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 - pancaketom
Pages: 1 ... 67 68 69 70 71 [72] 73 74 75 76 77 ... 91
1776
« on: October 24, 2011, 14:21 »
Well, I'd like to see them (H&F) leave as soon as possible, but since they are strangling the goose, they might not be able to find a buyer. I do wonder how long it would take to get things back on track if they did leave. The damage (for contributors) might be terminal.
1777
« on: October 24, 2011, 11:10 »
don't forget you have to keep up with the headset technology too.
While most of the images bought might be the typical HCV images, if the buyer can't find the other images on the site they will look elsewhere for them. If another site has all of the HCV images they need (pretty much all the sites have these I imagine), then they might just want to stay with the site that ALSO has the quirky LCV images they need every once in a while. Does it make sense to go out of your way or work hard to make LCV images for microstock? - probably not, especially not if they get rejected, but if you live near a minor landmark and can get a pic of it while out walking the dog or whatever, then the return might compensate the effort - or maybe it would make more sense to send it to Alamy where you might get more for the one off sale.
I do think that making the search engines work well is more important that rejecting LCV images for the sites - unfortunately that doesn't appear to be how they see it.
1778
« on: October 22, 2011, 14:23 »
I took a quick peek - is 20 pounds the standard price for anything - all sizes? What is your minimum file size? 300 dpi is sort of meaningless w/o some other dimensions listed.
Having seen many new sites come and go many here (myself included) are somewhat jaded about new sites and want some assurances that we won't be spending a lot of effort only to see the site fold or worse morph into something unacceptable like a free image site.
In any case, good luck - experience suggests you will need it or some very deep pockets.
1779
« on: October 22, 2011, 14:15 »
I agree that the rejection/acceptance criteria seem to have changed. They have always been somewhat arbitrary in that what is rejected one day might be accepted the next and vice versa. The fact that many of my older smaller (crappier? some of them anyway) imaged continue to sell makes me think that there is more to sales than just image quality. It sure is frustrating to improve upon an old decent seller and have it rejected for LCV (which I agree w/ Laurin is a bit of a cop out rejection reason). I also think that DT is going overboard on what they consider "too similar". I'm not quite as immune as Perry to the rejection reasons - I usually look at them and back at the pics to see if I agree and if I could fix it, but ultimately they just get sent to all my sites and some take them and some don't and some sell them and some don't (at least not yet).
If the present trends continue I don't think that there will be much of a point in working at micro for many of us - between the dropping royalties at places like IS and FT and the lack of acceptances and new image sales at SS and DT... It will be worth leaving the old images up and collecting the $ though. Personally I'll just keep an eye on how things go (and what my alternatives are) and when it is no longer worth it I'll stop or at least cut down my effort a lot. Meanwhile I might grumble and rant a bit, but I have had more BMEs this year than any in a while, so it isn't all doom and gloom.
As an aside, I have always wanted to post my best sellers on the critique forum and let the critics say everything that is wrong with them and how they won't be accepted etc. (or maybe they would say they are good stock - submit them, but I have my doubts).
1780
« on: October 22, 2011, 08:41 »
Yeah, I was going to check to see how the searches I've disappeared for compared to the searches I've appeared in... But it didn't work. I'd rather they fix problem A first though.
1781
« on: October 21, 2011, 19:55 »
After the images are uploaded you get to "process" them. At that point one of the options is what type of license you want - that is where you would designate it RM, you can also put more restrictions on it for example geographic restrictions. Once it has been designated RM or RF, you can't change that as far as I know.
I don't know if they have any sorts of partner programs, but you can designate if you want to take part in "special offers" - which seem to mostly be deep discounts for students etc? - I am not so sure of that, and you might only get to designate that during a specific period of the year.
1782
« on: October 21, 2011, 16:13 »
I do agree that copyright info should be saved. If unaltered (slightly altered?) images are put on the web they should contain our copyright info along with a unique code showing that the image was purchased legally so we could all go after people using images illegally.
Many of the suspected bogus uses I have found from my limited image searches it looks like a whole bunch of people ripped off one other web page. (this is based on repeated odd cropping). I suppose you could track that down if there were embedded codes in it, but you would want to be able to go after all but the original buyer. The other large source of likely bogus uses I have seen are ones with the watermark or a poorly photoshop-removed watermark. Those are pretty easy to tell where it came from if you can read the watermark. For a popular image selling on multiple sites, you have to assume that it is a legitimate use even if it might not be.
1783
« on: October 21, 2011, 15:52 »
Actually I found some images that PS said were 24MB weren't big enough for Alamy. What they require is over 8.4 megapixels. (as best I can determine). Why they continue to insist on their bizarre uncompressed file size description when they don't want uncompressed files is completely beyond me, perhaps it is an artifact of the days when all their images were scans.
1784
« on: October 21, 2011, 15:46 »
For me new files are not being displayed in popular and relevant searches. Only in newest. This explains why new files get much less sales. Doesn't make any sense to upload files until the problem is fixed. And probably will have to reupload new files after that.
It used to be that SS would index images every day or so. Until then new images were only visible in our ports. If they had a glitch where there was no update for a few days it would mean either a very nice boost or complete burial depending on if your image was indexed right before the glitch or not. A year or so ago they went to a sort of continuous update for newest, but I think that the popular and relevant searches have always taken a bit longer to update. In any case they only update the sales stats once a day and until a new image has a sale it isn't going to have a very favorable placement in the regular searches. It would be nice for them to figure out whatever the problem is and fix it once and for all. I am much less worried about images disappearing and reappearing only from our ports than something weirdly wrong and inconsistent with the search overall and different search placement when searching with and without vectors etc. etc. I have had some sales of possibly buried images since this latest switch, and when searching on some of them they do have favorable placement, so I don't think that it has effected my overall sales much in the short term.
1785
« on: October 20, 2011, 14:14 »
It definitely doesn't sound like it is really ready for prime time, but with a bit of advancement it could radically alter something like macro photography. Imagine being able to just shoot a macro and then in post decide how much of a depth of field you want. You could also vastly improve portrait photography by having more of the face in focus but also have the very out of focus background - plus the data is already there to make things 3d.
I totally agree that the "mac" approach to consumer electronics is very frustrating. I would much rather be able to buy 2 batteries and swap them and upgrade the storage with just a card rather than having to pay an extra 100$ to get 8 more GB worth built in. Not to mention the fact that if the trends of the past continue you could buy a new 64 GB card for that price and the convenience of being able to swap in a fresh card when traveling away from your computer...
1786
« on: October 19, 2011, 17:09 »
In any shift there are winners (files at the front of the search) and losers (files that aren't near the front). The fact that SS says this is a bug they are trying to fix and that it took good sellers and put them far behind relatively weak sellers (at least in the case of the one search I am familiar with) suggests that they will try to return this to some semblance of how it was. Hopefully for me my best seller doesn't completely lose it's place near the front of the search.
Personally I would love to see any of my images that get to the top of the search to stay there, but realistically I realize that a compromise of stability and mobility with the ability of good images to rise based on their merits is probably the best policy - maybe a tiny bit of positive feedback at first and then over time gradually increase the negative feedback so an image has to continue to increase sales to maintain a top position. A few years ago I think SS was leaning a bit too much towards new images and lately they have probably leaned a bit too much towards old images. This latest shift is just a weird IS best match esque change, so in general I don't approve. If they fix it soon then it probably won't make much of a long range difference other than giving a few images the chance to rise more than they would have otherwise. If it takes a long time (someone suggested it was linked to the problem of new images disappearing which has been going on for months), then it might permanently kill some best sellers which would be unfortunate. Since I only have one best seller that was hit by this it doesn't effect my overall sales all that much (maybe one a day - certainly nice, but not that great a percent of my overall sales to notice a huge drop off).
edited to fix typo
1787
« on: October 19, 2011, 09:22 »
hello, I used to IPTC tag my photos via XnView, and used to put on more keywords the same line, separated by commas, e.g.: dog,animal,pet lovely,cute
Since they have changed the website at SS, it is not possible to put more than a keyword per line (otherwise they are considered as a single keyword). How can I convert my archive of IPTC templates to the new format required by SS?
thanks
p.s. sorry for reply to this topic instead of starting a new one: but I'm not able to start a new topic, the website allows me only to start a new poll 
Perhaps if you had a space along with the comma? ie "dog, pet, cute" I do the keywords all on a line in photoshop which I think puts ; between the words (and I use a space too). No problem w/ the new editor.
1788
« on: October 18, 2011, 15:03 »
It would be interesting to see the results of really showing the same search to everyone - from Getty on down to photos.com, but without a better way of sorting out the prices it would most likely just frustrate the lower tier buyers and send a few of the upper tier buyers to the lower tiers.
You would think that they would know if you were a buyer or a seller when you logged in and send the survey accordingly.
Some of the questions do sort of give the hint that maybe TPTB have finally noticed that all is not well in the Gettyverse. Maybe it has gotten bad enough that even wringing the final 20% out of the independents wouldn't be enough to maintain profits.
1789
« on: October 18, 2011, 14:56 »
On the SS Forum an SS person said that it is a bug they are working on.
forumguru said
"Hi all,
Thanks for your feedback. This is related to a bug that we are working on correcting."
Glad to hear it is a bug and not a new IS style best match shake.
1790
« on: October 18, 2011, 12:24 »
AGAIN! DO NOT SPIT ON THE HAND THAT FEED YOU AND YOUR KIDS! THINK ABOUT THE PUNISHMENT!
Can anyone translate this?
1791
« on: October 18, 2011, 10:38 »
My image that disappeared is 4 years old, but the one that I found on page 13 is less than 4 years (by about a month), so I wonder if they booted images older than 4 years? Another possibility is that it is just over 4 MP I think so maybe a penalty for smaller images? I am just speculating here. Hopefully this is just a short term hiccup. It does still appear in position 9 for "relevant" search which is about where it was before. Since the default is "most popular" I am guessing that is where most buyers leave it though.
1792
« on: October 18, 2011, 10:01 »
WOW. The one image I had at or near the top of the search order is gone (well at least as far as page 25). Curiously another image with 2 orders of magnitude less downloads was on page 13. I hope this didn't permanently kill my one reliable image. It almost seems like an IS best match shift.
A slight boost to newer images would be nice though.
1793
« on: October 17, 2011, 14:03 »
I remember the days prior to the internet, a werid thing called "BBS" where forums did exist but took 24 hours to sync the messages between them...
Sure, I used BBSs too. They were cool. The slowness of message transfers made for a different sort of exchange.
you young puppies. I remember this thing called the post office where you would write messages on actual paper and stick them in a box and a few days later they would be delivered to someone else. It was so much clearer than smoke signals. It is a bit amazing to think I've been using e-mail for 25 years. I do wish there was some way to encourage civility without having to remove anonymity though. Not that there aren't plenty of people without anonymity who are uncivil. (maybe I am being too negative in that sentence?)
1794
« on: October 17, 2011, 11:59 »
For their last survey I just answered as if they meant selling instead of buying since the wording was a little vague. Mostly I just listed about 5 things they could do at the end when they had a space you could actually type in.
Maybe in a few days they will say "based on buyer feedback we now realize that buyers want more expensive images..."
1795
« on: October 16, 2011, 18:50 »
At SS, In US dollars, to download one on-demand image is $19.00.
Is that number right? In Europe 5 OD images cost 39 euros, That's about 8 euros one image, less than 12 american dollars. There's a difference.
I think you are mixing up on demand and single image downloads.
1796
« on: October 16, 2011, 18:50 »
One potential downside of giving Tyler people's real identities is if the site gets hacked - unlikely someone would hack the site to get that, but it is a possibility.
1797
« on: October 15, 2011, 20:57 »
And it should be so indicated to the rest of the forum that they are NOT confirmed.
This is a great idea! Just as we have the "premium member" designation under our names, we could also have "confirmed" or "unconfirmed". I don't know that people should have to pay to be unconfirmed. The designation would probably do the trick all by itself.
LOL...And this from the some of the friendliest members on the boards.
Tongue in cheek- Why stop there, if we fail to expose ourselves for scrutiny you could brand our foreheads with U's and ban us from the forums. ;P Yep that free google plus circle seems friendlier and more productive all the time.
Tongue in cheek...why thank you! 
Or, if you want friendly, head on over to the istock forum. Everyone is very friendly there, too!
except the admins
1798
« on: October 15, 2011, 20:55 »
I see no reason to pull a port merely because sales are slow, especially if the minimum payout is also fairly small. It doesn't take much work to request a payout once a year. Then if things pick up you can upload the backlog or maybe you can get onto the bridge to bigstock and have your stuff from SS moved there for no extra effort on your part. Now if the site is doing unsavory things that is a different story.
For me BS is slow but pretty steady. I made more on Veer in one day this month than many months on BS. Even without the Veer Dash for cash I make more than double the BS earnings on Veer.
As far as sales if you stop uploading I think that SS has switched their matches a bit so that it doesn't favor new files quite as much. That means if you have steady sellers there, they will probably continue to sell for a while. How well sales would continue if you stopped uploading has always been a bit of a wildcard for microstock. It is heartening to think that they might continue for some time. Many of my older images that I doubt would be accepted now continue to sell.
1799
« on: October 15, 2011, 08:25 »
I think the endgame for Getty is to move away from istock and the higher percentages they have to pay exclusives. If they can switch higher priced sales to agency/vetta on Getty and lower priced sales to PP they pay lower royalties and no RC. Unfortunately in trying to do that they are killing IS and many buyers are moving to rival sites. Getty might actually make more from all this action, but I don't think it is good for artists at all (except perhaps for independents as buyers move elsewhere). I don't think that anyone will publicly admit to this strategy though, so we just have to see what happens.
IS was the one site that consistently pushed prices up but unfortunately at the same time the pushed royalties down.
1800
« on: October 14, 2011, 12:27 »
I don't think requiring true identity would be all that good of an idea, especially with at least one agency publicly stating they would take retribution for things said in public fora.
That said, some of the spats and arguments are pretty annoying and childish, and people coming back repeatedly with different usernames is annoying.
A side forum for only people that are verified might be nice though.
Generally I'd advocate for a pretty loose hand on the reigns here, but when people start insulting each other directly as opposed to disagreeing with what they said, it just gets messy, so go ahead and delete that stuff. Sometimes it might be tongue in cheek or meant as a joke, but that can be hard to convey with text. Just because you put a smiley after an insult doesn't mean it is ok.
I do appreciate this forum and most of its members. Over time there are some I have come to value their opinions more than others. Some people just seem to talk a big game but don't really follow it up. Maybe they actually do have a good game, but since they don't follow it up their posts don't carry as much weight for me. When a discussion descends into a pissing contest I usually either grab the popcorn or stop reading.
Pages: 1 ... 67 68 69 70 71 [72] 73 74 75 76 77 ... 91
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|