|
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 - a.k.a.-tom
Pages: 1 ... 24 25 26 27 28 [29] 30 31 32 33 34 ... 44
701
« on: August 12, 2007, 17:35 »
LOL.....  Yeah, what's going on.... took them almost 10 hours to hook me up this week... LOL StockXpert has always been fast for me... sometimes when I upload a batch, before I'm finished, the first ones are already being reviewed... go StockXpert!! Now THAT'S service!!  =tom
702
« on: August 11, 2007, 16:19 »
IMHO, I think we've had enough confrontation, reaching a point were nothing good comes from it.
Regards,
Adelaide
You are correct, madelaide!!! I have always respected your opinions and observations here. In my part, I did not realize that I offended, insulted, inflamed, defamed, whatever. All I did was answer the question of the original poster, George Flopos. Next thing I know, I'm being insulted by the Zymm-folks. Like the majority of the MSG family, I am on IS, I can compete there and I am making money there!! Just stating a fact. Like this thread started out, we have had threads like this before and it turned out it was someone other than a mere contributor, we had been down that road before. Some owner or manager or CKO trying to bobo us all. Just stating a fact. Then, ............I became ' cheap beer' according to the CKO. Well, I do have time and I do have money and I do like beer. And those that think they insulted me can rest assured, I will swill and cry in that beer......... all the way to the bank.... to make another deposit. Whatever. If I offended Mr. George Flopos or any of the officers of Zymmetrical.com.. I apologize. -a.k.a. tom p.s. Why do I use a ' photog handle' (aka tom)? For just this very reason, you never know what kind of people you are going to run into on the web.
703
« on: August 10, 2007, 23:32 »
Modified. removed.
704
« on: August 08, 2007, 22:40 »
Istockphoto is full of pros that have both the time and money to make great picture. I cannot compete with that. can you ?
Yea, daily. And more successfully every day. As do many, many members here on MSG. If you think the members here just bought their first camera yesterday, you're sadly mistaken. And as for paranoia, we've all been down this road before. -tom
705
« on: August 07, 2007, 15:55 »
Actually, as crummy as my sales are at LO, they are still outselling 123rf for me. Reveiws are taking a lot longer than they used to. My rejections are up as well, but........... I'm still hanging in there. I like LO, I might find in time that their buyers just aren't interested in my work and I never will realize good sales there... While I've bailed out of a couple other sites with low sales, I have no plan to do so with LO. I'm giving them more time and I continue to upload there. Go Bryan, Go!! remaining faithful, -tom LOL
706
« on: August 07, 2007, 15:48 »
For me, in pure numbers.. Highest volume of pix sold, SS. Fastest money-maker, IS. Most EL's, SS. As some have already said here, they all work differently for everyone. I don't think there's any cut & dry fromula on which is the best. Example, just reading on another thread. Topic, BigStock vs 123rf. Some love 123rf, for others it's a low earner, and vice-versa. For me, BigStock is my #4 earner and 123 is 8th out of 9. You'll find out what's good for you in time. ...wishing you success, welcome to the club!! -tom
707
« on: August 07, 2007, 15:35 »
So far this year I am making 22 times more $$ on BigStock than on 123rf. Out of 9 sites, 123rf is next to last in sales for me. I have sold more pix in one day on SS than I have all year on 123rf. Essentially the same pix on BigStock, SS, 123rf. I like BigStock and the couple times I've had a problem, the folks there fixed me up in less than 24 hours! And... my highest acceptance percentage is at BigStock, 96.2%. Pix that others reject, I sell at BigStock for a buck a pop. You can't beat that. I'm liking BigStock alot. Nice Folks!!! -tom
708
« on: August 02, 2007, 22:11 »
Whoa.... mine looks fine!! Don't mind saying I was sweating that one, I just hit a payout point this week. - tom
709
« on: August 02, 2007, 22:05 »
Hey, ..I'm interested! Need to see more details, gather more ideas, do a little brain-storming here before we jump at a domain, name and all the other goodies. Can we gain a return on our investment? What's the bottomline on this thing... will it be cost affective... what might be some of the specific bennies in this for the members.... what would be the organizational structure... who's going to do all the grunt work...... Lots of stuff to kick around... need everyone's input and need to take advantage of all the different business talent and experience that might be amongst us. And, naturally, the more members the better... what is the REAL interest here on the old MSG? If we're going to do it, let's do it right. However, if we only see a few names in support...... ..... can 3 dudes be an organization? LOL LOL -tom
710
« on: July 29, 2007, 12:19 »
Hmmm... mine's 82.66%. I'm disappointed with that. It was 86% until last week when an inspector decided to reject three files for 'artifacts'.
I love it here. You folks always boost my spirits... LOL. My last batch of 20 to IS had 7 rejected for "artifacts".... Must be the new catch-phrase of the week! I was kind of bummed out. Now I feel better knowing I'm in good company! LOL -tom
711
« on: July 29, 2007, 12:14 »
I'm not so sure that we need a 'union' as such. Instead, maybe we should be thinking of a professional association that represents our voice.
Wouldn't this tie in with what litifeta had suggested last week or so on another thread? Suggesting the formation of an organization to establish group/bulk buying power? =tom
712
« on: July 28, 2007, 17:21 »
I've found that SS isn't that good an indicator of what will universally sell well. Its business model is such that users are inclined to DL images they don't immediately need, and that can artificially inflate the demand for any given image. I'm sure there are plenty of people who have images that sell well on SS and linger in obscurity elsewhere (vice-versa, too). Flickr's "interestingness" rating works similarly.
I would concur with that too. When I first got into the biz, I felt exactly that "If it will fly on SS, it will fly anywhere". That has not proved to be true in my case. I also thought if I got it passed the SS reviewers (they were pretty tough on me in the beginning) I could get it uploaded anywhere. That REALLY turned out not to be true. That is not meant to be slap on SS. I have pix they shot down that IS took. SS is tough and demanding of technical quality. They know what they want. But, SS didn't turn out to be the is all, end all I thought it would be as a 'measuring rod'. Each site is different, as each site has a different client base. I think Sharply_Done has it right] as far as SS goes.... "users are inclined to DL images they don't immediately need"[/i.
713
« on: July 27, 2007, 17:12 »
Im floundering..... please someone give me an EL..... please!!!! Just one, that's all I ask..... July so far... (so far? it's the 27th)... so far... sux for me! LOL -tom
714
« on: July 27, 2007, 15:45 »
some of my shots get accepted/rejected very quickly, while others sit in the queue for days and days.
Same experience here. Majority knocked off in one batch and the rest seem to take upwards of a day or more later. ? 8)tom
715
« on: July 27, 2007, 15:40 »
[... you have to keep uploading new material constantly in order to maintain your download rate.
I think of it as feeding the monster. Ya gotta keep him happy or things will go south in a hurry. Leaf once commented that his sales dropped by about 2/3 when he stopped uploading to SS.
Big fat coincidence?  I think not, especially at SS. Whenever I take a break from uploading, my sales tank down to zero $ days... -tom
716
« on: July 27, 2007, 15:36 »
I will out myself and give you guys a little more additional comfort, only 48% acceptance rate! I guess I use Photoshop to much..
That's what I get nailed for the most "over filtered" "over processed" ..... all this time I think I'm making it look better... LOL -tom
717
« on: July 27, 2007, 06:29 »
61.54%......... that sux! .... however, let us all remember that many of those rejections DO finally get accepted after modification. I assume that percentage is the initial rejections. Many of my rejects only required a minor adjustment ( removal of a nike logo off a model's sock and nonsense like that). So overall, we're still not so bad? or are we.... LOL -tom
718
« on: July 21, 2007, 10:07 »
Thank you, Traveler. It's nice to have a Fulltime Macro Pro here with supportive comments and encouraging words!! (rather than the usual head bashing, LOL) It was appreciated very much!!
719
« on: July 21, 2007, 09:21 »
i don't keep track of which photos are rejected/accepted where. I just keep track to submit the photos everywhere and hope for the best.
As for tracking sales. I don't do it by individual photo, just by the day and by the site. I keep track of this on excel.
Wow... doing a search on databases ... only this thread turned up and really........ no great response. I know you all must track your submissions and sales on something besides a legal pad, LOL... Like leaf, I just wrote a spreadsheet in excel and started plugging away at it. But now, after a year in the business, spreading hundreds of pix over up to 10 sites.... I track each pic on each site ( I also keep track of rejections and reason. why? some that had been rejected for "not stock material", "too many on site", "not interested"... I have later resubmited, had accepted and sold) ...but now, it is getting a bit large and bulky to manage. I find I'm spending too much time toggling back and forth, paging up and down to document my daily sales. There's gotta be a better way. I just read about Adobe's "Lightroom". Anyone out there know anything about it besides what I can read in the ad??? Also, I try again putting out the original question. What are you folks using to manage your photo database and sales? I'd appreciate any insight or pointers. -tom
720
« on: July 21, 2007, 09:05 »
litifeta.... very interesting..... and I concur with leaf, might need to have some formal foundation.... sad to see only 3 responses to this though... don't understand why either, next to 'free', 'discounted' is my favorite price. -tom
721
« on: July 19, 2007, 17:46 »
my BigStock sales have jumped recently too.... I sold two yesterday that never sold and were uploaded last october and november ?? -tom
722
« on: July 12, 2007, 20:00 »
Okay, now I get it!! thanks!! I will be forming my CN starting tonight... kind of a long process, hunh??? Every one here will be on mine in a matter of a couple nights!! My IS is ThomasTakacs. thanks, -tom
723
« on: July 12, 2007, 16:30 »
ah................ what am I missing out on??? everyone seems pretty excited...... ? -tom
724
« on: July 10, 2007, 18:59 »
Yes Tom I agree wholeheartedly.
However sometimes all the planning in the world doesn't allow for things not seen at the scene or not noticed at the time.
On Saturday I had a three hour studio session with a lovely girl, and I've got 37 'possibles' out of about 120 shots. That's great.
Now if only I had noticed that logo on her jeans..........
Amen, brother!! LOL LOL I just got hit for a Nike logo on the side of a sneaker that you have to blow up to 300% before you can tell what the heck it is... LOL... but, rules are rules... Ain't no biggie, I can fix it in about 20 seconds and resubmit... The interesting thing is... I'm selling (or have loaded) that pix on 8 other sites... LOL T o Others: I just want to comment on this thread. This is a perfect example of what a great bunch of people we have here on MSG!!! The help and advice is given so freely in effort to help and encourage those of us new to the business. I appreciate these gestures very much, again, this thread a perfect example! Once again I sincerely send my thanks to Leaf for his efforts and to all you more learned photogs here!! -tom
725
« on: July 10, 2007, 18:49 »
I mean if I have to blow up the image to 400% to see it... is it really going to affect the quality of the image if it is used in a magazine, book or on a website?
I sure see your point, Cricket. I've been down that very road. I have a number of my pictures published in magazines..... pix that were shot down by one or another micro and accepted by others. These were handled directly by the editors and art directors working for the publishing company. More to the point, these were pix that were shot down for.. noise and artifacting. Some of these pictures were used in the mags, full page as article covers. So I too often wonder about 'what is too much noise'. I can see if someone wants to blow the thing up the size of a roadside billboard... but they look just fine in the magazine and/or book. I just had over half of my latest batch shot down by IS for 'artifacting'. These were pix shot over a period of 2 years, interestingly, some in series of shots, where others of the series have already been accepted on IS. I understand they are the boss, it's their site, their business, their rules... no problem... and, honestly, I'm not complaining here....
I hope to continue to upload to IS, I think I will do well there. (I usually don't do that bad .... in fact I usually do well uploading to IS... just shocked me to see that kind of rejection this time). Ain't no biggie, just confusing, don't get the rationale sometimes... I just smile, sit back and take another sip of beer. LOL Guess I need to invest in Noise Nija or something... I've been in the business for a year now and have never used a 'denoise' program. Suppose I'll have to learn. -tom
Pages: 1 ... 24 25 26 27 28 [29] 30 31 32 33 34 ... 44
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
