|
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 - thesentinel
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14
201
« on: December 12, 2008, 15:34 »
But it runs until New Years Eve  ETA simultaneously posted with the above
202
« on: December 11, 2008, 15:00 »
Hi JS or Shank,
You guys are both exclusive. Do you know the answer to my question above your last statement. If you want you can always PM me. That goes for anyone that knows the correct answer for certain.
Thx,
AVAVA
Surely the best way to get a definitive answer to your question is to contact istock directly yourself.
203
« on: December 10, 2008, 16:06 »
I presume because she has an opinion, and she wanted to voice it.
Nothing wrong in that is there?
If someone couldn't care less it's odd that they bother to post, that would suggest that in fact they do care.
Nothing wrong with querying that is there?
Well, actually it comes off pretty antagonistic. It's one thing to disagree with her point, another entirely to challenge her motives for making it.
Oh, my apologies, I've just realised it's an instinctual female thing to say you don't care about the thing that bothers you most ;-)
204
« on: December 10, 2008, 12:28 »
I presume because she has an opinion, and she wanted to voice it.
Nothing wrong in that is there?
If someone couldn't care less it's odd that they bother to post, that would suggest that in fact they do care. Nothing wrong with querying that is there?
205
« on: December 10, 2008, 11:15 »
Whatalife 
I read it myself. Twice. Give you my word, it did say that independents will be allowed inside the Premiere Collection based on invitations.
Trust me
It did say so.
And you're right. I couldn't care less. Let them have it, the Premiere Collection I mean.
It is the best of what exclusives on Istock have on offer.
I wouldn't like them to call it 'The Best Stock Collection in the World', though.
Simply because that's not true.
Independents beat exclusives hands down. By far.
Still, let them have it! It is their business plan, let them live with it.
I couldn't care less...
All the best,
Anna
You say you couldn't care less, if this is so why are you posting?
206
« on: December 10, 2008, 05:27 »
Envy?
I'm sure the bulk of any envy, if there be any, would be his access to a gene pool of blond haired clear skinned models who ate a lot of dairy products when young and have great teeth and above average height as a result.
207
« on: December 09, 2008, 18:18 »
Looks as if Im barred from IS now, cant even log into the site anylonger.
All your images seem to have turned to voodoo dolls with pins sticking in them
208
« on: December 09, 2008, 05:54 »
A good case of PEBCAK probably.
209
« on: December 05, 2008, 04:45 »
Without knowledge of the traditional market you can come to this conclusion. But it is actually a very naive kind of view. What could be shifted from traditional to microstock is already by 80-90% done, the rest will mostly remain like it is.
This is interesting, can you share the source for this information.
210
« on: December 01, 2008, 15:52 »
Can I just say that I contacted Jonathan to say that I had 'posted in good humour', then seemed to imply it was a joke. Good humour, I hoped, would imply lack of malice, the way that blokes might rib each other in pub, which I thought I could as we'd previously PMe'd.
211
« on: December 01, 2008, 09:30 »
One thing I do know is that I really hope they do NOT implement their yearly price increase! I think that would be suicide in this financial environment.
Effectively UK buyers at all USD priced stock agencies have already had an approximately 25% increase due to the currency fluctuations.
212
« on: November 30, 2008, 03:36 »
I love these conspiracy threads, does this one hold water though? Here's your last 20 uploads and their views just now. First in list was uploaded 18th November, last 25 October. Of them at the very most only 5 could possibly have met the stated first day views of 20 and there is only one multiple of 20. 12,11,10,15,9,20,25,15,16,24,15,19,11,21,15,13,9,13,16,27. As all images have always had an initial kick from being in the newest uploads link, CNs etc etc I wonder if Mulder and Scully may just stay at the office over this mystery 
213
« on: November 28, 2008, 17:39 »
I believe that in some cases mans evolution from the lower primates is incomplete.
214
« on: November 27, 2008, 05:03 »
Just throwing a few discussion points in here, mainly at Christian
If the 20/80 rule applies, it's quite often a very good guide, and 80% percent of the sales at istock come from 20% percent of the suppliers and moves are made to enhance the position of that 20% the noise generated by the the dis-benefitted 80% may seem overwhelming but really of little consequence.
If, as Christian states, his and Lisas images where given greater visibility at other sites as a direct result of being demoted at istock are those other sites just as guilty of intervention, and what of their other members who must have been demoted in order to promote them? What of their credibility?
Are not most if not all of these sites the investment instruments of others? In the current climate would the investors not be either looking for a better return or to withdraw their capital?
I'm sure the next few months will see many changes, for example if agencies feel that prices cannot rise much more in the current financial situation and their investors need their returns then decreased commissions may be on the horizon, in fact at Alamy and in a convoluted way at Fotolia they are already here.
For all the name calling and playground antics here it's big business we're engaged in and the climate has changed, probably for the long term.
215
« on: November 22, 2008, 15:16 »
It's well documented bug.
But of course any conspiracy theory will be more interesting than the boring truth!
216
« on: November 21, 2008, 15:52 »
Right over your head. 
217
« on: November 21, 2008, 15:10 »
Because while this is a public forum it's privately funded and administered. And the administer who funds it gets to decide how far freedom of speech goes here.
Since this is primarily a microstock forum, maybe it would make more sense for you to find forums whose main subjects are gays, wars, and bears.
I know what the primary concern is for this site.I posted my comment in the 'off topic' so i can post my concerns about gay bears going to war......
If you google you'll find lots of sites that will accommodate some of those needs.
218
« on: November 21, 2008, 02:45 »
I know it is true. They've deleted my posts, even when the post isn't controversial.
Thats nothing i have had plenty of replies removed and posts deleted.The forum admin's could not keep up most days until finally they removed the source
I think that was done as a public service. I'm sure the same behaviour from yourself here would have the same outcome.
219
« on: November 20, 2008, 16:05 »
I know it is true. They've deleted my posts, even when the post isn't controversial.
I've written some very forthright comments and never had any removed, and there are many, many others in the awkward squad that cannot be counted in the wooyay brigade.
220
« on: November 16, 2008, 02:49 »
I am here and not queer
I doubt you'll be here for long if you behave as you did elsewhere.
221
« on: November 10, 2008, 19:17 »
I'm no genius but if I had an image with a harp in it I'd probably keyword it 'harp'. Last time I did math (one=1). I think you meant 'whining' or did you?
Dictionary: whinge (hwĭnj, wĭnj) intr.v. Chiefly British., whinged, whinging, whinges. To complain or protest, especially in an annoying or persistent manner. [Dialectal alteration of Middle English whinsen, from Old English hwinsian.] whinger whing'er n. whingingly whing'ingly adv.
222
« on: November 10, 2008, 18:16 »
Sorry, I don't get it...
How could your portfolio be sorted according to a Best Match; best matching what? There must be a reason why my photos shows in a given order when I look at my portfolio, but I think it has nothing to do with a search with keywords.
Am I wrong?
Claude
best match gives each file a value depending on whatever the current criteria are, relevancy to a search term is not one of them, so when you look at your own portfolio by best match you see it ordered in ranking according to the current formula.
223
« on: November 10, 2008, 13:46 »
Hi SJ,
Thanks for the feedback. That is a tough game to play against but that is part of all business. I just need to find a way to compete in a company that offers those opportunities to their exclusives. I bet you had a lot of fun. I have never done a gang shoot but I have friends that do it that love it.
Is this something they offer regularly to exclusives and are they open to any exclusive that wants to pony up $ 500 dollars or is it by invitation only to a select group of Exclusives.
Others that live close to one another should maybe think about doing this on a smaller scale. You can learn a lot from each other and it really drops costs and allows you production higher quality images than youcould afford on your own. I doubt you will get quite as good an image placement as the ones Istock puts together but add a case of beer and it couldn't be a total loss of your time.
Best,
AVAVA
You really ought to read more on the istock forums!
224
« on: November 10, 2008, 10:57 »
Another possible factor behind this observation could be a self limiting brake on runaway files.
I'm sure we've all scratched our heads wondering why one generic brickwall/flower/handshake has sold a thousand in six months. Now if that file suddenly dies the owner will notice a great deal more than the possible hundreds of beneficiaries of one extra sale here and there. But in the long run a smoothing out of these hyper files would benefit many.
Obviously this would also possibly disrupt successful unique files, but they ten to have lots of 'just looking' views too.
225
« on: November 10, 2008, 10:13 »
The LAST PICTURE of my portfolio has 16 DLs and 118 views. QED. Of course now it will neither be seen nor downloaded. These f****** idiots at IS. Note to self: Do not upload highly specialized pictures that target a tiny market because if they fit too well they get KILLED. Morons.
Maybe you should extend your opprobrium to those who were gaming the system this time last year with their buying gangs shooting a selection of seasonal images right to the top of the best match - self perpetuating incredible dl/view ratios. No doubt this best match is over reactive to that scenario at this peak buying time but moronic behaviour is not the sole prerogative of istock.
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
