|
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 - VB inc
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 15 ... 26
226
« on: February 28, 2013, 00:00 »
As much as Vectorstock is a pain, it's actually pretty good for sales.  I'm making an average 7-10$ per day there with just 25 files. It appears to be swarming with buyers due to the low prices. If you've got a portfolio that are in the thousands, you should give it a shot.
Think about what your doing. By contributing to this site, you are training buyers that they can get decent files for dirt cheap prices. You are actually harming yourself in the long run. If enough established contributors start selling their stuff on this site, why would any buyer go anywhere else? I've seen the overall quality improve on SS for the last few years when it comes to vectors. Pretty sure this attracted more buyers. Lets hope for all our futures sake, vectorstock prices don't become the industry standard. This is one site that really has no respect for the artist imo.
227
« on: February 18, 2013, 18:24 »
Hey Dan,
Thanks for taking the initiative to even do this. I am sure you learned a lot through this process that will only help you out. Sorry it had to come to this.
228
« on: February 18, 2013, 18:19 »
I am really excited about the possible success of stocksy.
It's a bit ironic how istock was created in response to Getty's closed door policy allowing the select few in. Now it seems that stocksy will start off that way in which i agree is the right approach. I am just speculating at this point.
229
« on: February 14, 2013, 18:23 »
i can have the option to not have that contributor on my network.[/i] You got it! Not only that, but I'll be putting in individual image exclusions. The self-regulation will be nice. If your network buddy is obnoxiously undercutting, obviously keyword spamming, or doing any number of things... "click" he loses that trust, and with it possible benefits by being connected with you.
Would the network that i am in be advertised on all the members sites? How would people know who is still linked or not? I think networks when starting out should have certain rules that all members should abide by. The members themselves should enforce this. That image exclusion idea sounds great! "that image of his is waaaay better than mine..." zaaap! haha jk.. theres the good and the ugly to this. Notification email goes out to the zapped image producer maybe?
230
« on: February 14, 2013, 17:45 »
1. You do a search on your friend's site. His images show at about 50 in the first "box" of results.
2. Further down, you see another stack of boxes, with search results, and the top of the box says "results from 'so-and-so's' network, net next box likewise.
3. You like that result. You click on image. A window pops up with image, meta, and price detail. You still like it, so you click the "visit image" link.
I dont have a site up yet to sell my stuff but is very interested in starting one. Hence my lack of knowledge in areas like search. Do i have to get a word press site in order to participate in this venture of yours? Im just playing devils advocate here. If i were a buyer (which sometimes i am), two things really annoy me when searching.. keyword spamming and similar content from the same contributor. Is there any way for you to address this on your project? I like to be shown variety. Maybe the way for a linked sites to work effectively would be to be selective on who i would personally like to join my network. So if a contributor is known to be spamming keywords or putting lots of similars that show up on searches, i can have the option to not have that contributor on my network.
231
« on: February 14, 2013, 10:18 »
forgive my ignorance on this subject but how will the search process work? Since this would be the focal point of this new site, shouldn't we have an actual valid discussion how this will come about? Not one or two minds working on it but a collective of thoughts and problem solving skills by many would make for a better search system put in place.
232
« on: February 14, 2013, 10:04 »
I lost productivity the last few days cus of this incident. Spending way too much time on msg!
233
« on: February 13, 2013, 19:03 »
I expect Stocksy to be nothing more of what Stockfresh is - big hopes leading to nothing. I just don't understand how people think that the guy who run istock YEARS ago can make a relevant comeback nowadays. There are lots now who understand thoroughly stock photography, Bruce is not a miracle waiting to happen.
Please bear in mind that stocksy wont be another agency but a co-op. I believe it will attract a lot of talented photographers and designers with years of experience in this industry and that is an invaluable resource to have. Im a designer. I started off as a buyer on istock and continued to purchase after i became exclusive contributor there. I told anyone i could about istock. The designers were a big part of istocks success. The change for me and many others were the RC credits that got introduced. The two way street ended. After that, i no longer told other colleagues about that place and never referred anyone else there afterwards. If this site gets enough designers onboard initially, they will help grow this company in my opinion by word of mouth and through social networks in the industry.
234
« on: February 11, 2013, 22:24 »
This clearly tells me Getty has more unpleasant things in store for the contributors in the near future. For all the exclusives still hoping... this is an ominous sign. I fear it will only get worse...
I think we're on our third or fourth ominous sign at this point, and it's been getting worse.
Yup. But how much worse can it get? For those that are still hoping and pleading for management to be play nice, its not gonna happen.
235
« on: February 11, 2013, 21:06 »
This clearly tells me Getty has more unpleasant things in store for the contributors in the near future. For all the exclusives still hoping... this is an ominous sign. I fear it will only get worse.
They would not kick Sean out if they were willing to concede to any of our concerns or make it better for the contributor. It is business as usual to maximize profits.
I fully agree with Chromaco's post "Perhaps they (Getty/Istock) were seeing the writing on the wall that he was on his was out the door and felt that it would be better for them to control the timing. If he chose to leave on his own it might almost be worse for them."
They were fully aware of him starting his own discussion group to talk freely without the need for censorship. The script he wrote that quickly deactivates files with ease is a godsend for most contributors. I wonder how many thousands of files were deactivated this way. They have the data to prove it. And last but not least, Stocksy which he is a member of. This looks like some sort of plan B or exit strategy in their eyes.
Still, they can change all this around by making things better and getting on his and the contributors good side. But they wont. Because it really seems to me that the company motto is profit first, by all means necessary.
What happened to Sean is messed up, but i feel the most sorry for is for the people that have to work in that environment that is Getty. Im sure some really hate their jobs or really have to detach themselves from work. And I wonder about the people stuck on istock knowing they work in this corporate environment when just a few years ago, it was a different vibe all together. ok Im going off topic now.
236
« on: February 07, 2013, 22:03 »
I would love to know about vector contributors and if they have any stats ...
237
« on: February 06, 2013, 18:25 »
over 4 years since a raise? Thats like 4 decades in internet years 
238
« on: February 06, 2013, 15:47 »
As an newly independent contributor, I am confused on which agencies to upload to. I have started uploading to shutterstock and GL this past month. Looking on the right side of the board, fotolia and dreamstime is still top tier but there are negative comments for both these agencies that leads me to hesitate applying to those sites.
Should i apply to fotolia and dreamstime? Would i be foolish not to? What other agencies should i really consider? I have mainly vectors.
239
« on: February 03, 2013, 13:35 »
For what its worth, I dropped my crown back in december. This was b4 this google fiasco came out and i feel that i have made the right decision. Although i will miss the income i will lose out on temporarily, i feel a heavy weight is lifted off my shoulder. I am excited once again to actually upload files. I don't plan to upload anything to istock and in fact deactivated all my vetta illustrations roughly 20. There is no way istock is making a cent more on these files i have labored over.
240
« on: February 02, 2013, 12:19 »
Do you really want a manager of a company with 40 000 employees to earn 50 000 dollars a year? Or 200 000? You will never get any good people for that money. If they end up in court they get huge fines, maybe several hundred million. And they might not actually be at fault, just very bad business luck, it can happen.
Maybe we shouldnt have 40,000 employees in a company to begin with.
241
« on: January 28, 2013, 15:38 »
But limiting uploads -- people would own their own sites so allowing as many as they wish would be natural.
I guess the real question is how to actually come up with a search function like they have at istock or the other big agencies. My point was for the contributors can have their own sites but only allow a certain amount of their files to be included in this universal search system used by the contributor owned agency.
242
« on: January 28, 2013, 14:51 »
This topic comes up time and time again. I would love to see this possibility happen. I also think there should be a maximum uploaded files per contributor. I think 100 is too little but closer to 300 would be ideal. This would eliminate the need for inspections/inspectors as you would only want your best content to showcase. Otherwise, the search will come up with plenty of garbage that contributors will put into this collection.
243
« on: January 23, 2013, 21:17 »
Does the site have some sort of best match search system in place?
244
« on: January 20, 2013, 01:56 »
is it possible to opt out of subscriptions with photos?
I know you can with video.
From what I hear this is what many people would like to do- send images to ss only for regular single sales.
Yes, is this possible?
I would really like to know if this is possible too. This option would be key in a lot of exclusives dropping their crowns imo.
245
« on: January 17, 2013, 12:39 »
Thats awesome! too bad its on discovery as that channel has gone to crap lately... I hope they have something decent instead of making a 1 hour special on something that should be 15 minutes max. dragging and dragging... after the commercial break, we show you what you saw before the commercial break.
246
« on: January 14, 2013, 19:41 »
how many times you think they rotate these changes per year? 2? 4? 6?
247
« on: January 11, 2013, 14:39 »
thanks lisa. looks like an uphill battle for the contributors.
248
« on: January 11, 2013, 13:28 »
I know there has been many threads here that deals with taking down illegal images or sites that give out free images. Can someone explain or point out to a thread that explains this process in detail?
Is contacting google the only way to go?
249
« on: January 10, 2013, 12:33 »
There are also other articles that show how Facebook is forcing people to pay to insure all your followers will read your posts. Guess what? People are now turning against facebook. Amazing how you can screw up your own business...
Thats the sad nature of going public and the company's duty is to their shareholders. Nothing matters except for profits. Same thing with all the decisions made by getty/istock. Getty, however is operating from a business model of the 90's. be the gatekeeper of images.... be selective in who you bring in to the club. charge a premium for those images... and give the contributors 20%. That works when you charge thousands per image and the contributor makes a living off those 20%. With millions of images nowadays their business model doesn't work in this new environment. They have squeezed the goose too much and finally realized where the breaking point was and is trying desperately to backpedal. i fear they are going in the way of Kodak in 5 years which is probably a good thing. Unless they do something drastic in favor of contributors in the next few months, I wonder how many other exclusives are jumping ship.
250
« on: January 10, 2013, 10:40 »
Two words: Class Action.
How hard would it be? its about time really. out of thousands of contributors, im sure people have friends that are lawyers... I find it funny now we see a lawyer from istock chiming in the forums.
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 15 ... 26
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
