|
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 - Jens G
126
« on: December 21, 2015, 11:23 »
Congratulations 
I will get there next month, but it has taken me two more years than you.
Thanks
I think that in vector illustration is more easy due less competitors and more versatility of contents.
Anyway I hope you get next rank in this month with a couple of big Sods.
That would be a nice surprise :-) But the rest of this month will probably be very slow.
127
« on: December 21, 2015, 11:01 »
After I updated Microstockr on my Samsung Galaxy S4 Mini with Android 4.4.2 today, the program stops every time I use it. I think it's when it comes to 123RF captcha.
128
« on: December 21, 2015, 07:31 »
Maybe it is not a big deal, but today I reach 0,38 rank at SS.
My first upload there, was in end of December 2012.
I'm pretty happy this morning,
Congratulations I will get there next month, but it has taken me two more years than you.
129
« on: September 13, 2015, 13:28 »
Works here too again. It just took a very long time from upload till they showed up in the queue. In the mean time I uploaded my files via the web-form, and then I suddely had them twice 
130
« on: September 13, 2015, 12:27 »
I get the same.
Seems the files don't get moved from the FTP.
131
« on: May 14, 2015, 02:09 »
I don't think they reject based on EXIF.
I use Sony(A6000 for the moment), and have untill a month ago stripped EXIF from my stock photos, because I had som bad experience some years ago where people looked at exif in digital competitions, and just ignored my photos. Without EXIF they were not ignored.
But a month ago I stopped stripping EXIF from the stock photos to see if it had any influence, and it hasn't. I am not as productive as many of you, but I have managed to upload 36 photos in that month with EXIF, and only two were rejected. One of them I agree with, the other I'm not sure.
ISO has generally been from 100 to 320, but one of the accepted is ISO 1000, which makes me think that they don't automaticly reject based on EXIF.
132
« on: December 13, 2014, 06:12 »
I had a few macro photos accepted there some years ago, and still upload a few images from time to time, mainly for the weekly theme, which I find very inspiring. I don't get many votes in the weekly theme, but it's good fun to find a photo to participate with. And I usually get at few votes and comments I never had any sales, and have not seen anyone writing about it.
135
« on: September 18, 2014, 10:29 »
I have used A-mount(KM 5D, Sony A700 and A77) for some years, but in april I got a Sony A6000 E-mount camera with 16-70mm lens, and after that I haven't really used my A77.
A6000 is a great little camera, and I'm sure E-mount is the future for me for some time.
136
« on: August 17, 2014, 04:29 »
I got the Sony A6000 with 16-70mm some time ago, and its a great camera.
Since I got the A6000, my A77 has almost not been used. I find it too big now.
Combined with the LA-EA4 adapter, I can use my A-mount lenses, but I do look forward to more E-mount lenses. Especially the macro lens that is rumored.
137
« on: August 11, 2014, 05:23 »
No, it's only up to the 18th so far.
I have PP's on the 31st, but there are many days without any. With my small port, it's normal to have some days without any PP's though.
138
« on: August 11, 2014, 04:15 »
Has it finished?
If it did, it's really bad. Only half of June, wich was bad enough already.
139
« on: August 06, 2014, 13:17 »
"IF" and in my experience they don't
I read some years ago that one of the parameters for search rank on FT is the view/sale ratio. I can't remember where I read it, but probably at the FT forum. Or maybe here?
140
« on: August 06, 2014, 00:17 »
Of course it is sales that matter, but if the ratio between views and sales counts in the search ranks, then views also matter some.
141
« on: August 04, 2014, 08:59 »
It's probably views from bots. For example DT views are totally messed up because of that.
Some sites are less affected but overall it's best to not take it into consideration.
Yes it could be bots of course. And I think that views related to sales affects how high a file is placed in a search at FT, which could explain the lower sales. And then again, June already is a slow month.
142
« on: August 04, 2014, 07:03 »
For a couple of weeks in june, the number of views of my files at Fotolia were up to 4 times more than normal. But in the same period sales were only about half of normal.
It doesn't seem logic to me. I would expect more sales with more views? Does anyone have an idea what happened there?
143
« on: July 05, 2014, 04:10 »
I got a Sony A6000 with 16-70mm lens a couple of months ago. It's too big for a pocket, but fits fine in a small Pacsafe shoulderbag, so I can easily carry it with me averywhere.
The picture quality is as good, or even better, than that of my Sony A77, which now has been degraded to second camera.
144
« on: October 07, 2013, 12:44 »
Thay are now showing the actual sales price for sold images, and the large majority are sold for 1 or less.
So actually 0.20 for a 0.71 sale maybe isn't so bad(except that 0.71 sales price isn't much).
So far I have only had one sale higher than 1, but I don't have a large port.
Jens G
So why are you bothering with them? There's enough sites that sell at higher prices and make more for independents. Do we really want buyers to start using sites like this? Do we really want the other sites to see how little they can get away with paying us? Supporting a site like this is just going to make it harder for us to make money.
Well,- many danish newspapers use Colourbox, and I like to see an ocasional photo of mine used there. And is the subscription price much lower than at other sites? 0.2 EUR is ~0.27 USD. My income from Colourbox is a little higher than from Fotolia, and about the double of Dreamstime. Only Shutterstock and iStock make more for me than Colourbox. Jens G
145
« on: October 07, 2013, 10:06 »
Thay are now showing the actual sales price for sold images, and the large majority are sold for 1 or less.
So actually 0.20 for a 0.71 sale maybe isn't so bad(except that 0.71 sales price isn't much).
So far I have only had one sale higher than 1, but I don't have a large port.
Jens G
146
« on: October 07, 2013, 09:56 »
I have no idea if it was just me, or a general problem.
They re-batched my august uploads, and approved my september uploads. A couple of days later they were all on-line.
But since you still have the problem, it might be best to contact them?
Jens G
147
« on: October 04, 2013, 15:42 »
Had very fast reply from 123RF support that the issues should be solved in a couple of days.
Jens G
148
« on: October 04, 2013, 11:23 »
Thanks Ron
I'll write them and ask what is happening.
Jens G
149
« on: October 04, 2013, 10:36 »
Hi
My approved images from august are still not visible in my 123RF portfolio, and I think that is a little long. All my previous uploads have only taken some days before they were visible.
Also none of my september uploads have been reviewed yet.
Are others experiencing the same?
Jens G
150
« on: June 24, 2013, 08:50 »
My files are moved to pending now. I had been logged out, probably by the 123RF system, and when I logged back in, they were in the pending queue.
Jens
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
