|
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 - Allsa
Pages: 1 ... 10 11 12 13 14 [15] 16 17
351
« on: July 16, 2009, 14:30 »
What you don't understand is, the images that were rejected were of all different types of subject matter. And again, if they dislike my work so much, why did they accept every single one of my initial submissions, and then go on to accept most of the illustrations in the second batch? Why didn't they just reject my initial submission, and save me a lot of trouble? It's not the rejections, this isn't a wounded ego speaking here - I resent the inconsiderate way I was treated, and how so much of my time was wasted. I believe that the third batch fell into that hands of a 'bad' inspector, but I have no way of verifying this, and no one from Veer has addressed any of my concerns.
I know there is an unspoken taboo against complaining about rejections in the forums, but I just thought people should know that not everyone has a 'woo yay' opinion of Veer. Again, isn't this supposed to be a balanced forum? If Veer were my business I'd want the benefit of hearing about both the positive AND negative experiences of my contributors and customers. It seems to me that's only common sense.
352
« on: July 16, 2009, 13:27 »
If you don't like Veer then why contribute to them?
I've stopped uploading to them and will not be uploading anything else. Right now I'm trying to decide if I should pull my portfolio and close my account. The fact that others claim to have had positive experiences with Veer makes wonder if perhaps the mass rejections were simply a mistake. I doubt it, though - call me a pessimist, but most likely I'll be deleting my portfolio from Veer. I've got 6 agencies I contribute to, so I would rather focus on them. I wrote this to warn others that Veer was a waste of time for me, and could possibly be a waste for them as well. We've all heard from those who think Veer is wonderful, why not have a more balanced assessment of this new agency? Isn't that part of the reason why this group exists in the first place?
353
« on: July 16, 2009, 07:25 »
If your avatar says something about your style of work i feel that you maybe really doesn't fit to veer.
If Veer doesn't want my style of work, fine - they should have rejected my application. Sure my ego would have been wounded, but at least least I wouldn't have wasted any more time on it. All ten of my initial submissions were accepted. Then I uploaded around 34 more images - only four of these were rejected. That was encouraging, so I submitted around 38 more images, and nearly all of these were rejected. Now what would you think? Honestly, what would anyone think? Would you assume you were dealing with a professional, well run agency, with a thoroughly trained, high quality inspection team? Or would you think you had just wasted a massive amount of time on yet another poorly run, highly overrated agency? That was the conclusion I reached, and I posted about it to warn others. OK, I admit, I wanted to blow off a little steam, too. But my main intention was to spare others a similar experience to mine, and to add another voice to counter all the hype I've been hearing on this forum about Veer. I have yet to hear a response from Veer, but then there was no response when I had the FTP problems, either. You may not like my avatar, but don't assume that my work is of poor quality. I've been in the micro business since 2004, and I have been successful at it. Am I supposed to believe that a portfolio that earned diamond status at iStock is of poor quality? Don't make assumptions. Linda B
354
« on: July 15, 2009, 20:39 »
Let me start out by saying I regret joining Veer, and wasting so much time on their site. I've decided to stop uploading, and I'm getting close to canceling my account. I wasted several hours uploading a batch of around 40 illustrations to Veer, all different subject matter. Most of them were rejected as "subject matter not suitable for the Veer marketplace". I seriously doubt they spent more that 5 minutes looking over the whole batch of around 40. There was a wide range of subjects, most were rejected. I'm mainly disgusted at the colossal waste of time this was, time that could have been spent creating new illustrations for my portfolio. Even iStock, the most rejecting agency out there, accepts 79% of my work - and they also provide Scout to rescue the images that never should have been rejected. And that's not all, I can't get the FTP to work, and when I posted about it on this forum, I received no help whatsoever. I had to upload images one at a time, ridiculously time consuming. I'm very busy and don't have time to waste like this. Take some advice that I wished I had received to begin with - don't waste your time on Veer  Linda B
355
« on: July 13, 2009, 21:00 »
I'm using CoreFTP and I can't connect, my password seems to be the problem. The last few entries of the log are below - does anyone have an idea as to what I'm doing wrong?
SER AlienCat
331 Password required for AlienCat.
PASS **********
530 User cannot log in.
356
« on: June 30, 2009, 12:35 »
The really big fault I have with your reasoning is that you may experience better growth than you'd expect when going exclusive because of extra exposure and better search results. But hey, if you enjoy uploading to 7 sites, go for it. I know I'm enjoying the perks of not having to worry about rejections and processing for the tastes of different sites, but thats me.
But your rejected images go to waste - doesn't that frustrate you?
357
« on: June 29, 2009, 15:30 »
I also know several diamond independents and I think istock is mostly in the 30 - 40% range of their micro income. If you double that for a diamond you are still only going to get 60 - 80%
Of course there are many other reasons to go exclusive and the ones I know who did are mostly glad they did, but higher revenue isn't guaranteed at all.
True, but if I lose Fotolia, it would probably make sense for me financially. I would much rather stay independent and I don't mind uploading to multiple sites. I do mostly illustration, so the volume of uploads is small in my case.
358
« on: June 29, 2009, 09:27 »
Hi, I sometimes consider exlusivity at Istock as well (nowhere near you standard as I am a mere silver contributer) as Fotolia is really getting worse by the day and shutterstock is also not such a winner anymore but I am very afraid that I lose control over my own images. One exclusive I understand you are not allowed to sell or use your images by yourself (I don't mean via stock) Even images which has been rejected are no go. And all your eggs in one basket still seems to me is not very businesswise. But I hope some exlusive or ex exlusive will answer your question. That would really help.
Good luck with your decision.
Patricia
I have the same concerns about exclusivity that you do. I enjoy being an independent, I like seeing how different types of images sell on different sites, and if an image is rejected by one agency, it will be accepted by others, so the illustration still has a chance and doesn't go to waste. I never imagined that I'd ever consider exclusivity with iStock or any other agency, but then I never considered the possibility of getting kicked out of Fotolia, either.
359
« on: June 29, 2009, 07:44 »
They are having trouble with the fact that I purchased most of the models I use in my 3D renders, instead of creating the models myself. I thought I could clear everything up when I proved to them that my use of the models was permitted under the vendor's license agreement, but as of yet they are not satisfied with this and my account remains frozen.
istockphoto does not allow to use 3d models that you purchased too
This isn't true - I went through the same thing with iStock a few years ago. Someone discovered that I had used a purchased model, and they reported it to iStock. iStock disabled the image in question, and I had to prove that it's usage was legal. I even had to solicit help from the company I bought the model from. At one point, by some miracle, I was able to get Bruce Livingstone on the phone! (Bet that would never happen today  ). The thing dragged on for a month, but finally iStock was assured that my usage of the model wasn't going to open them up to any legal liability, and they relented and the image was returned to my portfolio. But iStock never disabled my ENTIRE portfolio! Fotolia disabled the two images in question - I had no problem with that - but then they disabled my entire portfolio ...and they are thinking about deleting it entirely. I even had a representative of the company I bought the model from email FT and assure them that this sort of usage is perfectly legal under their EULA. He also answered their questions, yet in spite of that FT is still thinking about deleting my portfolio, it is still offline.
360
« on: June 28, 2009, 20:19 »
your choice, it doesn't work for me 
Maybe I way off here but I would say that IS is less one for being able to resubmit. Once they mark as this is not stock or whatever and flag as noresubmit you cannot resubmit and apparently resubmitting as a new image is big no-no as far as they are concerned (havent had a problem there myself though). The other sites you just fix and submit as a new image.
personally if fotolia has this issue I would be much more worried about going to only agency in case the same thing happened there. if someone competing with you flags it to admin and you go through the whole thing again with istock you lose all your income. (and I thought istock were the strongest on trying to control these type of issues).
I agree with you, exclusivity is very risky, and probably a bad choice for me. I just want to know what, if any, alternatives there are out there for me. I've never had a site threaten to drop my entire portfolio before, and I'm so discouraged I'm even considering options that would have been unthinkable not too long ago. I'm still in shock that this would happen. But I won't make any decisions until I'm able to consider the situation calmly and rationally.
361
« on: June 28, 2009, 17:53 »
Meanwhile my FT portfolio is frozen, my account may be deleted and I'm not making any money there at all. I have no idea how long this situation will continue, and I lose more money each day that it drags on.
If you're able to could you explain why your account is frozen there?
They are having trouble with the fact that I purchased most of the models I use in my 3D renders, instead of creating the models myself. I thought I could clear everything up when I proved to them that my use of the models was permitted under the vendor's license agreement, but as of yet they are not satisfied with this and my account remains frozen.
362
« on: June 28, 2009, 17:30 »
As an independent contributor I'd be delighted if you chose exclusivity __ makes my life so much easier everywhere else!
I would warn you though that it's a easy road to travel down but much more difficult and costly to reverse. Apart from all the re-uploading you'd be back at the bottom rankings on commissions at SS & FT and Level 1 for all your images at DT. What a horrible thought.
FT, for all their many faults, appear to be the most aggressive and fastest growing agency out there. They've come from virtually nowhere to being the 3rd biggest agency in little more than three years. With the newly-recruited management team and the rumoured vast funding it doesn't look like they're happy to sit there either. I reckon they'll be up there jostling for position with IS before too long.
I've been doing great at IS lately - Meanwhile my FT portfolio is frozen, my account may be deleted and I'm not making any money there at all. I have no idea how long this situation will continue, and I lose more money each day that it drags on. Meanwhile, IS exclusivity is looking more attractive all the time.
363
« on: June 28, 2009, 17:13 »
As a Diamond contributor, would your earnings at iStock not double?
I thought the payout at Diamond level was 40%...
My mistake, I meant to say that my commission will rise from 20% to 45%. At least I thought it was 45%, maybe I'm wrong.
364
« on: June 28, 2009, 15:46 »
I never thought I'd ever seriously consider iStock exclusivity, but since my relationship with Fotolia is going sour, I'm seriously considering it. Fotolia was my second highest earning site, but I actually prefer the management at iStock. I'm a diamond level contributor at iStock, so my earnings would increase by 45%. Without Fotolia, it might make financial sense. My biggest frustration at iStock has been the senseless rejections, but that problem is mitigated to large extent by the Scout program. I also appreciate the fact that they are the only site that allows you to correct problems and resubmit.
But I'm concerned that that if things go sour with iStock, I'm done for. Has anyone gone exclusive and then regretted it? Were the benefits what you expected? I haven't made any decisions yet, I'm just exploring my options.
Linda B
365
« on: June 25, 2009, 08:36 »
Linda, the phone to fotolia is under the logo on their page... top left corner,
718-577-1321
I was so freaked I didn't see that - thanks for letting me know. I called but couldn't get through, so I left a message.
366
« on: June 25, 2009, 07:49 »
My Fotolia account has been blocked and I need to contact Chad Bridwell as soon as possible. I'm using this forum because I don't have access to the Fotolia forums. This is all because of a misunderstanding that I can clear up. Chad, if you are reading this, I responded to your email, please call me.
Linda Bucklin (AlienCat)
367
« on: June 20, 2009, 12:57 »
I've been interested in the Wacom Cintiq tablets for at least a couple of years now. I don't know how I'd fit it into my work area, though. Seems like a fantastic tool and a great way to work. I'd love to hear from anyone who's had experience with it.
368
« on: June 20, 2009, 12:53 »
Only 7% sales tax? Lucky *insult removed*. In Belgium it's 21% VAT and in the Philippines 12%.
That's only State taxes Flemish. We also pay 25% federal income tax and 15% social security tax. And then there's the $600/month for private health insurance and still pay 20% copay when we go to the doctor because we live in the only civilized country in the Western world that doesn't have universal health care.
Can't feel to bad for you Flemish. At least when you pay taxes you get something in return. We pay taxes and get diddly squat.
This is what scares me - I live in the US, too. My husband & I are in our early 50's. He's looking to retire when he turns 591/2 and can access what funds are still remaining in his 401K. We've both been relying on Healthcare benefit associated with his job; Medicare won't kick in until he's 67. We both have a lot of health issues, and with our "pre-existing conditions" it will be very difficult to get insurance, and if we do manage to find it, it will cost us a fortune. Lisa, are there any health issues in your family? I've heard insurance can $1000 or more per month for people with pre-existing conditions - who can afford that? 
369
« on: June 12, 2009, 17:47 »
I found one of my images on Zazzle. It can be printed on a coffee mug, chef's apron and tote bag . Is this sort of thing allowed under most extended license agreements? I would think this is only allowed if the person owned the image outright, but I'm not sure. Thoughts, anyone?
370
« on: February 18, 2009, 12:18 »
3% pay cut, just what we need during a recession. Thanks, Fotolia
371
« on: February 12, 2009, 11:26 »
Am I the only one having trouble uploading to iStock? Images often upload without the file info, so I have to cut and paste from Photoshop ...or the thumbnail for the image isn't generated and you get blank white space instead. This has been going on for at least two weeks, but I haven't seen any complaints in their forums. Is anyone else having problems?
Linda B
372
« on: February 03, 2009, 15:02 »
I wish SS and other sites would follow iStock's lead and institute upload limits. I know everyone complains about them, but upload limits would force people to become much more selective about what they upload, and the overall quality of the collections would improve. The end result would be smaller libraries with higher quality images, and we would all benefit. With these huge libraries, due to the dilution effect, it will eventually reach the point where the only people working in microstock and making any real money will be the agencies.
373
« on: February 02, 2009, 11:01 »
I haven't had a problem with rejections at BS. Downloads are a bit slow, but I saw that as just ebb and flow. Not a top earner, but I've always been happy with BS -and I also like the fact that they don't offer subscriptions.
Linda B
374
« on: December 17, 2008, 09:55 »
I have been dropping like a rock in the weekly rankings. I expect my overall ranking will drop as well. Don't know why all of a sudden their buyers don't like my pics anymore?
It is a first sign of overdose of Christmas .. Will be better in January ... 
I wish. Although I expect sales in general to go down around Christmas time, I don't see why that would affect my ranking relative to other contributors.
The ranking drop means some people are selling more compared to me... 
My 7 days rank has dropped considerably in recent days, but my overall rank has stayed consistent. I think they must has tinkered with the search algorithm. I'm still doing well at Fotolia these days though, just not as good as I was doing in November.
375
« on: December 17, 2008, 08:13 »
I have rejected few files from my last batch and I am very surprised that reviewer sent me the problematic part of my image that caused rejection. That's awesome and I am very thankful. I didn't notice that number of my rejection icreased, but lately I started to receive precise notes from reviewers about rejection reasons. I appreciate that a lot. It's so much better than simple automatic pushing a button for "overfilterd" or "artifacting". This time reviewer sent me a piece of an image...that's really kind and very proffessional. Thank you!
I agree, when the inspector points out specifically what's wrong with an image, and gives you the opportunity to correct and resubmit, that's great. This is where the iStock inspectors shine above the rest, and the quality of my work has shown a definite improvement, thanks to them. It's all the seemingly random and pointless rejections that are frustrating. The absurd preoccupation with edges drives me batty. I think the Scout program is a great idea - I feel much better about iStock since they have worked the bugs out of the scout system. 'Scout' has saved many of my best images from oblivion. I think the other sites would do well to adopt something similar to the Scout system, it goes a long way toward helping contributor relations.
Pages: 1 ... 10 11 12 13 14 [15] 16 17
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
