pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Show Posts

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 - mtilghma

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6
26
iStockPhoto.com / iStock enjoying slight resurgence
« on: May 14, 2012, 10:13 »
Over april and into may so far, iStock seems to have been enjoying a slight resurgence for me.  Nowhere near it's former glory, but at least making up a little ground.  Very welcomed, indeed.  Anyone else seeing something similar?

27
My top 5 is almost identical at every site

28
Yes!  It's where I link to my photos as art.  Hopefully I'll make more money off them as art than I do as stock.  It's moving in that direction but still a long ways off.  Check it out!  www.tilghman.smugmug.com  -- I'd switch it to a more unique name but am having trouble coming up with something that doesn't sound pretentious (not that my name plastered across the front ISNT pretentious...)

29
ignored by 0.

oddly, it makes me feel a little inadequate...

30
General Stock Discussion / Re: Allyoucanstock Sales
« on: April 04, 2012, 12:32 »
But all of the early sales happened before the $25 payout limit was in place.  I've already received all my money from those tantalizing early sales.

31
General Stock Discussion / Re: Do you like your bestsellers?
« on: April 02, 2012, 10:31 »
Cool question.  Don't know if you wanted examples or not, but I'm an open book so feel like giving them.  At almost all sites, my four bestsellers are some combination of the following four.  I really like two, and then kinda-but-not-so-much like the other two.  They are just boring backgrounds, but I can see why theyre useful.

The ones I like:




The ones I think are pretty meh:





And then here's another that I just switched from RM to RF because it hadn't sold and wasnt getting many views.  It's creeped up to #5 at SS, but it could be temporary because it's such a new file.  I'm hoping it's not temporary and that it continues it's push, because I really like it

32
General Stock Discussion / Re: Photocase
« on: March 30, 2012, 14:56 »
well big-port people like you often claim to be off-put by after-the-upload photo tasks, like categorizing, etc.

let me just say that I have discovered this to be the worst, even worse than alamy

33
General Stock Discussion / Re: Photocase
« on: March 29, 2012, 11:20 »
This thread inspired me to apply, too... 2 out of first 3 accepted.  WOOO IM SUCH AN ARTIST!!

34
Whats funny to me is that if you're going to fraud your way into a profession, why pick photography?  Pay is low and clients are guaranteed to find out you're not what you cracked yourself up to be.

35
I voted FT only because they reject a TON of my images.  But i know it's a known fact that they don't really want nature pictures too badly, so I can't actually blame them for sticking to that claim and rejecting the images.

36
iStockPhoto.com / Re: Did February's PPs come all at once?
« on: March 21, 2012, 11:55 »
Feb was decent for me too, a BMSSHFIRE, a 'best month since s*$# hit the fan and i rescinded exclusivity" (thank you, thank you, feel free to use it).  actually wait, I thought of an acronym I like more... it was a BMCE, a best month, common era.

Still an 87% reduction (ie, my BMCE is 13% of my BME)... a stat some exclusive champion-ers might want to latch on to (and are free to!).  But I have no regrets.

37
As I understand it, that type of info you should never share here. You will start another 123RF gold rush and in the end sit with 2000 unsatisfied contributors (and you started it)!!!  ;D

CanStockPhoto, not 123RF :)  And whatever, I welcome the gold rush!  Hopefully it would bring the traffic, and I'd maintain my favorable search ranking :D

38
123RF / Re: We still have 50% of royalties?
« on: March 21, 2012, 00:21 »
I mean, I don't particularly care.  Lots of microstock companies do it.  If they really think it will bring in more money and raise traffic, I can't argue... I have a terrible mind for marketing.  My only gripe is when they claim to be taking all the risk in such endeavors.  The risk is split as evenly as the royalty ratio.  Let's call spades spades.

39
It seems like these days, it's all too common for people to see sales that bring royalties which don't jive with their understanding of what they should be.  Ends up being secret subscription programs, partner program, discounted bulk credits, blah blah.

I'm having the same problem at CanStockPhoto.  Except, the opposite problem.  Last month, I got a "regular, distribution, small" purchase for $12.90.  Yesterday, I got a "regular, distribution, XL" purchase for $25.45.  Those are some big numbers for non EL sales!  Can't really figure them out from the payout schedule (http://www.canstockphoto.com/payout_schedule.php) , other than I guess it's 20% of a distribution/fotosearch individual purchase? 

Whatever the explanation, color me satisfied!

40
iStockPhoto.com / Did February's PPs come all at once?
« on: March 20, 2012, 14:11 »
I noticed a ~30$ increase in my balance a few days ago, and I thought it was probably an EL.  The EL still hasn't shown up, and I noticed that I do seem to have some little green bars on top of my February earnings now.  Did the Feb PP earnings come in all at once?

41
Print on Demand Forum / Re: Print-On-Demand Sites Worthwhile?
« on: March 20, 2012, 13:34 »
Well then... hey everyone, visit my site and buy something!!  http://www.zazzle.com/mattt513

but seriously though, I'm confident in the quality of my photos, but I just don't think that many people come to zazzle to buy photos.  They want THINGS.. mugs, plates, totes, phone cases... and for that, designs work better than photos.  In fact, even for posters, they want a design element to it, not JUST a photo.

Since I'm a photographer, not a designer, this is why I do better at FAA I think.  The only reason I have stuff on zazzle is for when I'm too brain-dead to take, edit, or keyword photos, and I just use files I've already keyworded and edited to make products there.

42
123RF / Re: We still have 50% of royalties?
« on: March 20, 2012, 10:52 »
Hello,

Sorry about the miscommunication. An investigation was carried out and we are correcting the understanding of contributor commissions.

Here are the answers you require:

1. Yes, you will continue to receive 50% of all nett earnings till January 1, 2013.
2. What ToniFlap got was a promotional credit sale. These promotional credits are valued at $0.20 to the contributor. At times we give out free credit sponsorships, giveaways, test drive 123RF credits and other promotional credits in an effort to market 123RF to potential customers. These credits are billed as a part of 123RF's Advertising and Promotional budget. The client did not pay at all for these credits, the cost comes directly out of 123RF.
3. JoAnn is right, all subscription downloads are still valued at $0.36 per download to a contributor.

Thank you very much and once again, I apologize for the error in our reply.

Alex.

I might be misunderstanding, but...  if it is "billed as a part of 123RF's Advertising and Promotional budget," or "the cost comes directly out of 123RF," wouldn't that mean credits aren't devalued to the contributor?  Sounds to me like costs are coming from the contributor.

43
Print on Demand Forum / Re: Print-On-Demand Sites Worthwhile?
« on: March 20, 2012, 10:31 »
I make a lot more on FAA than I do on Zazzle... I think it's better suited to actually simply printing photos on demand, since Zazzle has so many other types of products.  Most of my photos are simply better suited to printing and putting on a wall than being featured on any other sort of product, and they seem to see more movement over on FAA

44
Shutterstock.com / Re: it's frustrating
« on: March 15, 2012, 14:16 »
It is well known that SS reviews are all over the map.  They accept the most god awful stuff from some well known submitters and reject pristine work from others.

For a very long time I had close to 100% acceptance then suddenly I ran into a reviewer or possible a script that was rejecting my work at close to 90% for about 4 months. I kept submitting images to get a good understanding of what was up. My conclusion was either the reviewer was making more for rejections, they were malicious or they were completely blind.

Now for the kicker, suddenly that reviewer seems to have moved on to new prey, because once again I have close to 100% acceptance.

I find that doubtful, because I doubt reviewers are assigned to certain people... I figure they probably just pick batches from the top of the queue, but thats just a guess.

That being said, I also HOPE you are wrong, because my trends are somewhat similar.  I started off with a high acceptance rate, then it dwindled, then it rose and is very high right now.  I like my explanation (for me), better than yours... when I first left iS, I was submitting my very best work to SS first, so most of it got accepted.  Then, stuff started becoming rejected because I had to learn exactly what SS wanted, if the shots didnt scream "accept me!!!".  Then I learned, and now I am having almost everything accepted.  That is my explanation, becuase it's what I want to believe :)

Anyone have insight on whether reviewers cherry-pick certain photogs, or get assigned to certain photogs?  Or do they just get a batch ID in their inbox

45
Shutterstock.com / Re: first single image download!
« on: March 15, 2012, 14:09 »
Ha!  I don't know your stats but I doubt I'm selling a lot more than you on SS, ELs or otherwise.  I'm relatively new there and have seen, and continue to see, steady growth (apart from the rate at which I'm adding images)... you know, like you always see when you start at a new site.

I've only sold 2 ELs to date (joined june last year or so... my join date on SS is my first time joining, but then cancelled and went exclusive on IS, and have been adding images slowly because I didnt have them IPTC'ed... argh I blame IS for that).

That being said, I take it as a compliment :)

46
Shutterstock.com / first single image download!
« on: March 14, 2012, 15:54 »
Don't know if it means it's no longer in trial mode (probably not).  I'm also aware of the fact that mody people are not likely to care... but whatever.  It was a nice surprise.  I searched for threads and couldnt find one devoted to this, so anyone else is feel free to chip in if they want... if not, I don't care :)


47
Shutterstock.com / Re: must this really be editorial?
« on: March 09, 2012, 12:22 »
Hi Barry,

Yea you replied that to my same thread on SS, and I do think that was the correct/most helpful reply.  After a short bit of research, I found exactly which vessel this was, and where it was built and by whom.  It was built by derecktor shipyards, which after viewing their website, looks like a commercial company so I think that's my answer.

48
Shutterstock.com / Re: must this really be editorial?
« on: March 08, 2012, 20:29 »
By all means, I agree.  But to think that reviewer discretion does not enter into the decision is naive, and if a simple note and resubmit would elucidate them enough to change their decision, there's no reason I shouldn't investigate that.  If indeed it was a rule though, like "no recognizable civil service vessels", of course I'm fine with that.

49
Shutterstock.com / some more maths
« on: March 08, 2012, 13:04 »
I'm pursuing a phd in something most people would consider "math-y", but I fear I might be missing something on this simple math here...

Shutterstock's subscription is $249 for 25 images a day, or 750 a month.  If someone were to download all of those images, that comes out to 33.2c per image.  Now I know shutterstock probably makes a lot of money off people not downloading their whole quota, but that is an unknown we cant really quantify right now.  So ignoring that, someone at the 25c level makes 75% royalties off of subscription sales... someone at the 33c level makes 99.4% royalties, someone at the 38c level makes 114% royalties. 

Often the people balking about fairer royalties also balk about subscription structures, which seems a little backwards to me.  Is this ever brought up in those arguments? Am I missing something else?

50
Shutterstock.com / must this really be editorial?
« on: March 08, 2012, 12:51 »
full disclosure, i just posted this exact message on the SS forum, but then realized there's some ppl here whose opinion i'd want.  so this is directly copy-pasted:

Hey all... I had been on a roll lately with tons of approvals, but just got this one (and a similar) rejected for:  "please add proper editorial caption"



well...hrm... I wasn't trying to submit as editorial!  The boat says "US Coast Guard" on it, and the coast guard color scheme (red stripe, etc) is easily recognizable.  But its not a private company... as far as I know, there is no harm in selling images of coast guard boats as stock.  Look it up in any stock library and theres tons of of them.  I've had them up on IS for years and they do sell, that's the only reason I'm pursuing this.

Anyone know if they really have to be editorial?  If not, should I resubmit with a note?

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors