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 - heywoody
Pages: 1 ... 18 19 20 21 22 [23] 24 25 26 27 28 ... 58
551
« on: September 11, 2013, 16:51 »
Not sure I like that explanation - prefer to think it's just a bug in their view counter. These are not 'not published' images as they are languishing in a review queue so (should) not viewable except by IS or someone with my login credentials - the implication is that someone just needs a greasemonkey script to browse anything including financial info for anyone - also my creative network is on the small side
552
« on: September 10, 2013, 17:51 »
I thought only buyer views were counted?
553
« on: September 10, 2013, 17:17 »
I have 6 files sitting there pending model release while I wait (and wait and wait) for a response from scout - how . are they getting views?
554
« on: September 09, 2013, 17:10 »
Frankly, I don't believe anyone is getting 100 DLs on SS and 2 on DT with the same portfolio. Probably 20 with at least twice the RPD which still puts them miles behind SS. However DLs per image probably in the same ballpark as FT, 123 and (even IS after recent innovations) and these last three have SS RPD without the volumes, not to mention they have bent contributors over again and again in recent times.
Reason to be negative compared to SS but dropping them and submitting to those other three makes no sense.
I do.
Me too. And the two DT downloads will likely be subs, too.
Wow
555
« on: September 09, 2013, 15:35 »
Frankly, I don't believe anyone is getting 100 DLs on SS and 2 on DT with the same portfolio. Probably 20 with at least twice the RPD which still puts them miles behind SS. However DLs per image probably in the same ballpark as FT, 123 and (even IS after recent innovations) and these last three have SS RPD without the volumes, not to mention they have bent contributors over again and again in recent times.
Reason to be negative compared to SS but dropping them and submitting to those other three makes no sense.
556
« on: September 08, 2013, 12:29 »
.... I heard of someone that had 2,000 images on Canstock and than submitted to GL where they took less that 150 of their images! ....
Wondering why he bothered
557
« on: September 07, 2013, 08:49 »
They don't edit for content, and AFAIK never have. They check for technical errors only. iS seems to have gone even further recently. 
Apparently they don't want "glamour"
558
« on: September 04, 2013, 15:10 »
They convert the uploaded jpgs to tiffs and have since the beginning.
Exactly. If anything DT 'TIFF' images are simply degraded JPEG's. This is a non-issue.
Agree. And when they do sell as credit, I still haven't put in extra effort, and they pay that bit extra. (Funny never figured myself as that "glass is half full" guy)
559
« on: September 03, 2013, 12:48 »
Personally, don't get this minus voting at all - I do the odd plus but have never done a minus and have received most on threads where there has been fairly evenly balanced argument and would guess the responsible folks are pretty black & white in their outlook.
560
« on: September 02, 2013, 17:34 »
The flags are great. I notice that many of them are on the first 2 pages with sort by popular. Only one year on ss and the last 3 months earnings are "$89.95, $127.83, and $171.41". Seems like you're figuring things out nicely on your own. 
I have to disagree here, I can compare his portfolio with mine. Same period, same kind of images and same port size and I make double his monthly earnings. The flags look nice, but something doesnt seem right to me.
Everyone isn't a superstar like you, Ron Yep, the textures don't follow the fabric well enough.
Very true. Is it really a problem though if buyers don't notice / don't care?
561
« on: August 31, 2013, 17:03 »
Not a lot really. On the one hand there is quite an amount of stuff labelled "only from istock" available elsewhere and, on the other hand, stuff truly only from istock but not labelled as such, because no other site, with the possible exception of flickr, would accept it.
562
« on: August 31, 2013, 15:04 »
That's unfortunate. The basis of most algebra, our number system and countless other aspects of modern "western" civilization comes directly from Arab culture. I recommend that you and others who do not like Arabs sincerely try to make friends with an Arab neighbor or co-worker before making such judgements.
I am not Arab. However I am a Muslim with many Arab associates and have studied the language. Learning about Arabs and the Arab language has enlightened me to many positive things.
Arab culture influenced people were very advanced when compared to Europe in the 12th century. Not only in medicine, technology but they were also incredibly more tolerant than Europeans and Christians towards other peoples races and beliefs.
They brought great wealth of knowledge to some parts of Europe that allowed a couple centuries later for some countries to start exploring the world and turned Europe in what it became. This is something I've been taught in the first years of school and it's still taught here. Besides I've seen documentaries about the middle ages that can only makes us admire the Arab influenced cultures from the 12th century.
Having said that, something happened that made the Arab to stop in time when compared to the western culture. Or in fact, nothing happened. It's just that they have a set of beliefs crystallized in the form of religious texts that are indisputable and sentence to death people who defy them. Contrary to other religions, the death penalty is inscribed in texts that are so indisputable that at any time any Muslim country, no matter how advanced it may be, may regress a 1000 years just because some people started to impose the laws of the religion people profess.
In my country, Muslims are very tolerant and there aren't any problems with them and go under the radar. They are honest, hard working and I had colleagues in school that were great kids. They are a small community too. But from what I heard from their main religious leader leads me to think that they are almost blasphemous when it comes to the interpretation of the religious laws, if we take in consideration what we hear from countries like Iran (I won't even mention the Taliban) that follow the religion more to the letter. My doubt is, how much does it take for a fundamentalist to arise and force people to act according to the religion that they affirm to have? My fear is that it's not hard to force people to commit horrible acts when they are inscribed in their religious texts.
Well said. I know lots of muslims and no problem with them whatsoever. Like you, I would consider that, at the time of the crusades, arab culture was way ahead of the west but western states have evolved and arab states haven't. Every other race and culture gets parodied so why not arab (apart from the fact that, uniquely, it could get you killed). If western states showed the same tolerence for other peoples' beliefs as they do, they might have valid cause for complaint.
563
« on: August 30, 2013, 17:47 »
Maybe they don't want 3 of the atm or a colour / mono version of the same thing and just hit the focus button?
564
« on: August 29, 2013, 17:45 »
This is the best place to find a critic 
Yeah - be careful what you wish for
565
« on: August 29, 2013, 17:44 »
Congrats
566
« on: August 28, 2013, 12:27 »
Possibly both transactions happened very close together and you never noticed the relevant sale - i don't think refunds show on sales history (  ) so, logically, the sale would have to come out to keep the total correct.
567
« on: August 25, 2013, 17:12 »
SS will reject anything that has the remotest chance of being copyright protected - for your first 10 play safe.
568
« on: August 25, 2013, 16:57 »
I had never heard of Potos.com until I read Dhanford's post, so I checked it out. I don't understand why anyone would offer their material for so little money. When prices go lower and lower, there comes a point at which it's no longer profitable for the artist to create material, and Photos.com has gone way beyond that point. Perhaps if we could create material in the computer and take no longer than 30 seconds per item, it might be worth it. Otherwise,... (Apologies for diverting the topic.)
You know, I actually don't mind low unit prices if I move enough units - I'd be happy enough getting 1 cent per DL if every image was downloaded 100 times a day because there is zero ongoing effort after the initial creation and upload. There has to be some combination of price and volume that makes it worthwhile - this just about exists on the top 4.
569
« on: August 24, 2013, 18:56 »
Just this morning and I had over 30 refund of purchase notifications. Way to go IS. All on the same date so probably a fraudulent credit card.
If I had a dodgy card and was buying stuff of the internet, I wouldn't be wasting it on stock images that's for sure
570
« on: August 24, 2013, 16:03 »
I would guess it's an issue with rendering program and 3d models not that they think it's a real person bur you can send the rejection to scout with a note about how it was created.
Thought initially crossed my mind but (a) no problem with previous or subsequent submissions and (b) images in the same batch where the "models"' faces were covered were accepted so pure reviewer error - I doubt he / she more than glanced at the pics. Liz, Thanks - one is a reject so may, for the 1st time ever, try the scout route if only to be a nuisance Just seen a follow up from CR suggesting the same so happy enough with that bit of the organisation.
571
« on: August 24, 2013, 13:43 »
So, I've been including them in my uploads recently (under the "we'll accept any old sh1te" regime) given that RPI, even at 20% of what it was, is still not too bad (relatively speaking). More than doubled my port (which isn't saying much) in the last few weeks with no image quality rejects. However, I have had one rejected for model release and have a half dozen sitting there pending model release (all 3d renders). I had a polite reply from contributor relations who obviously completely missed the point I was making and no response on the subsequent clarification.
Seems that model releases are a jpeg - should I just upload a jpeg with "this isn't a real person"?
572
« on: August 24, 2013, 13:28 »
Yep. Totally dysfunctional and a sinking ship BUT, like Beppo suggests, still probably generate better returns than most others (SS excepted of course).
573
« on: August 22, 2013, 15:18 »
sales seem steady maybe even increasing very slightly but price /commission cuts has resulted in a decline. I have a graph of RPI (adjusted by port size per site each month) DT / SS are rising, FT is falling and IS (which was double ss up to the end of last year) has fallen off a cliff but probably still better than DT / FT
574
« on: August 21, 2013, 14:56 »
Seems like a case of things just being very slow, oldest stuff got approved today.
575
« on: August 21, 2013, 14:53 »
Totally agree on the staffing thing - it's not their fault that the muppets have taken over.
If revenue = price * volume it's acceptable to have lower volumes with higher prices. Non-exclusive content was not exorbitant so they cut prices along with some of the overpriced stuff. Is anyone seeing a compensating increase in volumes cos I sure ain't? I'm seeing similar or lower volumes for less $$ and for every buck I'm down, IS is down 7. Extrapolate this to thousands of contributors who are actually making money and they must be down a fortune.
Pages: 1 ... 18 19 20 21 22 [23] 24 25 26 27 28 ... 58
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|