|
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 - aremafoto
26
« on: October 23, 2008, 19:02 »
Actually, in my humble opinion, the new best match tends to favor more old-timers (people who has been on istock for three, four or more years --exclusive or not) than simply exclusives. If you are old timer and exclusive I suppose it's even better.
I've been there just under four years and I don't feel particularly favored. True, the best match seems to be promoting older images, so that is helping old timers, but the bias against independents is too strong for it to be helping most of us.
Paul Cowan is a special case. He shoots a lot of niche items where there just may not be enough competing images to push his to the back.
Not for me either. I've been there for 3 yrs and this month (after the best match change) is the worst month of this year.
27
« on: October 11, 2008, 09:51 »
I have to say my IS income has dropped off significantly this month and April has been the best month this year and I've been uploading to the limit as well.
28
« on: October 07, 2008, 20:32 »
Haven't had any since Oct 3rd either and I used to have them almost everyday...
29
« on: October 04, 2008, 23:02 »
You are right, but the one I should have returned was from DT. Maybe DT needs to implement a zoom feature now that they have so many returns they put the cost on the photographer.
That's why I asked Achilles what are the reasons given (and accepted) for refunds. Mistaken double dlds are obvious, so we are not talking about this. If a customer complains of sharpness or focus in a crisp image, it's nonsense - does DT accept that on a "the customer is always right" basis?
But then, as I said, I wouldn't find suspicious if a buyer would return one image from a bunch of purchased ones. If he does it repeatedly, that would be suspicious.
I agree however that a zoom tool would reduce the refund requests for (allegedly) technical quality.
Regards,
Adelaide
One reason for refund that was given to me was accidental download, which I find to be ridiculous...
30
« on: October 03, 2008, 12:09 »
I should have returned one shot to DT that had so much NR it was unuseable to me, but for the small amount of $ it didn't seem worth the effort. Now that prices are higher than a couple years ago I bet we see more and more returns, I know this is a DT thread, but on Istock to buy a single large photo it is a little over $10 (I'd have to look up DT). I would definitely return a single purchase for that amount if I felt it was too different from the thumb.
If you bought from IS, you can zoom in 100% before you purchase, so there shouldn't be any reason to refund other than duplicate download.
31
« on: September 24, 2008, 22:20 »
DT(with RPM of 1.45$) for the first time ever is in 3rd place beating IS
Do you mean RPD? If so, how do you get $1.45? Don't you get any subscription sales?
32
« on: September 19, 2008, 13:48 »
Brian,
Why does it take so long to have an FTP? Is it not a high priority?
I think without FTP, you are really limiting your growth. I, for example, will not upload anything new until you have an FTP.
Supri
33
« on: September 17, 2008, 16:19 »
If I ever had a refund, I am unaware of. What would be the reason? Client not satisfied with the image?
DT will send you an email if you had a refund. The two reasons I've had so far: 1. Duplicate download, which I can somewhat understand. 2. Accidental download, which I can't really understand how it could happen. Don't they have to go through several steps to buy an image? It's not like there is a one click download button.
34
« on: September 17, 2008, 10:17 »
I've never had one. Sounds fishy. Have you contacted support or asked in the forum?
Yes I did, all that they can say is that it's the site's policy to allow returns 
35
« on: September 17, 2008, 09:54 »
Hmmm, nobody else?
36
« on: September 16, 2008, 20:39 »
Is anyone getting more refunds lately? I've had more and more lately  . The most common reasons are duplicate download and accidental download. Accidental download??? How could that happen?
37
« on: September 12, 2008, 13:07 »
I've been emerald for several months and increased my prices to a base of 2 as soon as I was able. I noticed a near doubling of income. I may have lost a few sales, but nothing significant. I would say I increased my income there by a bit over 80%.
Looks like a long trek to sapphire and 3 credits though. Not likely to reach it this year.
I am noticing a significant increase in subscription sales though lately, and there is no doubling of royalties on those. Just getting .34, so that is bringing down my average. They have been a solid 3rd in my % of income over the summer, but they may be taking a drop this month because of all the subs.
What do subs count toward your ranking there now? Is it 1:4 or 1:1?
I believe it's 1:4. I'm getting more subs lately as well, which is not good. I wonder if FT took away some of SS customers?
38
« on: September 12, 2008, 10:48 »
I have just become Rubis member and will "up-price" all my images to a starting point of 4 USD. Last time I did so, going from 2-3, I got a huge income boost. This month, IS and FT, are equal in earnings for me.
Congrats. Do you experience loss in income since they introduced subscription?
39
« on: September 12, 2008, 10:47 »
oh.. well that's almost close enough to challenge you to a duel  ..... except i have a feeling you would win! I am still 2500 away.
Haha... I'm not sure I'd win, I suck at FT. Especially, since they introduced subs, took away a lot of my credit sales
40
« on: September 12, 2008, 01:46 »
how close are you aremafoto? By the looks of your meters on DT and IS you can't be too far off?
About 2000 downloads away, it's getting there
41
« on: September 12, 2008, 01:35 »
I've seen an 18-month earnings chart of one of our market's finest and the increase at Fotolia as he climbed the rankings was near-parabolic! If you wonder how the people at the top make such amazing amounts, that is how. Fotolia's strategy is very clever in this regard - incentivising the top performers and making the rest of us work for it!
It's nice to know, I'm so looking forward to it !!!
42
« on: August 15, 2008, 11:05 »
I have had images in the first page of the search result when searched by Best Match and I'm not exclusive.
43
« on: August 05, 2008, 20:27 »
Steve,
Even better if you have 4 different checkboxes:
- subscription on StockXpert
- extended license on StockXpert
- subscription on photos.com
- extended license on photos.com
Supri
44
« on: August 04, 2008, 22:39 »
Steve, Why don't you have a separate opt-in/opt-out choice for Photos.com? Supri Hi Adelaide,
The Stockxpert subscription option is for StockXpert subs and all other Jupiterimages sub programs. So, yes, by opting out of StockXpert subs, you have opted out of Photos.com Plus.
3rd party licensing is a separate option that includes any partnership and licensing opportunities outside of Jupiterimages. We currently do not engage in these types of partnerships, so you have not sold any images through this option.
Does this clarify things?
-Steve
45
« on: August 04, 2008, 18:50 »
Btw, congrats, very nice portfolio!
46
« on: August 04, 2008, 18:49 »
Thanks for the recognition everybody - I really appreciate it!
I've seen a bit of a jump in sales, but mostly subs so far. The biggest change is that a lot of people have added me to their 'favorite photographer' list.
Haha... I had the same experience when I was featured a few weeks ago...So, guys, if you woke up in the morning and check your DT stats and got like 8 people adding you as their favorite photographe, you know that you are being featured.
47
« on: August 02, 2008, 10:56 »
Annoyingly, happens only in Fotolia, but not other sites.
48
« on: August 01, 2008, 10:55 »
I keep getting rejected for similar photographs when submitting a series to Fotolia, although, they all have different poses.
Anyone else getting the same thing?
49
« on: August 01, 2008, 10:51 »
I wasn't able to either, but I just checked this morning and the link appeared.
50
« on: July 11, 2008, 10:30 »
My goal is sustainable earnings. Not sure if that is even realistic, though, with increasing market saturation/competition. As it is now, some months I feel like I have struck gold and then a month or so down the line earnings dip uncomfortably.
My goal and my feeling as well...
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
