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 - UncleGene
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 ... 14
101
« on: March 03, 2010, 11:01 »
I also think it's a big improvement but it could use finer ratings. But for a general idea it's good. However, people shouldn't put the $$ earned from uploads on DepositPhotos as monthly income, it's just a bonus. I doubt DepositPhotos earns more than 123RF and BigStock like it is now shown on the results.
DP is high because a lot of people for some reason include non-sale income in votes. Do not worry, it will sink drastically next month
103
« on: March 02, 2010, 14:56 »
I think that we just need two different systems that would cover different aspects First - current variant of earnings voting, though probably it needs to be a little more fine-grained Second - RPI (perhaps for I[mages submitted], not I[mages accepted]). It may have similar exponential scale
104
« on: March 02, 2010, 11:57 »
AFAIK: Incremental enlargement made sense for ancient algorithms. Bicubic directly to target size does it much better.
105
« on: March 02, 2010, 11:42 »
At first I was on the same page with borg, but changed my mind. This poll makes real practical sense - it shows average income for particular stock.
BTW, results show what we discussed several times - there is no big 6 (or big 4), there are 2 + 2 + 5 + 3 + N (or, more realistically, 2 (>5) + 2(> 4) + N)
106
« on: March 01, 2010, 22:44 »
Nice way to sneak in referral link?
107
« on: March 01, 2010, 10:48 »
Suggestion: ratings now have a price tag. It would be nice if we can see this tag (average earnings) on the results (may be a little tricky to calculate, but possible)
108
« on: February 26, 2010, 23:42 »
Ouch. Do they want to win 'worst ever design' prize? I thought something happened to my screen...
109
« on: February 26, 2010, 22:35 »
I think first one is really good _stock_ image. Do not drop it from candidates!
110
« on: February 26, 2010, 22:27 »
Last time we discussed this, I lobbied for poll to have percentages, not abstract ranks. Ranks are arbitrary, 5 agencies covering 99% of income will still include in big 6 one that is 0.0005 %, if others are even less
111
« on: February 26, 2010, 22:23 »
I'd see as paradox that FT accepted anything at all. If they decided to accept 1 - it is almost 17% probability to hit one rejected by SS, so nothing extraordinary
112
« on: February 26, 2010, 10:50 »
Everything which is bigger than 10% of all you earnings to count on Big xx (4 in my case). Under 2% in New sites. Between 2 and 10% guess? Up and coming...
What's magic in 10%? Look how your own percentage grouped, and see where split belongs (I believe it is different for everybody). Big 6 always were really on different scales, and recently 'lighter' scale, at least for me, dropped out of big range, really making big 2, "deciding where to go" 1, and all others - "down and going",
113
« on: February 25, 2010, 22:28 »
Or Big 2?
Agree! Plus section for 'going down'!
114
« on: February 24, 2010, 10:21 »
The main problem with shoot description is that it makes generic release unusable - e.g. DT effectively requires 'catchall' release, so one with description cannot be used there
that becomes a non-problem if you submit a new release for every new session
Sorry, looks like some misunderstanding. How can I do it with DT? "Important: Ensure that you don't use different MR documents for the same model."
115
« on: February 23, 2010, 11:19 »
The main problem with shoot description is that it makes generic release unusable - e.g. DT effectively requires 'catchall' release, so one with description cannot be used there
116
« on: February 23, 2010, 11:10 »
Sorry for example of whitespace spam:
117
« on: February 23, 2010, 11:09 »
Without regulation it is hard to rely on somebody's reasonableness. Just compare mantonio and Stu49 signatures on this thread.
My screen is real estate. I like to use it to read, not to 'filter' unrelated stuff. The main problem is that several abusers show to new users behavior that may seem ok to copy. Wait a little, and 90% of posts here will have half-page signatures and posts overloaded with pimping links.
BTW, for unrelated things - leaf, is it possible to strip trailing whitespaces from posts?
118
« on: February 22, 2010, 10:34 »
I do not think that it is on the page source - just look at any image page. Most probably Google crawled some of your images _before_ you toggled showing of username
119
« on: February 20, 2010, 11:57 »
Oops. For some reason I never noticed second page in IS article. All the discussions were around the requirement to have separate releases with appropriate _dates_, description got 'lost in translation'
120
« on: February 19, 2010, 20:31 »
I received a new one:
++Releases for photos shot September 1st and later require both a shoot date and a shoot description.
Is this yet something new? (my releases have signature date that is exactly the shoot date. Even this is not enough now?)
121
« on: February 19, 2010, 18:40 »
Successfully received my $100 + $10 C'mon, people, give me some referral earnings!!!!!!!!! http://submit.depositphotos.com?ref=1006094
122
« on: February 19, 2010, 18:09 »
123
« on: February 17, 2010, 12:53 »
Well... You can't really count that Canstockphoto has so low rate because it shows it's content on Fotosearch also. You must find right curve for that too... So, it is the fact that Canstockphoto has more traffic and exposure than depositphotos for now despite curve you see in that stats!
Yes, and nobody argues that these graphs can represent exposure of your work that you submit to particular site. What they show is popularity in _US_ of the site itself, this just a piece of information, but pretty important one (especially if you look at trends).
124
« on: February 17, 2010, 10:43 »
Can't tell anything about safety, but by traffic DP is already ahead of CanStockPhoto. BS is next . #8! http://statsmicro.com/graphs
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 ... 14
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|