|
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 - cthoman
3126
« on: August 31, 2010, 09:03 »
Sigh...Again, Fotolia? 
3127
« on: August 30, 2010, 14:01 »
I stopped uploading for 6 months at DT to be able to apply for IS exclusivity, but the sales are so low at IS these last 2 months that I was scared of the jump and decided that I wasn't going to do it.
Maybe because it's Summer, maybe Thinkstock deal (I retrieved myself), maybe new design change favoring exclusivity or whatever but I wonder if some of you were going to become exclusive also and decided not to do it after all?
Well, you lasted longer than I did. I think I stopped uploading to DT for about a month before I lost my nerve to go exclusive. The summer has been pretty bad there, but I'm hoping it picks up in September.
3128
« on: August 27, 2010, 11:53 »
Wow, that is bad news . I just joined Shutterstock and they sell well for me. Does it indicate I will have to be seeing more rejections even if I submit future work that compliment my best sellers?
Any experienced Shutterstock contributorship insight will be much appreciated.
So sorry I am a late comer for Shutterstock. Because each month I get BME from them. Is this sustainable?
Cthoman?
I assume you can't keep having BME forever. If you do, then I want your secret.  I wasn't affected by this change at SS, but other reviewal changes at IS have hit me. So, I can understand how the other contributors feel. It sucks.
3129
« on: August 27, 2010, 09:54 »
I am confident Shutterstock most reviewers do not wish ill on contributor
but post here and in Shutterstock forum say there is indication of one rogue reviewer.
This is more of a policy change than one grumpy reviewer. SS appears to have clamped down on abstract backgrounds and other things on the illustration side that they have too many of. There are several threads and many illustrator contributors complaining about it on SS. gubh83 has links to those threads above if you want to read more about it. From a general standpoint, this doesn't seem like anything new. Agencies get more picky and standards for acceptance go up. The agencies usually don't release a statement saying they've made a policy change, so most of us find out the hard way, rejections.
3130
« on: August 25, 2010, 22:09 »
opinions are like... Everybody's got one and they all stink.
3131
« on: August 25, 2010, 14:17 »
It's like the other thread.
"Cut all out the crap out of the sites to make it easier for buyers! Except for mine."
That's what I was thinking. Or maybe the agencies should implement a buy one of my files and get somebody else's crap for free.
3132
« on: August 25, 2010, 10:07 »
Interesting change for Shutterstock. I assumed they'd have to fix their vector collection eventually, but I thought they would start by removing files. I guess they decided to put a bouncer at the door first. I rarely look through the collection. Are there really that many abstract backgrounds?
3133
« on: August 24, 2010, 16:49 »
I set up a Hubpage a while back. I can't really say I was sold on the whole concept, but some people swear by that and Squidoo. I guess some of it is probably my fault because I didn't dive into it like I did with my blog.
3134
« on: August 24, 2010, 15:35 »
I'm not saying that either is correct or wrong. I'm just adding in the info of what I've read on recent rejections, along with the seemingly lack of communications with the contributor by IS. I think I would be a lot less reasonable than who posted this if this happened to me.
Yeah, I've read some of these horror stories too, but I've also been treated fairly in my dealings with IS. So, it makes it hard to know whether these stories are entirely accurate. I can't speak to this particular contributor, but it's definitely a scary thought if they really did nothing wrong.
3135
« on: August 24, 2010, 09:10 »
If this thread is only about complaining then I suppose I am OT. But the complaining will not achieve anything. You need to come up with posititve ideas and strategies which independents can use to create for themselves some of the same marketing advantages which non independents enjoy at IS? The front page collections are about marketing. Personally, I'd rather see ideas than complaining, so I appreciated your post (even thought it was on topic). Even if I'm not necessarily going to go out and start a site, it jump started my brain to think about marketing again.
3136
« on: August 23, 2010, 08:54 »
Didn't iStock always promote holiday and seasonal themed lightboxes? I always assumed they picked a lot of them by specific keywords or categories. The back to school one doesn't look that much different.
3137
« on: August 22, 2010, 20:35 »
Sounds like a lot of fun. I used to travel the country with my grandparents every summer when I was a kid. I think I've forgotten more American national landmarks than most people will ever see, but I would gladly do it all again. Have fun!
3138
« on: August 19, 2010, 14:02 »
Considering how many images I'm sure they had to review, they've done a decent job. I'm down to my last 100 images for review from the Dash program. Hopefully, they will get everyone else's reviewed soon, so I can get a big fat check.
3139
« on: August 19, 2010, 11:54 »
I don't think it matters anymore. The beast is so fat and bloated it doesn't care. I used to see big spikes after a busy week of uploads, but that doesn't really happen anymore. I can't tell the difference between a week I uploaded 100 images or a week I uploaded none. I'm not sure what would happen if I stopped uploading for a while though. I did it a few years ago, and sales went down but hit a baseline. I'm not sure if the same thing would happen now though. A lot has changed.
3140
« on: August 14, 2010, 15:26 »
Hi All,
I would just like to add that I was told 20 years ago by a big stock shooter that the market was shut tight and that we as new students would never have a chance to compete. He's dead now. Always a way in. New images needed every day specially as time makes our older work obsolete. Don't stop trying if you have the passion you will service. Good luck to all of you.
Best,
Jonathan
Are you suggesting that we kill our competition literally?
3141
« on: August 14, 2010, 13:49 »
Both DT and FT seem to be way down for me this month too. I'm hoping for a few rallying days this month to bring it back up. Today was a good start for that at FT.
3142
« on: August 13, 2010, 11:40 »
Those custom and specialty stock "stores" are already cropping up (Jonathan Ross's "Spaces" site for example), but they are in the macro market, whose prices can better afford to sustain such a specialty model.
The only way to make money at micro prices, for a site or an individual, is to offer a wide variety and quantity of images.
Agreed, that it is already here. Some of my fastest growing sites now are illustration only. I can definitely see this becoming a trend. I could even see the larger sites splitting off into specialty or limited content (similar to the Vetta stuff).
3143
« on: August 12, 2010, 11:57 »
Yeah, I haven't seen much of an increase either. Sales are few and far between, but they are usually a pretty decent royalty when I get them. I have gotten several ELs since I've been there too, but none this month though.
3144
« on: August 11, 2010, 15:16 »
There is only the one extra step of purchasing credits. I don't see why it's that hard.
I always thought it was a pain if you are buying several images and have to add up different credit packs to see which is the best deal or gives you the least amount of extras. I recently had my extra credits deleted from IS because I didn't spend them in a year. I can't really complain because they sent me several notices, but it still doesn't seem like the best system. I can see making people have a minimum purchase, but having to buy packs is annoying.
3145
« on: August 11, 2010, 12:57 »
Mostly inaudible muttering of various curse words?
3146
« on: August 11, 2010, 11:38 »
Very interesting poll. You know what else ive been wondering? Where everyone is from. Love reading the results. Btw, I'm in Texas
Mark me down as another Texan (Austin). I knew some of the contributors were over 40, but I expected more under 30 too.
3147
« on: August 10, 2010, 18:24 »
Crap. I used to be better at this. 
You just need to start earlier. Maybe, start speaking at elementary schools to discourage your future competitors.
3148
« on: August 10, 2010, 13:55 »
Not a bad summary imgbuyer. I definitely think some of those ideas have fallen on deaf ears at the agencies. I know there are some agencies that don't do credits. I can't think of which one though. As far as price though, can't you still buy web images for a buck? That never seemed too expensive to me.
3149
« on: August 10, 2010, 11:36 »
I really didn't think it took any longer to upload. Yeah, those extra keyword terms are annoying and not really necessary, but like most of the uploading process, I just turn my brain off and click on the buttons. Maybe, that is why they say uploading is a complicated process because you have to ignore all the extra garbage and just click the right buttons in a monotonous machine-like way.
3150
« on: August 07, 2010, 13:47 »
The design looks nice and is fairly easy to use. My only first impression complaint is that the forum text is a little small and hard to read and the teal text links are a little bright and hard on the eyes.
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
