|
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 ... 23
76
« on: January 13, 2013, 15:14 »
The blogg is called " why exclusivity doesnt work"
Exclusivity does work but not on a micro platform.
The blog post is entitled "Why going exclusive as a microstock photographer doesnt work.
So you agree with him. Which bit is BS ?
ROFLMAO !!! Never seen someone contradict himself that fast in the same thread.
Well you havent seen much then. I was just taking exclusivity a bit further and on a broader scale then just micro. Thats all. Ofcourse I forgot. Its strictly a micro forum. Appoligies for that.
77
« on: January 13, 2013, 14:38 »
The blogg is called " why exclusivity doesnt work" my point is, it does work and would work if it wasnt for certain agencies abusing it.
I mean thanks to IS, I would think just the very word Exclusivity would make most here go to the bathroom. The concept of exclusivity, the way it should be, should be a guarantee for its members to earn money. Thats what it used to be and still is within certain agencies.
Never mind. Its a waste to try and explain it but still. 
You should practice what you preach. For many of us it has been the belief that by staying exclusive we were securing our work and the industry. It has always been disheartening to see established artists, like yourself, upload to multiple subscription agencies. Now IS appears to be fighting back by offering our work for next to nothing. Its a fight to the bottom and no one knows what will be left at the end.
I have been exclusive in the RM- Getty-house-collection, stones, image-bank, since 1993. I know what it means and its working perfectly. Micro is a differant story. Difficult being exclusive in micro when every single Admin is thinking short-term profits, constantly changing sort-orders, killing off portfolios, etc. How can you possibly secure your work in micro when at least 60% of tens of thousands do nothing but copy others work and the editors/reviewers seem to just love it, accepting it. Exclusivity does work but not on a micro platform.
78
« on: January 13, 2013, 13:58 »
Total BS! its worked perfect for 30 years, most people here have only micro to compare with, thats all theyve done, thinking its the only photography there is.
The reason it doesnt work is because micro-agencies ABUSE! the exclusivity asd on both sides of the fence Esclusives and Indies.
You have to be a bit longer in the tooth, takes more then 7 years in micro to be able to compare or make a judgement and btw, how old is Oringer? has he been around in the REAL world of stock-agencies, not micro.
now Oringer means nothing? you need to stop complaining, really man! why don't you quit all micro agencies and leave us talking about micro? we are in a microstock forum 
Come on Luis. I know its micro but that doesnt mean conversations have to be lowered to kindergarden levels. Tho Op has only done micro but many here have experienced the good and great side of stock-photography and ofcourse we dont walk around with blindfolders.
Its all such dogmatic thinking and quite laughable actually.
best. Chris.
the discussion here was never if we ever did RM or RF or RFF or RAA or RTC or RTZ, its about agencies offering exclusivity or not
The blogg is called " why exclusivity doesnt work" my point is, it does work and would work if it wasnt for certain agencies abusing it. I mean thanks to IS, I would think just the very word Exclusivity would make most here go to the bathroom. The concept of exclusivity, the way it should be, should be a guarantee for its members to earn money. Thats what it used to be and still is within certain agencies. Never mind. Its a waste to try and explain it but still.
79
« on: January 13, 2013, 13:15 »
Total BS! its worked perfect for 30 years, most people here have only micro to compare with, thats all theyve done, thinking its the only photography there is.
The reason it doesnt work is because micro-agencies ABUSE! the exclusivity asd on both sides of the fence Esclusives and Indies.
You have to be a bit longer in the tooth, takes more then 7 years in micro to be able to compare or make a judgement and btw, how old is Oringer? has he been around in the REAL world of stock-agencies, not micro.
now Oringer means nothing? you need to stop complaining, really man! why don't you quit all micro agencies and leave us talking about micro? we are in a microstock forum
Come on Luis. I know its micro but that doesnt mean conversations have to be lowered to kindergarden levels. Tho Op has only done micro but many here have experienced the good and great side of stock-photography and ofcourse we dont walk around with blindfolders. Its all such dogmatic thinking and quite laughable actually. best. Chris.
80
« on: January 13, 2013, 13:08 »
Mantis! I know its no consolation but I know two guys with 12K images between them, they have been stung now third time in a row by the changes and they are pulling their ports and ciao bella.
Me. no it hasnt effected me as yet.
81
« on: January 13, 2013, 12:51 »
Total BS! its worked perfect for 30 years, most people here have only micro to compare with, thats all theyve done, thinking its the only photography there is.
The reason it doesnt work is because micro-agencies ABUSE! the exclusivity asd on both sides of the fence Esclusives and Indies.
You have to be a bit longer in the tooth, takes more then 7 years in micro to be able to compare or make a judgement and btw, how old is Oringer? has he been around in the REAL world of stock-agencies, not micro.
82
« on: January 13, 2013, 01:17 »
" we are changing the search for the benefit of buyers and contributors and also getting rid of glitches". which means: business is bad and we "think" our new search will increase speedy profits for ourselves. F##k our contributors.
83
« on: January 12, 2013, 17:22 »
84
« on: January 12, 2013, 16:23 »
Its cobblers, all of it. Cobblers. Any search change, no matter what and especially when it comes to micros is just a feeble try for short term profit thinking, thats all.
Bit of deja vu this. I seem to remember another massive agency constantly wank#ng around with their search and, well, theyre not doing too good at the moment.
85
« on: January 12, 2013, 13:00 »
So what have we got now. A re-shuffle of popular? or are we back to relevancy? as the default search I mean.
86
« on: January 12, 2013, 09:26 »
Still beats me. Cant see any change at all. I think Tab must have been bitten by the hair-of-the doggy. 
87
« on: January 12, 2013, 02:12 »
Well I cant see any change at all? not in search nor in my port? but that could ofcourse be a glitch. so if there was a shuffle what are we talking about here? a shuffle in Popular? or back to this spam-filled Relevancy?
89
« on: January 11, 2013, 11:34 »
Well yes. When they get their search together and when it works, they are selling Ok. I have had two so and so days and have resumed uploading, hoping it gets back to the way it was.
90
« on: January 11, 2013, 11:09 »
I got payed 1.38$, what about that?!? 
Well. better then a smack in the balls, aint it?
91
« on: January 11, 2013, 10:40 »
Are you being serious? youre going to sue IS/Getty? you havent got a hope in hell. All I can say is: you better have a few million quid in your account.
Only because Erin succeeded doesnt mean anything outside the movie.
92
« on: January 11, 2013, 08:10 »
None of them. Try for Nik HDR effex pro instead.
93
« on: January 10, 2013, 12:29 »
NO, NO and NO!!!!!!!!!
94
« on: January 10, 2013, 10:03 »
I feel as if I am going to throw up! got to get some Alka Zeltzer.
95
« on: January 10, 2013, 09:53 »
Not just IS. All search engines are geared towards short term profits, hence they are ofcourse useless. Many use relevancy, which is totally in the hands of spamming and bad keywording.
96
« on: January 10, 2013, 03:41 »
Pugh! 10 pages of this nonsense. I think we are getting hard up for topics?
Right, The fall of the site that created microstock is non-topic on microstockgroup. We should talk more about RM.
After all istock only had 75% market share as of 2010. Istock going from top 200 site to outside the top 1000 is not an important topic.
If you weren't exclusive from 2003-2011 you were crazy. Now you are crazy if you are exclusive from 2012- ??.
The only problem is the "not all my eggs in one basket" is going to collapse pricing. And the only differentiating factor will be pricing. Look out below!!!!!
Well put! just that as you see in this 11 page thread, the overwhelming majority havent grasped this fact. They are still bewildered and confused, their heads are still spinning around, joining every sheit agency they can lay their hands on thinking thats the answer.
97
« on: January 09, 2013, 18:20 »
My remaining at FT depends entirely on where in the search my latest uploads will land.
98
« on: January 09, 2013, 13:56 »
Pugh! 10 pages of this nonsense. I think we are getting hard up for topics?
99
« on: January 09, 2013, 08:56 »
Terrifying! the least. OTOH, with all this cr#p, we should all be earning an absoloute fortune. So where is all the dosh going?
100
« on: January 08, 2013, 17:28 »
That about the commission is not true. It takes almost two months to pay out. Cut off is the 15th.
Checks and PayPal payments are issued on the 15th of each month for all sales completed before the 15th of the the previous month. For example, on 01/15, you will be paid for all of your unpaid orders that shipped before 12/15
Hi! You seem very familiar with the FAA. What puzzels me is this: it says original prints, etc. contact the artist. However I would rather see that the FAA did all the prints, dealings, etc. Is there a way to do this?
as I read you can do that yourself too if you are lets say a painter and send the frame to buyer etc.. by default I believe they do all the job, pretty much you MARK UP (choose what you want to earn in each size) and then they will add printing, frames etc to the buyer..
Ok! cheers.
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 ... 23
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
) At least I can still smile at everyone 
