|
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 - KB
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 17 ... 57
276
« on: December 10, 2014, 01:09 »
One thing I really wouldn't like as a buyer -- no mouseover clips. AFAIK (I could be wrong) every video site I contribute to has mouseover clips. This one shows a static thumbnail. Maybe real buyers don't care?
277
« on: December 05, 2014, 12:27 »
Please "don't try this at home", standing in one and same place is much worse than sitting! The solution is carry on as you doing your computer works, but a while go outside for a walk, perhaps you got one image more, if you take camera with you 
BR,
Kalevi
I'm not sure it's "much worse", but I agree it also isn't healthy. The idea of sit/stand desks is to SWITCH between standing and sitting, not to do only one or the other. Ideally, stand for an hour, then sit for an hour. If you have a setup that is easy to switch, then you're more likely to switch often. I use a Kangaroo Pro, which in theory is fairly easy, but for my setup takes nearly a minute to switch. So I tend to get lazy and end up sitting or standing for several hours at a time. Still beats just sitting all the time, which is what I used to do.
278
« on: December 04, 2014, 20:27 »
I had some decent sales around mid-year, but now I've had only 1 sale over the last 3 months.  (That's with a port of under 600 clips.) I really would like them to succeed. They are the best chance at a real #3 site, and I think we need a #3 site. (I'm ignoring iStock, for obvious reasons.)
279
« on: December 02, 2014, 17:54 »
IS exclusive here; my streak of year over year revenue declines remained intact:
Sep down 44%
Oct down 49%
Nov down 29%
I suppose I should take comfort that Nov's year over year decline wasn't as bad as the previous months. Except Nov 2013 was one of my worst months that year, down considerably from previous months. So really nothing positive here.
280
« on: November 25, 2014, 20:14 »
I'm thinking I can handle any tax changes coming out of this, either by claiming them back internally or being covered by existing treaties (England) to pay zero at source.
What makes my blood really boil is the fact their bean counter toadies have finally figured out a way to hang on to their cash flow for as long as possible - by delaying payment to me for as long as possible.
No different from SS they always payout once per month.
On the 7th !!!!
They say by the 15th, do they always pay out on the 7th?
They have for the past four years since I've been submitting there. The only exceptions being when the 7th falls on weekend or holiday, then it comes sooner.
I just looked over the payments I've received over the last four years, and you are almost exactly correct. There were two exceptions for me: 8 April 2012 and 3 July 2012. I'd say that's remarkable consistency. The 25th (or, it sounds to me, even later) is totally unacceptable.
281
« on: November 21, 2014, 13:18 »
account balance - I had to search the "all sales" page for the file number to find out when the sale was.
It was a file that hadn't been paid for.
Sounds like you're right, then, it's just them clearing an old, unpaid sale off their (and your) balance sheet. If they have to do this, it seems the least they could do is send an email explaining the situation.
282
« on: November 21, 2014, 11:06 »
Was this on a sale that hadn't yet cleared payment, or had it cleared and you actually had money deducted from your cleared balance?
I haven't experienced this (yet?), but my oldest uncleared sale is just under 2 years old, so maybe it will happen next year.
283
« on: November 19, 2014, 12:57 »
and have you talked to other contributors on the list about the price point shutterstock set for BS video clips.?
Ha, I love this idea! Send an email to everyone on that list about the new BS subscription deal, just in case they aren't aware (most probably aren't). (And include a link to MSG, so they can keep better informed.)
284
« on: November 19, 2014, 12:54 »
It has to do with the fact that SS owns BS, SS says they dont sell video through subscription but they are now reaching out to buyers to ask them if they want to get a video subscription on SS. Unless I missed something.
 Most of my SS video sales (> 50%, certainly) are and always have been through subscription. Where did you get the idea they say they don't sell video through subscriptions?
285
« on: November 19, 2014, 12:00 »
An email from SS seems to contradict that reply from their customer service
http://www.microstockgroup.com/shutterstock-com/ss-sends-mass-mail-with-open-adresslist
In what way does that email contradict that our clips will not be licensed through BS without our permission? That email was referring only to opting in to SS subscriptions; it has nothing to do with BS sales. However, while it is good that our clips won't be sold on BS without our permission, the fact that SS is selling clips on BS for such ridiculously low prices is what really matters.
286
« on: November 17, 2014, 19:29 »
and the fact that Bigstock and Istock are at the prenatal stages of destroying video in microstock
I don't see how you can compare the two. iStock's commission levels are without a doubt too low for independents to support. But iStock is still selling indie videos at prices above the average HD selling price at P5. So while I can certainly understand (and strongly support) indies removing their video files from IS, I can't agree that what iStock is doing is "destroying video in microstock". BS, OTOH, is doing exactly that.
287
« on: November 17, 2014, 19:23 »
I always failed to understand why exclusivity should matter to buyers.
The only reason exclusivity would matter to buyers is if a site had a large enough supply of high quality, unique files, along with most of the other files available everywhere. That would make that site the preferred first place to look for buyers who value their time. iStock has the largest (ha, almost the only) such collection, but they definitely do not have most of the non-exclusive content available on other sites. And hopefully that content is getting smaller by the day.
288
« on: November 14, 2014, 22:40 »
IS must have the country. (don't need the state by the way, just the city That is because "Portland, USA" is unambiguous, but "Portland, Maine" could be anywhere in the world. 
289
« on: November 14, 2014, 20:20 »
Posted by Lobo at http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=364161&page=1
"the majority of the feedback we have received has been positive."
HAH!
HAHA!
HAHAHA!
HAHAHAHA!
HAHAHAHAHA!
HAHAHAHAHAHA!
It's too bad the feedback they get is apparently only from inside their own organization, rather than from real buyers and sellers. Because there is no doubt at all from my perspective that the most recent changes have been an unmitigated disaster. But I'm curious; if that buyer has been a customer for 19 years, are they referring to Getty, then, and not IS? (Or maybe it was a typo, meant to be a '10'.)
290
« on: November 13, 2014, 14:14 »
Our apologies for any confusion. As many of you know, Bigstock is oriented towards the consumer market and independent creatives and the needs of that audience are different than traditional stock footage customers (think of enthusiastic YouTube creators vs. professional video editors). Bigstock is developing a small collection of videos to test how first-time and casual footage customers respond to different entry-level products. The contributors who are participating have all opted-in and all of the content is being appropriately licensed with their consent. The collection will be limited and these early packages represent some initial efforts to test and generate interest in footage among non-traditional buyers. We will continue to work with participating contributors as we learn more about this new market.
Michal on behalf of Bigstock
This is the almost identical argument that iStock / Getty used when they first introduced Thinkstock: It was aimed at an entirely different market and buyers who didn't overlap iStock's traditional customers. We all know how true that argument was. However, true or not, the very idea of giving away (almost literally) clips at these prices undermines the entire market. SS should know better, but apparently doesn't. 
291
« on: November 11, 2014, 19:12 »
Perhaps try this link: http://www.bigstockphoto.com/video/search/sunny/
For me, that link just re-directs to bigstockphoto.com, so clearly they are doing some kind of restricted testing. Whatever it is, I hope the test is a huge failure.  Anyone else?
292
« on: November 11, 2014, 12:43 »
I like the old version better because it was simple and effective. I could edit a few images on the same page without having to click if I don't want to.
^This. I mentioned that in my post above, and someone else did before me. I think this and no more tabs are the most important to improve productivity.
293
« on: November 11, 2014, 12:35 »
Yes, mystock has it right; sorry I didn't mean to mislead anyone. But I thought 400 contributors logged in at once was quite a few! But you're right, that does include photographers, too (forgot about that). Thanks, mystock. I didn't realize there were other P5 ftp servers available. That's great to know! my understanding is that 421 is an FTP error code meaning too many users
and 400 is the number of users logged in - still many, but more reasonable;
and photographers are included as well
you may also try one of their other FTP servers:
ftp2.pond5.com
ftp3.pond5.com
ftp4.pond5.com
http://help.pond5.com/hc/en-us/articles/200944073-How-Do-I-Upload-Media-Using-The-FTP-Uploader-
294
« on: November 11, 2014, 11:53 »
I'm constantly seeing posts from people deciding they're going to start uploading video clips. I think it won't be too long before the popular areas are well over-saturated with clips (considering the demand is so much less than for photos).
I've been trying to log on to P5's FTP server this morning, but so far it's been futile:
[R1] 421 400 users (the maximum) are already logged in, sorry
Ha!
(Re-formatted to make message more clear)
295
« on: November 11, 2014, 00:16 »
Well, that just looks scary. And the thought they might get the files from SS .... I still don't see it when I go there, so perhaps it's a regional thing. Anyway, we'll probably learn more soon enough. Good (?) find, though.
296
« on: November 10, 2014, 20:05 »
SS still owns BigStock, right? Why in the world would they create that kind of pricing? That seems exactly like something Getty would do, but I'd have thought SS would avoid such an undercutting of their own pricing. The only thing missing would be SS calling current customers and informing them of the lower sub pricing available at BS. (Yes, IS really did that with ThinkStock. ) One of the very best things about SS to me is that the commission for their video subs are more or less the same as the commission on cart sales. I'd really hate to see SS video sub buyers move to BS. PS - I don't see any video prices listed on the link that you gave, only image plans. Either I'm missing something, or you accidentally saw something that you weren't supposed to see.  PPS - In fact, I don't see mention of videos anywhere on BS' site. 
297
« on: November 06, 2014, 16:46 »
It's a bit of side step here, but I find photojpeg for video a rather poor choice compared to what other codecs now exist. Which is another serious flaw with iStock, they tend not to keep up with the advances in technology as well as other sites.
I was told only last month by SS that they prefer ProRes or Photojpeg, so I can't imagine that Photojpeg is that poor a choice. ProRes may be better, but it also produces larger files, so I find Photojpeg to be a decent compromise.
298
« on: November 05, 2014, 16:45 »
I didn't even know about Alamys similars policy. They sure don't enforce it from what I can see. Their batch editor seems designrd to support the uploading of similar images.
You're right, they don't seem to enforce it. They seem to want to trust contributors to be professionals, but unfortunately that isn't always the case. Their policy used to state to not upload more than 4 (or was it 5?) images on the same subject, which I always thought was a bit too restrictive (and vague). But I don't see that wording any longer, so perhaps they've done away with that. But the example above is CLEARLY beyond what is or should be allowed. And just as Ariene wrote, I wonder why any contributor would even bother doing that, especially one as talented as this one?
299
« on: November 05, 2014, 12:52 »
Thanks for the replies. Not so encouraging from a financial standpoint, but I'll give it a shot. I did find a way to edit the keywords, titles and so on after a clip has been submitted. You unpublish it, then it goes to the tagging section of the site. Whatever you've entered for that clip remains, and you can add or subtract what you'd like. Hope this is helpful. Pity you can't change the thumbnails though!
Hey, thank you! That is very helpful. A bit of a hassle, as they need to re-inspect the file, but I forgot a rather important keyword on one clip and had wanted to add it in. I agree; I wish they'd update their interface to let us specify a thumbnail. It's really a very basic thing to have. Good luck with sales.
300
« on: November 05, 2014, 12:19 »
You should review the photos more accurately
When I see this: E3FEAC RF E3FEHN RF E3FEHT RF E38AYK RF E38AYT RF E38AYY RF
or this E2MJWP RF E2MK1J RF E2MK1N RF E36N5J RF E36N5Y RF E36N9G RF
I have difficulties to believe that you review the images.
This is not the correct thread for that; it'd be better to have a separate thread, in case similar situations like this one are found. However, if I were Alamy, I'd boot this person right off the site. That's a flagrant violation of their similars policy: uploading half a dozen copies of the SAME FILE. She had been uploading only 3 each, but for some reason recently decided that wasn't enough. I don't know why someone who is this talented would do such a thing. Here's her port on DT; it's superb: http://www.dreamstime.com/gornostaj_more-latest-adition_pg1
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 17 ... 57
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
