|
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 - Not Today
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14
276
« on: December 04, 2018, 09:03 »
277
« on: December 04, 2018, 08:56 »
Just wait till after Brexit, they'll probably disappear.
278
« on: December 04, 2018, 06:55 »
Best to do it on laptop, as you'd need to upload the files from there to avoid heavy phone compression anyway.
279
« on: December 03, 2018, 09:22 »
Maybe a stupid question... where can you see how many files you've uploaded this year?
If you click on one image from your portfolio you can see the date when it is accepted. Every screen has 100 images, so it is easy to scroll the screens...
Thanks, that works! 
280
« on: December 03, 2018, 04:00 »
Ted Baker staff launch petition over 'forced hugging'
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-46417578
What a crazy time we're living in.
So when this kind of things come up, and you happen to have a photo of people hugging in the office. Would you go back to change your keywords to 'forced hugging'? Just an idea but not sure if that's worth it.
281
« on: December 03, 2018, 03:27 »
You can always try to contact DepositPhotos support to see if they have an alternative. If they have an option to download files individually, they might have one to download everything at once. Otherwise, you can always do it one by one, and metadata should still be in the photos given you've added it to the files before uploading them. Time consuming, but if you set a goal to download 100 per day, you'll have 1000 in 10 days. 
282
« on: December 01, 2018, 13:38 »
Wow I've got commercial videos with status pending since the 11th of April 2018 and editorial photos since the 15th of October 2018 in there. No issue with commercial photos, all the recent ones from the last weeks have been reviewed.
Do we need to email them when it takes too long?
283
« on: December 01, 2018, 12:58 »
Why worry? Your files are on other sites so if someone wants them, they'll need to buy them there.
At one time iS would likely have rejected any font you didn't design yourself, and more recently, they'd have rejected what you described as being "too simplistic". At the low selling rate there nowadays, they can't pay for detailed inspection so probably just tell inspectors just to reject quotations - they can't afford inspector time for research.
Finally, back in the day, I had a file rejected for having the name of the town visible. It was really small, but I had to remove it (prior to them accepting editorial). I questioned it on the forum and was told to my astonishment that the town name might be copyrighted. I couldn't imagine such a scenario, and anyway the town has had that name since at least the 11th century. But blanket rejections on town names.
Just move on.
Sad but true, the town name wouldn't be copyrighted as such, but the council holds copyright over every single street sign in the city, including a sign with the town name on it (at least that's how it works in the UK, not sure about the US)
284
« on: December 01, 2018, 12:30 »
Seems that some of Aristotle work is still copyrighted in the US until 2023 and 2026 - that might be why then: https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Author:AristotleOtherwise, you should contact iStock support to get more information, or try to resubmit and hope for another reviewer.
285
« on: December 01, 2018, 12:11 »
Did you use the word 'logo' as keyword, title, description?
''The iStock Content Licensing Agreement specifically prohibits clients from using our illustrations as logos (See section 3b: Restricted Uses: No use in Trademark or Logos). Describing your illustration as a logo is extremely misleading for clients as they are not allowed to use iStock illustrations as logos or trademarks. As such, if you use the word logo in your illustration (for example, you type Logo Template as placeholder text), or in your metadata (keywords, description, or title), your file will be declined. This information is also covered in our comprehensive Contributor FAQs site.''
Also
''Read the license that came with your font to ensure it can be used commercially (i.e. sold as a Royalty Free stock illustration). As per our ASA (Artists Supply Agreement), you are responsible for ensuring your submissions dont contain any legal issues. As such, you will need to check the font license to ensure its OK to use it commercially. When in doubt, please contact the font creator or type foundry for clarification.''
And
''All text must be converted to outlines. This is because clients likely dont have the same fonts as you, so editable text boxes in your le will default to a system font (such as Courier). In order to ensure clients are receiving the exact same file they saw on iStock you must convert all your text to outlines. To do this in Adobe Illustrator, just click on your text and go to Type > Create Outlines.''
286
« on: December 01, 2018, 12:00 »
I create some quotes lettering illustration and upload them on several agency and they are accepted on every stock agency. but istock rejected my vector for copyright and trademark issue. how it is possible when I am using perfect font. and quotes are before 1920. they are famous ancient philosophical quotes before 1920. so how there is any copyrigh or trademark problem. if someone have some knowledge about that please describe it. thanks.
Sent from my SM-J200G using Tapatalk
Do you have a link with an example of image you are talking about? Like a link from a different stock website that accepted it? Maybe the quotation is not the copyright issue, but another element in your design. For instance, if you've used reference images, you would need to own the copyright of these, and upload the ref image as well: https://contributors.gettyimages.com/article.aspx?article_id=5190
287
« on: December 01, 2018, 03:47 »
- Few years ago iStock began to accept anything (except images with potential problem with copyright)
- Then Dreamstime did the same
- Since one year Shutterstock does the same (and even accepts tons of double similar images - sometimes like single frames taken from a video)
- On Alamy, as I remember I never got a rejection, or maybe one or two a year for files under 4MB (not rejected in fact but refused by the system)
And I dont tell about sites like Mostphotos, Picfair and similar
Now I have noticed that Depositphotos does the same.
I you go to the tag rejected and then click resubmit, all your images will be accepted in a couple of days!
Is that the new microstock way??
Yes, all agencies (with the exception of Envato) want to offer the largest database of crap, while at the same time offering a curated 'premium' section to ensure they don't lose their important clients.
288
« on: November 30, 2018, 11:09 »
Greetings.
A video effects and stock footage market called 100wa (100wa.com/en) reached out to me. Does anyone sell video works on stock? Seems like they have some kind of reward payment thing. They offer to pay me upfront if I upload a certain amount of clips, then my future sales will pay back this amount.
Please take a look and tell me what you think.
Thanks and have a great day.
Is this a marketing thread?
This is your first day here and your first post.
It does sound like it.
289
« on: November 30, 2018, 08:08 »
Nice post, but it's a good idea to compare what's trending with what's on the market already (as Sammy mentioned).
On a side note, I do find the monkey relevant in a way, just look at Boris Johnson.
290
« on: November 30, 2018, 06:55 »
291
« on: November 30, 2018, 03:47 »
Maybe a stupid question... where can you see how many files you've uploaded this year?
292
« on: November 29, 2018, 14:56 »
MicroStockr Pro (note missing 'e') will give you that info across all your agencies.
How can it give iS sub sales values before the sub has expired?
I'm intrigued. Although mindstorm maybe missed the fact this topic was created under iStock.
293
« on: November 29, 2018, 11:43 »
Only thing you can do is go to 'My performance > Content Statistics' and you can check which items were viewed and which ones were added to a board. And then compare with previous month to guess your earnings
294
« on: November 29, 2018, 07:01 »
what... ancient philosophical quote before 1920 by ancient philosophers as aristotle and William Shakespeare could be copyrighted or trademark.. please explain how it is possible.
Sent from my SM-J200G using Tapatalk
This came up with a Google search: https://info.legalzoom.com/copyrighted-trademark-phrases-20178.htmlCould be worth double checking if someone else copyrighted it. Better safe than sorry. If not, it could also be a copyrighted name in your keywords?
297
« on: November 27, 2018, 05:01 »
Alamy tell us this
" Pseudonyms with a high click through rate (CTR) will be receiving more zooms relative to views than pseudonyms with a low CTR. This is important information because the ratio of zooms to views is one of the factors that influences your AlamyRank score.
Is CTR my AlamyRank?
No. CTR is just one of the factors that make up your AlamyRank."
I think its a very reasonable assumption that many if not most agencies include this to some extent in their search algorithms.
Yeah Alamy takes it even further as this CTR score affects your whole portfolio/pseudo's image rankings and not just the image itself. Wondering if it's the same with Adobe Stock, would many low ranking images have an impact on your portfolio as a whole?
298
« on: November 26, 2018, 15:48 »
I was responding to this
"everytime buyers search for images and come up with irrelevant results your images get marked down as less relevant" - sorry, do you have an evidence of such thing???"
It is safe to assume that if an image appears in a certain search result, is seen by the customer and not purchased that the image drops lower in the search results. It is best to only add keywords that are relevant to the image. Irrelevant keywords may be considered spam and have a negative effect on both the potential of success for your file and on the customer experience.
-Mat
...Thanks Mat for jumping into this discussion; only you can clarify things which are in mind of AS contributors... However, even good assumptions do not build strong bridges.. I still have a few unclear for me points:
1) Does AS algorithm really punish ("drops lower in the search results") good images because they were viewed but not purchased??? Do you know that any buyer (!!!) before buying an image selects 10 best ones, carefully looks at them, then selects 3 from 10, and then goes to sleep, next morning, he/she has to do a hard task, to select 1 from 3 and buy it... Though, in other words, AS assigns less weights to those poor 9 images, because they were viewed but not purchased? Do I understand it correctly?
2) What does it have to do with bad, spam, fishing keywording? You name it... Because, if a buyer is looking for an apple, but a page with 100 results shows him/her 1 peach, in 99% the buyer even will not look at it, no clicks, no views, you have no data to work with, and the algorithm has no idea, why peach was not viewed, is that because bad keywords, or because some other 100+ parameters: colors, background, composition, crop... In other words, it is extremely difficult task to look into "black matter" of buyers mentality and predict their behavior...
3) I think the best way, and, probably, the only way, to fight spammers and fishers is to use an image recognition system, an AI (there are a lot of them already in the market), and delete the most irrelevant keywords at the stage of submitting your content... SS is already doing this... I think AS is already using a kind of this artificial intelligence (AI) software, because it can recognize duplicates or very similar content in your portfolio and reject them for submission... The same should be done for keywords!!!
1) I personally purchase photos and videos regularly for video editing purpose for my clients, and I don't have the luxury to go to sleep and select what I want the next day or the day after... because deadline. Usually if I see something I like in the first pages, I just buy it and get on with my work. Sometimes I might need approval for specific projects so I'll copy the links and send them to the client so he can choose the ones he likes best, but definitely I'm not going to pick something because it's pretty and not relevant.
2) View means appear in search results. So your 'peach' will go down in ranking if it keeps appearing for 'apple' search in the search results but that is not the only factor taken in consideration in the algorithm, that would be too easy to cheat the system, it's a mix of sales, clicks and views, among many other things.
3) I wouldn't trust AI softwares at this point, it's not accurate enough and can't always recognise properly what's in the image let alone video.
...yes, that's what I meant, between searching, selection and purchasing there are many things happening, some go to sleep, some show content to clients or project leaders, some buy instantly cause they have money, so they buy whatever they like for their own database for 100+ projects in mind... However, what I wanted to stress here is that buyers do not buy content based on how well keywords match to their search strategy/expectations... they buy on basis of the particular image likeness, attractiveness, technical and aesthetic quality, and how well it fits to the project...
...your second point I did not get: how on earth algorithm knows that there is a peach actually in the image but not an apple and it should not be in the search results? The peach with "apple" in keywords will be shown in the "apple" search results, but machine thinks it is an apple .. and there will be 10000+ more unseen, unviewed unclicked truly apples, by your hypothesis, they should be all punished, because they were in search results but not viewed... unless there is image recognition which will tell the script the peach is not matching to the apple, let's punish only the peach... Do you understand what I mean?
...well, if you never tried Google image/place recognition service, I suggest to try it, you will be astonished how accurate it is...
Let's say if 100 people search for 'apple' and nobody clicks on or buys your 'peach' image, your image becomes irrelevant, and goes down in ranking. All the other images of apples in the same situation will also be 'punished' if you want to call it that - they are not relevant in the sense that nobody wants them, so they will also go down in rankings. Back to your Waterfall image for instance, every time someone looks for actual photos of Sea or Flowers as the main subject, and scroll past your photo without clicking on it or buying it, your photo will go down in ranking. So it's a gamble, you might attract a random buyer who's in love with your photo while they were actually looking for something else, but in the meantime, every time someone isn't in love with it, your photo will go down.. until it's buried under photos of other contributors. Is it worth the risk?
299
« on: November 26, 2018, 14:52 »
I was responding to this
"everytime buyers search for images and come up with irrelevant results your images get marked down as less relevant" - sorry, do you have an evidence of such thing???"
It is safe to assume that if an image appears in a certain search result, is seen by the customer and not purchased that the image drops lower in the search results. It is best to only add keywords that are relevant to the image. Irrelevant keywords may be considered spam and have a negative effect on both the potential of success for your file and on the customer experience.
-Mat
...Thanks Mat for jumping into this discussion; only you can clarify things which are in mind of AS contributors... However, even good assumptions do not build strong bridges.. I still have a few unclear for me points:
1) Does AS algorithm really punish ("drops lower in the search results") good images because they were viewed but not purchased??? Do you know that any buyer (!!!) before buying an image selects 10 best ones, carefully looks at them, then selects 3 from 10, and then goes to sleep, next morning, he/she has to do a hard task, to select 1 from 3 and buy it... Though, in other words, AS assigns less weights to those poor 9 images, because they were viewed but not purchased? Do I understand it correctly?
2) What does it have to do with bad, spam, fishing keywording? You name it... Because, if a buyer is looking for an apple, but a page with 100 results shows him/her 1 peach, in 99% the buyer even will not look at it, no clicks, no views, you have no data to work with, and the algorithm has no idea, why peach was not viewed, is that because bad keywords, or because some other 100+ parameters: colors, background, composition, crop... In other words, it is extremely difficult task to look into "black matter" of buyers mentality and predict their behavior...
3) I think the best way, and, probably, the only way, to fight spammers and fishers is to use an image recognition system, an AI (there are a lot of them already in the market), and delete the most irrelevant keywords at the stage of submitting your content... SS is already doing this... I think AS is already using a kind of this artificial intelligence (AI) software, because it can recognize duplicates or very similar content in your portfolio and reject them for submission... The same should be done for keywords!!!
1) I personally purchase photos and videos regularly for video editing purpose for my clients, and I don't have the luxury to go to sleep and select what I want the next day or the day after... because deadline. Usually if I see something I like in the first pages, I just buy it and get on with my work. Sometimes I might need approval for specific projects so I'll copy the links and send them to the client so he can choose the ones he likes best, but definitely I'm not going to pick something because it's pretty and not relevant. 2) View means appear in search results. So your 'peach' will go down in ranking if it keeps appearing for 'apple' search in the search results but that is not the only factor taken in consideration in the algorithm, that would be too easy to cheat the system, it's a mix of sales, clicks and views, among many other things. 3) I wouldn't trust AI softwares at this point, it's not accurate enough and can't always recognise properly what's in the image let alone video.
300
« on: November 26, 2018, 14:39 »
Describe only what is in the image not what is imagined by you ~ its just spamming
I love this justification "flowers" they are there, you can not see them because of image resolution..." ~ good grief what nonsense
Imagining that something will get a sale for the 43 keywords that are not searched, or something that's not in the image is also nonsense. What buyer wants an image of something that's not there? 
I think that some people, since the beginning of microstock, are convinced that they can sell images, based on just being seem. Like putting apple for a photo of a tomato in case the buyer likes the image and decides to download it. No really! People have said just that. Someone tell me, if you are searching for a photo of an apple, don't you search for apple? Not tomato, because you might randomly see something so attractive, you just can't resist downloading a file you don't want or don't need?
Lol I'm gonna take a POV shot of my shoes and tag it 'aerial', I'm sure it will sell, they're very nice shoes.
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
