|
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 - donding
Pages: 1 ... 17 18 19 20 21 [22] 23 24 25 26 27 ... 70
526
« on: November 06, 2010, 11:27 »
Look in "My Alamy" and go to Alamy Measures and click "All of Alamy". There you will see what people are looking for. Click on the Sales Column and that will show you how many sales for a certain Search. Thats one way of checking out what sells.
You can also go into the forums and look for Threads about Found Images to get an idea of types of images that are being use.. and by who.
I see a lot of usage by UK Guardian.. I think an Online News outlet.
That helps a lot. It gives an idea what the keywords they use to find what they are looking for. I'm going to study that more and try to see what the treads are. I can't help with the UK, but the US I can. We'll see if it works.
527
« on: November 06, 2010, 10:55 »
The demand for images from the UK worries me. I never did good with Fotolia and I think that was a lot of the problem...UK images. Maybe I'm wrong but as for US I think you gotta have something that is in demand that is of US origin. Is there a way to determine how many downloads a photo gets on Alamy? I know I have photos of things that are found on Alamy, but in short supply. I'd like to be able to look at the download demand for that type of image to see if it's really worth the effort to edit these images.
528
« on: November 06, 2010, 09:44 »
Alamy does not QC for content! I'll repeat myself. If you have a well lighted shot of a brown rock on a brown sand beach, proper white balance... they will accept it!  What else can we ask for? A site that takes our images and shows them to customers and pays us 60%. Not a site that rejects most everything, and what they do take, they keep 80% and send us some spare change for being their slaves and donkeys.
You gotta good point there. I don't think I'd have problems with rejects like I did in the early days, I've learned a lot since then. My main rejects initially was with the upsizing. I always had trouble with that if there was any cropping done to my photos.
529
« on: November 06, 2010, 09:35 »
Plus the reduction from 48MB really helps with the quality of the photo. Not nearly the noise you'd have with the other size. It helps the 10mp camera shooters.
530
« on: November 06, 2010, 09:30 »
I don't think alamy will make as much for me as SS or istock but perhaps close to DT. They sell images that wont be accepted or aren't going to make much on the micros and there is always the chance of some big sales. I really don't like estimating how much I might make, I am going to build a bigger portfolio and find out.
That's what I think I'm going to do. I mean what would happen? No sales? Well the way I look at it is your really not losing anything but your time because a lot of the photos that can be uploaded would be rejected by most micro's because of the copyright fears of microstock. That is pretty much the only place you can upload all those editorial like images that are sitting idle on your hard drive. I won't mix the micro with the macro though. I'm willing to spend the time it takes to upload those images I already have to see what will happen.
531
« on: November 05, 2010, 22:08 »
I haven't uploaded to them in ages. Been there since 2007 and always had trouble with their "up-sizing" policy. I got 64 photos there and got $32.00 in sales from 07 til now.
Do you know if they still reject the whole batch if one is bad or have they renewed their ways? That always irritated the crap out of me.
Yep, same policy. All in or all out.
At least you don't have to upsize now.
The upsize part is good to know but the reject one rejects all part I still don't like. I might start uploading there again. I do have tons of images that wouldn't make it on regular micro because of property release's/landmarks. Micorstock doesn't seem to understand the concept of flowing water from a waterfall and the silky look. They always say focus isn't where we feel it should be or poor focus. I'll upload those to Alamy.
532
« on: November 05, 2010, 21:19 »
I haven't uploaded to them in ages. Been there since 2007 and always had trouble with their "up-sizing" policy. I got 64 photos there and got $32.00 in sales from 07 til now.
Do you know if they still reject the whole batch if one is bad or have they renewed their ways? That always irritated the crap out of me.
533
« on: November 05, 2010, 20:59 »
What brings us back to cclapper's statement that I commented: "I can't figure out why big corporations get such hefty discounts...they are the ones that can afford to pay more! " Big companies have more money, can afford images without any significant impact on their budgets, and yet they are the ones who benefit more from subs or any other discount prices. If there were no subs, I am certain they would buy images anyway. Maybe less images, but at a higher, non-subs price.
Bigger corporations get bigger discounts because they buy more credits in one go or because they commit to buying longer subscriptions. That's the way the corporate world works and always did -- long before stock libraries existed. I don't like it any more than you do but it's not going to go away.
If subscriptions didn't exist, I agree that some companies would buy credits instead but many others wouldn't. Subscriptions is the only model that's going to work for many large corporations for the reasons mentioned in my earlier post.
I agree and the company making the money is iStock...it's not passed on down to the contributor. They are selling in bulk and more than likely this buyer doesn't even use all the credits they buy.
534
« on: November 05, 2010, 19:58 »
Tripod
Hiking Boots
Diet Dr Pepper....
535
« on: November 05, 2010, 19:45 »
Where do you go to know what has been submitted or can you? I'm curious to see what kind of crap has been entered.
I quit uploading when all this began back in September and am in no way going to enter the stupid thing.
536
« on: November 04, 2010, 20:46 »
Their intent is to leave it as vague as possible. They have a hoard of lawyers that can make sure it says what they want it to say. If they wanted it to say 500K books, they would have.
A smaller client who doesn't spend much money gets the interpretation that it's 500k images. A larger client who spends more money gets the 500K books interpretation.
Exactly. All the big corporate clients are the "respected" clients, while all the small buyers can go to hell. It's an old boys corporate club.
I'm beginning to think that's the trend in business theses days. My husband worked in field service until he lost his job in March; he told me he was disgusted at the way management no longer cared about the small clients, neglecting them in favor of the big accounts. He cared about his customers, both small and large. In fact, he lost his job because he refused to lie to a customer to help the sales department secure a sale. Seems to me that business is becoming steadily more ruthless and cut-throat in the 21st century.
It would be nice if every one treated everybody equally, but they don't. Once big money is involved....greed sets in. You see it everywhere....even on here at times.
537
« on: November 03, 2010, 11:51 »
Some one referred to Walmart in this thread or another, but it got me thinking. You know at Walmart that they do rollbacks. Well if you pay close attention to these prices you will notice they are actually rollups. It's just the sign that has a price listed as the old price that was rolled back. That old price is actually more than the price that was being paid before. On items I buy regularly I always notice this. Many people that see "Rollback" automatically think of a bargain. That's kinda what iStock is doing with these price increases then offering the discount packages so they basically aren't losing that money they lost before the price increase. And of course telling us we'd be making more because they increased the price isn't true because they are basically making what the did before but will start paying us less making us think we are actually making more $$ rather than a lower % because of the price increase. I think this is backfiring on their part but it really makes me wonder if that was what they were trying to do.
538
« on: November 03, 2010, 11:18 »
So, the Extended License change happened September 27!!!!!!! More than a month ago. And iStock had absolutely no intention of fixing it until they got caught. You can't tell me they didn't notice. They knew EXACTLY what they were doing. Desperate. Greedy. Malicious.
I particularly enjoyed their "oops, the software accidentally got pushed early but sorry guys, we'll give it back to ya". Anyone want to bet it doesn't go back into exclusive's account until after Jan. 1? I'm thinking they need the money to contribute to that bottom line they are trying to achieve this year. We shall see. I will be surprised if it happens before.
That's my thinking on it all too. Those refunds probably won't come until after January 1 which won't take away from their bottom line for 2010. Then in 2011 they'll deduct it as a loss from the previous year. Maybe if they meet the projected profit point this year they will do the refund, but I doubt they will unless it is met. Really when you think about it, it wouldn't be that hard to go back on those past sales and credit those accounts within any given time period....which they have yet to say how long that will take. I just got a bad feeling about all this.
539
« on: November 02, 2010, 13:41 »
I'm not effected by vector prices because I don't have vectors on iStock, but the thing that bothers me the most is that we have to watch iStock like a hawk in hopes that they don't sneak a price increase or a % decrease under our noses just to meet the bottom line on their year end profit. It really makes me wonder how many out there are effected and don't even know about it and would never know because all they do is check balances....not which one sold for what.
540
« on: November 02, 2010, 13:12 »
The point is that in a normal business practice the supplier sells the products to the seller. The supplier decides the price they want to take. The seller doesn't just take the product then tell the supplier later.....well sorry we can't give you the $1.00 you wanted so you'll have to settle on 15 cents. Sorry but the deal's already done so we can't give it back.
541
« on: November 01, 2010, 19:30 »
It'll be interesting to see how long it takes for them to fix it. Maybe they think everyone will forget or they will come out with some other lame statement. That excuse is unbelievable. They gotta hold on to the money as long as they can before this "fix" will become reality. Something is up.
542
« on: November 01, 2010, 19:23 »
It is very easy to know if they hide or "steal" downloads or subscriptions. I'm not going to tell you how. You should know it just thinking a little. Maybe it would help if you didn't have a conclusion you want/need to expose before you begin your thinking process.
I'm sorry, but it's impossible to discover if they steel downloads if they want to hide them, and it's very easy to do on their end.
It would be fair tho, if you could explain your theory about impossibility to hide downloads from contributors, because the only thing you can check is the number of downloads that you can see in your port, and you can never be sure if they hide 1-2% of downloads from you.
Think a little bit, please.
I don't think they steel downloads, but I could see where they would miss crediting someone for the download and how you would know that would be nearly impossible in my opinion. You'd have to know how many downloads they had in a day and who downloaded them and from who they downloaded them from. You can't go under that other contributors account to know rather he was credited any more than you can your own without seeing the actual numbers. I doubt it's even possible even if we all think about it.
543
« on: October 31, 2010, 12:44 »
Help me out here. I got a couple of EL's a couple of weeks ago. Both were 125 credits. One payed 31.51 and one payed 32.40. Are independents earnings amounts different than exclusives on EL licenses? I assume they are but do those amounts sound right? Also how can you find out the date the EL license was sold?
Independents earn 20%
Thanks...the numbers sound right for me then.
544
« on: October 31, 2010, 12:16 »
I was also looking at another I had back in September of 09 that sold for 200 credits and I only got $44.52 for it. I have no idea if that is the correct amount. Any help would be appreciated.
I've always assumed iStock knew what they were doing so why check??
545
« on: October 31, 2010, 11:50 »
Help me out here. I got a couple of EL's a couple of weeks ago. Both were 125 credits. One payed 31.51 and one payed 32.40. Are independents earnings amounts different than exclusives on EL licenses? I assume they are but do those amounts sound right? Also how can you find out the date the EL license was sold?
546
« on: October 30, 2010, 20:29 »
That's rather strange.....I haven't uploaded any so I don't know if I have that problem. Wonder if the person who's photos you have also have yours?
547
« on: October 30, 2010, 19:56 »
If you notice on the main page all the images in the slide show are from one photographer....Ferenc Cegledi
No thanks
549
« on: October 30, 2010, 19:24 »
Wanna know what my brain looks like....go here http://www.atelier-us.com/page/15 It's on the story of "No evidence that Web is bad for brains". Wonder if they had a doctor check for the defect in that MRI?  ?lol I think the pages change so I don't know how long it will be there.
550
« on: October 30, 2010, 17:53 »
I used to have pretty regular sales there before the takeover...but now I get one every now and then. Their review process takes longer than any other site...besides Veer..
thats a new one at least for me... less than 24h never had more..
Which one Veer or Bigstock? As for Bigstock, they use to be fast but haven't been for me for awhile. Probably a difference in portfolio's....yours is much more impressive than mine... 
Pages: 1 ... 17 18 19 20 21 [22] 23 24 25 26 27 ... 70
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
