|
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 - qwerty
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 ... 42
51
« on: November 11, 2017, 01:10 »
There seem to be some thought in the list but I wouldn't expect a lot of sales. only if you already had photos that you hadn't submitted, or you were going there anyway.
52
« on: October 30, 2017, 00:50 »
It would appear not anybody here.
Like all these agencies its hard to know if they'll make you sales. (hence your question)
I would think that supply of images for New Zealand and wealth of the country for there to be a reasonable chance of a local agency making money. They need to concentrate on only NZ images not some NZ and hundreds of generic stock. They also need to have links to NZ advertising, magazines etc.
A quick google search shows that oneshoto comes up first on my list but there are a number of others.
My favourite named agency that comes up is called "mychillybin" (which is an esky in Australia, icebox elsewhere)
53
« on: October 14, 2017, 16:49 »
well that managed to turn into a negative thread pretty quick.
54
« on: October 08, 2017, 03:38 »
I would rather encourage buyers to move away from subs and go to sites that pay us 50%. If they aren't using much of their download quota and we aren't getting paid much, it seems like a bad deal for both of us.
Thing is they don't need to use much of the quota for it to be good value. I suspect for many its simply the convenience factor of not having to spend time thinking about it...in the same way I might get better value if I had pay per view tv...I'm not going to log in and pay every time I watch something.
especially if they don't personally benefit on going to pay per image. i.e. big company - hassle getting approval for many small purchases. If they go with a subscription they can do it once per year. If it's a one person show they have more incentive to minimise costs.
55
« on: September 24, 2017, 01:35 »
This is complete rubbish, he's trying to portray that you'll be taken to places where you can get shots like these but they're not even the right country. Doesn't fill me with confidence he's get me to the best place for that once in a lifetime dawn shoot.
If it's a new course where he hasn't been sure include some stock photos but mark that they are representational.
On other notes I hate the people who spam location keyword their photos, they should be banned. So easy for someone to write a script from the agencies view to identify issues like this. I'll point them to 1000 images within 10 minutes for locations I've been.
Unless it's one of those NASA shots where people submit as their own its just not possible to have Hawaii and Fiji in the same photos !
56
« on: September 24, 2017, 01:24 »
Well if they don't get it back up soon they'll lose the 3 customers they have.
57
« on: August 27, 2017, 01:56 »
Welcome aboard.
If you just want to do this for fun, just do what you want.
Obviously you don't want to stop in the middle of surgery to snap a few for your microstock port.
but you've got a big leg into the system that I would never be able to get.
One model and property released shot of heart surgery would be worth 1000 shots of your local beach and your cat.
You could start with some staged stuff in your office with some medical equipment and no real patients which would be much easier.
Anyway best of luck and if your doing it for fun keep it fun.
58
« on: June 12, 2017, 02:16 »
Geeze everyone wants the new players to come with something different and as soon as they do, you complain. Australia's GDP is around 13th in the world, GDP per capita is around 10th. No need to be so negative all the time. Lets concentrate our negativity on the agencies that actually deserve it 
59
« on: May 04, 2017, 00:29 »
My ports all gone, nice though they keep sending me emails telling me to check out what's happening in their forums.
Searching photodune now I can't see them being able to supply a lot of customers needs. Maybe if you need a smiling business man etc.
For instance a search Perth Australia yields 6 city shots before it starts returning pictures of ducks and generic buildings.
60
« on: February 25, 2017, 00:33 »
I stopped uploading there due to the massive delays in reviewing, I don't like having images waiting for months, if they decide to artibarily rejecting images I will have wasted my time uploading big batches. I'd rather spend it on producing more content for places that will accept it and sell it. (or waste the time on here reading about rejections !!)
61
« on: February 25, 2017, 00:22 »
0.41 for IS subs which is better than expected but we'll see how it goes, a lot of 2cents balanced with some larger ones, biggest $4.
62
« on: February 25, 2017, 00:13 »
I can't imagine anybody is surprised. Couldn't organise a p1ss up in a brewery !
63
« on: February 07, 2017, 03:30 »
There is a gofundme page set up to raise money from iStock Exclusives to pay for a party.
https://www.gofundme.com/thank-you-from-istock-exclusives
"The iStock/Getty team has been working hard at the tedious Unification project and are near completion. As iStock Exclusive Contributors, we want to thank them with the gift of a celebration dinner/party. This is to thank them not just for their work on the ESP project but for all they do in our support and advocacy.
There are around 15-25 folks that have touched the project in some way. $750 should be enough for a nice dinner/party (or at least a good start!).
The funds will be disbursed to Brenda Bazylewski/Chris McBurney to arrange for a celebration.
Q: iStock has people working all over the world, not everyone is Calgary.
A: That's true. Not everyone can probably make such a celebration. But hopefully they still feel appreciated.
Help spread the word!"
What !!!
64
« on: February 07, 2017, 02:46 »
Got the FON email. Why on earth would I want to reapply ? There is no way I can spend time uploading to a site that just chucked countless hours of my time in the bin. Especially when the returns spending my time elsewhere are 20-25 times greater.
Disappointing, however I can't see how removing everybody's content that is selling will help. You could have chucked out the content that hadn't sold in 12 months out and had a restricted upload limit related to a contributors approval rate from now.
Taking the majority of sale price then shafting the suppliers seems like a strange move to me. Hang on ! That's microstocks number one playbook !
Please post if you do get accepted
65
« on: December 27, 2016, 17:14 »
I've seen my photos used as backgrounds behind local newsreader, everyday for 5 years for 25 cents. Yay ! I signed up for it though.
66
« on: November 19, 2016, 02:06 »
The part about articles related to % royalties to the contributors that these agencies are paying seemed the most achievable sensible idea that an association could achieve.
If buyers had the knowledge that for the same or even paying a lower price that if they changed sites they were giving more money to the photographers some of them would change. Might only be a couple of % of buyers.
Of course people have to step up and run it, and people would need to fund it.
One of the problems is that the definition of fair royalities is different to contributors. Some say 80%, some >80%, some 30% aslong as they sell a lot, some anything higher than IS.
67
« on: October 04, 2016, 03:22 »
Uploading with Microsoft edge = internet explorer doesn't work.
Uploading using goggle chrome works.
68
« on: September 28, 2016, 07:07 »
?? sounds like an info-mercial
Why? I'm not selling anything, just trying to help newbies out and raise my profile as a photographer
The wording from the second poster reminded me of an advert response. Like ones where they say I use to spend hours chopping onions but with my onion pro 2000 I now have tonnes of time to relax. Thanks so much mr onion pro you're a lifesaver. Didn't mean to offend
69
« on: September 28, 2016, 04:12 »
?? sounds like an info-mercial
70
« on: September 22, 2016, 21:46 »
If you're able to outsource and it costs less than the extra money you can make by shooting researching planning, submitting it's worth it. If you're a photoshop guru and can process an imag in 1 minute then it might not worth it but if you're already at capacity then outsourcing can be good.
I know people who spend an hour processing trying to get everything perfect. Not a receipe for microstock.
71
« on: September 22, 2016, 21:40 »
You can claim anything till you get audited.  Rules are different all over the place but, a proportion of the costs that you can assign to taking the stock video images should be reasonable, I wouldn't go overboard, it would also depend on how much stock you actually get up for sale, if you went on a 3 month round the world trip and submitted 1 10 second clip and claimed the whole lot of expenses wouldn't be a good look. As with all things tax 100 bucks asking a tax accountant would be tax deductible money well spent.
72
« on: September 11, 2016, 00:12 »
Hmm I'm sure there will be some awesome stuff.
73
« on: September 08, 2016, 17:09 »
you'd think if they cared, that they would change the front page from 90,000,000 to 100,000,000.
74
« on: September 08, 2016, 03:40 »
These are my better sellers (ranked by popularity) with newer ones near the bottom of the first page:
http://www.shutterstock.com/video/gallery/1432769/
I've noticed that most popular ones out-sell anything new I upload these days, probably just higher in search rankings...
Wow... Love that eagle footage!
I agree , well done.
75
« on: September 05, 2016, 03:34 »
It did a great deal better than me a translating
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 ... 42
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
