SMOOCH.   

That's me giving you a big fat kiss.  So many times I'm shooting in arenas, etc. and have a hell of a time with the white balance.  I just tried quickly on a couple.  YOU'RE MY HERO.

I talked to a advertising exec for a big company recently about this: he said they would never use microstock because they don't want "their" picture to show up on 23 other webpages and a bunch of flyers.

A couple years ago both a provincial bank and a national eyeglasses company had billboards and print ads all over town.  It was slightly confusing because they were head and closeup shots of men/women with glasses.  One of the advertisers were selling glasses... but since the photos were exactly the same - I'd say they both bought stock....  You'd think the eyeglasses place would at least hire a photographer!

Then last year I did some work for the bridal show and when the big program came out in the paper everyone must have discovered cheap stock... because one photo appeared on the cover and in an unrelated ad inside. 

Just a couple cases where they shoulda spent the big bucks.

That is amazing.  Such a simple thing.  And I find it amazing how the blue one has blown away the sales of your other tickets which are equally as good.  I guess people really are drawn to blue.   How long did it take?

You know, here on the Canadian prairies "Socials" or "Cabarets" are the BIG thing.  Someone rents a hall, throws a party, sells drink tickets.  Football teams raise money that way, or engagement couples raise funds for the wedding.  When I see the ticket it makes me want to order a beer.  Ah, when did my youth dissapear?  Now I go to birthday parties and soccer games.

What exactly do flames mean?  I got one in my first couple months there.  I don't think it has added any $ per sale though.  Is it simply for recognition - I suppose it gives a potential purchaser a vote of encouragement if it has so many sales that it is flaming?

Also - are canisters just a recognition thing?

Because you had to ask, your instinct is likely correct.  Have some respect.  The tattoo is an easily identifyable mark.  I don't know you or the situation behind this image, you may even had permission to take this,  but however famous the girl is, she is likely already being exploted for drug or mental issues.   I'm not cristisizing you - but from my point when I clicked and found her face missing very offensive for some reason.  Almost like stumbling across kiddie porn on the web.  If you don't have her permission for such a an intimate image, how could feel good about exploiting it?

Hey Sharply.  I hardly ever go to the actual SS site, but your most pop airplane was there on the welcome page a minute ago - big and bold (and with no watermark!).  A pretty darned impressive photo.  Hopefully good for a couple of downloads if it's the first thing they see! 

Edit:  Sorry gang, I thought this was a shutterstock thread.  Oh well.

A couple things from their news:

At the end of this week, Fotolia will be closed for approximately 12 hours to move our servers and release the new version of the website. No major visual changes have been made from a design point of view, however the entire website has been recoded to improve performances and prepare Fotolia for the future.

Searching, editing, and uploading have all been optimized to increase speed, accuracy, and performance.

Please, let it be faster.

Miz, I read/watch them.  Quite a few came up that I haven't gotten to in the past 2 days, but I INTEND to.  I noticed your work on Dreamstime a few months ago - before I spotted you here - and it really stands out in quality and imagination.  So when someone like The Miz is willing to share their expertise I think that a lot of us are extremely thankful but don't always voice our gratitude like we should.  I happen to have cs2 but I know Corel pretty thouroughly so I've been slow to learn photoshop.  (I know my reluctance/lack of time is hurting me in the long run.)  The "live" tutorials have a big impact.

I think that sometimes the agency is too quick to pass the "too many of this subject" rejection.  Not too long ago I needed coffee beans isolated on white.  I found HUNDREDS of photos, but every single one was sharply chopped off on the side - no nice spray of beans.

The photog in me tires very easily when looking at dozens of the same - but when I'm the one purchasing more often than not I am looking for a better angle of the perfect model than the one presented.

I just had a small cluster of a little boy with musical instruments downloaded at LO.  Presumably the same buyer, so in my case a very good thing LO took all of them.

In case anyone is so inclined to look into it, this new site posted on another forum.   Started in Jan.  Photogs have to apply.  They charge $10 per image, but their site doesn't state compensation or so much as where they are physically  located. 

http://visualliving.com/ 

Go to the business category and you get pumpkins, garage doors and street signs, so I don't think they have many images yet.  Don't think I'll be rushing to upload.

A photo that has a teddy bear and a homemade quilt has been rejected by just SS for possible trademark infringement.  It's an old generic teddy bear but I've heard that some sites don't like toys of any kind.  There is a pattern and tiny images in the quilt fabric, could this be the trademark?   I try to avoid t-shirts, etc. with images, but never thought about simple fabric material.  Anyone know?

... oy vey!

Sharply... is that you rolling on the floor in laughter over there on the West Coast?     We'll let you know when you should upload.   If I don't get back to you by Christmas 2008 be sure to follow up with one of us.   I thought that although slim, the downloads were doubling and soon there would be a sale every day.... Then I read a post by rinderart and he only had like 57 sales or something like that (the amazing Laurin Rinder!).

I'm still optomistic.  I like the way they treat their contributors.  I do think they'll find their way. 

Might also be a good idea to throw a few exclusive images to DT - if exclusive gets any priority it might be important to have a few of those to hopefully direct a buyer to one's broader portfolio.

Help me with the definition of exclusive.  If I have several images that are essentially the same but each definitely from a different RAW file, can can each individual file be sent exclusive to different agencies? 

I've recognised some of the better photos - the you spot on splash pages - are touted as "exclusive", but I've seen the set up on more than one agency and in my eyes they are essentially the same.