|
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 - KimC
26
« on: March 14, 2023, 08:50 »
Many of you do pixel peeping and says the image is OK. Because that is wat you were used to at Shutterstock. Maybe the reviewer though: "No way this image will ever sell" or "We have a zillion better images on that topic already".
27
« on: February 28, 2023, 02:34 »
I think that AI will eventually kill stock photograpy. I have seen what AI can do now where it is merely in a "newbie" state. It will improve. If AI does no manage to kill stock photography, then pirates and low commisions will. We have not had the last "exciting news".
28
« on: October 21, 2022, 14:28 »
OK for me, with a reasonable average RPD for a change.
29
« on: October 19, 2022, 01:43 »
I'm just looking at why we can't make that change on our own. There's always hope that some representatives will see the farce that the laws are, and how artists are not protected, and maybe do something to make them functional and give us the ability to fight back.
The law is not there to protect us. The law is there and made as complex as it is so that these high paid lawyers can argue in long lasting high-paid court sessions about right or wrong.
30
« on: October 18, 2022, 06:18 »
The hourly rate for a top-tier litigation partner may range from $1000 to $1700. There are no limits to the amount of money that may be spent on processing and evaluating electronic discovery in huge cases. Other than these, there are travel, expert, deposition, and court fees."[/i]
That is a lot of 10 cent sales. So basically we just need to accept this?
31
« on: September 29, 2022, 06:43 »
I honestly don't understand how anyone can have their work on 123RF anymore. Sorry, but I don't think you can be helped.
Yes, I have work on 123RF. The platform is crappy and wobbly. But they pay me 0,216$ per subscription which still is 10-20 cents more than several other agencies.
32
« on: September 26, 2022, 08:22 »
33
« on: September 21, 2022, 07:51 »
I had 5x0.02 cents today  . How and where can you opt out? I have not heard about this deal.
Under the graph on your dashboard there is a field with Additional Revenue Options. My dashboard says that I can opt out in April. And that is what I will do - if it actually works.
34
« on: September 21, 2022, 01:11 »
This is how 2 cent sales via distributor ends up.
My fabolous share is 0,00!
I will opt out of distibutor sales whenever I get the chance.
35
« on: September 12, 2022, 14:18 »
BUT Shutterstock has the best contributor support of any agency.... Shutterstock is the greatest stock agency in existence. Absolutely!
You have no idea how much i laughed. Thank you for your post. 
Congratulations i think you're in 0,00001% that probably thinks that.
Please, please, please....
Don't forget to get a big tattoo with SSTK logo and btw upload-upload-uplload it to your portfolio too.
If you're right you probably sell thousands!!! Absolutely! ehehhe 
It would be rejected for visible trademarks, image noise (the AI takes he skin pores for image noise) and lack of focus (the AI cant understand that a tattoo machine cant work with the same precision as a professional inkjet printer)
36
« on: September 12, 2022, 06:29 »
Thank you for your words of appreciation, Joe!
The problem is not you. But if you look back to the time, when for example at Fotolia the number of views and downloads of each image was still displayed, you unfortunately have to realize that too many contributors did not think like you. And the worst thing was that the algorithm favored newer images and thus placed the copies before the original in the search.
That is also my concern. Then Shutterstock added a similar feature like that you describe from Fotolia. Not my concern, as I am no longer a member of the Shuterstock clan. But I think you got Joe's original question wrong. Joe asked for our rejections. I can see a pont in that, bt I can't see a point in those posts where someone asks in anger "Why were all my photos rejected!" - without showing us the photos or telling the reason given along with the rejection.
37
« on: August 24, 2022, 06:03 »
My Eyeem payment also came a moment ago!
38
« on: August 15, 2022, 04:19 »
I can't remember the last time I had a rejection at Shutterstock.
try to submit something with a lot of leaves 
Asphalt and concrete also translates into image noise on shuttersick
39
« on: August 14, 2022, 03:11 »
Why bother with random rejections, low royalties and a stinky support. If you want to do it, do it but consider if it is worth the time.
40
« on: August 07, 2022, 12:34 »
I am definitely not. Why would I do that?
Thats not the point. I was an avid photographer and spent lots of time with the photos that are already on there.
I want my money and close my account..
And some respect
I don't know what your health problem is, and I do not need to know. But it sounds like something has happened to you recently. I got pernmanently ill in 2017. I could improve a little, but most important was that I over time learned to live with my illness, shut some of my activities down, and change others, do things in another way - and I am now able to participate in some sort of stock photography again. Health issues have become a part of my portfolio, they were not before. Those things sells on DT. While I was in hospital I never thought I would be able to do that again. DT is not a pixel peeping agency, and they pay us 35 cents for a subscription, who else does that - except AS if you've been there long enough? If you can not make new material for DT, then you just need to accept that these conditions were what you signed up for.
41
« on: August 05, 2022, 09:23 »
I have requested the colsure of my Eyeemaccount already a month ago. Nothing happens, the account is still up. No sales report either. I wrote them again, and got this quite fast answer. Hi Kim
we have received your request to fully delete your EyeEm account. Please allow us 7 days to do so. This will pull all your images from EyeEm Market and our Partners. Partner image takedowns can take up to 21 days.
Please make sure that you are requesting your account deletion from the exact same email address that is associated to your EyeEm account. Otherwise we won't be able to process this request.
If you have pending payouts, we will trigger them to be paid out before deleting your account. This will add an additional week, to assure your payout goes through. In case you don't wish to receive that last payment but rather speed up your account deletion process, then please reply with "No payout request needed, please delete my account asap".
Best,
your EyeEm Support Team
PS: If you have changed your mind or if you want to change the type of deletion request, then please reply to this message by copy & pasting one of the other three [ ] options below. Right now the request marked with - is activated:
- Please delete my full EyeEm account and all images on EyeEm Market and Partners
[ ] Please delete all my images (Market and Partners) but keep my account active (to keep access to payouts history, keep receiving newsletters, etc)
[ ] Please only delete my images that are on Partners (keep my EyeEm account and Market images)
[ ] I have changed my mind, please don't take any action / I did not request an account deletion
The 21 days referred to have already expired onc without result. But I notice taht they can speed things up if I do not want my pending payments. In other words, they are broke!
42
« on: August 02, 2022, 09:20 »
We have become used to Shuttersock being weird about focus and noise, Is being weird about model releases for spiders etc. Most agencies have their review attention to technical or legal issues. Adobe may as well evaluate if an asset has any market interest at all. Being a niche photographer that can become annoying. But somehow I am happy that AS does not accept a zillion images of "nothing" into their collection.
43
« on: August 02, 2022, 09:16 »
We had this on Kindle Direct Publish (Amazon) some years ago, massive purchases, and then refunds after some time. The problem was that Amazon back then allowed the refund o pe paid to another credit card as the one used for the purchase. It was simply money launder. It stopped when Amazon got attention to this.
If DT allows refunds to another source as the one used for the purchase, that is likely to be the issue.
44
« on: July 31, 2022, 01:27 »
I don't understand the threads on this subject at Stocktwits (just that it sounds very hyped up and unstable to my untrained ears)
https://stocktwits.com/symbol/GETY
All this after one whole week as a public company again...
Short on the stock market is borrowing shares that are expected to go down in price. The "shorters" sell the shares and wait pr the share's price to fall, then they buy them back at a lower price and returns the share to the owner. The "shorters" gain the difference between the high and the low price of the share. Now it seems that getty made some cleanups and removed some shres from the market, which causes trouble for the shorters that wait to rebuy the shares they sold. The price goes up which means loss to the shorters.
45
« on: July 31, 2022, 01:15 »
That is when they transfer the payment to next month.
46
« on: July 28, 2022, 14:31 »
It just seems that making money from microstock gets harder and harder. For everyone.
47
« on: July 16, 2022, 14:29 »
At the Grand Canyon if you hike down to the bottom and can't make it back up, and need a rescue they charge you something like $30,000 - wonder if the Italians do the same?
They are likely to do so. Rescue helicopters are very expensive in service. In some cases a travel insurence will pay, but if these tourists wanted to avoid the 10 entrance fee, they might not be the sort of people who are insured.
48
« on: July 15, 2022, 01:22 »
Predicting buyer behaviour can end up in something misleading.
I experienced that assets aimed at small/one person companies appear more likely to sell by on demand licences, but would not get into guessing why, or if this is a mere coincidence.
Then what determines where the buyer goes sockshopping. Most customers have subscription plans at one agency. Their Shutterstock subscription plan will not work on Dreamstime etc. The boss may be he one who decides what agency to purchase from, looking at the bill is probably quite common.
The other part of me that is not stock photo is a one person company that sometims buy visual assets that it is not feasible for me to produce myself. These purchases are always on demand, as even the smallest subscription packages expire before I get them used. Thus I am not bound to any agency. So what are the actual costs buying from an agency. A spot-on search function saves me a lot of time browsing trough the collections. Adobe and Dreamstime does well here. Alamy, iStock and 123RF less, but it still works. Shutterstock is the looser here. Often I will have to browsee trough a ton of assets that abviously have no relation to my search whatsoever. Or one contributor has found a trick to basically own the first page of a search with semi-dull images. The right image is most likely there somewhere on page 35. Being able to select I go elsewhere, knowing that Shutterstock has no exclusive contributor agreements. So the things I search for may indeed be somewhere on Shutterstock, but is lkely to be somewhere else too, where it may be easier to find. The "get rich fast" with their keyword spamming and loads of identical assets tend to cling to Shutterstock
50
« on: July 13, 2022, 05:47 »
I just recently requested my Eyeem account to be closed. (after a long series of 1 cent "sales") It seems they are processing a lot of those requests at the moment. Support has been back to me and offers payout, but so far nothing...
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
