|
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 - shutterdrop
51
« on: March 06, 2009, 14:54 »
I don't know about anyone else but things happening at Dreamtime lately have seriously made me consider pulling my portfolio from there.
-Their only credible resource has announced she's leaving.
-It's impossible to upload there using any FTP software.
-Yesterday they had a major security breach and are recommending everyone change their password (although they're doing their best to play this down in the forum)
-Sales lately have just plummeted.
-But the final insult for me was reading in the forum about their latest editor, not only has this guy got a mediocre portfolio with low sales, but one of his latest uploads is a photo of a duck, and not just a photo of a duck but one he took standing up and looking down and he even managed to cut the tail out of the frame, I mean for crying out loud this guy is going to be reviewing our work!!!
Yes, given your above statement you should leave now. Do not kick the can down the road. It is nice knowing you! Go Now! Go Quick!
52
« on: March 06, 2009, 10:18 »
If your images are not approved you download rate decreases. That equal to losing money!!!
53
« on: March 05, 2009, 08:42 »
3 out 4 rejected for overuse of filter. For years images were rejected for noise, now being rejected for over correction of noise. Make up your mind SS!!!
These images were accepted at the other agencies, but not at SS.
Is this an SS issue or a reviewer issue?
54
« on: March 05, 2009, 08:06 »
If you have to post here on, " How do you stay motivated," just maybe this cookie is not for you!
55
« on: February 27, 2009, 08:21 »
Use the lowest ISO possible. Set the noise reduction in camera for low light and long exposures.
56
« on: February 12, 2009, 08:47 »
Sub count toward your image levels. Downloads count toward your exposure. Sales average at DT are the highest of all the agencies that is submit to.
I get sub sales on higher level images and I get many downloads with larger size.
It is a win win!!!
57
« on: January 30, 2009, 10:30 »
4 out of 4 rejected in record time. Lighting Lighting They were shot on a bright day with light cloud cover. I quess I will start shooting everything is a studio!
58
« on: January 25, 2009, 09:36 »
Lisa thanks for the info. I am happy that BigStock is making a push. I have always thought they are a good agency and like working with them.
CB
59
« on: January 17, 2009, 09:17 »
[
70,000 x 50 weeks = 3,500,000 more by the end of the year. Not much more buyers. In 10 years from now, the whole world will be shooting, photoshopping and keywording for the last 5 buyers left.
No control leads to an oversupply of images. More images equal to a decline of sales per contributor. Larger database equal harder search to find useable images for project.
60
« on: January 15, 2009, 22:34 »
SS is definitely not proactive when it comes to the pushing the envelope. I do not think they are interested in improving contributors, buyers, search, and other enhancements. Your images only show in recent searches after that they fall into the disappearing abyss.
SS will only change when forced to by the competition.
61
« on: January 08, 2009, 12:13 »
5,562,019 royalty-free stock photos
52,442 new stock photos added this week
136,636 photographers
2.3% in new photographers in one week at SS. I guess not all are giving up on submitting to Micros.
62
« on: January 08, 2009, 12:08 »
I am sorry you are finding rejections bad....I still get rejections....but you just have to take them and learn from them! Most of the time if you take a look at your photos you can see what the reviewer is talking about.
Same images are being accepted at other agencies. What is SS review talking about if it is accepted at 3 other agencies? I would conclude that SS or SS reviewer has a case Ruby Red Rash.
63
« on: January 08, 2009, 08:22 »
I submitted a small batch of 4 images and 3 were rejected. It must be the reviewer. All of a sudden my approval rate dropped from 60-80 % to 25%.
What is up at SS? Has SS changed their name to Super Suck?
64
« on: January 03, 2009, 08:59 »
Who is X agency? Contributor will keep uploading even if their return rate continue to decline. Better image quality from the uptick in rejection rates.
Well, I don't know about that. I've seen many people drop X agency because it doesn't return well enough, and even a few people who have stopped submitting altogether.
65
« on: January 03, 2009, 08:56 »
I have seen the 1st miracle of 2009!!!
I submit 10 images for review and four hours later 8 images accepted!
The eyes of Shutterstop are upon us!
66
« on: January 03, 2009, 08:51 »
Thanks for all the valuable discussion!
It look like the agency style will make all the different in the future of Mircos. Agencies using exclusive, tier pricing, image size, better search engine to seperate themselves from the crowd.
Contributor will keep uploading even if their return rate continue to decline. Better image quality from the uptick in rejection rates.
I personally will become more selective on agencies and stop uploading to some agencies and cancel a few agencies.
67
« on: January 03, 2009, 08:37 »
As a designer I have difficulties sort those thousands on images to find the right image. After locating correct images it is crap shoot on quality of image. The criteria on acception of image is varied. States size of the image many time are incorrect. Bad keywords that don't even fit the image, or spammed. and the improvement of the "search" function for some sites would help too.
lately, i checked on one of my associates work, her new image accepted last week.
guess what? can't find it... using the most obvious keywords.
instead, all i see are pages of single contributors clogging up the first 10 pages
with images that do not even feature the relevant keywords.
then on page 15, or so, aha! her images at last.
it's a mean unjust situation that a site would allow such an abuse of flooding one contributor's images in preference to others who do not have perharps tons of irrelevant images.
would a buyer notice that and get tired of looking?
sure, wouldn't you? and the one who does no spamming suffers.
where's the justification in all this?
68
« on: January 02, 2009, 09:39 »
Happy Year!
69
« on: December 30, 2008, 09:06 »
Thanks for all your opinions!
Will microstock have to raise their prices to entice better image quality?
70
« on: December 29, 2008, 13:00 »
Today SS stats show:
5,502,534 royalty-free stock photos
34,510 new stock photos added this week
134,908 photographers
The trend is lower image acceptance rate at most of the Big 6.
Reviewers want Macro quality and Agencies are paying Micro prices. Micro are still accepting new contributors. SS images count is at 5.5 million, DT image count is at 4.5 million. More startup of small microstock companies.
What is the future for our business? What is the limit? Will we see a limit on contributors?
Please comment, I am interested in your thoughts!
71
« on: December 22, 2008, 09:08 »
All I want is for adequate, transparent communication to contributors. Random increases in rejections with no policy change is not fair to contributors.
If SS wants to increase their standards, I agree and it should be done with adequate transparent communications. That has not occurred!! SS response was absolute arrogant that contributors were even questioning the increase in random rejections! Now the have completely pull the thread instead of communicating.
72
« on: December 20, 2008, 23:33 »
The first sentence on SS home page:
Shutterstock is the largest subscription-based stock photo agency in the world.Where in the contract does it state that microstocks are acting as our "agent?" It doesn't because they are not agencies. They are more like consignment shops. We supply the images, they sell them and we get a commission on the sale. Yes it would be nice if they were more forthcoming with information about site changes and new sales venues, but they are not required to be.
Do you think Toy's R Us calls Hasbro and says "Hey what do you think about us adding an infant section?" Do you think that Walmart calls Sony and says "Do you think we should raise the price on DVD players?" Then why would an image licensing company contact a photographer and ask "What do you think about this?"
That said it is always good business to inform your suppliers of major changes in advance so that they can have the product ready, but each company is free to run their business as they see fit. Just like you are free to sell (in this case license) your product through whatever means you feel are appropriate.
73
« on: December 20, 2008, 10:55 »
Am I the only one who believes that some agencies have forgotten who they work for?
Without contributors submitting their images and designers purchasing images there is no business. An agencies is to provide service that includes communications to their clients.
Administers and managers should have a copy of definition the "agency" on their desk.
noun, plural -cies. 1. an organization, company, or bureau that provides some service for another: a welfare agency.
2. a company having a franchise to represent another.
3. a governmental bureau, or an office that represents it.
4. the place of business of an agent.
5. Indian agency.
6. an administrative division of a government.
7. the duty or function of an agent.
8. the relationship between a principal and his or her agent.
9. the state of being in action or of exerting power; operation: the agency of Providence.
10. a means of exerting power or influence; instrumentality: nominated by the agency of friends.
74
« on: December 20, 2008, 09:08 »
John: You did not answer the two issue in the forum. 1. Why the sudden increase in rejection rate? 2. Has SS changed it standard on acceptable images? When did the SS admin become unable to communicate on their forum? Every other business I know use it forum to communicate with customers and associates. Hello all,
Thank you for offering up your comments - contrary to how many of you feel, we take your thoughts and comments seriously and with consideration.
If you feel you're receiving too many rejections, please refer to the Critiques forum, where you can post your images for other members to offer constructive criticism. We also address particular rejection reasons in our monthly newsletter - these can also be helpful.
http://submit.shutterstock.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=4
http://submit.shutterstock.com/newsletter/109/article2.html
Lastly, if you wish to reach us, contact us directly at [email protected]. Calling out admins in a forum thread is not the most efficient way to reach us, as these forums are intended as a venue for you to interact with each other.
Thanks again,
John
75
« on: December 19, 2008, 08:41 »
There is a pattern emerging at SS. They are accepting about 60,000 images per week. That means 100,000 to 150,000 images are being submitted.
That is the only plausible explanation for the eratic increase in rejections and strange reason for rejections!
The increase submitter volume SS had to outsource the work load to FT reviewers.
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
