|
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 - Ploink
Pages: 1 ... 10 11 12 13 14 [15] 16 17 18
351
« on: November 04, 2010, 08:13 »
Makes me think it's some sort of SNAFU rather than deliberate.
"Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity." - That seems to be IS's mission statement lately 
352
« on: October 26, 2010, 12:46 »
Thread ended because someone posted that agency collection pictures are upscaled ?
I had missed that. Are Agency images upscaled? Isn't that one of the biggest taboos on Istock?
I don't want to believe Istock is in demise, but things like this cause me real concern.
Just have a look at the last two or three pages of the "Where we go from here"-thread. It is obvious "where we go from here": Someone at Getty/Istock management made the decision that it would be more profitable to screw their contributors every which way, than to have a happy community. And I'm afraid that time will prove them right: the dust has settled by now, only very few contributors of importance took any consequences (my hat's off to jamirae et al.) and come January it wil be business as usual - only at a quite lower percentage to most of us. It comes to light that agency photos are obviously not only not inspected as rigorously as yours our mine, but that some of them are also upscaled. Not to mention that nobody bothered to deny the fact that some inspectors/admins have faster reviews than your average exclusive, let alone the independents. I never bought into the "we are one happy family" at IS, but then I never wore the crown and always was from the part of the family nobody really wanted to talk about. Right now the income from IS is between 15 and 25% of my total microstock income, in January it will be between 13% and 21%. A loss for sure, but nothing that would be "unsustainable" (sic!). Luckily I'm not doing this for a living, but I feel for everybody who does and who put all their eggs in the IS-basket...
353
« on: October 26, 2010, 08:39 »
At least someone is answering the phone  and pretty quickly, at that... Doesn't change the fact that the matrix of the Getty universe seems to be full of glitches lately 
354
« on: October 19, 2010, 04:51 »
KAACHING! Well, actually kaaching September earnings are posted...
355
« on: October 12, 2010, 23:17 »
Propably so that we can't ask about payout anymore
356
« on: October 12, 2010, 11:44 »
Is the forum gone on the StockXpert-site? Or did they put some place where I can't find it? 
357
« on: October 11, 2010, 01:40 »
...but is reflecting a moving date range set by Veer. This is confusing a number of people, as it can appear that we've lost money when we haven't. Now I've got it  Thanks for explaining it patiently
358
« on: October 10, 2010, 23:36 »
Thanks for the hint, but I don't think that applies to the "overall view" of views and earnings on the http://contributor.veer.com/dashboard/stats page - above the diagrams, not below? Anyway, nothing changes when use the maximum time span
I just re-tested it and yes, it changes the total number under the 'statistics' panel, by the words 'Gross Earnings'.
Yes, they do change - but I was talking about the "Royalties" display above the statistics panel. This shows your 'lifetime earnings' as far as I can tell. Thanks for checking again, though 
359
« on: October 10, 2010, 14:16 »
Be sure to check the date range you're looking at. Thanks for the hint, but I don't think that applies to the "overall view" of views and earnings on the http://contributor.veer.com/dashboard/stats page - above the diagrams, not below? Anyway, nothing changes when use the maximum time span
360
« on: October 10, 2010, 06:46 »
I am posing the people in 4 rows and shooting from slightly above.
That arrangement gives you 25 people per row and a very "panoramic" picture with lot of empty back- and foreground. Maybe this is the desired effect, if not I'd think about other ways of arranging the crowd.
361
« on: October 10, 2010, 05:28 »
I just had a sale disappear at Veer (again)! Suddenly $3.50 are missing - is there any way to track customer refunds (because I hope that's what it is...)
362
« on: September 06, 2010, 03:50 »
Thinkstock earnings for August(!) have been posted at StockXpert last night. So apparently it is possible to crunch the numbers and transfer them to another database in less than four weeks - let's see how long it's going to take IS until they show sales from August...
363
« on: September 01, 2010, 10:20 »
...You've got exactly what they promised and what you signed up for.
The fiasco of JIU/PC sales at StockXpert, when weeks of sales were simply unrecorded and unacknowledged, should have been warning enough of how the PP was likely to play out. Once they've got your images they could care less about you as a contributor. I would guess it's on a similar level to prostitution then. Less tangible or immediate concepts like self-worth, legitimacy/transparency or long-term health/business can just be ignored ... because it's extra income. Figuratively speaking they knew they were likely to be screwed ... and that's what happened. Heigh-ho. Yeah, well, hindsight is always 20/20, isn't it? Neither do I see a reason for this hostility, nor do i appreciate being called a prostitute... This is what we/they were promised: http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=88699&page=1Payment structure is similar to SS - at least if your exclusive - they have OD downloads (image packs) now, and I fail to see the difference beween a $0.25 download on SS or Canstock and one in the partner program. Apart from the fact that I have three downloads per month on Canstock and three digit figures in the partner program, that is
364
« on: August 31, 2010, 03:52 »
Is there any way of limiting a particular image on Shutterstock to Enhanced License? I have a newsworthy image that might prove to be in demand as the anniversary of the event approaches. It sort of rankles to see the license royalties at $.25 for this particular image.
If there is, I'm missing the boat. I have thousands (not just tossing out a number, actual thousands!) of images that I will not upload to SS or any other micro that takes editorial, because of the 25c sales or low prices. They do sell for a reasonable price on Alamy.
As far as I've seen, my SS editorial sell for the same prices as the RF and I've never found any way to limit the choice of license available to buyers.
Just out of curiosity: Which type of editorial photos do you have on Alamy? I'm asking because I have a bit more than thousand editorials on SS - all of them sport photos - and they outsell my non-editorials by 3:1...
365
« on: August 29, 2010, 13:47 »
One thing I don't understand is the fact that StockXpert manages to post the Thinkstock earnings consistently a week earlier than IS does - considering the source is the same On a related note: On the StockXpert-forums someone posted a very polite reply from a senior IS director that he got after asking for the missing payments. It really is completely different from the BS you get on the IS forums about the "rare and fleeting beast" and some such - check it out here (big post halfway down the page): http://www.stockxpert.com/forum/show_messages/28132/2I wonder why a message like that is not possible on the IS forums - it would go a long way in calming the waves...
366
« on: August 22, 2010, 11:23 »
I just had a sale disappear on Veer - it was only for $0.35 but since I tend to get one only every other month, I really care about them It was there on Thursday or Friday and it is gone now Does anyone know how Veer handles customer refunds and if they show up in the sales statistics?
367
« on: May 19, 2010, 04:06 »
For clarity's sake, lets say $100 (minimum payout level) per month would be "significant". I have followed the threads closely and don't see many claiming to make anywhere near that on TS.
If anyone is making that much or more at Thinkstock on a regular basis then I hope they will post here and clear up my misconception that TS is only paying pocket change.
I won't post absolute numbers here, but in February ThinkStock sales made 20% percent of my total IS income, in March it was 35% - with a portfolio of approx. 500 of what must be the worst stockphotos ever So if someone with a "good portfolio" would opt their photos in, I'm sure there is significant money to be made - the question remains, of course, about the long term effect on sales on IS and - for non-exclusives - on all other sites... FYI: April earnings from ThinkStock have started to trickle into my IS account today...
368
« on: May 08, 2010, 16:56 »
BTW, Tom. I wouldn't be too discouraged. If you read the IS thread, the people who are opted in and have images selling there aren't making money either. Nobody except Getty (and their wholly owned collection) are making any significant money on TS.
I, respectfully, beg to differ - I am making significant money. A least compared to what I am making on my regular IS sales. I'm not yet convinced that the March results on IS are correct for everyone, I can't imagine people going from 700 to 70 sales on TS in a single month - Rob promised to look into it, and the final word is still out...
369
« on: May 07, 2010, 11:21 »
Just wanted to let you know that StockXpert posted Thinkstock earnings for April today...
So, how are things looking for you Thinkstock contributors? Just curious.
When I add up my Thinkstock sales via StockXpert (Hemera) and via IS, I have a lot more subscription sales than before (when StockXpert was still StockXpert) - "a lot more" meaning by a factor of 2 - 3. What is missing, of course, are the PPD sales from StockXpert. I also was not affected by the drastic decline of TS sales that is discussed at the IS forums...
370
« on: May 07, 2010, 10:32 »
Just wanted to let you know that StockXpert posted Thinkstock earnings for April today...
371
« on: May 03, 2010, 04:58 »
I uploaded a few images to test the waters. They were accepted within hours. A regular RF image from the batch is still pending. It seems editorial receives special attention by reviewers. Wondering how others are doing with editorial at SS?
Yes, editorials have their own, faster review queue at both SS and DT. My editorials (sports of all kinds) do very well (3 editorial sales for every non-editorial) on SS, not so on DT (7 editorial sales for every 10 non-editorial) - no idea why, though...
372
« on: April 30, 2010, 03:32 »
(not confused enough yet?)
People who had images on IS and StockXpert, AKA phase three people, appear to have some IS images added and a promise that soon the StockXpert images will be searched for dupes and those may be added to ThinkStock. Three months and nothing.
The phase three people will be paid by both agencies, depending on where the image came from.
I think I can add a bit to the confusion: I had photos on both StockXpert and IS, therefore I should have been a "phase three person", but - for reasons known only to "a speculative being" - was in phase one. I have been paid by both agencies (IS and the sorry remains of StockXpert) for Thinkstock sales, and all TS-bashing aside: If I add up my March sales on the StockXpert- and the IS-part of Thinkstock, I made more money than I ever did with StockXpert-subscriptions when they were still StockXpert. So, go figure...
373
« on: April 13, 2010, 09:20 »
You can get virtually 100% uptime for a site if you mirror/synchronize all on geographically different data centers, for a hefty cost. Is that worth it? (it will show in the commissions).
Yeah, they'd probably lower the commissions to 20% - no, wait... Maybe I'm too negative, but things like the current server problems let me fear the worst when they announce "a major site overhaul sometimes this year..." 
374
« on: April 09, 2010, 09:41 »
Is it by the 15th of the following month?
Is "used" to be in the second week of the month, in March it was in the third week, only TPTB know for sure what it will be in April. I for one don't understand why it is so hard to transfer downloads from one database do another?
375
« on: April 08, 2010, 09:54 »
It must have been Getty adjusting the matrix so they can take their bigger chunk. 
So who do we nominate for Agent Smith and, more importantly, who is going to be our Neo?
Pages: 1 ... 10 11 12 13 14 [15] 16 17 18
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
