|
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 - ShadySue
Pages: 1 ... 26 27 28 29 30 [31] 32 33 34 35 36 ... 624
751
« on: January 17, 2020, 15:37 »
....very good month compared to the at least last 6 months....
Wow, December was my best month since ESP started!!!  (but, keeping it real, -44% on Dec 2011.)  OK, there seems to have been a much higher number of Credit Pack sales, which has helped a lot, but I'm nervous about two sales. Both sold twice the same day (all 20th December), both on the subject of agriculture, both with one large value credit pack sales and one small value, the same for both. One file hasn't sold previously under ESP, the other has only sold twice. I fear refunds might yet happen. https://www.dropbox.com/s/0dq1hneqzq0z4hp/Double%20sales.jpg?dl=0That's one file's two sales, the other file's two sales are identical to that. Hope I'm being overly pessimistic, but it seems like a ridiculously huge coincidence otherwise.
752
« on: January 15, 2020, 20:31 »
Looks to me like clickhole thought they should be able to use images free. So they decided to make a joke (not very funny) about it. Cheap greedy
people.
I don't believe that. Clickhole is a humor site, a low rent version of The Onion. I suspect someone there saw a photo with watermark and thought it would make an amusing article. I didn't laugh, but I suspect that was their intent.
But they are still using a watermarked image in their blog, right? To illustrate their not funny blog? 🙄 Just because they think its funny, guess that means its ok to use watermarked images.
But now that I'm looking on my computer, I see that it isn't an actual watermarked image, as it would be on iStock (iS doesn't engrave the watermarks into the rock, there would be more than one watermark). I think you're right, they are just making a point rather than pointing out an actual misuse, which I stupidly picked up on. They may well have paid for the image, although arguably satire doesn't require them to. I think this was the original iS photo, which they have trimmed a bit. https://www.istockphoto.com/gb/photo/mount-rushmore-rapid-city-south-dakota-gm1126952302-296868683Sorry, had my chain yanked but should have checked. 
753
« on: January 15, 2020, 15:28 »
Looks to me like clickhole thought they should be able to use images free. So they decided to make a joke (not very funny) about it. Cheap greedy
people.
Oh!
755
« on: January 14, 2020, 12:50 »
Alamy
Alamy's cheapest are $20 and these licenses are either for personal use or Presentations and newsletters.
https://www.alamy.com/download-packs.aspx
Nitpicking but these packs are of two (or ten) images, and the OP specifically asked for price of a single image.
756
« on: January 13, 2020, 19:55 »
I'm into the iStock esp site, not sure if that's different, although it says Getty Images.
(The dls ytd are up at last!)
Mind you, I don't log out from there, so maybe it would be different if I'd logged out, or been logged out. Nope, I logged out and logged in again and it was fine.
Hope you get sorted soon.
thanks for your input  yes istock esp..
very weird thing is now that I tried, I could actually login on my mobile phone, but I still can't on desktop version of chrome.
I'm using Firefox
757
« on: January 13, 2020, 19:34 »
I'm into the iStock esp site, not sure if that's different, although it says Getty Images.
(The dls ytd are up at last!)
Mind you, I don't log out from there, so maybe it would be different if I'd logged out, or been logged out. Nope, I logged out and logged in again and it was fine.
Hope you get sorted soon.
758
« on: January 13, 2020, 06:04 »
Hi ShadySue, So it seems the system of meta data changed about 2014 2013 by our accounts in IS. Care to share some insights about how it all matters? :~) Best, Lee
1. Makes me look like an idiot 2. Makes the site look totally unprofessional - first impressions count 3. Deliberate spamming is rampant on many (all?) sites. But even when people list e.g. 10+ species or 10+ locations of a beach, most don't spam the description, so unless there is a 'genuine mistake', the buyer should be confident that what is in the description is what is shown in the image. 4. Demonstrates their tech incompetence to any who weren't already aware 5. Demonstrates management incompetence: why did they decide to do away with the descriptions in the first place ... 6. ... and not giving a reason when asked many times is a prime example of Mushroom Management.
759
« on: January 12, 2020, 20:39 »
Here are four of mine which I randomly clicked on. The first one (2013) has the description truncated, the second one (2009) has no description at all, and for sure I put one in, the third one (2012) has been tampered with, there's no way I'd have put quotation marks around the description, and it's also been truncated, (I know how I write that sort of description, the comma would come before the scientific name, then a description of the feeder and the seeds inside), the fourth one (2009) has been truncated. I see that the categories have been changed since upload, and some are very strange. https://www.dropbox.com/s/lg9j0hqj3v90d78/Descriptions.jpg?dl=0
760
« on: January 12, 2020, 14:58 »
I have a strange decline in views since beginning of december.......
I usually had about 800 views per month and it suddenly dropped to something like 300...
Over the last 4 days there were only 15 views of my pictures.....
Has anybody else noticed something like that as well?
I mean I dont really sell much stuff on Alamy anyway but if nobody even views my pics I might opt out as well......
No, my views are stable, and for some reason my CTR is relatively high (for me). (I see it was high last Jan too, doesn't necesarily mean anything, though: I have no sales this year so far, which is my slowest-starting year since 2012).
761
« on: January 12, 2020, 13:42 »
IStockPhotos = Title, Description, Keywords
It's not that simple. Description has always shown on editorial files. For 'creative' files, for some bizarre reason, they decided not to show description on the file pages, maybe around the time of ESP. Many people complained on their forum and other official channels at the time, and no explanation or reason was given (unless I missed it, but if so, so did many other people). Late last year, someone announced on their forum that descriptions were showing again. I'm not sure that we got any official word about this, but maybe I misssed it. But in fact, on some files the description shows as written, sometimes it doesn't show at all, and sometimes it's severely truncated: a number of mine just have the first word, which is usually 'a' or 'the'. It may be (?) that descriptions are showing correctly on newer files, but it's sketchy on older files; but I haven't the time or inclination to check.
762
« on: January 11, 2020, 14:18 »
I've scratched my head more than once over stuff like this, too, Pete. Always a bit perplexed when (on one site or another) I see "more from this series" or "similar images" or some such on the page with one of my images and there is no observable similarity whatsoever. A photo of a bumble bee in a flower may result in a "similar" photo of a mountain, or some such.
Obviously, something has triggered the "similar" or "series" response in some AI robot's pointy little head that my very human head can't discern.
Keyword 'nature' perhaps?
763
« on: January 11, 2020, 13:16 »
Yes I mean Istock. I was an non-exclusive istock contributor + some partnersites of theirs like thinkstock etc. before they was bought up or whatever. Then it all moved to getty? I dont know really what happened, but i log into ESP-portal and get earnings from there now instead. No idea how uploads to getty/istock work now, someone can enlight me if they want. I cant upload new content to istock/getty as non-exlusive anymore? Is it through the old istock-site?
No you have to upload via ESP. If you can log in there, presumably you can upload. ('Upload and Review Content'.) IMO, it's horribler than the old system. You can still upload via DeepMeta, and there's another uploader called qHero. These are accessible via ESP, and DeepMeta at least is also downloadable from the website of that name. Your earnings look better via DeepMeta or a third party website called TodayIs20.
764
« on: January 10, 2020, 09:26 »
So I could do with some advice please:
Should I quit completely? Or go non exclusive?
Sorry, I can't advise, I don't do video If so, Can I delete some clips and leave others?
If y ou want to delete one or some, you have to ask them and give what they consider to be a good reason, (though I haven't read of any refusals). How does it work with uploading IStock model releases with other agencies? Are they accepted?
I'm sure I've read that the Getty release is pretty much accepted in other places, you can check through the forum here to clarify. Is it 90 days before I can sell with other agencies?
Did you read your agreement? You may terminate this Agreement with respect to the whole (but not part of) one or more of Photo Content, Illustration Content or Video Content at any time by giving thirty (30) days written notice specifying the category or categories of Exclusive Content to which termination applies
765
« on: January 08, 2020, 18:16 »
Slow on an off for a few hours, especially messaging.
766
« on: January 05, 2020, 11:14 »
Yup, very slow here today also.
767
« on: January 03, 2020, 14:46 »
and Alamy has some interesting information on searches. Alamy Measures: https://www.alamy.com/Alamysearchhistory/contributorsearch.aspx
With the bonus that Alamy Measures shows what can happen if you have too many keywords. Although their system can mix any word from a keyword, even splitting a keyword phrase, with any other keyword or word from the caption. Often, you can't do anything about it, as both words were truly relevant, or even highly relevant, but didn't belong in juxtaposition. Example from a search result in my Measures from yesterday: Space artefacts. The photo in question was of artefacts, and there was 'copy space'.  (I suspect that searcher was quite disappointed!)
768
« on: January 02, 2020, 17:46 »
@OP: just in case you don't know, although you can sell stills via Pond5, it's really a video sales place, and the news here on msg is that stills don't sell well via Pond5. (Because I don't think you mentioned that you do video work).
769
« on: January 02, 2020, 14:38 »
Just curious ... does anyone know what sizes are most commonly sold on istock. Or the cost commonly sold aspect ratios?
Files are sold at their native size, i.e. the size they were uploaded at. I doubt if any of us could give more than anecdotal evidence about aspect ratios, and it's not something I take note of.
770
« on: January 01, 2020, 13:49 »
I cannot see anynore it under account management... a way to make things mushier than are now?
They have stopped "downloads year to date" while they're calculating everyone's starting rate for next year. As per their message, it could take ten days; so they must be doing everyone's individually with an abacus. Added: but that only applies to Exclusives, so if it has also stopped for indies, all bets are off!
771
« on: December 31, 2019, 08:55 »
the problem is stock is impacting a lot ss and adobe giving practically free image to customer
And previously Getty/iS was trying to raise prices (I was then averaging >$6.75 per sale, and plenty others were averaging well over $8 rpd), but SS and Ft etc were holding prices down. The message being, we don't know what's round the corner, and it's impossible in this business to make 'informed' decisions based on current reality, particularly if it involves deleting one's port. iS was the one we loved, then it seemed to be SS, now it's Adobe. Next year ... who knows? It seems whoever is the favoured one starts to take their suppliers for granted.
772
« on: December 30, 2019, 18:09 »
If it's just a tomato on a white background, then you'll have hard time finding more than 30 relevant keywords.
30!!!
773
« on: December 30, 2019, 18:06 »
I see it in the Samsung browser for Android. But thanks for your work in the background. MSG seems to be running at its usual speed today. 
774
« on: December 29, 2019, 12:53 »
Hi guys.
Agreed - I found it super slow 2 evenings and off and on the past while. Not sure what is up - I wonder if it is being visited a lot by spammers.. which uses up all the resources. I asked the hosting company the other night when I noticed it and got a few suggestions, but will perhaps also send things through cloudflare which will hopefully stop a few of the DDOS 'attacks' as well..
either way - i'll work out a solution
Thanks, sounds like a lot of work for you. 
775
« on: December 29, 2019, 12:05 »
Slow for me the last 2 days. I tried earlier, wasnt opening. But just now it came right up. Maybe fixed?
Normal speed, dead slow and timing out
Pages: 1 ... 26 27 28 29 30 [31] 32 33 34 35 36 ... 624
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
