|
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 - cascoly
Pages: 1 ... 167 168 169 170 171 [172] 173 174
4276
« on: October 19, 2008, 14:18 »
re-inspecting all images (on todays criteria) older than 18 months would be best solution.
only if you assume reviews are consistent -- if an old image is rejected on second review it could just be the reviewer ideally no image should be rejected by a single reviewer - it should have at least 1 additional review. in any other situation this would be a no brainer, but when an agency is dealing with thousands of images a day they just cant afford it. this is a type ii error http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_I_and_type_II_errorsit's better overall to accept that there will be false negative [rejecting good images] rather than accepting type i errors [which is what sites like most, cut, yay et al do by accepting just about anything] it's possible to keep both types of error low, but it's much more expensive and only used where it's critical. we see examples of this every day, but often the choice between the 2 types isnt acknowledged -- eg, death penalty laws, rules of engagement re civilian casualties. for a much less important case like selecting pretty pictures, it's no surprise how the agencies react
4277
« on: October 19, 2008, 14:07 »
.... IMHO taking a second look at the file and searching for what is worng or borderline has taugth me more than a year in an photgraphy school. Now and then, in rare ocasions, I haven't been able to find the supposed flaw, .....
true, but what can you conclude when 5 agencies accept and 1 doesnt -- and there's no consistency -- 4 out of 5 accept each image but it's a different agency rejecting there's almost as much variation among reviewers at a given site as there is among agencies overall. [with the exception of FT which rejects wholesale] so, yes, it's worth trying to see what the reviewer didnt like, but usually not worth the effort of re-processing to try to get it accepted.
4278
« on: October 19, 2008, 13:54 »
they';re usually pretty reasonable -- a business day or so.
i've had similar problems with 'cascoly' being 'already used' -- in one case it had kept a signup from several YEARS ago. try to sign in with the name you want and ask for the password to be sent -- you may find out you'd forgotten you'd signed up.
4279
« on: October 19, 2008, 13:40 »
this thread should probably be a subset of the inane reviewer one BigStock has no consistency in what their reviewers consider editorial http://www.bigstockphoto.com/photo/view/3776341was accepted as editorial, similar shots in the series were rejected later for 'recognizable person' even tho submitted as editorial
4280
« on: October 19, 2008, 02:57 »
i put up with their ridiculous submission process when they actually sold images for me, but once their sales dropped so did my submissions -- maybe that's linked, but i'd rather spend more time uploading to sites like SS DT and 123 that actually eaRN some $$
steve
4281
« on: October 14, 2008, 18:53 »
i started uploading but gave up after rejection rates of 13-15 -- they were rejected for lighting, composuition & not stockworthy -- ogf course i only sent images that were accepted by most of the big6! not worth my time trying to figure out what they want when there are so little sales reported.
i'll let others experiment and will jump in if they actually start to sell [i'm currently doing my bit with cutcaster, yay and most]
steve
4282
« on: October 12, 2008, 13:56 »
i' ve had decent results on DT & SS, but no sales on [surprise] most, cutcast or YAY. bigstock just started accepting editorials.
i do a lot of markets, protests and parades, more general editorial than newsworthy immediate interest
steve
4283
« on: October 11, 2008, 14:47 »
thanks -- that's probably the reason -- also why i could see the images when i tested the post!
steve
4284
« on: October 10, 2008, 19:08 »
i just tested all of them & they worked fine -- which didnt work for you?
4285
« on: October 09, 2008, 13:36 »
.... Don't they think their customers deserve some fresh new work, or are they going to just lock in the old stuff. I think they need to weed out some of the stuff that has been on there a couple years that hasn't sold and make room for new work. Just my 2 cents worth. I could understand if my photos were being rejected for a technical reason, but it just gripes me when they tell me they are tuning it down just because they already have enough of that subject. 
actually FT is the only agency i know of that promised to winnow the files - their terms said they would delete any images that didnt sell after 18 mo -- i thought that was brave talk when i read it -- since agencies brag about quantity, what MS is going to post a banner saying "we just went from 2 million to 1.5 million, but trust us, they're all really good now!" steve
4286
« on: October 09, 2008, 13:31 »
....
Personally I have a problem with the "too many of this" rejection - who is to say that your pic is not much better than some of the stale crap that is already in there? As in flowers, landscapes etc. There's always room for something good to give fresh inventory to the buyers..
any decent reviewer has already taken that into account when they make the rekection -- the full rejection should really say "we have an overabundance of this type and your submission doesnt add anything to our collection" btw, this type of rection is probably the most common one i get at dt and ft s
4287
« on: October 05, 2008, 13:31 »
definitely resubmit all your previous entries.
SS is very sensitive to noise and focus - many blurry rejects there that most others take. also, they seem to prefer more saturated images
4288
« on: October 04, 2008, 15:19 »
Personally I haven't found that sales fall if I don't constantly upload. I've gone for months with just a few (2-4) new images per month uploaded and seen a consistent growth in sales there.
Like most here I've noticed a quick spike in new image sales within hours or days of uploading, but the main sales trend has been up regardless of new work.
The most frustrating thing about SS is the lack of good tools to track my images. It is impossible to see my portfolio there with meaningful numbers by each image. Why they can't give us tools similar to IS's "downloads per month" by image is beyond me. I've emailed support with their meaningless answers referring to their "Stats" button with its nearly worthless information.
totally agree with the latter points - SS is one of the worst to get meaningful dl stats, and they account for such a large % of total dl that it doesnt make much sense to track the other sites closely if it cant be done on SS i' in same poisition as you - i was in peru all of aug, with no contact , and my ss sales have been steady over jul - aug - sep. i suspect one reason is that my portfolio is heavily weighted with images with long halflives - few of the top 20 sellers i have on SS were uploaded this year -- so i sell at perhaps 10% of the RPI of others, but my portfolio will stay fresh longer
4289
« on: October 04, 2008, 15:06 »
i dont submit to most contests anymore -- before digital i did send to various magazine, calendar, etc contests in both photo and recipes [recipe contests were lucrative, my best win was a trip to NY to meet paul newman at the finals for his newman's own line - prize for the 6 finalists included $10K to your favorite charity - but few MS sites are going to be able to match that] right now, i submit to the JPG magazine themes contests - they pay $100 and the process is simple & quick http://www.jpgmag.com/photos/1026769JPG isnt selling images tho, but MS has the additional advantage that the secondary prizes could be postings in a hall of fame [like editors picks], so the images would continue to get exposure
4290
« on: October 04, 2008, 14:46 »
i'm working right now on a blog covering this subject - briefly, it's similar to other replies here -- using a excel worksheet for simplicity and ease of use is much preferable to a database system [even though i'm a db consultant by training] in this case a db is overkill Before jumping in take some time to analyze what you need to do My needs: Unique number for any image Fast sorting by date, topic, etc Ability to analyze images accepted rating & sorts Used to decide what to edit, submit to other sites, those w ltd upls My excel sheet looks like this: [set of col for each ms] [image id] [desc] [keywords] this lets you get away from the need to store all images and move them among different folders. i caption & kw in this sheet, then add IPTC info from there - this means you can quickly paste info from similar images later. this solution leaves out one big area - tracking sales. there's no simple way to automate this, as many MS sites dont make the info easily avaialble for download, and even those that do use their own numbering system and eliminate the name you used. update 10/7: the blog mentioned above is at http://photoinfos.blogspot.com/2008/10/building-microstock-submission-tracking.html
4291
« on: October 04, 2008, 14:33 »
you will have a hard time getting landscapes or backgrounds into fotolia but in general the sites are not too diferent
To improve I would suggest uploading a photo in the critique forum, if you have thick enough skin;)
landscapes are a tough sell anywhere, buteven with their massive rejection rate, FT does take landscapes - here are 2 i've had accepted in the last week or so: http://us.fotolia.com/Member/Content/9697601http://us.fotolia.com/Member/Content/9630253of course, whether they'll sell is another question. there's also so much variatin in taste BETWEEN reviewers at any MS site, that it's hard to determine f there are any site preferences for types of images - often the "not a stock photo" rejection is just a catchall for overworked reviewers steve
4292
« on: October 04, 2008, 14:25 »
when starting submit to all the big 6 and get your portfolios established - each site has a different sell pattern, and for an individual it ca change from mnt to month -- SS is always my top earner, but 2nd 3rd & 4th change from month to month
steve
4293
« on: October 03, 2008, 20:09 »
after the adjustments already mention, yes, these would be good for stock -- Despite the ms faqs sayiing 'no flowers', etc, these sorts of shots do sell -- they just sell at about 10% of what models in business might sell for; and there's a lot of competition -- the good news is the half life for these sorts of images ismuch longer than model based images [unless spiders start wearing bell-bottoms]
s
4295
« on: July 09, 2008, 16:48 »
that's only part of 'editorial' - it also includes generic images, crowds, city views, traffic, etc where it's difficult to remove all faces or trademarks
steve
4296
« on: July 07, 2008, 14:59 »
This could become really tangled as I know each country has it's own laws. So, how does all this work via internet where the website the photos may be uploaded to are in one country and the owner is in another? And since the internet is worldwide....?lots and lots to think about.
My guess (and it's only a guess) is that the country of origin is what matters. If photos were taken in UK the laws described by Adeptris would prevail. And I think many countries follow the 70-year or similar rules (I think it's 75 here in Brazil, not quite sure).
Therefore images taken in the 19th century would likely be treated as public domain. I believe this is why you have so many poster stores/sites selling copies of famous paintings. No descendant of Renoir can claim rights over his works.
Regards,
Adelaide
those copies are risky -- the museum or other owner of the renoir COULD sue -- and they do -- posters in museum stores, books, etc are licensed from the owners. re the deceased in images - they may not be a copyright issue, but the separtae issue of model releases still applies -- you'd have to have a release from the heirs. steve
4297
« on: July 07, 2008, 14:50 »
not a true sepia, but this one outsells the rosier version: 
4298
« on: July 07, 2008, 14:32 »
I am considering building a site to promote my potfolios and try to refer stock buyers to MS sites. Can everyone post their links to their sites so i can see how you all do it? Just need some good ideas to get rolling.
my portfolio is http://pix-now.com/main.phpi'll trade links with anyone else 's portfolio -- submit your site address at: http://cascoly.com/sell-your-photography.aspOne of the factors search engines calculate is the number of relevant external pages that link to your simple. Simple 'add your link' pages are discounted. Here are several ways to promote your images and increase the google pagerank of your webpages. GLOBAL SCAVENGER HUNT: Go to http://pix-now.com/games/hunt/adm-addtreasure.htm where you can define treasures from around the world - for each item, you can include both a URL to your webpage and a URL to your image [your choice of size]. When people play the game they will see these links. In addition, we create a physical page for each treasure, that is picked up by search engine crawlers. the current version of the game itself is at http://cascoly.com/games/hunt/main.aspONLINE PUZZLES We host the software, you provide the images - you can link to an unique page showing your image(s) as a puzzle. YOur linking page can work like this: http://cascoly.com/games/puzzle.asp
4299
« on: June 26, 2008, 14:46 »
It is a tricky question and in a way, that is how a rating out of 10 works good. Istock exclusives can give istock a 10 if they want and people who submit to 2 sites can give shutterstock a 10, and istock a 10, or 9 or something. That way even non exclusive photographers can give sites a 10 - with percentages you could never give your top site a 100% unless you were exclusive.
For the percentage thing to work out, people would really all have to be submitting to the same sites.
but the 1-10 scale is subjective and you really cant compare or average the results in any statistically valid way, since you still dont know the underlying $ involved
4300
« on: June 25, 2008, 01:07 »
One of the factors search engines calculate is the number of relevant external pages that link to your simple. Simple 'add your link' pages are discounted. Here are several ways to promote your images and increase the google pagerank of your webpages. GLOBAL SCAVENGER HUNT: Go to http://pix-now.com/games/hunt/adm-addtreasure.htm where you can define treasures from around the world - for each item, you can include both a URL to your webpage and a URL to your image [your choice of size]. When people play the game they will see these links. In addition, we create a physical page for each treasure, that is picked up by search engine crawlers. the current version of the game itself is at http://cascoly.com/games/hunt/main.aspONLINE PUZZLES We host the software, you provide the images - you can link to an unique page showing your image(s) as a puzzle. YOur linking page can work like this: http://cascoly.com/games/puzzle.asp
Pages: 1 ... 167 168 169 170 171 [172] 173 174
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
