|
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 - ShadySue
Pages: 1 ... 18 19 20 21 22 [23] 24 25 26 27 28 ... 624
551
« on: September 10, 2020, 06:47 »
Thanks, Im thinking about it, so can I still give my old photos to SS ft, haha
No, you can't. Exclusivity at iS is artist exclusivity, so you can only sell RF files via iS/Getty. If you are caught out, you'll likely be removed altogether (I think that has happened in the past, someone can correct me if I'm wrong). You can sell other (non-sister) files RM anywhere you like or on print sites like Fine Art America (other suppliers are available).
552
« on: September 10, 2020, 06:13 »
When the new ones become exclusive their old pictures become exclusive too? Or are just the new ones?
CORRECTION: All your RF files must be exclusive at iStock. However, your old pics will still be sold at one credit, though you get your new percentage on them. Whether they are incapable of upgrading old pics, or they just don't want to, is the old 'incompetence vs malice' conundrum. In the Old Days, they were willing and able to upgrade old pics if someone became exclusive.
553
« on: September 04, 2020, 12:02 »
I've been looking at ways of getting an online language tutor, and in looking at reviews, the most recommended site is one called italki. This is NOT an ad, I signed up, paid up and have had one lesson so far which was fine. So far, the 'system' is very impressive indeed (to me).
But in looking at the reviews, a number of reviewers felt that the site was ripping off the tutors. So I looked into it, and apparently they take 15% of the price of the lesson. The tutors set their own prices. Also there's a fixed 'admin' fee of IIRC $4.44 to users, which is (apparently, from what I've read) the same whether you pay $10 in advance or several hundred $$. Certainly I started off with $100 and paid $4.44.
So if they can (presumably) make loads of money with such 'relatively' small fees, why do stock agencies feel they 'have to' take such a huge proportion of our sales value? OK, they're not storing millions of images/clips, but they do have short videos from each of thousands of tutors, and as well as Skype, there's an option to have the lessons within their own 'video-conferencing' system, which AFAICS they don't charge extra for (I did my first-and-only lesson in Skype so I can't vouch for that).
554
« on: September 02, 2020, 11:50 »
I have used Deepmeta in the past for submitting photos. I had no idea it contained earnings information as well.
Edit: Ive just checked out "Sales" in Deepmeta after signing in and all the fields under the headings are blank.
You may need to contact Support. (Though for some odd reason, I don't get replies to my support tickets, although they say they've been sent. I do get their other emails though).
555
« on: September 01, 2020, 10:33 »
These are imponderable questions, meaning we have no objective way of assessing that. You could upload loads of great work, but at that exact time, new files are being held down in search algorithms, and might never recover. Or you could hold onto your files until there's an improvement in demand and lose possible sales. If you have found a niche which sells well and has little competition, you're winning in most future scenarios, especially if there is little potential for competition. This year may be the cause of the new crown pneumonia that caused the big data economy to be poor. What if there is no cause of the new crown pneumonia? According to last year's usual sales and download data, is it objective? I mean, is the result of my hard work now that the economic recovery after the end of the new crown pneumonia is a good return? ? ? ?
Unfortunately, iStock also has a long and sad history of unilaterally changing contacts, moving goals posts and screwing contributors over.
iStock exclusive's download targets are unreachable due to coronavirus slowdown.
Many exclusives will lose their current royalty level this year.
556
« on: August 30, 2020, 14:56 »
I don't know why, my adobe income is very poor. I already have more than 10,000 pictures on adobe, and only more than 100 dollars a month, I am so depressed!
I'm on the fence also. Adobe is not enough to compensate for SS loses. Other agencies are not even worth mentioning. So, it comes down to decision Adobe vs Istock exclusive. It doesn't look like a hard decision at this moment and in this environment.
If it will make things any easier for you - I'm depressed, too 
As I said above, "I'm exclusive and I'm earning less than 25% of what I earned in e.g. 2011-12, when my port was about 30% of its current size", so I'm not exactly jumping with joy. The situation is imponderable, it's impossible to make any sort of informed decision, as any agency/distributor can make changes at any time, very occasionally for the better, usually for the worse. Even as exclusives, we are really at the mercy of the search algorithm. I've had best sellers (by my standards) drop to almost zero overnight, and it's usually because of a change in algorithm (e.g. going from the first two lines for a keyword to below the tenth page). There is absolutely nothing we can do about that.
557
« on: August 30, 2020, 06:03 »
I won't offer an opinion as to whether you should become exclusive at iStock: it all depends on your port and your tolerance of BS. (disclaimer: I'm exclusive and I'm earning less than 25% of what I earned in e.g.2011-12, when my port was about 30% of its current size, but I know that was better 'for me' than being indie would have been, through the years I've been active [historically, SS wouldn't have worked for my particular port]).
And who knows what will happen in future? Risky if you do, risky if you don't.
Nowadays, becoming exclusive isn't dependent on sales, it's done by them assessing your port for commercial value.
Be aware that if you choose to become exclusive, your existing files will all stay at their current 1 credit selling price, though you'll get your exclusive rate on these sales. Your subsequently uploaded files will sell at 3 credits, and you'll get your exclusive rate.
558
« on: August 28, 2020, 05:58 »
Not sure if less volume (depending on whether 'our' work is in direct competition with the PA offerings) at the same prices is going to be 'better'. Whether more buyers will come to the site and that will benefit us remains to be seen.
I agree, sales aren't improving, and prices are getting very low: though I see some people still reporting $$$ sales (maybe gross?).
quote author=Brasilnut link=topic=35920.msg556323#msg556323 date=1598611748]
Anything is better than what's going on.
Seeing microstock prices but midstock volumes for the past 4 months.
[/quote]
559
« on: August 27, 2020, 04:38 »
I've just noticed, which I didn't before, that the pics I linked to above have 'signed property release on file with Shutterstock' on them.
Could it be that the author has got permission from the original photographers to use their files?
(OTOH, s/he used the OP's files without permission and I don't know if the PR note was on their file pages).
560
« on: August 27, 2020, 04:20 »
Ne er heard of Printful, but this sort of 'deal' has been going on for a years, and not just with iStock/Getty.
561
« on: August 24, 2020, 17:43 »
Do you guys think that other stocks like iStock and Adobe check contributor portfolios more carefully?
Historically, iS used to ban people for posting files for which they didn't have copyright. They actually blocked ports pending enquiry following a complaint, which was a bit unfair if someone was innocent (in the days when a few days 'down' could mean a serious money loss). However, there was definitely a time when they wouldn't investigate unless it was the actual copyright owner who contacted them. I don't know what happens there now, haven't seen a thread here for a while. Previous threads here have shown that SS can take weeks to take down an abuser. Meanwhile, I got a reply from their twitter presence: Thank you for letting us know. We've submitted this for review with our compliance team. That was an hour ago, so you can keep checking to see how long it takes. Quite possibly/probably all of that port isn't their copyright.
562
« on: August 24, 2020, 06:08 »
Its still down ? or am I the ony one who can't access anything but home page ?
I can get into Image Manager, My Alamy (stats) and the forum, and the main (selling) site seems to be functioning as normal for me at the moment (meaning I can make searches, I didn't actually buy anything).
563
« on: August 23, 2020, 10:18 »
OK, four tweets sent after the note to support, one for each of the ones I found. Also all messaged to their Facebook account.
Added: I tried to post to TrustPilot, but they don't allow links in reviews, and I thought 'this site sells stolen images' without the evidence just looked like a jilted ex, so I didn't post.
564
« on: August 23, 2020, 10:08 »
...
Check him out, maybe you are also bringing bread to someone else's table - https://www.shutterstock.com/g/Khoirillistration
This illustration
https://www.shutterstock.com/image-illustration/lion-illustration-wallpaper-background-1585086241
is a filtered version of this photo:
https://news.sky.com/story/lioness-kills-father-of-her-three-cubs-at-indianapolis-zoo-11532092
This one:
https://www.shutterstock.com/image-illustration/winter-illustration-wallpaper-background-1589482882
is a filtered version of this still from a movie:
https://growthcommissionblog.org/film/405034/jilbab-traveler-love-sparks-in-korea
This one:
https://www.shutterstock.com/image-illustration/tiger-illustration-wallpaper-background-1585075810
is a filtered version of
https://www.flickr.com/photos/brianscott/150007690/in/photolist-eV6aj-eibKr-eod53-efQ4u-ei9fg-2MN5YD-4BzHB1-7fQMry-5v3cLg-5v7Ekj-7fQNwA-7fQN93-7fLSbB-5v3m9n-7fLWgn-7fQSvh-7fLWJv-7fLRyD-7fLVWg-7fQNQ5-7fLWY6-7fQMVb-4Bvr6c-7fQJoE-7fLLkn-sEEGa-7fLSRn-7fLNNz-7fQL6u-7fQJBu-2giNQz
https://www.shutterstock.com/image-illustration/winter-illustration-wallpaper-background-1589481829
is a filtered version of this one:
https://www.liputan6.com/global/read/3083716/australia-bersiap-hadapi-musim-dingin-terganas
Every other file I clicked on is available on the internet, though it would take more time to identify the original author.
SS didn't even try Google Reverse Image Search. They really don't care.
This post should be sent to the SS shareholders before their next conference.
BTW, since you already did all this work identifying the stolen images, you might send this also to SS Support.
As I don't have an account there, I sent a guest post, but I only had 400 characters, so just the top link then a note to say all others are findable online. Maybe others could send them more? I'm blocked from Oringer's Twitter, but maybe I can blast some quickly to SS's Twitter before being banned, and presumably also Fb. If anyone else would like to join in, feel free!
565
« on: August 22, 2020, 19:41 »
566
« on: August 22, 2020, 15:40 »
I don't have a Connect tab in Account Management. Is that something special you have to do for that to show up?
In Royalties > Export, you should have three options for exporting: PDF, TXT and ConnectTXT.
567
« on: August 22, 2020, 13:49 »
Yesterday July stats was showing, but today I see June stats again. Anybody else?
Should I care? 
July 2020
0.05 USD
35 photos sold
0.00 average
Really? 31 photos show being sold for $.0.00
Total for the month a healthy whole 5 cents.
SS pays double that for one download. (just being sarcastic, but it's a fact)
You should take out a support ticket to question that. Not that it's likely you'll get an answer you like, but they should be forced to give an answer.
568
« on: August 21, 2020, 05:54 »
Anyone else notice a small difference between the Today is 20 figure and the Istock figure?
5c, but that's normal. No figure on iS corresponds with any other figure. I think my 5c is probably the connect aggregation, bearing in mind the TodayIs20 is using Getty's exported information.
569
« on: August 20, 2020, 20:54 »
To be fair, TrustPilot is untrustworthy.
it is not, because they remove fake reviews whenever detected, but you cannot stop them all. its one of the better review sites out there
You are entitled to your opinion, but I don't think it's very trustworthy that I was invited to write a review just by googling TrustPilot Shutterstock. How would they have 'detected' that I had never been a buyer if I'd written one?
570
« on: August 20, 2020, 13:39 »
I don't "EVER" pay Models for Penny stock. My students pay them so they can learn. I Pay Models with copies of the work. so that they can use to get paid assignments. Some of my Models have made $1,000s of dollars using My Images in their Ports.
Thats the way it is and thats the way it's been forever. How good you are and the value of the work Is their payment. Of course. I work In Hollywood. every waiter in a restaurant is a Model trying to make it and they need Images. I've had men and women who are smart enough to sell themselves make "A LOT" of Money with My work........To get them More work. If I lived in a small town In Idaho? , Im sorry. Maybe move On to products or Food or landscapes. TRUTH.!
You paid them with EXPOSURE? Ugh.
Why not just pay them for the time they put in for you?
Not only that, why did he Revive a twelve-Year old thread to Boast of The fact?
571
« on: August 20, 2020, 09:41 »
Genuine or not, I would go to the site directly and do it. Next time it might not be genuine.
Which is also the official advice on the iS forums.
572
« on: August 20, 2020, 05:28 »
Not sure that was a very helpful reply. I'm sure many of the sites' own forums would also be good/better than here. But we come here as it is sort of 'news central' so we don't have to read each and every forum.
Bear in mind we're not supposed to link to their forum.
573
« on: August 19, 2020, 18:36 »
To be fair, TrustPilot is untrustworthy. I've seen Joe Lycett's uncovering of fake reviews*, and when I googled Trust Pilot, Shutterstock just now, I immediately was invited to write a review as a customer of SS, though I've never been one (I have written TP reviews before, but only via emails from companies I've dealt with). Not that that means that SS is any better than the bad reviews, of course. I have no respect for them. * It's a bit silly and longer than it needs to be, but clearly Channel 4 is targetting a younger audience than the very worthy Beeb consumer shows attract. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5VMSMjF_b_Y
575
« on: August 02, 2020, 18:50 »
I believe they are searchable, at least they certainly were around 18 months ago.
You can request keywords to be added, if it's really important like the actual subject.
Contact us > File Submission > Suggest new keyword
Pages: 1 ... 18 19 20 21 22 [23] 24 25 26 27 28 ... 624
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
