|
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 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 ... 26
76
« on: November 18, 2015, 13:05 »
Hello,
I have just started with Fotolia because of the "Adobe thing" and I have uploaded some of my best footage in there.
The problem is that they keep rejecting lots of them for no reason. Even some animation backgrounds have been refused.
They say that the review team works separtely from the Fotolia team and they cannot explain the reasons that footage is rejected.
Many of these rejected files are selling a lot in websites like Shutterstock, Pond5 and VideoBlocks. No problem at all!
if they are selling like hotcakes on ss ,etc why do you want to cannibalize your image further???
ss sales are based on dls, the more dls you get from that image, the more likely more sales come
due to its placement based on performance.
if you continue to cannibalize your sellers of ss to spread thinly to give more agencies,
you will kill your golden goose with ss.
moreover, why put yourself through the abuse of reviewers rejecting your work?
give them works that are not selling, not works that are selling for you.
SS is an non exclusive agency. If a buyer is at SS I don't think the buyer will be shopping at FT or any other agency so why limit your sales by only leaving that hot seller to an agency that isn't even exclusive? 
77
« on: November 18, 2015, 10:46 »
What you are saying helloitsme doesn't really make much business sense because most peoples clips can be $100 or more. So you are joining and advertising an agency which doesn't think HD is worth more than $49. In you're own little way (good intensions at heart I know) you're desecrating our video industry. I'd never support an agency who sells video files for that amount. If the vids were low quality and of subjects and content that was poor then maybe? but to sell top quality clips at that price is crazy.
Agreed.... Its sad but the reality is that there will always be people/contributors willing to make the quick buck now because they fail to realize or not care about the bigger picture. Shutterstock did this with its low price that only attracted half decent talent in the beginning. Once talented contributors started adding to the library, the buyers took notice and attracted more buyers which attracted more downloads. Since this is a global economic marketplace, what is an acceptable to some might not be to others. Soon enough, Shutterstock's library had content to compete with the other major agencies and buyers aren't dumb. Why would they pay more when they don't have to.
78
« on: November 18, 2015, 10:32 »
I also have been getting some ridiculous rejections as of lately as i start to upload there. I think the review teams are very inconsistent in handling the way they review files. My files are vector files. Most of my work i either sketch off the top of my head or sketch of something i watch online or through tv. I then refine my sketch when i vector it going through another transformation process as to make it 100% my creation. I attach these sketches as proof in the model release form section. I still get the weird need model/property release things for these things i made up.
It is annoying when you select your best of the bunch that has been selling at other agencies and get generic rejection notices. It seriously dampens your mood to keep uploading your good work there in my opinion. I dare hope not that these reviewers are my competitors at the library and is just trying to keep my stuff out.
79
« on: November 17, 2015, 18:37 »
just googled dollar to euro and dollar is more than euro?? 1 dollar is .92 euro  dagg i remember something like 1.5 dollar to 1 euro ratio or something close to it awhile back.
80
« on: November 16, 2015, 10:42 »
Im not sure if this is the best place to get information regarding what you would like. I think you should try to research the big textile companies and find a niche where your patterns might work in. I have no clue on what they look like or if they even meet expectations. I know that some textile firms always buy patterns and such from various freelancers even if they have a design department as they are always looking for different looks.
81
« on: November 13, 2015, 20:49 »
Not talking from technical stand point but more of visual composition. This image can be improved by the girls poses. Think contrapposto where one leg has brunt of the weight. Right now it is not appealing and sort of confusing. I think the girl is bending down and pointing to the rock formation but it seems like she is passing gas. (hehe sorry but its just a awkward pose) The shot would be much better in my opinion if you shot at a 3/4 angle from the back instead of fully back view. Also, If you brought them slightly closer to the camera to make them fill a bit more of the image and took 2-3 steps to the left of where you shot this image. The nice rock formation in the middle of the background would separate itself from the other rock formations to help stand out and to showcase thats what she is pointing to. At least thats what I think she is pointing to. You have to think of yourself as the director of this image and everything matters.
82
« on: November 13, 2015, 17:43 »
I have been getting rejections lately on my vectors I created from my own sketches. I provide proof of my sketches and they still say they need model releases or something like that. It's like they don't believe i can sketch that off my head. I majored in illustration and have taken hundreds of hours on life drawing which is to study the anatomy. Who can I contact? It's like they think they have a bunch of people that cant draw submitting there or something. Why isn't sketch enough proof?
83
« on: November 12, 2015, 15:22 »
You'll now see articles like The Heady Rise of Republicunus Erectus and Why All Other Species are Inferior
Did it ever occur to anyone here that all species not dancing with the brain-dead bi-partisan cacophony are "inferior"? Apparently not.
So everyone here seems to think NPR or HuffPost would be better for NG?! And back we are in that old black-and-white thinking again. I thought, we are grown-ups here, seriously, and are also capable of understanding a bit more of the news than the mainstream mass-media boneheads usually give us. Not? Must still be a matter of Republicans or Democrats for some. Very disappointing.
The REAL problem is that they've been sold AT ALL! Let us watch and see how that one turns out...
Why is there an assumption everyone here would prefer npr or huffpost? I consider myself an independent more than either party because i'm all about greyscale. The REAL problem really is progress or technology. Not many are willing to pay the prices people used to pay to get subscriptions to the national geographic when there is so much more alternatives that have surplanted reading that magazine publication.
84
« on: November 12, 2015, 00:59 »
Science fiction films/books of corporations becoming stronger than nations is coming to fruition. Its already depressing to me in order for me to find animal programming i have to got nat geo wild. Now Nat Geo and all its affiliate channels i cant take seriously any more.
85
« on: November 10, 2015, 11:51 »
I had two $125 days and now I am on my 5th in a row $10 day.  Control control control.
Ive had similar situation which makes me wonder too. Have a great week with 4 days of over $100 and then the next couple of weeks i just get subscription sales.
86
« on: November 10, 2015, 11:47 »
looking at the polls, it looks like its pretty divided issue
87
« on: November 07, 2015, 13:57 »
Another issue. Thieves are gonna steal Images that they can use. Posting examples of stuff they don't care about is useless. They want T-shirts and Prints. and stuff they can change in sec to sell as Prints on POD sites or to a million Tourists on cruse ship stopovers. Thats a billion dollar industry.. a Interior Kitchen redo doesn't qualify.
We lost Guys and they don't get it because it's not there work anyway. *.
I am surprised that your site doesn't have any watermarks to protect your images. most of them appear to be 800 by 650 px. It is very easy to copy these images on a mac. pressing command and shift and 4 at same time brings up a rectangular box you can adjust where you can screen capture any image. Just giving you a heads up if you are not aware of this capability on a mac.
88
« on: November 07, 2015, 13:00 »
4k TV that I've seen looks amazing and they sell a 4k TV for around the same price HD TV's were a few years ago in my local Tesco now. If the internet is going to be too slow, I wonder if there will be 4K rentals like the old VHS and DVD days? Would be easy to put a film on a USB stick in the post.
USB stick so everyone can just make a copy? Probably never, but Ultra HD Bluray players and discs are expected to get released in a few months. Once the porn industry adopts it and they will, it's going to give some momentum to the entire market.
Porn in 4k? no thank you!!! do we really need to see any more clearer than hd??? Even HD is just too much imo. hehe
89
« on: November 06, 2015, 20:40 »
They seem to have a fairly effective watermark. Is someone really going to do that much work to save $5?
Don't even bother trying to say these things. you will get ganged up on and belittled here 
90
« on: November 06, 2015, 00:08 »
If your awesome shot of a cat competed with 100 other cat shots last year, your window of it being seen and bought by a buyer was 1/100. With a bit of luck, within a day or 2 a buyer would search cat when your cat picture enters library and would get a view. this year it is 1/150. so maybe last year your cat shot was 3rd page. this year it is most likely 5 page and those pages matter. In my eyes, it is a lot harder to attract views now.
if i read understood you correctly, i have to disagree with your point.
as much as i do not like ss these days , been hating them since they went public.
but truth is truth, so let me clear this up.
no, your cat will not go from pg 3 to pg 5, if you gain dl almost daily from day 1.
You are not understanding my point. Since the library has grown 150% from previous quarter or year, the cat picture you uploaded last year might have been seen at page 3 when the buyer first bought the picture. The cat picture you upload this/next year might be placed in page 5 when a buyer searches for cat since there is much more cat picture uploads. I am not talking about best sellers at all here. I am talking about your recently uploaded files being buried before they get a chance to become best sellers. I am talking about chance and luck playing a bigger role when the library has grown over 50% because the window of time when a buyer searches your category becomes shorter as the library gets bigger to give each file a chance to be seen
my best earners are still on pg 1 no matter how many thousands other come in daily.
the way i see it is that ss does not shuffle your placement . the best sellers will always bring
in money if it was downloaded on the first day and almost daily the first month.
you can be sure it is still the best earner after 5 years.
even if there is a lapse of one month without any dl, you still will be seeing dl almost daily
from your cat on pg 1. it will not go to pg2 never mind 3 or even 5.
this is my own history.
which answers the other thread of why most of us are not leaving the sinking HMS ss
... our best sellers are giving us incentive to stay .
Bolded by me in red
91
« on: November 05, 2015, 12:16 »
Aren't there any talented artists outside the US?
Theres talented artist all over. Why isn't there any shown in the USA was my point.
92
« on: November 05, 2015, 12:02 »
Paid downloads increased 22%
Image collection expanded 49%
Taking 100 as our exposure value for last year, we now have 81
To mantain our revenue, we had to increase our portfolio by ~23%
Of course, most new images are similar illustrations that never get sold.
So I would estimate about 15% increase in port to break even. Not so bad.
I somehow think the math is not right... Since most of the downloads happen in the first couple of pages, we have to figure out what percentage of our portfolio we upload will get a shot at being in those pages where it matters. More images that is uploaded means your image you uploaded has less chance of being seen... your 15% increase in portfolio seems way off to me. If your awesome shot of a cat competed with 100 other cat shots last year, your window of it being seen and bought by a buyer was 1/100. With a bit of luck, within a day or 2 a buyer would search cat when your cat picture enters library and would get a view. this year it is 1/150. so maybe last year your cat shot was 3rd page. this year it is most likely 5 page and those pages matter. In my eyes, it is a lot harder to attract views now.
93
« on: November 05, 2015, 11:50 »
Hi @VB,
I don't recall your concern being discussed in the past. I can bring it up though can't you convert a vector to a larger file and use it at all sites or do others cap the size? Is it a matter of storage? I would like to fully understand the issue before I dig too deep on our end.
-Mat
Yea, its not a big deal, I just have these hundreds of files from the istock exclusive days that I had to change and keyword for shutterstock. Then I find out the sizes are not big enough for fotolia and its a hassle to spend more time on files you worked on 5 years ago! lol
94
« on: November 05, 2015, 11:43 »
I think the shift has already been happening for awhile now. Experienced contributors have begun spending less time on micro as the returns are just not there. The library will start to be dominated by contributors in countries with less wage earnings. I think the models i see on shutterstock and fotolia already reflect that and it will get more apparent in the future. Shutterstock has this artist spotlight type of thing. http://www.shutterstock.com/panorama/Very telling when the contributors they spotlight are all outside the united states. Tells me that it doesn't make financial sense for a talented artists to submit their work on this platform.
95
« on: November 05, 2015, 11:18 »
Hey Mat,
Thanks for the response. Do you think there is a possibility of reducing the size of the minimum size of the jpeg needed to be include in the zip file for vectors? Most of my vectors are sized on a 10" by10" art board. I already have jpegs the same size keyworded in 300 dpi. Unfortunately this isn't big enough for your site. Fotolia is the only site I know that requires a huge jpeg. I have to take extra steps to create jpegs big enough just for your site. A pain when you are dealing with hundreds of files already made. That was one of the reasons I didn't upload much to your site previously.
Am I wrong in thinking anything that is 10" X 10" at 300 dpi is sufficient for any site? I have to either bump my files to 15 x 15 or up my dpi by 444... I hope this is another issue you guys might be over hauling. Thanks again for being here.
96
« on: November 04, 2015, 12:33 »
After the Dollar Photo Club incident, whatever little files I had on I deleted. Now that I have begun uploading back to this site, I am seeing that its hard to navigate or see all my files. I am not a fan of their drop down list of showing the files. Has there been talk about this and do you think they will change/update this area anytime soon now that Adobe is involved? It just looks terribly outdated compared to some other sites navigation/dashboard...
97
« on: November 03, 2015, 16:51 »
I believe luck/timing plays a larger role when there is more competition. Before, when the libraries weren't so big, your high quality, highly commercial images would gain sales almost right away and rise to the top fairly quickly. It seems that these days on SS at least, if your image doesn't gain any sales in the first couple of days, it seems to sink in search placement and never gain any traction from there on.
By luck/timing i mean buyers would search for your image keywords within a day or couple of days after it gets into the library and download. I think it needs to get downloaded at least 2 times or more within the first week to keep it moving up in search ranks...just my guess from my own experience.
98
« on: November 02, 2015, 17:17 »
Nitor, if it makes u feel any better my october was about 25% down from previous october which had me guessing also... 
99
« on: November 02, 2015, 15:03 »
fotolia? theres only so many buyers to go around... look at the thread that says fotolia downloads are rising
100
« on: October 30, 2015, 15:07 »
that's you thinking that all/most buyers are thieves.... again clueless over reaction. So your basically saying that if you are a buyer yourself, you would just be stealing these images.
This is where you go off the rails, VB.
Nobody is saying "all/most buyers are thieves". By definition, a "buyer" is not a "thief."
The thieves are those out in the great cyber-universe who would never buy an image in their lives, but they will happily stealand thus devalueother people's intellectual property.
Why is that concept so hard for you to understand?
Martha scroll up to where 60D says I am a buyer, then assumes i will be happy because i will steal it. Am i the one going off the rails? I think I am the one being entertained by people on this thread going off the rails and excuse me if i have a differing opinion. This is where I get attacked cus im not freaking the eff out. Oh god, another tony stone remark... 
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 ... 26
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
