|
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 - Newsfocus1
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 ... 20
51
« on: February 04, 2017, 15:21 »
Just a straight question. Has anyone ever seen an iStock 2c commission or anything from Getty saying that number is real? Or is it just a contributor reading a table and making up news?
It was in the Istock Royalties Update that Getty sent out on October 25 2016. For non-exclusives this is the "worst case" (my words) scenario where a subs buyer downloads their whole allowance giving a Price Per File of 10c and commission to us of 2c. The flip side is that there is no upper limit to what we get when the buyer only downloads a portion of their allowance. Most buyers don't use their full allowance (Shutterstock would be out of business if they did). What we'll end up averaging for sub sales is the big question.
52
« on: February 04, 2017, 09:46 »
No e-mail for me yet either. I have received all of the other e-mails leading up to the change-over. Not unexpected.
They said (last night) that they are still working through non-exclusives and emails would continue today.
53
« on: February 04, 2017, 09:11 »
Ok..so i don't understand nothing....and it's really frustrated.
1) Where is my portfolio now? All my files? I saw them in Deep Meta v2 , now Deep Meta v3 is empty...
Also i can't find my portfolio on GettyImages, Esp profile is also empty. Should i upload all files again but via ESP??? ( i'm non- exclusive contributor)
2) What about sales : i saw SOME (of course i have no idea which one because Deep Meta v2 doesn't work properly also ) sales in January . Do they pay the money about 25 February with specific information about what kind of file was sold?
3) Where is support center??
Its' really hard to understand everything when English is not your native language, but thanks to this Istock/Getty/Deep Meta thing it's a kind of disaster..
Your portfolio is where it always was at Istockphoto.com - which is now the site for buyers (you can still log in as ever and see your files). No need to re-upload! Sales data for rest of December and January will be posted on the ESP site on February 20 with payments (where applicable) going out on Feb 25. Support is via link on top right "need help?" or go to the forum ("Contributor Community") for answers -link to that is also on top right.
54
« on: February 03, 2017, 06:09 »
Got the email. It wasn't a clickable link and I couldn't copy and paste it (just selected the whole of the email). Tried (and failed) patiently typing the very long code into my address bar and then, finally, just got into ESP using my existing Istock password! So what was all this new password business about?
55
« on: January 30, 2017, 06:36 »
Not just new accounts now. Looks like the roll out is well under way - check out the numerous threads on the Alamy forum for a lot of useful information on how to get to grips with the new system. Still waiting for it myself though!
56
« on: January 18, 2017, 14:21 »
For anyone who didn't get or read the notification sent out some weeks ago this is all part of the Unification process with Istock Editorial becoming Unreleased Creative. Essentially all the stuff that Istock didn't initially allow when they launched Editorial some years back, then started to allow, is now out again. This includes politicians, celebrities, professional sports, elections, political protests/demonstrations etc. The sort of images that buyers would expect Getty to be covering (as they put it). Anything requiring press credentials would also be out (even if you have them). Still allowed, for example, are travel/street type images, parades etc with unreleased people (as long as they are not famous people!). In my own case I had about 35 disabled -most of which were of British Home Secretary Amber Rudd (she's my local M.P.). Also out for me were performance shots of local bands at a local music festival -they weren't exactly famous but probaly got interpreted as "celebrities". Oh well, they're all still for sale at SS/BS/123/DT etc.
57
« on: January 14, 2017, 15:00 »
The bridge to bigstock seems to be broken too. Hopefully they will fix it soon.
Many thanks for the heads up on that - I hadn't noticed. Nothing (of mine) approved since around December 15 has made it over to Bigstock. I've started a thread on the SS forum about it but, so far, no response from them. Probaly I'll end up having to contact support but I'm guessing (hoping) that they are aware of the problem.
58
« on: January 07, 2017, 15:31 »
Twitter sharing of sets (on the actual site) is broken for me too. It just posts "just shared a set@shutterstock" with no link to the set. I use that feature a lot with a rolling programme of sharing sets. It's one of the few Social Media actions that I actually see results for e.g. in portfolio views (though that's broken as well!) and actual related sales.
59
« on: December 11, 2016, 14:45 »
As Jo Ann rightly said there are all sorts of reasons for people being anonymous here and, to be honest, even when they are not I don't go rushing to check their ports before deciding the worth of their opinions. Forum posts might be interesting and informative (or not) but I wouldn't make decisions just based on those.
60
« on: December 11, 2016, 14:33 »
Well I'm not exclusive but I can confirm my editorials are always reviewed in under a day (often minutes). Uploaded some last night and they were approved when I got up this morning. Sounds like there may be some other issue here if yours are waiting a month. Non editorial, on the other hand, are currently taking several weeks before review.
61
« on: November 29, 2016, 17:18 »
Page one, position two here in UK 
62
« on: November 25, 2016, 15:09 »
Two editorials just rejected for the same reason. There's a thread open on the SS forum and lots of people are getting this (mainly on editorials it seems). Have just re-submitted and awaiting result.
63
« on: November 09, 2016, 15:40 »
On the subject of finding your images in use you might want to try the new See In Action feature at Dreamstime (I don't think this has been mentioned on MSG as yet). Just go to your sales page and hover to the right of the thumbnail of the sold image. Click the See In Action box and it does an immediate Google search for that image on the internet. The great advantage is that you don't have to faff around uploading the image first like you do with a reverse image search. My very first search threw up an Ebook cover featuring my Avatar cat http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/23414251-figaro-the-cat-detective-and-the-great-dog-pooh-mystery which was quite fun to see. Note, it's not showing you where Dreamstime sold that particular image -just internet matches in general.
64
« on: November 03, 2016, 15:42 »
Just signed - now at 771 ETA Also Tweeted the link to over 1k followers.
65
« on: November 03, 2016, 12:15 »
[quote author=etudiante_rapide link=topic=28705.msg468660#msg468660 date=1478179170
i wonder, too.. can you pls explain what you mean by just limited to the Reuters content???
do you mean that we are still not yet able to upload editorial to fotolia
and./or adobe for general distribution???
[/quote]
Yes, exactly that - they don't currently allow upload of editorial images.
67
« on: October 31, 2016, 15:28 »
Enterprise Submission Platform. It's what video contributors currently upload by but will now be for still images as well.
68
« on: October 02, 2016, 13:20 »
All zeros showing for me in August too (though it wasn't). I'm not worried about the missing money as I know they'll sort it out in due course. I'm more anxious to find out if I really have dropped from level 2 to level 1 which I'm not thrilled about. Hoping that once the August sales are restored my level will revert back to 2.
69
« on: September 20, 2016, 03:50 »
Maybe I'm missing something. As a Fotolia contributor is there any advantage or benefit to also signing up with the Adobe site and synching my two accounts? My Fotolia uploads are mirrored on Adobe anyway so why would I do that? The only reason I can see is that some might find the Adobe upload interface better or easier to use but other than that there is no reason to sign up. Right?
On a seperate note, dissapointing to see that editorial images are still excluded. I had hoped that Scott (Braut) would have seen this as a priority given that FT/Adobe is the only major agency not to offer editorial images.
71
« on: July 31, 2016, 13:56 »
Sorry, a bit off topic but has anyone else had virtually no sales in July? 123 have been picking up quite nicely for me of late (I have over 2k files -mainly editorial). I have had just One download (25c sub) for the whole month! I cannot remember ever having such low sales since i joined them some years ago - I keep hoping there's a reporting problem due to the new dashboard.
72
« on: June 30, 2016, 13:56 »
Yes, I just got the same email. I think it must be some sort of mistake as none of my 1900 images have that sort of caption - and I never edit captions after acceptance (unless there is a mistake in the info -such as a wrong date). Looks like they may have just accidentally sent this out to everyone -not just to those it applies to. Gave me an unpleasant moment though 
73
« on: June 30, 2016, 03:02 »
It's funny to see the "remember when you had 10 TV channels" Memes but it sucked back then.
I wish I had ten. NBC, CBS, ABC, PBS and the local independent.
Spoilt! In the UK we had 2 channels - BBC (British Broadcasting Corporation) and ITV (Independent Television). Imagine the excitement when a third channel BBC2 launched and then (much later) Channel 4.
74
« on: June 18, 2016, 14:36 »
It does happen. A few months ago I checked in to DT on a Sunday (of all days) to find I'd had 54 downloads. I was a bit sceptical at first but the sales remained. The OP didn't say if the images he sold were connected in some way but in my case they were all of my late 1970s rock/pop bands (Thin Lizzy etc) so likely a buyer with a particular project. I've had the same thing happen several times before on Shutterstock with the same images. Congratulations Kenny!
75
« on: June 16, 2016, 14:14 »
Hi Seb, I do a lot of airshow photography -all submitted as editorial. Shutterstock initially introduced a credentials required for ALL airshows rule but I managed to get them to ammend this to a case by case basis. I actually had some great correspondence with them and they couldn't have been more helpful. Bottom line is free seafront airshows like Torquay (and in my case Eastbourne) are fine without credentials. However, you need to email credentials at Shutterstock with details of the Torquay airshow (links to airshow website etc). Once they are satified this is a free, public airshow they will provide a credential reference number which you can include with future submissions. I did this once for Eastbourne and just use the same ref. number for all future submissions. Ticketed air shows are a different matter and they will not take those without credentials. Istock will usually accept if it's aircraft up in the sky and Dreamstime and 123rf do not currently have any issues with either flight shots or on the ground. Regards, David.
ETA Just to make totally clear: SS do not require credentials for free public airshows but you will need a reference number to submit with the images -so that the reviewer knows there is no problem.
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 ... 20
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
