|
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 ... 14 15 16 17 18 [19] 20 21 22 23 24 ... 119
451
« on: March 05, 2013, 11:57 »
As so often, when a buyout is announced and a somewhat new "partnership" emerges we, the contributors, are left in the dark how our share of the pie will be.
There are no numbers of commission % mentioned anywhere.
I can hardly believe that sales through the Pixmac affiliate network will still net us contributors 50% like the sales at Pond5!
Am I too pessimistic or is there really a chance this will be the first affiliate network that still works at 50% for the contributors?
I'm eager to see the numbers.
I'm off to write a nice email to Pond5 now.
452
« on: March 05, 2013, 11:52 »
I just received the email from Pond5 and with the information provided in the email and the FAQ section on Pond5 I am NOT happy. Again, we're at the mercy of Pixmac's funny business (sorry, the past will haunt you). Now my oh so beloved Pond5 that provided excellent results will depend on the distribution and sales reporting of Pixmac. I'm devastated.  I hope that at least Pond5 replaces all staff at Pixmac worldwide to regain control over their conglomerate of subsidiaries. This sucks.
453
« on: March 04, 2013, 13:37 »
Wonderful post! 10,000 hearts!
454
« on: March 01, 2013, 19:57 »
This will not change their stance on illustrations and submitting individual design elements instead of sets.
While of course it's not making much sense not to submit sets as long as they are vector based - I still don't understand their, more than, questionable position on asking us illustrators to submit sets even if the original image is non-vector (e.g. 3D) based.
I'm selling lots of design elements on any other agency which doesn't make it worth my while to upload sets to DT because I'd be undercutting myself. Well I'm not brain dead, so no changes for me - sorry DT.
Good for photographers though with models and the like.
455
« on: March 01, 2013, 12:19 »
I hope you aren't worried about selling images at maximum size for $10? Right now Blend Images has sold more than 12,000 images at Istock, their largest size is priced at $345 and the smallest sale for any image is $95. Please don't devalue your work, it's worth much more than $10 for a full sized license.
Uhhh, is anyone here contributing to an agency called Shutterstock? I've heard they sell images for 25-38 cents to the contributor. I better stay far away from that shabby agency that pays us peanuts. I have to start pricing all my images at $1000 for the largest size at Pond5 to make sure my work is valued appropriately! 
456
« on: February 23, 2013, 16:35 »
Assuming that SS sold the image to this publisher in questions what the "best" thing that could happen?
That after spending 1 hour of research where the image might have been downloaded from and contacting the publisher and Shutterstock, the publisher just has to license it again a second time for another 25-38 cents for the remainder of the print run to be legally covered?
I've given up on these kinds of infringements.
457
« on: February 23, 2013, 16:13 »
So on this note I would suggest that all agencies publish their partners officially so that we contributors can decide whether we want to submit our images directly to these "partners" ourselves and make more $$$ or just allow the agencies to use our images and take a bigger cut!
458
« on: February 23, 2013, 16:10 »
OK let's do this:
This has to be the next BIG thing!
I found my images under the Bigstock pseudonym as well.
It is NOT enough for Bigstock to allow us to opt out from "Partner Sales" in general.
What if I want to be opted in for digital files sales BUT NOT POD partners?
I already have a Cafepress and Zazzle store. Now I'm competing against myself?
Through sales on Cafepress with my Bigstock images I will make at least 30% less than selling through my own Cafepress marketplace account.
This is not cool that we get undercut with our own images through sales like this.
Am I the only one thinking that this stinks?
459
« on: February 22, 2013, 11:13 »
If I had pictures that are so bad they are unsellable on microstock sites why would I want to advertise this by giving them away for free.
You got a point here, Sir.
460
« on: February 22, 2013, 08:29 »
Obviously in any industry you will find good players and bad players.
PD in your situation, is not a suitable fit I would say. Drop them, it's not worth the aggravation.
EVERY agency has images that slipped through the review process that shouldn't have been approved. Even iStockphoto approved images with several logos in them in some cases that sold more than 10,000 times. What shall I do about it?
If any agency doesn't want my images then it shall be that way. As you are working already with 40 agencies I don't think that PD is going to make a big difference for you.
Your images look good so you shouldn't have to worry about your future success.
On the other hand, I've been trying to get into constructive communication with Clipdealer and those folks just offer one of the worst support amongst all agencies I deal with. Similar situation with Panthermedia.
Some agencies work out for a contributor - others don't.
461
« on: February 20, 2013, 14:00 »
I have one folder.
I upload all new images to all the sites.
Whatever gets accepted - fine.
Whatever gets rejected - who cares?
462
« on: February 19, 2013, 13:33 »
There are some problems. Had issues connecting the last few minutes and now it's up again. Miami, Florida.
463
« on: February 19, 2013, 11:13 »
Wow stunning work. It's almost a crime that images like that are selling for pennies.
You have to realize that the artist uploaded them to DT in the first place...
If I created such nice images I would NOT upload them to any micros.
Yes that is exactly the point I was making.
I thought you were criticizing DT for their pricing scheme rather than criticizing the contributor. If he/she is selling this stuff for pennies, I wonder what else they are selling through other channels then.
464
« on: February 18, 2013, 19:19 »
Wow stunning work. It's almost a crime that images like that are selling for pennies.
You have to realize that the artist uploaded them to DT in the first place... If I created such nice images I would NOT upload them to any micros.
465
« on: February 16, 2013, 18:44 »
... So, it is a difference of $6500 a year or a little over $500 a month. It's a nice chunk of change that all of us would definitely like, but it's not necessarily life changing. First, if you can spare $500 a month feel free to send them my way. They sure are life changing for me. Second, this makes me think of this: Black Books | Rip-Off | Channel 4 (The video's owner prevents external embedding)
466
« on: February 13, 2013, 20:15 »
Found this guy selling Shutterstock images:
http://fiverr. com/manojdaran/give-you-12-royalty-free-images-from-shutterstock (I put a space before the com so the link wouldn't work)
Pff, what a "creative" way to make money off of a subscription.
467
« on: February 11, 2013, 15:53 »
It may well be the "easy deletion" script that really got up their noses.
Very possible. There probably was a reason why IS made it such a pain to deactivate files. Now Sean is coming a long with a nice handy script so they feel like losing control over their territory.
468
« on: February 11, 2013, 14:47 »
Sean, I think this very unprofessional kick-out is a blessing in disguise.
IS should have valued your support and efforts a lot more, actually you should have been on their employee payroll IMO for your tremendous amount of help you provided all around IS related questions in your blog and here.
I truly hope you have prepared yourself for such a short term disaster to provide for your family.
We all know that your skills will ensure further safety and security of your loved ones by selling at (many) other places.
Best of luck. Stay strong and keep posting here about your new ventures.
469
« on: February 05, 2013, 09:59 »
This is a great project and I'd be willing to donate for a final version as well.
OP, could you please add all the latest updates and eventual download links into your first post?
That way it's much easier to see the "official" development.
Best of luck!
470
« on: February 04, 2013, 16:25 »
IMHO totally unimaginative and boring. Looks exactly like every other corporate web site. Well I guess that fits with the "stock imagery" concept, doesn't it?
Interesting observation. Let me ask you something: How creative does an agency have to be? Especially in terms of their web design? Sure a funky web design can create (generic) traffic but isn't it more important for DT to serve as a efficient platform for creative CONTENT and therefore providing this content as simple and easy as possible? I've seen a bunch of "creative" stock image sites with huge wallpaper images that look great and everything but navigation was almost non-existent or hard to find. I'm not saying that DT's revamped design is the best ever but doesn't it still deliver what buyers are looking for?
471
« on: February 04, 2013, 11:31 »
Just saw their "new" look!
OK maybe a bit of an overstatement but they cleaned it up a bit.
472
« on: February 04, 2013, 11:30 »
It's not just you.
Reviews may take a long time but that's because Pond5 is a rather successful selling platform for footage which is a good thing.
The guys there are really busy to sell our stuff. Give them time to work through the queue.
I'm sure they know that 3+ weeks for reviews are just too long and work on a solution for that.
Most importantly: They sell frequently and they pay out on time!
473
« on: February 01, 2013, 10:19 »
Yeah, no need to freak yet. I think it's only things you have saved "locally" to your drive. I can't find a way to just pull something from the "online" google drive. I even tried creating a "drawing".
When I select Google Drive I see a pop up where briefly (split second) a search field shows up which disappears again just to show you the contents of your Google Drive account. I cannot select ANY general Google Drive archives, only personally uploaded content.
474
« on: January 30, 2013, 21:30 »
That's something new, right? I don't see anything about it in the forums, but I just noticed my P+ images are all starting at XS for $6. It was $4 before, right? Or am I just losing it?
Well it's just logical that IS has to up prices (once again) to compensate for buyers that are running away, exclusives dropping their crowns and the rest not uploading new content. It just wouldn't be sustainable for them, you know
475
« on: January 30, 2013, 19:23 »
To just say that's the risk he takes when he sells online -- what an incredibly insensitive cavalier attitude, and certainly not appropriate when they're taking the lion's share of the royalties!... Unreal behavior! To speak to your own exclusives that way is a disgrace. Where does this support rep think their salary money is coming from??? WOW, sorry the OP had to go through this.
Pages: 1 ... 14 15 16 17 18 [19] 20 21 22 23 24 ... 119
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
