|
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 - caspixel
Pages: 1 ... 31 32 33 34 35 [36] 37 38 39 40 41
876
« on: October 27, 2010, 17:00 »
I'm pretty sure iStock doesn't care what buyers think either. No doubt if the OP posts in the iStock forums that thread will be deleted almost immediately.
877
« on: October 26, 2010, 13:45 »
What I care about a lot is (a) being told one thing when what happens clearly contradicts it and (b) one set of rules for a special group that bypasses those rules the rest of us have to abide by.
+1 And - btw - bravo what you said on that now dead thread about "the contest" ... I was in the process of quoting you and posting a reply when Lobo hammered it.
The Stockys contest thread was locked? I see it still open on the site. Or are you referring to a different thread?
878
« on: October 26, 2010, 12:43 »
Could they be phasing out all announcements of price changes and the like? Wouldn't surprise me at all.
879
« on: October 25, 2010, 21:13 »
...and all along he deleted posts, diverted public discourse with snide remarks, banned members he couldn't intimidate with sitemails and at the end locked the threads with a little stab of a statement to finish it off (see "we are undersigned" thread lock).
Spot on.
880
« on: October 25, 2010, 18:51 »
OMG, feels like the end of an era.... 
Actually, I felt like the era ended when Getty bought iStock. I guess now it's the end of a different era. 
881
« on: October 25, 2010, 16:00 »
So I guess the orders finally came from above that all protest threads must now be locked. At least you still have MSG!
882
« on: October 24, 2010, 01:04 »
Your name should be "waa" instead of "zzz".
LOL
883
« on: October 23, 2010, 17:29 »
Geez caspixel I had no idea you were banned. Unless you were abusive (which I doubt) that is just shameful.
I thought you were absent from the forums as a silent protest, never thought you WERE silenced. Do they just give you a timeout or is the ban for lifetime?
Oh yeah you can vote for my stuff, not only am I not in the "club" they won't even let me bus the tables or valet the cars.
I'm thinking permanent ban. I guess my humor was seen as abusive by some. LOL Do they at least let you wash the dishes?
884
« on: October 23, 2010, 16:32 »
That's Another fallacy. Point me to a single person who has had decreasing returns at iStock. The absolute figures people have earned over the years has risen constantly. That's what people keep admitting on iStock's forums.
I know of several people who aren't making as much money as years past. And they even admit it on the iStock forums, so you must be missing those posts.
886
« on: October 23, 2010, 16:00 »
Thanks caspixel for the good wishes. I have always enjoyed reading your posts in the designer and other forums at IS and the same goes for here as well. 
Maybe you could click on the contest lightbox just for shits and grins (are we allowed to use language here?)
4 posts down and 7 to go before I lose the spam moniker. I will try to be relevant.
Well, thanks. At least someone did. Apparently enough people didn't because I have been banned from the iStock forums. I will try to remember to check out the contest lightbox and maybe I'll even vote for some poor sod who is not in "the club".
887
« on: October 23, 2010, 14:09 »
And his later post, which I think really speaks volumes about what Istock is losing: In response to the question "Are you in a position to explain these licenses?" He replies (emphasis added by me):
I am, but I didn't. I decided to cut back on my defending istock from 40% to 35% and I am currently over that percentage.. After all, money won't bring istock happiness.
That was awesome.
888
« on: October 23, 2010, 14:07 »
Hate to tell you this, but it's unlikely any buyers will even look at those lightboxes. Well, maybe if those buyers are also contributors. But then they will only buy if they have the need for your illustrations. I think the "exposure" such contests generate is highly over-rated and may even be fabricated.
Not so sure about unlikely.
Before I was a buyer/contributor I was just a buyer and I often look through themed lightboxes to add to my private ones. But really the bottom line is self-promotion. If I get buyers (even if only a handful) to look at my illustrations and then my portfolio it could mean a sale, and I make so few sales that each one is still exciting to me.
Well, good luck to you. I hope it works out. As for me, I didn't have much success finding anything I wanted the few times I looked at themed lightboxes for images. I'd much rather just conduct my own search than trust that someone else thinks they know what I want. Now lightboxes that contributors have made of their own similar images are a different story. However, the lightboxes for this contest cover such a vague and wide range of concepts, that I really can't see them being particularly useful to buyers, IMO.
889
« on: October 23, 2010, 14:03 »
People want to feel they are valued as employees. They want to enjoy their job. So your studies stand against my studies ;-)
Nothing says "I value you" more than cash compensation. Even the best jobs breed resentment if you are working as hard as you can with ever decreasing returns.
891
« on: October 23, 2010, 09:35 »
If only you was in charge of the H2O Vac advertising, my life would be 2x better, since their commercial are 50% of what Canadians see everyday.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fUd7qTF7rAA[/youtube]
That marketing worked on me. I want that vacuum. LOL
892
« on: October 22, 2010, 23:27 »
Hate to tell you this, but it's unlikely any buyers will even look at those lightboxes. Well, maybe if those buyers are also contributors. But then they will only buy if they have the need for your illustrations. I think the "exposure" such contests generate is highly over-rated and may even be fabricated.
893
« on: October 22, 2010, 09:02 »
They really probably should have called it "The Clubbys".
894
« on: October 21, 2010, 19:57 »
And still no love to the buyers. At least with stupid Punctum day the iStock selected (by one person) DOTWs from that particular year were eligible.
I see there are still plenty of iStock kool-aid drinking Woo-Yays to go around on that thread though.
I actually can't believe they have the gall to announce this contest so close to all the unsustainable talk. What a bunch of idiots there.
896
« on: October 20, 2010, 09:55 »
New mail from IS. Learn all about collections. They say "Agency Collection photos cost from 55 to 200 credits. " XXXL images cost 250 credits but I guess that's not meant to mislead anyone, just a typo. They also say vetta "cost between 30 and 125 credits. " XXXL Vetta is 150, another typo? They also say "Exclusive photos can cost between 2 and 25 credits" not exactly an E+ XXXL costs 35 credits, maybe it's a typo too?
Aren't their laws against deliberate false advertising?
897
« on: October 19, 2010, 19:37 »
898
« on: October 17, 2010, 15:47 »
I don't think IS/Getty cares one way or another if contributors think this is a scam or if buyers think this is a scam. Their attitude is, if you don't like it, go somewhere else. That's what happens when one company is allowed to get big and powerful. They know that contributors aren't going to go anywhere and they know that most buyers aren't going anywhere. In fact their basic marketing plan is to deceive this way. There will be a certain percentage of buyers who stumble on the IS/Getty agency collection, find the image they are looking for, and purchase it at $300, instead of looking around for the same image for $3. They are banking on the fact that some consumers are just too busy/lazy to do the searching.
I, for one, am hoping that their plan backfires.
I hope it backfires too. I hate that attitude and it's far too prevalent in big business these days.
899
« on: October 17, 2010, 09:15 »
So it looks like iStock exclusive photos are being added to the Agency collection now. I don't know if they were regular collection or Vetta photos, but I don't expect that to go over well with buyers who have lightboxed these photos for projects with a budget. Not only that, but, as with Vetta, we see similar photos from the same series in the regular collection. So, as with Vetta, what makes those particular photos worth more? I'd love to hear iStock's reasoning some photos costs 1000% more than others in the same series. And it looks like they are also adding files irrespective of how many downloads they have...unlike Vetta, where they supposedly weren't adding anything with flames. Really scratching my head. It will be interesting to see what happens with the downloads to those files. Hmm...those with images in a series in both Agency and regular collections might want to take their links to "More in this series" off their Agency photos so the scam is less obvious.
900
« on: October 16, 2010, 09:41 »
Thanks for the nice comments - really appreciate it! I just stumbled across it too - was very surprised to see my image on one of the pages, but pretty happy. The shot they've chosen is from Abel Tasman National Park in New Zealand over 3 years ago- one of those days where I figured taking a D-SLR kayaking for a day was a good idea!
They don't inform you when you receive such a distinction?
Pages: 1 ... 31 32 33 34 35 [36] 37 38 39 40 41
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
