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 - Microstock Posts
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 15 ... 53
226
« on: June 12, 2015, 17:23 »
I removed my port last year I think, or was it the year before. There were a number of reasons for leaving. One of them being I didn't like working with them or the way they worked (this might not matter to many people but it's important to me).
The strangest experience I had was when I wrote to them asking to change the descriptions of a few editorial images. I had made a terrible mistake in the descriptions of these images which needed to be rectified to be factually accurate. Instead of a thank you for informing us email (remember the mistake was being displayed on their site and being viewed by their buyers), I received a long winded and scolding email basically saying don't do it again (does anyone actually set out to intentionally make mistakes?) and saying how difficult it was for their IT personnel to change the descriptions, maybe that's a good indication of how smart their IT personnel are. They did inform me they will make the changes to the descriptions though. They never actually did. There's a difference in making a mistake and being unprofessional. I made a mistake, they were unprofessional. I don't regret leaving.
227
« on: June 11, 2015, 04:10 »
Ok I missed it, so I'm back now.
228
« on: June 11, 2015, 04:09 »
This forum sucks. I'm out of here.
229
« on: April 16, 2015, 08:13 »
I think they paid out $80 million dollars to contributors last year. How many cents is that?
230
« on: March 18, 2015, 13:48 »
"Forcing customers to buy credits may simplify the process on one hand, but can lead to customers paying too much, forgetting they have credits available and in some cases have them expire before they can use them."
Customers aren't forced to do anything, they could buy from sites like Alamy if they wish but microstock buyers prefer to license many images for the price of one of yours. And these forgetful buyers somehow keep remembering to come back and buy new credits.
231
« on: February 28, 2015, 15:12 »
Just curious, why pull thumbnails?
To see the sold images without having to click on the image links. That's my guess.
232
« on: December 14, 2014, 12:23 »
Pepsi has said this on the post.
Translated from Portuguese:
"Thanks for your pertinent observation!
By mistake we do not publish the correct version of the image. The final version includes your photo, we like a lot, but without the watermark.
If you want to send us a private message to you do get proof of purchase of the image, which as you can see is still done on Friday.
Thank you for your attention!"
233
« on: December 11, 2014, 10:19 »
12 cents Time for a sad song.
234
« on: December 05, 2014, 23:10 »
"Just bend over.. Mwa-ha-ha-haaaa!", said the agency.
236
« on: March 06, 2014, 13:20 »
What the he-ll guys, up until now we got ZERO $$$ from bloggers...
I have always bought microstock for my blog and I'm not the only one.
237
« on: February 13, 2014, 20:57 »
Passed the $500 mark. I do see quite a few non sub sales. No ELs yet tho.
Keep trying Sean. If you need any advice just let me know.
238
« on: January 23, 2014, 09:44 »
When you explain to your mother's cronies what it is you do and afterwards there is complete silence, apart from the cat releasing a fart. Then your mother says: "My other son is a lawyer."
That's a good one!
239
« on: January 20, 2014, 14:52 »
When you tell an agency exactly what you think of them in their forum.
240
« on: December 14, 2013, 09:10 »
Here's an example of how Fotolia operates, which might explain why they're so deep in debt. I recently received this email message from them...
We were recently contacted by one of your models, [model's name]. She has asked us to remove the images you uploaded even though a model release has been provided. This complaint has raised some questions about your account and as a result we have blocked your account until this issue can be resolved. If [model] will remove her request we can reopen your account. Please let me know if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Chad Bridwell Director of Operations Fotolia.com 206-683-4942 [email protected]
Skype Chad_fotolia Linkedin - www.linkedin.com/in/chadbridwell/
Shocking! Fotolia don't live in the same world as the rest of us and they never will.
241
« on: December 13, 2013, 03:47 »
Because each time you apply, it is a new review, which can lead to different results from the same images. They are not looking back at the results of the previous 10 that you sent.
242
« on: December 06, 2013, 11:10 »
is it worth selling these on micros may be read as "is it worth selling these great images on worthless micros".. at least that's how it sounded to me.. and since the images aren't really as good as thread title implies, the answer was spot on..
I didn't infer that at all. It's clearly all in the interpretation. I interpreted it as "is there any point in trying to sell these images on micros?".
I thought the same.
243
« on: September 27, 2013, 13:53 »
90% of ufos in pictures are insects.
..and the other 10% are aliens in spaceships with malfunctioning cloaking devices.
244
« on: September 25, 2013, 08:17 »
Here we go again.
245
« on: September 24, 2013, 06:51 »
SS posts a total of their earnings, their profits, the number of individual sales, the average revenue of every sale.
What on earth can we contributors do that will give the competition more information??
+1 I wonder if they could object to us publishing stats without revealing who the agency is. My earnings this month was $xx on "unnamed agency", compared to $xx on Dreamstime etc. Until now broadcasting of stats has been good publicity for ss, if it ain't broke, don't fix it.
246
« on: September 17, 2013, 04:57 »
crestock were good and have offered me my princely payout of $8.xx
My experience with Crestock was hilarious, luckily I had too few images with them to care and I guess the feeling was mutual. I was only making an enquiry, I hadn't made a decision but they were all too keen to get rid of my images, or was it me . Here's my email communication with them. Me: If I want to take my images off Crestock, is the only way of doing this by closing my account? CS: This email is to confirm that the images which were formerly active in your portfolio have now been removed. I can leave your account active, or close it if you wish. Let me know what you prefer and I will take care of it for you. Me: Close the account. Thank you. I didn't ask for the money, nor did they send it, but it was a tiny amount, maybe $2 or $3.
247
« on: September 16, 2013, 18:27 »
My main issue has been getting files from the last 5 years on other sites. I took the approach of keeping anything SS wouldn't take as exclusive on DT. But only half my portfolio is on SS. If I could get all my files up they would beat DT.
What for? I don't think exclusive images by non-exclusive contributors get favoured in search results and you only get a little extra for these exclusive files on Dt. If I had 3k images I wouldn't keep half of them on just one site because they didn't get on ss. Plus if you choose again carefully, I'm sure a lot of the ones which didn't get on ss would get on next time, their reviewing process is primarily a human one.
249
« on: September 16, 2013, 13:58 »
They should rethink instead.
250
« on: September 14, 2013, 10:22 »
here today $2.50 subscription sale an image at level 2, ?
That's strange. They announced this, "The royalties awarded are $2.00 for non-exclusive contributors and $2.20 for exclusives."
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 15 ... 53
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|