51
Shutterstock.com / Re: Best weekday to upload?
« on: February 20, 2015, 12:52 »april 1 2015
april 1 2016
april 1 2017...
April 1 2017 will be on weekend
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. 51
Shutterstock.com / Re: Best weekday to upload?« on: February 20, 2015, 12:52 »april 1 2015 April 1 2017 will be on weekend 52
Shutterstock.com / Re: Uploading failed by FTP« on: February 11, 2015, 11:01 »
They can survive without single new photo for years so there is no hurry to throw resources on contributor side of their site :-)
53
Dreamstime.com / Re: Do you believe that DT is dying?« on: February 11, 2015, 10:33 »
Somebody will buy them soon, either vulture capitalist like in Getty case or white knight in shiny armor like Adobe :-)
54
Shutterstock.com / Re: Uploading failed by FTP« on: February 11, 2015, 10:19 »
I have been using FTP when problems happen. Two days ago files were delayed and randomly missed. Today most of the batch appears but still delayed.
55
Shutterstock.com / Re: Uploading failed by FTP« on: February 10, 2015, 11:51 »
Seems like files are lost randomly. I am sending same set of files to multiple agencies but SS is the only one that looses files.
56
Adobe Stock / Re: Fotolia Joins Adobe« on: January 28, 2015, 16:23 »
3.4 million subscribers to CC? or they count anybody who has Adobe ID (I registered some Adobe products).
57
Shutterstock.com / Re: Exciting news from Shutterstock HQ!« on: January 20, 2015, 10:28 »
One day there will be more information on internet telling that there is no money in microstock than sites telling people that it is get rich quick schema. At this point of time people will stop coming and whole business model will collapse. When supply of newbies dries up and more experienced photogs will not return they can only sell old images.
58
General Stock Discussion / Re: Keyword tool on site not working?« on: January 19, 2015, 16:49 »
Never tried to search for APIs but now I found this article: http://microstockinsider.com/api_list
59
General Stock Discussion / Re: Keyword tool on site not working?« on: January 19, 2015, 11:56 »
Are there any other agencies that provide APIs?
60
Off Topic / Re: What does 'Exciting' News Truly Mean to the Artists - Contributors« on: January 19, 2015, 11:54 »After so many years at iStock, "exciting news" is the most feared phrase in my universe. Exactly, ex-frightening 61
Shutterstock.com / Re: Exciting news from Shutterstock HQ!« on: January 15, 2015, 15:49 »
Interesting article: http://blog.melchersystem.com/2015/01/15/shutterstock-buys-rex-33-million/
62
General Stock Discussion / Re: Keyword tool on site not working?« on: January 14, 2015, 19:37 »
This one is messed up too.
63
Shutterstock.com / SS Keyword Suggestions messed up in Chrome« on: January 13, 2015, 23:58 »
It has been not usable for couple days in Chrome (both Windows and Mac) while it is still working in Firefox.
64
General Stock Discussion / Re: Being sued by model for half a million dollars in federal court, please read!« on: January 08, 2015, 23:26 »
It looks like Shutterstock is one of defendants. They can afford big lawyers. Also Playboy, Amazon and Barnes and Noble...
65
General Stock Discussion / Re: Your hopes for 2015« on: January 07, 2015, 18:50 »
I hope one of my photos will sell for $1M and I can quit microstock :-)
66
Shutterstock.com / Re: Bravo Shutterstock« on: January 06, 2015, 17:34 »
I wonder when we finally get contributor stats working?
67
General - Top Sites / Re: Is DT still one of the Big 4?« on: January 06, 2015, 10:34 »
For me it is third overall but my top tier is just SS which makes 75% of all sales. Middle tier would be 123rf, DT, FT and Deposit. Everything else is just dust. If trends continues I could be SS "forced exclusive" :-)
68
General Photography Discussion / Re: Amazon Prime Members Now Get Unlimited Photo Storage at No Additional Cost« on: November 04, 2014, 12:38 »
Even for personal use it is very limited, you cannot even create folders.
69
123RF / Re: 123rf sharing commissions with parent company Inmagine« on: October 30, 2014, 11:18 »
By uploading to any microstock agency you agree that they can do whatever they want with your images because they do not care about you, there are thousands of other that are willing to these terms. Contributors have no power to change that and maybe it is time to quit if somebody have a problem with this situation. Do not expect that any new agency would be knight on white horse and help contributors. They are starting business to make money by any means possible. Nowadays companies are only ethical if they are force to be by law.
70
General Stock Discussion / Re: Photo Description and SEO« on: October 27, 2014, 18:56 »
Search engines would decompose long sentences into individual words. it is is like have more keywords added in different location. If in your description words from keywords list are re-used it probably does not help.
I thought that many agencies provide localized version of image pages and some even localize keywords. Suggestion to translate your page to different languages make sense only for self hosting. 71
General Stock Discussion / Re: YAY - how many images do you need to earn $10,000 month« on: October 07, 2014, 12:27 »
Just to add to this if we got 2,628,000 seconds in a month you need to produce around 200 images per second :-) 72
Photography Equipment / Re: What Camera System Will You Primarily Use in 2015?« on: September 20, 2014, 11:09 »
Does it matter? If agencies started accepting photos from smartphones any camera from last decade should be good enough.
73
iStockPhoto.com / Re: How does the NEW iStock stack up against Shutterstock?« on: September 15, 2014, 15:25 »
I was always wondering what kind of business cannot afford to pay equivalent of cup of coffee (or even 3 cups) for an image?
74
123RF / Re: Only subs this month at 123RF« on: September 12, 2014, 09:22 »
Reporting any patterns does not make sense with current volume of images. Even if 10 people see the same it does not make any statistical significance.
75
Off Topic / Re: Apple Watch is magic« on: September 10, 2014, 23:03 »
I think Apple should start designing jewelry. Just put your logo on a bracelet and Apple fans will claim it revolutionary. Apple should be fashion company.
|
|