition...
270
« on: March 17, 2010, 15:15 »
i had my first pel today. really makes up for the drought of the past few months. the great thing is that they're giving you 43.5% commission, or $21.75, which beats fotolia's $5 chuck el anytime. anyone else?
271
« on: March 17, 2010, 13:33 »
congratulations! photocase is my #3 site even though my port there is about 10% of what i have elsewhere and the photos are quite a bit different. i'm going to keep my ears open for their el. now, you'll have to show the lucky photo. 
272
« on: March 16, 2010, 19:46 »
And actually, I am trying to get my company to change from istock to another site that gives better return to the photographer, but at the same price or cheaper than us.. but there's no enough consistency with pricing yet to implement it.. for example on cutcaster, if we move our account to there because there are three photographers producing lots of new images we like, who's to say on their next batch of images they won't increase the price.. it's a tough model to sell..
isn't there a site that does price comparison across the board for a particular image? wouldn't that be more helpful to you? so, as a buyer, are you placing all the images you like into your own private lightboxes and then search for them cheaper elsewhere? this seem to be happening to me at is. my lightboxes that covert to sales are about 2.5:1.
273
« on: March 13, 2010, 01:08 »
it should be an interesting read!
274
« on: March 12, 2010, 00:08 »
some sales are trickling through, but i have a very small port there. i just picked up a cute puppy get well card at trader joes with a veer copyright, but no photog attribution.
275
« on: March 12, 2010, 00:01 »
i once saw a b-card that said 40 is sporty...now i know what it means.
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 ... 21
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
