|
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 - ClaridgeJ
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 ... 23
126
« on: January 06, 2013, 13:55 »
Your port is very good and salable and you will have success but i most advice you about rejections. In SS or Istock you can view your rejections get high , you can get about 30% your port rejected ... or not.....but be prepared to.....
Another thing to note about rejections - DT is the only site that rejection rate plays a part in search placement. Rejections are never fun, of course, but you don't have to worry that they will affect your search positions at other sites  .
True! another thing. Throughout the years I have noticed DT to be very professional about their reviewing. Its quite clear they pay attention to the markets, commercial value and saleabillity. Thats the way it should be.
127
« on: January 06, 2013, 12:57 »
a very low January and why? I would say because ....
By a 'very slow January' you mean the first 6 days including January 1st and two weekend days ? I really don't know what's going on .. 
I meant 6 sales in 6 days (only 6 hours left today) and I had 118 sales in January 2012, my usual weekly rank jumped from 1000/1200 to 7500!
still considering your port, thats a pittyful result. You mean they will look after the ones uploading regularly? well that sounds like a big suck-in, keeps people uploading forever with minimal results. Well I stood for the 3-card trick during 2012, but no way during 2013. Too busy.
it gotta be an automatic process but I certainly think you have better search placement if you keep uploading regularly, I say that because by default the search type is Revelance (you can change it to Downloads but on the next search it will get back to Revelance) which is pretty much just new uploads, as we all know and keep on saying they are punishing pictures that sold many times before, have a few examples myself actually
searching for man, from the first page (100 results) there are:
id - number of files (from when)
364 - 1 (October 28th 2011)
437 - 1 (September 5th 2012)
459 - 1
463 - 1
466 - 1 (November 9th 2012)
468 - 1 (November 15th 2012)
474 - 3 (December 5th 2012)
475 - 3 (December 10th 2012)
476 - 4
477 - 10
478 - 16 (December 20th 2012)
479 - 20 (December 20th 2012)
480 - 5 (End of December)
481 - 4
482 - 1 (January 5th 2013)
10 files from the infinity collection (10% of the results)
more than 50% of the showing up files are on FT for less than half month
Well what can one say to that? Its strange though. In my personal case, SS, DT, even IS, is doing great, everyone exept FT and this slope pretty much started when I hit the Gold level. When silver like you I had about 20-25, dls per day and at good prices as well. Its a shame because theres no doubt, FT, can sell, its not as if they are short of buyers thats for sure.
128
« on: January 06, 2013, 12:46 »
Well I am happy then that my inferior images are selling at FT now...
I have to say this. To imagine that everything written, slightest criticism, etc, is a dig and aimed at oneself, well theres a clinical word for that, a sort of condition that has got to do with the mental state.
I do mean well and one of my best friends here in Sweden is actually a world famous brain surgeon who is one of the few that can actually remove small Gliomas, i.e. small imaginative stod cells.
Well you were having a dig, kind of trolling, to get reaction from someone. and that sucker was me, and then you can jab some more. Its typical troll behaviour dude. Why dont you troll like that on SS? Why only here? Because on SS you would get a life time ban, and not just for a week.
Sigh! sometimes you pretend to be a bit too fragile, too easily hurt and for nothing. Ease up a bit, chill out. Everything isnt aimed at you personally, instead be happy FT is doing well for you. Be humble. End of discussion.
129
« on: January 06, 2013, 12:00 »
a very low January and why? I would say because ....
By a 'very slow January' you mean the first 6 days including January 1st and two weekend days ? I really don't know what's going on ..
I meant 6 sales in 6 days (only 6 hours left today) and I had 118 sales in January 2012, my usual weekly rank jumped from 1000/1200 to 7500!
still considering your port, thats a pittyful result. You mean they will look after the ones uploading regularly? well that sounds like a big suck-in, keeps people uploading forever with minimal results. Well I stood for the 3-card trick during 2012, but no way during 2013. Too busy.
130
« on: January 06, 2013, 11:55 »
Well I am happy then that my inferior images are selling at FT now...
I have to say this. To imagine that everything written, slightest criticism, etc, is a dig and aimed at oneself, well theres a clinical word for that, a sort of condition that has got to do with the mental state. I do mean well and one of my best friends here in Sweden is actually a world famous brain surgeon who is one of the few that can actually remove small Gliomas, i.e. small imaginative stod cells.
131
« on: January 06, 2013, 08:18 »
Whats the point? ELs, this and that, whats the point. FT, have made a clear point of totally crush gold and emerald contributors, pushed back in search and very often giving preferance to inferior and irrelevant material.
Got a few images there with 2000 dls a piece, found them way, way back in search, so I am deleting them.
132
« on: January 06, 2013, 04:32 »
GL, is a professional bunch, the guys know a lot about design, advertising, this and that and its as close to a trad-agency as you can get in the micro world. Its a good agency and its a crying shame more buyers dont realize this because buyers is the only thing they are short of, unfortunately.
My only concern is, they seem to press too much on the graphic aspects, vectors, illustrations, etc, so much so that I know buyers are getting confused, dont really associate them with actual photography for sale.
I have actually recommended a few buyers to go there and they came back to me saying they want images not illustrations so it speaks for itself.
They should do something about this.
133
« on: January 06, 2013, 02:21 »
Quit agencies that can not produce min. 500 bucks per month. waste of time, effort and whiskey.
Notice how all the smaller agencies have begun to follow the big boys? ages before reviewing, piss-poor communication, sort-order changes, etc, etc.
No sir! not this dude.
135
« on: January 05, 2013, 02:54 »
136
« on: January 04, 2013, 14:26 »
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
Welcome back. Bonne anne.
et une bonne et heureuse anne vous aussi. Agrable d'tre de retour parmi la meute.
My high school French is a bit rusty, buried as it is behind more than 20 years of attempts to learn Spanish, but I wanted to welcome you back Christian. Site was pretty tame without you
cheers Lisa! youre a true pro! nothing seems to shake your equiliberium! well some trollope must have pushed the report button on me? never mind it was well worth it. heard from a friend of mine you have some sort of a heatwave in Fl? all the best Chris.
137
« on: January 04, 2013, 12:56 »
Maybe some web developer can inform us about whether or not it is difficult or risky to make alterations to a search algorithm. I don't know, but given the disastrous search "upgrades" we've seen at various sites I would rather see a degree of care and caution exercised in rolling out alterations.
Hi Paul! You know I have reached the conclusion that no matter what search algorithm or method. As long as agencies are constructing it just for short term profit or to save them from having to pay out too much commission, type FT, etc. then whats the point? you reach a certain level or ranking and as thanks you get way pushed back in the search instead of encouraged. How about that? Alterations? well you can bet your bottom dollar these alterations will not benefit the indies. Although lately IS have indeed sold very well for me.
138
« on: January 04, 2013, 12:13 »
Sales and revenues ar NOT falling at all. They are on their way up. Take no notice of this unreliable Alexa ranking. The demise is just malicious wishful thinking thats all.
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ three times!
139
« on: January 04, 2013, 11:35 »
Sales and revenues ar NOT falling at all. They are on their way up. Take no notice of this unreliable Alexa ranking. The demise is just malicious wishful thinking thats all.
140
« on: January 04, 2013, 11:05 »
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
Welcome back. Bonne anne.
et une bonne et heureuse anne vous aussi. Agrable d'tre de retour parmi la meute.
141
« on: January 04, 2013, 09:59 »
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
142
« on: December 22, 2012, 10:45 »
Having quite a good day here actually. IS keeps selling.
143
« on: December 22, 2012, 10:16 »
Secondly, I was hesitant to post in this thread because of the title.
You are right Lisa, I changed the title as the previous one wasn't that great
New title definitely makes more sense
Am I the only independent who has mixed feelings about Istock's demise?
I can definitely understand the sense of schadenfreude at seeing a site that has behaved with such hubris suffer as a result of their actions.
But at the same time, I would much prefer for them to roll back the bad changes, begin rewarding contributors with more respect (and more MONEY), and pull out of this nosedive.
It may be naive, but I see the recent improvements in site functionality, communication, and freezing the RC rates for next year as steps in the right direction. It gives me some hope that the new owners are more far sighted than the prior ones.
Of course it may be way too little way too late. I don't know.
Yes there is an improvement! and a clear one. Its rather stupid asking for anybodys demise. Could backfire on them as well.
Coming from you thats odd.
Dont matter how many. FT has turned bad and sour. The agency changed the search some time back and its just terrible. Im leaving this place and slowly take my port with me.
same here! with non performers or even if they perform but mess around. I close my account and take my portfolio with me.
Have done this with three sites this year so nowdays I only activly submit to five sites.
I recon FT, will be the next one to call a halt. They have been chopping and changing their sort-order now for 6 months, to the point where they dont even know themselves on which leg to stand on. Ofcourse as usual it only hits the high-ranking members.
Anyway what am I doing here? trying to chat with what? bunch of total morons? end of conversation.
What are you doing here?
Piss off! punk. Divvy or Prat? which are your trade?
144
« on: December 21, 2012, 16:52 »
Secondly, I was hesitant to post in this thread because of the title.
You are right Lisa, I changed the title as the previous one wasn't that great
New title definitely makes more sense
Am I the only independent who has mixed feelings about Istock's demise?
I can definitely understand the sense of schadenfreude at seeing a site that has behaved with such hubris suffer as a result of their actions.
But at the same time, I would much prefer for them to roll back the bad changes, begin rewarding contributors with more respect (and more MONEY), and pull out of this nosedive.
It may be naive, but I see the recent improvements in site functionality, communication, and freezing the RC rates for next year as steps in the right direction. It gives me some hope that the new owners are more far sighted than the prior ones.
Of course it may be way too little way too late. I don't know.
Yes there is an improvement! and a clear one. Its rather stupid asking for anybodys demise. Could backfire on them as well.
145
« on: December 21, 2012, 14:04 »
This is a stupid, naive, banal, unintelligent thread. Havent ppl here got more important things to do then starting one bollocks thread after another.
Go and do some work instead, you can always supply the freebie agencies.
146
« on: December 21, 2012, 07:29 »
yeah they are trying desperatly to find the right search to maximize profits. Chopping, changing, ups and downs, old files new files, this and that. profit gaining. ONLY, nothing seems to work? oh well maybe in 20 years time.
147
« on: December 21, 2012, 06:37 »
Ha, ha! I have been saying that for weeks now. Ever since their so called experiment with Relevancy, as a search, its never been right.
Day before yesterday they sold a pic which I submitted in my second batch, 7 years back. Embarrassing! I deleted it.
I dont have a problem with selling older files, they are not bad, but I wish it was alongside new files, not one or the other.
Agreeing! that would be ideal.
148
« on: December 21, 2012, 06:12 »
Ha, ha! I have been saying that for weeks now. Ever since their so called experiment with Relevancy, as a search, its never been right.
Day before yesterday they sold a pic which I submitted in my second batch, 7 years back. Embarrassing! I deleted it.
149
« on: December 20, 2012, 15:06 »
E+ for whatever reason, is being allowed to dominate the search results on the Getty site. That would be the reason you are doing well there. But believe me, this hardly goes unnoticed by regular Getty contributors who would like to know why this is being allowed. Getty has a lot hungry mouths to feed and most aren't passive bystanders.
Getty for whatever reason, is being allowed to dominate the search results on the iStock site. That would be the reason you are doing well there. But believe me, this hardly goes unnoticed by regular iStock contributors who would like to know why this is being allowed. iStock has a lot hungry mouths to feed and most aren't passive bystanders.
Yah, I think the getty "overated" and "overpriced" collection which are often 10 years old being shoved down the throats of istock buyers with the new title of "agency" for the last 3 years can't be made up for with any move to getty for exclusives.
They had to make istock handsome for 2 sales and now the traffic/sales have tanked. Look at alexa. SS and IS have switched. Not that SS contributors income is on par with IS exclusives in 2010. That money went to Jon (400,000,000 dollars)
I predict that IS is on a verge of a total collapse as far as traffic and downloads in 2013. Exclusives have been demoralized even a top ten exclusive who has made more the a million dollars in 5 years say they aren't going to invest in photo shoots. IS has a big problem with lack of new content being created by the people who made it great. It is just not worth being ripped off by them just so a private equity firm can make 2 billion dollars on the next sell.
Dont get fooled by what IS exclusives etc, say! when the going gets rough they all say that, in the next breath they are uploading like crazy. Its been like that for the past 3 years. Same here at the MSG, whatever they do, in the next breath we are * up like little squirts. Its about the money involved.
150
« on: December 20, 2012, 13:59 »
Serves you all right! its called come upens. 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 ... 23
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
