|
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 - Mantis
4551
« on: September 12, 2012, 18:40 »
It could be worse. I know the countries concerned had a "frosty" relationship but I don't believe they ever actually fought each other??
Not sure what your point is.
4552
« on: September 12, 2012, 18:24 »
When you look at low performing agencies like these you really have to give it time (maybe 6-12 months) before you dump them. Uploading to low end or start up sites is always a test. I wouldn't hold your breath that Zoonar is a key player now in your monthly stock revenue.
4553
« on: September 12, 2012, 18:19 »
Pixmac is stealing all the traffic 
4554
« on: September 12, 2012, 18:17 »
Shameful of that party.
4555
« on: September 12, 2012, 18:13 »
Today's phones have filters built in so they could be straight from the phone with a phone filter applied. You pick one filter then shoot and you get what you get. Different results with different filters. I think he means that he didn't do any post-processing (correct me if I'm wrong).
Wow. You learn something new every day. Probably most certainly what he means then.
4556
« on: September 12, 2012, 18:03 »
This is what we really need. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price_fixing 
And if the micros get caught, we walk away WITH NOTHING 
Just sayin.
New agencies will start up and we will keep selling...
You aren't serious I am assuming?
4557
« on: September 12, 2012, 17:59 »
They're obviously filtered Straight from phone Which one is it?
4559
« on: September 12, 2012, 17:01 »
DP has been notorious for using price to beat the competition. Instead of upping their prices to buyers, creating licenses that add greater value for the customer and generating the perception of enhanced value-to-price relationship, they take the rookie route.
4560
« on: September 12, 2012, 16:58 »
1/4000 shutter - hmm i believe this is one important feature that make the difference compared with D800.
One very important + is for 5.5 fps.
I'm curious about the price....
Very rarely do you need 1/4000th shutter, so for me and probably most microstock shooters it's not a very important feature, but nice as a back pocket feature. Same for FPS. Really depends on what context you are baselining your comments on, 1; microstock or other uses like 2;sports photography, two completely different techniques..generally speaking who would, or would not use your techniques.
4561
« on: September 12, 2012, 16:50 »
What really would be eco-friendly : a keyboard (or anything else elelectronic) that can be repaired when it breaks down (or when I spill my entire glass of apple-juice
For me anyway!!..
4562
« on: September 12, 2012, 16:40 »
Dreamstime is still one of my Big 4, but their performance is falling too much lately.
My TOP 8:
1) Shutter
2) Istock
3) Fotolia
4) Dreamstime
5) Deposit
6) Canstock
7) 123RF
Photodune
I have a scenario that just seems warped: SS: 800-1k a month IS: $600 a month (IS + TS) DT: ~$150 a month All others (FT, BigStock, DP, PD, CanStockPhoto, 123) well below DT by $50-$100 bucks.
4563
« on: September 12, 2012, 16:37 »
Maybe they're blocking 'similar' visits to the site 
HAhahaha, yes. And customers who buy more than one version of a cocnept get blocked too 
The traffic is down clearly because they have forced buyers to buy in composite increments.
4564
« on: September 09, 2012, 18:20 »
For me, the monthly total counts. You can slice and dice MS any way you want, but in the end you don't control it. I am done being frustrated with trying to figure it all out. I refuse to shoot for any one agency because they do or don't like a kind of image, such as dark images (like SS hates). Whether US (for me) or Abroad I cannot satisfy them all. And honestly this can explain why I do crummy on some sites and better on others while my competition does the opposite.
4565
« on: September 09, 2012, 14:18 »
That's funny, I never really looked at it until you pointed it out. Haven't a clue either.
4566
« on: September 09, 2012, 14:10 »
Fotolia is pretty infamous for selling a few images lots and the rest of the images very little or not at all. It's not that Yuri's entire port isn't saleable it's that Fotolia has a habit of favoring a small selection of photos. If your photos aren't lucky to get in that group you won't see downloads.
So very true. I swear I sell 10 images there of my 2500. 
4567
« on: September 09, 2012, 08:36 »
Unfortunately there are too many sites out there whose bosses may care about their business but who long since stopped caring about their contributors, regarding them as replacable and generally irrelevant. Unfortunately, they seem to be able to keep making money while doing that.
Well stated.^^^
4568
« on: September 09, 2012, 08:35 »
Do FT explain the technical issues they rejected your images for? Or is it just a blanket rejection?
No. They don't give you much in the way of details. I think it's either "technical issues" and something like "too many similar in our database" or "well covered subject". The well covered is pretty straight forward, but "technical" is a very broad rejection reason. Could be anything including "we don't like this image even if the technical quality is good".
4569
« on: September 08, 2012, 18:15 »
I'm a video contributor with a port of only around 130 videos however sales are fairly consistent each month which is encouraging, and Duncan sounds like a really honest chap.
However, i can't help but think that if us video contributors were pushed further up in the search instead of being lumped at the very back of the search results (heck i'd even be happy if videos were somewhere in the middle) and in addition were given the ability to change thumbnail to represent what the video is about instead of a blank, I'm confident that my sales would be much higher. And course that would mean a higher margin of profit for you as well Duncan as video sells for much more.
At the moment i feel like we are being choked for some reason which i do not know.
Just to be clear I think Duncan also "sounds like a really honest chap." Ya know when some of us criticize an agency (and I am not saying that you are saying this) we don't always criticize an individual. We probably shouldn't since most angered comments by us are based on decisions by them as a company, not an individual.
4570
« on: September 08, 2012, 17:41 »
I have a very small port but unlike what was said that maybe a small port could pull in a couple sales. Hasn't worked for me but i'm still hanging in there.
All my sales elsewhere are from small ports so maybe i'll can get a sale or two here also.
I won't give up because Duncan sounds like he really cares about us contributors.
Hey Dan, Duncan cares about his business first, profits, etc, then there are the contributors. Although your port is small (and I don't know if it's 10, 50, 500, etc) just receiving one or two sales somewhere doesn't mean their site is on fire. I am not trying to discourage you, I am merely suggesting that not all sites are the same and a sale here and there doesn't set precedence, although it may give hope. The goal is to upload as you are, see what happens and adjust your strategy accordingly. I am not on all sites, in fact not on most small sites. I have tried a many that are either no longer in business or are just too high of risk (no downloads). But I would just say that don't rely on something like Duncan cares as a strategy. Best of luck.
4571
« on: September 08, 2012, 17:08 »
I added several more to review. By next Friday (or so) my port should double.
Even with a small port i had a SALE. So yeah they're worth a shot.
For you. I never did get a reasonable response from Zager so in my mind same ol same ol. Lisa, you may be satisfied that you are getting a payout every month, but have you ever asked yourself how much you aren't getting? Of all the forum posts about these guys (here, SS, DT, etc) I just think they are a lousy option, personally.
4572
« on: September 08, 2012, 15:53 »
The past 3 months have been really slow for me there. Also happens to be ever since I queried the really low royalty on a video with support.
Never had a bad word against them or their proposed business model, except for questioning sales volume now. That might put a bit of a dent in the conspiracy theory... (unless a new employee just does not like my avatar)
So you don't mind that 123 is introducing an RC system they model after Istock's? Many contributors will get an instant pay cut come January.
We were talking about people who publicly criticized them and feel that it might have something to do with their bad sales (referring to this thread's topic). I mentioned that I did not publicly criticized them. Nowhere did I say or imply that I approve everything they do. Your inference is thus totally misplaced and of topic.
As you will note I asked you a question, I did not accuse, so it is you that misinterpreted. So let me be clear. I am simply asking you that question to bring clarity to your comment "Never had a bad word against them or their proposed business model". It infers that you are okay with it, but I was merely asking if you approve of their RC system. That's all. If I would have used a period instead of a question mark in my post, then you'd of been correct in your inference accusation of my post.
So you are nitpicking about something which is not really relevant to this thread, probably hoping to stir some sort of argument because you like to stir and just have nothing better to do?
Note that my sentence ends with a question mark. I therefore do not imply or accuse you of anything. Just wondering. 
Well unlike you, I will answer the question. No I am not trying to stir the pot nor create any flaming. I asked you a question out of pure curiosity based on a comment you made. If you don't want to answer it that's your right. Onward.
4573
« on: September 08, 2012, 11:12 »
The past 3 months have been really slow for me there. Also happens to be ever since I queried the really low royalty on a video with support.
Never had a bad word against them or their proposed business model, except for questioning sales volume now. That might put a bit of a dent in the conspiracy theory... (unless a new employee just does not like my avatar)
So you don't mind that 123 is introducing an RC system they model after Istock's? Many contributors will get an instant pay cut come January.
We were talking about people who publicly criticized them and feel that it might have something to do with their bad sales (referring to this thread's topic). I mentioned that I did not publicly criticized them. Nowhere did I say or imply that I approve everything they do. Your inference is thus totally misplaced and of topic.
As you will note I asked you a question, I did not accuse, so it is you that misinterpreted. So let me be clear. I am simply asking you that question to bring clarity to your comment "Never had a bad word against them or their proposed business model". It infers that you are okay with it, but I was merely asking if you approve of their RC system. That's all. If I would have used a period instead of a question mark in my post, then you'd of been correct in your inference accusation of my post.
4574
« on: September 08, 2012, 09:33 »
The past 3 months have been really slow for me there. Also happens to be ever since I queried the really low royalty on a video with support.
Never had a bad word against them or their proposed business model, except for questioning sales volume now. That might put a bit of a dent in the conspiracy theory... (unless a new employee just does not like my avatar)
So you don't mind that 123 is introducing an RC system they model after Istock's? Many contributors will get an instant pay cut come January.
4575
« on: September 07, 2012, 18:31 »
All work fine for me now.
Did you have to reload PicNiche? My istock numbers are still the same as a few days ago.
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
