|
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 - qwerty
Pages: 1 ... 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 18 19 ... 42
326
« on: October 05, 2012, 05:50 »
What ever camera you get make sure its got 'P' mode for professionals. If you want to submit to microstock 'M' mode works aswell. There's also 'A' for Alamy if you want to do RM.
327
« on: October 05, 2012, 05:45 »
0 followers
I see they have number of downloads this month.
It would be good to have downloads today aswell.
If people want to copy others works there's always bookmarks, its not like this followers thing is going to change what is happening anyway.
328
« on: September 25, 2012, 16:15 »
Well, I have to say I've been inspired by this thread. I'm off to do a group of angry villagers wielding pitchforks, torches and sundry agricultural implements isolated on white.
make sure you put in the description "angry villagers preparing to punish microstock copycats."
329
« on: September 25, 2012, 03:13 »
Yuri threw out a little bait and everybody jumped on it.
Is there a list of what concepts are acceptable to copy ?
Do they have a time limit ? 10 years ?
If 1000 people beat you to using the concept its okay but a concept from 1 person isn't ?
Is it okay to use a concept from RM ? but not from RF ?
Tip for all serious concept inspired contributors search RM not Istock to find your inspiration.
Gold fish are they fair game ?
computers with chains ?
girls with headphones ?
girls blowing dandelions ?
nests with golden eggs ?
Elephants riding surfboards ?
All very confusing.
I had a photo of landmark refused because it was to similar to "someone elses work." What a massive concept it was to take a photo of one of the worlds most recognisable landmarks from a easily accessible vantage point at lunchtime.
It made sense to reject it for "our database already covers this area" or purely that's hopeless, shoot at a better time of day but to say I was copying was a long bow to draw in my opion. I think that especially when you see how well and how widely some concepts are re-invented.
Maybe the poster wanted to get everybody to copy yuri's work to get them all band so that he could wipe out the competition. Just yuri and himself raking in the cash.
Hey ! that's my concept ! no photos of rakes and money. Oh hang on there's 24 already on istock. Are they 10 years old yet ?
Oh well looks like I bit at Yuri's bait aswell.
330
« on: September 23, 2012, 06:18 »
You have to link them via code in the description field.
Someone here might point to the generator someone created to make the links
Something like this
replace #### with the lightbox number and the other one with an image number that is representive of whats in the lightbox.
It changed stuff and didn't display sorry, I don't know how to fix it.
331
« on: September 23, 2012, 06:08 »
You have to link them via code in the description field. Someone here might point to the generator someone created to make the links Something like this replace #### with the lightbox number and the other one with an image number that is representive of whats in the lightbox.
332
« on: September 23, 2012, 04:06 »
last time I checked paypal offered very competitive rates on USD to ASD.
Having said that, competitive compared to the blood * leech banks.
Only way to win ! Buy bank shares with your microstock earnings.
333
« on: September 22, 2012, 02:31 »
I have 2 days worth showing up
334
« on: September 21, 2012, 18:26 »
I emailed them and said I wanted my 12,96 dollars paid.
They said I could give it to a buyer.
If i had an expensive attorney for cheap, i would sue them.
Before you sue them I'd read the terms and conditions because it probably says that they get to keep it if its below payout. I'd think that processing the payment would cost them less than hasselling around responding to emails and alike.
335
« on: September 21, 2012, 02:27 »
Thanks for posting and the replies so far, I like to see the constructive ideas on how to improve photos.
336
« on: September 20, 2012, 05:06 »
while we're on conspiracy theories. Is it atilla inspecting from the clocktower or is it some faceless men on the grassy knoll that are rejecting our potential best sellers ?
337
« on: September 20, 2012, 04:55 »
September is terrible, accross the board not only limited to Istock.
I started in 2007 with an even mix of submission across the years.
338
« on: September 16, 2012, 03:39 »
for 85%-80% of the take you'd think they'd be able to do this properly.
If a company was taking 85%-80% commissions you'd think they'd start re-tiling the shop floor on the weekend and they'd employ someone who knows how to tile.
339
« on: September 16, 2012, 03:09 »
The longer they delay the payment, the more money for them. I don't expect them to pay more promptly in the future.
As a somewhat related aside, this week I saw about 90 more files from my older images make it over to Thinkstock (after a few months when nothing was moving from the backlog even though new images mostly made it over)
I'm noticing some "selectivity." There seems to be someone (or a group of someone) reviewing files just for Thinkstock. And, it doesn't seem to be based on quality.
?? You mean someone is reviewing only files that certain exclusives may have directed to go solely to TS, not to iS?
NO... I don't know anything about exclusives. I'm just saying that of 20 of my accepted images at iS, maybe 3-5 are seen on TS. There seems to be specific criteria. I just don't know what the criteria is.
lol criteria lol The connector doesn't work correctly but they don't care too much just as long as they get a few thousand a week new photos on there to keep the subscription customers happy enough to not go to shutterstock
340
« on: September 15, 2012, 18:25 »
Am I correct in remembering that FT reduced royalties for those who were on DP? Do correct me if I'm wrong.
If that's right then I wonder if those who are pulling their ports should let FT know to get their royalties restored to normal. I was never on DP myself, so I can't test the waters on this.
I think that was threatened, but DP raised prices sufficiently that Fotolia did not end up following through on that. Thank goodness.
pot meet kettle fotolia meet DP
341
« on: September 14, 2012, 02:42 »
I think he was saying he wanted a coffee for 10c per cup total, not that he wanted a discount of 10c
He wants Starbucks to sell coffee for less that what it costs (presumably) but then is upset that stock agencies are selling our stuff cheaply?
*$2.85 for a coffee!! it's already cheap and he wants it cheaper. we pay $4 in Australia. (not Starbucks, good cafe coffee)
$4 is okay, atleast the staff get more than $2 per hour in Australia Should the analogy be a chinese buffet
342
« on: September 13, 2012, 05:39 »
I think that anybody waiting for an upsurge will be disappointed.
The only way to increase income is to
increase photos
improve quality
improve keywording
improve self promotion
Any improvement in the economy will only be a couple of percent. There is no way in my opion that improvement of the economy will offset factors
increased competition
reduced commission %
aging of your portfolio
Maybe I misunderstood the thread. I thought it was about reasons that top agencies are showing drops in traffic, not about the performance (or not) of individual portfolios.
While your suggestions are obvious if one wants to improve their position relative to other contributors, it doesn't really address why the sites as a whole are seeing a drop in sales/traffic.
Re-reading it looks like I was expanding the topic a little. There was one comment that the downslide in global economy was the reason for the reduced traffic which generally links into how much we are earning. My main point (although it appears slightly off topic) was don't hold your breath thinking when the economy picks up that we'll be rolling around in our money vaults like scrooge mcduck.
343
« on: September 13, 2012, 04:48 »
All those keen for a strike here's your chance 
344
« on: September 12, 2012, 16:22 »
I think that anybody waiting for an upsurge will be disappointed.
The only way to increase income is to
increase photos
improve quality
improve keywording
improve self promotion
Any improvement in the economy will only be a couple of percent. There is no way in my opion that improvement of the economy will offset factors
increased competition
reduced commission %
aging of your portfolio
345
« on: September 09, 2012, 01:32 »
But this is the US against the rest of the world? I would have been surprised if the numbers would show the US as the biggest buyer. Its one country against the rest. No?
Worlds biggest economy by decent way, maybe bigger than western europe. People are also interested because the tax is different whether the sales are from the US and from non-US
346
« on: September 05, 2012, 03:13 »
If you get your investment back in 6 months to 2 years I would have thought that was pretty good.
347
« on: September 01, 2012, 22:51 »
Maybe they should outsource their forum researching ?
348
« on: September 01, 2012, 19:17 »
I did find a company paying $50 per image, but that is for images not already producing revenue.
Care to elaborate a little more about this ? Seems like an interesting thing and I would love to know what conditions do they make.
Search the forum. For $50 you sell your copyright. It's not complicated, but it isnt smart.
The fact that they cherry pick ones they want for $50, not buy the ones gathering dust on your hard drive that you want make this generally a bad deal.
349
« on: August 28, 2012, 05:09 »
Doest anyone know USA and Australia in this matter?
Australia is great for microstock! (as presumably that means you are not earning a high income!)
There is an entrepreneurs tax offset that (from memory) is shaped between 25 and 50k - if you earn 0-50k it applies an offset on any tax you are due to pay: up to about 30k it can write it out completely.
if you are sole trading and so paying tax as an individual then income tax is stepped (a bit like the uk) and again if your income is modest it means a low tax burden:
0 - $18,200 =Nil
$18,201 - $37,000 19c for each $1 over $18,200
$37,001 - $80,000 $3,572 plus 32.5c for each $1 over $37,000
$80,001 - $180,000 $17,547 plus 37c for each $1 over $80,000
$180,001 and over $54,547 plus 45c for each $1 over $180,000
there is a 1.5% medicare levy unless you have private healthcare and 10% on almost all purchases via GST (business can claim that back)
to compare with the UK there are no separate National insurance contributions to pay.
for small business there are also simplified rules for writing off purchases in the first year without the need to track them as assets and value them each year.
compared to when I ran a business in the UK, Australias tax system seems to be a lot simpler for 'simple businesses'
There are two medicare charges the medicare levy charged above a certain threshold and another medicare levy surcharge for if you don't have private health insurance and above a certain level.
350
« on: August 28, 2012, 04:19 »
unless you have some specific niche in mind for your agency your pushing "sh#t" uphill. i.e. aerial photos, asian models, industrial, etc.
You'll need to spend a huge amount of time providing excellent service to your customers in order to provide value. Can you really do this as a one man band part time.
What agencies are acceptable to also distribute to under your non-exclusive terms of "I'll cancel your account and hit you with a big stick if you submit to microstock"
I'm all for fair royalities and I would love to see successful agencies that pay 50% or more.
BTW did anybody notice that photodune is paying 70% royalities for the last week of the month.
Pages: 1 ... 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 18 19 ... 42
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
