|
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
76
« on: March 16, 2022, 10:33 »
Got a small portfolio there. uploading to twenty20 they do not read metadata, so it is manual typing, only allow 10 keywords per image. Even with that small portrfolio i have made at least one sale per month, and up to 10 sales per month. No matter the amout of sales I always get 1 dollar. One dollar for one image is fine with me, but one dollar for 10 images is just the same as shitterstuck. I do not uploa more to that site, but keep observing.
77
« on: March 15, 2022, 02:32 »
Good to hear. I look forward to the increased sales. Matter of fact, my portfolio at istock and shutterstock have done 10x better since they started paying us pennies.
Serious question, what do you think the end result will be with regards to quality of footage?
I suspect many will submit garbage footage with little to no effort to help offset the lower pay.
Strange enough Shitterstock have set technical demands that only can be obtained with very expensive cameras, like they have in Hollywood or NASA. "Hi NASA can I borrow your new super camera for a 0.25$ job in microstock?"
78
« on: March 10, 2022, 03:29 »
Covid is not over. It has been decided that Covid is over.
The current Omikron is "more harmless" but very infective, still many dies.
Politicians are used to negotiate and make agreements. They will find that they can't negotiate or make agreements with a virus.
Covid will be back with a not so harmless version.
79
« on: March 06, 2022, 11:37 »
For med DT came back with several sales right at the start of March. Wonder if sales reports were stuck for some time?
80
« on: February 26, 2022, 09:39 »
Since mid January and until now I had only 1 sale on DT. My normal at DT is 10-20 sales in a month. My sales activity on other agencies are normal for the season.
Have you< noticed unusual low sales on DT recently?
Or is it only the everpresent fluctuations of microstock)
81
« on: February 10, 2022, 02:45 »
Always consider: Who would want to use this or that photo for what. You have quie some similar images: Usually Adobe is fast on the similar content-trigger, but you should chose the best of these, and leave the others alone.
You have very general keywords. The same keywords apply to a zillion other images on Adobe, and as your preferred topics are well-present on the agencies, and the demand not ovewhelming, you need to be better then the best. Do your research on whatever you photograph and find the names or relavant terms for the image. Your research will each you what is important about this or that topic, then return to the subject and make sure that the important tithings are clerly visible. It is a lot of work, but if you want to get anywhere on an agency like Adobe, that is the price it takes.
82
« on: February 07, 2022, 02:43 »
It's still tempting. They have 100+ sales!
But is it worth the possible trouble? Carefully read the Agencies Terms of Service like a lawyer, and find who's head will be on the block if things go wrong. If there are no precise terms on that question, assume it will be your head in the pillory.
83
« on: January 24, 2022, 08:45 »
Well, I had 5 EL's at $13,47 each while at level 1. Why couldn't they have purchased them in December!
84
« on: January 19, 2022, 14:58 »
Adobe recently rejects images that were accepted by all agencies including SS and Alamy. What frustrates me is that they simply use technical issues as rejection reason. There weren't any technical issues. Can't they just say that they don't want a photo like that because they already have thousands of them. Why can't they just be honest?
The technical error thing is likely to be "We don't want that image". I've had aome of them too.. Then I made some extreme closeup pics of metallic Arsenic, took the lens to the limit and likelye more than that. If they were picky about actual technical errors, they would have found it in that image, nevertheless it got accepted. Mos other agencies take everything if the exposure is OK, even if the image's potential is close to zero. Adobe pays more than most agencies, so we shopuld really expect the curation to be more severe than the cheeper agencies.
85
« on: January 19, 2022, 03:06 »
Some agencies have the option to issue commercial licences on editorial images. Let them hanlde it. The customers that try to arganize something with the photographer directly, are ost likely looking for a scapegoat to take the trouble if thy come.
86
« on: January 19, 2022, 03:02 »
I don't think its a totally a machine it takes humans to mess it up so badly and inconsistently...though I'm sure they are screening in some way.
A machine could indeed register birds in the sky as dust, it has happened for me.
87
« on: January 11, 2022, 09:35 »
It looks as if there is electrical light in that cave. If you paid an entranvce to get there, there may be legal problems with selling the photos there. P5 does not care about that, they blame it on you.
There are many backgrounds offered for sale, and the marked interest is modest. It will never be a big deal.
You should also learn to select. Having 3 good photos on a subject is better than hiding 3 good photos in a group of 50 less god images.
Further, P5 is a footage site. They may sell a photo now and then, but footage is their thing.
88
« on: October 10, 2021, 00:52 »
the big difference here is between government & business censorship. US govt is prohibited from censorship in almost all cases by the 1st amendment. businesses are not. but the actual question is whether FB should be censoring at all. Extreme, ongoing false, malicious and speech that incites violence is sound reason for censorship. merely expressing false, hateful or unpopular views is not (anti-vaxxers, creationists, etc) but 'ordinary' businesses may censor speech they disagree with. but FB is not an ordinary business - it's dominance makes it a common carrier like telephone services, mail delivery, etc and limits what it can do. and they should not be censoring except in extreme cases presenting a 'clear & present danger'
in addition, hate speech laws make expression a thought crime, which threatens the free exchange of ideas & eventually democracy itself. look at Texas' anti abortion law which makes it illegal to talk to someone about abortion, or even drive them to a provider!
Look at what happene to 8chan. It was not ther most beautiful place on the net, but when the El Paso killer made his announcement on 8chan, 8chan was drawn into the legal machinery. Seems like the authorities expect some sort of real time censorship from the sites and networks. That is difficult to maintain, that is why we deal with bots that lock accounts on and off because of some auto-detected words that may relate to something illegal. Censorship does excist, and it is expected to do so.
89
« on: October 05, 2021, 11:00 »
Christmas happens to be one of my stock topics. I make what I feel for and upload to all agencies on which I'm involved. There seems to be some segmentation on the market there. The images are uploaded with same keywords on the agencies. Shutterstock makes me almost no christmas sales. Adobe quite some sales, but for me Istock is the top seller (measured in $) when it comes to Christmas.
90
« on: October 01, 2021, 10:04 »
Back in the late 1990's I had my own little stock agency. A lot of work, and many difficult customers. One customer used my photos via remote file access, so that my site carried the load. I gladly surrender those protection and legal issues to a stock agency, so that I can now use my time to make pictures.
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
