|
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 ... 10 11 12 13 14 [15] 16 17 18 19 20 ... 42
351
« on: August 27, 2012, 16:11 »
Thanks CD!
Just did the cal I have 372 points thus a level two at 35% a nice 15% pay cut! Let's see my day time job I haven't got a raise in three years and now pay cuts on my part time job- gotta love it.
That equates to a 30% drop in income.
352
« on: August 21, 2012, 03:08 »
I haven't looked too much at panther before.
I like there is greater increase for larger sizes than at some other agencies.
Thanks for posting here. Good to see some contribution from agencies here.
353
« on: August 20, 2012, 03:37 »
oh no ! here we go again !
354
« on: August 19, 2012, 01:28 »
Just make sure your website is geared towards buyers, direct them to the site which you think has the best balance between sales,price and % commission. i.e. the one that will earn you the most money.
there's plenty of websites using referrals etc aimed at contributors.
355
« on: August 18, 2012, 17:51 »
The thing that annoys me is that I've just had some disabled for "trademark". Can't they just change them to editorial use.
No, because the inspection process is different, and because you have to write a proper caption.
Mind you, I've read more than once of files being refused for the main collection with a suggestion that it should be sent as editorial, then the editorial is rejected with the suggestion that with a few deft clonings out, it should be in the main collection (and/or vice versa) - thereafter stuck in limbo.
 I know that they have different requirements for editorial. It was a retorical question. I'll refrase. I wish they'd find a sensible method of migrating them to editorial without me having to re-upload the file. i.e move them to an area where I can add a caption and press a button to submit to the editorial que. I know that they are not capable of this. Of course they'd reject it for artifacts 
356
« on: August 18, 2012, 17:43 »
Spending to much time on this doesn't add up $ wise. I'd just send the takedown notice with a link on where to buy it if they want to keep using the image. My time would be better off submitting more images than chasing $10 here and there. If IBM or Toyota were using it illegally it might be a different story. I know the moral of not stealing is really important to other people and go for it if that what is important to you.
357
« on: August 18, 2012, 17:19 »
The thing that annoys me is that I've just had some disabled for "trademark". Can't they just change them to editorial use.
Checked the search and there are more than 200 still in the search however when you click on some of them they come up with file not found. Looks like everyones got the chop.
358
« on: August 18, 2012, 04:27 »
How about 50% on normal sales for 365 days until next years birthday.
And Extended licenses should be priced higher.
359
« on: August 17, 2012, 19:57 »
Fotolia has always been the agency who accepts the least amount of my images.
360
« on: August 16, 2012, 16:08 »
I'm not on warmpicture can I post
361
« on: August 15, 2012, 15:43 »
Sucks if you live in Australia.
I wonder if it would be a $69 airfare and no first class and no baggage allowance
I'd probably be over it though because if I made 3.3m on photodune I would have made around 60million all up and I'd be buying my own plane ticket and it wouldn't be to Melbourne.
362
« on: August 13, 2012, 03:03 »
I have no personal stake in this site, but at the beginning you have the ability to have the best search engine around. But what do I find? Puppies in the 'wildlife' category.
'Should do better'.
I think you are right Sue that I have to do better. But most sites have an animals/wildlife category which encompasses everything from goldfish to dogs to killer whales. Our categories are very broad, per SS. What we allow people to do is to drift to a category, then search within that category for something specific (like dogs or killer whales).
Internal search is something which would bare fruit later down the road. Most of our traffic lands directly on an image (through Google Images mainly), so when they click to our image they have essentially already found what they are looking for. I think our landing page accounts for something like 10% of our entry traffic.
If you search "wildlife" as a keyword in the seach it returns animals that I would consider to be wildlife. i.e. not horses,puppies and goldfish. Is warm picture an agency or a co-op ?
363
« on: August 11, 2012, 23:38 »
We are never going to totally loose getty. It's like a house property. Even if the owner goes bankrupt, the house doesn't disappear. It just falls into someone else's hands at a discounted rate. If Getty was in the discount bin, some other investor, business man, company would gobble them up.
Maybe for now they have only name and old content and new content is nothing special (Vetta DeBileta most) + * money from "both" IS contributors (ex and non ex). Money which they just sucked and testing a ground how they will give Mooooreeeeee
Maybe I am too boooooorring to all of you because this is my 3rd or 4th post about the same sick history at that subject.
For me it perfectly fits in my theory about black mailing old daddy Getty when he was live.
----------------------------------------------------------
First
Daddy Getty when he was a live was some kind of rich collector and he was blackmailed by Mafia.
Because of that how he can avoid that, he made public Foundation.
As in term of any Foundation is that it is to be sustainable as itself.
This is more visible as GettyImages site which can even afford that to by iStock site.
Second
Somehow Getty Foundation which is sustainable as it self which is not on free market with somehow process was purchased with murky Offshore lets say "investors" H&F(uckers) MAFIA.
Third
Seam As is
H&F = hidden MAFIA which came back to take easy money and they suck it now
This is front end
--------------------
For contributor back end is constantly lowering commissions throwing sand in the contributors eyes and selling the story of exclusivity and unsustainability?! what?!
Anyhow H&F is sckin Getty> Getty is sckin iStock> iStock is cheating us contributors.
H&F(uckers) (read Mafia not in figurative sense but in real) are making more murky debt and they deposit is Getty whole sucked and Gettys for now Livestock branches.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
@ Leaf
Disable that lobotomy IGNORE button
I am boring to my self in repeating same old story: How fish is stinking from head, and this forum laments of minor technical problems while Greedy sharks grabs our money in tons from our eyes, and here we have fantastic IGNORE button which will help all us to share our thoughts.
Briliant
Will something Like/Dislike button wouldnt be enough in ranking useful vs trolling?
@ GostWyck Excellent post
They might be looking at it but it is far from a done deal. It would appear that Getty's revenue has only increased from $858M in 2007 to $945M last year. That's not much to say the least. Istock would have been a tiny contributor to revenue in 2007 but now might be as much as 30% of the entire business. That suggests to me that most of the business has been in fairly serious decline (as indeed it had been prior to the H&F buyout) since then. Getty has also been stripped of $900M cash in 'dividends' over the last 18 months and saddled with tons of debt instead.
How can Getty be worth $4B or anything even remotely close to that figure? I think H&F must be hoping to find a mug punter with more spare cash than business sense but I doubt that they will be successful. We'd need to see more financial details but from what we know already I struggle to see why anyone would even offer the $2.4B that H&F originally paid for Getty.
http://www.wikinvest.com/stock/Getty_Images_(GYI)/Filing/10-K/2008/F2564506
Add that one to the list of posts that I couldn't understand
364
« on: August 08, 2012, 05:48 »
I more upset with slow sales than slow reviews. They are normally about 5% of my earnings.
365
« on: August 06, 2012, 15:26 »
months
366
« on: August 01, 2012, 05:48 »
I have to imagine that wedding photography being one of the more popular genres of photography that the masses like to do for money, it is highly likely you'll find a photographer using a stock photo for advertising purposes. Of course, the 'found' bit is garbage, and just dropping it in a portfolio is misrepresentatiin, but using it in a more promotional aspect should be OK. Everyone can't shoot everything, and photographers have the right to use stock to fill needs.
Probably "okay" as far as licensing is concerned but ethically in the gutter. The service you are providing is wedding photos
367
« on: July 30, 2012, 07:12 »
can the time machine go forward in time aswell ?
I'd go forward get the cure for cancer,aids, an iphone 8, 5dMVII and the race results for every horse race.
I'd Come back give the cures to some researcher, sell the iphone and 5dMVII to samsung for 1 billion dollars and keep the race results as backup. I'd delete all my microstock accounts.
Then I'd go back in time to see if that jesus dood was really all he was cracked up to be, see who it really was on that grassy knoll and check out some good surf spots with no crowds.
368
« on: July 23, 2012, 06:51 »
May aswell contribute to this ground breaking thread.
How do you want to measure it ? Who is the biggest seller of crap ?
total sales, total dollars, total royalities to contributors, % of sales that are crap
369
« on: July 23, 2012, 06:32 »
it would be more useful to report the number of photos you had on line month by month. Atleast you could guage your rpi throughout time.
0.02% database exposure if I double my portfolio and the top guy doesn't upload any I'll go to 0.04%. I agree it's useless, probably made some sense when 3000 would have been the largest portfolio but times have moved on dreamstime.
370
« on: July 21, 2012, 21:42 »
I'd use my 5-1000 f1.2 IS L - since we are in fantasy land.
Maybe I could use a heap of cameras with different sensor sizes to make up for the lack of different lenses.
Mine is bigger than yours but of course lighter. Made from nano tubes. Its a M series canon lens (next in the alphabet) M series is so exclusive you've never heard of it, Instead of white it grey, not battle ship grey (N series) but a special shade of grey that is one shade tougher than gun metal grey. 1- 9142mm f0.01 IS M The IS works by moving the universe around the lens through quantum plasma transpiration. 24-105mm is probably 90% of my shots.
371
« on: July 20, 2012, 04:10 »
Yet it is not easy to kill a troll. One story goes that if a troll comes to eat you, you must offer to feed him a lot of food first. Then, when the troll isn't looking, you put a backpack on your stomach. When you sit down to eat, you take a knife and cut a hole in the backback and shovel food into it. Tell the troll that he would be able to get food to his stomach faster if he cuts a hole in it like you did. That will be the end of that troll!
Source: Wikipedia?
Wow ! who said you couldn't learn anything on this forum. With hot tips like this I won't have to put up with those nasty troll attacks any more.
372
« on: July 18, 2012, 05:25 »
30 months to break even. a bit longer than I'd would have thought would be a target for a full time microstock machine.
373
« on: July 18, 2012, 04:15 »
10 years? you are so weak with numbers, at least prepare what you are going to say
80K images
10 years = 3560 days
80K divided by 3560 = 22.47
Dude check your own numbers before you attack someone else
Theres 365 days in a year not 356!
And you forgot the leap years (and leap seconds aswell) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leap_second
374
« on: July 10, 2012, 16:27 »
The funniest part is they told me it hurts my own sales! Let's see I have had one sale for $.35 in 17 days boy I better not have similar pics or I risk losing that $.35 
Their theory is that images will not climb as high in the levels ranking if you have similar photos. i.e people will buy the cheaper similar still on level 1 instead of a level 2 and so on.
375
« on: July 06, 2012, 05:28 »
it might not be that convient but I think you can do time lapse by connecting a laptop to your camera and using the canon software to trigger from the computer at set intervals.
Pages: 1 ... 10 11 12 13 14 [15] 16 17 18 19 20 ... 42
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
