|
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 - Mantis
5276
« on: June 16, 2011, 18:01 »
Sorry to say, but I think rejection was justified...
He doesn't look like crying to me. he does not look depressed (He is smiling!). Can't see any signs of violence, pain or illness either... Maybe there is a tear in his eye, but the facial expression and body language looks pretty positive to me.
Have to agree. If he's crying at all, it's maybe because he's had a nice surprise.
Or cutting onions 
5277
« on: June 16, 2011, 17:59 »
till now i haven't receive may 2011 payment. i got an email on may 6, it said my payment have been computed and will be send by 15th may 2011 to my moneybookers, but then i change to paypal, because my moneybookers is no longer active, so i send email to request payment to my paypal. i email them but no respond till now. can anyone help?
Sure! For a 50% commission
5278
« on: June 16, 2011, 17:57 »
I just went and looked at a batch of 30 images I uploaded mid May. Some have zero views, most have 1 view and the best was 4 views. Before they made that last tweak I got a lot of views. My sales have tanked there from $150-160ish to $60-$75 bucks a month. Really sucks. I am still going to keep uploading for the next time they tweak the best match in my favor 
5279
« on: June 16, 2011, 07:35 »
Good for Yuri. Reading this it does look like he is going to run a traditional micro and use his brand to drive sales. However, I am betting that he will keep his stuff on other micros that's already there and then create an "Exclusive" Yuri collection for his site.
5280
« on: June 14, 2011, 19:52 »
It is a very discouraging time in microstock; none of the agencies are offering happy faces. 
Rejections at Dreamstime and Shutterstock; nothing selling at BS and CC; and the really infuriating results (for me) at iStock. I just had three consecutive sales giving me .... 10 cents, 14 cents, and 18 cents.
Makes the Dreamstime Level Zero stuff look pretty good. 
But not if it's a collage. For that you have to divide the sales price by the number of images in that collage to get your true RPI. So an old 20 cent subscription for a four image collage will get you .05 cents (before taxes)  per image. Hardly fair. Microstock seems to have a similar relationship as that of a toilet the Coriolis effect.
5281
« on: June 12, 2011, 07:35 »
Well before you gays go gathering from your hard rive, see this
Don't know about the others but I'm not gay
ROFLMAO...REALLY!!! That is freakin hilarious.
5282
« on: June 11, 2011, 14:13 »
nope
5283
« on: June 11, 2011, 08:36 »
So refreshing to see an honest answer, unlike some other new sites that promised lots and failed to deliver. I'm sure lots of people wont have the patience to stick this out but I'm going to give them as long as it takes.
^^ Same here.
5284
« on: June 11, 2011, 07:59 »
http://stockfresh.com/forum/topic/77Nothing mind blowing but people are asking and SF is responding with caution. "I understand your frustration, but we need to build up a customer base essentially from zero, and that takes a while. We are not backed by multi million dollar investments like most agencies, so there won't be instant results. We do plan to become profitable within a year though and if all goes well it's going to happen because our sales are increasing steadily. As I said in the very beginning, what we're doing is quite risky in this market, and there are no guarantees that we'll even survive. We certainly hope we will succeed, but we're trying not to waste contributors' precious time in case we don't. I even import files myself for a number of people. If you feel that submitting is taking up an unreasonable amount of your time, we're not going to blame you for not doing it. We really appreciate the support though!"
5285
« on: June 11, 2011, 07:35 »
Like Dreamstime. I am expecting a bunch of de-activations this month for images that haven't sold in three years. They cull their collection as most of you know.
5286
« on: June 10, 2011, 20:40 »
I don't see any illustration work in your portfolios. Which images did they reject?
http://www.dreamstime.com/stock-photos-gay-image5703013
Well, to be honest, if that's the sort of stuff you're seeing rejected by Shutterstock, I think the rejections are justified. That type of work just isn't going to cut it anymore. And not just at Shutterstock. There are tons of silhouettes on all the sites. Maybe you could get a group of silhouettes approved (9 or more silhouettes in 1 file) but even that may be a stretch.
You definitely need to step it up with your illustrations if you expect to get approvals.
Helix is right. That doesn't align with today's standards. The problem is that although it may be technically acceptable, agencies have to balance content with quality or they end up with a collection of sub par images sprinkled in with their top dawg images. But I say that the inspection process at SS is greatly flawed. Take photos. There is one guy on SS who claims to be the king of stock and he is the worst photographer in general I can think of, yet SS continues to reject good images and accept his junk. There is, in my opinion, a double standard over there. Not a variance in inspectors for him, but favoritism for him. When I look at the crap he gets accepted and the excellent images that get rejected I can only conclude that there is a different set of rules for some photographers. This isn't just one or two images I disagree with. It's been that way for years, that's why he has 10,000 images on line THERE. He can't get accepted anywhere else. If I have 10,000 GOOD images I would certainly take the time to upload on all sites I could. He doesn't. I don't personally know the guy nor do I blame him. I blame Shutterstock for creating that unfair rift and showing clear favoritism.
5287
« on: June 10, 2011, 20:14 »
Another bute from LOBO http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=330440&page=1
Totally insensitive from someone whose salary derives from the contributors he enjoys putting down, but which presumably doesn't fluctuate with the whims of the best match, or reduce because of the policies of the company which is supposed to be representing his interests
I'm a pretty fair and decent person but if he worked for me I would have him in my office for a short discussion, and his response in retrospect would have been quite different. He needs to represent the qualities of the Istock brand, regardless of who touches the process...and he dilutes, in my opinion, brand equity (not that they have much left).
I suspect that he does represent very well the iStock brand of 2010/11. For better or worse.
Okay, true. You got me there.
5288
« on: June 10, 2011, 20:12 »
Why is it that EVERY single topic about Istock these days turns into a mud slinging match at some point?
Maybe because photographers, in general, seem to be a negative and pessimistic bunch of people.
Is it true? I sometimes wonder about it too.
Just human nature. It isn't just photographers, it's everyone and anyone who has a stake in something and that stake gets chopped with an axe. When things are good, we party. When things go bad we bitch...just the way it is.
5289
« on: June 10, 2011, 20:04 »
Another bute from LOBO http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=330440&page=1
Totally insensitive from someone whose salary derives from the contributors he enjoys putting down, but which presumably doesn't fluctuate with the whims of the best match, or reduce because of the policies of the company which is supposed to be representing his interests
I'm a pretty fair and decent person but if he worked for me I would have him in my office for a short discussion, and his response in retrospect would have been quite different. He needs to represent the qualities of the Istock brand, regardless of who touches the process...and he dilutes, in my opinion, brand equity (not that they have much left).
5290
« on: June 10, 2011, 19:21 »
5291
« on: June 10, 2011, 06:44 »
Sales are indeed slow. This little I've picked up in their forums is that they have yet to launch their core campaign, although they've done some test marketing. I've seen their ads on the net. So, in 4-5 months I have managed to muster up somewhere around $30 in sales. Only 10 times that amount and I can go get my next set of toys 
5292
« on: June 10, 2011, 06:39 »
My Fotolia income has dropped from 300 to 400 dollars/mo to 150....200. This month has the potential to be the weakest month since January 2009.
So sad. It seems my avatar predicted even this...
^Nice about your avatar
5293
« on: June 09, 2011, 20:16 »
123 is by far the most difficult site to work with. Their navigation is horrible, their upload process rarely works, assigning releases is a nightmare and, well, sales are stagnant for me.
5294
« on: June 09, 2011, 19:48 »
You have to email them.
5295
« on: June 09, 2011, 17:14 »
My story is that I went from $150 a month to about $60 a month, more than a 50% drop.
5296
« on: June 07, 2011, 16:31 »
Inevitably the traditional micro contributors will be pushed out and into TS and PP. I have been saying this ever since Sept 2010. Every activity is indicative that more change is coming. Just watch....there will be so much competition in the micro collection when they complete the mass induction of agency collections and other Getty contributor ports that the Getty contributors will scream about "too much competition and depressed sales" resulting from superior micro content and Alamy-type volume (x2) that Getty will force the migration of Istocks micro contributors into their sub collections, or tell you to not let the door hit you in the ass on the way out. There will be arguments to the contrary but they have made so many fkd up decisions over there that I am sure are mandated by Getty that I see this scenario happening.
5297
« on: June 04, 2011, 09:48 »
That's an easy enough shot to cut out the sign and drop in your own background. I agree...way too much noise.
5298
« on: June 04, 2011, 08:28 »
they should close the forum and only use it for tech support questions etc as Alamy does.
Nooooo, I think if they got rid of the icon things they would lose half their exclusives. It makes them feel important. Just look, alot of them will dabble in the other media just to pick up the new icon... wooyay
Excellent point. What would IS be without their puerile little cliques, their party-patch scout badges, and their in-crowd cheerleaders? A fair open-market business maybe? Heaven forbid.
I am proud to say that my single little icon is about the color of a bed pan
5299
« on: June 04, 2011, 08:22 »
istock's forum is simply a joke, THIS is the only decent stock forum (micro and not) around.
I couldn't agree more. I've stopped participating altogether at Istock six months ago. Tired of my threads getting locked instantly each and every time I ask a question that is relevant to my future (and happens to be a question about Istock)....such as something along the lines of "where is Istock advertising these days"? Not to hijack this thread but Shutterstock's forum is a joke as well. I mean you have mr. know it all there, you have that guy with 10,000 crappy images who claims to be the king of stock....when he is in fact a laughing stock (he can't get anything accepted anywhere else)....people get pissed off and amazed how he gets his files accepted when legitimate stock images that FAR EXCEED the value and quality of his get rejected.....and contributors are very open about this over there. The on-going political threads rule over there and there's very little discussion about "the industry" and stock in general. The stupid "show me how great you are" threads and "show me your latest download" add absolutely no value other than boosting ones ego. I got fed up with both forums and joined MSG. I like it here, I don't agree with everyone all the time but I also learn different perspectives..... and my mind does get changed with good posts from a lot of you. I've not put anyone on ignore (when we could) because I still want to see what they have to say on other topics. That's what a forum is all about, sprinkled in with some socializing discussions as well. One more thing. I like the tutorials and blogs this site offers and I have used a few in my work (so close my account because I used this guys action . I am about a 3,000 image contributor so I have a good deal of experience but I am certainly open to improve and these blogs and tutorials help me a lot. The other forums really don't offer this...Istock does have some stuff, to be fair.
5300
« on: June 03, 2011, 19:27 »
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
