|
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 - Boylet
26
« on: September 08, 2006, 00:56 »
how is it to upload to there?
It's relatively easy compared to other sites. They have FTP which basically smoothens the upload process. You still however need to go to your picture one-by-one and add a category for each pics before you can "send to stock" the picture. Take note...limit of keywords is 50.
27
« on: September 07, 2006, 22:06 »
Just submitted my first 25 pics. One has been accepted. I'm still waiting for the 24 to be approved/disapproved. Now, based on your theory, I wonder if I should continue submitting.... Let's see, if my picture is approved, should I be happy or not since it would mean that my picture has low selling potential. Then if its rejected, it would mean that it has the potential to compete with the the exclusives then I should be happy .... Hmmm ...  This is very confusing ...   I hope the theory is wrong, otherwise, they'll be killing themselves. SS is very close behind them in terms of agency sales performance. Not to mention DT which is slowly creeping in.
28
« on: September 07, 2006, 20:55 »
I uploaded my best selling 12 shots a week ago. If they sell a few of those, I might give them more. So far, they haven't gotten around to reviewing them. Not looking good. I'm with kacper, wasted too much time on up and coming sites.
I think they suddenly have an influx of submissions during this past few weeks. Maybe because many are posting sales activity in forums. Not sure if they'll be adjusting their manpower to accomodate the increase in submission and meet their 3-5 days deadline or they'll just continue on their pace until the queue is cleared or everybody stops submitting due to delays in review. Hope they take the former approach and increase manpower. More submissions means many photographers, be it amateur or pro, are willing to entrust their photos, especially to a site that was mostly presumed dead.
29
« on: September 05, 2006, 20:55 »
For those uploading to LO, they say the IPTC keyword import problem has been solved. Haven't tested it though.. Here's the announcement: A few of you have had problems having your IPTC data read. This is because a few popular programs for adding keywords to images actually don't conform properly to the IPTC standard. However, we've heeded your call, and those images should now have their IPTC data read properly. You can just delete any uploaded photos which didn't have their data read and upload them again if you want. Let me know if you're still having problems.
I've been working on a big new feature which is nearly done, and otherwise been up to some maintenance stuff lately. We've had so many images coming in we're running short of space sooner than we thought, so soon we'll be upgrading our storage capabilities. Various little bugs have been fixed thanks to reports from our olivers; we listen to your emails! Site performance has never been better, and every single image should have been resized by now, so no more delays when trying to buy. Expect some cool new stuff this week; things they are a-changin'.
30
« on: September 05, 2006, 20:03 »
Just using the laptop. main problem is colours change depending on veiwing angle.
Yeah ... me too. Makes me wonder whether my "underexposure or over exposure" rejections are caused by me not seeing the same thing with the reviewer in terms of brightness.
31
« on: September 05, 2006, 20:01 »
The only one of interest is the small business one. Not enough info though - do we get more money - if so how much. how do we activate it. Why only small businesses.
I believe we do get extra money. There is a tool to calculate how much depending on how many items the image will be printed on by the client. The tool is available when you click one of your "published image". It's labelled "Royalty Free Extended: Calculate". You have to be logged in though... Hope this helps. Regards.
33
« on: September 04, 2006, 00:22 »
34
« on: September 03, 2006, 21:38 »
This site is built with this $295 software : http://www.ktools.net/products.php
There's a lot of sites like this one...
I guess now I know what they mean when they say "cheap" site...
35
« on: September 03, 2006, 09:18 »
Just sold 1 pic @ featurpics, 2 at StockXpert, both just after a day uploading the pics ... I'm feeling positive vibe here... 
36
« on: September 03, 2006, 07:46 »
Found this new site from another forum: http://www.soupmeister.co.ukBrowsed through the site. Here are some things I noticed: 1. Site supposedly started February 2, 2005. For a site which is more than 1 year old, it's forum is sure like a ghost town. (Although there is a section in it's news that the board itself was started only August 7, I'm not sure on the veracity of this claim. 2. There are only 15 photographers on the site. Again, for a site more than 1 year old, this is very peculiar. 3. It uses a site template similar to USPhotoStock. Not sure what is it with this template and fly-by-night agencies... 4. The news section containing news from Feb 2005 to present seems to look like its just been put there in one night. 5. Site owner is honest enough to say that it is being run as a hobby. Lastly, with the above points, I didn't bother to read their contracts. Maybe somebody else will...
37
« on: September 03, 2006, 01:08 »
just had my first sale there
Congrats Now, if only somebody could confirm if he/she already had a payout there ...
38
« on: September 01, 2006, 02:48 »
Have you read the Photographer Agreement?
"It is agreed that all rights, including title and copyright, in and to the uploaded Data Files is retained by the Supplier, and that no title or copyright transfers or is granted to CanStockPhoto or any third party."
Oops! I think someone stole a text!
Regards,
Adelaide
PS: I have emailed them and it bouced back:
<[email protected]>: This address no longer accepts mail
I am new at stock photo and I dont understand what the reference is about. Is this site ok or is there something fishy about it?
The excerpt/reference on madelaide's post is the actual Photographer Agreement of GalaStock which the photographer agrees to when he uploads an image. Notice that the agreement posted on the GalaStock site contain section which refers to CanStockPhoto, which is another stock agency. The agreement seems to be just copied from the other site. This made some photographers warry about the site.... including me... Regards.
39
« on: September 01, 2006, 01:02 »
Nice.... Thanks StockManiac
40
« on: September 01, 2006, 00:24 »
A week ago I uploaded one only photo to http://galastock.com/referal.php?id=247 and it already sold!!! Excuse me, have to upload the rest of my portfolio to them... In case somebody wants to join, the link is a referral link  SY
Curiously, mine too...If you don't mind me asking, is the date by any chance August 30???
41
« on: August 28, 2006, 08:46 »
Point him to your IStock portfolio Then let him sue IStock for putting watermarks on the images... I'm sure both their lawyers would have some fun... LOL
42
« on: August 28, 2006, 03:09 »
4 main improvements:
1. 10.1 mp v 8.2 mp
2. noise reduction
3. self-cleaning sensor
4. bigger LCD
I have a feeling the noise reduction enhancement would at best only compensate for the noise brought by the upgrade from 8.2Mp to 10.1 Mp.
43
« on: August 28, 2006, 03:06 »
Agreed Mitch,
however as Phil pointed out your # 7 is not so obvious. He got a message stating it was no good that another photog was downloading Phil's photos. That's what I asked Bryan. If you can't use tokens to download your own photos and you can't use them to download others' photos, whose photos can you download?
Download mine
44
« on: August 27, 2006, 05:34 »
...
For stock work the 350D is a great little camera. Save your pennies for some good lenses, they will make far more difference to your images than the camera body every could. Forget about the 5D for microstock unless you're doing very well out of it, or you need it for other more demanding work...
Thanks chellyar. Makes me feel a whole lot better that I made a good choice for buying a camera within my budget range. At least I know that I didn't sacrifice much for the price. I used to own the point and click types of canon (sd550 and g5). This is my first dSLR so I dont have much preference yet except on what I have read on forums. So far, this is the heaviest camera I've held which actually required me to bring along a bag for the lenses. Yet, I'm very much enjoying the use of it. I'm still a new hobbyist in photography and also new in microstock. It comforts me to see professionals like kacper still uses the 350D. I've even seen others use 300D. I guess the only thing I can't buy is talent... hope I develop one... 
45
« on: August 26, 2006, 19:30 »
Hi Everyone,
I'm new to this forum. I'm curious to know how many of u are uploading to citizen image? I've been uploading a couple of weeks now.
thanks
Hi gbcimages ... I personally am not uploading there yet. I think others aren't also yet (but I might be mistaken). I'm still on a "wait-and-see how the site performs" state. Sure would like to know how things fare for you. Regards,
46
« on: August 26, 2006, 10:23 »
Anybody here using Canon 350D??? Can't blame myself.... I like you cameras but this is the only model I can afford. I could push for a 5D but I'm pretty certain my wife would throw me out once the credit card bill arrives. So I guess for now, I'll just drool over your cameras.... 
47
« on: August 26, 2006, 10:04 »
Just my two cents worth...
The foundation of the TOS is very subjective since the medium (internet) has no definite boundaries. What's right for one country might not be right for another. However, the TOS' intention, although weakly defined, is to protect the model. I guess for this scenario, the first person who should actually define whether the ad was offensive or not, is the model himself (the old man). If it's ok with him, even if his friends or relatives says otherwise, then there is no problem. He was not offended. Whether others thinks they would be offended if it had happened to them, it has no bearing since the model involved was not.
Unfortunately, based on what I have already read in the forum there (although I haven't read all) the photographer was still undecided to tell the old man how his photo was used because he was unsure how the old man would react. I hope he decides soon, lest the old man found out from others. In my opinion, that would increase the possibility that old man would react negatively, especially if the person who would relay the message also has negative opinion on the matter.
Regards.
48
« on: August 25, 2006, 19:02 »
Have you read the Photographer Agreement?
"It is agreed that all rights, including title and copyright, in and to the uploaded Data Files is retained by the Supplier, and that no title or copyright transfers or is granted to CanStockPhoto or any third party."
Oops! I think someone stole a text!
Regards,
Adelaide
PS: I have emailed them and it bouced back:
<[email protected]>: This address no longer accepts mail Same here ... I used their site mail to get support but no response.
49
« on: August 25, 2006, 01:20 »
50
« on: August 25, 2006, 01:14 »
In many cases I have one particular image in a series getting downloads and the others none - then on other site is another of them that shows this trend.
I find the same thing happening and it is very difficult to predict which image will start to 'snowball'. It is my reason for uploading a whole series rather than one or two "best" shots like they ask. Who are we to decide which are the best shots? I know from a photographic point of view but I would rather let the designers vote with their downloads. Oh well, only another 21 hours and 40 minutes and I can upload again!
Hu hu hu  The only 'snowball' effect I experience is when I submit a whole batch of files and they all get rejected because one/some is/are out of focus or grainy...
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
