|
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 - Red Dove
Pages: 1 ... 22 23 24 25 26 [27] 28 29 30 31
651
« on: January 10, 2011, 03:16 »
Yes. Dollar value increasing but not shown in image earnings or account statistics. There was an announcement: "Scheduled maintenance will be performed on Sunday, January 9th, 2:00 AM CDT. Part of the services may be unavailable for a short time interval. Thank you for your patience. - posted by Tano"......might have something to do with it?
652
« on: December 29, 2010, 17:32 »
I can't read this stuff anymore...it's too depressing. I've stopped uploading since nobody can see my stuff...or buy it even if they can. The sales I had on Christmas Day are very likely fraudulent and will be backed out. It's a ship of fools captained by Donald Duck. Unbelievable. And one of my New Year's resolutions was to cut down on the scotch. Fat chance.
653
« on: December 14, 2010, 09:00 »
No good for me. Dropped from around 5% to 1% of my earnings this last six months. I still upload 30-50 images once a month, but probably won't bother in 2011
654
« on: December 09, 2010, 16:58 »
Much as DT annoys me with their similars rejections, they have moved ahead of FT for me in the past quarter even though I have 33% more files at FT
655
« on: November 15, 2010, 10:25 »
No sales in Greenland yet.
Slow and not much practical use - but still fun to see your stuff pop up...I wonder who bought one of my xmas shots in Saudi Arabia?
656
« on: November 13, 2010, 16:08 »
skullduggery and shenanigans Pardon my ignorance, but what does that mean?
Skullduggery is sort of dishonest, cheating sort of behavior, and shenigans are mischief and generally behaving badly.
Here are the dictionary definitions:
Skullduggery: underhanded or unscrupulous behavior; also : a devious device or trick
Shenanigans: 1) a devious trick used especially for an underhand purpose
2) a : tricky or questionable practices or conduct usually used in plural
b : high-spirited or mischievous activity usually used in plural
Thanks for the translation 
657
« on: November 10, 2010, 17:52 »
Sandwiches...
Accessory wise it has to be a notebook and pen if I'm outdoors....I seem to come up with my best ideas for future work when I'm roaming the woods.
658
« on: November 10, 2010, 17:28 »
It'S a GOOD thing. *, with all the skullduggery and shenanigans going on elsewhere the best thing to do is upload like mad. Personally, I'd like to see them rocket through 10m and well beyond before month end. It might encourage a few incentives elsewhere - a longshot but who knows. Just grab it.
659
« on: September 29, 2010, 14:50 »
British Journal Of Photography - not a forum but I like it for the pro approach to gear and industry news. http://www.bjp-online.com/
660
« on: September 27, 2010, 04:43 »
try the poll results link on the right - just worked for me
661
« on: September 27, 2010, 04:39 »
yep logged out and have to go through craptcha - then get internal server error message
662
« on: September 22, 2010, 13:24 »
Well SS have been rejecting a lot of abstract vectors recently - a lot of noise in their forum and elsewhere about that. Then you have DT with their increasingly unfathomable "Too many photos/illustrations on the same subject "
Personally my acceptance rate is stable - but uploading has suffered for family reasons not for any particular trend or lack of enthusiasm....or events at IS
IS,SS FT and DT seem to be about a day over usual inspection times in September though.
663
« on: September 18, 2010, 06:39 »
I am sorry I am jumping in the middle of the thread, but I just feel I have to say a few words here. First of all, I did not read all of the replies, but according to the reply from FD and his link to Fstop, I don't feel the same way as you guys, I don't see what most of you see. Come on, guys! I have to say I'm sorry to FD and everyone else, I have nothing personal against you but Fstop's site, at least the one that FD links to, I see a much better photographer than many of us. I wish I had a portfolio like his. Okay, there are some images that he probably should delete, but all in all, it is just superb. I don't know if I am looking at the same portfolio as you, but the link from FD leads me to the one I'm talking about.
I am sorry FD, but I have to say this and don't take it personally, I like your post and I will be reading them with interest.
Kone
[/quote]
Have to agree to some extent....it's easy to pick out the crap but there is high quailty work on the site, superior to a lot of "exclusive" work on IS - inflammatory but true I'm afraid
664
« on: September 16, 2010, 14:29 »
This is so depressing. I've got to stop reading the forums or I'll finish up down by the railway tracks drinking Special Brew and sitting next to someone who smells like a drain.
665
« on: September 16, 2010, 10:41 »
Someone switched off the life support.
666
« on: September 16, 2010, 09:44 »
What a tremendous cock-up. Competitors must be doing cartwheels down the office hallway and giving each other
high-fives on their way to the coffee machine.
I feel for the contributors who built iStock up from the ground. And those who put the hard work and creativity into building the Vetta collection.
In most organisations, the announcements/events of these past days would result in disciplinary action at best or blood on the carpet at worst.
667
« on: September 10, 2010, 08:56 »
Another site reduced to sweeping the crumbs from the table.......If I had ever sold anything there I'd be bothered.
668
« on: September 10, 2010, 08:39 »
What's this "Agency" stuff? Is it top drawer work or crap that Getty can't sell elsewhere. Also, is the royalty locked in at 20% or above for these new contributors, forcing IS to claw it back from their current slaves? Whenever I see something like this I wonder at the back story...having listened to years of corporate speak I know the top suits only ever give you a scratch and sniff, never the real thing.
669
« on: September 10, 2010, 08:25 »
Finally all will be 0.30 or so subs, that's were clients aredirected.
Inclined to agree. The buyers are driving the value not the agencies or (unfortunately) the contributors. 'Twas and ever will be in most retail businesses.
670
« on: August 27, 2010, 14:03 »
Same rejection for me at IS on one image. I now use my Giotto rocket air blower to clear the area....saves time in post.....and I never used the thing for anything else anyway.
671
« on: August 27, 2010, 13:58 »
Nice one. We have a saying in the UK "where there's muck there's brass"
brass being an old word for coinage,change,loot,folding money,spending,filthy lucre,cash,spondoolies,readies,beer vouchers etc etc
672
« on: August 17, 2010, 14:19 »
If you got the mail today my "joke" image is the hand with the number 13 lottery ticket - which I confess, was never submitted to any micro agencies because I didn't think it would make it ie technically okay but low commercial value.
I've been a slacker with Getty and only have a handful on there but this encourages me to give it more of a go....although this image hasn't sold yet.....
I know some have said they are doing nicely out of this collaboration with Flickr - would be interesting to hear any updates on recent experiences.
I wouldn't consider that image as a joke. There is a clear concept evident so no harsh judgment there.
I originally started this thread with images that I had a problem finding the conceptual approach.
I don't consider it a joke either - but some might I see what you're saying about some of the work on there (and agree with you) but you could apply that to any agency I guess.
673
« on: August 17, 2010, 13:47 »
If you got the mail today my "joke" image is the hand with the number 13 lottery ticket - which I confess, was never submitted to any micro agencies because I didn't think it would make it ie technically okay but low commercial value.
I've been a slacker with Getty and only have a handful on there but this encourages me to give it more of a go....although this image hasn't sold yet.....
I know some have said they are doing nicely out of this collaboration with Flickr - would be interesting to hear any updates on recent experiences.
674
« on: July 31, 2010, 13:54 »
I wouldn't consider exclusivity anywhere but IS....DT just doesn't cut it for sales. It's a really strange community, even more of a love-in than IS used to be. Most of the posts read like they're written by pubescent teenagers raving about the latest Twilight movie....banging on about going exclusive with a port of 50 and 7 sales, or writing simplistic blogs about creativity and inspiration....or...or.....enough. I have a specific problem with DT at the moment - I'll get over it but at the moment GGGGRRRRRR
675
« on: July 31, 2010, 13:44 »
"Not what we're looking for" rejections are definitely on the increase. Never had one of those in six months but got half a dozen this week. Gonna have to rejig my submissions but it's EXTREMELY IRRITATING when the other big 4 are accepting them....
Pages: 1 ... 22 23 24 25 26 [27] 28 29 30 31
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
