|
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 - astrocady
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 ... 10
51
« on: June 09, 2009, 07:59 »
I had a potential client contact me a few months ago about building a web site for a new start-up business the hoped to launch this summer. During the course of the conversation, he said had everything needed for the site -- he said he even had "over $500 of stock photography from istock" sitting on his hard disk.
Unfortunately, he thought $1000 for the html & php coding was too much.
I also had another client that went to istock and found his own pictures for this hair saloon website before he even started looking for a webmaster.
52
« on: June 08, 2009, 08:30 »
<snip> there is a Firefox add on which is called IE View. With it, one can specify which particular sites to open as an IE tab within Firefox </snip>
WOW! That's huge news. I've been with FireFox since before it was FireFox. Love it -- Hate IE. Having said that... IE has been moving more towards FireFox, or towards a web standard complaint browser I should say, and I've heard that ie8 is supposed to be "nearly there". I haven't installed it, thought, because as a web developer I need to make sure my pages work well in Microsoft's non-compliant browsers, which means I still need ie7 (and ie6 for that matter) to check my work. And since Microsoft won't allow you to have more than one version of ie on a computer at the same time, I'll stick with 7 until enough people make the shift, and more people quit using 6 (I have 7 on my primary computer and 6 on an old laptop I drag out simply to check pages). The short of this is from what I've read, it is unlikely that ie8 is going to break any reasonable designed web page. Of course, we've heard that before.
53
« on: June 06, 2009, 09:14 »
I have the right to view my sales on all the agencies that I subscribe to.
What is the difference if I go there my self to look, give my info to my wife so she can look, give it to my accountant so they can look, or give i to look-stat so they can look. And what difference does it make that one is automated and the rest are manual?
If these request become too frequent, then I see where that poses a burden to the agency. The solution is simple, limit the number of times I can check per day. Maybe 10 time per day? If I exceed my limit, just don't let me in and I have to wait until after midnight to have a peek. The coding is simple enough even I could do it.
Now those companies that make products like look-stats will have to modify their products to comply with this -- gone is the check every 30 minutes to see i anything has changed. They'll either have to check only when you sign-in to their service (causing a time delay while they gather the info) or check at a more reasonable time interval, like 6 time daily, with those times listed on the webpage/taskbar in local times.
Seems like a viable solution to me. What am I missing??
54
« on: June 04, 2009, 08:34 »
So, for those who don't know, if you press ctrl+click it will open in a new tab while keeping the focus on the current tab. This way you can click on 10 links you want to read from the current page and THEN go and read those pages (which will already be loaded)
ORCenter-Button Click if your using a PC
55
« on: May 29, 2009, 07:33 »
Welcome Luce
56
« on: May 27, 2009, 08:23 »
I just had 2 pix rejected for "visible dirt".  That's a new for me.
57
« on: May 26, 2009, 13:18 »
would people be interested in some kind of opt out of creating and offering different sizes of their images on a site?
I'm sure that would depend on the price reduction offered for smaller sizes. Personally, I wouldn't offer much of a break in price -- I'd think of it as a service offered. Most small pix go onto blogs and the bloggers may not know how to resize. Your doing them a favor even without any discount. (but I would off some discount, just not a lot.)
58
« on: May 26, 2009, 13:14 »
I'm embarrassed to say that I dropped by camera about 6 months ago and broke the UF filter. That was the only damage. Put my first UV onto a lens back in 1969, and haven't had a lens since without one.
59
« on: May 23, 2009, 09:12 »
Sounds like a great class, Bobby, and something I could sure use. However, the cab fare from west central Florida would be a little steep for me.
But if I ever win a free trip to Vegas, I will take you up on your studio tour!
Steve
60
« on: May 22, 2009, 11:17 »
I wouldn't think you would want to lock in both height and width dimensions, as that ratio is going to vary depending on the type of camera used to take the image (as madelaide said) and/or whether or not the image was cropped or whether its orientation is horizontal or vertical.
I think I would just use "longest dimension" as in:
small-- longest dimension = 400px
medium -- longest dimension = 800px
large -- longest dimension = 1600 px
ex-large -- longest dimension = 3000 (native for 6mp cameras)
super-size = full width/height of picture if greater than 3000px
61
« on: May 21, 2009, 15:40 »
Can I help you in any way? Just trying to be useful  Of course my wife would say that's impossible!
62
« on: May 21, 2009, 15:36 »
What happened to the green bars under our names? How are we suppose to know who is useful and who isn't?
63
« on: May 21, 2009, 15:29 »
I think we all get rejection now and then that we feel are arbitrary or that we don't understand.
When this happens to me, and I feel the back of my neck starting to get hot, I do try to remember that iStock is not a photography school and it is my responsibility to know my craft and to stay up to date on trends -- not their responsibility to provide that training.
64
« on: May 21, 2009, 08:10 »
SO ... did you have a beer? 
YES!! Had a BIG day on Dreamstime. Sold over $3 so I had two
65
« on: May 21, 2009, 08:08 »
A couple of Christmases ago, my wife gave me a new DSLR which revived my interest in "serious" photography. I entered and placed in a couple of local contests and began searching online for more to enter, as well as general digital photo info. Somehow when surfing from site to site, I ended up on microstock diary. Uploaded a few to Dreamstime, then fotolia, then etc, etc.
66
« on: May 20, 2009, 16:36 »
I just made my evening rounds of my micro sites to see if I made enough today to have a beer, and I noticed that YAY has redesigned their website. Didn't spend a lot of time checking it out, but it seemed a little confusing to me -- at least in trying to get to the "my account" page. Hint: click on your username at the top of the page. Anyway, I see that they are now listing views and downloads on the "my portfolio" page. WOW!!! If those views are for the entire year I've had pix up there, it's no wonder I haven't sold anything. Hardly any views at all. I think I've sold more pictures on most other sites than I"ve had views on YAY  Perhaps those views are just from today since they turned on the new site???
67
« on: May 20, 2009, 15:59 »
My setting match yours, dragoon, except for the port setting. I tried leaving it blank, but my version of Filezilla wouldn't let me -- kept telling me I had to enter something. So I put 21 (the default) back in.
BUT, while looking in the "advanced" section and decided to try the "passive" connect mode. Sometime this helps in Dreamweaver while connecting with fpt to a server, so I figured it was worth a try.
AND IT WORKED! Go figure. Not mentioned anywhere in the instructions, so it must not be normally needed, but it seems it is for me.
Thank to Dragoon for the advice and to John for the offer of email help. Now I can start uploading!
68
« on: May 20, 2009, 09:05 »
I posted this several days ago on the cutcaster forum and still haven't gotten a reply. Maybe someone here can help me?? Hi all -- I'm new here, obviously
I'm having trouble logging in to ftp. Don't understand it, never had problems with ftp before, but I'm sure it must be something I'm doing wrong as nobody else if reporting problems :oops:
I'm using FileZilla, and have the host set to content.cutcaster.com with the default port of 21.
Loggin type is set as Anonymous and in the advanced section, default host directory is set to /mynumber/
When I click connect I immediately get an error message "Error: Unable to connect!"
I use FileZilla to connect to other micro sites with no problems.
Thank for your help,
Steve
69
« on: May 17, 2009, 16:19 »
Well, I don't know. Very strange. I've never had problems adding images to MSG boxes, and all my images show on the http://www.microstockgroup.com/istocklightbox/ page , but when I clicked on the images in the litebox, only about half had the banner showing. I've fixed all of them except those in the healthy food box. None of them had banners, so I didn't have anything to copy the code from. Maybe it was a glitch when I originally added them, but I doubt that as those with and those without seemed so random. At least it's good to hear I'm the only one with the problem. Thanks for your input Steve
70
« on: May 17, 2009, 11:30 »
I have been working today on updating some lightboxes -- some of my own, and also adding pix to the new microstockgroup boxes.
While reviewing what I already had loaded in the older MSG boxes, I noticed that the MSG banner/link thingy had disappeared from about half of my images! I know they used to be there -- they would have had to be or I couldn't have added them to the lightboxes.
So how did they disapear? Did IS remove them?
For those that have images in the MSG boxes, please check yours and see if some are missing the banners of if it's just me.
Thanks,
Steve
71
« on: May 15, 2009, 08:11 »
What gets me, is that manufactures PAY to have their products used on television shows and in movies --- even to have billboards advertising their product appear in the background of a scene, but yet we can't have that same product out of focus and in the background of one of our photos.
72
« on: May 14, 2009, 18:23 »
No change... zero views on new images for me.
Patrick H.
Same with me
73
« on: May 13, 2009, 07:47 »
Ouch! How was C-h-r-i-s-t's name substituted by "creepeers"?
LOL -- Now I understand any your post makes sense!
74
« on: May 10, 2009, 07:42 »
I don't know. I've had no problems with them, and my approval rating is very good.
But
I talked my wife into joining as her interest are more landscape and artsy-fartsy stuff and I thought it'd be a good outlet for her. It took here a few tries to get approved (which surprised me), but was accepted about 2 months ago. She quickly submitted a few batches, maybe 4 or 5 with 2 or 3 images each. About 60% were approved. Then she got an email warning her about too many rejections and that she better shape up or she'd get banned. This after only about 2 weeks.
It kind of took the wind from her sails and she more or less stopped uploading. I think she make one upload of 2 pix right after getting the notice, which was approved. Two days ago she got another email saying her account had been frozen because she didn't correct her ways. Very harsh, since she hasn't been uploading at all. I told her she should email them but I don't think she has, or will.
So I'm confused about them right now.
75
« on: May 05, 2009, 09:58 »
I just finally after two years with them made it to the $50.00 payout....whoo hooo!!!
that makes me feel better, dongling, as I'm at $26.67 after a year. Guess I right on schedule!
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 ... 10
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
