|
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 - heywoody
Pages: 1 ... 32 33 34 35 36 [37] 38 39 40 41 42 ... 58
901
« on: September 30, 2012, 17:37 »
Not Yuri standard but isolation is good and they do all have perfect teeth 
902
« on: September 30, 2012, 17:29 »
Yes, models have polygons, not necessarily visible @ 100% but still not photographs. I know exactly where you're coming from and 100% agree. Except, it is possible to get some product on their shelves and what does get there doesn't have the same competition due to their restrictive approach and tends to do much better than elsewhere. Course, I'm only guessing about the unnamed stock photo site 
903
« on: September 29, 2012, 08:52 »
Only if Yuri pays me for doing it, otherwise I've got better things to do with my time, like working out if goldfish will look natural enough when superglued to a glass sheet between two bowls.
Depends if its an African or European goldfish!
Classic!! 
904
« on: September 28, 2012, 09:03 »
right gotcha. I wrote them an email and they confirmed i will have 0 credit months since I started back in march. they also said they are aware of the uproar and that people have stopped uploading, but they consider it a fair deal because now the good portfolios will get the higher commission. they are sticking to their guns. lets see if its IS all over again and if they join the race to the bottom. greedy b....
There is a big difference in the motivation to submit to IS and 123 in that volumes and prices at IS make it worthwhile and 15% of something is something. 30%, 35%, 40% of very little would not inspire me to submit and the new subs rates are a deal breaker.
905
« on: September 26, 2012, 17:15 »
What Ponke said. You can't submit NASA images but can include them in a wider composition. I think that ban was mainly aimed at scans of images like old books, maps etc.
906
« on: September 25, 2012, 17:25 »
Well, I have to say I've been inspired by this thread. I'm off to do a group of angry villagers wielding pitchforks, torches and sundry agricultural implements isolated on white.
make sure you put in the description "angry villagers preparing to punish microstock copycats."
The first guy is done (the fat bald guy with the pitchfork and the clenched fist). A few more and I'll combine them in PSP to make a group (just like Yuri does)
907
« on: September 25, 2012, 07:46 »
Well, I have to say I've been inspired by this thread. I'm off to do a group of angry villagers wielding pitchforks, torches and sundry agricultural implements isolated on white.
908
« on: September 24, 2012, 15:58 »
Maybe what's left of the Beatles should sue Apple - Apple Corps was there before Steve started up
909
« on: September 24, 2012, 13:03 »
Dreamstime should give a clear statement and ban this guy. We all get inspired and "copy" somehow known concepts, but at least most of us try to do it different, better in the own style.
The difference:
- Copy a concept with own flavour
- Copy the whole picture while trying to reassemble light, perspective, model look etc.
The latter one IMHO is theft and should be banned.
Banned for what? Making a badly thought out and inappropriate forum post? If that's the case a lot of us would be in big trouble. The guy has 8 pictures, none of which would be remotely mistaken for one of Yuri's so he hasn't actually copied anything.
910
« on: September 24, 2012, 12:47 »
..... in my eyes not just "naive" or something a newbie would do and we can forgive. This is different entirely.
The very fact that someone thought this was a great insight and decided to post it is a sure sign that it's a naive beginner. The folks you need to be concerned about are those that keep their heads down, quietly copy the style and content and have the skills to pull it off. Mopic's examples are much more "pitchfork" worthy
911
« on: September 24, 2012, 10:26 »
Lets get real here. We have a silly naive post from a beginner and the villagers are gathering pitchforks like he was raping babies. The subject matter here is as generic stock as it gets and emulated across all the sites by beginners and established practitioners alike even if the execution doesnt come close.
912
« on: September 24, 2012, 05:57 »
What Leaf said. Still, it's someone who is brand new and doesn't know any better, how many more established contributors are trying to do this but just not posting about it?
913
« on: September 23, 2012, 06:41 »
You can select the data on the screen and paste into Excel (haven't tried it on FT but usually works on web pages formatted as a table). Put as many results on each screen as you can.
914
« on: September 23, 2012, 06:35 »
Let's assume that popularity takes views into account. So (possibly) pimping = more views = increased popularity ranking = more sales.
Yeah __ that'll be it! Yuri, Andres and the like must be somehow secretly pimping their stuff like mad (rather than just spending their time producing quality content). Meanwhile all the idiots, sorry, I mean contributors on the SS forum discussing such issues are simply not spending enough time pimping their stuff! *wipes tears from eyes*
Am I advocating pimping? No. Do I think sales happen because buyers see something in a pimping thread? No Do I think views of an image in a pimping thread might affect search placement? Possibly Do I think search placement affects sales? Yes Your sides must be splitting from laughter at the contributions from the great and the good in all the threads about the impact of search algorithm changes.
915
« on: September 22, 2012, 20:26 »
Let's assume that popularity takes views into account. So (possibly) pimping = more views = increased popularity ranking = more sales.
916
« on: September 22, 2012, 12:35 »
Lots of folks pimp images on the SS forum - pointless exercise?? It occurs to me that the "popularity" search is influenced by views even though no counter is visible as the only explanation why files that are online for approximately the same time with less sales are often higher in this search. Maybe not so pointless?
917
« on: September 20, 2012, 09:28 »
I'm sure the "related image" algorithm just uses keywords and if we see something that's really, really unrelated it's most likely caused by the same spam that results in searches pulling up stuff with no relationship to the search term.
918
« on: September 20, 2012, 06:47 »
Jaysus no - don't know blender & trying to do something similar in Hexagon so will be interested in the answers 
919
« on: September 20, 2012, 02:55 »
Just yanking your chain with a 3rd option I'd be fairly confident that someone's eyes are involved in acceptances.
920
« on: September 19, 2012, 11:40 »
.... It's possible that they treat beaches as an oversupplied subject and thus are picky, but the ones they do accept sell well there too..... I believe they are much more picky about "oversupplied subject matter" and if even the ones that sell well weren't there, a buyer has plenty more to pick from so no sale lost (for SS). I know this Ps off a lot of contributors but it makes sound business sense (again for SS).
921
« on: September 19, 2012, 05:38 »
Yesterday were reviewed 4 particular pictures... two of them were accepted and two declined. All four pictures are at the same resolution, object, quality. the reason for declined ones was: Trademark. not even one has a trademark sign/logo on them.
This experience can mean two thinks:
1. SS is using some sort of software as a filter before review , and the ''filtered'' images end up for a second ''human'' review. In this case the soft decided that two of my pics have trademark logos/brands and rejects them..... and the human reviewer accepted the other 2.
2. same bench of images are reviewed by multiple reviewers and one person receive two pics and another one the other two.
I can't find other explanation in my case.
Or, the automated filter accepted 2 and the human reviewer rejected 2
922
« on: September 19, 2012, 05:35 »
Those ads on DVDs are really, really annoying. It's almost like it would be better to get a pirate version without those annoyances.
Yeah and there is even a language selection to get the propaganda in your own language. If it's on the internet it will get nicked and, whatever we think, that ain't gonna stop.
923
« on: September 17, 2012, 11:54 »
Ah yes, but isn't there a training course buyers have to take so they can find what they're looking for on IS?
924
« on: September 17, 2012, 11:51 »
Pretty much immediately - I'm not a big seller but had sales on my first 10 the day they were approved BUT there is an alleged "new contributor bonus" (I don't know this for a fact but it's a widely held belief) where new contributors get a boost in the search and your boost may have come and gone while your files were inactive.
925
« on: September 17, 2012, 07:25 »
But the sites hire and fire the reviewers. It should be easy to have an alert when someone that has a 70% acceptance rate gets 29 out of 30 rejected. That's almost certainly a bad job by the reviewer, so why can't they get rid of the bad reviewers and automatically put the images back in the queue? I think its because they have so many images now that they don't care. It's not just DT, I've had some strange reviews from most of the sites that I think they could easily flag up and sort out without me having to send support an email and them having to waste time replying.
I agree. A quality system that doesn't have consistency is not a quality system and THAT is the site's responsibility. I happen to think that the IS approach to the kind of stuff I do is misguided but it is their approach and they are pretty consistent. FT on the other hand pick one occasionally to reject seemingly at random and usually something much better than a lot of what they accept.
Pages: 1 ... 32 33 34 35 36 [37] 38 39 40 41 42 ... 58
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
