|
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 - etudiante_rapide
Pages: 1 ... 23 24 25 26 27 [28] 29 30 31 32 33 ... 79
676
« on: February 27, 2016, 11:11 »
personally, i liked Alamy... (past tense).
i had pretty close to 100% approval no matter what from their inception. i only deleted my account
after i joined shutterstock because after so many years with 100% approval ,
i had zero dl, and when i examined my views, i had almost single digit views.
as i mentioned before, i checked my name in the photographers list and i was literally invisible.
so i deleted my account because it was absurd to have so many images plus 100% approval
and no dl and worse very little view.
even my worst accounts crestock... had dls and views and i only had what??? 4 images there a long time ago.
needless to say, as soon as i got 100 dls with shutterstock in my first month with only a handful of images, i deleted alamy and all the rest of the deadbeats.
if things have changed with Alamy since then, i would like to know , as i said, i did like them
as their upload and methods are fine with me. but looking at the right column,
17% after so many years. i don't think i would bother... since i don't even bother with
fotolia and istock being 2nd and 3rd.
iow, i won't lift a finger anymore , no more how wunder the new wunderkin is
until i see some ratings close enough to ss,
or even 50% is a margin i would move my butt
677
« on: February 26, 2016, 18:44 »
"i think you are both correct in this suspicion of what others will call unlevel field favourism.
because last summer at a motorsport event i remember talking with some of the credential photogs
there who also told me they are like special stringers for photo agency.
they got invited to sign some special arrangement and they submit all without review, all go straight into their portfolio instantly. "
Interesting as I believe in the last Teleconference it was stated that every image was inspected by SS .....misleading shareholders is taken quite seriously.......
" Overall, we now have over 100,000 contributors submitting content, almost 1 million pieces of content per week. And despite the significant quantity of submissions we receive daily, standards we have implemented."
i should clarify to repeat the quoted statement you used ... in that ... none of the credential photogs at the motorsport event mentioned , did not specifically say which agency they string for. so pls do not think it is ss. .. maybe someone who is a maths-major can give a basic calculation of whether it is possible for one reviewer to say eye-ball each photo of say the marijuana or the illustration of the icons of those super-humans who uploaded xxxxxxxx images in one year. is this really humanly possible to review every piece stringently. or to extrapolate per xxxxxxxxxxx images per day , how many reviewers does ss need to really do what they say ... standards we have implemented." [/quote]
678
« on: February 26, 2016, 12:59 »
Been two months since my last one. I used to get 3-5 a month. Now basically zero, with one SURPRISE every so often. They are done for me.
3-5 a month??? wow! annually accustomed to get one to four 28 every 4 months or single 85 dollars every two months. this past year to date , the only thing i get is 2.50 to 5.00 singles. this is depressing. did ss replace those 28 dollars/85 dollars with lower cost??? is that why we now see 2.50 and 5.00 +- instead of 28/85 dollars???
679
« on: February 26, 2016, 11:56 »
1 million files a week and less overall growth than library growth (30% versus 53% increase) is not a good sign for me and my little stock shop.
if i understand what you mean by negative growth to mean you see have xxx,000 imgs port and xxx dls. when you look at it, you cannot really be too hip hip hooray for yourself, instead of say you have the same xxx dls with say 800 images portfolio. if that is what you mean, than yes, i agree. i cannot see myself be so happy i can upload 3000 photos a day without review, and they may all be also without photoshop, since no one is curating my work. by year end i will have more images than yuri, sjlocke, lisafx,dolgachov,etc.. put together. but that still does not mean i will also be earning as much as even one of those mentioned. to me, it's alot of work that go to waste. it's like those govt office workers who do mindless work just for a living. it's not satisfying. but that's me ... 
680
« on: February 26, 2016, 11:47 »
They do target fulltimers or at least the top earners, big producers and factories. They get special treatment under the name of Premier Select, invite only.
I agree, if you are a stock factory they will probably negotiate something special for you. Nothing wrong with that.
i think you are both correct in this suspicion of what others will call unlevel field favourism. because last summer at a motorsport event i remember talking with some of the credential photogs there who also told me they are like special stringers for photo agency. they got invited to sign some special arrangement and they submit all without review, all go straight into their portfolio instantly. at that time i told it was alot of hot-air... because i ask them ,"how can that be??? you mean you can now upload garbage or even some editorials that has IP issues or say submit something that is taboo in some countries eg not allowed to shoot at a president's compound, certain museam,etc.." and they told me, "it is up to you. because you also agree that if you submit say a paris by night and the agency gets sued... you the photographer will be given the lawsuit" ie. in the special treatment, you assume all legal responsibility to not , how you say that word... indemnify(  ) the stock agency. so in some way, it is wonderful, no more reviews, no delay, you upload 10,000 and all go live instantly. but if some one complains that one of your photos broke the rule of a country, or john deere or a ruler of some despotic country is angry... you are the one responsible to solve the issue, not the agency. i am sure , it is the same with some selected invited videographers/photographers with ss too. ..like obj owl says... Premier Select. in fact, maybe those ppl i spoke too, were with ss PS... they did not tell me. it was all hush hush special "us" and you outsider common not special
681
« on: February 25, 2016, 21:05 »
is ss like the old railroad of some cities where the mayor just refuses to spend money to get a new train or fire all the old engineers to get a new super train that really works and does not break down every two days???
if the upload is f*ckingup, would it also be telling us that maybe just maybe the zero days of dls
is due to the clients not being able to see what they want to find or just can't buy any dls because
the system is just f*ckingup once again???
we only know when the upload is f*ckingup...
i like to ask if there are any buyers here experiencing problems finding photos on certain days too
682
« on: February 25, 2016, 15:35 »
personally, ss is still earning most of all for me.
only difference is that if i extrapolate the dls to past years, my total earning actually dropped
but my dls actually increased.
also, the single earning (28 to 102 bucks) have disappeared.
are you experiencing the same disappearance? if so, what is the reason???
683
« on: February 25, 2016, 12:32 »
I've always found that being discreet is about 90% of the battle as far as keeping your gear and yourself safe.
100% well said every word. that is why the new mirrorless or leica in their heydays of cartier-bresson captured the best people pictures of all time. i used to be in a booth with "professionals" all carrying the biggest longest (phallic symbol LOL)... and me with the tiny minox or leice or nikonos. the pros look at me like , "who's these amateur???" needless to say, when i turn away from the venue and started shooting the crowd, no one stared at me or told me to stop. otoh, when i was at a country-fair , sort of a woodstock type thing where all is love and free. i happen to walk there after a "pro shoot" with my biggest and longest . i don't know how many dirty looks i got from both men and women just walking . i didn't have to point the camera at them, ... just the perception, "don't you dare point that at me or my gal". even from a distance, when i point it in the direction ... i can still see from the pictures i got.. lots of nasty faces... ie. they knew someone was taking shots at them, and they did not like it.
684
« on: February 24, 2016, 17:16 »
Isn't microstock really meant to be about cheap and cheerful images as reflected in the price? The model of selling thousands of images to recoup huge outlay was never going to be sustainable.
selling it cheap is not the problem. the golden M and KFC sold quick non-cordon bleu food cheaply and is still thriving with lots of copycats. the issue is not that microstock cannot sustain at low prices. the issue is when you give away lifetime-usage at low price. imagine a eat all you want for a lifetime $15 restuarant... and you have ss is etc. even at a so-called all you can eat at $15 still restricts you from coming in to eat and taking away more food in a paper-bag. there is someone watching you to make sure you do not replace yourself with your friend,etc... to make sure all you can eat means all your stomach can eat without taking anything home with you.
you can go to the WC to puke it all out, and eat some more. but you cannot bring anything home .
microstock lets you bring all the food home too... after you ate and puke and ate and puke.. that is what makes microstock unsustainable
685
« on: February 24, 2016, 14:30 »
I wonder if Bruce is looking for another 50mill+ buyer?
Someone makes this speculation every few months. Let's put it to rest, shall we? Stocksy is a co-op. This is not a thing that will or even could happen.
Time to wake up. I like many other people wonder if Bruce had stayed at the helm of istock, would we have been better off. Stock has been my full-time job for 10 years so it kind of matters when, after everyone else has taken a percentage on the way through, it puts food on the table.
Wake up how? Stocksy is a co-op. That means one person literally can't just decide to sell the company. Also, Bruce hasn't been the CEO of Stocksy since 2014.
i think the word bruce l........ sort of spooked a lot of ex istock faithful and repelled them from stocksy no matter how coop it is. it's difficult to come on stage as a hen after being known as the fox to say you are now going to help the chicken grow
686
« on: February 23, 2016, 13:47 »
Love Stocksy, but find it odd that they haven't updated the categories on their home page since around Christmas by the looks of it. Would have thought categories would now be more focussed on Easter, spring, etc. Minor point, but just looks a bit strange for an agency that prides itself on being on trend / ahead of the curve to fall behind in updating home page
LOL, perharps growing pains. normal for newly startups, to go like a bullet maiden voyage then slow down once the novelty sets it. much like a new car or a new toy or like you say a new trend. only hope it is not another canva. but after veer,....(enter your once fave bet )... many are not kin no more with the nkotb
687
« on: February 23, 2016, 11:43 »
I worked as a photojournalist for many years and although I was threatened too many times to count, the only people that actually assaulted me were the owner of the Toronto Maple Leafs, one of the Maple Leafs players and the corrupt Mayor of a small city. (None were actually much of an assault), etc.
well said. and with the experience comes knowing when and where to not stand out conspicuos or obnoxiously. a lone foreigner or visible with a bag of expensive equipment is not only bait to muggers, but also a threat to ppl like you said... owner of venues or politicians with territorial mentality. as no doubt i am sure it was how you got into trouble at maple leafs. i once got into trouble just being where some politician was walking with a sweet looking young lady . i was not even shooting photos of them. .. but pointed in that direction. before you know it, i had plain-clothes police and body-guards asking for my passport.
688
« on: February 23, 2016, 10:31 »
Yikes! Where do you live? Chicago? Seriously though, that sounds like some terribly broken police.
not , no chicago or even boston nor manhattan. i lived all over the place due to my job entails. but what i mean to say is not where you live that is known to be dangerous that matters, but that it is where you drop your guard and think it is the safest city in the world that gets you into trouble. yes, i have worked and lived in the most dangerous cities in the world ... according to Forbes... but i never got robbed in those cities. i got robbed ... and beaten up ... in the most known to be safest cities . it's all politically correct but the cops are not all they show in magazines... esp if you're ethnic different as i said, manhattan, sao paulo, chicago, boston,etc... are full of ethnics, people are used to seeing different culturals and caucasians alike ...they mix very easily with you as you do not appear like a martian. it is where you stand out that is more prone to trouble and where the duke of hazard type police do not always side with the good guys 
689
« on: February 22, 2016, 19:46 »
No. That would be "unsustainable". Exciting would be if they harvested our organs for the black market. I have an agency-speak dictionary you can borrow if you like.
LOL, i too have a copy of the agency-speak dictionary !!! the decipher is " wait for the exciting news ppl!!! we paid you peanuts, and treated you like excited monkeys. you already see less money coming from less $28 to 102 single earnings disappear. now we are planning to prioritize in respective order.. - shareholders -- clients --- employees what??? no contributors??? oh ya, forgot to say it... (um, read my lips as a whisper)... we will fry your peanuts !!!
690
« on: February 22, 2016, 19:31 »
i travelled all over the world, only carrying as little as i can, with as little money i can in a neck strap envelope containing very little money. i dress very simply, probably less than a mugger.
wherever i go, i hear doors slamming as i approach in the early mornings past midnight.
nothing ever happened to me.
one day last year, back home, i was out taking shots for a client. in what i consider my home turf.
very safe. i ended up being confronted by a guy and i was civil to him. i turned around to walk away and he turned me around and smashed me in the head against the concrete before someone
up in a building called the cops.
the cops came and instead of arresting the guy, laughed because he was a friend of the crooked cops. i ended up with 7 stitches and concussion and bruises all over that kept me in hospital for a week. the ambulance people told me they had known of this guy and never was he ever arrested.
really, there isn't anything to keep you safe. unless you carry a gun. if they want to hurt you,
they will. it has nothing to do with robbing you.
and yes, i know capoeira and it still didn't help. if i had won , it would only be in time before that brute come finding me again.
needless to say, i moved out of that city. also, i no longer consider any place safe.
in another incident, a friend of mine was attacked by a bunch of guys. he grabbed the knife off one of his attacker. because he was black, he was threatened by the cops for carrying a knife; never mind being the single person being attacked by a group welding knives.
in other words, don't play hero. usually, the innocent guy ends up being charged with A&B, especially if you're the pigeon.
691
« on: February 22, 2016, 15:36 »
Is there any company we could trust to keep such a promise?
The 'crowd favourite' keeps changing; but contributor loyalty has tended to mean next to nothing, historically.
Still, 50% could be a Good Thing; depending on "50% of what?".
For 50% I would start uploading again and make all my new work exclusive to Fotolia.
red ... so true. many agencies to the right offer much more... (except)... like you say... xxx% of nothing = 0
692
« on: February 22, 2016, 13:34 »
There is Not one agent,Manager,or company that takes more than 50% of any artist commissions in any segment of the arts.
as i said before, microstock is similar to music . only Michael Jackson, Beatles, Springstein,.. were paid 50 cts per album they sold. that is the percentage of a top earner for the record company. the rest made nothing at all. that is why Prince left after literally bankrupting his recording company, so they could cancel his contract before he spend anymore. that, if i read correctly , was how Prince got out of a contract that binds him until 20** . and local musicians i know, get paid a case of 6 pack for playing at the night clubs and festivals. it's the name of the game. a long long long time ago ..in the early 90s, musicians were paid 0.0004 cts per dl for their indie music, on the top music site .... which wanted indie musicians to thrive. they later told these same musicians who made them ... that now that tori amos,etc have joined them, everyone who is not with a recording label has to pay to stay.
693
« on: February 21, 2016, 14:51 »
Thats pretty awesome. How big is your port on an average?
Depends which agency around 1700 or less some of the smaller agencies I didn't bother adding any more as sales stayed around $0 to $10 a month no matter how much I added.
One agency hasn't recorded a single sale in 5 years (600 images).
The agency with the most is currently at 2,300 images (and that is not SS)
thx for replying. your portfolio is small in comparision to all those i know with 17,000 , 70,000 imgs.etc but extrapolation of your small portfolio is pretty remarkable. ss is flat, i am surprised here, since many consider ss our top earner. alamy good for you is also another surpriising discovery to me, since personally alamy was a non-starter for me even though i had 100% approval for a whole year during their inception to about a few years back, so i gave up on them. good to know, it's not all the same for all of us... or perharps alamy has improved since i left them for ss
694
« on: February 20, 2016, 18:35 »
Mean average over 2015 about $419.56 per month ~ Hi $544 lo $356
Mean average over 2014 about $268.70 per month
Mean average over 2013 about $63.25 per month
2012 $83.19 total
There you go 
Don't know why stock types are so shy about figures 
you went from 400% and then double again. good job!!! but can you tell me if it was due to an increase in portfolio or same did the pecentage increase with the increase in port or decrease... just curious. no need for specific numbers, just like to know. what i ask is that many of my colleagues report drop of income, .. even the great yuri. so i am just curious if it's universal that stock income is dropping... or just going to other ppl or spreading across the board
695
« on: February 20, 2016, 18:11 »
I am wondering, if I'm shooting with a camera that has 28 mp, and in 3 years new cameras are probably going to have 40mp, are my photos today will be obsolete in 3 years?
How are you handling the technological advances in terms of old photos?
i can honestly tell you that i started with an 8MP dslr and now have a +-20MP camera. but i never submit anything more than 8 MP to stock photo agencies. why should i give them full res for 38 cts??? yes, i do give full res to my local clients who pay me 150 -300 dollars per shoot, but i would be crazy to give these to micro stock or even getty. as someone once said, "show me the money??? you get what you pay for!" no, your camera will not be obsolete. in fact, i know of at least one person who still submit to stock with her PNS. and still make more money than i do. who knows what you used to shoot no one. .. if you do not include the original .
696
« on: February 20, 2016, 17:47 »
wow, interesting, i always associate getty with big money in stock photos, and ss little pen(n)i(e)s in stock photography.
is this the shapes of things to come? like when prince quit sony???
can we succeed without the big agencies like getty, ss, is???
is prince, U2, sinead oconnor, loreena mckeenon, etc.. making more money independently
than with the big giants taking 95 cts to the dollar???
i think music and stock photography have alot in common. only thing is, music has youtube,etc..
and stock photographers have NFA
697
« on: February 19, 2016, 10:21 »
lol, are you trying to convince yourself or other photographers??? you can do anything you like... even sell john deere, mercedez benz, paris by night, etc... just don't submit them to shutterstock etc,,, and retain a good copyright intellectual property lawyer
698
« on: February 18, 2016, 16:43 »
i suppose it is possible if say your sports editorial is of an event by a certain sponsor,
and that company who wants to use it as a commercial is the one who is the sponsor itself.
in that case, it wouldn't be that difficult for the company to approach those sports celebrities themselves to get the release.
that would be wonderful , wouldn't it???
699
« on: February 18, 2016, 15:50 »
If you are anonymous, and dont include any personal info or links, nor one of your own photos as an avatar, as mentioned above, it would be nearly impossible for the agencies to know who you are. Also avoid posting specific, identifying details about your income or accounts.
Sounds a bit cloak and dagger, but worth it to be able to honestly discuss issues.
Also, I trust Tyler, the forum owner, who posts under the name Leaf, completely. I told him my real name back in 2009 when I signed up and he has never given away my anonymity. Not that anyone would 6ld care much anyway.
Maybe now Leaf can tell us have agency ever asked for our names? Yes or no would be enough. :-)
technically speaking, leaf is not obligated in any way of form to tell anyone, agencies or not, the real identity of anyone registered here. that applies to anywhere, really. the only time a site owner is obligated is in situation of the law eg. you are a crook or wanted for some terrible acts eg sabotage,etc.. in such situation, yes, ppl like the enforcement around the world , can and in many cases get the site owner to reveal the true identity of a person(s). thus the importance of not leaving too much papertrail in anything . the safety being that a papertrail on the internet can also be hacked by an expert if you have too much personal informations on social media,etc. you could in fact end up a victim of some scam artists. banks , politicians, musicians,etc do get hacked too, a good example is how U2 had their music stolen..... only they don't tell us. another example is those cases where some employee was fired for saying some bad things about their employer, or passing on confidential info on the social media. yes, the company can request the infos too. and other side of things, the site giving away your info can also face charges for giving away those infos. depends on how good your lawyer is
700
« on: February 17, 2016, 08:40 »
Yes I made a mistake. Alerted me to it happening again (uploading similars photos)
I am happy today unblocked my account Thank You Fotolia Team
That is really great. It is good they are taking more time and care than before. Now FL how about reviewing previous bans with a view to reinstating some of the users banned for voicing opposition to DPC on a case by case basis?
Some of them were long standing community members legitimately and quite politely stating their concerns, it would really show an improvement in contributor relations if you did this.
not sure if it is indeed a PR, or is it a damage-control due to the exposure here ... as i said previously, bad press or gossip in the office place is not what any proper corporation... or stock agency ... wants
Pages: 1 ... 23 24 25 26 27 [28] 29 30 31 32 33 ... 79
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
