|
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 - ravens
Pages: 1 ... 11 12 13 14 15 [16] 17
376
« on: May 12, 2015, 14:55 »
Your example looks a high quality photograph, but due to this technique it doesn't look like a newsworthy image. Shouldn't editorial images have some newsworthiness? How about removing every sign logo etc and submitting RF to other agencies?
377
« on: May 07, 2015, 15:48 »
For me it is still about 75 % rejections or 100 % acceptance - depending on the day. You can't predict which will happen.
378
« on: May 07, 2015, 10:14 »
The upload system is working better today, still a bit slow, but working. 
379
« on: May 07, 2015, 10:09 »
0,00 is not a sale, it is a free image. Giving your image free is a violation of the contract when you have not agreed to give free images. I don't think there is a possibility to REALLY donate images "free" on Mostphotos, outside this rip-off Monthly Package system I mean. These rip-off images are sold through the Monthly package system. You need to OPT OUT. I have sales outside the Monthly package, even one 12 Euro sale, so that is not bad. If everyone opted out the Monthly package, they would get a more reasonable pay. OPT OUT! I got a sale for 0,00 !!!
Amazing... Going to send them an angry mail tomorrow, If they don't answer with a reasonable explanation.... bye bye Mostphotos!
380
« on: May 06, 2015, 09:10 »
A disaster! You should put this on social, on Facebook, on Twitter, G+ people should see this. Opt out from subs. What about this sale 
381
« on: May 06, 2015, 02:29 »
0,14 Euro equals 0,15-0,16 USD guys! Opt out from the Monthly package sales. nothing news under the sun.
I have had 0,14 and 0,17 sales (medium- and highres)
382
« on: May 05, 2015, 11:17 »
The site is completely messed up. You can get past that annoying ID statement by clicking and even upload images, but the uploads won't show up. I uploaded a few images about 8 hours ago and thought they were queued, but now they have disappeared. FTP doesn't work either. Complete and utter waste of time. When do we actually have time and energy to _photograph_ when our days are spent messing with **** like this?? Now when I try to upload, I get a screen that says, "123RF.com will only review and approve submissions by Contributors who have uploaded their ID for verification.
You have submitted your ID for payment verification. To resubmit, click here:"
383
« on: April 28, 2015, 15:13 »
Who is this sour face SS reviewer? I just got ALL my photos back rejected with "incorrect white balance".
Nothing wrong with them, just more work to fix them and resubmit. They won't look better with changes anyway. Who is this idiot?
384
« on: April 08, 2015, 14:23 »
SS reviewers really piss me off right now!! 66% of my photos this week were rejected due to "poor lighting" I am livid. I work on each photo for 30-60 mins to get every tiny detail correct. They then reject a photo in a fraction of a second.
What has happened with SS?
Before any rejections were rational but now they are erratic.
385
« on: February 03, 2015, 10:38 »
I've usually made some changes, then resubmitted without a note. It's a new image at that point. It's not just resubmitting the same rejected file. If the new version is rejected, which is rare, I just let it go. I've never gotten a warning. I think warnings are for people who just stubbornly resubmit the same rejected file over and over.
I used the email once on a illustrative editorial when the reviewer rejected it saying the site didn't accept that type of editorial, which it did.
I think so, too. If you correct a file and resubmit it, it is a new file. If you keep submitting the same old over and over, it's totally different. If it was tedious for them to read the notes, just how tedious and time consuming it will be to email back and forth. SS reviewers the fairest that I know but this new "leave us alone" development does not sound good.
386
« on: February 03, 2015, 06:19 »
I would just make corrections to the rejected image and resubmit. Since they don't want to hear any explanations, why give any?
387
« on: January 14, 2015, 15:32 »
Thank you so much for the replies, everyone. I contacted them and asked if they can source the releases themselves, that would be the best option anyway. Let's see what their response will be. You can license it to them without releases, but they wouldn't be able to use it without sourcing the releases themselves. It doesn't have to be your responsibility.
388
« on: January 13, 2015, 14:29 »
Hi,
Can you help please? Someone would like to use commercially a photo that I am selling under Editorial license in a couple of stock agencies (DT, SS, 123rf etc). Can I licence that image directly to them to be used commercially, or do I have to decline?
Thank you.
389
« on: December 19, 2014, 06:26 »
I hope you did not eat the raspberries or kill them by freezing. They couldn't be able to write a model release for you now. Seriously though I think they clicked the wrong button or then it is the glass bowl that needs a release. The third option is that the reviewer is a misunderstoof genious who takes all the pain out on you. You are doomed if that is the case.... 
391
« on: July 30, 2014, 13:45 »
I don't know man. Personally, I have no issues with them, everything works including review process, which is fair - I mean I have to agree with rejections.
I agree. No objections here about the review process. SS still accepts most everything I offer them, and when they don't I tend to understand why. Plus, on the few occasions when I've requested a re-evaluation of an image (or set of images) that was rejected, the second reviewer has agreed with me.
I like dealing with SS, and I earn more there than anywhere else. Just wish other companies could do as well.
I agree completely. I love Shutterstock. The reviews are more than fair, they are easy to deal with, I have no problem with them. They sell my images so well, and my sales and earnings keep increasing. If anyone has a problem with them, why don't you email them directly? Or address the issue at the SS forum? Why complain here, and expect a prompt reply, it doesn't even make sense? If you should put all the time and effort spent here complaining into learning to shoot the right type of images, and improving your technical skills you would have more images accepted, it would be easier and faster and you would earn more.
392
« on: July 17, 2014, 06:47 »
Many thanks, Anglee, for your reply! I was able to upload today, so everything looks normal again. Thanks again
393
« on: July 16, 2014, 03:55 »
Hi, Can't upload anything to 123RF today. The upload via the web form starts but the images won't show up in "history".
Is anyone experiencing the same, or is it just my computer etc some tech issues?
Thanks!
394
« on: July 10, 2014, 04:41 »
Hey, can you save or move this app to the SD card?
395
« on: July 09, 2014, 04:01 »
Good news! They replied to my email pretty quickly re-sending the credentials, with no conditions. What a relief! Thank you again for your help and good luck wishes! Uncle Pete, thanks for your insight. This would be applicable for some future events, so it's a good point to remember: >Short version, you get a signed release from the event promoter, and they get a single photo of each participant with their item. (whatever that means?) You might also have them forward your name and you can offer to sell prints to the participants, who want other photos? ShadySue, I wish you good luck too. I don't use snail mail (expenses, it is slow, there is too much junk snail too). Have you tried On the Red carpet program? If you are a SS contributor, they can make it easier for you.
396
« on: July 08, 2014, 06:14 »
Thank you, everyone! You have all been so helpful! Mat, wordplanet, you are absolutely right in that I can't show up without contacting them. StanRohrer, thank you for the advice and I like that scenario, but my hunch is that they are only after free images. Thank you for adding the link Ed, that was a final eye-opener. So, I emailed them and asked what they meant by their terms. I basically said that I shoot professionally and that I can't give images for free. I explained what the law states about shooting at a public venue with free access for all, and asked if they can kindly give me the credentials without conditions. Figured that I have nothing to lose at this point... I'll keep you posted on what happens. Thank you again, and have a great day!
397
« on: July 07, 2014, 12:38 »
Wow, thank you worldplanet! That was very helpful! I suppose I still will need to make up my mind between the two alternatives, contacting OTRC or contacting the event organizer. I've been shooting events like this one and always got the credentials without too much hassle, sometimes got free tickets (even for family) and always got a welcome, so this was a bit surprising. This is not a band (like Matt up there assumed) and it is actually a small event, so much so that I would think they'd appreciate all the exposure they could get. More Google searches, more people next year. I think every event organizer in their right mind wants media there, and will not blackmail them. What use it is to organize an event, and have no one shooting and reporting it, unless it is a secret club? What I regret is that I actually _asked_ for credentials, as it would have been fine and legal to shoot without the credentials and licence the photos editorially. No tickets, free for everyone event. Just wanted to avoid the hassle with the stock agencies, and got instead a hassle with the event organizer. Just wish I could turn back time and un-send the credentials request!
398
« on: July 07, 2014, 10:32 »
Hi, and thanks for the reply. Well, I shoot stock. I do not want to give user rights for free. In this occasion it would mean giving out user rights for 30--50 images, that would define insane!
Can anyone tell me what options do I have? I would still like to cover the event, as I find it interesting.
1. Not cover the event at all.
2. Go and shoot it, and if they demand images from me claim that their demands are unreasonable.
Not use the credentials form they sent as according to the law I am allowed to photograph it (outdoors, open area, no tickets).
3. Email them, saying thank you very much, unfortunately I do not provide free images, you can upload the photos from agency X after the event.
4. Other?
399
« on: July 07, 2014, 05:46 »
Hi and thank you so much for your reply. Sorry, I noticed that the thread was probably on a wrong forum so I re-posted it on general stock discussion. That is a clever thing that you do, I will definitely keep that in mind. Thank you for sharing!  You're right in that you probably didn't have to bother non-ticketed event in public space. What I have often done, if in doubt, is to ask for credentials with the added note that if the event organizer did NOT issue credentials (highly likely) to reply to me with an email stating that they do not issue credentials. I then forward this response to SS. They in turn tell me I am pre-approved for credentials and to give the reviewer a case number.
A real PITA, wouldn't you say?
400
« on: July 07, 2014, 05:41 »
Hi,
I would need advice regarding a credentials issue. Thanks in advance for everyone who have the strenght go through this:
I asked editorial credentials for a small-ish event, to make the submission easier for SS and Bigstock. Actually that might not have been necessary (not a ticketed event, open area etc...) but I wanted to avoid the song and dance with the stock agencies. Usually getting the credentials hasn't been that hard anyway.
This time the organizer of the event sent me an email, which contained the editorial credentials form. OK so far, BUT the email said further: "The credentials are ok if we can use your images later. We will give the participants (ie who bring an item to the event) a photo of their X (X being whatever item they bring) at the venue."
Can someone tell me what does this mean, and do I need to mind the added sentence? Their condition is not reasonable, and doens't seem even legal.
I was thinking that, sure they can use my images, if they download them from a stock agency. No problem. But then I thought, wait a minute, they cannot actually "give" my images away. They don't have the rights to pass on my images to a third party.
The email just said "images", not how many, nothing about the price of images (not "for free"). No one, not even a child would let 30-50 of their images used without a charge, and the form of EC, that is really not that valuable!
I later learned that the event organizer is not a professional (wasn't hard to guess eh) so maybe he was just ignorant.
I can't accept the condition of providing images for free. Is that kind of a condition, attached to an editorial credential, even legally binding?
Provided that it is probably legally ok to shoot at the event without the editorial credentials anyway, and licence them as editorial, can I just ignore the editorial credentials form? I would shoot at the event and never submit the form they sent me.
What would be the best way to proceed?
Thank you for your help!
Pages: 1 ... 11 12 13 14 15 [16] 17
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
