|
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 - fotografer
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 17 ... 110
276
« on: August 21, 2013, 11:58 »
My dl charts reads like a total disaster. From a peak of over 1000 dls a month to lows of under 200 !!! It's slightly on the up this year.
277
« on: August 16, 2013, 11:45 »
Mine are showing from the 1st through to the 13th.
278
« on: July 24, 2013, 11:30 »
For emeralds and above a similar policy has been in place for years (reducing our base price to 1 instead of 2), only it took 5 sales at the reduced price to be able to reset.
Have you ever reset any of yours Lisa? I'm guessing that the only way to find out which images can be reset would be to click on every file and check and nobody has time for that.
279
« on: July 20, 2013, 15:41 »
I tend to believe the second. Honestly, Lev, do you believe you can continue to spend 2-3k per shoot and make a profit?
with 7 years of stock experience and 700+ stock shoots made so far - yes, i do.
Good luck 
Let's just say I too have a reaaally hard time believing those numbers. Reminds of the SS bragathon threads : )
a portfolio of high quality images should easily be able to make $25 per image over a life time.
Yes it should easily and without spending 2 to 3 thousand on a shoot.
280
« on: July 20, 2013, 09:57 »
There's been a little jump overnight. I've got an almost plausible figure for the 21st and 22nd.
Yes same here for 20th, 21st, 22nd
281
« on: July 18, 2013, 12:44 »
Woopee, I now have one sale on the 9th and one on the 15th. I usually get about 15 a day so this is all beyond ridiculous.!!!!
282
« on: July 15, 2013, 08:48 »
I have got one pp dl showing for 9th May !!!
283
« on: July 01, 2013, 14:36 »
This is also related to lurkers who just vote people down.
How do you know that there are lurkers who just vote people down?
284
« on: June 27, 2013, 04:42 »
Hmm seems to be typo according to Kelvinjay-
This isn't something I've been briefed on,[/i]
He's just making guesses like the rest of us.
285
« on: June 27, 2013, 04:41 »
And a while ago when people started reporting how bad multiple-word searches work, I remember iStock saying something like "well, most buyers only do one word searches anyway"... not a very uplifting thing to hear. And it can't be true either.
I also found that very hard to believe. At the very least, surely a significant percentage modify their original search once they see the original one-word results.
At DT where they show the keywords used to find an image that is sold only about a third are searched for using just one word. I believe that only the original search is shown so a lot of those one word searches will have other words added to filter it down which we won't see.
286
« on: June 26, 2013, 03:47 »
Make between $800 and a $1,000 a month on Shutterstock; same port can't even get a monthly payout on DT.
Cause they have this silly similar image thing about your own images competing with your own images crap!!!!!!!!!!
Thats completely unrelated, as Rob says its the same port. I pity your exclamation point key. Go easy on it.
How can it be unrelated?? Care to explain?
Considering there is no way he nor anyone else can have the same port at DT because they will hit you with similars!
And I know what Rob shoots so I am sure they hit him with similars!
Just as it would be with you and all of your eye shots! They would be hit with similars!
If you were on DT then you would know this!!!!
Not necessarily true. I have never had a refusal because of a similar at DT. I stagger uploading there so that a whole batch of similars doesn't go though at once and I make sure that titles and descriptions are all different.
287
« on: June 20, 2013, 13:10 »
Microstock provides about 70% of my earnings. I have never earnt as much in a month at a day job as I do with mickrostock.
288
« on: June 20, 2013, 12:14 »
Here if people's identity is known then it's easy to check if they are exaggerating or not. If their identity isn't known then what is the point of exaggerating if nobody knows who you are anyway.
People do it anyway, even when they're known. There was a very vocal forum member over at SS who bragged for years about all the money he was making, paying his bills and mortgage and blowing the rest on lots of new gear. Then he installed the SS twitter app which reports your daily DLs and he was blown. Even kept up the charade afterwards saying that the twitter feed was reporting wrong numbers.
People are strange. There's no limit to the lies people will tell for any (or no) reason at all.
go and look at his latest pictures, does he have automatic approval? just unbelievable! 
I guess that SS is one place where you can lie about how well you do. Love the fact that somebody got busted like that LOL
289
« on: June 20, 2013, 02:44 »
Here if people's identity is known then it's easy to check if they are exaggerating or not. If their identity isn't known then what is the point of exaggerating if nobody knows who you are anyway.
290
« on: June 19, 2013, 03:11 »
Don't know why, but Tuesdays seem to be my best days on a pretty consistent basis. If every day was a Tuesday I'd be rich 
Same here. I get excited every Tuesday thinking that it is going to be an amazing week.
291
« on: June 18, 2013, 10:17 »
Correct me if I'm wrong... It appears that buyers can't buy a single image anymore. It used to be $19 for 1 image, now it appears to be $29 for 2 images which may account for the lower commissions ($4.35 vs $5.70) that I have been seeing.
I sold one or over 44$ a couple of days ago.
292
« on: June 18, 2013, 10:13 »
Sounds like it won't be worth it as I only sell RF, not exclusive. 
Mine are all RF and the same images I upload to all the other sites. My highest sale netted me over 200$ and could have been had from any of a dozen other sites as a sub sale.
293
« on: June 18, 2013, 04:39 »
I've been uploading to Alamy for a year now and average just under 100$ a month. I think it's worth the extra effort just to see some of the higher priced sales. Most of my sales have been 29$ or 27$
sales of which I get 40% but I love to see the occasional high one that has given me a couple of hundred commission. I do tend to take a while to go in and finish them off after approval especially as for some reason they never carry all my keywords over so I have to go to the image and get the keywords again.
eta I've just had a look and average commision for me is 18$
294
« on: June 18, 2013, 03:20 »
How are Istock getting around the model release requirements? Lots of the indies flooding the site with their back catalogues of work may not be able to upload a shiny new Istock release for each shoot because it was not required prior to Sept. 2009.
Have they also relaxed the model release rules? Not relevant to me, but I am curious if they've relaxed them after being such hard a$se$ for so long. I remember what a PITA it was to get a release for every single time I shot my husband or daughter... 
No that is the only thing that they haven't relaxed. I haven't had a single technical refusal but have had a few for model releases.
295
« on: June 16, 2013, 18:17 »
Reaching out to the customer after the sale and demanding to know where the image was purchased and what type of license it was is unprofessional, no two ways around it. The agency looks bad, the contributor looks bad, and all of us are damaged. You placed your bet on the customer being in the wrong, and you (along with Dreamstime and all of microstock along with you) ended up looking foolish. Thanks.
Well, since this comment, and Tickstock's agreeing with it have gotten some -1's my +1's to both posts aren't visible. Just wanted you to know I wholeheartedly agree.
Some people have WAY too much time on their hands.
And I have just given a positive to you but you I unfortunately can't get rid of the other to my mind undeserved negative.
296
« on: June 15, 2013, 07:41 »
Luckily most of the other sites don't think like that. Buyers would soon give up on microstock if the quality was abysmal. There's nothing wrong selling for $1 if you can sell lots of times. I'd still rather have 150x$1 than 1x$100. Unfortunately you'll never understand that, far too complicated for a macrosaur
So this latest istock policy is probably going to lose them more buyers but I think they'll probably go to other microstock sites, not to RM. If they're used to paying lower prices or don't have the money to spend on the higher priced sites, they're not going to start using Getty.
Every one of the images that I resubmitted were accepted and sell at the other 12 other sites that I upload to so in my opinion shouldn't have been rejected at IS in the first place.
Their standards were too high at one time but judging by what people are saying in this thread and some of the examples I've seen, they don't have any now. It's a shame they've gone from one extreme to the other. Perhaps they're just accepting everything to get the queue down but that's not a good idea.
I agree that it's a shame but I rarely put anything up unlesss it is more or less perfect or different engough from everything else that a slight imperection could be over looked and Iused to get really annoyed at their silly rejections. They can't seem to get anything they do right these days if they are going so far the other way.
297
« on: June 15, 2013, 06:15 »
As expected, (very nearly) all the people who were bleating about poor sales last week are doing cartwheels on their way to the bank this week, with one of 'em claiming a $900 day.
Codswallop I say.
Mate you do have selective reading. Go back an read more carefully, the people reporting poor sales are still in the same boat.
I had to adjust my post. Mr Hip Hip Hooray is an exception.
That person said he would post a screenshot, but I havent seen it yet. I am not sure if I want to take it for granted. 900 dollars on they day seems a bit over the top, especially when its reported when the day wasnt even over yet. The contrast is so big, from day to day.
Given who it was making that claim I would take that post with a huge pinch of salt.
298
« on: June 15, 2013, 05:54 »
Luckily most of the other sites don't think like that. Buyers would soon give up on microstock if the quality was abysmal. There's nothing wrong selling for $1 if you can sell lots of times. I'd still rather have 150x$1 than 1x$100. Unfortunately you'll never understand that, far too complicated for a macrosaur
So this latest istock policy is probably going to lose them more buyers but I think they'll probably go to other microstock sites, not to RM. If they're used to paying lower prices or don't have the money to spend on the higher priced sites, they're not going to start using Getty.
Every one of the images that I resubmitted were accepted and sell at the other 12 other sites that I upload to so in my opinion shouldn't have been rejected at IS in the first place.
299
« on: June 15, 2013, 04:14 »
Every month I make more on non sub sales than I do on sub sales at SS. Dt have a much higher rpd than any of the other big 4 sites despite getting quite a few subs there.
300
« on: June 15, 2013, 04:12 »
Last month was a BME for me, but I understand what the OP is talking about. I've been there since 06 and understand fluctuations, but these weird gaps where I don't get a single sale for 24 hours, or nothing overnight from Asia/Europe, or entire weekdays without a single sale from US is different from normal ups and downs. there are several old timers reporting similar issues on SS forum.
My actual numbers are down a bit this month but plenty of non sub sales have kept the earnings up.
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 17 ... 110
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
