|
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 - Dodie
Pages: 1 ... 14 15 16 17 18 [19] 20 21 22 23 24 ... 27
451
« on: July 26, 2016, 14:20 »
The way things are going he was probably booted out. Most of the old crowd got laid off.
The way things are going I don't think anyone is booted out, better, they don't know how to make them stay. Many good guys are gone "to spend more time with their family".
452
« on: July 26, 2016, 13:38 »
I am missing the sold image size on earnings (daily) page. So if I have 5 sales a day (which I don't) I see only the total number of sales and earnings total.
Anyone knows if this column is gone forever from stat or I'm looking in the wrong place?
453
« on: July 26, 2016, 13:19 »
Wow, I love it! It is the most beautiful design in all agencies, I hope it works too.
Now, with this done, they will have more time to sell some images too.
454
« on: July 14, 2016, 09:23 »
As has been already mentioned, it doesn't matter if you use your phone or an expensive, high end camera, or are young and new to microstock, or have been here for years...talent is talent. The problems at SS are a combination of things, mostly WAY out of the contributors' control.
As far as diversifying one's port, there are plenty of people who are doing that, and sales are STILL tanking. Blaming Laurin or any other contributor for the problems just doesn't make sense. If you are critiquing a person's port one-on-one, diversifying might be a perfectly legitimate criticism. But the sales problems are so widespread among all different portfolios, I just don't think that is what is going on here.
I agree with everything you said here, except one thing: nobody attacked Laurin before he attacked others, in his very first sentence. As I said before, I admire Laurin and learned a lot from him just by reading his posts during the years. Most of all, I admire his ability to revigorate and create commotion on both forums.
455
« on: July 14, 2016, 08:43 »
snip
IMO, Shutterstock has opened the flood gates and lowered the standards, and this is clearly working for their bottom line profits in the short term. Longterm, the question is will they manage to keep contributors engaged if the contributor only earns $72 for 18000 images? Eventually, they will only manage to keep the contributors producing mediocre content, as the rest of us will have sought out alternative opportunities for revenue. I sincerely hope they realise the path they are on is not sustainable before it's too late.
Most definitely there is a problem with SS that doesn't have anything to do with whether one is old or young, or has a new portfolio or has been there for years. Some of the previous posters think it's "cool" to disrespect someone like Laurin, who has more talent in his left pinky than they will in their entire lives, but the bolded statement above says it all. The cream of the crop talent will find other more profitable venues, and the low to mediocre talent will remain in microstock, dispelling the theory that one has to be a "hipster" just to produce saleable, relevant content. Good is good no matter how old you are or how long you have been in the business.
I see the word entitlement being thrown around...and yet the notion that "old" people should go rest and smoke their bongs and leave the real talent to the young hipsters, to me, is the epitome of the definition of entitlement. Maybe a little humility would go a long way. Some of you hipsters might have to go google that word. 
If you are referring to my comment above, I think you are overreacting but that is my fault. First of all, I have a great respect for Laurin and his work. Second, when I say old (in this context), it doesn't mean less valuable, it only means that the new generation has much more tools for creative work from an early age on. Graphic design (without being hipsters) takes many years of study and much, much time to learn, which older people don't have. Uploading vectors along with photos diversifies a port big time. So, it's no need to make a mountain out of a molehill for the use or the word "old". No, old people should NOT "go rest and smoke their bongs......", they should try to learn diversify their port if they still can and kip up with the trend. This is what I need and find it very hard to accomplish. On a side-note, this is an international forum where not all of us are English speakers. No offense, it would be nice to use a simple vocabulary instead of sending people to g00gle but it's just my 5c. It's obvious that you are an intelligent person, I, on the other hand have some limitations when it comes to correctly express what I think in English.
456
« on: July 14, 2016, 06:17 »
And yes. There are many newbies, graphic designers and young creative talents that are doing much, much better commercial work. THAT is why some people are loosing sales.
That's true and that is the real threat for oldies and also the hidden reason of their complaint. I'm old too, I don't complain, just envy them. It's a new world!.
457
« on: July 11, 2016, 03:50 »
It's infinite contributor, but I don't know what infinite means....Thats why it's probably allowed...
Yes, I see now the black FT logo. Infinite is a collection where emerald members are invited. That is how this site describes it (in 2007). FT describes it as: The Infinite Collection is a library of premium images gathered from top international agencies and made available to Fotolia customers. Nice work anyway.
458
« on: July 10, 2016, 16:45 »
Is it allowed to put titles like that?
I don't know but it's a professional looking port. You can search for the exact words from the thread title (first part) if you wish.
459
« on: July 08, 2016, 05:36 »
Just saw something interesting while looking at the sales graph. US sales accounts for nearly 70% of my revenue now. It looks like they also back filled the previous months.
I remember looking at the graph a few weeks ago and only about 10% were from US sales. I wonder if they messed up the reporting metrics previously and just fixed it recently. It kinda make sense that 70% of sales would come from US buyers.
Not for me. I had 4 US sales in the last 30 days. I used to have more during DPC but not lately, which I don't mind. I just end up with double taxation.
460
« on: July 08, 2016, 05:20 »
Yes, that could be a reason when someone is that good.
461
« on: July 08, 2016, 05:12 »
I've seen many images in (a) big and beautiful port having almost all still images with the same title/description: Royalty-free stock photography by ... What could be the advantage of this, if allowed?
462
« on: July 07, 2016, 01:21 »
That's why I don't resubmit. Ever. It is a waste of time. I upload to a number of sites and do not keep track of rejections. Obviously I notice if an image is rejected by a number of sites, then I know there is something wrong with it. But usually the randomness of the process is discouraging and resubmitting often is not worth my time. As for dreams time, I might be too old to collect the next payout.
Thank you all for your input. I was more interested about the rejection reason mentioned. I don't resubmit either but this time I was stubborn because the strange rejection. DT is a low earner for me too, very low lately but some people at the other thread still report good sales. I'm sure it depends on the portfolio, you can't expect earnings with a port of 200 images. I said many times that I stop uploading but things change all the time in stock world, you never know which agency goes down or comes up. I made $0.90 in June and then, on the last day of the month some bigger sales came in, still not worse than 123, BS or DP. Keeping my images on my hard drive will not bring anything in my pocket.
463
« on: July 05, 2016, 15:15 »
The original is a photo of 24 Megapixel but this one that I uploaded was downsized to 6 Megapixel. I don't upload full size images.
I'll move on, I just wanted to know for future images (if.....)
Thanks Cathy.
464
« on: July 05, 2016, 14:50 »
You are right Cathy, thanks, here is a sketch. I've seen many images with open books. I could have put something in the background but I wanted it to be isolated.
465
« on: July 05, 2016, 13:55 »
Thanks, I can't reply to a machine ( [email protected]) and I don't want to. You are right about reaching payout a few times in a lifetime, still the tone of the reviewer could be different.
466
« on: July 05, 2016, 13:26 »
I got an image rejected for too much white space with this text:
"The area occupied by the isolated subject is too small, and by cropping the resulting image is under 3 Megapixels."
The image is an open diary/note book with flowers on top, isolated, so, long but not tall.
I cropped the image close to the isolated object on the long side but I kept the aspect ratio of the original format (3:2), it's my usual workflow because some agencies specify standard aspect ratio.
After the crop, the image was 6 Megapixel, so I resubmitted it with the resubmit button and a note.
This was rejected again but now I pissed the reviewer off big time, here he is shouting with uppercase and threatening "the stupid contributor":
"The area occupied by the ISOLATED SUBJECT is too small, and by cropping the resulting image is under 3 Megapixels.
You have submitted this image before and it was refused for the same reason(s) OR the resubmitted file is too similar with your initial submission. Please ensure that you did fix the problem(s). Do not resubmit identical images. Your account privileges may be restricted if you use this method."
I had no intention to misbehave and the original image is 24 Megapixel, big enough even for DT but I didn't understand what the problem was. And what method is he talking about, it's their official resubmit button.
I don't give a da*n about my "privileges" of a few cents/month and I have no intention to resubmit but please enlighten me, do I have to cut out the middle of the image with no white space?
Again, it was accepted by all agencies the first time.
Many thanks for your thoughts.
467
« on: July 05, 2016, 03:52 »
I know it was reported, what I wanted to say is that it is impossible to check keywords on images after page 10 on buyer site.
468
« on: July 05, 2016, 03:28 »
OK, now I'm really curious. I'm gonna check some of my images. Where did you people, who are missing keywords checked for them. On a page like the buyer would see the image and keywords or in that section, where you can edit your keywords (Approval status/Approved images...)?
I don't think that position of keyword matter at SS.
I checked on buyer site in chronological order "New". Keywords for newer images are in alphabetical order but older ones are random. The problem is that after page 10 when I click the "next page" (big gray button), it jumps back to page 4. When I insert manually the page number in the box (11, 12, 13....), images are in random order, so I give up further checking. What a mess!
469
« on: July 03, 2016, 15:33 »
I'll bet you dollars to donuts that everyone who received the first email received the second as well. I'm sure they didn't do any further programming to tease real spammers out of their original email list. So all the spammers now feel there's no action needed on their part.
Obviously this port passed through review with the spammy titles in place. All in all a complete fail for Shutterstock.
I could understand if a few of these spammy images passed review but there are thousands of spammy vectors and entire ports. You just have to hover over the images on this page and see for yourself.
so now we see that perharps there is no review going on with vectors
or that there is a bunch of lax reviewers for vectors
while there is an extreme ANALysis of reviewer(s) for photographs.
That's not what I said, I have no idea of how review works with vectors. I showed clear examples of spam, you are welcome to demonstrate that I'm wrong.
470
« on: July 03, 2016, 12:37 »
I'm pretty sure that those ports were uploaded with the spammy titles and I'm sure because there are many new ports from 2016 among them. Which beginner contributor would risk to be suspended right at the start? This is very sad, not just because it is unjust but because it encourages further spamming.
471
« on: July 03, 2016, 06:35 »
I'll bet you dollars to donuts that everyone who received the first email received the second as well. I'm sure they didn't do any further programming to tease real spammers out of their original email list. So all the spammers now feel there's no action needed on their part.
Obviously this port passed through review with the spammy titles in place. All in all a complete fail for Shutterstock.
I could understand if a few of these spammy images passed review but there are thousands of spammy vectors and entire ports. You just have to hover over the images on this page and see for yourself.
472
« on: July 03, 2016, 01:47 »
http://www.shutterstock.com/de/pic-385305055/stock-vector-heart-heart-heart-heart-heart-heart-heart-heart-heart-heart-heart-heart-heart-heart.html
What a sad portfolio - perhaps 200 actual images and endless repetitions of similars - glasses, skulls, easter eggs and so on
http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-318128897/stock-vector-glasses-glasses-glasses-glasses-glasses-glasses-glasses-glasses-glasses-glasses-glasses.html
The titles are spammed, the keywords are spammed and visually, 9/10 of the portfolio is spam. SS must really want to bulk up the library to permit this sort of pollution.
If you change the title after approval, do they change the image page URL? If not, these URLs indicate the image was approved this way, not changed afterwards.
How can this get past a reviewer? And here the rest of us have to put up with seemingly random rejection reasons. Something is deeply wrong there.
I have the same question, what was the reviewer doing when he let these vectors pass with such a title: Emoticon emoji set. Emoticon emoji icon. Emoticon emoji design. Emoticon emoji flat. Emoticon emoji art. Emoticon emoji image. Emoticon emoji illustration. Emoticon emoji vector. Emoticon emoji eps 10http://image.shutterstock.com/display_pic_with_logo/2271365/429629455/stock-vector-emoticon-emoji-set-emoticon-emoji-icon-emoticon-emoji-design-emoticon-emoji-flat-emoticon-emoji-429629455.jpgEven now these spammers don't care to correct these titles, obviously they got no email, or just don't care. These spammy titles are a new trend and obviously they work wonders in search and rank.
473
« on: June 28, 2016, 06:17 »
I came here to complain but now I see that I'm rich. I earned 0.96c in the last 35 days. Last time I wrote to support I received a short and impertinent answer telling me that I should upload more. IMO, they should review faster. I disabled extended licenses when they introduced unlimited use in March, this year: http://www.microstockgroup.com/dreamstime-com/dreamstime-introduces-unlimited-extended-licenses/I wonder if this has anything to do with these ridiculous earnings?
475
« on: June 20, 2016, 04:56 »
Yes you're right about "their sites, their rules" but same content,same contrubitors and also sales coming fotolia statistics.Dpc was mirror of fotolia.They must consider contrubitors.My lost 300 usd each month and this is the main reason.
same content,same contrubitors and also sales coming fotolia statistics but not the same buyers, not the same view count and not the same downloads even when the search engine works the same way, IMO. I can understand your anger for those $300 but sales are down for many contributors lately ( myself included), some say it's because of closing DPC.
Pages: 1 ... 14 15 16 17 18 [19] 20 21 22 23 24 ... 27
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
