|
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 - Karimala
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 ... 61
76
« on: July 28, 2012, 18:20 »
Have to disagree. I do extremely well on FAA with a good payout every month!
It has become one of my top earners. It's not so much the artistic that sell well but the stock images which surprises me. You do need to have at least 200 or more good quality images and to me the key is to upload regularly.
I highly recommend selling there.
http://sandra-cunningham.artistwebsites.com/galleries.html
Lots of businesses need generic wall art and stock is perfectly suited!
77
« on: July 26, 2012, 16:36 »
FINALLY!!! Shutterstock finally added the 0 download images to Image Gallery Stats (BETA). Yippee!!! And I LOVE how it shows keywords trends and %. That's extremely helpful!
I have my earnings page bookmarked and avoid the landing page, so only having monthly earnings up top is fine with me.
78
« on: July 26, 2012, 16:18 »
Depends on the site for me. SS and BigStock are breaking summer high records, while all the others are breaking summer low records. It's crazy. I'm not going to reach payout on DT for the first time in 5 years, and at Fotolia for the second time in 2 months after years of weekly payouts.
79
« on: July 26, 2012, 11:22 »
Years ago, I remember Shutterstock addressing this very issue in their forums. Their answer: No, you may not delete and resubmit images just because they aren't selling or to give them better placement. They only allow resubmission of approved images if you found something wrong with the image after approval, and you must submit a note detailing the issue. If they catch you resubmitting non-selling images, they will issue a warning against your account.
The trick to getting sales on similar images is to submit them at different times far apart. I'm in the habit of dividing up photos from a large batch into smaller batches that stretch over the course of a year.
80
« on: July 23, 2012, 07:53 »
I am not sure if BS will add anything to your sales. Most people I know dont have a lot of sales, little to none. I know a few lads with ports the size of about 2000 and above images and not hitting pay out every month. Nothing to do with the quality of the port imo as these guys have been around for ages and their ports do well elsewhere.
I am not saying dont add to BS, but the return might not be worth your time. Their editing and submitting system is a bit cumbersome compared to SS, 123RF and CanStockPhoto but a lot quicker then FT.
SS has the Bridge to BigStock program, where you upload all your images to SS and once approved they go to both SS and BigStock. It eliminates the step of uploading to both sites.
Only the few elites have that, I dont have it, and I cant get it either. Its on invite, and probably only if they think your port is worth it.
Good to know. I didn't realize the program was limited to "invitation only." I just assumed everyone could get in like I did. My portfolio isn't anything to get excited about and I certainly don't consider myself an "elite" worthy of special privileges. I guess I got in mostly because I have nearly 3000 images and have been on SS since 2005.
81
« on: July 21, 2012, 05:18 »
I warned them of this infraction of Federal Law a few years ago. They are liable for any intentional or unintentional leak of financial or personal information that is hacked if thy new of the problem and did nothing about it.
In accordance with IRC. Section 6103 (i)(i) anyone requiring your SS# or any other financial information is liable for securing it. Plus the penalty for failing to comply is serious.
Perhaps this should be reported to the Internal Revenue Service since they were warned and allowed it to come back to haunt them again.
I did the same thing...warned Fotolia that exposing our SS#'s was a violation of Federal law. I just didn't know where to report them at the time other than the BBB, which I later learned isn't the reputable organization I thought it was. If they don't fix it and soon, I'll definitely be contacting the proper authorities. Fotolia has done some pretty crappy things over the years, but this now-recurring SS# problem is the one that angers me the most.
82
« on: July 21, 2012, 05:12 »
Go to "My Uploads." On the left hand side of the page listed under "Contributor Tools" is a link to PP figures per file. However, if you want to see each sale individually, you have to go back to "My Uploads" and click on each photo individually, then look under the PP tab. It's not a very good setup.
83
« on: July 20, 2012, 14:23 »
It appears the changes have reverted back to the old way regarding extended licenses and the default settings for free images. I'm waiting to hear back about the SS# visibility.
Thanks,
Mat
Thanks, Mat! Hopefully you have more luck getting it fixed than I did last time. I can't tell you how many site mails I sent them over that year, which they just ignored. I also brought it up here at MSG numerous times to no avail. Heck, I even filed a complaint with the Better Business Bureau thinking that might help! It wasn't until they couldn't actually process my tax documents that they finally paid attention.
84
« on: July 20, 2012, 14:19 »
Thanks for pointing that out, Karin. I guess FT thinks as long as the page is in https format, it's completely safe. And, of course, the ID card scan is in plain sight and can be easily downloaded.
Totally unacceptable!
That might be my own internal encryption. I have HTTPS Everywhere installed in Firefox, which encrypts unencryted web pages.
85
« on: July 20, 2012, 07:55 »
86
« on: July 20, 2012, 07:49 »
87
« on: July 20, 2012, 04:51 »
How can one check if ones work is for sale/used else where illegally?
Google has an image search where you can drag an image into the search field, and it will find the image. Somehow there's also a way to add it to Firefox where you can just right-click on the image and search Google that way, but I can't find it (middle of the night and I'm too tired to look...LOL). https://encrypted.google.com/imghp
88
« on: July 19, 2012, 12:27 »
Anti-social?! Wow. You come on here with the name "antistock," start blasting everyone who doesn't agree with your wildly paranoid ideas, basically calling everyone "stupid" in so many words, and you think we're anti-social?
Good riddance, Troll.
89
« on: July 19, 2012, 12:20 »
90
« on: July 18, 2012, 20:37 »
One last thing...this thread went totally off the rails.
The woman isn't lying or making up stories. The OP said she went blind AFTER she left her job as a photo editor.
91
« on: July 18, 2012, 20:35 »
I don't mind the occasional screwy search, because sometimes they end up bringing up old images that never had many sales. I have one at SS that had only sold a handful of times in two years, and it's sold three times in the past two days. That's a good thing. And my other sales haven't been impacted at all.
92
« on: July 18, 2012, 20:32 »
interesting.
how can they make photos if they're blind ? how about editing, photoshopping ?
you mean they're 100% blind or just 80-90% blind ?
technically i'm 60% blind by the way and yet here i am.
Photography is all about light...and the vast majority of legally blind folks have enough vision to see light and shadows. My daughter also uses sound in order to follow the subject with her camera. As long as she can hear her subject and/or can see some sort of shadow and light in the viewfinder, she can make a photo. I choose the best compositions and do the editing for her, but she makes all the decisions about how I edit the image. I describe everything in Photoshop to her and she knows what most of the features do now. She's also an awesome assistant! Check out Pete Eckert's work. I really feel very sorry for you when I read this, it must be hard to raise a blind child. how does she take a picture?
No need to feel sorry. She's 30 now and was born with her visual impairment, so it's normal for us. It's more like a pain in the you-know-where. 
93
« on: July 18, 2012, 20:20 »
94
« on: July 18, 2012, 12:50 »
Something Ain't Right. My "Popular" search option reminds me that my port contains some crap. Several are being shown in the first ten and have NEVER sold.
"Most Relevant" displays what I would expect from "Popular" search.
That's what I've been seeing for about a month now...and the images change order once in a while in "Popular" and after a few pages in "Most Relevant."
96
« on: July 13, 2012, 12:33 »
What guy in their right mind wants to put on MU? I am sure there are a few but that is not real.
See the pic in my previous post. All the work...makeup, hair, photography...is done by men. 
97
« on: July 13, 2012, 12:08 »
I've only used MUAs and hair stylists with group shoots, and the photogs split the costs. I've been able to work with some great makeup and hair artists at minimal cost this way. When I first started my Zazzle store, I discovered that one of their t-shirt models is an amazing hair stylist I worked with on one of the group shoots. He was once the hair stylist for the San Francisco 49ers cheerleaders. Small world, eh?  Here's a pic of Mikel at work (photo by Tim Engle, body painting by Michael Rosner): 
98
« on: July 12, 2012, 17:51 »
To be fair - Fotolia pays to contributors still same amount regardless of credit package that buyers bought (it's less than promised with small packages but it's for example 37.77% - instead of "bronze" 23% - with 7000 credit package with payout in EUR).
DT's maths scares me more.
come on! who gets 7k credits?
(admin) edited for language
Exactly!
99
« on: July 12, 2012, 14:30 »
Is what Fotolia doing even legal? That company.................... 
100
« on: July 12, 2012, 10:28 »
I'll accept lower sub royalties, if the company itself is a good one. CanStockPhoto is one of those companies. Duncan has always been fantastic about working with contributors, sales may be slow but they are always steady, and CanStockPhoto has never been known to make us jump through hoops nor have they ever cut royalties (they have been the same since at least 2005, so perhaps it's time for a small raise).
Sure. He is a nice guy, but the most important thing, the money, just isn't there. Sure steady, that's exactly it, you make the same with 500 images as you did with 100. At least in my case. Instead of making 20x more like I do at IS or SS. I make more in a couple of rush hours at SS than in a whole month there. And because of that, they have no leverage to make us jump through hoops or cut commissions (I'd have to pay them if they'd cut them  ) . So what I wanted to say is, they're not necessarily nice guys, they just don't have business-wise what it takes to not be nice. I hope you caught my drift
Yeh...I understand. But for me, after all the headaches with IS and Fotolia, it's nice to have a site where I'm not worrying all the time about what's going to happen next.
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 ... 61
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
