|
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 - louoates
Pages: 1 ... 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 18 19 ... 31
326
« on: July 23, 2010, 20:11 »
Contests have become a source of pirate-able images. Some even ask a "entry fee". So you can actually pay to have your work stolen. If you've never heard of the outfit asking for "entries" and you are contacted through email do the following: Find a mirror. Twist your head around. Read the "rekcus" sign on your back.
327
« on: July 23, 2010, 15:12 »
Warning--biased opinion:
I have concluded that uploading to the wanna-bes are like giving images away for zero. No matter how easy the uploading--it's still time wasted. It seems like the greater the hype the more disappointing in the end.
So I absolutely refuse to spend any more time with any start-up. I learned the hard way with the last bunch that closed up shop before any payouts. About the only time I will spend on them is checking on the poll results on the right side of this page. If they move to the middle tier I may give them some upload time.
328
« on: July 20, 2010, 14:02 »
Bob does instructional classes for beginning photographers and is a member of several art groups in Arizona. Maybe he's "ripe" for * via one of their contact email lists.
At any rate, I'm insulted that I haven't been asked to ship any of my work to Nigeria!
329
« on: July 20, 2010, 13:42 »
Since I started this thread Bob added yet another scam to the above link. He just received it today.
330
« on: July 20, 2010, 11:51 »
Us micro-stock folks aren't the only photographers being scammed. A friend of mine sent me this link to his site that deals with how thieves are stealing from other photographers via email. Nice outline of danger signs: http://bobestrin.com/artscam.html
331
« on: July 19, 2010, 14:12 »
How about this:
RFSF
Royalty Free--Small Fee
332
« on: July 19, 2010, 14:01 »
WARNING--Important biased remark:
Without Istock and Shutterstock it wouldn't be worth the time to upload to all the others combined.
333
« on: July 17, 2010, 12:29 »
These are prime candidates for re-submissions without changes. I did so with one a few months ago and it was accepted. It's now my number two best seller at that site!
334
« on: July 17, 2010, 09:02 »
Yesterday IS rejected a vertical shot (for lighting and artifact issues) and accepted a horizontal shot OF THE VERY SAME setup shot seconds apart.  I could go on and on....
335
« on: July 06, 2010, 19:12 »
New owner could mean solving past problems. The 2 month review time short-term doesn't look promising but it sounds like they understand that that was one of the old owners' problems that had to be fixed. I had never uploaded there before what with all the negative vibes reported here. So I'll consider them a future possibility...when and if the kind folks here give them a thumbs up. Right now they're in the Yay/Veer nether-land. Their PR stuff is pretty well written. But then again it reminds me a lot of the early days of Lucky Oliver. Don't remember Lucky Oliver? You are indeed the lucky one.
336
« on: July 05, 2010, 12:06 »
My theory:
If a reviewer rejects an image for whatever reason it is not likely to reflect badly on them with their bosses. Few submitters will challenge the rejection through normal channels even though they may re-submit it later unchanged and have it accepted by a different reviewer. So the rejections slither under the radar with management. From an employees point of view it's safer to have a higher reject rate rather than being called on the carpet for accepting an image that may have had some debatable flaw.
The other element is a reviewer's time. I bet rejections take less time to process thus earnings are higher with more rejections. Human nature being what it is. Again, my theory.
337
« on: July 05, 2010, 11:32 »
I appreciate your efforts to add those bells and whistles. But I wish you'd spend that time and money to better market our images. I've been very disappointed with my sales at Veer and have seen no improvement over the last year. So I'm not really interested in tutorials or sharing my financial information.
338
« on: July 02, 2010, 15:18 »
Relax already. This problem started for me on June 14th or so. IS said they were working on it. I take them at their word.
339
« on: July 02, 2010, 10:28 »
I think this view thing is an electronic disease that's going around. If so IS probably caught it from Veer. My Veer views have been WAY UP for a few months while 2010 sales for me remain at ZERO.
I hope there's a cure discovered before it spreads to SS, DT, FT, etc.
340
« on: July 01, 2010, 14:56 »
I wonder who could make $1 million with $0 expenses. 
341
« on: July 01, 2010, 10:34 »
342
« on: July 01, 2010, 10:04 »
I hate to start a string on such a minor (I think) topic but I just had an extraordinary view count on an image I just uploaded to IS. Normal views for my images are around, maybe, a dozen to two dozen the first week. This one had 317 views the first TWO DAYS!! And it's no big deal, super unusual shot. Item 13434843 if you really want to see it.
Anyone else had such a large view count the first few days? And did it result in good long term sales?
I've had no sales so far with this one.
??
343
« on: July 01, 2010, 09:38 »
If you want to attack it like a business then forget about what your monthly sales are and look at your monthly, 1/4, year profits. $3500 a month might sound impressive to some people but what goes in your pocket? A person could make a million dollars but if they're operating on a 20% profit then they are actually failing horribly. How much money you bring in doesn't mean anything ... it's how much you keep.
Hmmm. 20% of one million sounds an awful lot like a profit of $200,000.
344
« on: June 30, 2010, 16:03 »
After another month of great views and 0 sales I just sent them this email:
Please help.
I've had no sales this year even though views seem to be up substantially. I request that you check my account and see if there is a technical reason I have not had any sales credited to me since October 13, 2009. Thank you.
Lou
We'll see what happens. If I decide to pull all my images from there does anyone have any advice other than to delete them one-by-one?
345
« on: June 30, 2010, 10:57 »
In your situation I wouldn't worry about RPI. Everyone's images yield different RPIs. You may just need to produce more images than someone else for the same income. If you believe you can succeed in this business or that you cannot succeed you are absolutely correct. I think that puts you in the upper tier of successful contributors.
i never thought that i could be in the upper tier, my monthly RPI is only $0.7
346
« on: June 30, 2010, 09:53 »
Regardless of how many are in your portfolio I'd say that $3500/mo part time is a green light for full time production. You've obviously learned enough to get that many accepted so why not give full time a go?
347
« on: June 30, 2010, 09:46 »
I've given up on trying to understand the release issue; It goes from obvious to the absurd. You'd think that graffiti is obviously not art but mindless scribbling with the intent to deface rather than edify. That's why you can get arrested for it. But "art"?. I think few common sense judges would fall for that plea. Not so sure about reviewers.
348
« on: June 27, 2010, 14:20 »
Last 3 months, 300 of my best images on line = 0 sales.
What's not going on here?
349
« on: June 25, 2010, 20:16 »
Ooops! Sorry I misread the question. I don't think I should have voted in this survey due to the wording.
I should have voted for a category that offered me: 5-10 downloads total for the 2 weeks following the first sale. For me 10 downloads on IS per month is a good seller.
I don't bother tracking the other sites because it's too time consuming. I love the DL per month feature at IS.
350
« on: June 25, 2010, 20:07 »
I've learned lots from rejections that has helped me in all my shooting. But after awhile you know that some rejections are pure subjective nonsense. Those that I've resubmitted with no change have been accepted nearly all of the time. Best bet is to learn from all rejections and resubmit the same one from time to time in hopes of getting a better reviewer.
Personally I never resubmit the rejected image. If they don't like it...what is the point of resubmitting?
Also if you want to learn from the rejection why do you resubmit the same one?
Pages: 1 ... 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 18 19 ... 31
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
