|
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 - YadaYadaYada
Pages: 1 ... 33 34 35 36 37 [38] 39 40 41 42 43 ... 64
926
« on: November 25, 2016, 16:29 »
So I have to disagree, Getty might not think it matters but they are wrong.
If the top 800 leave, Getty would really notice it. If the bottom 8000 leave they would just laugh about how much wasted server space was being recovered. And those most likely to leave are those with the least to lose. The top 800 would lose quite a lot. The bottom 8000 probably would never have made a payout, anyway. That's just how it is.
I'd agree except add that if everybody here and everybody who signed the petition left, they still wouldn't care. If one peanut producer leaves the maarket or 800 peanut growers leave the market, there are many more to fill in. This is a world market, and for some reason, just like Micro, there are more and more people willing to work for underpaying peanuts if anybody else leaves. The agencies have come to the power point of, if you don't like it, you can leave. They have 1000 other stupid people that are willing to work for nearly nothing. This is the house that the early people built on happiness for 25c sales or 15% commissions at IS. The same people who flocked to sell out their soul for 25c to be a member on DP. And every time one agency lowers returns, people scream, but we are unheard. A petition with 1000 names has no weight to Getty.
927
« on: November 25, 2016, 16:22 »
The analogy with Dickens is erroneous because hes been dead a certain number of years his work is out of copyright. Try selling the work of a living author and see how far you get.
That's not how it works, but you can believe what you want. You just shouldn't pretend it's the truth, on a forum. A living author can have public domain works. Or lose rights when she donates the rights to The L.O.C. The laws changed. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_Term_Extension_ActBefore 1978 the laws were different and 28 years was term for copyright. Works which hadn't passed into public domain before that date, were extended 47 years making the total 75 years. Yes the death of an author comes into play for some works, but it's not as simple as how many years is somebody dead. A book, photo or anything else that passed into public domain in 1949 could very well have a living author and be public domain. All books before 1923 have already become public domain. Just to be on topic, photos also. Would you write the same if he had used Ben-Hur as the book? It is public domain. Books and works from 1923 will now start passing into public domain. The copyrights have expired. http://www.gutenberg.org/ Project Gutenberg offers over 53,000 free ebooks. I know it's not Getty the devils photo agency, but without bias, the laws are the same for all. Undisclosed settlement wasn't for copyright or the DMCA violation or anything we would like to believe. It was the last of the unfair trade practices claims for the state of New York. At minimum they paid for lawyers fees, so she broke even, and may have added a small token payment, admitting no wrong, as a courtesy. These paymenst are made privte for both sides as well as to lessen the chances that people will see it as a way to make a quick buck from Getty, by filing suits. A fair settlement would be for Getty to stop selling her work, without compensation? Or pay her for every use.
928
« on: November 25, 2016, 11:13 »
They paid up front for all the people who would sell out for a 25c prepaid. That was a collection of the biggest artists and desperate people. DP then changed all the rules, sold us under the table and cheated us through the back door. But some people stayed, because they are so desperate to work for the crooks.
That's why DP doesn't need more photos. They have enough and enough artists who will take any minimum slave wage working for them.
Rejected by DP is a compliment and a way to tell you, they aren't worth working for.
929
« on: November 25, 2016, 11:08 »
The option for even total newbies to become exclusive, should they want to  , is part of all the new arrangements)
Why would we want to? Slow agency, dropping commissions, no support, low sales. I'm waiting a few months to see if I get some of those 2c sales. It was bad enough when I got 28c. If it gets worse, leaving is the answer. I won't even leave files there for that pay, it's an insult.
930
« on: November 25, 2016, 11:04 »
Here is the part many I think have been waiting for;
"Simplified restrictions
In addition to the simplified restrictions that were recently introduced across Alamy, there will now be a check box for Editorial Only. This means you can assign editorial only restrictions to an image if you wish and this includes Royalty Free images."
Yep strange that this is rather buried away as it has big implications which some people aren't going to like! But some are so might be interesting debate!
Yes, if you look at the comments some already fear the invasion of the scary microstockers.
We'rre already there. That's what drove me to Alamy years ago, reading about how we were ruining stock, on the Alamy forum from some tight ass snobs. Invade everybody. Hope you all make good money.
931
« on: November 25, 2016, 11:00 »
Don't expect Shutterstock would eliminate ALL those accounts. This is their money finally and many spammy titles allow those images pop up in higher Google search positions than the same images uploaded to Fotolia or Depositphotos for example (Am I right that huge spam title problem is Shutterstock only?) It's a balancing between being modern and responsible and losing total income.
No they don't rank higher than FT or DP, it hurts them. Google blocks spammy titles and sites. The Google SEO is smart enough to put them on the bottom. This has been since 2000 or before. Why do people here invent information that's not fact,to support the superstition claims? https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/66358?hl=enhttps://www.seroundtable.com/google-keywords-duplicate-16716.htmlJohn explained that he is repeating the same keyword over and over again, to the point where it is making it hard for Google to "recognize what's really unique & compelling" on that specific site.
932
« on: November 25, 2016, 10:51 »
Take into account that reload of previously bought files (in same size) is for free (at least it was so couple years ago, i presume nothing is changed). Specially for seasonal themes and very often used themes agencies reload previously purchased files very often. It means that company and also seller lose potential money. This is one very impotant thing to focus not only on old, very popular stuff.
I'm very satisfied with last days changes. Very.
I suppose no matter what anybody says, the negtives will find some conspiracy about how SS has changed search things against them. Them is most of the gloom and doom people here. Uploaded March 2016, which is a new file? 170 download, #9 on popular search for two words. I don't see that as being hidden or buried? Other photos have done similar. Not everything does that well, but I'm not buried or hidden, just because something is new. I think most of the complainers are thinking they should have some special place because they are old or because they are better? Why can't new photos be equal and better? Oh wait, new photos don't sell. How can two complete opposite claims be made over and over?
933
« on: November 23, 2016, 20:30 »
It's all very odd.... I've been around for about 5 or 6 years now. The last few months have been TERRIBLE with old and some REALLY old and forgotten stuff selling, nothing new, not my usual best sellers.
But whatever they have done has improved my situation. This month is not like how it was, but way better than it has been lately.
I think they just keep tinkering, or else servers keep having issues...
Sometimes you are on the 'up' side and sometimes on the 'down'.....but you never know when things might change again....
Reminds me of the Skinner Box experiments - quote from Wikipedia:
"Skinner's research discovered many fascinating examples of animal behavior. One of the most interesting, perhaps, was Skinner's work on superstition. Instead of giving a reward for a specific action and training a specific behavior, Skinner would take a hungry pigeon and place it in a box that would release a food pellet at random. The pigeons developed all kinds of complex behavioral responses such as bowing, scraping, dancing, and neck turns.[7]
What happened was the pigeon would receive the food pellet while it happened to be performing some action, and rather than attributing the food pellet reward to randomness, it would assume that the appearance of the food pellet had something to do with its behavior. So it started doing whatever that action was, over and over again, and sure enough, it was eventually rewarded with a food pellet again. Since the pigeon is increasing the amount of time spent performing a particular action, it is also increasing the number of times it is "rewarded" for that action, even though the reward is random".
We are the pigeons but one day we will fly away....
Yep humans tend to try and impose a pattern on random events to make sense of the world.....you only have to look at the way people try to predict lottery results...
or sales patterns and the SS search?
934
« on: November 21, 2016, 20:28 »
So I'm seeing more and more posts beginning with "so". Rather than just poke fun at this practice, I'd like to know what it really adds. Is it emphasis or informality? Or does it imply that a question will follow? I'm not getting it. If I take that word away, nothing about the post seems different.
It's just a current 'thing'. I hear it on TV all the time, usually prefacing an answer.
Q: How does your invention work?
A: So, ...
Q: Why did you decide to move to Outer Mongolia?
A: So, ...
Q: When will you try to beat the world crochet record again?
A: So, ...
etc
Perhaps this might help:
http://www.npr.org/2015/09/03/432732859/so-whats-the-big-deal-with-starting-a-sentence-with-so
But, one common start word will soon be replaced with another. I mean like dude, take a lude. That's awsome and rad, man. Don't be a debbie downer. BUT <pause>, you'll see the next one is already here.
935
« on: November 19, 2016, 23:26 »
Ok, they seem to he showing now so I am wondering if there is some delay in the images being picked up after I re-keyworded ? If so, I don't mind at all.
One more thing, is the title or caption or the image description more crucial ? Also, is it important to state time, place and date for better sales ?
If all that has been stopping me getting sales is my keywording I will happlily take back all the criticism I have made.
Thanks.
You and everybody else needs to know how to work with the agencies. You've been doing this since 2008! http://www.alamy.com/contributors/captions-and-keywords-for-alamy-images.pdf
936
« on: November 17, 2016, 21:52 »
Any particular reasons for "yes" or "no", guys and girls? Now your conversation looks childish like:
- Yes, yes, yes!
- No, no, no!
What is your leverage or barging power over the agencies. Without that it's just an empty friendship club. This isn't just words, it's the essence and bottom line of any union and the power to negotiate. No power, no leverage, you have nothing. Somebody tell me how you pressure the agencies with no power or control. NO! and that's why it will never work.
937
« on: November 17, 2016, 13:07 »
"Micro images don't sell on Alamy"
Although this gets said a lot, I've never seen a single example to illustrate this theory. My best sellers on Alamy are just as popular on the micros. Alamy sells as good as the column to the right of these words would indicate. Less sales, albeit higher priced, but averages out to right around 123RF and Dreamstime overall. Shutterstock, Fotolia, even Pond5 eat Alamy for breakfast. I barely make enough to justify the tedious keywording system.
You left off my word, MY micro don't sell as well on Alamy. My point remains the same. Individual not by forum pundits experience. We all have different photos and subjects. Counting numbers for different pictures makes no sense. "how many photos do I need to make $100?" who knows? What are the photos? No way to know how many sales per 1000 if we don't know whaat the photos are! What subjects and styles sells better on Alamy then Micro, that's the question. I like Alamy, one $20 sale is 71 subs on some place. It's like sharpshot says, worth the time and effort to make good keywords.
938
« on: November 15, 2016, 13:47 »
Personal experience, Micro images don't sell on Alamy. Personal experience, the average sale is now $20 commission. I have thousands of images on Alamy, I don't get one sale per thousand on average. Hope that explains my viewpoint better.
What one person gets, doesn't mean anybody else can or SHOULD expect the same. 1 sale per 1000 is air and false for new people. They should be told, expect what you earn will be proportinante to what your photos are and if Alamy buyers want them. Not how many equals how many sales.
My last sale had no views. I've had that before. Views are not a measure of sales, like some will also add, 1 sale per 100 views or some other rubbish numbers.
940
« on: November 14, 2016, 11:16 »
We looked really hard But it appears the page you seek doesn't exist anymore. You can continue on to iStock.com or report this 404 error to Customer Support. 404 error I hope he's gone. Now crying, he thought they were free. What a loser and thief. Caught and now says, he thought it was legal? http://forums.submit.shutterstock.com/topic/89192-account-suspend/
941
« on: November 14, 2016, 11:14 »
^ Next month iStock will report the sales in advance : 0 sale
They can give all of us 50 .02 cent sales, like a subscription advance. Imagine that a whole dollar is what 4 piss poor subs commission used to get us. Until we see the real numbers this is all another scam to lower our earnings and keep more for Getty. Exciting news and profit?
942
« on: November 13, 2016, 22:18 »
Means nothing if they aren't buying. Just like views are not sales. You can argue important to have more followers, but if you don't know who they are, like might be competition watching, the number has no meaning without who. Do you have socil followers and I have none? I have seven buyer followers and you have two. Who sells more?
943
« on: November 13, 2016, 22:06 »
Many say that for every 1000 files you get one sale?
Per day? Per month? Per year?
Many?
Someone posted on the October sales thread that they'd got a sale with a port of <50. It's just if you happen to have what a buyer needs. Generally different buyers from micro. My best selling genre on iS doesn't sell at all (for me) on Alamy (different images, obviously), which is a great pity.
The consensus on the Alamy forums is that, on average, people there get one sale per month per 1000 images. Some do better, some do worse. Just like comparing yourself to the averages in the poll here. I average more than one sale per month per 1000 images. Sorry I wasn't clear before.
Surprisingly, sales from my small portfolio are in rough agreement with that figure. And I had to stop and reflect on this for a minute because producing 1,000 quality stock photos is a huge amount of work - unless they're dead simple, no-brainer shots. And the return you can expect on that work is pitiful, even from an honest agency like Alamy.
Right and that's why people who quote downloads per thousand are not using their brains. No-brainer shots, no download shots and no number for downloads per unknown photos or 1000 common ordinary shots. There is no expected download per shot number when we are all different and so are our photos. Why do people insist on making up these statitistics with no value or meaning and promoting them? I don't get 1 sale per month for each 1000 photos. Some people will get many more, if they have better pictures. Anything micro has never sold for me on Alamy. I think buyers are smart enough to search for a $10 download instead of $48 download for the same picture? Yes, $20 is average now for a download on Alamy. And better words first that match the photo subject exact will get better sales. Views for a mismatch don't mean any sales ever.
944
« on: November 13, 2016, 21:39 »
1st image is nice but no copy space
2nd image under exposed no copy space
3rd image no copy space
4th image composition is weak, no copy space
5th image probably too small because the majority is white space plus its not a good isolation
youv'e seen whats on sale on every site right? There would be about 5% of what there is by your standards
And is that a bad thing if there was 95% less competition and higher standards, and higher pay of course. So places will take anything. At least getting rejected by DP is good news.
But if there so bad its not competition is it?
Right and that's the good news.
945
« on: November 13, 2016, 21:22 »
I don't know about last month but seeing this month reported up to three days ago, means all this time, they could have done things right instead of delayed? Or maybe the new system will be closer to days instead of months. Ha Ha, IS will now report on time sales, instead of holding our money for 2 months.
946
« on: November 12, 2016, 12:42 »
I hate their time consuming 3 tier keywording because I know that however many images I upload, it makes no difference as I still get zero sales.
To bad, I hear Alamy is high on farmers standing in a pen with sheeps or goats. The 3 tier is your friend, you can weight the most important words first, unlike SS or IS who decide for us what word order and weight should be.
947
« on: November 12, 2016, 12:35 »
1st image is nice but no copy space
2nd image under exposed no copy space
3rd image no copy space
4th image composition is weak, no copy space
5th image probably too small because the majority is white space plus its not a good isolation
youv'e seen whats on sale on every site right? There would be about 5% of what there is by your standards
And is that a bad thing if there was 95% less competition and higher standards, and higher pay of course. So places will take anything. At least getting rejected by DP is good news.
948
« on: November 04, 2016, 21:07 »
May be the first signs of Adobe making serious inroads....SS really need to get their act together imho they do seem to be losing their grip but think they are still a long way ahead.
I think you are right. Maybe not the end, but a serious change in the overwhelming leader dominance. Reminds me that once IS was the leader and the rest were chasing. Adobestock will catch SS eventually, not for a few more years. Growth and innovation will win.
949
« on: November 04, 2016, 10:48 »
Fonts, templates, visual search, editorial photo and video. Anybody else see this giant is moving up the mountain to challenge SS? The way things are going, Leaf can change the forum to the Big Two sometime next year.
If we just get a trade, lose buyers from one site, move them to another. No gain. If we get buyers from places paying low like middle teir and below, we make more, this would be some welcome news for a change.
950
« on: November 04, 2016, 10:40 »
There's a button on the petition page that anyone can use to share it on Facebook.
I'll look into PR Newswire.
I do believe all kinds of creative people will be outraged. 
I do believe that you are correct. Many people will not know what is going on, exposing this is good. More buyers to sites that pay us fairer like SS and FT.
Pages: 1 ... 33 34 35 36 37 [38] 39 40 41 42 43 ... 64
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
