|
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 - somethingpretentious
126
« on: April 29, 2011, 06:11 »
"The commission from our partner sites will be added in your daily earning"
- where can I see the commision % I am recieving on such downloads?
"We will not show our partner list as we are governed by Non Disclosure Agreements"
- Frankly, that sounds completely absurd - I can not be told where my own pictures are sold if I'm opted in? Please elaborate on as to why that is.
cheers
127
« on: April 28, 2011, 08:39 »
Where can I see the commisions paid through the partner sites, and where can I see a list of the sites?
128
« on: January 20, 2011, 15:26 »
Thanks Artmyth! Useful for me..
129
« on: January 20, 2011, 07:58 »
Fotolia silvers will be getting a 19,4% cut in their royalty payout. Maybe Fotolia could be hurting themselves more than they realize with such a slaughter. A very large number of pro top notch quality producers that have entered microstock in the last 1-2 years are still silvers and will not advance within the next year - at which time Fotolia will move the goal post again. These new pro top notch quality producers are the same people that will do (relatively) well under iStocks new redeemed credit race system..
Are they sending the new pros to iStock?
As it has already been pointed out here, we should also not forget that these "royalty %'s" actually has nothing to do with the actual royalty % that we recieve after the obsure credit and currency conversions that they have put in place to further milk contributers. The legislation is clearly lagging behind on this issue and I'm sure most contributers are completely in the blind about this, as it is human nature to assume that "royalty %" also means "royalty %".
I know microstock is the wild west, but A 19,4% paycut (with one weeks notice) is outrages.
130
« on: January 18, 2011, 19:14 »
Hi elvinstar
Thanks for the advice - I will lower my sharpness already tomorrow:-). Cinema5d Looks like a really great and active site - I'll read my night away...
Thanks a bunch!
131
« on: January 18, 2011, 18:18 »
Hi
I recently shot some outdoors scenes with my 5D mark II and noticed some artifacts in the busy areas (trees in wind etc...). My exposure time was 1/100 pr frame and the picture style was "standard" with "sharpness 3". Should I use a longer exposure time and is sharpness 3 to much for video? I'm new to video and are never sure what settings to use. Are there guidelines out there that can help me with my video settings in different scenarios? Any help would be greatly appreciated!
cheers!
132
« on: January 12, 2011, 20:30 »
lol, saw that coming...watch out for the dangerous boob crack! "its not what we are looking for"..
133
« on: January 12, 2011, 20:11 »
bump aleart!
Normally Rahul from Lookstat is very fast to comment on threads regarding Lookstat, but I started this one just before the holidays so in fairness he never had a chance before it got buried. As I'm really eager to hear a response from lookstat, I thought I would give this thread a bump.
So, Lookstat, your prices are VERY reasonable and I am itching to join and throw 100s of images/month your way. (thats 10.000s of good'n'green USD for Lookstat/year) but I seriously would need to (publically) know what you will do with my sales data?
Cheers!
134
« on: January 12, 2011, 19:46 »
I don't get it either. In both cases you are criticising the agency for low sub commissions. In fact writing to them rather then just doing it here behind their backs makes a lot more sense.
What's wrong with writing to an agency you feel is low balling us and letting them know?
Somethingpretentious' attitude seems pretty consistent as far as I can see
I love it when absolute strangers stand up for me! thanks! to djpadavona and m@m: let this rest - we largely agree...And if I was support Canstock or Crestock, I would definately also go for Canstock. I realize that Canstock is mainly a pay pr download site and crestock mainly a subscribtion site - I know this from the "junk images" I still have there from my earliest microstock days. Canstock also give a resonable pay pr download (attributed to fotosearch partner) whereas Crestock is ridicoulosly low...I just chose to not accept 25 cent under any circumstances....so im not uploading to Canstock nor Crestock, nor am I opted in for partner programs at iS. Very consistant in fact:-) cheers!
135
« on: January 12, 2011, 19:27 »
not much info there...lots of mystery though. Maybe you could elaborate on the "type" of images?
136
« on: January 11, 2011, 22:21 »
IMHO, criticizing an agency for their sub royalties, while asking the members of this forum to contact the administration of another and bargain for higher sub commissions still sounds strange to me...support or not, still questionable 
why??
137
« on: January 11, 2011, 18:45 »
somethingpret... you're the same person that is trying to convince contributors to upload to Crestock on a different thread?....Hummmmm... ...oh sorry write to them to convince administration to give .38 vs .25 per sub on one of the worst acceptance sites in the market...lol
Awesome catch. Well done m@m.
Wherein lies the "awesome catch"? My point of view here and on the other thread about Crestock is pretty clear. I dont support Crestock nor Canstock because of the 25 cent subs....
138
« on: December 29, 2010, 19:48 »
somethingpret,
Actually, we pay a flat 50% commission for all credit and on-demand downloads - which is one of the highest in the industry. Regarding our subscription payout schedule, 2 of the 4 "Top Tier" agencies also have subscription payouts starting at the same rate.
When you consider our total commissions earned on a per-sale basis, you'll find that we have one of the highest averages in the industry.
Your comment on subscriptions is good spin:-) The reality however is somewhat different: iS: Subscriptions are the same on iStock partner programs, but you can opt out of these. SS: On Shutterstock they also start at 25 cents, but you if you are serious about microstock you will soon get 33 - 38 cents. F: On Fotolia you start at 30 cents (and 35 for thier premium subscribtion) DT: On Dreamstime all subscriptions are 35 cent to start with and best sellers give 70 cent pr download. On Canstock you stay at 25 cents. And that is the reason I'm not uploading to Canstock.
139
« on: December 29, 2010, 15:53 »
I like very much this agency because of its easy submitting system and pretty good acceptation, it's a pity I have no sales!! I don't know what's the problem, not enought pupblicity or what? I find they way much friendly than SS, I wish they could raise among big four!!
Canstock pays the lowest royalites in the industry for subscriptions (25 cents) and also have very low prices and commissions for on demand downloads. Why would you want them in the big 4?
140
« on: December 21, 2010, 12:46 »
Thanks for your replies. I'm not implying that Lookstat is doing anything wrong, but I don't think they are clear enough about what they do with this data. When I have no idea what they do with my data, there is absolutely no way I can evaluate if their services will do me more harm than good. Will my best concepts, keywords etc be handed over to my competition on a sliver platter if they are willing to pay for it? I realize they can "hide" under aggregate data, but as I explained, I dont give to much for that.
I would have liked to try Lookstat out, but I will have to stay away from them until they are more clear about this.
141
« on: December 19, 2010, 22:36 »
I wont bother until they increase the $0.25 subs. There were too many of them and I don't want buyers to go there when other sites pay me much more.
+1 
+2
+3, waste of time
+4, and they have the worst RPD in top 10.....Write them and let them know they have to increase subs or introduce an opt out option. Its a small agency - they might listen if enough let them know.
somethingpretentious, why would anyone want to waste their time doing that?...thats like telling a pile of horse manure it stinks!!! ...it already knows that 
Stir a bit in the manure - its very fertile! New amino acids will form, life will evolve, neurons will fire and sub commisions will be increased to 38 cents! What I should answer is: At least give them a chance to listen - Its new management. If 10 people here write they dont submit at Crestock because of there low commisions, they will know that 100s more think the same
142
« on: December 18, 2010, 21:59 »
Did you Lookstat users know that Lookstat sell your sales statistics? And what is your opinion about it?
Accoording to their privacy policy they assume the right to use your sales data (in the form of aggregate data) to sell to whoever they want to - including your competition.
Aggregate data may not sound so bad to you, but you dont have to be very niche before your data likely will be very significant in an analasis....
Maybe you were specialising in ballet pictures and using Lookstat to analyse your results. Lookstat spots that "ballet" is an awesome keyword giving the highest RPI's they have in their database. You are probably one of the few or maybe the only one in Lookstats data pool with that keyword. Lookstat then sells the information to the top contributors that are always looking for new keywords...And suddenly Yuri has 63 images on DT of ballet - and you are doomed....
I'm not saying this actually happens or that I know who lookstat sells the data to, but I dont feel comfortable about this, and would like to know your thoughts on it.
I'd also very much like Lookstats view - who do you sell the data to and in what form?
Cheers
143
« on: December 18, 2010, 21:01 »
Good question - but probably without any good answer! Especially when using deepmeta its much faster to just submit the picture again as you can copy paste all the info from your first submission. Probably resubmission saves iS a bit of time, but definately not the contributer...
144
« on: December 18, 2010, 20:29 »
I wont bother until they increase the $0.25 subs. There were too many of them and I don't want buyers to go there when other sites pay me much more.
+1
+2
+3, waste of time
+4, and they have the worst RPD in top 10.....Write them and let them know they have to increase subs or introduce an opt out option. Its a small agency - they might listen if enough let them know.
145
« on: December 07, 2010, 16:07 »
Transparency is everything when writing a blog, and the first thing I want to see before i read anything is your portfolio - i want to see that you do great stuff, so I know that Im listining to someone who knows what he is talking about...you have a link to your videos?
good luck!
146
« on: December 06, 2010, 10:01 »
not acceptable - its also possible to send a comment directly to the partner site...
147
« on: November 26, 2010, 11:48 »
And I'm going to add same stats as in LookStat soon.
sounds more and more interesting...
148
« on: November 25, 2010, 20:08 »
Looks like a good tool.
First thing that come to my mind is about the security, how can i be sure the paswords are secure?
I'd like to know that too. Also, will our sales data stay private or will you have access to them?
149
« on: November 24, 2010, 10:17 »
why?
150
« on: November 11, 2010, 12:17 »
Prostockmaster said they would have something ready by the end of last month - however they did not follow up on it...
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
