|
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 - mindstorm
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13
226
« on: August 28, 2018, 11:10 »
Some amazing Spamfolios here:-
Appears to be 40,000 images of the same thing with only slight changes and mono/colour for each one.
I guess SS doesn't do rejections for similar any more!
That one is indeed mind-blowing. I HAVE had rejects for too many similar, when I submitted 5 shots of a cheetah in Namibia and they decided the pose was not sufficiently different. I wonder how long this guy has had those images up, and how he got them there? Perhaps a few a day, so they don't all flood the same reviewer and are thus not noticed. Even then, 45,000+??? And more to the point, I wonder what his sales are from this...?
227
« on: August 27, 2018, 14:40 »
Re @Uncle Pete: I'm reasonably certain that as long as you still have the disk or the software on your computer for the non-cloud version of PS it won't become invalidated from downloading the Creative Cloud version onto your machine. I have a request for a definitive confirmation of this and will let you know when I receive it.
FWIW, I kept the old Lightroom 6 on my system after signing up for CC a few years ago. The LR6 continued to work without a hitch... with the exception that the library got updated in CC and was therefore no longer readable in LR6. Just keep a copy of your current LR6 library when you use the code. If you really want to go back to LR6 afterwards, you can -- but I have a hard time believing anyone will use the current LR CC (Classic in my case -- I do not like the cloud version) and want to revert to LR6...
228
« on: August 25, 2018, 22:19 »
Did you contact them via the adobestock contact link?...that is the recommended method. I had the >=$500 sales but <300 uploaded assets. The response I got within a couple of days was a little cryptic, but it sounds like they are still sorting things out.
Yep. That is how I sent the contact request. In my case, I have well over the 300 assets, but well under the $500 royalties.
229
« on: August 25, 2018, 17:45 »
Note the "or".
That was my initial understanding too. However, I qualified for that 300 assets accepted before they even announced this, and have more than 300 additional new assets accepted since that time. But I have not received any coupon? (I am nowhere near the dollar amount, as my Adobe portfolio was zero until April of this year) I have also not received any response to my query to them to see if there was a problem somewhere (though the email to them was only sent Thursday, so it might be too soon to expect a response?)
230
« on: August 25, 2018, 15:29 »
I read the requirements carefully:
Either qualify by earnings OR by uploads.
Looks as though now they've changed that to earnings AND uploads - which is why a few of us haven't received the code. Would be nice if the new goalposts were clarified. Matt??
SAY WHAT??? They changed the rules and never notified us, even though we were told that the uploads alone would be sufficient??? If so, I take back every nice thing I ever said about this sh*** company! Good way to lose support of your contributors, Adobe! 
231
« on: August 23, 2018, 18:17 »
SS was zero for two days for me, which is quite unusual. However, I then had double the normal daily sales for the next couple days. Looked to me like there was just a glitch in reporting to us, but once the glitch was resolved, the backlog of sales all got reported at once.
It was just a short and small glitch. Nothing to get concerned over. At the end of the month, let alone end of year, I won't even remember a couple days of puzzling silence.
232
« on: August 23, 2018, 01:17 »
Me too
I was over 300 image approved when Matt made the announce. My fotolia account is synced with adobe
So was I, and I am pretty sure I have had another 300 approved since then. Still no code though...?
233
« on: August 22, 2018, 23:43 »
Is there anyone else who is qualified who hasn't received a code?
I'm in that situation, but wondered if the codes didn't all go out at once for whatever reason and they're not yet done.
Yep, me too.
234
« on: August 22, 2018, 11:04 »
@BaldricksTrousers - Yes, both of these are recently approved images. They were both uploaded within the past week, from a trip to Namibia last month, and are part of a couple hundred wildlife images approved by DT (and several other agencies).
@Me - I obviously would not complain if I still got paid for any downloads they did not charge for. Obviously I have no way to know how many downloads were made (do I?). There have been no reported sales on either of those images from DT since they were uploaded last week though.
And yes, after posting this, I reread that checkbox I leave off more carefully. It DOES refer to images that are not accepted by DT, and thus is probably not relevant to these accepted images.
235
« on: August 21, 2018, 21:35 »
When I submit to DT, there is a checkbox I can use if I agree to have my images given away for free. I NEVER have that box checked. If they can't sell it, I'm not going to just let them use it free for their own promotional purposes...
Yet yesterday I discovered two of my recent images from Namibia are "free for 24 hours -- download here" on the DT site.
Anyone else have that happen? How did you handle it, if so?
236
« on: August 21, 2018, 14:47 »
If your photos are good enough to be accepted by Getty when submitted by Chinese 500px then your photos are good enough to be accepted by Getty when submitted directly by you. Why split your earnings with 500px?
Because when you try to submit directly to Getty you are told that they only accept exclusive images. Sell on another agency, and they refuse your image. Apparently with 500px, they have decided to wink at that requirement, since not many (if any) were exclusive there.
237
« on: August 20, 2018, 11:09 »
It's useful as an editable template, not as a rendered video file.
That was my reaction too. I can't see any use at all for this as a rendered video...?
239
« on: August 18, 2018, 10:50 »
Its just that they never seem to say if with the rates they've negotiated how much will i end up making after the 15% goes to them. The other question is on timelines. If i send something today how long before it is live, a week, a month?
Sign up for an account with them. Costs nothing and you are not committed to actually submitting any media. Once you have the account, you can read their very much in-depth discussion of those questions, among many others. Specifically, they tell you how much you will make on a video sale from an agency on your own vs through them. (short answer, they claim your net $ paid is higher through them, and they supply specific numbers)
240
« on: August 17, 2018, 20:26 »
As usual, well done! I particularly like that last clip you showed. Interesting combination of effects makes the result more interesting than the typical cinemagraph.
241
« on: August 17, 2018, 17:15 »
@derby:
Their "special agreement" (we are both speculating here) could very well be higher commission for higher number of sales, perhaps even ratcheting up as sales increase, the way my photo commission does (I am on the third tier for those). It does not necessarily include any "automatic acceptance of media supplied." In fact, I would be surprised if it did...
" if I should go to give them my port there should be good reasons not to go by myself: higher percentage of sells, quick review without expecting rejections, and so on"
How about: You get the same rejections you would on your own (no better, no worse), but you show up higher in search because you are part of a bigger team, and you get higher dollars per sale because the "team" gets a larger increase than their cut of the take?
To me, that would seem like enough reason to go with BB.
Again, though, I am not (yet) selling through BB and this is mostly speculative. However, if indeed they can raise me in the search rankings plus give me more dollars per end-user sale, then I will seriously consider using them.
242
« on: August 17, 2018, 14:21 »
I hear a lot of speculation, and most of it does not make any sense to me at all.
Why does BB claim they get a higher commission? Because, with more videos available, they presumably sell (or at least are projecting selling) more videos than any of us individually would. If I sell more photos on SS, I get paid more. I don't think that is explicitly stated (would have to check again to be sure) for videos, but I'll bet there is room there for that same arrangement in videos.
As for their small number of sales so far. Yeah, and why would you expect otherwise? BB said their portfolio increased 4X just in the month of June 2018. They said it was accelerating even faster in July, as word got out about them. They are a new company and building portfolio fast. Those who sell video here have often said that video does not sell quickly, and that it often takes many months or even more than a year to get the first sale from a clip. If 80% or more of their stock is less than 30 days old, how would you expect higher sales yet?
Complaint that the same number of videos is not on every agency? Well, do you have 100% acceptance on your media? Have you never had media accepted on one be rejected on another? That alone could easily account for the number difference. Add the fact that the portfolio is very new, and the turnaround for reviewing video is much longer than photos, and I think the rest of the difference is easily explained.
I have no axe to grind either way. I am not (yet) selling on BB. I don't know squat about them other than their web site and what has been discussed here. It just seems there is a lot of frothing at the mouth here with not a whole lot of thought going on behind the volume...
243
« on: August 16, 2018, 18:10 »
Hopefully mine will come soon too then. I was already over 300 when they announced this incentive, and have had more than 300 additional approved since then. I would have thought that would put me near the head of the line?
Of course, no real rush as I have had the cloud photo subscription for years, and this will just tack onto end of the current sub. Still, will nice to have an extra $120 earned from Adobe, and I'd like to know that it really came and the code didn't get sucked up in some spam bucket I overlooked...
244
« on: August 16, 2018, 16:49 »
I am now getting reviews in about 30 hours, vs the 2 hours I was getting up to a week ago. Still plenty fast. A year from now, I will not remember that it took an extra day at the front. Not sure why people get so freaked out over minor delays in getting images up that will presumably be selling for years...? OTOH, BigStock is my biggest problem. Not from delays, but from major bugs in their web submission. If you select more than one image, then ONLY set the category, the buggy site changes EVERYTHING to match. You end up with the same title, description, keywords. Everything! They have known about this bug for at least 4 months, which is when tech support told me they knew about it and were "working to fix it." They told me the workaround was to only submit one image at a time. Yeah, right. I have roughly 1000 images to upload to them, and they want me to do one at a time because they are too sloppy to fix such an obvious and major bug in 4 months??? No, thank you. BS simply hasn't gotten anything from me in that time, and from the looks of it, may never again. 
245
« on: August 11, 2018, 19:57 »
@ShadySue - I am pretty sure the phrase he intended is more along the lines of "There is no opportunity to get good, honest feedback on my portfolio locally."
Whenever using Google Translate, you have to allow for some approximations in language...
246
« on: August 07, 2018, 01:19 »
My guess is that the reviewer looked at the pattern on the shirt, decided it was "original art" and wants a release as a result.
Your options (as i see them) are:
1) Move on, ignore this agency for this photo, and submit to other agencies (I doubt that will be rejected by many agencies if that is the reason).
2) Try to submit again and see if you get the same results. Personally, unless i am Really Sure the image is a winner (and i am of usually wrong about which of my images will sell...), I would choose #1.
247
« on: August 06, 2018, 00:33 »
There are several home exchange sites available where you might want to float your idea.
I did a home exchange with a couple from Istanbul for 3 months a couple years ago. Offer came out of the blue over Facebook (in response to a farewell post i made to a house sitting forum, when I realized that was not what I was after). Worked out like a charm for both of us.
I live in a penthouse in the Old Town of Cuenca, Ecuador, and would definitely be interested in such an exchange. Though I have a studio, it is not really set up for model shoots (more for product and the like), and it is actually one room I normally have locked up tight if doing a home exchange (our computers, cameras, etc are locked up in there).
We have been to Madrid, but only as a tourist stop of a few days. Would definitely be interested in staying there longer (as we did in Istanbul). Let me know if this would interest you (or others reading this, in other parts of the world -- we have visited 75 countries so far, returning from Namibia and Botswana just yesterday, with a month in India in February for Holi, and another trip planned for October to Vermont for Fall Colors).
248
« on: June 28, 2018, 21:23 »
That has not been my experience. I sell old stuff (as far back as 2010 when I first started uploading) and new stuff (sold within a few days of uploading). In fact, my sales are all over the map, both in terms of timeframe uploaded and in terms of subject matter.
I am selling landscapes (one uploaded last August has sold continuously 40+ times per month), butterflies (uploaded in my very first batch in 2010), India street scenes (uploaded May of this year), scenes of Broadway lit billboards (uploaded also in May), eagle hunters (uploaded last Fall), Galapagos birds (from 2005), Dubai camel race training (again May this year), Panama hat making (2016), Icelandic horses (2015), lots of Cuba cars (last December), etc, etc.
No rhyme or reason that I can see, and no pattern of age...
249
« on: June 04, 2018, 12:31 »
You should have insisted he not call you again and then hung up.
If you are uncomfortable, that is the exact right response. The "not answering the phone when he calls" is the exact WRONG response. The caller does not know that you are there and refusing to answer, so he keeps calling. That just makes you more nervous and concerned. Just communicate your desires and be done with it. If he keeps calling after that, then just say "I DO NOT WANT TO TALK TO YOU ANY MORE. PLEASE STOP CALLING" and hang up. Only an obtuse moron would continue after hearing that (OK,maybe after hearing it twice...)
250
« on: June 04, 2018, 03:13 »
Not quite sure how to interpret these results. Surprised you didn't start with your own results...??
At any rate, I have an iMac Pro. 10 CPUs. 128 GB RAM. I turned off the main upload for this (Backblaze trying to upload 6TB of files...), but still have other things running in the background. Here is what the benchmark gave me --
Last login: Sun Jun 3 17:14:04 on console
Burts-iMac-Pro:~ burt$ /Users/burt/Downloads/NeatBench ; exit;
Neat Bench (Neat Image 8.4.0, Neat Video 4.7.4) x64
Copyright (c) 1999-2018 Neat Image team, Neat Video team, ABSoft.
All Rights Reserved.
Log will be saved to /Users/burt/NeatBenchLog 2018-06-04 03-10-14.txt
GPU detection log:
Looking for NVIDIA CUDA-capable devices...
Failed to load CUDA driver ("/usr/local/cuda/lib/libcuda.dylib")
If you use an NVIDIA card, please install the latest CUDA driver from NVIDIA.
Looking for AMD OpenCL-capable devices...
OpenCL driver version: 20180315.215937
OpenCL initialized successfully.
Checking OpenCL GPU #1:
GPU device name is: AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 Compute Engine
16368 MB available during initialization
Check passed - will attempt to use the device
Neat Video benchmark:
Frame Size: 1920x1080 progressive
Bitdepth: 8 bits per channel
Mix with Original: Disabled
Temporal Filter: Enabled
Quality Mode: Normal
Radius: 2 frames
Dust and Scratches: Disabled
Slow Shutter: Disabled
Spatial Filter: Enabled
Quality Mode: Normal
Frequencies High, Mid, Low
Artifact Removal: Enabled
Detail Recovery: Disabled
Edge Smoothing: Disabled
Sharpening: Disabled
Detecting the best combination of performance settings:
running the test data set on up to 20 CPU cores and on up to 1 GPU
AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 Compute Engine: 16368 MB currently available, using up to 100%
CPU only (1 core): 2 frames/sec
CPU only (2 cores): 4.26 frames/sec
CPU only (3 cores): 5.85 frames/sec
CPU only (4 cores): 7.63 frames/sec
CPU only (5 cores): 9.35 frames/sec
CPU only (6 cores): 10.9 frames/sec
CPU only (7 cores): 12.8 frames/sec
CPU only (8 cores): 14.1 frames/sec
CPU only (9 cores): 15.4 frames/sec
CPU only (10 cores): 16.7 frames/sec
CPU only (11 cores): 16.7 frames/sec
CPU only (12 cores): 16.7 frames/sec
CPU only (13 cores): 17.2 frames/sec
CPU only (14 cores): 17.5 frames/sec
CPU only (15 cores): 17.9 frames/sec
CPU only (16 cores): 17.9 frames/sec
CPU only (17 cores): 17.5 frames/sec
CPU only (18 cores): 17.5 frames/sec
CPU only (19 cores): 17.9 frames/sec
CPU only (20 cores): 16.9 frames/sec
GPU only (AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 Compute Engine): 11.5 frames/sec
CPU (1 core) and GPU (AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 Compute Engine): 9.9 frames/sec
CPU (2 cores) and GPU (AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 Compute Engine): 8.06 frames/sec
CPU (3 cores) and GPU (AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 Compute Engine): 10.2 frames/sec
CPU (4 cores) and GPU (AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 Compute Engine): 12 frames/sec
CPU (5 cores) and GPU (AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 Compute Engine): 13.3 frames/sec
CPU (6 cores) and GPU (AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 Compute Engine): 13.5 frames/sec
CPU (7 cores) and GPU (AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 Compute Engine): 17.2 frames/sec
CPU (8 cores) and GPU (AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 Compute Engine): 17.5 frames/sec
CPU (9 cores) and GPU (AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 Compute Engine): 17.2 frames/sec
CPU (10 cores) and GPU (AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 Compute Engine): 18.5 frames/sec
CPU (11 cores) and GPU (AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 Compute Engine): 18.2 frames/sec
CPU (12 cores) and GPU (AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 Compute Engine): 18.2 frames/sec
CPU (13 cores) and GPU (AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 Compute Engine): 17.9 frames/sec
CPU (14 cores) and GPU (AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 Compute Engine): 17.9 frames/sec
CPU (15 cores) and GPU (AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 Compute Engine): 18.2 frames/sec
CPU (16 cores) and GPU (AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 Compute Engine): 17.5 frames/sec
CPU (17 cores) and GPU (AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 Compute Engine): 17.2 frames/sec
CPU (18 cores) and GPU (AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 Compute Engine): 16.9 frames/sec
CPU (19 cores) and GPU (AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 Compute Engine): 16.4 frames/sec
CPU (20 cores) and GPU (AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 Compute Engine): 15.4 frames/sec
Best combination: CPU (10 cores) and GPU (AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 Compute Engine)
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
