|
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 - hroe
51
« on: April 14, 2010, 08:30 »
Yeah, it's probably that. I wouldn't like to be an IS site programmer at the moment 
52
« on: April 14, 2010, 08:21 »
Weird, I still don't see my images uploaded on 04/04, approved on 04/11 whereas I can see other images of non-exclusives on the site 'uploaded' on 04/07... 
53
« on: April 01, 2010, 12:45 »
Good to know, clarifies everything. Thank you.
54
« on: April 01, 2010, 12:18 »
Okay, thanks. I thought IS put a date limit when you buy credits, good for a year or something. These must be years-years old credits! From before 2005 (since Bronze level in 2005 commission is $0.25 for the equivalent)............. 
55
« on: April 01, 2010, 12:02 »
I am on Bronze level and non-exclusive. If I look at the chart here http://www.istockphoto.com/rate_schedule.phpno commission is under $0.30 at my level and I just sold 5 images at $0.20 each: extra small, pay as you go, regular. The same image has been sold before with commission of $0.23, $0.25, $0.29 under the same "extra small, pay as you go, regular". I am very puzzled here as to why the commission doesn't reflect what the chart says and why the price vary under same purchase conditions... Am I missing something?
56
« on: March 01, 2010, 16:43 »
Well, sorry, I wasn't getting the point. English is not my first language and I am new to stock also... Anyway thanks for all your informative answers!
57
« on: March 01, 2010, 16:03 »
Gracias amigo!
58
« on: March 01, 2010, 15:53 »
Well, I am not selling them to my local newspaper, but to other agencies equivalent to IS (DT, SS)... I wouldn't bother asking if there were not the direct IS competition.
59
« on: March 01, 2010, 15:49 »
And bottom line of all of that: I can't become exclusive with IS and keep the so-called editorial images on other agencies, correct?
60
« on: March 01, 2010, 15:24 »
Mmmmmm.....? I am puzzled, editorial license are not considered RF license for the agencies (my images have tons of logos). They are sold under the editorial license, and you said they sell as RF? No comprendo.
61
« on: March 01, 2010, 15:10 »
Just to make it simple. Apparently I am able to keep everything that is not RF images on the other agencies. Does anyone has experience this? Anyway, the guys who became exclusive with IS in the last months, do you really see a worthwhile difference? Do you recommend the jump Thank you.
62
« on: October 26, 2009, 11:18 »
Yes, make sense, I had 260 images when I passed the barrier...
63
« on: October 26, 2009, 09:00 »
Lots of download but little money for it.... Ho well... I am new to SS since March this year... Compare to your experience is this good or just medium (I will not input the bad)... 
64
« on: June 09, 2009, 08:25 »
Ha oui, tout le probleme est la. C'est pour des gens que je ne connais pas. Bon, comme ce n'est pas ma specialite (people), c'est + de trouble qu'autre chose. Bon j'apporterai une traduction et puis s'ils ne veulent pas signer j'insisterai pas...
Merci !
65
« on: June 09, 2009, 06:56 »
Well, if every company has a base in Europe, they should accept releases in any of these languages, but to be verified. Yes, I can put both English and French text on the same release, it just complicates everything, but that's an idea...
66
« on: June 09, 2009, 06:53 »
Mais ils ne vont pas se mefier de signer un papier dont ils ne connaissent pas le contenu ? Je peux leur raconter ce que je veux, ils ne sont pas oblige de me croire. Tu signerai toi un papier en allemand ou tu ne comprends rien du tout ? Dur, dur, non ?
67
« on: June 09, 2009, 05:56 »
Tu veux dire que tu fais signer en anglais (puisque tu leur traduis sur place)... Il y a une petite typo, je voulais juste m'assurer
68
« on: June 08, 2009, 20:23 »
I guess I can play with Photoshop and cut and paste their info on an English release, that's an idea... Just more time consuming...
Thanks!
69
« on: June 08, 2009, 20:20 »
Justement, parce que je vais faire les photos en France... et que les francais ne pige que-dalle a l'anglais ou du moins la ou je vais (dans les campagnes). Je ne vais quand-meme pas leur faire signer des papiers qu'ils ne comprennent pas. Le but de ma question etait la... Merci quand-meme !
70
« on: June 08, 2009, 10:42 »
Bonjour a tous !
Je cherche un modele release en francais accepte par toutes les companies (ou du moins les plus importantes). Croyez-vous que quand vous "uploader" vos photos sur les micro americains, ils acceptent les modeles release etrangers ?
Le fait est que j'habite aux US et vais en France faire des photos et puis quand je reviens, je suis sur le site americains avec les keywords en anglais...
Merci !
71
« on: June 08, 2009, 10:31 »
Do you know if there is a general Model Release in French that is accepted by all Microstocks (the main ones at least)? I upload in the US but will go to France for shooting, so I need a French Model Release...
Thanks!
72
« on: April 23, 2009, 08:47 »
This is my advice. They reject all your files at once, even the ones who are accepted everywhere else and they ignore requests to close account. I have asked twice to be removed and nothing happens, not even a reply or anything. My advice: avoid them!
73
« on: April 21, 2009, 07:39 »
Thanks! I was mostly concerned about how 'buyers' see them, not really me. If the preview is lifeless on Firefox it's an issue since a lot of people use it. On the other hand, PCs are darker than Macs, so they would gain some color back...
74
« on: April 20, 2009, 21:25 »
Thank you Inga for your answer and your sample! I have noticed before that Adobe RGB is not rendered well in Firefox, I then did some tests and decided to embed my monitor 'Apple Cinema Display' which gives the same result as Adobe RGB color-wise but can be read by Firefox (and other browsers) absolutely fine. I tested it on different platforms (was mostly concerned about PCs) and colors didn't shift... So, I was pleased with it... until I started to upload to IS and realize that everything looks paler, but only on Firefox (because actually like you said, they change the color profile).... I did some tests with sRGB but it still look paler on Firefox. Here another sample with the same image from IS on two different browsers (Safari and Firefox). I don't have the problem with the other companies since they don't convert the color profile. The problem is that some of my images are on the "Can resubmit" section for being dull or have lack of contrast. But then I don't know if they saw them with real colors and contrast or not... Voila. Is there someone who has any idea to go around the problem Thanks!
75
« on: April 20, 2009, 15:28 »
Hello,
I am completely new at istock and I have a question about the color difference seen on istock only. Even though the color of my jpg images look OK on my browser and in all the other micro sites, on istock they all look more dull and paler. It's weird to me because it's the internet and if it looks fine on my browser (last version Firefox), then it should look the same once uploaded...... but it doesn't. On all the other sites, the colors are fine.
Here a sample of what I mean
Anybody experiences the same problem?
Thank you!
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
