pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Show Posts

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 - Mantis

Pages: 1 ... 203 204 205 206 207 [208] 209 210 211 212 213 ... 217
5176
I am only thinking of removing files from searches that dont sell (after 3,4,5, years) Just like you suggested to purge old portfolios. These would be automatically transformed into nearly 100% "personal portfolios".

The artist can then return if he wants to and add new content.

Maybe even have the possibility to add an old file to the main collection if suddenly it starts to sell again. 

I think culling will be the way of the near future to push out the inevitable 100 mil threshold.  And I suspect that it will be done in more frequent periods, say non-selling in two years.  We're going to have to keep shooting, shooting, shooting to pipeline in new stuff to replace the culled images.  It will weed out the part timers and really only be aligned with those who can turn and burn.

5177
Photo Critique / Re: My Style
« on: July 15, 2011, 18:32 »
Will,

I give you huge cudos for coming into this forum and asking for help.  And taking the high road for the feedback you're getting.  It's called having think skin.  If you keep listening to these fine photographers' advice, create a plan (tiered plans each with a desired outcome and metric that helps you understand whether you met that outcome) you can make it.

1. Skills (shooting and key wording)
2. Initial Shooting Plan
3. Shoot
4. Post process
5. Upload to a couple of agencies
6. Assess any rejections (get critique)
7. Start building a port around your new competencies
8. Grow competencies = grow port
9. Make a few bucks

I think you have the attitude to make something work for you.

Good luck.

5178
iStockPhoto.com / Re: Are Your Exclusive To Istock?
« on: July 14, 2011, 19:54 »
No hostility at all.  It's not us vs. them. I was poking fun at the OP is all. Surprised you thought that comment seemed real.

5179
General Stock Discussion / Re: Do Effects Sell Well
« on: July 14, 2011, 19:21 »
Fairly simple.  Designers can take your color image and make them B&W, Sepia, or whatever.  You limit the image usefulness in most cases by doing that.  Give them the full monty and let them be the manipulator.  Your images will be more marketable that way.
Ahk, good point. It's just that my main interest in photography is landscape, icons (buildings ie- Eiffel Tower) and animals. I find taking black and white and sepia shots more interesting. Also it seems that selling microstock photos mainly evolves around what the industry wants and less what you want to shoot, but that is fair enough.

This is a general rule.  Doesn't mean your shots won't sell.  Just that, "IN GENERAL" submitting pics in their native format of color is the most acceptable way to go.  Give it a try.  Part of stock is testing new ideas, concepts and styles.

5180
iStockPhoto.com / Re: best match shake 13/07/11
« on: July 14, 2011, 19:14 »
You're basing your assumption on the idea that price is all that makes buyers happy, when it isn't necessarily so.  You can't fit everything above the fold.

Well, not really. I did mention quality....maybe I should have added composition....all I am saying is that there are some pretty competitive images with the upper echelon price points that don't get poop for placement when they should.  Agree, though, that given all the collections you have to have a happy medium.

5181
General Stock Discussion / Re: Do Effects Sell Well
« on: July 14, 2011, 19:10 »
After browsing through varies microstock sites I found that there are only a few amount of photos with effects such as Black and White, Sepia, Negative ect.

This leads me to two questions of curiosity, Why is this? and Do effects not sell as well as colour?

If anyone has an answer, please feel free to share ;)

Fairly simple.  Designers can take your color image and make them B&W, Sepia, or whatever.  You limit the image usefulness in most cases by doing that.  Give them the full monty and let them be the manipulator.  Your images will be more marketable that way.

5182
iStockPhoto.com / Re: Are Your Exclusive To Istock?
« on: July 14, 2011, 19:08 »
It's all or nothing with regards to exclusive images.  YOU are exclusive or YOU are not exclusive.  I think you can get all the answers by looking at the application and FAQ for iStock on the website.

Dreamstime and Fotolia also have exclusivity but they allow individual images to be exclusive.
Thanks for the reply traveler, I shall browse through the FAQ now.

@Mantis
Some of the questions are simple yes and no answers, but I am mainly interested in hearing experiences from exclusive photographers and images.

Thanks for the help

Here's why you are wrong in asking for this.  Several contributors here WERE exclusives and no longer are.  You would be wise to freely accept their opinions on the good, bad and the ugly of exclusivity. Otherwise you are only seeing one side of the story.

5183
Hi All,

I am planing to start selling some of my photos soon. I was wondering if selling photos in the lower earning tier is worth it? and which lower earning microstock sites are best to upload and sell on?

Kind Regards
-WD

If you are going independent then you need to decide if all the upload work is worth your time for a few buck a month.  You need EXCELLENT images with large volume to make a nickle on these low tier sites.  Start out with the top 3-5 first then when you have nothing to do, upload to low tier sites.  Be careful which sites you upload to.  Deposit Photos, for example, doesn't rub right with some folks.  All up to you.

5184
iStockPhoto.com / Re: Are Your Exclusive To Istock?
« on: July 14, 2011, 18:56 »
I'm sure if you research a bit, you can find the requirements for exclusivity.

But yes, you will need to show some technical and conceptual skill to be accepted as a contributor to start.
I am aware of the quality images need to be. Like I said earlier I would like to hear from exclusive photographers about the questions I asked :P

Thanks ;)

Sean is exclusive.  Why do you only want to hear from exclusives?  They will pollute your brain.  Why put up a poll for "exclusive" or "non exclusive" if all you want to hear from is exclusive.  I'd reword and rephrase exactly what you are looking to gain from this thread.  Very unclear as to who you're asking to participate and what you are looking for.

5185
iStockPhoto.com / Re: best match shake 13/07/11
« on: July 14, 2011, 18:02 »
'Can we please drop the fiction that best match has ANYTHING to do with what buyers want?'

Actually, I think the relevancy factor does a pretty good job of showing what other buyers were happy with.  Within that, the mix of collections is what it is.

The best match was clearly designed for revenue push given all the different collections, not what makes buyers happy. I mean, why on earth would they put an image of equal quality with equal keyword quality at a fraction of the price (say, from an independent) on the back pages if this image were to make the buyer happy because it's cheaper?  It's crystal clear that the best match is #1. revenue push; #2. what the customer wants.

5186
iStockPhoto.com / Re: best match shake 13/07/11
« on: July 14, 2011, 17:52 »

Normally I would blow off the, Best Match issues and sales are falling, complaints and whining. It's never ending, so like rain, no one notices another few more drops here and there.

Well it's official now. I haven't had a download on IS in 30 days!

Small collection or not, I've never had a dry spell for that long. Considering I've had the same pictures and at least some monthly downloads for years, I can only guess, that I don't exist and I just haven't realized it yet, or sales have fallen off a cliff! (calling all Lemmings) Not one CrapStock shot sold in a month? Impossible!

Wait, when Mostphotos passes IS, we'll all know it's the end of the world!  ;D (is it 2012 yet?)

LOL!  This is so typical.  Dismiss the complaints of others as whining until the same thing happens to you.  Then it is a real problem.   ::)

^^ stole my thoughts to a tee.

5187
123RF / Re: Review Times
« on: July 14, 2011, 17:41 »
Interesting....

Uploaded 46 images on June 27th and they got reviewed yesterday July 13.  I had 5 accepted - all but 1 were rejected for "minimal commercial value".  Some of the same images commercially available on DT, IS, SS, etc.

I guess it's one way to clear the queue  ;D

Not sure if I should take 123RF seriously.

Their site is hard to navigate, although I appreciate Alex coming in to try to bring a solution.  However, their acceptance is usually pretty fair.  I have had images rejected for LCV and other reasons but not too many.  There have been a few times where I got a lot rejected by some reviewer with a hard on for my submissions and I resubmitted them, all got accepted.  Once got a $30 EL not too long ago.  Just goes to show you that reviewers should not be inspecting for LCV unless it's a floating turd in a toiled bowl... :o  But then again that one may sell for $500 on Alamy.  YOU JUST NEVER KNOW!!  I wouldn't write 123 off.  Maybe post some of your work here for us to look at.  I'll admit that my sales at 123 are nhot great, never have been, but are fairly consistent, so I can rely on them when I run my spreadsheet every month.

5188
StockXpert.com / Re: Thinkstock earning posted !
« on: July 13, 2011, 07:51 »
Up a tad by 7 bucks. Made $23 last month and $30 this month. Big whoop.

5189
iStockPhoto.com / Re: best match shake 13/07/11
« on: July 12, 2011, 18:53 »
Interesting.  Let's see how long this lasts.

5190
Shutterstock.com / Re: Are you experiencing MASS REJECTIONS?
« on: July 11, 2011, 18:10 »
Perhaps the company has been too lenient in the past on quality.It has a huge library now and if it continued accepting the majority of content submitted by its contributors the quality would be diluted.
If as the majority in this thread suspect,the inspection has got harder,i would except the new standard,learn it and match it .Simple.

Good luck in that.  We don't know what the standard is and seeing some of the rejects the top echelon gets smells of SS incompetence.  There is no pattern other than random.  We've asked over and over again for Anthony to define some kind of standard so we can comply and upload to those standards.  They come out and say to "just shoot better stuff".  What the Fk is up with that? They must be taking lessons from Istock.
Who is Anthony?
Please dont bring another agent into the debate.Thanks

Honestly, don't tell me what to do. I don't march to the beat of your drum.  And to educate you, Anthony is one of the head guys at SS and he manages the inspectors, so he is a viable name to mention here.

5191
Shutterstock.com / Re: Are you experiencing MASS REJECTIONS?
« on: July 11, 2011, 16:11 »
Perhaps the company has been too lenient in the past on quality.It has a huge library now and if it continued accepting the majority of content submitted by its contributors the quality would be diluted.
If as the majority in this thread suspect,the inspection has got harder,i would except the new standard,learn it and match it .Simple.

Good luck in that.  We don't know what the standard is and seeing some of the rejects the top echelon gets smells of SS incompetence.  There is no pattern other than random.  We've asked over and over again for Anthony to define some kind of standard so we can comply and upload to those standards.  They come out and say to "just shoot better stuff".  What the Fk is up with that? They must be taking lessons from Istock.

5192
Shutterstock.com / Re: Are you experiencing MASS REJECTIONS?
« on: July 10, 2011, 19:58 »
I've come to the conclusion that the rejection reasons given are irrelevant. It now seems to be up to reviewers to decide whether or not they feel the collection would benefit from having something. If they think so, it gets accepted, if not, they hit a random rejection button.

Of course, some rejections will be for the given reason, but once something is good enough in technical terms, it then runs into the "do we want it" layer of reviewing.

DT's "too many of the same thing" when you have three completely different views of a subject may be irritating (and stupid) but at least you know what is happening.

I'm not doing this long and it's only a hobby but what you say is pretty obviously what's happening.  I suspect reviewers have giidelines to work to and this is company policy  - still has to be some room for personal judgement within these guidelines which explains why there is a degree of inconsistency.

There's not a lot of traction in your statement.  In the case of SS there's blatant misuse of the rejection button...no guidelines, no public policy and a lot of personal judgement that's completely unwarranted.  Anthony Correa of Shutterstock should be:

1. Ashamed of the "law" he's created
2. Quit if these random crap rejections are being shoved onto him

Having perfectly good images, marketable, and high quality are overrun by we "want to create the illusion that we are hard on image submissions so we can attract more buyers" when in reality it is a disservice to the buyers and photographers.   

5193
Dreamstime.com / Re: DT, is flagging images!!
« on: July 10, 2011, 19:41 »
ALL of mine are from people in poor countries.  Not trying to start anything here, just telling you that they are from India and other world regions where 2 cents added up times 10,000 = a lot by some of their standards.  And what pisses me off the most is that DT is asking US contributors to be nice to the flagger if we get flagged.  I had two more worthless flags today. Fk em.

5194
iStockPhoto.com / Re: First time downloads at weekends
« on: July 10, 2011, 19:37 »
No, not me.

5195
General Stock Discussion / Re: Bad July sales
« on: July 10, 2011, 19:34 »
The reality is that the whole * industry is changing.  So many factors enter into sales volume.  Here are a few and please feel free to add.

1. Flood of contributors
2. best match changes
3. Acquisitions
4. Wringing money from contributors to appease the [excessive] profiteer owners
5. Wringing money from buyers to appease the [excessive] profiteer owners

5196
Flat rate works best for me.  $50-$100 for 3-4 hours.

5197
Shutterstock.com / Re: Are you experiencing MASS REJECTIONS?
« on: July 09, 2011, 20:21 »
submitting to SS = gambling, as one user said...
Most inconsistent reviewing process ever!!! I get approvals on images I was sure were going to be rejected and images that I consider good stock are rejected  >:( >:( >:(

I happen to agree with you.  Not just based on my experience but from feedback of other submitters who are more than average names.

5198
Adobe Stock / Re: fotolia is sinking
« on: July 09, 2011, 20:03 »
To give an example of how bad things are for some of us emeralds, last year in June I made over 1500$ this year I made less than 500$.  This has hit me really, really badly. Dt has been able to make up for it a bit but obviously not  nearly enough.

Did you upload regularly? Did you not do something you used to (getting the best models, locations, lighting etc) or do you think it's completely FT's fault?

Oh come one now.  He said it was nothing irregular.  And even if he did sway far from the norm, would it be that bad giving his current port?  I think there's a lot to be concerned about here.

5199
Adobe Stock / Re: Curious to see this as stock image
« on: July 09, 2011, 13:41 »
No complaint regarding the artist, but I was surprised to see this as a stock image.

The author has many other cartoon strips of this character.


Isn't that duck copyrighted? Daffy Duck from Warner Brothers? Is this an editorial type image? 

5200
Bigstock.com / Re: Changes?
« on: July 09, 2011, 08:34 »
Normally slow. I upload there as a low priority.  And now I see they are starting to do these LCV rejections. Funny, within the first week of uploading one specific rejection, I've had dl's on IS, DT and SS with their LCV rejection.  Just goes to show you that they simply don't know what is LCV and what's not.  There's a different reason why LCV is being flung but I don't know what that reason is.

Pages: 1 ... 203 204 205 206 207 [208] 209 210 211 212 213 ... 217

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors