|
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 - ap
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 ... 21
26
« on: September 09, 2010, 19:52 »
Can deactivated images be re-activated? Is that possible? If so, I don't think that is as easy to do at IS as it is at SS. [/quote] you're right, you'll need to go through support to reactivate. it will be awkward. 
27
« on: September 09, 2010, 19:40 »
Why do you say that?
it seems the reviewers are on strike indefinitely. it doesn't matter whether you upload or not. i still have files from the first of the month.
28
« on: September 09, 2010, 19:19 »
so, there is really no point to not uploading as a protest strategy.
29
« on: September 09, 2010, 18:14 »
As much as I support boycotting further uploads for a few months we have to consider what the outcome (most likely) will be.
The 100+ inspectors will be out of work after approx. 7-10 days. That means that iStock starts saving money as they won't be paying any inspectors for the period of no images coming in.
Over 3 months I assume they would save around $0.5 million maybe more. That's actually not even bad for them considering that they keep running their business technically as if nothing happened, just without brand new images. I'm sure naive buyers don't care.
I can't see how this would dramatically affect IS.
The only way we, as contributors can take action, is removing our files. This way we make the decision for the buyers and they don't even have an option of buying our images at IS. Just by telling them might not even work as some are probably sitting on credit packages that they need to use anyway.
You think they would forget about tens or hundreds of $$$ just because some photographer they know is not getting paid enough - next year...?
It's like ripping my own heart out when thinking about pulling my port at IS due to the hard work I put in. I will take enough time necessary to think about that one.
i think you're on the right track. for the maximum impact, we should set up D-day, a day where contributors deactivate their most popular files. this could be for a day or a week or longer, but it isn't permanent and you don't even have to pull your entire port. it sends a clear message to the management that the contributors can turn off the spigot anytime we choose. it will impact your bottom line, but collectively, it will impact is bottom line tremendously, perhaps to the tune of $.5 million a day. will someone listen then?
30
« on: September 09, 2010, 17:41 »
I think you need to read the tread " iStock changing royalty structure " in this forum before you invest to much time on this.
lol. i think this should be the stock reply to all newbies from now on. if they still want to go on, then....
31
« on: September 09, 2010, 16:05 »
The point is simple. They are working on trying to make iStock exclusive only and pay 20%.
They will continue to drop the % for non-exclusives until they all leave (or work for free). In the process they will drive exclusives down also to 20% like the rest of Getty and throw a few unreachable goals to keep the mice turning the wheel.
Once that is done, the door to iStock will be exclusive only and 20% (or less starting out).
That is my prediction. Only time will tell.
if that is the case, it's in every photographer's interest to be proactive and promote other agencies to take istock's place.
33
« on: September 08, 2010, 18:35 »
it's been great across the board...including is. i think it's just september, the best month of the year. 123 finally woke up from a two month hiatus.
34
« on: September 08, 2010, 17:47 »
I doubt the majority of buyers care how much we earn. They just want the right image and at bargain price.
i think the obvious way to hit istock is to deactivate your best sellers, the ones that make istock the place for buyers to shop. if everyone can do that all at once, for a day, a week, and see how that affects istock's bottomline... of course this will affect everyone's earnings, but this is better than to deactivate your entire portfolio or to walk away altogether. this is the equivalent of a strike. but it must be coordinated to happen in one fell swoop.
35
« on: September 08, 2010, 16:24 »
that's where the negotiations come in. we as microstockers/photographers must come into agreement about what our relationship with the agency should be and how the agency should be accountable to us. an agency on their balls may see this as a great opportunity to capture a significant size of the market, right now.
36
« on: September 08, 2010, 15:57 »
i think instead of starting a brand new co-op, or at least till it's set up (at some indeterminate future), we should just negotiate with an agency already up and running, and throw ALL our support to them. right now, the two candidate are cutcaster and stockfresh for their higher commissions and their vast experience.
so, if one can't be king, we can still be the king maker.
37
« on: August 28, 2010, 21:51 »
I have been a stock photo buyer since the late 90s and have been a creative director for over 30 years. I may be sharing my thoughts from that point of view soon.
please do! we always welcome viewpoints from buyers and buyer contributors. just out of curiosity, why did you switch to the other side a month ago? by the way, fd is a good egg once you get to know him. you can certainly pick his brain on anything web related.
38
« on: August 28, 2010, 13:06 »
I have to admit I submitted the last batch beyond the 12 midnight European deadline, but within the US Pacific deadline. I'm just curious if they will accept this last batch within the DFC program.
you should check the date for those in your pending que. if it's 6-30-10, then its within the deadline. i had submitted a bunch by us pacific midnight, but some rolled over into 7-01-10, which probably won't be considered.
39
« on: August 27, 2010, 18:45 »
yesterday, $3.5, today $219.8. it is not a glitch.
er...do you have my port, per chance?
40
« on: August 26, 2010, 18:06 »
this is going to be my bme after a full year on is.
41
« on: August 24, 2010, 18:18 »
although i complained last week about their severe 100% rejections, today, they've finally approved all of the rest of 75. different reviewers, different strokes. there was also a sale yesterday and an el last month, so things are gonna be schizophrenic there for a while.
42
« on: August 21, 2010, 22:26 »
i can only process up to 10 images per day, without getting bored or tired. i tend to treat each photo individually and try to bring out the best during post processing. so, i probably spend more time than most.
for the veer dash for cash, i couldn't do more than that per day, even though i tried to get 400+ uploaded (didn't make it). during the 11th hour, i actually processed 30-40 in the final day. i don't think i can do that for a while, and certainly not on photos i care about.
post veer dash, i'm down to about 1 a day. nice...
43
« on: August 21, 2010, 14:22 »
thanks, hope someone will remind us then. 
44
« on: August 21, 2010, 13:43 »
i tried to opt out, but it doesn't appear you can do that anymore. do you need to notify alamy's admin instead?
45
« on: August 19, 2010, 22:50 »
although is is another pita, at least their reviewer has spent more than a minute per photo when they isolate an area to explain to you the reason for their rejection.
They actually showed you??? I'm with FD....I've only gotten that from iStock. At Veer it's called mass rejections with all the same reasons in the same batch.
is = istock. sorry.
46
« on: August 19, 2010, 18:16 »
I just don't like it when someone changes the rules in the middle of the game. To me that isn't being honest and they wait til they got you on a hook before they say....heh by the way...
i have to agree with you there. i think this is quite rude what they are doing and i can understand now why some have developed a distrust for them. it takes seconds to mass reject everything, but it takes a contributor hours to upload and then months to wait for the review. what a waste of time. although is is another pita, at least their reviewer has spent more than a minute per photo when they isolate an area to explain to you the reason for their rejection.
47
« on: August 19, 2010, 16:29 »
i don't think they want anyone to reach the $1.4/photo level since you'll need 400 approvals.
48
« on: August 19, 2010, 16:27 »
sweet (memories)!
49
« on: August 19, 2010, 16:24 »
In nineties we had a hyper inflation here. Government started to print banknotes with 11 zeros. The biggest one was 500 000 000 000 dinars, which is a world record for a banknote. And for that money you could maybe buy a hamburger...or maybe not, I can't remember. Anyway, stores were totally empty, so we had to make even bread at home.
wow, you read news stories like that, but it's hard to comprehend the reality of the situation. did it mean that your entire financial savings were wiped out? and what happens post hyperinflation? did the money you have before revert to previous values?
50
« on: August 19, 2010, 16:07 »
5700 images on ss, started 2007.
My income is still increasing, doubling my port has seen about 20% increase since 2008. The images going on now though are miles better than what I was submitting then. The increase though is not subs sales which used to be much higher (I remember thinking it was good for a new image to get 20+ sales in a day, once ot twice I got 50 subs sales on a single image. Now it is good for me if I can get 5) the increased income is increase commission rate and mostly because of ppd sales.
50 a day, wow... i started only a year ago and i guess the gravy train has already left the station for 5/day on the same image is something i have not achieved yet. on a brighter note, my sales have increased at a much higher rate than my upload rate, consistently. although i'm currently at tier 2 pricing, it hasn't affected sales at all. bme and bde.
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 ... 21
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
