|
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 - berryspun
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13
276
« on: September 22, 2006, 16:14 »
Rachell, yes, 100 ISO.
Just to clarify too, I am not against noise reduction programs. When SS started to apply the almost zero-tolerance for noise in Spring time, I started to have much more rejections, so I bought NeatImage to solve this very frustrating problem. But I prefer to shoot pictures with 100 ISO as much as I can for low noise level. The pictures are accepted now, which is a relief.
If you cannot use a tripod easily, just put your camera against a post or a ramp, or something, to avoid the softness/blurriness, which could also be seen by the approvers as a result of too much application of a noise reduction software.
277
« on: September 22, 2006, 12:07 »
NeatImage - but I don't use it anymore because it softens the images. I found out that if I shoot at 100 with a tripod, the pictures remain sharp and are not rejected.
278
« on: September 21, 2006, 17:35 »
Professorgb, then your definition of conspiracy would include any kind of business implementation which has been discussed and decided behind closed doors. This, I call business strategy. We, the suppliers, are independent contracters. When changes are made, either we are free to continue or to withdraw our investments and our trust. And in this case I agree that they are making a big gamble by not respecting the top vendor's wishes - by mistreating them if you wish 
279
« on: September 21, 2006, 17:04 »
Professorgb, I didn't say that is was a conspiracy, but I think that it's a site atrategy (I don't think that these people are dumb - unconsiderate maybe, but not dumb), and as I said, and this is a fact, they did encourage photographers to sort throught their pictures with more scrutiny so that they would upload less and present their best work. Nothing parano here, just facts.
280
« on: September 21, 2006, 16:15 »
IS did exactly what they wanted to do! Now that they seem to be satisfied with the numbers they have online, they shifted their strategy a few weeks ago by restricting the numbers of uploads for most of us. When they reduced the amount of uploads by half, they didn't hide that they expect the photographers to present their best by selecting only a portion of what they used to submit. Some photographers begged for quite some time to get an easy upload through FTP, but it has always been ignored, I suppose because it would flood them with many more series of pictures taken with sllight different angles and lightings, B&W, Sepia etc.., without encouraging the photographers to only upload a few outstanding ones, and only that. Making the pending time long, and making the uploading cumbersome is part of this strategy, I think. For example, there is no reason to keep the categories with the new keyword system, it creates a similar, almost duplicate search. They should have easily deleted it when they installed their new search engine, but however they didn't... So, the bottom line is that it will be much harder for the non-exclusive photographers to make a living or to get a decent income with IS. And it seems that they don't care anyway... but for the designers, it will be much simpler to choose pictures, without being confused with too many similar choices! The only risk that they take is that the photographers would turn away, but will they ?? mmmhhh...
281
« on: September 20, 2006, 23:33 »
Suwanneeredhead, just put your DT id in your profile, and then the total sales show up (not the money).
282
« on: September 20, 2006, 10:08 »
Thank you for this info fintastique, this is one of the reasons this site is so useful! I was almost ready to empty my portfolio from 123.... Even if the sales come drop by drop, at least I know now that this site is safe, and it's a relief. What I don't understand is that if the site is owned by such a giant, why don't they invest some of their funds in the marketing dept in order for 123 to have more exposure, thus more sale 
283
« on: September 19, 2006, 23:36 »
Well about half an hour after I posted, I received an email notification (wrong numbers, wrong results...), all my pictures were reviewed! They still don't show up in the online portfolio, but this delay should be fine.. I hope. So, the site is alive and afloat, this is god news! 
284
« on: September 19, 2006, 22:42 »
Thanks fintastique and CJPhoto. I just checked their forum thread about the slow review: http://forum.123rf.com/viewtopic.php?t=250It seems that either they are overwhelmed, or something else is happening, like when the admin was almost inexistent before TP closed... what do you think?
285
« on: September 19, 2006, 12:56 »
Usually my pictures are approved the same day or the next. Now I have had 41 pictures pending since Sept.8, and think that they may have been forgotten in a glitch. Do you have a similar experience or is it still flowing as usual for you? Thanks for any feedback
286
« on: September 19, 2006, 12:03 »
Amanda, I didn't mean to be negative, and apologize if it may have been seen that way to you. I read the post that you wrote on the IS site, and I wish that you would have felt free to write this experience here from the very start without fearing to be judged as being negative towards IS. There is a difference between being negative and sharing our experiences. Expressing our point of views based on fact, knowledge and personal experience is very fruitful. Being supportive means to discover, share, show the strengths and try to remedy the weaknesses, but not be hopeful that one day these weaknesses will magigally disappear by ignoring them. Obviously it's in the interest of all photographers for every site to be succesful, isn't it ?
I find this site very useful, constructive and positive, with a group of very mature people, and I hope that is stays that way, along with your very rich contribution.
287
« on: September 19, 2006, 01:57 »
Phildate, I would advise you to wait until they put more choices in the definitions of keywords. The photographer cannot add new definitions, only report them in the 'disambiguation' thread. If you uncheck something which doesn't fit, the corresponding keywords will disappear. There are hundreds of requests already, so it will take time and energy, since this step must be manually done by the admin. The bottom line is, IS must have purchased a very bad translation search engine  but even with a better one, finding a meaning for every word or word association will create an intermediary filter which will make most of the specific pictures less reachable by the designers. For example ask a farmer from the midwest what a tassel here, and it's definitely not associated with curtains nor graduation hats! The requests for new definitions are endless, so I see it as a true nightmare for the site, for the photographers, and for the designers to get a straightforward search. It's definitely not a win-win situation for anyone, not in the short-term nor in the long-term. And it will probablu give a boost to other stock sites, which may be good...
288
« on: September 18, 2006, 21:32 »
What would be great is to have this info installed on top of this page, where the DT sales already are. Would it be feasible? Thanks for your patience. The Window (Yahoo! Widget) version is now available on our site (www.microstockwatcher.com). We were working out some cookie and firewall issues but we believe the application is stable now. Best regards, Marcviln
289
« on: September 18, 2006, 17:50 »
I tested the new system with one upload, and found out that the keywords are not automatically entered anymore. The list have to be pasted, and then some keywords defined. Added to that, the categories still have to be filled on another page before sucessful submission...
Yes, Mitch, I liked the TP system, which was quite logical and allowed for flexibility. Sometimes, by allowing photographers to add their own definition, entering, sometines erroneously the new info into the system, that flexibility was innocently or purposefully abused. But altogether I think that it could have worked.
Even though there may be some mistakes with the simple keyword search result, I think that it's the simplest and the most practical for everyone. If designers want more specific results, they can add 2 or 3 more keywords to bring more specification to their search. I don't see this iStock new search engine as an improvement, neither for the photographer nor the buyer. It is burdensome, time-consuming, and creates too many limitations for everyone involved.
290
« on: September 18, 2006, 17:23 »
bleachers: a typically roofless section of low-priced, tiered-seating, usually made of boards, especially at an athletic field or stadium.
291
« on: September 18, 2006, 15:44 »
I tried to 'repair' a few of my pictures, but decided to let it go 'as is' for a while. It is impossible to repair a category error when there is no other alternative correct category to checkmark, and taking off wrong categories without having a new one would greatly limit the exposure. So, for the time being, the breed of Pinto horses will be found in the bean food and the dog section... It would take days to report each error and expect a follow-up  I'm wondering what the designers will think about this 'improvement' when they do their search...
292
« on: September 18, 2006, 12:21 »
Oh boy! I just cheched a few... I have "Natural Disaster" for a homeless shelter, "Purebred Dog" for horses, "Naked" for a bridge, and "Getting Dressed" for oil and vinegar!!!! Wow, what a mess! I hope that they can fix it from their side...!
293
« on: September 18, 2006, 09:35 »
Very good news, yes, thanks for the link ptlee. I hope that the automated translation engine IS chose is a good and accurate one.
294
« on: September 16, 2006, 17:51 »
Funny message on the home page:
"Don't shoot!
You've caught us with our pants down.
We're doing some upgrades.
We'll be presentable again before too long.
Thanks, Bryan
LuckyOliver"
295
« on: September 15, 2006, 19:21 »
In other words:
You better have a drink, because its time for massive rejections...
Why
296
« on: September 15, 2006, 17:33 »
Hi SB !!! Yes, the more competition the better, and it's nice to see friendly sites get the right tools to succeed ! Since I just joined LO recently - I waited a few months to make sure... - the numbers are still in the infancy stage: 226 Tokens, $0.30 Piggy Bank  , 1 Downloads, 232 Views. I'm working on shooting more, and diversifying my portfolio. I'm not a designer, but the idea of being able to easliy downolad some pictures from other friends's portfolios quite tempt me I am encouraged with the number of views, although I am aware that photographers enjoy looking around too. I like the 200% win-win situation, that's how everyone ends up happy! Take care, -Bn
297
« on: September 15, 2006, 17:09 »
Just got strange rejections from SS, saying " cannot read model release's name" as a reason.
so the whole batch of 20 got rejected . I told them I was the witness, and then they said you can't be the photographer and witness, have someone else sign it and print their name and resubmit the whole thing.
So basically I have to submit the whole thing, and reenter all the key words and everything else for a model release issue, very unfriendly way of handing my work. 
Beisea, sorry to hear that. Are you using Photoshop ? If yes, there is an easy way to have all the keyvords enbedded with the picture, and they are automatically entered afterwards on all the main stock sites. Let me know if you can use this info, it will save you lots of time.
298
« on: September 15, 2006, 12:27 »
Thanks Leaf and StockManiac I also got a very quick answer from Bryan, who is in charge of LO. Very satisfied with the explanation. I am glad that their primordial focus is on marketing, and hope that it will bear its fruits soon. Here is a copy: "Madeleine- Thanks for checking in. If you didn't get an email, it could have been lost in the mix. I apologize. Sometimes with all the reviews a few might not make it through correctly (either by human error or misdirected emails). In the near future we'll be providing more tools for photographers- right now we are gearing efforts towards buyers- so I hope you understand! As for the reports page...you should be able to click on the title to see your images. We'll be doing more with this in the future. Bryan"
299
« on: September 15, 2006, 10:23 »
Is there a way to keep track of pictures on the LO site ? I have had a batch of pictures accepted, probably yesterday or 2 days ago, and the admin forgot to send me an email about the results. I just saw the pictures visible in the portfolio. I couldn't find a place on the site to see if some were rejected, a few just disappeared. Or did they ? Is there a page which lists the refused pictures ?
Also, when a picture is sold, is there a way to keep track of when it was downloaded ? Is the title of the picture the only reference given ?
I like the simplicity of the site, but more detailed info about the different statistics would be great. Maybe there is one and I missed it ?
300
« on: September 14, 2006, 16:16 »
I agree, Tyler since you are responsible for this site, it's up to you to give the tone. Free speech doesn't necessarily means to gossip or spread suspicions, and it would be nice if everyone would stick to the facts, to keep the integrity and the transparency of this place. If a contributor has something to 'reveal' about a company, he shouldn't be afraid to speak his mind here if it comes with reliable sources and if it is legally correct. I am quite new on this site, but after checking it for a while as a 'guest', I decided to register, for I found it to be a neutral central place where I can quickly get the main relevant stock news topics without having to check the 10 different ones from each stock site, and it's a practical way to get some feedbacks or clarifications from an independent source. Thanks Leaf
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
