|
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 - FreeTransform
51
« on: June 13, 2011, 09:59 »
I have contacted them twice, via the online form, and both times received an automated response saying that their "friendly and knowledgeable" staff would contact me within one business day. It's been almost a month since the first one, and a week since the second one.
Is there a direct way to contact them? Phone?
52
« on: May 26, 2011, 11:03 »
53
« on: May 24, 2011, 17:20 »
Just got the email about the sale. I love how they use vectors to advertise their photos. The Life magazine photo contest email was accompanied by a lovely vector illustration 
54
« on: May 18, 2011, 11:23 »
I clicked on the link to LIFE, and it's all photos of celebrities. Bor-ing.
55
« on: May 17, 2011, 13:24 »
I canceled photo exclusivity. I have been accepted at Veer, but have tried twice at SS, and the same thing happened both times received a response within 12 hours that all my submissions were rejected. These were my top photos at iSrock, including a couple of my best watercolor maps. The latter were rejected for "composition." Huh-wha? It's a map. What am I supposed to do, add another panhandle to Florida to make it more interesting?
Does SS just have it out for iS contributors. or what? I know I'm not a great photographer, but these are all selling well at iS.
56
« on: May 10, 2011, 10:20 »
It means nothing until they release the targets, no?
57
« on: May 05, 2011, 11:41 »
I'm still in the 30-day waiting period for my "photo" (i.e., raster illustration) exclusivity. If iStock doesn't come up with the "big plans for vectors" they promised by September (i.e., a year after the "big plans" were said to be coming "very shortly"), I will probably drop the vector crown as well. It will depend on the other things I have put in place and how they're doing. I'm also waiting to see how vector Vetta pans out, as well as Editorial for vector (supposed to be happening some time this spring.)
58
« on: April 21, 2011, 16:52 »
Somebody brought this up in the video forum:
"Will there be more of a legal clause in the contract binding iStock to these rates until the end of 2012 other than just a 'promise' in the forums? We've learned from the past that promises in the forums by admins don't mean anything."
He's right, you know.
60
« on: April 20, 2011, 12:50 »
I just saw RypeArts is no longer exclusive. Something to do with the rebellion?
No, he's got his own site now, and it looks very cool: http://vectormill.com/I'm eager to hear how it is working out for him.
61
« on: April 15, 2011, 17:27 »
62
« on: April 15, 2011, 13:18 »
A few more hours and we may have another addition to the broken promises list 
63
« on: April 08, 2011, 11:38 »
Not sure how long this link will function, but here is what Google had cached for this thread.
Thank you. Nothing is ever really deleted from the internet! Wonder why iStock would remove this thread, though?
64
« on: April 08, 2011, 00:39 »
I've noticed lately more threads on iStock are being completely deleted, rather than being locked. Recently there was the one in the Vector forum about Russell Tate. I didn't think that thread would get very far, but I didn't expect it to just disappear. Tonight I was looking for another thread, one of the ones that promised "great things" ahead for vectors. I had actually copied the permalink back when it was originally posted, in case I needed to refer to it later, but now the link just goes back to the main Forums page. Before I go into conspiracy theory mode, here is the link: http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=253532&page=1#post4872401Did F5 mess up the permalinks? Or has it perhaps been deleted altogether? Here's the quote, btw: "Please also know that we do have some great things planned for Vectors, however to keep our competitive advantage, we're not able to announce them at this time, but will very shortly."
65
« on: April 01, 2011, 12:57 »
After a certain point you really can't expect growth every month. You only add maybe a couple of percent to your portfolio per month while newbies grow their percentages enormously. Your older files find they are competing against better, newer material so they effectively drop out of consideration. There are many reasons why it is hard to keep BME's rolling.
True, but it's doubly hard when your royalty percentages have been cut. 
66
« on: April 01, 2011, 11:56 »
It's my impression, from reading the monthly stats threads, that a lot of the BME's are Bronzes or below (what is that canister called, Ghost?). And more and more, the WME's are Diamonds. If this is true (and I realize that it's all anecdotal), it confirms what I've been thinking about a statement Kelly made about how the payouts to contributors keep increasing. He seemed to use that statement to justify that the RC targets were fair and that everybody was happy. But what he fails to understand, apparently, is that a statistic like that is cold comfort to the individual contributor whose income keeps dropping. It's just like when he said that we'd make 50% of our sales in the last quarter of the year. Again, that may be true for the company overall, but it doesn't take a math whiz to understand that it's not necessarily true for the individual.
You know what I'm saying? So do you think that the growth of the company is due to a lot of newbies, but at the expense of those of us near the top?
67
« on: March 31, 2011, 11:36 »
How can someone prove that you used the tutorial to create your files?
I doubt the tutorial thing was the reason for the deactivation/banning/whatever it is. Just noticed that the thread in the Illustration forum has not only been locked, but it has been disappeared
68
« on: March 30, 2011, 20:07 »
My "Vector Text" lightbox will soon have 20% fewer files. I don't know how he was able to get away with stuff like that so often. "We're sorry but iStock does not accept illustrations containing text as a primary focal point within a composition"http://www.istockphoto.com/search/lightbox/3815234#108d6921
69
« on: March 30, 2011, 19:17 »
Whoa. I just saw a couple of his files come through the recent uploads.
70
« on: March 30, 2011, 15:34 »
I heard from a Mexican iStocker friend that the best match takes into consideration the searcher's location. He showed a screen shot of his portfolio on a his computer in Mexico, and a lot of his Mexican folklore imagery was near the top. On a screen in the US, it was not.
Could this be?
71
« on: March 30, 2011, 11:27 »
Agreed with SNP. I have met Kelly only very briefly and have nothing bad to say about him. I know he and Bruce are best friends, and that says a lot. My impression is that he is a bit deer-in-the-headlights when it comes to answering questions.
72
« on: March 30, 2011, 11:24 »
I recently read this 2009 article and though this line was pretty funny: http://www.startribune.com/lifestyle/yourmoney/41592872.html?page=1&c=y"It doesn't really matter if someone considers themselves a professional or not," said iStockphoto COO Kelly Thompson. "People aren't looking to make a whole lot of money, but they want to get that new lens cap," Thompson said.
73
« on: March 29, 2011, 12:01 »
True. 2006 was another era, and I suppose it's not entirely fair to compare it to today. In 2007 I was able to quit my job because of iStock. In fact, we were all encouraged to do so, if you recall the very first Getty deal. Now, for the first time since, I had to get a part-time job. IStock changed my life once; it is changing it again. [/quote] that is so sad. [/quote] Well, I am now beginning to accept it and know that there will be other, better things on the horizon. I'm looking into other ways of selling my stock work, as well as pursuing more creative avenues. It's funny. When I discovered iStock, I was mired in a soulless job and I was so excited just to be looking at things differently and making art again. I didn't care about the money, and didn't expect it to be much. I was truly happy that my creativity had been awakened. Now I can't look at anything without thinking how I can make it into a stock image. So perhaps it is time to move on again. You know, the irony of all of these changes is that they were partly intended to encourage new, fresh work. And I was totally on board with that. But the unintended consequence, for me anyway, is that I have no incentive to create anything beyond the most generic, "stock-y" stuff and just crank it out as fast as I can. I mean, 26% for Vetta quality work? No thanks.
74
« on: March 29, 2011, 11:01 »
Different era.
Different corporate masters.
Things change.
We don't have to like it, but its up to each of us to decide whether or not to put up with it.
True. 2006 was another era, and I suppose it's not entirely fair to compare it to today. In 2007 I was able to quit my job because of iStock. In fact, we were all encouraged to do so, if you recall the very first Getty deal. Now, for the first time since, I had to get a part-time job. IStock changed my life once; it is changing it again.
75
« on: March 28, 2011, 18:50 »
I just looked at my stats from Aug 2006.
iStock: $6.2 RPD: 0.48
Fotolia: $9 RPD: 0.36
Shutterstock: $25 RPD: 0.24
Happy times indeed!
What does all that mean? RPD? The numbers?
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
