|
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 - incarno
1
« on: February 21, 2013, 10:21 »
as a markII owner I have to say I would go for the 6D if I had the choice today: smaller, wireless, app, better lowlight-AF and high iso.
2
« on: February 21, 2013, 05:05 »
John Lund:http://blog.johnlund.com/2013/02/getty-sales-and-numbers-for-thought.html
There is a price point at which the volume just does not make up for the low prices. That concerns me since there seems to be a movement of clients away from the higher priced sites, including microstock sites such as iStockphoto, and towards the less expensive agencies such as Shutterstock.
Exactly my experience I'm struggling to really succeed in micro, I still make several times more at macro despite of growing difficulties and lower prices over the years and months.
3
« on: February 14, 2013, 06:25 »
Installed Wordpress on my host now looking forward to beta-testing :-)
4
« on: February 12, 2013, 06:07 »
Thanks for the great information James. It is super to have information from the source.
I agree, therefore is it possible to have the newbie link removed in this case?
5
« on: February 11, 2013, 11:57 »
Sorry to hear that Sean! They have lost their mind!
6
« on: February 09, 2013, 11:33 »
7
« on: February 09, 2013, 04:21 »
They are very quick with account deactivation. They asked me for the reason in their deactivation email.  I must say I'm relieved they are 1% of my microstock-earnings and have always been a pita with their seven word description requirement I won't go back to them now even they would change their sub-system.
8
« on: February 08, 2013, 06:00 »
Leaving Bigstock is easy they are already my worst performing site. So Good-bye Bigstock!
But it's obvious that these RC-Targets will be implemented at SS which will lead to an commission-cut for me and many others.
9
« on: February 06, 2013, 16:49 »
Not cool to see my Yuri-referral earnings go   Well but it was quite nice while it lasted 
10
« on: January 31, 2013, 09:45 »
Xn view?
only free for private use afaik this is clearly a commercial use and should be paid.
11
« on: January 30, 2013, 07:28 »
I cannot find out, what you want with this post.
If I remember right back from the days where I deleted my IS-port you have to write a reason in a box why you deactivate the file...
12
« on: January 29, 2013, 13:06 »
Do you know if a $6.00 Getty sale on 11/01/2012 is related to the Google deal?
It very probably is, in the first batch it was 12,-$ than they thought 12,-$ commission is way too much money for a complete buy-out of all photographers and models rights and the reduced it to 6,- $ for the following batches!
13
« on: January 29, 2013, 12:25 »
Hi you are obviously a very nice guy and I really wish you luck and success. But I do think you do underestimate some things it's good to have your own selling site but to create a new agency that it's just another ball park IMHO.
14
« on: January 29, 2013, 09:59 »
Wow you are lucky normally new sites and sites owners with no marketing/business plans at all don't get such warm and nice comments here. Well in this regard good luck from me too! 
15
« on: January 28, 2013, 19:49 »
It seems a lot of people instinctively want sites that network with their friend's images. I thought that was my idea!
sorry I probably just wanted to highlight this important part of your post! Of course it was and is your idea!
16
« on: January 28, 2013, 19:26 »
PS
LOBO
Don't even dare to erase this thread...
LOL
17
« on: January 28, 2013, 02:27 »
I have already my own site I have paid 1000,- Euros for the software, still I find an opensource solution very interesting but I could only offer pretty basic html-knowledge.
I think the future could be an opensource software that would allow an optional universal search through all sites/hosts on every site that uses this opensource software.
I think is RM out because it would complicate the things way too much. Also my RM-Agencies treat my very fair even Getty pays a reasonable commission for RM-stuff (30-40% in opposite to a flat 20% for RF) so I don't think there is any need for an individual RM-Agency at the moment.
18
« on: January 28, 2013, 01:49 »
Why to apply to istock in the first place The people shots are quite okay. The cable shot could be quite useful as stock. The Tiger looks okay too but it also looks like a picture from a zoo, if so you are aware that you need a property release for that in most cases? The nightshot of the city is very bad, bad framing (you did cut the roof of the building) and the horizon is not straight. The landscape is very boring and the horizon doesn't look straight to me too.
19
« on: January 14, 2013, 06:03 »
okay will have a look into it and delete some model-released one as I do care about them.
20
« on: January 14, 2013, 05:51 »
I don't have any files at istock but I do have files on Thinkstock (from Stockxpert) anybody knows If I can still and how delete there?
21
« on: January 11, 2013, 12:26 »
I have 4 images there. They are from Getty/Flickr collection. Google bought them in 31-Oct-12. They paid $60 and I got $12 for each one.
And in 29-Nov-12, google bought another 2 images (Customer Name: Google: eC
ommerce & Google Dri), but can't find them there. Something different is that they paid only $30 for each one this time. 
How do you feel about it? Is it a problem for you? Why isn't this discussed in the Flickr forums? Four pictures are quite a lot if I read the iStock forums there is a lot of outcry even from contributors that aren't affected at all.
Are any of the Getty/Flickr images in the Google set? If so, then certainly the media wind-up could be started at the Flickr forums. Even if we don't know, the Getty/Flickr contributors would likely want to go look for themselves to see if they have any orphans now loose.
Yes there are many Getty/Flickr images in the Google set!
22
« on: January 11, 2013, 12:05 »
I have 4 images there. They are from Getty/Flickr collection. Google bought them in 31-Oct-12. They paid $60 and I got $12 for each one.
And in 29-Nov-12, google bought another 2 images (Customer Name: Google: eC
ommerce & Google Dri), but can't find them there. Something different is that they paid only $30 for each one this time.
How do you feel about it? Is it a problem for you? Why isn't this discussed in the Flickr forums? Four pictures are quite a lot if I read the iStock forums there is a lot of outcry even from contributors that aren't affected at all.
23
« on: January 11, 2013, 07:25 »
I have browsed through all files in this collection and I must say it's a wonderful collection very diverse with all aspects of modern stock photography. Who ever curated this did a great job! Unfortunately he did curate it for the dumbest deal in stock photography ever!
It's not all new images. I just had a quick look and recognised many Getty Images that I bought for commercial projects at least 8 years ago. Not that it makes any difference. I may be another handing in my crown shortly.
Certainly there are some classic shots but it's not a typical micro or macro collection it's very diverse and because of it a very valuable collection and shouldn't give away for free or peanuts!
24
« on: January 11, 2013, 05:41 »
I have browsed through all files in this collection and I must say it's a wonderful collection very diverse with all aspects of modern stock photography. Who ever curated this did a great job! Unfortunately he did curate it for the dumbest deal in stock photography ever!
25
« on: January 10, 2013, 11:57 »
In your case I would stay exclusive, you have very high ranked background pictures on IS, such backgrounds don't get easy accepted these days and if accepted it's hard to bring them up in searches.
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
