|
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 - Phadrea
Pages: 1 ... 35 36 37 38 39 [40] 41
976
« on: April 18, 2011, 09:55 »
I despair at Istock. I am earning almost half of what I was earning this time last year. I have more files uploaded and exclusive as a photographer (I no longer submit images because it's too hard to get them passed and I haven't the time to work out why) . They keep messing around tweaking the site more and more which affects sales for us in a negative way. I could go on but I haven't the time. Thank God for other sites that are now earning me a much better income (in audio)
977
« on: March 10, 2011, 05:16 »
Since my sales have picked up on Istock and reading some of the comments about SS being hard to get accepted images I will stay put. Istock have also started to take editorial shots which is the reason I wanted to join SS in the first place.
The seasoned self preserving stock pros here who have commented have clearly given off the "Leave it to the big boys and go away and play with your dolls" vibe.
978
« on: February 15, 2011, 05:24 »
I was seriously thinking of it but I am holding back for now. My sales with IS for images have been going downhill since the middle of last year. This month they seem to be selling again so I am hanging on to see what happens.
979
« on: February 14, 2011, 16:17 »
After months of downward sales this month is proving surprisingly much better. I hope it will continue.
980
« on: February 04, 2011, 19:31 »
It's obvious here that there are some who just don't want new members joining SS.
No, if you ask in the right way you'll get plenty of help here. However starting a thread with the title 'Ridiculous Rejections' suggests that you've already decided that you know more than any 'stupid reviewer' does __ and probably anyone else here too. But quite clearly you don't.
Don't flatter yourself Joe. I don't need your help . I have plenty of Photographic experience.
981
« on: February 04, 2011, 14:44 »
Excuse me, you studied photograhy 4 years and you don't know how to downsize an image?
I know it's ridiculous isn't it. I mean, fancy not teaching us that in the late 80's even though we only used film.  Don't worry, I am sure I will work it out on my own. It's not rocket science. Thanks for your help It's obvious here that there are some who just don't want new members joining SS.
982
« on: February 04, 2011, 12:36 »
Thanks for the advice, much appreciated. I won't submit the medals shot to be safe. Unfortunately I don't have many people shots. BTW-How do you downsize an image. I use Raw Shooter and The Gimp.   
983
« on: February 04, 2011, 12:04 »
Yea I will. It's not only me then  Don't worry, I don't get intimidated by bullies in ivory towers, especially when their work isn't itself exceptional.
984
« on: February 04, 2011, 11:34 »
The last time I sat in a lecture room (most time was spent shooting) was 1989. Granted, I might not know as much as you about microstock photography but at the same time don't call what I do "Camera club".
985
« on: February 04, 2011, 11:10 »
Again, quite rude. I understand what you say but the tone is not polite. Camera club ? I didn't study Photography for 4 years and get a HND in specialising in editorial images for nothing. Please do not patronise me.
I thought your opening gambit, in titling this thread 'Ridiculous Rejections', was extremely rude and patronising to the SS reviewers. I just carried on in the tone you had started.
As it happens I think the SS reviewers do a fine job other than that they should probably reject rather more than they do. I didn't 'study photography for 4 years and get an HND in editorial images' so I must yield to your superior knowledge __ but I do make my living from microstock.
Good for you. So do I as well as music and Sound recording. So carrying on in the same tone makes it right to be rude ? My initial post wasn't intending to be rude.
986
« on: February 04, 2011, 10:52 »
There not good ? Very blunt. Quite rude in fact. It's a matter of opinion as I think they are and so do others here. There are people out there that actually like to help others.
The only 'good' stock image is the tools and maybe the singers but I don't know who they are. The others all have either technical flaws or low commercial potential (or both). That bridge shot for instance __ who is going to buy that and what are they going to use it for? Honestly, if you don't understand why that shot is so pointless then you are not yet ready. Brick walls and flowers? Do me a favour. With 14M images online they need to be truly exceptional. SS is a commercial stock agency not your local camera club.
You should follow Xalanx's and others advice and get your critique from the SS forum.
Again, quite rude. I understand what you say but the tone is not polite. Camera club ? I didn't study Photography for 4 years and get a HND in specialising in editorial images for nothing. Please do not patronise me. As for the brick wall, if you look properly you can see it has a dirty great crack down the middle. Do me a favour, that image has sold over on IS. Think about Insurance ads, Surveying, cowboy builders etc etc. This is exactly why I have been reluctant to post in these forums. There has been some helpful advice, some PM's telling me it's good enough for SS but the minority tend to give sardonic remarks.
987
« on: February 04, 2011, 04:09 »
There not good ? Very blunt. Quite rude in fact. It's a matter of opinion as I think they are and so do others here. There are people out there that actually like to help others. This is the trouble with having a critique forum is you get more confused than you started out. Too many mixed messages.
988
« on: February 03, 2011, 17:26 »
Isn't it the technical and compositional quality that counts ? Surely how much demand for a subject is subjective. Anyway, they are unusual. Isn't that what a library wants rather than over stocked similar subject matter?
989
« on: February 03, 2011, 14:48 »
990
« on: February 03, 2011, 10:01 »
The trouble is they don't just review the images on technical quality but also if they think they will sell. One of my last batch that was rejected was for this reason but that images sells well on IS.
991
« on: February 03, 2011, 03:30 »
I am still not sure what images are right here. Is anyone here an ex SS moderator ? I don't want to have to wait yet another 30 days if they don't pass. I need to get earning :-)
992
« on: February 02, 2011, 10:08 »
Can anyone else give me any advice on some of these images ? I don't intend to submit more than one flower shot, I am just giving examples here. Do they want the more unusual type of subject ?
993
« on: February 01, 2011, 12:25 »
994
« on: February 01, 2011, 03:27 »
I have tried posting direct from my PC to here but it gives me img italics and no way to browse to my folder.
995
« on: January 31, 2011, 12:37 »
Have I got to post all these images to a host so they can be viewed by people here ? Having said that, surely everyone's opinion will be different to the admin at SS.
Where do I post them ?
996
« on: January 31, 2011, 05:50 »
I am going to have another shot at submitting but before I do, is it worth getting in at SS ? I mean, I am exclusive with IS BUT my sales are dropping like a lead balloon and I can't get images accepted anymore. is SS harder to get images accepted/sell than IS ? If so, then I can't afford to waste the time. I would like to take more editorial shots that don't require model releases. Thats the thing that initially attracted me to SS.
997
« on: January 29, 2011, 05:13 »
This time last year I had a really good month on Istock. This month so far with just 3 days to go and I am almost a third of earnings compared to last year. My image sales have dropped drasticly since the dreadful F5 was forced upon us. If this month is anything to go by it looks a very depressing year. I can't even get new images passed (my quality hasn't dropped) which is frustrating because I am exclusive with them.
In a nutshell: I am starting to resent Istock and reading other posts here I am not on my own. What a mess they made of an already decent system but that's what greed does until it destroys everything.
998
« on: January 18, 2011, 09:04 »
Well, over a month since I last got my initial rejection. I have had an email from SS since then but how on earth can I read it when it's IN GERMAN !!! Unbelievable.
999
« on: December 03, 2010, 03:54 »
Thats my point exactly. If you have a good shot that isn't 100% sharp but works as an image on an artistic level, that should be the criteria. Like I mentioned above, the images they rejected sell well on IS so I am not going to beat myself up about it. Perhaps they want you to jump through a few hoops before they let you in to filter out the half hearted and dejected. The pain is I can't re-submit until 30 days. Whats that all about ?
1000
« on: December 02, 2010, 15:28 »
I don't know how to do that here.
Pages: 1 ... 35 36 37 38 39 [40] 41
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
