|
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 - fotografer
Pages: 1 ... 16 17 18 19 20 [21] 22 23 24 25 26 ... 110
501
« on: March 16, 2013, 03:17 »
I looked at the map the first day or two it was there and I don't think that I have looked at is since. By the lack of response to this thread I'm guessing that a lot of people are the same.
502
« on: March 16, 2013, 03:08 »
I don't have a professional port and i do it for fun.
In my opinion DT seem more than anywhere else to reward consistently good portfolios in the search.
503
« on: March 15, 2013, 06:39 »
I'm running at about 35% subs this month. It's usually more but having a particularly good month for non-sub sales.
504
« on: March 14, 2013, 04:24 »
I find it really petty when somebody starts a thread asking how people are doing at a certain site and then people get minuses for daring to say that they are doing well. It gives an unrealistic idea of how a site is doing if only the people that are doing badly post.
505
« on: March 14, 2013, 04:21 »
HAHAHA! I SOLVED IT! 7 days man. Well, not really. But I did find out what the problem is - which is everything!
Its a wordpress issue. The "image" system is actually a custom post type, and wordpress has a BUG paginating these.
It has to do with how many search results I set it to show per page on the custom post type, VS the fact that wordpress still applies the site's default settings of "posts per page" at the same time...totally derailing it. I'd hate to release this thing with a big asterisk * saying btw, you have to tweak your blog settings to match image settings...thats not a winning solution.
Anyway, closer now!
Not the end of the world - one bug in this whole gigantic project is not bad - but I'm going to devote some time to getting this addressed.
I hope that you realize how much your work is appreciated by those of us that haven't got a clue about how these things work.
506
« on: March 14, 2013, 04:14 »
Having an image as editors choice doesn't mean sales. I had an Editor's choice image that never sold and was recently deleted by DT as being a non seller.
507
« on: March 14, 2013, 04:10 »
I had noticed that happening and sometimes got rid of the minus where it isn't necessary by voting it back up but lately there has sometimes been more than one minus on totally normal posts. Seems like such a stupid, pathetic thing to do. We aren't in the playground!!!
508
« on: March 13, 2013, 20:17 »
I have an image that sold over 200 times at IS in 2009/2010 and then stopped dead with a best match change in the beginning of 2011. It never sold once in over 2 years and has now sold twice this week.
509
« on: March 13, 2013, 13:59 »
In answer to the last part of your question, it is impossible to know if the they are accutate or not. We just have to rely on the honesty of the members that participate.
510
« on: March 13, 2013, 13:56 »
There is no way that Yuri's RPI is only 5$ a year. Possibly 5$ a month.
I made 5$ a month RPI a few years ago but it is now not much more that 2$
511
« on: March 13, 2013, 04:36 »
Getty bought istock way back on February 9, 2006. I think they did a good job with istock for a couple of years, except for not enticing more of us to go exclusive. That was a huge mistake, as it would of been quite easy for them to dominate microstock if they had the majority of contributors as exclusives. Then when Hellman & Friedman bought Getty in mid 2008, it all started to go badly wrong.
Wow was it that long ago??? Then for sure I had my best years while Getty owned it.
512
« on: March 13, 2013, 04:05 »
I think they came quite close at one time. Don't people remember when istock was making them so much money that it wasn't such an easy decision to remain non-exclusive? If they had raised commissions a little bit at one point, around 2008, I would of probably gone exclusive. Some people I really respect, like Stephen Strahdee went exclusive but luckily form me istock rejected some of my best selling images and it wasn't such a tough decision.
My comment was meant a bit tongue in cheek. I did slightly toy with the idea at one point years ago but don't remember if getty had bought it then or not. I remember that Lisa was seriously considering going exclusive when it all kicked off and she changed her mind just in time.
513
« on: March 13, 2013, 04:01 »
Is that because the newbie's images tend to be listed at the end of search result?
At DT the images go up in price levels. So more times it has sold the more exensive it becomes so you get a lot more for an image that has had 50 sales than you do for an image that has no sales. At FT once you reach a certain level you can double the price of your images. And an EL instead of selling at 10$ sells at 100$. So a newbie would be on base level whereas more established contributors will have gone up the ranks. Also at some sites a contributor with a good sales history tends to get better placement somebody without a good sales history.
514
« on: March 13, 2013, 03:44 »
Getty could of set up their own microstock sites and crushed istock or perhaps they would of bought another microstock site that would of been a big problem for istock?
Really!! I haven't noticed them crushing any of the other stock sites since they bought Istock
515
« on: March 12, 2013, 07:58 »
I am an accepted photographer at Veer but never uploaded there. Mostly because of what I hear on MSG about them and their upload process/submission process is clunky, IMO.
I put a few up but it's way too much trouble to continue uploading unless I hear that people are making a lot of money there.
516
« on: March 12, 2013, 06:52 »
How long does it take to review images there?
517
« on: March 12, 2013, 04:36 »
Normal review is taking 5 or 6 days and the initial 10 always takes a lot longer
518
« on: March 12, 2013, 04:35 »
The first is that the Single and Other Downloads on SS have dropped to almost nothing: January: $120, February: $17, March: $4. I suspect it is tied to the Google Images change, but that is having a big impact on my SS earnings.
Steve
I think it's just random as I have already made more on SODs this month than I did last month.
519
« on: March 12, 2013, 04:30 »
I'm not seeing any changes in this so call new policy either. Today I had 6 different poses of the the same subject and they all were rejected. Talk is cheap!!
If they were all rejected then surely that isn't because of similars. If it was similars that they didn't want then they would have approved at least one.
520
« on: March 11, 2013, 19:56 »
Seems to be shaping up to be a better month all round.  Hope the family are better soon
521
« on: March 11, 2013, 07:39 »
Dan, I advised you before to keep all these milestones in one thread. You are going to annoy people if you start a new thread everytime you have a couple of sales. As I said before if we all did the same the forums would be impossible to sift though.
522
« on: March 10, 2013, 20:47 »
I tried to upload by ftp this morning with no luck so I uploaded quite a few on the site uploader and they came though fine. This afternoon I tried 3 batches and 2 didn't upload at all and showed error messages. One batch said that they were uploaded but they never appeared.
ETA Just tried ftp again and the first image has come through fine
I've stopped using their FTP site. It is too unreliable and almost never works.
After it not working this morning I have just managed to upload over 100 images successfully.
523
« on: March 10, 2013, 16:53 »
I tried to upload by ftp this morning with no luck so I uploaded quite a few on the site uploader and they came though fine. This afternoon I tried 3 batches and 2 didn't upload at all and showed error messages. One batch said that they were uploaded but they never appeared. ETA Just tried ftp again and the first image has come through fine
524
« on: March 09, 2013, 14:53 »
Not that I enjoy being a contrarian voice, but... oh, who am I kidding? I enjoy the heck out of being contrarian. Always have, and likely always will.
With that said, my results at 123RF are going like gangbusters. January was double January 2012. February was just shy of triple the previous year, and that's with one less day to the month. Right now I'm on track to more than double March last year, although of course things can still fall apart. But suffice it to say that at least for me 123 is doing very well. Heck, this month they're ahead of Shutterstock, and that just doesn't happen!
You are just reporting facts. If people do not like it, tough. My sales quantity were a bit up, but not enough to lift my rating by much. This month seems to have started faster than others, so will see how its going to turn out. I am 400 points of level 4 so I need a good numbers boost from last year to get there (not talking finances now).
indeed facts! too bad they are for me half way what they were in 2012 
Unfortunately that's common in microstock. At fotolia my earnings dropped to about 20% of the good old days while other people were reporting increases. It now seems to be my turn at FT as I am starting to go up again while others are reporting decreasing sales. When some are reporting increasing sales and some decreasing then it is usually all down to best match order. It can make or break you.
525
« on: March 09, 2013, 13:24 »
I'm another one that is doing well there at the moment. If the rest of the month goes like the first part then I will have a BME there by quite a lot. I have already made 50% of what I do in a normal month.
Pages: 1 ... 16 17 18 19 20 [21] 22 23 24 25 26 ... 110
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
