|
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 - click_click
Pages: 1 ... 98 99 100 101 102 [103] 104 105 106 107 108 ... 119
2551
« on: March 12, 2010, 12:04 »
I think it would be enough to write to him that we found him. Maybe we could just tell him that we are gonna sue him and he will stop doing this.
I think this should be done in Bulgarian - usually these people know it's almost impossible to sue someone over this from another country without spending a lot of money on a lawyer.
2552
« on: March 10, 2010, 20:35 »
But maybe we could inform Google. It will be the same google user even if it pops-up somewhere else.
That would be the right thing to do, but I still didn't find any of my images so I can't make a claim. In any case, if the domain is not being renewed, Google won't be able to verify all that as the domain is gone... I'm not sure if they check their site cache for things like that. In any case, someone who is affected should take action sooner than later!
2553
« on: March 10, 2010, 20:04 »
Lol - the domain is expiring in 2 days.
Don't even bother. If they let it expire the content will soon pop up on another domain...
Nasty stuff.
2554
« on: March 10, 2010, 20:03 »
Whois info from www.netsol.com: This domain is registered by: Host.bg
Domain Name: GSM-KARTINKI.COM
Registrant:
Nikolaj Nikolov
Nikolaj Nikolov ([email protected])
none
Sofiya
Sofija,1000
BG
Tel. +359.1234567
Creation Date: 12-Mar-2009
Expiration Date: 12-Mar-2010
Domain servers in listed order:
redirns2.bgdns.net
redirns1.bgdns.net
Administrative Contact:
Nikolaj Nikolov
Nikolaj Nikolov ([email protected])
none
Sofiya
Sofija,1000
BG
Tel. +359.1234567
Technical Contact:
Nikolaj Nikolov
Nikolaj Nikolov ([email protected])
none
Sofiya
Sofija,1000
BG
Tel. +359.1234567
Status:ACTIVE
I can't make a claim as I couldn't find any of my images.
2555
« on: March 10, 2010, 13:39 »
I just want to thank everyone for checking out my article, and for all the kind words. I'm a little surprised I haven't started getting bashed, because usually when you post anything opinionated like this, there is at least one guy in the bunch that disagrees 
I originally was responding to a post in a Microstock discussion group on facebook, but my rant got so long that I figured I would turn it into a blog post  Thanks again for all your responses. I'll link back to this thread in the post's comments section.
It is indeed a well written blog post. And it cannot be emphasized enough that a certain amount of work is involved if it becomes your main business. I have no life and do this 10 hrs/day 7 days a week but I hope that I can retire before you do Hopefully I'm not going to be burnt out by then... 
2556
« on: March 10, 2010, 12:12 »
What a big surprise that someone said (again) that you can only succeed by working hard for it.
"Working hard for it" will get you nowhere if you're doing the wrong things. That's called banging your head against the wall.
You could do much LESS work, but work smarter, and get much further than those toiling away in the wrong direction.
There are very, very, very few contributors that have a portfolio of less than 400 images over the course of 5 or 6 years that make a living off of it - that's how I understand you statement about You could do much LESS work, but work smarter, and get much further than those toiling away in the wrong direction. . I'm talking about the common sense of doing what you love to do and doing it RIGHT (as in: knowing what you do)! Additionally, you will have to invest a lot of time to get off the ground. Just because somebody "works smarter" doesn't mean that they do this 3 hours a week.
2557
« on: March 10, 2010, 12:05 »
Looks like small sized images for cell phones.
Try to find out the web hosting company and write a DMCA notice to them. They will ask the owner to remove the content.
In many cases you will waste your time asking the site owner to remove the stuff.
2558
« on: March 10, 2010, 11:59 »
Do people still fall for the "get rich quick"-theme?
What a big surprise that someone said (again) that you can only succeed by working hard for it.
Haven't met (or heard) of anyone just being successful "by accident"...
2559
« on: March 10, 2010, 10:42 »
Personally, I sometimes prefer leaving the background untouched as it gives the subject more depth in certain lighting situations (almost like in your 3rd image that youposted).
Other than that I'd ALWAYS convert the background to white (if it was shot on white). Your doing the buyer a huge favor!
Furthermore if you make the effort of including a clipping path to isolate your subject with one click in Photoshop, the buyers will love you.
2560
« on: March 08, 2010, 21:57 »
Thanks for sharing those numbers PD. Very useful information for anyone considering uploading to Flikr. Sounds like it is as least as worthwhile as Canstock or 123RF.
Would that be worth your time Lisa? I think I'm going to try it though. 
2561
« on: March 07, 2010, 12:12 »
Ellen's example shows that even with the best intentions lead to confusion between contributors and reviewers. Implementing the flagging system that focuses on the actual keyword part of an image is one thing (despite the problem of missing disambiguation...) but DT's move to include the image description into the search function therefore creates a big problem when it comes to keyword reporting. This means more instances of confusing reports that have to be checked. Technically a very simple process when it comes to avoiding this but this has not been thought through from DT at the time of implementation. Maybe now this can be tackled... 
2562
« on: March 06, 2010, 15:02 »
...A D90 should be able to produce nice images... While I also own a D90, I hardly think that this is the problem here... Still - LOL.
2563
« on: March 05, 2010, 20:57 »
...Someone looking for a "white dog" doesn't want a black dog on white background.
Eloquently put.
2564
« on: March 04, 2010, 11:03 »
Serban, your statements and efforts do NOT prevent this systems from ripping apart search phrases.
I'm sure you and Dreamstime know that there are buyers out there using search phrases. What is being done about that?
2565
« on: March 03, 2010, 21:18 »
Is it just me, or has there been an awful lot of blame and accusation going around this forum recently?
Yes and it's all your fault
Priceless! 
2566
« on: March 03, 2010, 17:20 »
...
Let DT's admins do it for you.
I did, and today they stripped two valid keywords from one of my best selling image because the flagging system rips keywords out of context and the reviewers obviously don't have enough time to thoroughly go through all the keywords. I'm not the only one or first one this has happened to. They have no reason to remove relevant keywords.
Of course they have no reason to remove relevant keywords but since DT doesn't use disambiguation it's getting fairly impossible for reviewers to be up to date of how a keyword was used. ... Are photographers going to leave DT because of the flagging system?
Well, judging by what I've seen (most) photographers do, the sites they upload to, I have a hard time believing this either.
As long as it's all about the money, they'll keep on uploading. No matter what.
Once you will do this business as your main income you will care about things like this. And why would you care if anybody leaves DT? Neither me, Lisa, Elena or anybody else here wants to leave DT. No idea where that is coming from. ... Go ahead, I have 278 images, 2 flagged, 276 to go, plenty more images to click. Enjoy
Go get a cookie for that one. Congrats.
2567
« on: March 03, 2010, 15:19 »
Perhaps this is the way DT fights IS exclusivity? AFAIK any editing resets lock period?
And the conspiracy begins...
2568
« on: March 03, 2010, 14:45 »
In my case a flag from 2007 led to my keywords being locked on one of my best sellers although the keyword is absolutely valid.
I wrote to support to get the keyword re-inserted and the whopping 2 cents stripped from the flagger.
This in itself is such a waste of time.
2569
« on: March 03, 2010, 10:50 »
*everything you said*
Thanks Lisa for explaining this to everyone. Sometimes it just has to be spelled out.
2570
« on: March 03, 2010, 10:15 »
@Click - Click,
typical.
Since I haven't started uploading in 1963 (or thereabouts) my portfolio is small.
And that's the first thing you come up with.
Anything else?
What about the quality of my images?
Are they ok with you? Any complains?
Now, that beeing said, let's try to leave my portfolio out of the debate and return to the subject on hand.
There are photographers who have portfolios 50 times larger than mine.
Well, I'm sorry to say, but I imagine the number of bad keywords growing proportionally.
Is it not a good idea to clean them up? After all they're the ones who cover most searches.
And I still can't see the problem.
Don't have the time to edit them all?
Let admins do it.
Errors?
Report them.
Losing a few sales?
Were they legitimate in the first place?
I believe cleaning keywords is a good idea, hassle or not.
And you haven't managed to convice me otherwise, regardless of the thousands of images in your portfolio.
If you would have followed this and the parallel topic which was merged into this one you'd realize that nobody is against reporting spammed keywords. Removing spam is good - I hope this clarifies it for you! It is not good to have thousands of images reported ALHTOUGH the keywords ARE CORRECT!!! This is the problem we're discussing here that CORRECT KEYWORDS are being flagged BY ABUSERS OF THE SYSTEM!!! Just because you wouldn't have to go through hundreds and hundreds of images IF they WOULD be flagged doesn't mean that OTHER contributors HAVE TO DO SO. Regardless of how whiny you think we are - we are making a living off of this and if relevant keywords are being stripped from our images it's my *CENSORED* right to voice concerns about this system. And if you haven't gotten my point yet! SPAM IS BAD!!!
2571
« on: March 03, 2010, 09:08 »
And the problem is... ?
You get a flag/commment for bad keywords.
Next check all your keywords on reported images.
Remove irrelevant (if any).
Job done.
...
Eirann, please do understand that there are contributors with more than 10, 20 or 50 times more images in their portfolio than you do. With up to 40 or 50 flagged images per day this is a major inconvenience. These photographers don't make a living by double checking invalid flags from Dreamstime. Today, I found one of my best sellers reported AND my keywords locked for the keyword "ski" showing a skyline with 2 jet skiers in the foreground. Not to mention that the keyword "jet" was also removed. I've made more money with that image than many photographers will ever make with their portfolios and now someone received a whopping 2 cents for reporting a valid keyword pushing my image out of the search for a water sport in front of a major tropical skyline. This is sick.
2572
« on: March 02, 2010, 19:55 »
...I think Dreamstime's intention to clean up keywords is a good one. It's just the implementation that seems to have some problems.
I believe it's the approach how to get rid of spamming. First off, this system is not preventing spammers from initially spamming their keywords otherwise reviewers would catch on to those EVERY SINGLE TIME. As this is not possible (we're all humans/usually are not getting paid enough for what we do ) there will be spamming all the time. Secondly, paying flaggers is definitely wrong. Since they won't deduct 2 cents for "false flags" the flaggers have nothing to fear. If they simply don't want or can not implement a disambiguation system then go ahead and lock all new images to begin with. This will significantly reduce spamming. Take all the 2 cents per correctly reported spam and invest it into reviewers professionally checking our images and not some numb nuts who never learned English yet think they can report keywords. Plenty of long standing contributors have made the experience of being flagged unnecessarily. Such a waste of time (and money). I'm telling you - we all have to carry the costs for these flaggers. Bye bye commission raise 2011 !!!
2573
« on: March 02, 2010, 19:21 »
I would like to see all the micro-engines accept keyword phrases rather than breaking up all the data into single strings. It seems like it would be the most logical solution.
In another post somebody mentioned getting flagged for the color blue and their subject was a blue collar worker. If we were able to use the keyword phrase "blue collar worker" instead of "blue", "collar", "worker" there would be no confusion in the flagging process plus there should be an improvement in search results for the buyers. Is the buyer looking for my photos of a person with brown hair and blue eyes or blue hair and brown eyes .. with single keywords there is no way of knowing.
Correct thinking but tricky approach. "blue collar worker" works at Shutterstock for instance if you put that term in quotation marks. Still I would like to keep the three keywords individually because not every buyer is typing "blue collar worker". I think in most cases the buyer will type in the term without the quotation marks. So if an image still gets reported for "blue" or "collar" and the reviewer thinks: "Hey that's right, there is no color "blue" and no "collar" and removes these terms you are left to those buyers who make the effort of typing in "blue collar worker" with quotation marks and all other searches without quotation marks will direct the buyers to all images that haven't been flagged before and still carry the individual terms. This is the problem that important keywords may be stripped form our images decreasing the chance to find the correct buyers who do search for these terms but instead we get (partially) flagged by our competitors who simply want to move our images out of the search results. I hope this occurred to you all already...?
2574
« on: March 02, 2010, 18:12 »
I'm surprised that the account hasn't been suspended.
Obviously the guy didn't have the rights to display the images on Flickr and therefore was in breach with whatever terms and rights - MASSIVELY.
But obviously not enough to get him kicked out. Just a slap on the wrist.
I don't know, leaves a sour taste...
2575
« on: March 02, 2010, 16:38 »
...but I don't understand why they would pay someone 2 cents to flag keywords. I would think that would create misuse. Why in the world did they do that? My words, they just want to pay DT members less than what they would have to pay for their own staff for taking care of the problem. As somebody mentioned before: Also deduct 2 cents if the flagged keyword was indeed a correct one. Then the flaggers will have to think 3 times before submitting their report and refrain from flagging unsure keywords.
Pages: 1 ... 98 99 100 101 102 [103] 104 105 106 107 108 ... 119
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
