|
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 - Photosgraphis
Pages: [1]
2
« on: February 16, 2007, 14:10 »
Hi all!
I've just released version 1.1 of Microstock Monitor, which adds support for iStockPhoto. It seems that iStockPhoto has no concept of monthly downloads (I'm not sure, I got accepted, but don't have any downloads yet), so the "current downloads" field shows "N/A" (as for Lucky Oliver).
It would be awesome if you could grab the latest release (no need to uninstall 1.0) and tell me if and how iStockPhoto stats work for you in Microstock Monitor.
http://microstockmonitor.unfolded.com/
Many thanks!
Michael
Well, just like you said, it shows my current balance, but not the number of downloads. But, anyway, it's great, you don't even need to improve anything else. Well, if you really want to, maybe you could also include other sites (l123rf, featurepics...) and provide a "minimize to systray" option. As you can see, nothing you should really bother with... Best
3
« on: February 16, 2007, 14:00 »
Hi all,
due to the frustration with microstock watcher (support didn't reply to my e-mails either) and because I like programming, I wrote my own software to receiving stats:
http://microstockmonitor.unfolded.com
There is also a dedicated forum on Microstock Monitor in this forum (in the software section).
I'm looking forward to see you there.
Ah yes...and Microstock Monitor is of course free :-)
All the best,
Michael
Hello Michael, I've just tried it. It works great! Thanks.
4
« on: February 12, 2007, 21:49 »
Thank you for your message. Yes, I guess there is no other option than keep trying...
Do they say why they rejected your images? In many cases (although they have been a bit picky lately) their rejections come with some useful feedback. The image may not be bad, but on occasions I could really improved it as directed.
Regards,
Adelaide
Yes, but in a very subjective way, that's why I'm still without knowing what to do. Well, i think I'll need more time to decode the "Unfortunately it's not what we're looking for" message... Best
5
« on: February 12, 2007, 21:37 »
Wow, today four of my submitted photos were rejected at SS because of "overuse of noise reduction software"... lol, I think my SS addiction is turning into a "Neat Image" addiction too...
6
« on: February 08, 2007, 22:48 »
Photosgraphis.... Don't let it get you down.... I was accepted on my first try at StockXpert... but since I've been on, they've rejected about 60% of my portfolio.. for "too dark" or " don't need this kind of photo"...  So, there's no rhyme or reason... Hang in there, you'll get on. Rejection is part of the business.. Don't take it personal.  -tom
Thank you for your message. Yes, I guess there is no other option than keep trying... Best
7
« on: February 06, 2007, 22:01 »
Hey, let's try hard to improve our photoshop skills! 
| <![CDATA[<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pcFlxSlOKNI" target="_blank" class="aeva_link bbc_link new_win">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pcFlxSlOKNI</a>]]> | Cheers
8
« on: February 06, 2007, 20:22 »
i realy understand you! most oft the stockagencies are "sagen wir mal" realy unfriendly... i know stockexpert.. i think i have 100 pictures there with only 25 Euro a month sales... but best think dont be angry there are so much agencies...dont worry
By the way... You've got an awesome portfolio, congratulations!
9
« on: February 06, 2007, 20:19 »
i realy understand you! most oft the stockagencies are "sagen wir mal" realy unfriendly... i know stockexpert.. i think i have 100 pictures there with only 25 Euro a month sales... but best think dont be angry there are so much agencies...dont worry
Thanks for your kind words XeniaII, but I'm not angry with them, I know they all have their reasonable reasons for acting like this. But I also know that each agency has its own particular preference and peculiarity. I just would like to hear from people that are already stockxpert members how they succeeded in becoming part of their crew. Best
10
« on: February 06, 2007, 20:04 »
Hello,
Well, for the second time I've tried to be part of the "Stockxpert community" but then I've failed again. I knew it was not easy to be accepted there but I didn't know it could be that hard. The strangest thing is that I am now member of all the other top microstock sites and I was accepted by Shutterstock on my first attempt, and by Istock on my 2nd attempt. So I'm still not sure what they exactly want from me. Maybe it's because I don't take photos of people or, maybe because my photos are still far from being of good quality or original.
Here's the message they sent to me explaining, in an obscure way, the reasons why they didnt approve my 2nd batch:
Dear phgraphis,
We regret to inform you that your artist application was rejected. We are very sorry but at the moment we are not looking for pictures like the ones you uploaded.
Admin message: Overall quality is good. If you would have taken the time to clean the scratches and dust in Photoshop, it would of brought up the quality even more. Unfortunately, content wise, it is not what we are looking for.
I'm pretty sure that the dust/scratches issue applies to the "pocket watch" photo I've sent to them, but I would not agree that that's an important issue regarding all the other 4 photos.
I'd be glad if anybody here could send me any suggestion so I can improve the quality of my photos before I try to send another photo sample to Stockxpert. Feel free to choose your personal "top 5" on my portfolio too.
Thanks!
11
« on: February 01, 2007, 09:08 »
I once bought a book on Lulu - 130 different ways to make Jello Shots.
It's not safe.
So, what do you think about the quality of their prints, is it acceptable?
12
« on: February 01, 2007, 08:42 »
Hi, I'm not sure if this is the right place for posting this, as it's not exactly a microstock subject, but, anyway, I'd like to know if anyone has ever tried to sell images, photo calendars or even photo books at Lulu ( http://www.lulu.com/)? I don't know if it's a good idea to try it or not... Thanks
13
« on: January 31, 2007, 21:21 »
Hi,
I've found a briefly but interesting description about the differences between royalty-free and rights-managed photos at the Wikipedia site and would like to share it with you. Here's the description:
Royalty-free (a confusing term, this does not mean the image is "free")
1. Pay a one-time fee to use the image multiple times for multiple purposes (with limits).
2. No time limit on when you can use an image.
3. No one can have exclusive rights of a Royalty-free image (the photographer can sell the image as many times as he wants).
4. A Royalty-free image usually has a limit to how many times you can reproduce it. For example, a license might allow you to print 500,000 brochures with the purchased image. The amount of copies made is called the print run. Above that print run you are required to pay a fee per brochure, usually 1 to 3 cents. Magazines with a large print run cannot use a standard Royalty-free license and therefore they either purchase images with a Rights-managed license or have in-house photographers.
Rights-managed (sometimes called "licensed images")
1. Pay each time you use the image.
2. There is a time limit on how long a buyer has exclusive use of an image (usually one year). This allows the photographer to sell exclusive rights to the image again when the first buyer's time limit is up.
3. You must choose a Rights-managed license if you want exclusive use of an image. The photographer would not be allowed to sell the image to anyone else if exclusivity is part of the license. Not all Rights-managed licenses are exclusive, that must be stipulated in the agreement.
4. Fee is based on such things as exclusivity, distribution, length of time used, geographic location of use.
5. A Rights-managed image usually allows a much larger print run per image than a Royalty-free license.
6. Editorial is a form of rights-managed license when there are no releases for the subjects. Since there are no releases the images cannot be used for advertising or to depict controversial subjects, only for news or educational purposes.
I hope it is useful to someone.
Regards
Pages: [1]
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
