|
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 - click_click
Pages: 1 ... 21 22 23 24 25 [26] 27 28 29 30 31 ... 119
626
« on: October 25, 2012, 12:45 »
I'm making more with BigStock than FT now. Never thought that would happen.
Yep. Same here. It's a shame. They used to be a strong #2 earner. Seems pretty obvious their glory days are behind them.
That's incredible. For me FT earnings have roughly halved since their peak but they are still 3-4x more than BigStock. ...
+1 except that FT generates 7 times as much as Bigstock does. Either FT has crashed "too much" for most people or Bigstock is not doing a lot for me... 
627
« on: October 25, 2012, 12:38 »
My photos slip through review pretty quick, no complaints there but my illustrations (raster) are sitting there now for weeks.
How long are the current illustrations review times?
628
« on: October 24, 2012, 22:24 »
... I cannot pursue image infringements on RF licenses that dilute what my images are worth. ... For the sake of derailing this thread: I've had instances with Alamy where RM images were licensed once but popped up on several different news web sites. Member Services assured me that the license is in order and that the buyer purchased it for its own network of affiliates It's really funky to figure this one out regarding who belongs to this network etc. No fun.
629
« on: October 24, 2012, 17:42 »
I get these all the time and never bothered to answer.
Even if it wasn't spam they believe that since you're running a "small" photography site they can pay you $20 for year long spot on your homepage as advertising space.
Even if it was $1000 a year I wouldn't want to have some ads on my site promoting everlasting life or anything of that sort...
Your call.
630
« on: October 24, 2012, 10:12 »
I am very impressed by one big site and have gone exclusive. Has any one else a comment?
I'm hope you are referring to exclusivly posting on MicrostockGroup. Glad you are impressed with the site.
No Tyler, I think he talked about AOL, maybe Compuserve, hard to tell from the post but hey, English isn't my native tongue to begin with.
631
« on: October 23, 2012, 21:05 »
http://photodune.net/user/ENTER_USER_NAME_HERE/statement or Go to your dashboard and click on the "Statement" tab on right. or are you doing one of these? I am very impressed by one big site and have gone exclusive. Has any one else a comment?
632
« on: October 23, 2012, 19:52 »
Lame, I tweeted about this 2 days ago. Next.
633
« on: October 23, 2012, 12:18 »
I agree he often has useful blog posts, but this doesn't seem to me to be one of them. Five rules - three steps - seven no-nos - all sounds a bit like the covers of women's magazines. Can't argue with any of it, but doesn't seem to offer much beyond the obvious.
+1 New diet: How to lose 5 lb in 5 days...*  *(and gain it back after returning back to your current lifestyle - duh)
634
« on: October 22, 2012, 10:54 »
In regards to editing their submission of what "should be" approved and what shouldn't it's a catch 22.
Previously Alamy posted "terrible" photos that sold for 5 figures because someone out there wanted exactly that. These images would have never made it into the collection if reviewers were to pick only the "best".
To me it appears that Getty actually went into the same direction with the Flickr move. They added substandard quality images and sold them for good money although many contributors had no clue what Getty is and how much an image is "worth".
I believe it's not so much about rejecting "bad" images but rather having a very good search algorithm.
The buyers need to have options presented that filter out the crap and find exactly what the buyer wants.
Of course this includes the contributors submitting correctly keyworded images.
This is where some leverage could be applied that reported images (and reviewed to be confirmed) for invalid keywords which would lead to lower search result rankings favoring honest contributors using correct keywords.
635
« on: October 22, 2012, 09:22 »
Hiya, have you faved your images on 123RF.com? I reckon you'll be asking -- why is faving important? The simplest answer to this is SEARCH PRIORITY. Your Faved images will display on the first few pages whenever clients conduct a search.
Please follow steps as below (If you have yet to do so):
1) Login to 123RF
2) Go to "Sell Images" under the category of "For Photographers" at the footer.
3) Click "Faved".
4) Select 5% of your total images.
5) Click "Add to Favorite" for those images that you like to Fave.
Regards,
Anglee
Does the same apply to footage?
636
« on: October 21, 2012, 18:30 »
... This has been ongoing since the original "F5" how many years ago. Things haven't been working normally since then. This can't be attributed to someone being on vacation this many times or a rush job on something else. Basic functionality and accurate reporting should be a given... Maybe, and I'm just throwing this out there, the IT guy is in fact still on vacation since "F5" and IS "hired" some interns to bandage up the leaks until the "F5" guy comes back. I do have a feeling though that he won't come back...
637
« on: October 21, 2012, 16:14 »
All of my IPTC data comes through in lowercase so I have to manually edit the title and description. Is that just me?...
I have the same problem. Very annoying.
However annoying, in the end search engines are case-insensitive, so I'd just leave in lowercase (manual editing defeats the purpose of using IPTC to save time).
Yes, you are correct and in a pragmatic way it does not matter. However, with my OCD and trying to present my stuff nicely I just don't like the looks of city names or other terms all in lower cases.
638
« on: October 21, 2012, 15:15 »
All of my IPTC data comes through in lowercase so I have to manually edit the title and description. Is that just me?... I have the same problem. Very annoying.
639
« on: October 20, 2012, 09:16 »
I feel like iStock set the bar in the industry in terms of how bad we can be treated without leaving the agency.
Now DT is getting the hang of it and tries to push through these "tests" to beautify their bookkeeping. Every other reason to do this could have easily be announced prior to going live IMO.
Not cool.
640
« on: October 19, 2012, 13:00 »
Could anyone quickly point out which standard RF (NO EL) does allow print reproduction?
Only Alamy does, correct?
I just found 15 images of mine on a POD web site and want to make sure I'm hitting them the right way.
I also just found out that even though they created thumbnails for their store they forgot to strip my name out of the EXIF info.
I guess I should rather get a lawyer to get this stuff nailed before I mess it up...
641
« on: October 19, 2012, 12:13 »
I must be having the best and most effective stock site in the world as I have never ever touched it.
642
« on: October 19, 2012, 11:48 »
They plan on getting rid of "bidder" implementing a new feature called "Pocketstock Packages".
Yay or Nay?
643
« on: October 19, 2012, 11:44 »
AFAICR, the sale disappears as soon as, or maybe even before, you're notified.
That's my experience as well. I'm lazy as hell but we all should constantly download our downloads via CSV although the individual file downloads are not even listed there just to see if they really deduct the proper amounts. I could never verify it.
644
« on: October 19, 2012, 11:33 »
"It's a big day at the iStock office! This beautiful piece of hardware is up for grabs: http://twitpic.com/b5jnkw"
I hope no one considers Photoshopping that.
dafuq.
645
« on: October 19, 2012, 11:26 »
Everyone, please calm down. We have lived through very peculiar times with iStock for the last 10 years involving many stunts like failed site rollouts, search engine fiaskos, severe communications issues and so on. Remember the "funny" downtime messages written in poor language? Can we really expect professional, serious behavior from IS staff? No. I would be not surprised at all to see a video pop up on youtube showing iStock staff running a bobby car race on causal Friday. Bear in mind that IS "only" does this to improve moral and spirit within IS headquarters. Heck, we all need to goof around from time to time but please iStock: DO NOT POST THAT SH!T ON TWITTER! Also, besides the fact that this is happening right now, these are our $$$ taken from our sales "at work". At least do this after work, god d@mn it.
646
« on: October 18, 2012, 22:34 »
I'm not a vector artist but I really like your stuff! As far as I can say your characters (snowman, people, animals) like well proportioned which is something a lot of illustrators are struggling with.
I can see your stuff selling really well at Zazzle and Cafepress plus you can set your own commission which makes it even more attractive.
Maybe microstock is not the best place for such illustrations.
Some Zazzlers can easily rake in a couple grand a month with wedding invitations, baby shower announcements etc. using just that style. Do a search on Zazzle to see the competition. It's hard to get started - BUT - there are no reviewers!!! You need to get a critical amount of designs in your store and ideally direct traffic to your store (Twitter, FB, personal referrals etc.). But even their own marketplace search engine can earn you several hundreds a month.
I didn't check a lot of your images in regards of keywords but they looked ok from what I saw.
I'd say keep doing what you're doing. Apply to more sites - it's tough but it'll pay off in the long run and think about offering print on demand products like Zazzle.
Best of luck!
647
« on: October 18, 2012, 21:12 »
I think you've reached payout...
Nice. 
648
« on: October 18, 2012, 10:22 »
And don't ever change that, costs nothing and ... What? Customer service is free? Hey Yuri send me some free customer service reps over to me and I retrain them to do something I have a use for... That's a nice paycheck for "a day at work". Congrats. I think you shushed away Sean - now he's never gonna post... or is he...?
649
« on: October 17, 2012, 18:15 »
Thanks for the help. All the arbitrary pricing stuff you just mentioned applies to Graphic river, though, not photodune?
The commission is the same across all Envato sites, at least for non-exclusives (33%). On Photodune the pricing is based on the resolution not on the complexity of the illustration. I honestly don't know if they support clipping paths for all image sizes which would make things at least a little better for us contributors. I haven't had one illustration approved on Graphicriver with a price "higher" than Photodune's largest file for $9. In fact my highest priced image on Graphicriver is a PSD file with 30 isolated 3D objects for $7 Each of the 30 objects are on sale individually at Istock for up to $30 pay as you go, at least with clipping path. The collection would cost a buyer $900 which I understand is not economical when the entire set is required. $50 for the set would be fair in my opinion but $7? I'm just running a test there to see how the few files I have there perform but I'm not confident that I will continue to upload to Graphicriver.
650
« on: October 17, 2012, 17:17 »
I have no hard numbers but my gut says that the footage sales behave similar to the image sales.
Personally images didn't go down much for me (if any at all) but footage certainly didn't improve over the course of this year.
Pages: 1 ... 21 22 23 24 25 [26] 27 28 29 30 31 ... 119
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
