|
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 - Elenathewise
Pages: 1 ... 17 18 19 20 21 [22] 23 24 25 26 27 ... 36
526
« on: March 10, 2011, 21:20 »
I am in for a class action or audit or whatever... Can't drive this right now though, bad time.
527
« on: March 10, 2011, 19:18 »
Somebody please explain to me here - how do I know they are not just putting this money in their pockets? Where is the proof of fraudulent downloads?
If it was here and there, like with dreamstime or bigstock, it seems reasonable. When it is on this scale and all at the same time for so many contributors, it seems highly suspicious. I need proof and detailed explanation of what happened and where exactly the 200 bucks that will be deducted from my account will go. Where is accountability? As far as I know they are partying on this money like there is no tomorrow.
528
« on: March 10, 2011, 18:19 »
What assholes. Seriously. They send me an email with long 3-page list of "unauthorized" downloads that they gonna charge me back for and don't even give me the total!!! What is it - too much work to calculate how much money you're going to deduct from my earnings? Sh*theads. I am so pissed. One more thing like that and I am out of there. Screw the money.
529
« on: March 10, 2011, 15:41 »
We have decided to join Pixmac after a productive and satisfying discussion with their management. They seem to be very open about issues and genuinely interested to treat the contributors fairly. The minimum image commission now is fixed to 25 cents which is low but not that unusual in the industry. Here is an interview with me on their blog: http://blog.pixmac.com/3132/elena-elisseeva-professional-microstock-producer/And remember, the other agencies are their direct competitors. They may not be exactly 100% objective and honest in this case.
530
« on: March 09, 2011, 15:08 »
Fotolia has been really slow with payments this year. Wonder if it's official policy now.
I didn't receive mine for Feb yet, but I can wait - maybe the stupid Canadian dollar will go down finally... the US/CAD conversion rate is killing me!
Would be fine if prices here would go down too, but they are still higher than in US! Ok I am veering off topic here....
531
« on: March 09, 2011, 15:02 »
Plus, if you drop a lens, your hood can save your optics!
That is the main reason I have the lens hood on
Actually, this is a very good reason to have the hood on:) A friend of mine toppled the tripod with camera mounted on it - the hood broke but saved the lens (I sold him my old heavy tripod after that...  ) I always use hoods - Nikon lenses come with them, I see no reason not to use the hood, just advantages.
532
« on: March 09, 2011, 14:44 »
Fotolia used to be number one earner for me, but this month I see interesting dynamics: all "big 3" - SS, FT and IS are showing practically same earnings, within tens of dollars. Fotolia did slow down a bit and Shutterstock is showing improvement for me.
533
« on: March 05, 2011, 19:05 »
the default is on DISABLE!
I am in Dreamstime almost 2 years and never changed anything regarding this matter
Look above Dreamstime said the default is donate.
mine isnt and I have never touched it
Then they must have changed the default for some (more recent) contributors..?. Although the email I got from them says default is "donate' - confusing, eh? The default was definitely "donate" for me - hope that changing the option described in this thread works.
534
« on: March 04, 2011, 11:41 »
How long does it take before unsold files fall into the trap? I'm a compulsive editor with an itchy delete finger. I wanna mark my calendar!
It used to be 4 years, now it's 3. Soon they'll start giving away your images for free after a couple of months....
Is it 3 years? Everything I see in the thread and the oldfiles page say 4+... I still think it should default to delete rather than donate as well, but at least they let you change it ahead of time now...
When I contacted Dreamstime about this issue here is what I got in reply: "All images that have been online for more than 3 years and have no downloads automatically enter our database clean-up process. Please see link for more details on this:
http://www.dreamstime.com/thread_19023
You receive a notification for all such files and you are asked to take one of the three indicated actions: donate to the free section, re-keyword via the keymasters program or simply disable the file. The donate option is set as default so if you do not select another option by a certain date, the images will be donated.
We can disable these images if you wish but we recommend all members to keep free files online as they increase the exposure of your portfolio. Once disabled, the free images cannot be enabled again or uploaded for the commercial section."
535
« on: March 04, 2011, 11:36 »
How long does it take before unsold files fall into the trap? I'm a compulsive editor with an itchy delete finger. I wanna mark my calendar!
It used to be 4 years, now it's 3. Soon they'll start giving away your images for free after a couple of months....
Have you seen the free image section: http://www.dreamstime.com/free-images_pg1. It's got 8044 pages of 20 images which comes to 160,880 images.
Yikes!!! This is scary and very disturbing. Dreamstime is turning into free images site. I too wonder how many people (like me) didn't realize their images were offered for free. I deleted mine yesterday but not before some of them had over 100 free downloads (!). This is unacceptable and shouldn't be allowed - like "black billing".
536
« on: March 03, 2011, 16:53 »
Hey Lisa, you can still do that - I just did (I don't have any old files pending either). You go to http://www.dreamstime.com/oldfiles.php and the last sentence you see before "No images found" contains a link to click on to change the default. Hope that works. Thanks everyone - this is very helpful!
537
« on: March 03, 2011, 14:35 »
How long does it take before unsold files fall into the trap? I'm a compulsive editor with an itchy delete finger. I wanna mark my calendar!
It used to be 4 years, now it's 3. Soon they'll start giving away your images for free after a couple of months....
538
« on: March 03, 2011, 14:06 »
Here's the thread on the how-to - http://www.dreamstime.com/thread_19796
Donated without consent - how do I disable/delete free images
Basically, you get a notification by email and in your comments 30 days prior. Once you click the box to delete rather than move to the free section it becomes the default for any future images.
Ummm, it doesn't for me. I keep clicking "delete" and the default is still "donate".
539
« on: March 03, 2011, 12:43 »
I find it extremely annoying that old images that didn't sell on Dreamstime are marked by default as "donate free" if you don't get to them in time. I would much prefer "disable" as default. The fact that these images didn't sell on DT doesn't mean they are not (sometimes actively) selling on other sites. I hope DT realizes they are not the fastest-selling site out there.
But fine, if they don't want to keep images for longer than certain time, it's their choice. But don't offer my work for free! I don't work for free!
And yes I know to avoid that I need to check my messages and delete old images as they come up.... but here is another newsflash - my life doesn't revolve around DT... maybe it's hard for them to imagine, but it's true.
Frustrating at the least.
540
« on: March 02, 2011, 18:26 »
Yikes! It's unreadable.
541
« on: March 02, 2011, 16:00 »
It's impossible to say if the second image is a copy or not. The concept isn't that complex. But yes, it's likely a work of a copycat, not that there is nothing wrong with that because you cannot copyright a concept.
BTW I think the second image (NOT-Yuri) could be used for an editorial article better than Yuri's image, because it looks more "real".
What about these: (some of these make me laugh 
http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-67389103/stock-photo-portrait-of-healthy-young-woman-eating-apple-while-holding-scales.html
http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-56764732/stock-photo-young-woman-holding-weight-scale.html
http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-47960407/stock-photo-diet.html
http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-38159944/stock-photo-dieting-overweight-women-with-scales-and-apple.html
http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-54120958/stock-photo-beautiful-young-woman-wearing-sports-clothes-holding-scales-and-eating-an-apple.html
http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-71944639/stock-photo-portrait-of-young-smiling-girl-with-green-apple-and-scales.html
http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-71067829/stock-photo-a-happy-young-athlete-holding-a-weight-scale-and-red-apple-isolated-on-white-background.html
http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-64386553/stock-photo-beautiful-young-woman-wearing-sports-clothes-holding-scales-and-eating-an-apple.html
http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-44482444/stock-photo-woman-with-scale-and-apple.html
Yup these are fun too, but they are not copies. These are concept-copies, which is OK since (I totally agree) you can't copyright the concept. But if you take 2 different images, print them and they practically coincide when overlayed - that would be a copy that I would have a problem with. There are 2 different things here: 1) if you choose the same concept, or pose, or choice of props as the other photographer, it's a concept copy, it's nothing super-creative but it's fine 2) if you "borrow" not only things mentioned above, but also create a composition that matches exactly the composition of the other image, that's a copy, and it's not fine.
542
« on: March 02, 2011, 14:50 »
It's not really a concept of stunning originality, is it? It may very well be a copy but accusing particular people of plagiarism on a public forum with no more evidence than that there are two remarkably similar images is potentially unfair, damaging and possibly libelous.
Well, here come rhetorical questions:) Of course the concept is not new or original, and it doesn't have to be. For example, same concept here: http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-71881603/stock-photo-young-beautiful-sporty-woman-isolated-on-white.htmlIn this example it's just photographer's execution of a well-known concept, not copying. When somebody puts an effort into reproducing the photo as exactly as they can - same pose, even same amount of white space on the right - that's copying. Nothing unfair or unjust about calling this a copy - it's a pretty obvious one... isn't it? 
543
« on: March 02, 2011, 14:07 »
The Yuri version has a file number 34 million lower than the second one. Is that a hint at the right answer? 
Yeah, this is a pretty obvious example. Yuri's is so much better, you have to wonder why the other guy even bothered uploading this. Not only is it plagiarism, but it is a very poorly executed copy. I think Yuri's sales on that image are safe
Elena, did you contact Shutterstock to bring this to their attention?
I just found it while browsing - did not contact SS. Both images are on the first page of the search though, so believe it or not the "copy" image is getting good sales too.
544
« on: March 02, 2011, 14:05 »
Yup looks like someone's decided to directly reproduce Yuri's image - I mean, I've seen people getting "inspired" by someone else's work, but this is just plain copying - the pose, the crop. Lighting sucks though I agree:)
545
« on: March 02, 2011, 13:46 »
546
« on: March 02, 2011, 10:17 »
Awesome studio! You are going to make a killing renting this place to other photographers.
Yup I wonder how much is per day of shooting:)
548
« on: February 25, 2011, 12:54 »
I see no harm in such a page. I am not holding my breath that it would generate any real traffic to my site, but I don't see any problems with it either. So sure, I am participating.
When people talk about "centralized search" and "uniform licensing" and "singing up only once" it makes me wonder if they aware of places like Photoshelter. Why invent a bicycle?
I was willing to put my efforts in creating something a little bit more advanced that page of links (that thread is mentioned here), but you need money to advertise, and it turned out very few people are willing to spend money on their site's promotion. If you want an agricultural coop you collect the money and buy a tractor, and then everyone's field gets plowed. If you want a online stock photo coop you need to collect money to advertise it, and then everyone would benefit from traffic. But it looks like we're not quite "ripe" for a coop yet.
549
« on: February 24, 2011, 12:05 »
Nothing much gets past your radar does it?
That's right. Including the fact that you constantly seem to have a bug up your ass. (let him out already...
550
« on: February 24, 2011, 11:46 »
i tried to adjust something in the middle..do u adjust W/B based on 'feelings'?
I like the "something in the middle" version. Still bright but not too yellow. With color cast, it can often be tricky. The longer you look at the image, the more "normal" it seems to you - our brain has a sneaky way to adjust to the color cast and perceive it as new "normal". It's like wearing tinted ski goggles for a day and then when you take them off everything seems weird color. So what I'd recommend is this: when you stared at the image long enough that you're not sure anymore if the color is right, leave the desk and go around the room or look out of the window for a while - to reset the color calibration in your brain. If the image on the screen still looks "right" after this, you're done. More often then not however I'd came back to the monitor and be surprised - wow this is purple! (or yellow or whatever). So you can't always trust your "feelings" - only when you're sure your "base" color comprehension is unaltered.
Pages: 1 ... 17 18 19 20 21 [22] 23 24 25 26 27 ... 36
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
