|
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 - kuriouskat
Pages: 1 ... 20 21 22 23 24 [25] 26 27 28
601
« on: May 09, 2013, 08:35 »
Someone started a thread about this on Shutterstock but, having looked at the FB page, probably some people here also need to be aware. Here is the info from the Shutterstock forum: I just got the following message on my Linkedin page:
Hi everyone! I have a blog share free eps vector. I think it so helpful with you, you can visit and download free. And this is my fan page: https://www.facebook.com/epsvector
Started by Tina Swift, Designer at EPS Vector Blog
Here is the blog:http://eps-vector.blogspot.co.uk
Here is the Linkedin page:http://www.linkedin.com/groups/Hi-everyone-I-have-blog-121555%2ES%2E238766865?view=&gid=121555&type=member&item=238766865&trk=eml-anet_dig-b_nd-pst_ttle-cn
I have not found any of my own images but I quick Tin-Eye search shows that the images are on various stock sites and by numerous artists.
I have left a comment on the Linkedin page but some of you may want to add you own or contact Facebook, etc. if any of the images belong to you.
602
« on: April 04, 2013, 03:36 »
What about Pixmac? Now that they are one and the same, is it worth uploading there for faster reviews?
603
« on: March 26, 2013, 09:07 »
I first came across them when I found an almost exact copy of one of my vectors displayed both on Colourbox and Shutterstock. I emailed both companies, showing my original and the copy, (including an exact list of my keywords). Shutterstock acted promptly and removed the image in question but Colourbox said that, although the image resembled mine, it was not identical and they wouldn't take any action. Needless to say, it put me off them completely.
604
« on: March 13, 2013, 07:54 »
I don't think anyone has told the reviewers.
I just had one of two rejected for the "You already have several very similar images in your portfolio or approved within this batch" reason. As I don't have any of this particular subject in my portfolio, I can only surmise that two similars are still one too many.
605
« on: March 06, 2013, 03:22 »
I chose not to upload at Pixmac, due to the negative press they were receiving when I was looking at the site, and I haven't uploaded to Pond5 because 50% of my port is vectors. I do, however, have my full portfolio at DP but asked them to disable the partner program with Pixmac.
So, if I ask DP to enable the partner program with Pixmac does that mean that all of my port will be available on all three sites? Or would it be more beneficial to open a Pond5 account and upload directly?
606
« on: February 25, 2013, 12:30 »
Thank you 
607
« on: February 25, 2013, 12:13 »
I was looking forward to this but.......... nothing  Blank screen
608
« on: February 21, 2013, 07:20 »
520 with 2800+ images 2 subs so far, so only 49998 to go. 50000 per year equates to 137 per day so I am not holding my breath! At the rate I am selling them, 2 in five days, I will average 146 per year and reach 50000 in the year 2355. That should make a nice little nest egg for my great, great, great, great, great, great, grandchildren. I will be sure to make a note in my will 
609
« on: February 19, 2013, 13:17 »
Crashed for me too on both Safari and Firefox: Internal Server Error
The server encountered an internal error or misconfiguration and was unable to complete your request.
Please contact the server administrator, [email protected] and inform them of the time the error occurred, and anything you might have done that may have caused the error.
More information about this error may be available in the server error log.
610
« on: February 09, 2013, 09:51 »
Aspp, Sue and Stan - thanks very much - you have confirmed what I thought but I wanted to be sure. Regarding 'digitally altering' , I'll take another look at Alamy and see if I can find the guidelines. It is not something that has been an issue before, as the Micros don't ask the question for normal submissions and I was aware that editorial images should be only tidied up and not essentially changed. Thanks again
611
« on: February 09, 2013, 09:07 »
With everything that has been going on recently, I know it is time that I concentrated more effort on selling RM, rather that just giving everything I have to the Micros. I have a small Alamy port of RF images and a hard drive of images that are suitable for RM - just need some processing and uploading time. I know I can't sell any of my RF stuff as RM but that is about the extent of my knowledge!
Before I invest too much time getting things wrong, I just want to clarify a couple of points.
Firstly, if I submit RM to Alamy can I also sell the same images RM elsewhere? Can I also sell the same images on places like Fine Art America? In short, is the rule simply that I don't sell the same images as RF?
Secondly, I notice on Alamy that images that would perhaps sell as editorial on the Micros are clearly photoshopped more than an editorial image should be. One example I saw was very similar to an image I have, and was clearly taken from the same position, but mine has power cables cutting across it and the processed one on Alamy had the cables removed. I am used to just tidying up images for editorial - exposure/contrast/curves, etc. Is this kind or treatment acceptable for Alamy/RM? Also, at what point do I have to declare that it has been 'digitally altered'? I'm really not sure what 'digitally altered' constitutes - would that be anything that has been adjusted in PS or is it for substantial image manipulation? The image I mentioned with the removed cables was marked as NO to the 'digitally altered' bit.
Thanks
612
« on: February 07, 2013, 15:54 »
I am sentimental about Bigstock because I started out there. But, Bridge to Bigstock gives me 6 months at 38c then my port comes down. I am not accepting low BS rates, (no pun intended), when I can get 38c on Shutterstock who OWN Bigstock. This doesn't make sense - Shutterstock are allowing a company they own to undercut them? It does appear to be a race for the bottom that I won't be a part of. I won't let a small player cannibalise my sales at Shutterstock, regardless of sentiment.
I expect this sort of behaviour from some sites but I thought Shutterstock/Bigstock were above this.
613
« on: February 02, 2013, 18:41 »
22 from a very small port. The remaining 22 come down after next payout.
614
« on: February 02, 2013, 11:06 »
I think you have to have a minimum of $50 to request payout. There is a contact on the old StockXpert site that goes to Istock and, despite all their bad publicity recently, they were helpful and efficient when I closed my account this week. I was owed over $50, so I requested full payment and closure of the account, and it was dealt with within 24 hours: the money turned up in Paypal after about 5 days. You could email and ask if you will be paid if you close you account? Like you, I had deactivated all but one image, to give me access to my account details and, if I remember rightly, you don't have an option to reactivate anything once this is done? If that is the case, you will wait a long time to get to the $50 with only one live image I fear you will have to forgo your $37 and chalk this one up to experience.
615
« on: February 02, 2013, 07:02 »
OK, so my StockXpert Thinkstock images are already down, (approx 500) and today, I can add the small total of 22 images down from Istock - it may not sound much but is actually 50% of my tiny representation of photos on Istock. I have left the others until I reach payout and then the remainder, plus my few vectors come down.
I gave this as my deactivation reason: I wish to retain full control of how my images are distributed.
616
« on: February 01, 2013, 18:54 »
I have pulled all of my old StockXpert/Thinkstock account, 500 images, already and thankfully it was a very quick and easy process. Tomorrow I will pull the majority of my small Istock portfolio. This has gone on long enough with no credible answers, so let's have our actions speaking louder than words.
We should start a referral thread, so that anyone joining new agencies can pick from a list of links maybe?
617
« on: January 27, 2013, 05:49 »
I recently closed my old StockXpert account and sent an email requesting that the images be removed from Thinkstock. Istock acted very promptly and, although they said it could take up to 90 days, the images we actually taken down within 48 hours. I haven't had the payout yet but have had a confirmation email confirming that it is being processed.
Istock did confirm that removing the images from StockXpert wouldn't automatically remove them from Thinkstock, and that an email was request to specifically request this.
618
« on: January 14, 2013, 07:16 »
I have very few files at Istock and will hold off deactivating those for a few days, to give a chance for this mess to be amicably sorted.
Today, I have deactivated all my files from the old StockXpert site.
619
« on: January 11, 2013, 10:45 »
Also if you don't contribute to micro what was this post about?
http://www.microstockgroup.com/illustration-general/shutterstock-terminated-my-account/msg287498/#msg287498
It is funny how SS took action immediately to delete yr acct without explanation.
I tried deleting my SS and IS acct with 200+ images few weeks ago, and the images are still there.
I agree that earnings from there are quite good...........
Based on my 6 months journey with microstock listed here, the only sites that is worth uploading is Canstock, 123rf, Veer , yaymicro and GL, drawshop, toonvectors. This is based on illustrator point of view, not photographer.
Many ppl complain 123rf and Canstock is cheap, but for foreign contributors that are not based in US like me, they do not have W8ben form tax withholding rule and other silly foreign tax policies. Even though SS paid 35cent per dl, but after witholding tax, it is actually less than 20cent per dl, which is cheaper than 123rf.
IS is good, but they have 18 files upload limit per week. Unless yr files sold like hot cakes daily, it is impossible to survive for a freelancer starting out like me.
See, it is obvious that you are a good for nothing whistle blower who like to spend time looking for nonsense proof to make other fall.
I would'nt call them thief to steal pic to trace, i would call them Designers who took good inspiration source and ReCREATE them in a different expression and style.
Almost 100% of the contributors' portfolio here are Recreation and mimic of each other ideas.
Which contributors here dare to say that his works are purely 100% original here???
People like you, microbius who have nothing to do but spy on others deserve to be shot and gun down. How many good contributors have you sabotaged just becos 1 or 2 similar pics. You only judged their fault and not the hardworks they took.
Without Recreation, there is no improvement.
OMG - I don't believe this guy. Nonsense proof? Sabotage? Shot? What planet are you living on?? I guess your opinions, and now your physical threats, will get you banned from here but I doubt you will be missed. Bye-bye!
620
« on: January 11, 2013, 10:37 »
Stop trying to be noble and pretentious.
The way I see it, is your incapabilities to produce better artwork than others and poor designing/ drawing skill that made you jealous of others success. So to made yourself feel better, you try to sabotage others port.
The basics of adobe illustrator is tracing, and to hone the art of tracing to perfection takes time and years. I do trace, but i trace the artwork i draw on paper.
The animals that the fellow trace maybe copies, but he does alot of touchup and finishing in his works and made the final design a good piece of works.
This guy obviously have skills and talents and just because of a few pieces of works, you are gonna sabotage his years of work. This is really really bad and terrible thing to do.
Look at Shepard Fairey from the Obey. That guy obviously traced and sell his works but still regarded as a good artist.
Another example is Cristiano Siqueira from www.crisvector.com. One cafepress imitates Shepard Fairey style and come up with obey the breed. His works are also traced but they are accepted at cafepress to be sold.
For yr info, i dont any port in any microstock agencies listed here. I am only available at gettyimages and corbis.
Initially, i am only selling at istock and shutterstock but i have stopped. Becos I realised everybody there is selling themselves short and only making the agencies earn more $$$.
Pls post yr portfolio here if u have nothing to hide. Are u afraid that I can easily spot a few design of yours to be similar to others?
It is obvious that you are not going to post yr port here, becos you are afraid of the outcome.
You are only fit to accused others if you are 100% clean yourself which i doubt so.
Hmmmm, methinks he doth protest too much..... This really feels as if you are trying to muddy the waters somewhat. The issue is black or white - not grey. You cannot copy work if you do not have the right to do so - it is against the submitter agreement on all stock sites. There are many 'similars' on stock sites but that is a different matter - inspiration, (unless it is considered abusive), is not the same as theft. I can put up a cartoon of seven garden gnomes but, if I want to make them look like Disney characters and name them after the seven dwarfs, I will find myself in a lot of trouble - even if I have done a brilliant and skilful job of it. It doesn't matter how good a job you do, how difficult it is or whether you should be allowed to do so or not. It is wrong - FULLSTOP. If you get caught you will get banned. I for one would like to thank Microbius and others who take the time to report their findings and help to protect the interests of the honest contributors. You appear to be implying that Whistle Blowers are a breed of jealous, small-minded contributors who have nothing better to do than to trawl the internet trying to catch people out? I prefer to think of then as generous with their time in their efforts to look out for our collective interest. I am sure that their motivation comes from a strong sense of right and wrong and a desire to seek justice for the underdog. It IS noble and it is not pretentious to behave in such a manner.
621
« on: January 04, 2013, 04:54 »
Lots of mini resolutions but my main one is to become a reviewer. If I get my wish, I promise not to be Attila the 2nd
622
« on: December 07, 2012, 08:32 »
Hmmmm, worked really hard to grow my port in 2012, from just under 800 to just under 1300 images but I'm still going to drop to 45%
Not happy - where do I go to whinge??
623
« on: November 24, 2012, 15:56 »
Does signing up for the free trial before the launch qualify us for the lowest, locked-in price after the trial is over, even if you have already launched by then? Or will taking a year after launch and when the trial is over, mean we will be subject to a post launch price?
Thanks
624
« on: November 17, 2012, 05:54 »
I submit to several sites and each one has different rules and regulations as to how my images can be licensed. At the moment, I have disabled Partner Programs and ELs on several sites, purely because I don't want images sold for POD use, etc. On some sites, Fotolia for example, I actually removed my port, because I didn't like the way they were circumventing the licence agreement to allow POD on standard licences through some of their partners. I also don't like the idea of someone buying my image and putting it on mugs and mousemats on Etsy and Zazzle, etc
I am wondering what everyone else does?
Am I being over cautious and restricting my income dramatically? There is a part of me that wants to retain a modicum of control, and another part of me that says what the heck - if someone is going to misuse my image, they will do so anyway. Also, what is the likelihood that someone will pay for an EL just to use my image on a mousemat?
I don't know whether to throw caution to the wind or not, and would be really glad of some other points of view.
625
« on: November 14, 2012, 07:14 »
I don't understand why people worry about this. If a flag isn't justified nothing will happen so what's the problem? I get flagged regularly mostly by buyers and it is nearly always using the main keywords of the image so obviously done in error.
I have, on occasion, dropped a polite email back asking what the flagger perceives the problem to be. I am usually glad I chose to be polite, as the response is usually from a buyer who says they were attempting to DL the image and clicked on a wrong button.
Pages: 1 ... 20 21 22 23 24 [25] 26 27 28
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
