|
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 - aeonf
Pages: 1 ... 10 11 12 13 14 [15] 16 17 18 19 20 ... 27
351
« on: June 18, 2011, 11:24 »
You may all be surprised.
I am willing to bet our dear Sean makes more money then him (NET!).
His worthyness to the varius MS sites is highly overated (with all due respect to YA).
352
« on: June 14, 2011, 17:46 »
Thank you lisa for explaining exactly what I meant.
We have maybe 5 photos on E+ (non sellers).
Slovenian: Don't you get tired of spitting out nonsense ?
353
« on: June 14, 2011, 13:42 »
I've never really felt that exclusivity was a great deal. It looked a little more appealing with the price increases for exclusives (before the royalty cut), but that obviously was short-lived. But now I think it's fair to ask: Do any exclusives really still feel like their benefiting from the crown anymore?
Absolutely yes.
Unless you have tons of good selling A/V you'd be better off independent. If you just look at how great Shutterstock is doing for everyone and how sales at IS is dropping for most contributors you can see what a bad deal it is. And independents got P+ and we're soon gonna get Vetta as well and then you'll just start pulling your hair out 
I beg to differ. Exlusivity is great for us so far. P+ is a good thing for exlusives as well. If and when we will think exclusivity isn't profitable for us we will be the first to give our crown back.
354
« on: June 14, 2011, 13:00 »
I've never really felt that exclusivity was a great deal. It looked a little more appealing with the price increases for exclusives (before the royalty cut), but that obviously was short-lived. But now I think it's fair to ask: Do any exclusives really still feel like their benefiting from the crown anymore?
Absolutely yes.
355
« on: June 13, 2011, 17:46 »
Thank you MR PaulieWalnuts for expressing my exact thoughts and saving me a lot of time and trouble articulating them.
356
« on: June 13, 2011, 00:42 »
Maybe if more people focused on success around here instead of fighting and trying to find things to point out as failures there would be more success. Carry on with another 9 pages of bickering. I'm done.
Amen to that!
357
« on: June 12, 2011, 15:35 »
oh I forgot people are only allowed to rant about IS, let me join the crowd so I can also be one of the cool kids:
I hate IS, IS sucks. long live SS.
358
« on: June 12, 2011, 13:07 »
^^^ Speak for yourself. Editorial has been a success for us so far.
359
« on: June 12, 2011, 00:33 »
SNP: I wasn't stating my own opinion, I wouldn't even know how to recognize a good photo from a bad one (except from a composition point of view), I was merely quoting others.
360
« on: June 11, 2011, 18:07 »
luissantos84 :This may be true, but in this specific situation the goal (so they claim, and it does make sense to me) is to attract the traditional editorial buyers to IS. Again, this sounds like a GOOD thing to me.
Also do note that every EdStock photo import has a link and banner to the entire editorial collection.
I am personally satisfied with this move.
Lisa: Maybe, and maybe not. I wouldn't be suprized if you are right, but I will give them the benefit of the doubt in the meantime.
361
« on: June 11, 2011, 17:44 »
My logic dictates that if you have superior quality images, and your competition has inferior quality images it is actually a GOOD thing for you.
Am I wrong in my way of thinking ?
Low quality getty content = good for us.
362
« on: June 10, 2011, 11:08 »
Highest: 100$ GI sale.
Lowest: 0.24$ XS sale.
Average: 3.00$ per d/l
363
« on: June 09, 2011, 15:17 »
In IS, Caucasian and European refer to the same thing with the disambiguation.
364
« on: June 09, 2011, 13:10 »
On what site ?
365
« on: June 09, 2011, 05:49 »
a 'fair' system would be that everyone earns the same amount. a fixed percentage.
why should I earn more or less on image than anyone
In communist cuba maybe. In my book a fair system means: The better you are and the harder you work, the more you make! (absolute and in percentage).
You mean like if everyone earns a fixed percentage. Then the better you are the more you make. Absolute and in percentage (?!?!?!?!?)
What I mean is a better and more active contributor then you (for example) should make more %% then you and obviously more $$ as well. Only MHO.
366
« on: June 09, 2011, 05:10 »
Sean is right (again lol) we may want to have better royalties for our work but it is almost impossible to fight that.. they have the fork and the cheese (portuguese expression I guess) so not easy, it is just like other industry when there is a lot of supply and perhaps demand is not increasing on the same way but thats another question
I don't see any logic in that. Deactivating files is the same as stopping work, as Sean said. The only difference is you won't get paid for those few days (like workers still get), but you have to sacrifice something for the greater, long term good (it'll return for you, not just return, you'll profit in the long run, a lot). And the ones who could make the difference are the top players like Sean, if top 25 contributors at IS would do that it would make a huge difference in IS sales. And they could afford it too, they made so much money anyway that they could leave off of it (and the interest) for the rest of their lives. They're just doing it for fun anyway or because they want to buy themselves a new yacht or an island 
It's not at all the same as stopping work from the auto factory or whatever. If you deactivate files, who is to say if it is resubmitted, it will ever be as successful? A site is not likely to blindly reinstate files deactivated this way. If they wanted you messing with it, they would have put it a button that says "Temporarily put on hold", like I have on my netflix account.
Yeah, fun... 
I was not aware of that you loose best match placement. Then indeed there isn't much contributors can do to change the current and future situation.
367
« on: June 09, 2011, 04:22 »
The problem is, most realize, or think, that such an alliance really would have no "power". It isn't like a union where stopping work for a few days accomplishes something. The stuff is still there to sell.
You can deactivate files
I'm only deactivating files the day I quit IS. So, that's not any sort of reasonable short term protest thing.
Why not ? That is the only weapon one has. If you your self do it, it wont have much of an effect (well in your case maybe a little) if hundreds do, it will.
368
« on: June 08, 2011, 06:05 »
and somehow the IS fanboys are silent...
None left!
369
« on: June 07, 2011, 17:20 »
Come on guys it aint that complex...
370
« on: June 07, 2011, 15:56 »
You beat me to it! 45 seconds!
371
« on: June 07, 2011, 15:51 »
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=330294&page=1I quote: New Editorial Content We've been working hard on increasing our new editorial images collection over the last number of months. The traffic and buzz are growing, but we want to grow faster, and make the files easier to find. New Content Our product shots are already a great success for us. What we're quickly learning is that we need a much more complete offering to truly be competitive in the editorial space. In order to attract more of the non-creative users like media, publishers and bloggers, and properly assert ourselves in this marketplace, we need to add more traditional editorial content. On June 9th we are planning to add a collection of news, location and entertainment images from Getty Images photographers. You're going to see unreleased images of famous people and iconic locations on iStock for the first time ever. By adding this content we hope to draw more attention from traditional consumers of editorial imagery. At the outset we said we would be leaving politicians and celebrities to our colleagues at Getty Images and that is still the case. These images were all taken by accredited photographers who had the access and permission to obtain them. If you feel that you could obtain the kind of access and permission to shoot similar work, we encourage you to start the process of applying with the proper channels at Getty Images. You can get the ball rolling by sending an email to [email protected]. There is still no plan to get into current, timely news none of the new content we are adding will be more recent than 180 days. These new editorial files will all be in a single contributor portfolio called EdStock. On a technical note, we will be dating these files so that our system recognizes their original creation date, and not the date they are uploaded to iStock. This is being done to ensure that these new files do not dominate our Best Match sort en masse.
372
« on: June 06, 2011, 16:35 »
Very bad ineed. -37% from last month so far!!! 
373
« on: June 06, 2011, 16:25 »
I can't believe people on that thread are asking that iStock share the information on how the levels are set. I'm quite sure they actually wouldn't want to know. Then there would be a real row. And if you look at the level, *clearly* what they would like is to keep most people between 17-18% for independent or 30-35% for exclusive. Why else would there be such a huge leap to the next levels? And obviously, iStock does not care about incremental levels. I don't know why people are even suggesting that.
more like 25%-30% . The 40K RC's target is a quite difficult one to reach. BTW: Am I the only one having a crappy month so far ?
374
« on: June 04, 2011, 06:25 »
Slovenian: The problem is BD's ARE meeting the RC target. Why would they rebel ??
Yuri is also getting his 20% so he isn't hurt in any way, why would he do anything against IS ??
375
« on: June 04, 2011, 05:34 »
Sue, I ment a direct email to contributor relations, this is much quicker then a scout ticket, if you do use your regular scout ticket, don't open 1 for each photo but 1 scout ticket for the whole batch (even though they ask no to).
Pages: 1 ... 10 11 12 13 14 [15] 16 17 18 19 20 ... 27
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
