|
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 - Red On
1
« on: June 06, 2017, 09:40 »
on my stat I see 2017-06-01 6,469.59
anybody have the may total amont $ taked by shutterstock to payout ? Mine is not taked yet
Yes me. I have seen 15 thousands of dollars in my SS homepage two years ago, as monthly amount. They removed it in a couple of days and sent me an email of apologize. No payout, obviously. There was discrepancy among this figure and the details of sold photos, therefore no heart attack.
2
« on: December 08, 2016, 18:08 »
I my first batch for microstock, there was a photograph of two pidgeon on a wire and only sky as background. Was refused because without personal release. I don't know if they are stupid or idiot
3
« on: December 01, 2016, 11:15 »
For me i love making money and knowing that my images are used and published all over the world.
That's one of the reason why I use microstock only as parking for second choice shoot: publish everywhere and you don't know where, and ever without signature
4
« on: October 27, 2016, 13:03 »
Only one thing is needed in a food photograph: make you hungry or provoke mouthwashing. Part of my job is with starred chef and this is what they want. I love Indian cuisine, but I didn't find in Iris any image so sexy to do that. About medium format: 0,01% of food picture customers needs to print giant size and file so large. I use twice a year my view camera with medium format back: one is for a customer, one just for me; and for the customer is not matter of pixels, but only of Depth of Field
5
« on: October 27, 2016, 12:38 »
I can't left iStock for a whileI will do ASAP, but the fact is that they make a mistake, paying to me a quite important amount of money in advance. To delete my portfolio I have to wait to sell enough to delete the minus sign on the amount. The problem is that I'm not uploading since last year, and I see a regular decreasing in sold images, day by day. From now, with my 2 cents (per picture), I will wait for a long time before be released from this prison. 
6
« on: July 31, 2016, 12:32 »
this facebook page is so useless and full of junk that i can't see who would visit it intentinally. And i think the one who created has a maximum of 1 neuron.
about half of the world population is "mononeuron"
7
« on: April 21, 2016, 12:34 »
In my life as a photo-reporter, I sold some time editorials as extended license and perfectly legal: the buyer was the owner of the brand with full right to use the images. Could be your case too
8
« on: April 21, 2016, 12:28 »
Sorry, wrong thread I will post in the right one
9
« on: March 08, 2016, 14:47 »
What does it mean "VCG has also purchased the Demotix brand and content"? They cannot buy any content since it's property of the authors...
10
« on: February 19, 2016, 12:17 »
Is this a worldwide business or US only?
11
« on: February 16, 2016, 17:29 »
Ah okay, I understand the truth now that us contributors are just pawns and preyed on by big companies as the answer of 'Chill' does nothing to address this massive issue and instead is the standard 'ad hominem attack' (attack the person not the issue) used most likely from a stock marketplace employee or shill.
@TheDrift, audited by whom exactly? Wouldn't the marketplace be paying some auditor to support their narrative and story? ...and if the auditor did find an issue we would never hear about it.
Folks, wake up and demand more accountability and transparency in these marketplaces...we need a better system instead of just trusting that there are no bad actors or hackers screwing us out of our royalties!
How they became large companies?
12
« on: January 22, 2016, 14:56 »
Two of my photos DepositPhotos rejected because they have no commercial value
http://www.shutterstock.com/pic.mhtml?id=357544553
http://www.shutterstock.com/pic.mhtml?id=352015511
It is possible that they don't have commercial value. Time will tell.
I want to be honest: the first of the two images are not suitable ecc... because a lack of clear subject. Is quite confused for the microstock language, where a tree is a tree and a forest is something more than two trees. Deep or complicated concept, or pictures that require more than five words to be explicated are not suitable for the market that need simple concept. After that, I'm strongly convinced that behind the screen, to evaluate our pictures there are a majority without competence, or so lazy to take decision, using instead, a coin. Doesn't matter. 75% of my rejection are accepted one or two months later.
13
« on: January 22, 2016, 06:51 »
I'm sure that there are numerous jocker among the judges of our pictures. In my first batch submitted to Istock one photoograph of two pidgeon with really blurred background were refused because a lack of release; last year DT refused a still life of a pear isolated on black for the same reason, but accepted as RF a photograph of a medical machine with the brand in evidence (my fault to don't delete). Then I had refused an entire batch o 12 still life that were used last year for an important adv campaign, because "poor light".
I accept the verdict of this judges like a divine storm, Don't understand but accept. And resubmit as second chance
14
« on: January 03, 2016, 19:42 »
Thanks ShadySue,
I'm lucky because the worst price that I got by Alamy is $9.45. At the moment I have stolen pictures accerted mainly from DT e DP, excluding my website.
I have almost left DT because when I have alerted about a picture that was distributed only through DT, and sold only one time, that I found printed in a magazine with the signature of another agency, they have answered that can happen. Something like we are not organised to prosecute agencies and publishing company.... Because I know well the main shareholder of the signing agency, the only satisfaction was post a bill in his usual coffeshop, with the picture with his signature and my picture not cropped and the headline "XXX is a robber", then send a bill to the magazine that has payed $170. But this was possible because was happened in my country...
Well, all this to say that never my editorial photographs will be distributed by microstock.
15
« on: December 31, 2015, 19:27 »
Usually I don't check the box for Alamy in the poll, because I totally agree. Alamy sell another kind of images, enough far from microstock, and for me is 99% editorial. Through Alamy I sell my archive: wide reportage, old news and events, street and travel. I earn with Alamy more that with the entire microstock but is included in the "Low earners" agencies in the poll results, considering that for each photograph uploaded for microstock I have three in Alamy. What I'm selling in Alamy are the BW reportage (film not digital), portraits of famous people (Nelson Mandela, Dubcek, Honecker, Khadafi etc.) and now, thanks to my new customer, portrait of famous chef working in their kitchen. All pictures that I would never sell for $ .36 and that I want with my signature printed.
P.S. On the other side, I have an average of two download/months in Istock, that is the worst result ever!
16
« on: October 20, 2015, 02:28 »
How much cost wedding photographer per wedding in usa? in my country is 1000-1500 average ( 16 hours wedding, 2-3 day processing)
I think there are a very small number of wedding photographers who can make $$$$$ I think it has more to do with marketing and interpersonal skills than anything else - which rules me out 
A wedding in Italy cost from 1000 to 5000 Euro, depend by the name of the photographer and from the region, but 2-3 days of processing means that you a are a photoshopper and not a photographer...
17
« on: October 19, 2015, 08:28 »
Well, I'm not a professional microstocker: my uploads came from the garbage of my assignment, when I shot something more in the same set or location where I'm working for somebody else. In this way, with a bit more of 1000 images approved and online in five agencies, I can renew my equipment when in needs and pay some advertising to reach my real customer. Nothing more.
But I shot almost eighty thousand pictures per year and I have to keyword all for my purposes. Send some of them in MS is not a job, but just a couple of click per batch more.
18
« on: July 04, 2015, 17:45 »
This is not a joke: some years ago, one of my first submission was a simple and clear pictur of two pidgeons grabbed on an electrical wire suspended. Just pidgeons, wire and sky. It was rejected because "we require a model release". Unfortunately these two pidegeons were flight away.
19
« on: June 16, 2015, 14:11 »
Well, something is happened. I have the sum in the payment report waiting for clearance, BUT: in the financial page the sum is not zero, is negative as $-98.59! This should means that next month I have to pay Istock?
The balance is growing: now I owe to Istock "only" $98.31!
20
« on: June 15, 2015, 17:18 »
Well, something is happened. I have the sum in the payment report waiting for clearance, BUT: in the financial page the sum is not zero, is negative as $-98.59! This should means that next month I have to pay Istock?
21
« on: June 15, 2015, 12:33 »
I can't trust in Charles Taylor II (the first one was the worst president of Liberia, indicted for many crimes, hoax etc...), because his proposal is absolutely wrong. To became shareholder I need a reliable business plan first.
22
« on: June 12, 2015, 05:40 »
bank interests 
23
« on: March 07, 2015, 18:35 »
It seems not, but...as you know: I'm selling photos and in the rare case that I need to buy I prefere SS or FT! Anyway I believe that up to last year prices were in dollars, and I'm payed in USD. I have the site in english to practice, but in Italian is exactly the same.
24
« on: March 07, 2015, 17:26 »
That's are screenshot of what I see in Italy
25
« on: March 07, 2015, 12:55 »
It is clearly written on IS site that if you pay in Euro you'll have 10% discount. That's a bad move, because Euro is going to the parity with USD.
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
