|
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 - snaprender
1
« on: September 30, 2010, 23:11 »
Is it a business that you sold it to? If so, you may want to send them over a 10 day demand. It is a demand letting them know you plan on turning this into a collection agency who will report it on their credit if they do not pay. If they are a for profit business, you may want to add something about turning in a 1099-misc to the IRS on them at the end of the year also. They would owe IRS taxes on the value of the work since it was 'free'. I would also actually consider turning it over to a collection agency if I where you. They do all the work and take about 30%, so you still get 70%. You can usually get them to do a 10 day demand for free.
2
« on: September 25, 2010, 19:03 »
I've stopped uploading since the announcement also, but I haven't deactivated anything yet. I still have some x-mas videos waiting for approval. Once Jan. comes around I will deactivate them. I canceled some other uploaded videos before they got reviewed.
3
« on: May 11, 2010, 18:57 »
12 novel uses. 11 at $1.00 (.50 for me) and 1 at $9.98 ($5.00 of me).
5
« on: December 06, 2009, 17:21 »
Just wondering for the people that have uploaded to clipcanvas how they are doing? I've recently been thinking of joining and am just wondering.
Thanks
Snaprender
6
« on: December 05, 2009, 11:49 »
What she is doing is redistribution/print on demand and it is not allowed in any of dreamstimes regular or EL licenses from what I understand in their terms. I would contact dreamstime and let them know whats going on.
7
« on: November 25, 2009, 10:44 »
I've been submitting video to them for several months now and have sales almost monthly (the euro to usd makes it worthwhile for me). I've always got a great response whenever I have emailed them and I really like them.
I have some photos on there, but havent had any sales on the photos. I just recently (2 days ago) submitted some vectors. If you do decide to submit vectors, you just upload the eps file (no jpg preview needed because they generate that for you).
Tara
Snaprender
8
« on: November 06, 2009, 14:54 »
Pretty soon we won't be able to submit anything. Just about everything was manufactured or made by someone. That would leave nature the only subject legally open. Otherwise we will need a MR or PR for everything submitted. Wonder if we will hsve to get all releases notarized?
It may be time to find another way.
Roadrunner
Good news for 3D artists. No wonder mevans is doing so well with his port of 3D cars.
They're axing the 3D also. All my 3D motorcycles (which I designed myself) and cars have been removed.
That must be a mistake! Have you contacted them about that?
No I havent. They are still on several other sites (including IS) so I guess I'm just not that concerned. I saw some other 3D artists are having theirs removed too (and I think some illustrators according to the SS forum). This type of stuff is what reminds me why I would never want to go exclusive anywhere. The rules seem to change much too often in microstock.
9
« on: November 05, 2009, 17:02 »
Pretty soon we won't be able to submit anything. Just about everything was manufactured or made by someone. That would leave nature the only subject legally open. Otherwise we will need a MR or PR for everything submitted. Wonder if we will hsve to get all releases notarized?
It may be time to find another way.
Roadrunner
Good news for 3D artists. No wonder mevans is doing so well with his port of 3D cars.
They're axing the 3D also. All my 3D motorcycles (which I designed myself) and cars have been removed.
10
« on: October 29, 2009, 16:12 »
I also had another sale there the other day. It was a bid and I accepted it.  - $2.40 royalty - nice.
11
« on: October 21, 2009, 19:32 »
There is only so many times that FT can treat their contributors with worthless disdain, forever moving the goalposts, continually reducing their benefits and unfairly favouring the few over the majority __ whilst all the time refusing to engage in or even allow any discussion of such issues on their forum.
That is very true and the reason I left and have never looked back. I just wonder what their really up to though. It seems they do these things and then turn the tables a couple months down the road. Like their video collection - started uploading because I liked their commission..then all of a sudden a new subscription comes out and the new commision is $3.60 for and HD - hmmm. Not to mention the video contest for who can upload and get the most approved videos to sweeten the deal before they brought down the hammer. Or when they decided to offer $.50 for images that hadn't sold in 2 years for the free section...that actually turned into another site (photoxpress) for them and gives NO link back to the photographers portfolio on Fotolia for a possible paid sale. Or do you remember when the CEO said that subsciptions were ruining microstock...then 6 months later they started subs. The list goes on....
12
« on: October 11, 2009, 11:56 »
If it looks like a flat scan of the american money, it would get rejected for copyright. If you using where its like sticking out of a wallet or something like that, I believe that is okay. Its hard to tell without seeing the picture.
13
« on: September 18, 2009, 09:16 »
Yeah, I was really excited about P5's August, and am even more excited about Sept. So, far it looks like September might be able to out do August and become the new BME.
14
« on: September 12, 2009, 12:02 »
I would have a heart attack and/or nervous breakdown if I ever saw one of those spiders alive and anywhere near me.
I have my own system for killing spiders (in the house) - as soon as I see one..... I let out a blood curdling scream and freeze until my boyfriend brings a shoe to kill it or my Italian Greyhound eats it. If my boyfriend is not home and the spider is where my dog can't reach it... I let out a blood curdling scream freeze for a couple moments and then get my super super hold hairspray and nail it till it falls to the floor where I hit it with a shoe in a manic frenzy until it basically disintegrates.
15
« on: September 03, 2009, 22:37 »
Same here.
16
« on: September 01, 2009, 23:54 »
I've had a lot rejected there also for the 'not suitable for stock' or 'too many of the same subject' when there are 2 pics with the same model in them. I gave up a while ago. 
17
« on: August 26, 2009, 17:38 »
Not to play the devils advocate here (my photos on Cutcaster are priced with the algorithm), but I do take a little off the top for pricing my footage at Pond5 compared to the other sites I upload to and nearly every month Pond5 is my best earning video site. Pond5 has the highest RPV (V=Video) than any other site, so there could be some logic behind the blog post depending on how much the person is lowering the price..but thats just my own observation from my videos.
Also, wanted to point out that Dreamstime recently lowered commissions even though they posted how great they are doing and how everything is increasing, so lowering commissions may not always have to do with a site having fewer sales.
18
« on: August 15, 2009, 10:53 »
Just to prove the OP's point, I had some money deducted from my FT earnings this month. No one has bothered to inform me why. Hadn't I checked, I would never have found out.
It was probably from a fraudulent credit card. I heard they are having a lot of that going on there (I closed my account there so I wouldnt personally know though). This may sound silly, I know, but I am surprised someone (contributor in USA) has not turned them into the BBB or Federal Trade Commission. From everything I have read, the company that accepted the fraudulent credit card is the one that is supposed to take the loss and if the credit card company is not able to get the money back from the retailer, then they take the hit. Of course, if a retailer has too many fraudulent sales, they will get fines from the credit card company and possibly loss their ability to accept credit cards.
19
« on: August 13, 2009, 23:04 »
Yes, it's much better for a CEO to spend his time wisely! (insert sarcasm) Apparently John Griffin should be spending his time devising a scheme to raise prices on buyers while lowering commissions for contributors like so many other CEO's are doing these days! What were you thinking Mr. John Griffin coming up with a tactic to drive people to your site and get everyones attention?!?!? (end of sarcasm)
Snaprender
One second... Cutcaster making a ton of pointless mistakes is somehow excused by the fact that other agencies keep lowering our cut? You know, it is possible to be competant AND not lower royalties. It sounds like youd be happy with any screw up as long as your percentage stays intact!
I'm missing where Cutcaster made a TON of POINTLESS MISTAKES?!?!? Seems like a very dramatic statement to me. I highly doubt this was much of a mistake at all, nor do I think it was a 'screw up', but that's just my opinion and to each his/her own. I cant help but think this move was planned to get more attention to the site in which it has succeeded. I do appreciate your efforts Leontura in trying to assume what makes me happy though, it's nice to see someone is thinking of me - thanks 
20
« on: August 13, 2009, 09:40 »
Yes, it's much better for a CEO to spend his time wisely! (insert sarcasm) Apparently John Griffin should be spending his time devising a scheme to raise prices on buyers while lowering commissions for contributors like so many other CEO's are doing these days! What were you thinking Mr. John Griffin coming up with a tactic to drive people to your site and get everyones attention?!?!? (end of sarcasm)
Snaprender
Hold that thought and when you see another artist has copied your image or illustration, almost identical same composition keywords and title, just remeber it is a smart move as they are only trying to drive customers to thier images.
Bless them all!
David 
Too late, I already had that happen this week (other than it was a video and the title and keywords were changed). It was taken down by the sites that he uploaded it to just like Vetta was taken out of Betta than Vetta (except my video were he downloaded it from clearly states I am the copyright holder. As well as the fact that he was violating the terms and conditions he signed up for prior to downloading it - a bit of a difference from this instance obviously - but hey apples or oranges). I can promise you though, if I go to any site and search a picture of a 'Business handshake' or 'woman with headset' there will be more than one image and they will have similar keywords. I also never said it was a smart move, I would just rather see this move than ones were royalties are being lowered (hence the sarcasm).
21
« on: August 13, 2009, 09:15 »
Bizarre. Im not in a rush to contribute to a company which seems to come up with policies on the back of a beer mat.
"I did research on the Vetta trademark and istock in fact did NOT have it registered anywhere in the world but had a claim to it (according to them) due to common law."
So you did something which half of the people here thought was probably illegal but didnt think to consult a lawyer first? Come on now it would have cost you a few hundred bucks. Just call up a copyright lawyer and ask- one hour session.
"To be completely honest, I found the whole process of creating a collection and the legal tussle that ensued to be very interesting, a bit fun, a bit scary due to some perceived threats"
Im sure contributors will be glad to know that the CEO of the company is using his time wisely!
I think "Betta" is also pretty bad. It sounds cheap. "Premiere Collection" or something similar would have been a lot better.
Yes, it's much better for a CEO to spend his time wisely! (insert sarcasm) Apparently John Griffin should be spending his time devising a scheme to raise prices on buyers while lowering commissions for contributors like so many other CEO's are doing these days! What were you thinking Mr. John Griffin coming up with a tactic to drive people to your site and get everyones attention?!?!? (end of sarcasm) Snaprender
22
« on: August 12, 2009, 18:55 »
m@m, thank you for your welcome!
Everybody else HIIII! I'm back! 
Glad to see you back white child! When I left Fibtolia last month I used my earnings (since I had not hit payout before closing my account) to purchase 21 small images from a friend. So friends do buy friends photos regardless of what other say.
23
« on: August 11, 2009, 16:59 »
I'm having the same problem. They are rejecting images that are in sets (same models) and my acceptance ratio is less than 50% (which is way low compared to every other site I am on). I stopped uploading because I'm finding it to be a waste of my time. Lots of 'too similar' because they have the same model in them and 'not suitable for stock' rejections.
24
« on: August 11, 2009, 12:20 »
My personal suggestions:
Mount Saint Helens (WA)
Pike Place Market (Seattle)
There's Fort Vancouver - but that's about it for here in Vancouver, WA.
Tillamook Cheese Factory (Oregon Coast - be sure and grab some cheese curds)
Devils Punch Bowl (Oregon Coast south of the Tillamook Cheese factory)
Multnomah Falls (Oregon - Columbia Gorge)
OMSI - (Portland, OR)
Thats all I can think of without more coffee.
25
« on: August 06, 2009, 14:59 »
And if 2 other stock photgraphers get the other two to do same.
Vetta's headache with BTV cutcaster will grow in a large migraine 
Hahaha. Then they can all fight for the 'Vetta' Registered trademark since it doesnt show up as a US registered trademark for either Getty or IStock (although, they could still be in the application process???)
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
