|
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 - Shelma1
Pages: 1 ... 14 15 16 17 18 [19] 20 21 22 23 24 ... 116
451
« on: February 21, 2018, 07:12 »
Why not? You keep asking other people to share charts and earnings, but you're anonymous and refuse to answer a simple question about your earnings.
452
« on: February 20, 2018, 13:59 »
Let me make this easy. No I didn't post a blog, I don't have one. Stop trying to say you know who I am or that I can't be capped because I don't make enough. You are wrong. Stop saying where I live, including the city, as a way to say, I know who you are, because you are also wrong. But please keep saying that only upper level people are capped, it's good news for the rest of us who aren't. Reminder that when you criticize people for their work or levels, you are making fun of over half the people here, maybe 75%. But you're so vane you don't mind putting down all the new people and all of us not as wonderful as you.
Now you can go back to writing political hate messages and maybe keep busy with that. Or you can keep stalking me because you don't know what you are writing about and know nothing about who I am or my work. Please stop the obsession with my data or illustrations and video collection.
I think you've officially lost it.
No, a few moments with Agent Google reveal that she's from the US (it's easy enough to find the address). So you're probably mixing her up with someone else.
I don't think anyone's questioning whether I'm from the U.S. I think it's pretty clear I am. 
453
« on: February 20, 2018, 13:56 »
For those who are capped why not stop uploading and use the time more productively? If your content is really so good SS will see declining sales and customer dissatisfaction and do something about it.
Spoken like a true, clueless and ignorant hobbyist.
People who are professional and look at this as a business cannot simply abandon one of the major, if not the biggest earner of all their agencies.
Maybe you're in stock just to pay for a couple coffees, and despite that you are not shy about making ignorant comments towards professionals. But for a lot of people to abandon SS it means having to chose between paying the rent or buying food because half of their income would be lost.
Do you see why some people actually have reasons to take this issue seriously?
And this is the problems in these discussions. Some wannabees who need a year to make what professionals make in a month or even week think they have the same data and knowledge as them.
If you have reached your cap why would your sales go down if you stop uploading...Isn't that the whole point? As you are taking the issue seriously what are you actually doing about it? Did I say abandon? nope just stop uploading until a point when you feel resuming will actually bring an improved return. Seems perfectly sensible to me...perhaps you can tell me what I've missed?
Your sales would go down if you stop uploading for the same reasons everyone else's would. If you stop uploading, at what point, exactly, would resuming uploading make a difference, do you think? How would anyone be able to figure that out? I'd like to know how you'd figure it out. Say you stop uploading today. Exactly which day this year or this week or this month would be the magic day resuming uploads would make a difference? And why would stopping and then resuming change anything? You'd still be at the top tier royalty rate, still subject to the same algorithms that are suppressing your sales in favor of contributors with lower royalties.
454
« on: February 20, 2018, 08:39 »
I think people who haven't experienced it want to believe it will not happen to them, so it's easier to think the more experienced contributors are imagining things, or that newbies get higher placement simply because they "work harder" or "improve their images." That explains why you all keep ignoring the very specific things we're talking about.
Except you aren't specific at all. You are vague.
OK, so it's not worth discussing anything with you. You seem hell bent on getting people to share their earnings, and it ain't gonna happen.
455
« on: February 20, 2018, 08:08 »
The thing with these percentage increases on sales though... they're going to be somewhat in-line with how many items you're uploading. Not exactly, but in the same kind of ballpark. So lets say for example that you had 100 images in 2013 and you uploaded 416 images between then and 2014. That would equate to your 516% increase.
Then if you're uploading regular as clockwork, it stands to reason that you'll upload another 416 images the next year. So that would be an 80% increase on the previous year. Do the same the next year and you've got a 44% increase. Then 30%, then 23% and so on and so forth. So unless you're doubling your portfolio every year then you're bound to see a drop in your percentage increases. But who can upload 400 new images in 2013, 800 in 2014, 1600 in 2015, 3200 in 2016, 6400 in 2017 and 12800 in 2018? Not your average one-man band. The longer you're at it, the harder it becomes.
That's going on the assumption that all your content is exactly the same with regards to commercial appeal/quality etc... which they rarely are. So why are your percentage increases less than my figures? Because they don't take into account the continual increase in authors and the amount of images/videos on the site. Even if your portfolio did increase by 100% every year, you wouldn't see a 100% growth in sales every year. And if you didn't upload anything since 2013, your 0% increase year on year would rapidly head into negative figures as your sales declined.
Unfortunately, that's just par for the course, and there's no way to avoid it to a certain extent. Work on improving quality and diversity like you say, and try to upload more this year than you did the last... but if everyone keeps doing what they're doing, then you're never going to keep getting steady growth in sales figures.
The people who've experienced the "cap," or having their images pushed back in the search, are pointing out things that the rest of you choose to ignore. You all keep bringing up competition, image quality, how many images you upload, the size of the SS portfolio, etc. And we keep bringing up similar images from newbies placed high in the search, best-selling images being pushed back from page 1 to page 10 overnight, floodgates opening for a day or two when our sales suddenly jump back to "normal," images that don't appear on the site for days after approval, etc. Yes, we all know there's competition. Yes, the SS portfolio is growing like crazy. Yes, you need to always improve your image quality. But those factors are in addition to the specific machinations we see that purposely suppress the sales of contributors who've reached the top royalty tier and have a good number of top-selling images. I think people who haven't experienced it want to believe it will not happen to them, so it's easier to think the more experienced contributors are imagining things, or that newbies get higher placement simply because they "work harder" or "improve their images." That explains why you all keep ignoring the very specific things we're talking about.
456
« on: February 19, 2018, 20:20 »
Let me make this easy. No I didn't post a blog, I don't have one. Stop trying to say you know who I am or that I can't be capped because I don't make enough. You are wrong. Stop saying where I live, including the city, as a way to say, I know who you are, because you are also wrong. But please keep saying that only upper level people are capped, it's good news for the rest of us who aren't. Reminder that when you criticize people for their work or levels, you are making fun of over half the people here, maybe 75%. But you're so vane you don't mind putting down all the new people and all of us not as wonderful as you.
Now you can go back to writing political hate messages and maybe keep busy with that. Or you can keep stalking me because you don't know what you are writing about and know nothing about who I am or my work. Please stop the obsession with my data or illustrations and video collection.
I think you've officially lost it.
457
« on: February 19, 2018, 17:50 »
You have posted before you know who I am, posted the country I live many times and also the city. You say you know my sales and note how long it took me to reach $10,000, and you looked at my account on SS, but you aren't making notes or following me?
Why won't you answer? Everyone here can see that you want to make personal attacks on me instead of answering any questions or what I write. You do that when you can't answer. Why are you following me? I didn't imagine the things you have posted about me because you wanted to say you know who I am. I'd call that stalking.
All the stuff I know about you I know because you posted it here. You said you were from Canada, you posted links to your blog, you announced you recently made a new earnings level at SS after years there. How the heck else would I know anything about you? I'm not a magician or a mind reader. "Following you." Lolol.
458
« on: February 19, 2018, 13:53 »
u manage 10 k sales in 8 years maybe more...what ai can discuss with yoU?
understand?
You know my sales? Can you link so I can see that data myself? How many years?
How many sales and files does someone have to have to write an opinion here, I'd like to know the rules that you and Michelle have now created. I didn't see them listed when I signed up for the forum. But your point is, I can't see caps because I don't make enough sales? Wait, maybe I'm one of those people who's stealing your front page spot because I'm so terrible and cheap.
If you don't want everyone to know it took you 8 years to get 10K in sales, don't share that information. Anyone can read that and see you don't have all that many daily sales. And maybe don't claim that more successful microstockers must be wearing tinfoil hats when they have a lot more sales and can clearly see patterns you can't?
I'm guessing there are people here who make 10K a month, a few who make 10K a week. At those sales levels Shuttertock's machinations become a lot clearer, not only because you have enough sales to see drops that are statistically relevant, but also because you pay very careful attention to where your images are ranked, where your competitors are ranked, etc. And you can see that your images, along with those of your major competitors, are subject to the same algorithm changes.
Looking back, of course, I now understand that all those exciting instant sales I got as a newbie were because Shutterstock was pushing my lower-royalty-earning images up in the search.
So you benefit from the algorithms at first, and then you're punished by them as you get more successful. Sort of the exact opposite of what happens in the real world, where you get raises and promotions for doing a good job instead of getting demoted for it.
Except you don't know my sales or who I am and you're just making this all up to support your impossible conspiracy theory. No one is being demoted for doing a good job, competition and volume of new are extreme, you did't think these good sales would last forever without a flood of competition coming in and taking away your business? Of course you thought that buying a house near an airport meant no airplanes and nothing would ever change there either?
When many of the people here started there were under 10 million photos on SS, maybe 4 million. Now there are 180 million and a million new a month. Did you ever consider that these new photos might also make sales, that many would be similar to yours, or did you expect a monopoly of some sort? Should your work be in front forever and nothing new gets seen? The limit is how many total sales SS or anyplace else can make a year and your percentage is dropping.
You need to consider that I lied about how long it took to reach $10,000 how many years, how many files, because of trolls and stalkers like you and Simon and others who want to use anything someone writes as a way to personally degrade and attack them. False information is a way to throw you off so you don't know anything about who I am, what I shoot or draw or what my actual sales are.
If there was capping, I'd see it. I also trust someone like farble that his sales are steady, but not unlimited or capped either, he just does very good work and there's only so much that one person can sell a month. I don't know how good steady sales can be a bad thing? Growing against the million new images every month is impossible. Staying level is a hard earned prize and deserves admiration in this business.
I love your logic though. I'm too stupid or don't make enough sales so I can't see the cap. It's not just me, you are insulting everyone else here with that kind of arrogant self centered reasoning. We're all inferior to your superior self image, that's why we can't see something that doesn't exist, like you do. We either agree with you or we're dumb and blind or don't make enough. Thanks for the enlightened information that shows your proof, which you have avoided. I can't prove something doesn't exist, that's impossible. So the point for you or someone else is prove it does.
What a hilarious post. Trolls and stalkers? Holy moley. And you think other people are imagining things. Lol.
459
« on: February 19, 2018, 11:41 »
u manage 10 k sales in 8 years maybe more...what ai can discuss with yoU?
understand?
You know my sales? Can you link so I can see that data myself? How many years?
How many sales and files does someone have to have to write an opinion here, I'd like to know the rules that you and Michelle have now created. I didn't see them listed when I signed up for the forum. But your point is, I can't see caps because I don't make enough sales? Wait, maybe I'm one of those people who's stealing your front page spot because I'm so terrible and cheap.
If you don't want everyone to know it took you 8 years to get 10K in sales, don't share that information. Anyone can read that and see you don't have all that many daily sales. And maybe don't claim that more successful microstockers must be wearing tinfoil hats when they have a lot more sales and can clearly see patterns you can't? I'm guessing there are people here who make 10K a month, a few who make 10K a week. At those sales levels Shuttertock's machinations become a lot clearer, not only because you have enough sales to see drops that are statistically relevant, but also because you pay very careful attention to where your images are ranked, where your competitors are ranked, etc. And you can see that your images, along with those of your major competitors, are subject to the same algorithm changes. Looking back, of course, I now understand that all those exciting instant sales I got as a newbie were because Shutterstock was pushing my lower-royalty-earning images up in the search. So you benefit from the algorithms at first, and then you're punished by them as you get more successful. Sort of the exact opposite of what happens in the real world, where you get raises and promotions for doing a good job instead of getting demoted for it.
460
« on: February 19, 2018, 10:53 »
C'mon then.
Show us your spreadsheets. Show us your graphs. Show us your workings.
I can't because there are no caps. Show me proof of Nessie, the Bermuda Triangle, Vampires, shape shifting birds, or a yeti. You can't because just like caps, they are a children's fairy tale or belief based on repeated false evidence. There's no proof and that's why believers defend so much. They toss out other myths to prove the first one, like new people are pushed to the front. But wait, I'm on the first page of a number of searches and have been for those same for a long time. I guess SS like me better. 
I think they read this forum and punish people who write bad things. So you better watch out, they're making a list and checking it twice, Gonna find out who's naughty or nice. SS caps are coming to town. Then they will change the search so only people here drop down and push horrible new cheap images to the front so buyers will say, SS has terrible photos, we need to go someplace else.
Just because somebody makes a claims and a small minority of believers agree and make the same claim, that don't make it proof. Just false rumors. The number of wrong people doesn't make evidence, it just means more people who have no sense.
Since it took you about 100 years to get to whatis it 36 now?you clearly don't make enough sales to see patterns, and your images aren't popular enough to be affected by changing algorithms.
461
« on: February 19, 2018, 10:50 »
It only makes sense that Shutterstock would purposely promote newbies, because it increases their take. Better for them to keep 80% than 70%, so they'll play with the search as much as possible to get as close as possible to that 80% without depressing sales too much by pushing newer content that isn't as attractive to buyers. And they'll switch pages and images around to make page one appear "fresh."
I am sure they do it, but it's not my definition of a cap.
Why wouldn't they promote new contributors? completely different from a cap. Who says newer content isn't as attractive its no more "fair" to put established best sellers at the front of the queue than fresh new content.
It might not be a cap, but it has the effect of stopping, capping or even reversing your growth when you've reached a certain level of success, because your content is then targeted to be pushed back in favor of newer contributors'. I used to think this cap stuff was nonsense until it happened to me, and now I just see how naive I was until two years ago, when my earnings started dropping instead of growing and I started paying attention to why that was.
462
« on: February 19, 2018, 09:52 »
Shutterstock's terms forbid you from disclosing earnings anywhere, not just in their forums.
If you had enough sales to see patterns, you'd be able to see how Shutterstock pushes newbies to the top of the search...because you'd have enough top sellers to see when they suddenly stop selling, and then when you looked at the most popular search for those keywords you'd see that your images were moved from page one to page ten overnight, while a newbie photographer now has 20 nearly identical photos from the same shoot suddenly on page oneand there's just no way 20 photos that are virtually the same would all appear on page one organically.
Or you'd see that Shutterstock switched page one in most popular for page two, because you've checked pages one and two often enough to be familiar with the order of the most popular images, generally speaking.
Or you'd know when Shutterstock was changing the search algorithm because the floodgates would open for a day or two and your sales would suddenly be back to "normal," only to be suppressed again when they switched to the new algorithm.
It only makes sense that Shutterstock would purposely promote newbies, because it increases their take. Better for them to keep 80% than 70%, so they'll play with the search as much as possible to get as close as possible to that 80% without depressing sales too much by pushing newer content that isn't as attractive to buyers. And they'll switch pages and images around to make page one appear "fresh."
463
« on: February 19, 2018, 07:42 »
Lol. Anonymous people asking others to divulge their earnings (against Shutterstock's terms).
464
« on: February 19, 2018, 07:07 »
How about the people you know? How many are gun owners, how many have many guns and stockpiles of ammo. How many are against guns and won't have one in their home. I know more people who are not only against the violence but don't want a gun at home. Tell me about your friends.
Nice pass, Obama had power for eight years now you blame Trump for doing nothing. The question is why didn't all you know it all people who want to tell us how to live and think, do something? Maybe it's not as easy as just blaming Trump for everything that's wrong that you left behind.
Chicago is ridden with crime and you want to blame the states next to IL. Lets blame the countries next to the US for the gun and crime problems in the US. Start with Mexico? That's your plan.
The Obama thing has already been explained to you...clearly you don't understand the U.S. political system, being from Canada. A lot of the problem in Mexico can be blamed on the U.S., since we supply them with guns. The number of people I know is statistically insignificant, but let's just say they run the gamut from career criminals who commit armed robbery to rabid right-wing nutcases who are stockpiling weapons to staunch liberals AND conservatives who won't own a gun and want most of them destroyed. Stop your obsession with Chicago. Look up the cities with the worst homicide rates in the U.S. instead of getting your talking points from Breitbart. Let's talk about Regina instead, the murder capital of Canada, since that's where you live. "Bray [Regina's Chief of Police] gave four reasons what is driving crime in Regina: firearms, drugs, gang activity and street crime. " Explain why he puts firearms at the top of his list.
465
« on: February 18, 2018, 13:26 »
You can get almost any gun (legally) in Canada that you can in the US except fully automatic weapons and a few other restrictions that affect almost nobody. The difference is the number of hoops you need to jump through. You need a course run by the RCMP for basic ownership, a background check, and for "prohibited" weapons like handguns you need further courses, an exam and a list of rules for transport, storage and useage.
Banning would never work (from the outside looking in, I live right on the Can/US border), but I don't see why having some common sense laws are such an issue there. There are pros and cons to our system, like any other, but if even one mass shooting is prevented, then I will happily do the extra paperwork and really that is all it is for people who are not a threat to others.
We had our mass/school shootings and changed the laws. Seemed to work for the most part. A minor inconvenience to law abiding people, and much more difficult for people who really shouldn't have them. And yes, there are always ways to get a gun, but for every one who does, maybe so many more get caught trying.
Finally, the 2nd Amendment issue puzzles me. By definition it is something that has been added to or changed from the original. So it is not carved in stone IMHO. If you look at the 18th Amendment, you can see that when motivated, it is ok to change or even repeal an amendment.
Good points, and to some others.
Guns per capita is a false number because I know many people who own no guns or have no pistol and except for a small number, none own automatic weapons of any sort. USA 100 but some of those are collectors or gun hobbyists who own 50 or more. Canada 30 per 100, same but many less of those owners have more than a couple of useful weapons for hunting or hobby or self protection.
Gun murders per 100,000 people, Canada 1.9, .38 homicide, 1.52 suicide, US 10.5, 3.6 homicide, 6.3 suicide. In easy numbers Canada is 80% less, 90% less homicides, with 66% less guns. One big difference is society. We have Detroit right across the border from Windsor. Detroit has gangs, poverty to the max, crime, murders and all kinds of problems. Go across the border bridge and Windsor is a different world. It's not just the guns.
Right we don't need semi-automatic weapons in the US with 20 round clips. For hunting the animals would be long gone, are these guys that terrible of a shot that they have to throw a big clip at some poor little deer? Bump stocks, no need. 5 rounds max for shotguns and big rifles, more for 22 because that's standard for small game.
The reason gun sales go up after one of these incidents is not because people are buying killing machines. They want more for two general reasons. Protection or because they fear a ban is coming.
You can't ignore these countries just because they are crap holes or third world in your narrow opinion, as some have claimed they don't count. Trump didn't shoot the gun, he didn't make the laws, blame is easy and avoiding the truth is just as simple. If anyone pays attention, the President doesn't write the law or introduce the bills.
Places with higher gun homicides rates than the US, you need to include the whole Earth not just those that fit a liberal agenda.
Honduras 67.18
Venezuela 59.13
Swaziland 37.16
Jamaica 30.72
Guatemala 34.10
El Salvador 45.6
Colombia 25.94
Brazil 21.2
Panama 15.11
Philippines 8.90
South Africa 8.3
Mexico 7.64
Costa Rica 7.50
Paraguay 7.76
Uruguay 11.52
Peru 5.53
Nicaragua 4.68
State after state with some of the most stringent gun control laws in the nation also having the highest gun crime rates in the nation. Chicago would be an example.
Chicago is not the most murderous city in the U.S., not by a long shot, despite Illinois having a very long border with a neighboring state with very lax gun laws. So please stop using that false example. Trump blames the Democrats for not acting on gun control when they held power, but he and his fellow Republicans have all the power now, so what's stopping them from acting (other than being owned by the NRA)? Instead he's loosening gun laws while pointing blame elsewhere. Nice trick. Who cares how many people you know who don't own guns? Do you know everyone in the U.S. and Canada? Because only then would your personal experience be relevant.
466
« on: February 18, 2018, 13:18 »
Yup, agreed. But from the outside looking in, the USA very (internationally) publicly holds itself up as a beacon of peace and prosperity to the world and as a model for what democracy should be. The news you get inside your borders is vastly different from the news the rest of the world sees.
So yes, your country has a problem and because of the propensity of media to always fixate on your country, we will all get a front row seat.
Yada lives in Canada, not the USA, despite his proclivity for saying "we" and "us" when discussing issues in a country other than his own.
467
« on: February 18, 2018, 11:43 »
Let's compare the United States to other wealthy, developed countries. How about that?
468
« on: February 18, 2018, 09:59 »
Your killing your own children and you're talking about 'what's fashionable' - What is wrong with you people?
There's no other country where people are killing each other?
I have difficulty finding another country -- especially in the West -- where people slaughter so many children at school so often.
Perhaps you can help?
Oh boy. Sure I can help. Why only focus on the West? Has it become acceptable and mainstream for certain countries to slaughter people so let's just ignore them and exclude them from the statistics? Hardly.
Here are some figures by country per 100,000 people which is a reasonable measurement based on percentage of killings by population.
General homicide by all methods. If you sort by homicides it should be no surprise, maybe except for you, that places like El Salvador and Honduras top the list by rate. Even by total count Brazil and India are at the top. It's reasonable to assume children are part of these figures.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate
Killings by firearms. Again, sorting by homicides places like Honduras and Venezuela top that list which shouldn't be a surprise. It's reasonable to assume children are part of these figures.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate
School shootings. You'll notice there are countries on this list other than the United States.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_shooting
The information is there if you decide to look for it. Or you can blindly follow biased news media groups whose goal is to report information in a way that creates the most turmoil/division, gets them better ratings, and makes them more money. There are atrocities happening globally every day. Murder is horrible, Especially children. To say that United States is the only place where people, or children, are "slaughtered" is really naive. All countries have their problems. Quit blindly following the news media and focusing on the United States.
Now that I've presented some figures I fully expect to see responses with statistics being ignored, pivoting away from the topic, and more USA loves killing children drivel. Please proceed. I'll grab some popcorn.
From your own Wikipedia source about school shootings: "School shootings are an 'overwhelmingly American' phenomenon due to the availability of firearms in the United States." More than half of all school shootings in the US have occurred since 1990. Wayne La Pierre has served as CEO of the NRA since 1991.
469
« on: February 17, 2018, 14:03 »
Says it all:
https://youtu.be/KkH3mJnloO0
He's right, this is not normal. But it's not the guns that do this, it's the nut jobs. There are at least 25 other countries with 25% of the people who own a gun, and they aren't going into schools and shooting children. It's the attitude and the people and copy cats. Weak minds, angry people taking out their hostility on the innocent. If the numbers were the same for the other 25 countries they would have similar shootings once a month. They don't.
How do you take 300 million firearms away from people who have the right to own them and why punish the honest for what a minority of people, who most aren't allowed to own a gun, are causing the problem. Lets say, every time I upload a rejected photo, for illegal copyright not allowed, they take away from you to upload a file that day? You didn't do anything wrong, but you get punished because I broke the rules.
Only 2% of all homicides are committed by legal gun owners, I say punish the illegal owners. But then some here will say we have a prison stat in the US where too many are in jail. Use a gun in a crime, you go to prison. Someone uses your gun, stolen or other, the owner goes to jail or is at least risks going to prison for not securing a dangerous weapon. Make the law 21 and do background checks for all purchases. How does a mentally ill young person get a cache of weapons and ammo? Prosecute the people that sell weapons or ammo to people not allowed to own. Prosecute the source along with the criminal.
License the gun by serial number to a licensed owner, no others.
The United States has more guns per capita than any other country in the world. Second place is Serbia, with half the number of guns per capita. In Canada, where you live, there are 70% fewer guns per capita than in the U.S.A. If you want to be honest about who's killing people with guns, let's admit it's men. Men commit about 90% of homicides worldwide. So it's a gun problem and a man problem. And most specifically a Wayne LaPierre, NRA and gun manufacturer problem, because that handful of men are the ones who buy the politicians (mostly Republicans) in the USA.
470
« on: February 14, 2018, 07:57 »
? If you're looking for uses of photos you've licensed, then they're not stolen.
471
« on: February 13, 2018, 12:04 »
No, nobody has that information, and starting multiple threads about it won't change that.
472
« on: February 13, 2018, 11:06 »
This is an unusual case. According to the article, the building owner had given permission to the artists, the art was so good the buildings became a tourist attraction, and it would have been possible to salvage a lot of the art if the building owner had given the artists the opportunity to do so.
Also, it sounds like the art may have helped with the gentrification of the neighborhood, which is what made the building site so valuable to the owner.
474
« on: February 09, 2018, 14:26 »
He had one of my stolen vectors in his port...NOT in a link to Shutterstock. They've taken it down after I emailed them.
475
« on: February 08, 2018, 11:10 »
Hmmm. I'm vacillating between 2 and 4.
Pages: 1 ... 14 15 16 17 18 [19] 20 21 22 23 24 ... 116
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
