|
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 - zeljkok
51
« on: May 25, 2022, 17:29 »
To me this is one of great examples of all the nonsense AI brings. Chances are this image was never seen by human being during initial acceptance, or this subsequent removal.
52
« on: May 25, 2022, 17:25 »
...117 
Looks like it's not gameover, but gamecontinue ;=) These DL's are all subs, right? 36 - 99 cents range? (If I am asking too much, please ignore)
53
« on: May 24, 2022, 23:14 »
You need the system where the website sends you a code via text to your mobile and you login with that & your password on your laptop etc. paypal do it and a lot of big sites now do it.
That's pretty much standard today, isn't it. But it's way too much to ask from IS. Just look at entire dinosaur ESP interface
54
« on: May 21, 2022, 13:58 »
IS could help if they wanted. Assume hacker is involved; his IP address would be different from your home IP address & can be traced to geographic location. Ask them for dump of all account modifications on record. That way at least you could confirm you have been hacked & where it is coming from.
55
« on: May 18, 2022, 19:56 »
Worst month of the year so far, but still better than Shutterstock
56
« on: May 16, 2022, 22:43 »
Yes, Alamy does rejections. Reason iffy images get through sometime is that reviewers check only some in the batch, not every one. I've been with them 5yrs now, and had one rejection couple of years ago for this image - see attachment
It was handheld shot with not enough light, so with 1/30 sec exposure it was simply a bit too blurry (you can't tell on thumb like this). But my QC Rank did not drop and I my review time is 24hrs. I am fairly careful what I upload there, simply because I don't think it is fair to upload less then perfect images technically to agency where I had $$$ and even $$$$ downloads.
57
« on: May 16, 2022, 14:20 »
In all fairness, yours is actually one of the better shots. Many of other ones have the arch dominating the scenery, missing out the surroundings, are overly saturated or have crooked horizons or perspectives. While yours, while being no-nonsense, shows the complete scenery, colorful houses included. It's a realistic shot, and if you go there, it probably looks exactly as you shot it. So it's there for a good and valid reason. Well done.
Thank you; this place is ultra busy but I wanted shot with no people, so having hotel nearby got up before sunrise and -almost- succeeded. Only regret if any, was probably 10min too late for some sunrise colors, by the time I finished setting tripod and all it was mostly gone.
58
« on: May 16, 2022, 14:14 »
...58 
Next Stop: 100
59
« on: May 15, 2022, 15:14 »
Ah, my sales keep going, now are 48 ! Quite unusual and this is not among my best ones.
That is quite extraordinary. Continuing sales are not so strange - Adobe search engine ranks higher images that sell, specially recent sales - but initial 26 in a day is very intriguing Images that are best from photography perspective are not necessarily highest sellers. This is my image with highest # of downloads on AS - 131  Also nothing special and there are better images of this place, but for some reason this one picked up. If you search for "santa catalina arch antigua guatemala" there will be 5 pages of results, but this one is second on first page & getting couple of downloads every week which keeps it high on the list
60
« on: May 14, 2022, 17:36 »
take a look at the curated asset collections seen at the bottom of stock.adobe.com. If you image is featured there, it could explain the sudden jump in sales.
-Mat Hayward
Image was not there, but I enjoyed looking at that collection; some really nice images there. This is my favorite, not so easy to produce 
61
« on: May 14, 2022, 15:19 »
Yes, nothing really special, but the composition is good. Don't remember, maybe RF. It is an old one that sold several times
Yes, composition is good and colors are nice. It's a good image. I was thinking "nothing special" in terms of content. I got today 2 DL's of same image on Dreamstime, which is the first as DL's on that site are so scarce
62
« on: May 12, 2022, 13:50 »
Wow, nothing really special - just deli store front. At any rate, congratulations!
(Was this editorial or RF?)
63
« on: May 10, 2022, 14:44 »
I know some people won't like this, but the way the forum could have been rescued would have been actual moderation, with guidelines and rules that were fairly and equally enforced. The forum was abandoned long before it had to be shut down for going feral.
That's exactly right. Vast majority are "good" users interested in sharing and being part of community, but small % will always be trolls, stirring up trouble. If you don't deal with it, it will drag board down as few people are interested in online drama. On top, you had "10 cent" restructuring, which naturally made just about everyone unhappy; it didn't take rocket scientist to predict eventual extinction, only question was when. Yes, Kate was nice, Anna too, but strings were pulled by someone way above them. Alamy too removed public link to their Forum from main page, simply not wanting to make it directly visible to potential customers. But at least they didn't take it down and it is still moderated.
64
« on: May 10, 2022, 14:12 »
This was probably new developer not aware that internal customer accounts for testing software features already exist; so he/she created new one & made couple of "purchases" which then got reported to outside world
65
« on: May 09, 2022, 19:59 »
they probably wanted to close it last year, but it takes that long for a decision when a bunch of suits, who are afraid they will make a wrong decision and get fired, are unlikely to take any action, without falling back on a way to have studies, review and someone else to blame if something fails.
Simple enough, with a single real moderator, standards and rules, the forum would be fine and viable. At this point, it's just a neglected, nasty waste bin. Not the small number of people who still post, but just the forum itself and how it is so dysfunctional.
To me forum is way to build sense of community more than anything else. But, as you say, it needs moderation. Moderation is not necessarily time consuming - talking from experience. Real issue with SS Forum is that they didn't (don't) (stopped) caring about contributors So someone said something to the effect "Just leave it, they can trash each other all they want". And it went for awhile, but then these Asian spam posts started popping up & it was the last drop -- just close it and we are done. It is a shame, because when managed the right way Forums can be invaluable source of info, support or even making friends.
66
« on: May 09, 2022, 19:25 »
Stan should get an honorary compensation from Adobe for making them stronger and picking up all the customers and artists Shutterstock no longer wanted.
Great comment! It would be really interesting to know some numbers behind. I have only my own example; since I stopped uploading to Shutterstock, several fresh images -that would normally be uploaded to SS as well- sold on Adobe, few on Alamy too. So this is direct loss. Now single contributor is just a drop in the ocean, but with enough drops ...
67
« on: May 04, 2022, 17:41 »
I don't hold out much hope for any improvements for contributors.
Most people will agree with this. But I really think rebuilding contributor relationships is the only way forward. Stock agencies are parasites by nature; clearing houses, middle-man between producer and consumer. You can have best marketing, subscription plans, etc. but if fresh quality content stops coming -or is getting uploaded to competition instead- this is doomsday. What they did with 10 cents, AI QA nonsense, Forum etc. should be studied at college business classes how NOT to do things. If incoming management can understand and fix this, SS will be great again.
68
« on: May 04, 2022, 01:28 »
This might actually be low point for Shutterstock, and it will get better from now on. With capable person that understands kind of damage that has been done by one incompetent person, things can be reversed. Rebuilding trust with contributor base should be priority, including eliminating 10 cent abomination, fair QA, restoration of Forum etc. Fingers crossed
69
« on: May 03, 2022, 18:37 »
If he really resigned, it is not surprising. Only hope is that whoever comes next will realize that however difficult are the conditions, the road to recovery is to treat the very backbone whole business depends on - contributors - with more respect.
70
« on: May 02, 2022, 22:58 »
My Photoshop skills dramatically improved after I started doing stock photography 
Mine too! Learned how to replace the sky, etc. This is the reward I am talking about, getting better with end product, and feeling good about it. It is also large reason why I don't upload to Shutterstock, all the work you take pride in, to get devalued with 10 cents. No, Thank you
71
« on: May 02, 2022, 15:47 »
Agree 100% with Uncle Pete. Arcangel is total waste of time IMHO
Stock overall has only 1 way to go - down. This is why only way to approach this is as hobby and enjoy the photography which can be very rewarding in non-materialistic way. Anything else is just bonus
72
« on: May 01, 2022, 14:36 »
Alamy started strong with several $$ sales 1st half of April, but then it all stopped like someone turned off the pipe. Adobe strong # of DLs but lots of 0.36, DT in double digits (barely) and SS in freefall without parachute, like with most everyone else. IS plenty of DLs but this is never accurate so I don't hold my breath.
First 4 months of '22 I made more than in entire '21, helped by some direct sales for the book made through personal website. We'll see what happens next
73
« on: April 30, 2022, 14:21 »
Always interesting to read these as overall industry barometer. Over 10K stills on Shutterstock with less than 100 bucks return !??? I am really surprised you still keep contributing there
74
« on: April 29, 2022, 22:40 »
1. Canon 6D (1st gen) body, with lenses (all Canon): Using mostly 24-105L as it is versatile enough, although sometimes too soft in corners. 70-300L is optically superb, but very heavy. 50mm prime is great quality for price (under 200 Canadian). 17-40L is just collecting dust. 2. Sony Rx100 (3rd gen), with built-in 24-70mm lens F1.8 - 2.8 aperture Being huge hiker, Sony is invaluable. With good light quality will sometime approach Canon Full-Frame SLR. Small sensor deficiency is obvious in low light. In camera HDR is superb, vastly superior to Canon in-camera HDR. As far as stock goes think I sold more with Sony than with Canon. Still believe 1st gen of Rx100 was the best though, but I ruined it in Actun Tunichil Muknal Cave in Belize. Between all the "upgrades" of 3rd gen, I find I use only the tilting viewfinder which is quite handy when shooting something off tripod 3. Three tripods, of which I use the most small pocket Manfrotto I got on Amazon for 20 bucks. Works fast with Sony, but won't hold SLR. Sirui Carbon Fiber after that, light enough to take on travels, will hold SLR. Heavy Photomaster mostly sits in trunk of the car All the mirrorless hype is not appealing to me and I am happy with what I have. Only real limiting factor is 20 Megapixel of Canon, which doesn't make it suitable for large prints; but I workaround by shooting stacks - expose in center, then shoot the grid say 6x3 with huge overlap & you get super-resolution.
75
« on: April 29, 2022, 15:39 »
I am seeing lately sharp increase of first-time downloads, images older than 1 year. I did not mess with keywords. Change of algorithm? I don't think so ... probably just seasonal need. But worth noting.
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
