|
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 - Mantis
4176
« on: March 10, 2013, 18:58 »
I tried to upload by ftp this morning with no luck so I uploaded quite a few on the site uploader and they came though fine. This afternoon I tried 3 batches and 2 didn't upload at all and showed error messages. One batch said that they were uploaded but they never appeared.
ETA Just tried ftp again and the first image has come through fine 
I've stopped using their FTP site. It is too unreliable and almost never works.
4177
« on: March 10, 2013, 08:39 »
When you set the price. On what file size are you setting against?
The largest.
4178
« on: March 09, 2013, 17:24 »
It's a great birthday to have. Happens to be mine too, but I am not 51. I dare say I'm older  I am shooting in the studio for my Bday, what are you up to today, Tom?
4179
« on: March 09, 2013, 06:22 »
If P5 doesnt change their editing process, especially the MR issue, I wont submit. I am not going to edit every single file separately to attach a MR, and all of their templates dont work for photos. How can a site that sells photos, not have a proper editing tool for photos, only focuses on audio and video.
I'm not with either agency but am thinking about uploading. Is pixmac easier to upload to as I looked at pond5 and the MR attatchment looked a bit complicated.
No idea, I was hoping an admin would chime in.
Model releases are easy in Pond5 once you figure out their system. When I uploaded my 3000 images there, I put each model in their own set and uploaded. For example, I created a folder on my computer for Jane Doe, one for Joe Blow, one for Ima Hooker, one for Sheza Teazer and one for Ivan Kutchkokov. I uploaded these image folders via FTP so ONLY the one specific model showed up in my "ready to edit" section. The you just easily attach that person's model release to that batch and submit. Makes things A LOT easier and less confusing. Only thing is that you have to do multiple uploads, but it is way speedier. Then when all the model shots are done, I upload ALL non release images as one batch and submit.
Thank you for that. I already have most of my images organized into folders according to model releases needed for when I uploaded to photodune but had forgotten about it.
You are most welcome. The one thing I would ask P5 to do is to show an "attachment icon" after you attach releases, like a little paper clip or something. Once you attach there is no confirmation symbol, so if you are loading a mix of model releases it is not visually possible to verify that you attached a model release. That, in and of itself, can make it confusing. Originally I found myself reattaching again and again because this old noggin couldn't remember if I attached or not. Thus, I started doing what I described above. I sure wish they'd fix that as a visual management feature.
4180
« on: March 09, 2013, 06:17 »
What should I do if I upload to both sites? Upload only on Pond5 in the future?
Yes and no. Tom must verify when P5 will be mirrored on PM. If they are mirroring now, then you only need to upload to P5 (or PM). If no, you would need to still do both. Tom? Can you status?
4181
« on: March 08, 2013, 20:17 »
If P5 doesnt change their editing process, especially the MR issue, I wont submit. I am not going to edit every single file separately to attach a MR, and all of their templates dont work for photos. How can a site that sells photos, not have a proper editing tool for photos, only focuses on audio and video.
I'm not with either agency but am thinking about uploading. Is pixmac easier to upload to as I looked at pond5 and the MR attatchment looked a bit complicated.
No idea, I was hoping an admin would chime in.
Model releases are easy in Pond5 once you figure out their system. When I uploaded my 3000 images there, I put each model in their own set and uploaded. For example, I created a folder on my computer for Jane Doe, one for Joe Blow, one for Ima Hooker, one for Sheza Teazer and one for Ivan Kutchkokov. I uploaded these image folders via FTP so ONLY the one specific model showed up in my "ready to edit" section. The you just easily attach that person's model release to that batch and submit. Makes things A LOT easier and less confusing. Only thing is that you have to do multiple uploads, but it is way speedier. Then when all the model shots are done, I upload ALL non release images as one batch and submit.
4182
« on: March 08, 2013, 10:53 »
Uh, sorry to take us so far down the off topic road!
Hahaha me too.
4183
« on: March 08, 2013, 10:28 »
4184
« on: March 08, 2013, 09:54 »
It's buyers that you need. Even these tiny microstock agencies have no problem in attracting contributors (is there one out there that doesn't have the portfolios of Yuri, MB, etc for example?) but struggle far more to gain buyers.
There will be  ...
I'm sure there will be some initial excitement. But, will it sustain if they offer less choices than traditional sites?
Sorry, I was answering the question in the ()s .
I wouldn't necessarily say "less choice", but "different choice". Images you can't find elsewhere are a strong USP. You can't get IKEA anywhere but IKEA.
Yea but Ikea sells cheap crap and I don't shop there for that reason 
4185
« on: March 07, 2013, 19:52 »
I have PicNiche and all of the balances that PicNiche summarizes are accurate except 123RF. It's reporting $21.90 m,ore than what is summarized on 123. Anyone else having a reporting problem?
4186
« on: March 07, 2013, 08:01 »
Hey Microstock Man,
The RC requirements will remain in effect.
With the introduction of ML size, all current RC of L size and above will gain an additional 1 credit as such
- ML: 3 RC
- L: 4 RC
- XL: 5 RC
- XXL: 6 RC
Cheers,
Anglee
Anglee, Can you please get rid of the RC system? Thanks.
4187
« on: March 06, 2013, 19:45 »
Glad to see some of you are experiencing movement on SF. Sales, for me, remain pitiful...$4 to $7 a month.
4188
« on: March 06, 2013, 08:10 »
[Why does the third party distributor get a bigger cut than the artist?
Good point! I can imagine (putting words into Alamy's mouth) that they'd say this is the contract they have with distributors. Fair enough, but over the last several years, Alamy's commission has changed from 30% to 40% to (now) 50% and all of the change has come out of the contributor's hide.
Alamy revised the contract with contributors, with notice, and they can do the same with distributors. I think that the distributor should get a maximum of 25% of the gross - and if they want more money, sell more licenses.
I just went back to check and my first Alamy sale in 2007 had a commission for Alamy of 30% - I'm not making up numbers for rhetorical effect...
The commission on your first sale was actually 35% to Alamy in total. Our commission split back then (2007) was 65% to the photographer. It will be seen in your balance of account as 30% to Alamy then you will also see an account fee that is an additional 5% that takes the total to 35.
In order to be able to work with third party distributors, we have to negotiate the best deals possible and 40% is standard across the industry. Yes, it could be viewed as unfortunate that the distributor gets more than the artist but again, this is not an unusual trend in the industry. Indeed, I could mention many agencies that take more than the artist for direct sales, not even third party.
The pricing can be lower in these markets than what you would see in your primary markets but we also see very high value sales also.
It's also worth baring in mind that if you are not comfortable with the third party additional revenue opportunities you can opt out during the month of April.
Best wishes
James
And I will be doing this in a HEARTBEAT!!
4189
« on: March 05, 2013, 16:06 »
I was invited via bridge to BS and sales used to be really good but now its gone way down. I guess they like SS, changed their sort order and suddenly its just another low earner. Pitty.
+1
And since they introduced the subs, sales have gone down even more drastically.
Totally in awe at the pitiful sales resulting at bs. I am at $2-3 bucks right now for march and all but one 50 cent sale are 38 cent subs. but as usual they make the stupid claim that "we expect sales to go way up" but they fail to say "for Bigstock, not the contributor"
4190
« on: March 05, 2013, 14:26 »
Hi all, Tom from Pond5 here.
Just to follow up on what Vita said, a few points --
all Pixmac artists will earn 50% on all sales, independent of where the sales occur (Pond5 or Pixmac network)
there's no need to upload to both sites, as content uploaded to one will be distributed via the other (assuming you click through the new agreement)
Pixmac minimum payout is now $25, just like p5 -- and sharpshot, we'll make sure that the negative credits are cleared from your account 
We're incredibly excited about this deal + delighted to have Pixmac on board!
Tom
Tom, What if I don't want my images on pixmac? Their shady past getting caught red handed not paying out commissions is enough for me to not want my content there. Do I have a choice to not have my images on pond 5 mirrored on pixmac? If not I may have to close my 3000 image port at p5
4191
« on: March 05, 2013, 13:23 »
So if I am not on pixmac because I chose not to upload to them due to their not reporting commissions, I will be now mirrored there with my pond5 images?
4192
« on: March 04, 2013, 19:41 »
GL doesn't product much for me yet, but I did manage to make $23 yesterday, for a 40 something dollar sale. This would be a fantastic site if they keep the pricing this way and attract buyers and don't change the commission rules on us once they are flying high.
4193
« on: March 04, 2013, 19:37 »
I just had a sub download today of one image with 6 full resolution objects in a collage. These are very frustrating, I am done with uploading collages unless they somehow change the policy that collages are a different price point. In my case AT LEAST .35 x 6 = $2.10.
4194
« on: March 03, 2013, 08:37 »
Of the things an artist CAN control (who is not a blogger) on FAA, what are the critical value adds you must learn about how to interact with FAA in the best way possible? i.e. are there tricks within our control we should know or is it just upload, keyword and pray?
4195
« on: March 02, 2013, 10:44 »
Go to your refused files there is a tiny field to add up to five file numbers for them to reconsider
Interestingly, I've used that before and never heard a thing back.
4196
« on: March 01, 2013, 19:49 »
This is very good news! Thanks a lot for posting it Cypher
ETA: Since the thread there is closed, I will say here that I think this is a smart move by DT, and allow a greater variety of good stock on the site.
Still probably wise not to get carried away with uploading similars, but if you have a high value shoot and can get a greater selection of images online from it, that's a win-win for everybody.
I've noticed that my acceptance rate is back to almost 100%. Glad Serban listened. I agree, Lisa, that we still need to be smart about not submitting 5 angles of that tomato on white.
4197
« on: March 01, 2013, 14:32 »
Posted By Lobo: Posted By PrairieArtProject: December 2002, when I had 15 files in my portfolio, is the only month that I have ever done worse than I did in February of 2013. I am beyond shocked at how things have fallen apart here. When was the last time you uploaded a file? I'm just curious as it might help other contributors if they had some addition clarity regarding the decline you are seeing. Does it matter? We're not talking about a small decline. We're talking about a difference of hundreds of files that at least until the past month had managed to be not great but not terrible. But whatever, villify me if you want. The files I uploaded last summer have done nothing, so it wasn't terrifically motivating to keep on. BTW, I thought this was the stats thread, not the commentary thread, so keep it on topic.CLASSIC!!!! http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=351835&page=5
4198
« on: March 01, 2013, 08:20 »
Istock is on a foundation of sand.
4199
« on: March 01, 2013, 07:13 »
As long as the images are uploaded to Istock, which you can easily check by going to Istock and checking your pending images, I delete the ones that say pending. they will be in DM for eternity unless you delete them.
4200
« on: March 01, 2013, 07:09 »
The more I see and here the more probable I think it is that they are not interested in microstock at all, that it will be wall are, maybe gallery supplies or bulk sales to interior decor chains.
Bruce spotted a hole in the market first time round, if he's hunting out market holes again that microstock is not the place to look.
Based on what I've seen on the pinned images I'd agree with you.
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
. Sorry for the rant. Back on topic. 
