|
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 - seawhisper
51
« on: December 28, 2015, 17:30 »
iStock upload process + their high rejections ratio drives me insane. I wish they first checked the quality of the photos and only later allowed to use this archaic user unfriendly UX freaking nightmare interface of theirs...
High rejection ratio? I think your are mixing Istock with other agency. Istock accepts everything people submit. They only reject for law issues or keywording.
Mirco
I have higher rejection ration on IS than on SS. -_-
Just out of curiousity.... what is the reason for the rejections? It think it can only be for legal issue....
A mix of kewords + dull / flat colours / overprocessed / artifacts / direct flash (when no flash used and mostly flat curve  ) / harsh light / lens flare (couldn't find any tbh) / incorrect white balance. What I HAVE to give them is even though I do not agree mostly with these reasons (but truth to be said I seldom do ) is that these are very descriptive. It's not fotolia "we have problem with anything and everything, pick your fancy". But I tried now a few and got accepted, so maybe times changed. Still their way of clicking each and every word to describe what you mean + categories + having to scroll in this tiny little post stamp for ants input area while living in era of 1900+ screen resolution drives me wild and makes me wanna scream offensive words that ladies should only when being alone.
52
« on: December 28, 2015, 17:18 »
Sometimes contributors are worried about property and so on....
There is also editorial. Shoot the same pond under editorial license and voila the image is accepted. Editorial are creating me good sales.
Mirco
Yup, sounds like a good idea!
53
« on: December 28, 2015, 15:23 »
The technical/composition rejections on SS still exists but there are no topic rejections anymore as far as i experience.
Also in general the reviews are getting better.
Mirco
Probably so, what starts to be a pain in the a.. on SS but it concerns most stocksites lately is the property release. I can't shot a pond in the park to not get rejections based on property release (yup, I did got that just few minutes ago). I mean honestly who will be suing anyone for a use of building - it's not a human being. You can't shot cars, you can't shot famous places, soon you won't be able to shot food because the farmers will say these are recognizable their potato and sue you for infringement of intellectual property or whatever... -_-
54
« on: December 28, 2015, 14:11 »
Depends also wich agency. For example Shutterstock never rejects on subject. I have a feeling that i can submit every day a photo of a dandelion flower and it will be daily accepted.
True. 
Have they given up on their LCV rejections, which used to be lamented here?
I don't remember last time I got that on SS. For me it's always: FOCUS! NOISE! FOCUS! NOISE... NOISE AND FOCUS! lol But truth to be said I do sell 'vacation' shots so I don't walk around with a tripod and 50D isn't the lowest reduction camera ever built.
55
« on: December 28, 2015, 12:50 »
iStock upload process + their high rejections ratio drives me insane. I wish they first checked the quality of the photos and only later allowed to use this archaic user unfriendly UX freaking nightmare interface of theirs...
High rejection ratio? I think your are mixing Istock with other agency. Istock accepts everything people submit. They only reject for law issues or keywording.
Mirco
I have higher rejection ration on IS than on SS. -_-
56
« on: December 28, 2015, 12:49 »
Depends also wich agency. For example Shutterstock never rejects on subject. I have a feeling that i can submit every day a photo of a dandelion flower and it will be daily accepted.
True.
57
« on: December 28, 2015, 12:29 »
This is wrong.
They always need new ones. It is very important for the agencies that there is a flow and movement going on. Every agency encourage you to submit regulary.
Except that from time to time one agency or another rejects because they have too many of a particular subject.
Well I always thought that it's important to have fresh photos but I have a feeling (maybe it's just subjective overall tiredness and so on ) that there are significantly more rejections based on the subject being covered on stock issue.
58
« on: December 28, 2015, 12:27 »
Have you? How do you became one? I'm really curious of how this all works. What kind of tools reviewer use, and what are the specific guidelines for them. And how much are they paid (I bet not that much, but I might be surprised ).
59
« on: December 28, 2015, 09:24 »
iStock upload process + their high rejections ratio drives me insane. I wish they first checked the quality of the photos and only later allowed to use this archaic user unfriendly UX freaking nightmare interface of theirs...
60
« on: December 28, 2015, 09:19 »
Many of the big contributors I followed on these forums several years ago have given up. They must have seen this coming. As the new year looms, I'm wondering if I should join them and find something else that might replace my microstock income, or at least make me feel more fulfilled creatively instead of punishing me. The next few weeks may be a turning point for me. It could be my resolution: find a way to get my microstock income growing again, or find a new project more worthy of my blood, sweat and tears.
I have the same feeling about 2015, hope new year will be better. I thought it might be the case me uploading way less photos but it seems not nesesery... However, far more important are the numbers of total images and yearly additions both of which are known. And those figures don't bode well for any of the three groups.
So maybe it's the case when microstock banks got to the amount of number of photos when they simply don't need any new ones?
61
« on: December 28, 2015, 02:36 »
I wonder - does anyone seen or read any kind of stats or analysis of how many stock photographers are there now? (Comparing how many were eg. year, two or three years ago.) I mean rather the change in numbers not the numbers itself. I have a feeling quite a few years ago it was a photography trend - everyone thought it's really nice idea to earn money on photography via stock websites (rather then dealing with mood brides and their drunk guests during shooting weddings... ) but now it seems only the toughest survived. Not many articles on the blogs and photography websites about microstock and so on. I have a feeling this forum got a bit less active lately as well. Maybe there are numbers somewhere on new / active users? I guess two or three top / middle tier stocks would be reliable data if they did show such numbers anywhere. But also just an analysis or anything written by anyone?
62
« on: December 28, 2015, 02:19 »
I wonder if some of these sites died, and just never bothered to tell anyone.
Haha I love this, zombie microstock websites! <B
63
« on: December 25, 2015, 10:48 »
To quote from the original Star Trek series: "It's life Jim, but not as we know it".
Omg brilliant, just brilliant. But yes, it's quite sad. YM was always so very nice, easy upload, the best user experience for a stock website ever. I wonder what went wrong...
64
« on: December 25, 2015, 09:51 »
Hi,
how are your sales on yaymicro? I did start here some time ago but the results were discouraging so I stopped using it but from time to time I check. Last buy was from April. How is it going here?
65
« on: December 25, 2015, 07:49 »
"Due to upload volume, artists are experiencing unusually long wait times for content approval. Currently our average wait time is three weeks. We are working on shortening this wait time and we appreciate your patience."
If the AVERAGE is 3 weeks it makes me wonder what is their max...
66
« on: December 25, 2015, 04:13 »
Less rejections for me! (Haha it's also good wish for "real life" not only stock photography.)
67
« on: December 25, 2015, 04:08 »
This is really nice gift, but my sales on DT dropped so much that I doubt I get any sale into this very day. 
68
« on: December 25, 2015, 04:07 »
That's really not good at all. I've been using his keywording site for ages and it was very very convenient.
There are lots of alternatives. One example, http://microstockgroup.com/tools/keyword.php
Thanks! I know this one. But Yuri website had this huge advantage that he showed how popular are given keywords and also how much searched. This was very useful.
69
« on: December 25, 2015, 03:54 »
That's really not good at all. I've been using his keywording site for ages and it was very very convenient.
70
« on: December 24, 2015, 08:55 »
Thanks guys! It's seems the 7000 is indeed the max. Yeah, I'm not sure it's worth asking, DT wen't almost completely down lately for me. Also they kind of discouraged me to upload anything by trying to donate my photos that don't have any sales into a free section if I don't say they can't. O.o
71
« on: December 22, 2015, 18:05 »
Mine is showing at 7000 per week. I believe that is the maximum they are talking about.
Means you have to have above 80% acceptance ration? Hm either way I don't think that's the number - I got about 100 something earlier so that means the max would be about 300 for me (I'm in 1/3 of the max number). Maybe it's calculated for each user differently based on eg. database exposure or something else?
72
« on: December 22, 2015, 17:38 »
I never actually understood DT limits and how they are being calculated, but lately after having about 99% of batch rejected I got and info that I can only upload 2,33 images. O.o I thought it will reset after the weekend but it didn't.
The help says:
"Users with an approval percentage of between 30-50% can upload the third part (1/3) of the maximum amount of images per week."
But it doesn't say anywhere (or I can't find it) - what is this maximum amount?
73
« on: December 22, 2015, 17:23 »
So does anyone knows what happened exactly? It's still down. 
74
« on: December 16, 2015, 14:51 »
Hi,
I'm using the Big 4 and most of Middle Tier stocks, but I can't see any option how to add google analytics to the stocks. Many sites have this option (for example deviantART and redbubble) but I don't see it anywhere on stock sites. Is it somehow hidden or does it work any different way? Or simply not yet there?
75
« on: October 17, 2015, 02:38 »
Hi everyone,
We apologize for the confusion - we want to ensure that all users on our site are safe and secure and are taking an extra step to ensure that your data is safe. We have fixed the unsecure link now and would greatly appreciate if those that see the message can verify their email address. Thank you!
Vincent
Vincent, as long as you're here can you possible change the ridiculous captcha routine that makes us jump through repetitive photo-identifying hoops whenever we try to log into our own accounts?
That's a fairly new wrinkle at SS, and it's not especially appealing.
Thanks!
Well that's kind of strange anyway - first thing I did is to come here and check why there's a need to verify long ago verified mail. Whenever I see somewhere in the internet "we pay you but you just need to click this" makes me feel uneasy. Also you send the "welcome new user" template that says it's a first step on becoming new contributor. "Thank you for taking the first step in becoming a Shutterstock contributor." -> I was kind of surprised and this made me suspicious that my account was somehow hacked. Would be nice to get the real message explaining like, "Hi _our dearest and most precious and we love you so much_ user. We need to re-verify your mail, because of the reasons. [Put reasons here]. It's all ok, just click here and here."
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
