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 - click_click
Pages: 1 ... 13 14 15 16 17 [18] 19 20 21 22 23 ... 119
426
« on: March 21, 2013, 14:49 »
It might be exclusive - which is fine too.
Although I wouldn't mind signing a contract that wouldn't allow the contributors to sell the same images anywhere at a lower price point.
That would be difficult, as you've got no control over the prices some of the macro sites sell at - their prices for the same image are very variable.
I assume it's image exclusive. However, Alamy, as much as many people do not agree with their pricing scale, has proven to sell micro RF also at macro RF prices. They work on a sliding scale depending on how smart the customer is I guess. From $2 to $330 (my commission) I've seen it all. Most importantly the images should not be sold for scraps, available only to premium image buyers - period. Even Getty shooters got super low commissions on high-end RM sales from time to time so it's not out of the ordinary. But again, I expect it to be image exclusive.
427
« on: March 21, 2013, 14:34 »
It might be exclusive - which is fine too.
Although I wouldn't mind signing a contract that wouldn't allow the contributors to sell the same images anywhere at a lower price point.
428
« on: March 21, 2013, 10:02 »
It's about time that they've taken this step.
Despite having some fantastic imagery, I have to admit that 95% of all uploaded content is mediocre.
There HAS to be a place for high end images and they are filling this void in the RF "microstock" sector.
If they'd let me in - I'm more than happy to submit my more elaborate illustrations to them rather than SS.
I'm sure they have enough financial punch to lift this thing off the ground.
429
« on: March 21, 2013, 08:48 »
For anyone who has been working in microstock for a few years, plus reading the forums here should have a pretty good idea what their work is worth.
I don't see a need to lower my prices to what my actual payout would be, let's say at Stockfresh for example.
I don't have to charge iStock's prices either but somewhere in between.
After all, charging "realistic" prices guarantees that, by keeping 100% of the funds, the money will be spent wisely on new high quality content that the buyer came for in the first place.
430
« on: March 20, 2013, 20:35 »
I know this is off topic but where is the post where you keep us updated on the progress of Symbiostock.
I don't want to put any (further) pressure on you but I thought you were about to offer the theme for download soon.
Any concrete idea what we're looking at?
Sorry if I'm too pushy - just can't wait to see it.
Keep up the good work!
431
« on: March 19, 2013, 19:58 »
I just sent out several DMCA claims to various web sites (layoutsparks.com, photobucket.com etc.) and I noticed a challenge:
One issue that needs to be addressed is that certain sites require the DMCA claim in a specific format.
They have bullet lists or something similar where the information provided has to be in a particular order - it's not just a generic DMCA claim.
This has to be taken into consideration when setting this up (if it wasn't already on the list...).
432
« on: March 19, 2013, 19:54 »
Some wonderful pictures there. Thanks for the post.
433
« on: March 17, 2013, 13:28 »
Ok you can take the initiative and start a new thread to call this a project.
It does require someone who has a plan (you) to direct the efforts appropriately.
You have to find a trustworthy programmer who is willing to work on this project (with a plan in place in order to present it to the programmer!).
There are a lot of people on this forum who focus on producing images to sell them.
Very few have the time, energy and resources to do what it requires in order to create this site.
The idea is good - but it has to be thought through. A discussion on this forum can help to figure things out. Therefore it might be a good start to create a separate topic regarding this potential project.
Maybe this helps.
434
« on: March 17, 2013, 13:08 »
It's not a stupid idea. But as you mentioned there is no programmer available who would do that for free. Furthermore there are costs involved (domain, hosting etc.) Plus the site has to be updated and maintained as lots of things change constantly. ... Im not so good with coding and stuff , but wouldn't it be possible to build a small site where when someone finds something like that just copy-paste the link and the system does reporting automatically or semi-automatically and report the case where it should be reported in shortest possible perod. ...
It has to be a special person that would start working on it without pay. There might be payment options possible down the road (premium services, advertising income etc.) but initially there are no funds to start this. There are people out there that do this kind of work but only very few. Maybe someone on this forum is willing to set up such a site...?
435
« on: March 15, 2013, 21:51 »
False alarm. It's too late here - I read the charts wrong...
436
« on: March 15, 2013, 17:23 »
Update! POSITIVE. I finally solved the problem. It was a URL rewriting problem that was messing up the queries. I must have my rewrite rules wrong or misapplied. After this fix I'm going to try to sum up and get this thing released.
Sweet! Can't wait to see it in action!
437
« on: March 13, 2013, 22:21 »
HAHAHA! I SOLVED IT! 7 days man. Well, not really. But I did find out what the problem is - which is everything!
Its a wordpress issue. The "image" system is actually a custom post type, and wordpress has a BUG paginating these.
It has to do with how many search results I set it to show per page on the custom post type, VS the fact that wordpress still applies the site's default settings of "posts per page" at the same time...totally derailing it. I'd hate to release this thing with a big asterisk * saying btw, you have to tweak your blog settings to match image settings...thats not a winning solution.
Anyway, closer now!
Not the end of the world - one bug in this whole gigantic project is not bad - but I'm going to devote some time to getting this addressed.
Nice work! Keep going!
438
« on: March 13, 2013, 22:18 »
First, the infamous "Stock Rank Game".
Then the similar rejections.
Now, images sorted by camera.
There are simply no benefits to any of these three features.
What a waste. Why DT, oh why?
439
« on: March 09, 2013, 20:32 »
I'm thinking of producing several abstract 3d and / or visual effects videos, but are these selling well compared to real life footage?
Are 3D images selling well compared to real life photos? Same question - no answer. I'm doing both real life photos/videos and 3D illustrations/videos. I have great sellers as 3D and great sellers as real life. As always, you have to find the right niche for each type of media and you can do very well. There is no generic answer to your question.
440
« on: March 08, 2013, 10:47 »
I like it! Thanks for posting.
Sometimes it's hard to find good tutorials on youtube if you ever try to find something specific.
Will be added to my favorites!
441
« on: March 07, 2013, 20:04 »
Never got a reply to my email. Shall I submit again, or wait a little more? Anyone else didnt get a reply?
Try sending all cat pics and you might get a reply.
The reply: 30 minutes later a black limo pulls up and performs a drive by shooting.
442
« on: March 07, 2013, 19:30 »
As apparently this is not really turning out as a source of who actually got in (so far) - maybe someone can post if they heard of anyone getting in?
443
« on: March 06, 2013, 15:41 »
@click_click: I didn't even say it was their fault It's just that I never imagined that you can opt in or out for that, I thought I was automatically in. And I don't want to opt out, I want to opt in. Now I'm thinking that I might have missed a few sales and it's a bit annoying, that's why I asked about other websites, I don't want to miss more sales.
You are correct, it was my mistake for claiming that it wasn't Alamy's fault. I understood your post as if you were annoyed that agencies didn't approach you and ask you whether you want to opt in or out from certain services. As time goes on and you join more agencies you will notice that this is indeed big jungle to explore whether an agency allows opting in/out or nothing of that at all. There are plenty of reasons why Alamy (and other agencies) allow contributors to opt out from partner sales. Some contributors would like to have their portfolio spread all over the globe no matter how small the sale can be. Others are concerned about the privacy or safety of their models and therefore don't allow certain distribution. Novel use was a big disappointment. I dare to assume that you wouldn't have been happy with it anyway.
444
« on: March 06, 2013, 12:07 »
I guess we all agreed to these practices in our contracts, that the agency can use our content for promotional purposes at discounted rates... Nonetheless, a good stock agency would practice some communication about this with its contributors just to give everyone a heads up and stay transparent about what's going on. We're not asking for business secrets, just what the current promotions are etc...
445
« on: March 06, 2013, 12:03 »
I wrote to Pond5 and they responded quite quickly and thoroughly with all the concerns that I addressed!
Please - anyone who feels that information is missing please write to Pond5 directly.
All that I know at this point is that Pond5 will take over Pixmac and pretty much internalize it so it eventually becomes Pond5 altogether.
As far as I have been informed by Pond5 we will ALWAYS receive 50% on all sites where our content will be sold - which is great.
Furthermore, also as I have been told that prices will also stay the same as they are now at Pond5 (which we can set - also great!).
Opt out will be available (in a few weeks) to all contributors who wish not to be involved in this scheme.
These are the facts I got from Pond5.
446
« on: March 06, 2013, 09:50 »
I noticed just today that Alamy has opt in/opt out services ( the novel uses and partner sales ). It annoys me to no ends that I was a member there for 6 months and never knew about that.
Are any other websites with such options? I only know about Shutterstock and Alamy.
With all due respect, that's not Alamy's fault that it took you 6 months to find that out. If it was such an urgent issue you could have at least contacted Member Services and they would have told you where the opt-out page is located. BTW, I've been with Alamy for seven years now and they always had the option of opting out of partner sites and Novel Use.
447
« on: March 05, 2013, 13:36 »
I don't think most people who sell stock for a living want their images banned from google searches. A lot of sales come from google. We just want them properly watermarked and shown in the context of the webpage they are posted on (hopefully the download page at one of the agencies).
Why isn't Google providing referral links to the agencies and takes a cut for sales? Right now they are not making any money with their images search. Why not cash in a few cents per license? Isn't that a logical move for them?
448
« on: March 05, 2013, 12:44 »
To click_click: This might work as an example: http://techcrunch.com/2013/03/05/pond5-acquires-pixmac/
I believe that emails from Pond5 doesn't mention the 50% split as it would not be news. Pond5 was and will continue to pay 50% as before. And Pixmac goes from 30-40% to 50% to match Pond5. We were editing the news for each site so it brings the important info, but we should probably mention that the 50/50 split stays. Sorry for that. ...
From Techcrunch: Over the years, photo and video licensing company Pond5 has tried to differentiate itself with an artist-friendly licensing model, allowing its contributors to set their own terms and splitting sales with them 50-50. Thats a much more favorable revenue split than the competition, and as a result, the marketplace has done pretty well for itself. ... English is not my native tongue so I might get things wrong but even on the Techcrunch web site it only states that Pond5 runs a 50/50 business. There is no clear communication that all future sales through Pond5 and their newly acquired affiliate network will still be handled at 50/50. If however, as you mention, all sales that run through Pond5's future nervous system, will pay us 50% then praise the Lord!
449
« on: March 05, 2013, 12:39 »
Awesome! Can't wait to try it out.
450
« on: March 05, 2013, 12:17 »
To click_click: You'll get 50% of net at both sites. It was mentioned in the Press Release. It's not affiliate network as such, it's acquisition. Zager, kindly post the URL where this is stated. Both in the email I received from Pond5 and the FAQ on Pond5 I couldn't find that information that it's 50% net at both sites.
Pages: 1 ... 13 14 15 16 17 [18] 19 20 21 22 23 ... 119
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|