|
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 - Jo Ann Snover
5176
« on: October 02, 2012, 22:01 »
I downloaded the (free) beta of StatsPlus to see what it had to say about my iStock September stats - in particular the supposedly missing cash sales. It tells me that my downloads are actually 12% above the IS stats and $$ are 15% higher. Not enough to make it a good September but does raise it from disastrous to just rotten  This tool worked fine for me except where IS problems mess it up - all the past PP sales are reported with the current date, so if you try stats for today, you'll get really distorted totals (and unfortunately you can't turn the PP off). I'm not sure, but I think that the cash is shown in the balance, but I have no idea how I'd track that. Anyway just a thought for those having a cr#ppy month at IS to see if it perhaps isn't quite as bad as they thought. I wish IS would sort out they mess they've made of the site...
5177
« on: October 02, 2012, 10:15 »
I don't know if you've given any thought to this, but as I answered the poll for this month, it occurred to me that I couldn't be very accurate with some of the lower earning sites because of the way we're instructed to answer.
It says you must select the number where you have at least that amount, not the number closest to the amount you earned.
As an example, in September on PhotoDune I earned just shy of the $50 payout. I had to answer $20 as that was the next lower choice, but I was within $4 of $50, so really answering $50 would have given a much better picture of where PD stood. I answered $20 for BigStock too - they were about $30 for the month. So for the poll, the two sites look equivalent, but they really aren't (although if BigStock continues to be un-dead, things may turn around in a month or two!)
5178
« on: October 02, 2012, 09:21 »
This is part of the fallout from the attempt to update the site September 3rd - see here for an update and here for the October list of known bugs
5179
« on: October 01, 2012, 12:54 »
I received my payment this morning for my request a week earlier - IOW they didn't mess up all the payments. My amounts have been different for the last several weeks, so it's easy to tell which week they're paying.
5180
« on: October 01, 2012, 12:18 »
Don't yet have IS data for the last couple of days of the month - plus possibly some credit card sales. There is a group of contributors who seem convinced they have credit card sales that don't show up in the CSV files or my_uploads and think it's about 10% of their totals. I do have a handful of sales that show up in the CSV file but are not on my_uploads. Possibly, if the group of contributors is correct, the IS numbers won't be as horrible as they now appear to be OTOH, what do you expect when you introduce another broken site update right in the busy selling season? Based on the incomplete IS numbers, September was up over August, led by SS's lovely performance which was 22% higher $$ than August and 39% higher than Sept 2011.The total didn't quite top my BME at SS (which was November 2011) but came close. Overall, Sept was up 5% over August, but when the PP royalties come in I expect that will be 15% up over August (assuming I get the same as I did for August PP and I expect it will be higher). IS itself was up 7% over August, but that's no cause for celebration as August was wretched. Given the barren wasteland of desolation that is the IS monthly sales thread, I'm fairly content with a 5% - 15% monthly increase (and my numbers are up over 30% from Sept 2011). DT returned from the near-dead to be just ailing. They're temporarily #3, but as soon as the IS PP numbers for Sept are available, DT will be bumped down a notch. Veer had a good month because of an EL, but is otherwise very weak. BigStock looks to have come alive, and is up 10% over August (which was more than double July). PhotoDune had a decent month, just shy of a BME and up 22% over August. Canstock continues to meander along.
5181
« on: September 29, 2012, 13:36 »
I think the August PP sales are now complete and the PP is the #3 for me that month - after SS and IS.
Sort of both good news and bad. I'd much rather have had the sales at IS...
DR had a lackluster August or it might have been #3. As it was the PP was 40% more than DT
5182
« on: September 28, 2012, 09:46 »
August & September have been much better (not good, but August was twice July's earnings, so something shifted). I haven't uploaded there in many months as it seemed to be a waste of effort, but if this continues, I might finish putting my portfolio there
5183
« on: September 25, 2012, 11:51 »
I actually try to not look at anything else and keep my head fresh.
Exactly. The more time you spend trolling other people's portfolios, or the popular lists, the more likely you are to copy, sometimes without even consciously realizing it.
Generally the only time I take a look at other work is if I have what I think is a "bright idea" - I do a search on a couple of the big sites to see if it's already been done to death. I'm well aware that a new idea to me might not be an open niche or anything where I have a new take on a concept and it saves a lot of wasted time to check that out first. But the order is important - idea first then search
5184
« on: September 25, 2012, 09:46 »
The mobile site seems to be still broken although the main site has been fine since yesterday as noted above. In the SS forum, some posters said it was broken after they updated to iOS6, but I had updated to iOS6 a few days before the mobile site stopped working, so I believe it's the stats problem from this weekend that just didn't (somehow) get fixed for the mobile site. I posted in the above thread to note that.
5185
« on: September 24, 2012, 20:26 »
You're probably correct that the "distributor" takes a sizable cut - although I can't imagine it'd be 60% of the gross when Veer has all the work of inspection and setting everything up.
Even so, how is it in any way in my best interests as a contributor to line the pockets of one or more layers of distributors? In the internet age (versus slide duplication for availability at a local office) it makes virtually no sense, especially where the site's in English and payments are in US $. I'd rather upload directly to any of the sites that can actually sell anything and skip the rest.
I'd settle for a high percentage of Veer's take on any partner/distributor deals and an opt out for any I don't want to participate in. And I would want a full list of all partner deals so I know where they're handing off my intellectual property. The current situation is just not right.
5186
« on: September 24, 2012, 10:33 »
Ditto - Sunday had sales but the summary page is still showing 0 for that. I assume the total doesn't yet include Sunday's numbers?
5187
« on: September 24, 2012, 10:29 »
I decided I should have another look at the Veer Contributor agreement to see what it said about sales through partners. If I read it right, they get to pay us on the basis of a royalty per credit, regardless of how the customer actually paid. See section IV. Payment and Reporting, in particular paragraph E If that's what they really are doing - selling through a distributor for $70 and compensating me for a 15 credit sale at $5.25, with no indicator in my sales records on which site a sale was made - I think I just need to collect my payment for this month on the 15th of October and have them close my account. They might not be selling any - and how would I know? - but that's just a disgrace. A complete rip-off of contributors - a royalty of 7.5% of the sale! If they'd like to offer an opt out of all partner sales, I can live with sales via their own site only (even though they would make out should a cash sale get made with their compensation scheme). Looking at the posted credit prices (which may or may not be the only available prices to large customers), it's a minimum of 78 cents and maximum of $1.41 per credit to the buyer. Looking at my royalty on a 20 credit sale, it's a minimum of 24.8% and maximum of 44.8% which is acceptable to me.
5188
« on: September 24, 2012, 09:54 »
Why would they need to keep an eye on him. Yuri is a mentor to many, including some here, and myself. To be influenced, and understand the mechanics of the trade, just as Yuri did himself many years ago, is perfectly fine...
Taking inspiration is one thing - if you read what this person said, it was to make "the exact same thing" which isn't at all the same as learning from or being inspired by. Duplicating shots isn't OK and that's what he's advocating.
5189
« on: September 24, 2012, 09:28 »
Just stunning to see someone be such a shining example of moral bankruptcy and stupidity - the whole package!
I'm sure DT will keep a close eye on this numb nuts
5190
« on: September 23, 2012, 14:56 »
Are the prices so much higher? All mine are listed as "bargain price RF" or something like that. I don't know what the bargain price level is.
If you look at my screen capture in the other thread you'll see prices - over three times the price on Veer
5191
« on: September 23, 2012, 14:23 »
There are about 300 of mine there under the same alias. It's not iStock or anything associated with them because one I remember them rejecting is there. It's quite possibly Veer, since that roughly matches the number of images I have with them.
Oh - and they are not all over the place, kalium (potassium) is also a keyword for some images, that's why it pops up in the google search.
Is there any reporting of the third party earnings in Veer? Well most of the time we can't get access to Dashboard anyway.
I asked about that in this thread (which is covering the same topic, in essence) Given the prices are so much higher, I sincerely hope we are not just paid the same as the royalty when the sale is through Veer. However, having no details on how these sales are compensated is inexcusable.
5192
« on: September 23, 2012, 13:56 »
So this again raises for me the question - how much do we get paid if this site sells our Veer image? Take a look at the prices they're charging in the screen capture below.
If I sell an XL image directly through Veer (as an example) I receive $5.25 royalty on the 15 credits or $22 the buyer pays. The sizes on easyFotostock don't really match up (even the aspect ratio is wrong given the original) but the closest seems to be the 8 x 11 for $70. Do I still get $5.25 for that even though they're selling it for more than three times the price?
Veer never answered these questions when they came up in the Alamy train wreck. Did anyone ever get any information from Veer support about how contributors are compensated for these sales (if there are any) and how we would know in our Dashboard (when it works) that a sale was through a partner?
5193
« on: September 22, 2012, 15:51 »
Same here and 12 dl's netting 28,40$ on the first day of sept, not bad, the Partner site is performing better then the main site 
I think this month is the first time there are non-weekend days when the PP money total is greater than the IS total for that day. Not good, but given the circumstances, I'll take the extra cash and be happy
5194
« on: September 21, 2012, 11:12 »
Great Post JoAnn. Did you use the gold side? Sometimes when I use gold it is terribly yellow. You sure can't beat a good example like your before and after. The skin is softer and healthier, the eyes are brighter. The shadows aren't terribly harsh in the first shot, but they sure add age and even a few pounds. No hint of colour in the eyes - and the shadows from the brow are close to causing the "racoon eyes" that are so attractive with overhead light.
So who was holding the reflector?
Another great thing about the 5 in 1 reflectors is that you can take the outer casing off and use the inside as a scrim to reduce light, or to fire a flash through. I need to invest in a rig that won't blow over. (Maybe those C stands?) I can't use reflectors without help, it's ALWAYS windy on the prairies.
In this case, the reflector was on a cooperative shrub in front of me I have stands and sand bags (or those water filled plastic weight bags with hooks) so I can use both circular reflectors or the light panels without an assistant (which I almost never have). It was the gold/silver stripe cover in this case. I like the light from that a lot when you want a little warmth but not as much as the gold.
5195
« on: September 21, 2012, 10:15 »
Even on a bright overcast day, a reflector makes a huge difference. As an example, here's a crop from a test shot on a bright overcast day with and without a reflector. In this case it was one of the large circular ones, but I also have a few light panels which are great if you need a larger scrim or reflector surface. Click on the thumbnail for a larger version.  You can see tons of video tutorials on this sort of thing - see
and
and here for a couple of examples.
5196
« on: September 19, 2012, 19:23 »
This month SS is trouncing IS (SS is 45% more than IS - almost 1.5x even given one EL from IS). But the last two days at IS have been really good - good in comparison to terrible, not all time good.
I noticed there were old files in the mix - looking at my last 20 sales, I have every year from 2004 to 2012 represented in the sales. Perhaps people with only newer files are getting hit by some best match change?
5197
« on: September 19, 2012, 10:42 »
Here's an example that SS rejected twice - second time I downsized and I did note it was a resubmit. You can see the same image at DT here (as IS's zoom is busted) I've had a lot of beach (tropical, colorful, shots that sell elsewhere) shots rejected by SS. It's possible that they treat beaches as an oversupplied subject and thus are picky, but the ones they do accept sell well there too. I really have no idea what they do or how they do it, but I do get focus rejections for images that are clearly in focus and mostly on the beach shots. I've also had "poor framing" rejections from them from images that sell well elsewhere - so perhaps buyers love poor framing? I just move on, but it does irk me that the rejection reason is rubbish - they're entitled to say they don't want it but I wish they had a formal appeals process (and don't suggest the forum mosh pit, it's not the same thing).
5198
« on: September 18, 2012, 17:55 »
I have an XS subs sale from Sept 13th for 12 cents and one for a L sale (10 credits) from Sept 19 for $2.50. Neither of those are 11 cents a credit, and both are since the recent upgrade mess.
They may have done something in your case to mess up payments, but it isn't across the board.
5199
« on: September 18, 2012, 17:11 »
I think they have acknowledged (in their IPO filing?) that they use automated tools.
I've had shots that sell really well elsewhere and which I know are in focus rejected for focus. I suspect that something about those images runs afoul of the automated software they use.
I'd just move along - I doubt they are interested in doing anything about it (most unfortunately).
5200
« on: September 18, 2012, 12:48 »
I know he's not physically deceased - poor attempt at levity on my part I should perhaps have called him the "(dear) departed" kk thompson instead...
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
