|
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 - rosta
76
« on: October 02, 2007, 12:17 »
I've had no problems using explorer. My first image to be accepted there has already had a sale.
judy
77
« on: October 01, 2007, 18:47 »
The domain name that I have for my non photographic sales (i buy and sell vintage cameras and melamine) is cutterpup.com, long story, but in over ten years I have moved three times and was never "held hostage" by my original host/register which was yahoo. I still use cutterpup as my screen name/non photographic address.
My photographic one combines two interests, that way I can use it for both photographic images and plant sales "orchidimages".
78
« on: October 01, 2007, 15:08 »
79
« on: October 01, 2007, 07:59 »
Why is it that when MostPhotos said they were using this type of system it was disparaged and a lot of people here said they would not upload unless it changed. Now that LO is doing it, people are jumping in to comment and help boost image placements?
Just wondering
80
« on: September 26, 2007, 08:51 »
I have enjoyed reading the linked threads and came across this letter from a loyal istock contibutor,
"We should not complain too much and just be patienced. Staff will make all to get things in right way.
iStock is the best lever to earn money - one day off is nothing if you just think there is no istock what would you do, where would you share photos and get reviews, where would you meet so many friends worldwide, would you get money to buy gear, where would you get happiness looking at numbers of sales ...
So we just have to be thankful for letting us to enjoy all those benefits in this global community.
istock will maybe reward us somehow (don't forget rewards on Punctum day). We are rewarded with just that iStock exists.
So viva iStock - I love you! "
Guess I never spent enough time on the forums there to realize what a "club" it was over there.
Rosta
81
« on: September 24, 2007, 12:54 »
Okay, I know I'm not the most serious stock shooter here, but I really am trying to change that.  I've even had some payouts.  To date 95% of my sold images have been taken with a Pentax *DS (6mp). I love the camera and have a range of lenses for it that I am happy with. I have even passed Alamy's QC test with images taken from it and upsized. The other 5% of my sold images were taken with a Canon Powershot A630(8mp), and also have had Alamy accept images taken with it. Now the problem  Illness has been slowly taking away the amount of weight I can hold and how steady I can hold things. For images that I am "setting up" this is not a problem as I can use a tripod. But, I am looking to get a lightweight camera/lens that has IS for my carrying around camera. Originally I was going to get the Pentax K100 as it has in body IS and is lighter than my DS. But as the sites are rasing the bar for minimum image size, and somtimes cropping has got to be done for "on the go" shots, I'm not sure which way to go. Options: 1. Pentax K100D as planned, but it is only 6mp. 2. Switch to another brand of DSLR, but I really don't want to build another system right now and would have to sell off the Pentax gear to afford IS or VR lenses (or to buy the two lens Olympus kit) 3. Find a P & S similar to my Canon but with IS. My initial budget had been aroune $400, but now I don't know whether to stick with what I have, buy now, or stick with what I have until I can afford the $1000 plus it would cost to start switching systems, or go with an IS P& S. I have to admit that this is the first time Pentax has had me seriously consider jumping ship. Thanks for letting me ramble, any input would be recommended.
82
« on: September 18, 2007, 07:58 »
I gave them a year and gave up, their "Not what we are looking for" rejections combined with low sales drove me nuts. The only ones who were worse IMHO were Imangevortex in terms of acceptance.
Rosta
83
« on: September 14, 2007, 12:17 »
since we are posting the images here is my LO "winner" 1512 views as of now with ONE download 
84
« on: September 13, 2007, 23:07 »
I just checked my stats over there, sales are so poor for me I tend to forget about LO. I have one image that has had 1508 views and one sale. Definitly food for thought.
85
« on: September 07, 2007, 07:42 »
FD, i agree with all of your points except the last one. Moori had this very clear in the first post of this topic. Granted it was in the last paragraph, not the beginning where he first put the link but it was there. R "Feel free to use my referral link ;-)
--> www.mostphotos.com
Last Edit: August 30, 2007, 06:14:02 AM by moori "
86
« on: September 06, 2007, 14:15 »
I found it, thank you
r
87
« on: September 06, 2007, 07:26 »
You're right, I should have said "newest to me", but more important, what does it mean? I shot in RAW and chose the WB to be what I felt the image needed.
88
« on: September 06, 2007, 07:14 »
Hi all. I just had an image rejected at DT for the following reason:
"White balance parameter was not correctly assigned"
Guess the reviewers are getting creative over there.
Rosta
89
« on: September 05, 2007, 07:17 »
I don't have any specfic adblocker, but my firewall has a popup blocker, perhaps that is doing it for me. I don't mind the "image sharing" format as long as my images are watermarked and right hand clicking is disabled. Right now my website is linked only to FP and I'd be happy to consider adding this site but, I do want to be able to read the TOS for myself first.
90
« on: September 05, 2007, 07:03 »
I just came back from looking over the site. It loaded very fast for me (DSL connection in the USA) and I saw no ads. I thought it was nicely done but found the search engine gave me too many hits that were not what I had been looking for. By example, I typed in "poison ivy" and saw all the pictures where poison was listed such as snakes, then all the pictures where ivy was listed.
But, my biggest complaint is that the seller's terms of service are not yet in English. Sorry, but I think I'll hold off signing up until I can read the TOS myself..
91
« on: August 23, 2007, 12:45 »
I've finally been set uo to upload files. Did some todya, I'm using a DSL connection and it took about five minutes per image to upload.
92
« on: August 09, 2007, 14:09 »
I just spent some time on the site and this part of the photographer agreement kind of made me stop looking.
"II. Transfer of Rights
1. The photographer transfers to Picture Agency all (copyright) rights of use of the
picture material for every kind of commercial and/or non-commercial use. The right
to exercise accessory rights and droite de suite is also transferred."
94
« on: August 06, 2007, 08:51 »
I had three there, sold one twice, never got any others accepted, finally called it quits on trying..they can keep my two dollars.
Judy
95
« on: August 03, 2007, 05:38 »
FP have indeed low sales but they let you set your own price and give you 70%, have virtually 100% acceptance rate and no categories to input so submitting is fairly painless.
If you have your own website which attracts visitors it is worth linking some of your best photos to the picture for sale at FP instead of directing them to other sites where you can't set the price or receive 70%.
Never even thought of that. Great idea. Thanks
96
« on: July 27, 2007, 07:36 »
I agree totally. Right now I'm a nano-stocker but I'm working up to microstock. My "niche" has only four accepted images on istock so far but those four appear on page one of best match, three of the four appear on page one of most downloads (including the number one position) and also by rating.
Funny, when I was in the US Army Reserves my position was NCO in charge of local indigenous poisonous spiders, snakes and plants. This meant identifying them, educating others and on occasion being the one to remove said beasties. My best selling images are of poison ivy.
Now that due to neuro problems I'm confined to home (no driving) I still have the joys of two types of poisonous snakes, two spiders and multiple plants within walking distance to find and photograph.
Think I've found my niche.
Judy
97
« on: July 23, 2007, 15:12 »
Last week I sent in some sample images and an application. never even received an aknowledgment email. Today they phoned me to let me know that they will be writing me soon and wanted to know how "interested" I really was in doing stock work.
Never had that happen before.
Judy
98
« on: July 21, 2007, 17:42 »
I wrote and explained that I although I understood their reasoning for wanting images left up for 400 days I was uncomfortable in signing on because of that. They wrote back and told me that as long as I did not take the sign on bonus money being offered then I was free to remove my images and cancel my account at any time.
Judy
99
« on: July 11, 2007, 13:54 »
What about me Rosta
100
« on: July 06, 2007, 08:06 »
I checked the site and looked at my files and there was no rejected image there and the last one I sent was sitting on top with an acccepted icon. The response in French reminds me of an old military surplus computor we once bought. They had pulled all the hard drives before selling them and it came w/o hard drive or OS. We put in a new HD, installed an OS (at that time it was MS-DOS, guess I'm dating myself) and we always got error messages in Spanish.
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
