|
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 - tickstock
Pages: 1 ... 27 28 29 30 31 [32] 33 34 35 36 37 ... 151
777
« on: May 29, 2015, 15:19 »
778
« on: May 29, 2015, 11:00 »
From the forum:
"We've identified the issue causing the phantom download issue. It's a display issue that isn't impacting royalties in any way. We have a fix that we are hoping to push live as early as EOD (Friday May 29) but more likely early next week. Again, I will repeat; There aren't any royalty related issues attached to this bug. It's 100% a display issue which we will be resolving shortly."
779
« on: May 29, 2015, 10:12 »
Ebb and flow. One good week balances out with a bad one. You've been here long enough to know that you shouldn't judge anything by one day or one week. Besides before gostwyck's comments were removed he had a $200+ day so maybe it's just you. Maybe it was the holiday, the beginning of summer, Shutterstock's broken site, the massive amount of new files being accepted or something else out of your control. Probably best to just give up.
780
« on: May 29, 2015, 06:35 »
You're right, I never look there since it's mostly stuff I don't care about or things that aren't really that important.
obviously you do care and the downtime announcements are important. Bit of a contradiction there
Mostly Ron. They didn't post there yesterday that the ftp was down, just that a few days ago it would be down for a couple hours. We all know it's been down a lot more than that.
781
« on: May 28, 2015, 18:07 »
You're right, I never look there since it's mostly stuff I don't care about or things that aren't really that important.
782
« on: May 28, 2015, 16:57 »
When they start taking 4k I'll seriously consider it.
783
« on: May 28, 2015, 16:46 »
Where are you seeing downloads on the 'search results'?
On any search results page you can see your downloads total at the bottom of the image (just where they have always been).
I don't see download totals unless I change the display settings and then I only see >10 or >100.
Within your own portfolio?
I see exact numbers in mine.
Maybe we're on different design iterations.
It's switching back and forth, probably different iterations like you said. Maybe the numbers are different because you're seeing it cached from a different time? I haven't looked too closely but mine seem to match up.
784
« on: May 28, 2015, 16:34 »
Where are you seeing downloads on the 'search results'?
On any search results page you can see your downloads total at the bottom of the image (just where they have always been).
I don't see download totals unless I change the display settings and then I only see >10 or >100.
785
« on: May 28, 2015, 16:04 »
Crap week here, too. Month will be BME due to a giant sale on Alamy but everything else has been slow since last Friday. I figure it's a combination of the holidays, summer, and the SS switch to no daily limits (people may have used subs up earlier in the month).
It doesn't work that way, monthly subs start on the day the subscription was bought. There should be a wide spread of start and end times for them.
786
« on: May 28, 2015, 15:19 »
On the forums...
which doesnt explain yesterday when it was down when I originally tried to check.
Are we supposed to go search through the forums every day to see if they might shut something down then next day? They should have sent an email, tweet, or put up a notice on the contributor site at the very least shouldn't they? But you're right that doesn't explain why it's been broken so often recently.
787
« on: May 28, 2015, 14:43 »
In the last 14 days or so I put up almost 200 new files. Not even one single view has been recorded on any of them at all. I guess the new new just keeps getting newer.
Mod have noted over there that 'views are being recorded differently', but have offered no explanation.
Mind you, the last time they said only views from registered buyers counted, but someone here on msg (forget who, sorry) discovered that views from your 'friends' counted too. And that wasn't necessarily all, even though clearly very few views were showing.
So the new riddle is 'when is a view not a view'?
or, more pertinently, 'when is a view a view'?
And even more important: When is a sale not a sale? I have now lots of sales showing only on the old style ADP pages and search results pages but not in file download history pages and sub reports.
This is a noted bug over there.
But your observation is interesting. I'd thought, based on a couple of recent files showing the ghost download which I can see (I can't imagine the time which would be involved in searching through all my files) that they were sub sales which had somehow been reported as 'proper' sales, but you say yours aren't showing up as subs. Oh well, we'll just have to leave it to them to figure it out.   
Yes, I know it's a noted "bug" over there. A "bug" that's been affecting many of my files.
Let's see just one example:
On search results, on of my files shows 773 downloads. However, according to the records at my_uploads page or at its download history page, that file has only 763 downloads.
At first I thought the missing 10 downloads could have been subscriptions. But when I go to subscritions report, this file has had more than 50 subs downloads. Getty sales maybe? Nope! It has had only 4 of those. Old credit subscriptions? Nope!
Are you using the chrome or greasemonkey script? The new subscription sales don't count (neither do partner program subs). Where are you seeing downloads on the 'search results'?
788
« on: May 28, 2015, 14:24 »
Forums are back up.
Let the 'doom and gloom' continue.
And the search finally works. Maybe they're starting to fix things.
789
« on: May 28, 2015, 12:10 »
Might just be a sign that now is the right time to bail on them?
You first.
Of course, I'm talking about me.
FTP is still down. Weren't they supposed to fix the forums months ago? And what about creating sets for video? Might just be a sign that now is the right time to bail on them?
Yeah, site is down for a few hours, "EVERYONE RUN, ITS THE END OF THE WORLD!"
Seriously, get a grip folks.
It's not just the site is down. It's the ftp is still broken (tons of problems with that for a while now), low royalty rates along with low prices, not fixing the forums which if I remember correctly were supposed to have been fixed months ago, sets aren't available for video even though they are telling contributors to create them for google SEO just a few days ago, SS basically giving away video for free on bigstock, ending the referral program that should have lasted forever and now pushing for us to get more contributors, poor playback of video on the site, etc...
well, don't let the door hit you on the way out.
I'd rather that Shutterstock fixed the problems instead.
790
« on: May 28, 2015, 11:51 »
Might just be a sign that now is the right time to bail on them?
You first.
Of course, I'm talking about me. FTP is still down. Weren't they supposed to fix the forums months ago? And what about creating sets for video? Might just be a sign that now is the right time to bail on them?
Yeah, site is down for a few hours, "EVERYONE RUN, ITS THE END OF THE WORLD!"
Seriously, get a grip folks.
It's not just the site is down. It's the ftp is still broken (tons of problems with that for a while now), low royalty rates along with low prices, not fixing the forums which if I remember correctly were supposed to have been fixed months ago, sets aren't available for video even though they are telling contributors to create them for google SEO just a few days ago, SS basically giving away video for free on bigstock, ending the referral program that should have lasted forever and now pushing for us to get more contributors, poor playback of video on the site, etc...
791
« on: May 28, 2015, 11:14 »
FTP is still down. Weren't they supposed to fix the forums months ago? And what about creating sets for video? Might just be a sign that now is the right time to bail on them?
792
« on: May 27, 2015, 08:45 »
$20 per HD download seems too low, I'll probably leave SS soon. It's just not worth that.
793
« on: May 27, 2015, 07:48 »
Isn't that part of the agreement you signed? That they can use your images for promotional purposes without crediting you or paying you royalties?
That is part of the agreement I thought, although there are lots of credited tweets and tweets promoting artists.
794
« on: May 26, 2015, 09:00 »
795
« on: May 25, 2015, 16:26 »
I used to make some good money and helped a lot of people to become contributors. When SS changed their referral program I removed all my referral links!
They lied us the program is for lifetime!
SS get the money from the people who helped them to become the most successful microstock company to give them to the shareholders!
The referrers who invested a lot of time and efforts lost their income!
They need new contributors who will get less money in the beginning.
No more referrals from me!
Got the email too. Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me. This must be aimed at people too new to remember what they did before.
796
« on: May 22, 2015, 14:55 »
They are accepting too many images - in some cases.
They are rejecting too many images - in some cases.
All in all their review process is broken.
That's what it is about.
Just keep resubmitting they will eventually accept everything. 
I do think that is true.
When you look at the latest accepted images it's clear some reviewers will accept just about anything.
797
« on: May 22, 2015, 14:50 »
And iStock is not accepting everything? They accepted some of my images, that even I myself would reject them.
I agree they should be rejecting more, you won't ever hear me complain about a rejection, ever. Just because they will accept an image doesn't mean it's worth my time or self respect to upload it. I don't think you do yourself any favors by submitting sub par work and what's even worse is complaining that it was rejected. ETA: I meant in general all the complaining about rejections for what is surely sub par work, that part wasn't specifically aimed at you.
798
« on: May 22, 2015, 14:17 »
They are accepting too many images - in some cases.
They are rejecting too many images - in some cases.
All in all their review process is broken.
That's what it is about.
Just keep resubmitting they will eventually accept everything.
799
« on: May 22, 2015, 14:05 »
Still missing the point Tickstock. Its about incorrect reviews.
Anyhoo...
I agree completely it's about incorrect reviews, accepting way too many images. Just do a search of basically any common keyword and sort by newest it's pretty much a guarantee that there will be many many examples of huge amounts of similars accepted when just one or two would cover the concept or subject.
800
« on: May 22, 2015, 13:42 »
Two IS exclusives completely missing the point. Typical.
Carry on, its funny to read.
The point is that SS accepts way more images than they should. If you can't get images in now you need to re-evaluate what you are doing.
Pages: 1 ... 27 28 29 30 31 [32] 33 34 35 36 37 ... 151
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
