|
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
Pages: 1 ... 212 213 214 215 216 [217]
5401
« on: February 16, 2011, 08:42 »
And also to remind them to pay in time. I asked for a payment on Feb, 2nd and I am still waiting. In addition to their delay in reporting sales, this is annoying.
One of the good things of microstock in general - compared to real world clients - is that they used to pay without having to remind them over and over. But this is not happening anymore lately.
And your are going to wait a little longer... Why? Because of this little gem hidden on page 12 of this thread:
Got this late this afternoon:
"... Starting in 2011, payment requests will be processed once a month, on the last Friday of each month.
We sincerely apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused and wish you all a peaceful time during this festive season.
Thank you.
The StockXpert Team."
But it ain't money -or its timely delivery - that's making us happy, is it?  
This plain pisses me off. I have Dec and Jan still pending. "It's my money and I want it NOW!" to coin a TV commercial.
5402
« on: February 16, 2011, 08:39 »
Try logging in and out to both sites a few times. It seems to be popping up intermittently...
It's only for high performing ports, selective. No nearly everyone will be invited. Only a few high performance artists will be invited (for now, per SS admin). I'm already on both anyway but I bet invitees who do it get preferred placement in the search.
5403
« on: February 16, 2011, 08:36 »
I had the same problem on Friday and ended up having to use the Http upload. Which was kind of a pain with 30 images, but better than nothing.
Same here. Sometimes FTP works, like last weekend. Uploaded 26 images no problem. Before that, I had to use the 10 max upload. It's hit and miss with BigStock's FTP system.
5404
« on: February 16, 2011, 08:33 »
Still amazes me that everyone wants StockFresh to be different, to stand out in microstock and maybe become a major contender, and yet they expect the company to also operate in exactly the same way as other companies.
I'm one of the folks on the SF bandwagon, hoping that they become a major player in microstock because I think they offer the buyers a refreshing, simple, no B.S. way to buy images, while the competition is going the other way with overly complicated and bug-ridden search engines, increasing prices, and wildly varied price points.
That said, I don't expect SF to ever make a dent in this business if they were to do things exactly like every other company. If that means that they are a little more demanding with image reviews, more likely to reject stuff, take a bit longer to review applications, reject more applications, etc., then I'm fine with that.
If SF just did everything the same way the other companies do, there would be folks in here whining about how SF looks just like every other microstock company.
I say SF should just keep doing what they're doing. Have at it, Peter. I think you should reject more images, mine included. I don't expect you to accept some of the older stuff that I've managed to slide past reviewers elsewhere. I'd rather see SF have 1 million really strong images than 7 million of the exact same stuff other companies already have. Especially when it comes to older stuff. Anything from 2009 and earlier should be rejected.
This is where I stand. I think they have a chance to become a moderate player to maybe even become the BIG 5 (as opposed to the big four). Time. Learn their system. Work with them on your images rejections, but first remember to zoom in at 100 percent. I had some old images rejected for out of focus and when I opened up the image they were slightly soft. In the old days that was acceptable. Today it's not. So image you have that sell will today may be older images that aren't perfect, so they will get rejected by today's standards. I didn't bother re-uploading those rejected images.
5405
« on: February 15, 2011, 19:14 »
That does not happen anymore at SS. The BOOST you used to get was changed a couple of years ago. It's now much harder to make money there, way more images to compete with and a glut of them I might add. The good ol' days are over. It's quality, usefulness and volume.
5406
« on: February 15, 2011, 19:09 »
I dumped them a few years ago. Don't regret it at all.
5407
« on: February 14, 2011, 08:59 »
No, it is not. Excessive white/blank space will only increase artificially your image size, and thus become more expensive to customers w/o actually having any usable contents. Please crop your images in a reasonable way prior to your submissions. Hope this helps.
Well, I am using a Nikon D700 10 mp full frame camera. I will crop it until it meets the min requirements, go from there. Thanks
5408
« on: February 13, 2011, 09:47 »
Well 99.9% of my rejections are "Too many photos/illustrations on the same subject or from the same series" This drive me crazy.
I can understand rejected for noise, lighting... etc but this is nonsense
This was refused 
and this was accepted 
Thinking to give up and delete my port if it's keep going like this. I don't see any point to submit pictures anymore unless something change.
One thing you might do is to send in only one image with the bulls eye solid red, then in your description put in text that explains how a designer might use this image. Add some keywords relative to the image use (assuming you can sneak "jobs", "work" etc by the inspectors. Make sure you use "copy space" in your keywords as well and also in your description since DT search uses image descriptions in addition to keywords.
5409
« on: February 13, 2011, 09:37 »
No, it is not. Excessive white/blank space will only increase artificially your image size, and thus become more expensive to customers w/o actually having any usable contents. Please crop your images in a reasonable way prior to your submissions. Hope this helps.
I just sent DT a ticket on one of my pending images because it violates their white space rules. But when I crop it the file size does not meet their minimum file size requirements to be accepted, so it gets kicked out of the editing queue. So I am in a quandary but am confident DT will give me the right advice or allow me to crop the image to a point where it is large enough to meet their size requirements but chips away at the excessive white space.
5410
« on: February 13, 2011, 09:17 »
Alamy is a quirky site but like others have said they make it right in the end. Sales are spotty at best but I make $2500 to $3000 a year there, so that in and of itself makes it worth uploading there. They are not totally like Fotolia or Istock but they have cut commissions in the past. It's now 60% for contributor instead of 65%. I can envision another cut coming down the pipeline soon. The commission cut was because "we are expanding operations in the U.S." but they can spin it anyway they want. However, 60% of $300 is better than 60% of $3 in my book.
5411
« on: February 13, 2011, 09:10 »
Every site has their own quirks. I've had a bunch of images rejected for "bad background" when in fact they are pure white isolations. I believe that some of their inspectors are inexperienced. Other rejected for "needs property release" when the image was shot CLEARLY from a distance in public domain. So it's taking a bit to adjust to their way of doing business. Now, here's how I have dealt with them on high rejections. If you disagree with a rejection, fill out their "contact us" form and itemize each rejected image and why you think the rejection is unfair. The owner (I forget his name) is very fair about this. He sends them to another inspector who reads your notes and makes a final decision. I have had heavy moving images rejected on Stockfresh and point that out to them. Most (but not all) have been overturned. It's more of a pain in the ass to do it this way but if you believe that Stockfresh will eventually evolve into a decent ROI microsite then it's best to spend the time to maximize your port. They are new and will surly improve as them grow (we hope they'll grow anyway).
Also, I get 50 images per day, not 25. Maybe they've changed the rules. Out of about 1900 images I have more than 200 to go....so it's been months since I've started uploading. I upload based on open time only.
So as a whole the owner gets it if you're willing to work their system they way it currently stands.
5412
« on: February 08, 2011, 08:35 »
The fact that you are non exclusive means most inspectors punish you by kicking images back to you if they aren't "PERFECT" in every way, including keywords. They could easily remove them for you and increase inspector productivity because there would be far fewer images re-populating the queue. The DO remove keywords for exclusives and don't kick the file back (reject it) unless it has problems with the image itself. Seems caddywhompus but it's their way to offer a slight incentive to being exclusive.
5413
« on: February 06, 2011, 09:32 »
You don't have to wait for the forms to do your taxes. All you need to know is your annual income from microstock and make sure you report it on your taxes. Keep the 1099 in your tax folder in case you get audited. I do it that way every year.
Wow. I didn't know that. I always wait to get the forms, even though I keep meticulous records about my earnings. Some of the sites don't 1099 anyway, so it is best to keep your own records.
Hello Lisa, To be fair, I suppose that if you don't keep any records and don't want to sift through each sites' earnings pages then you must wait for the 1099's. As you've said those (like me and you) who keep monthly records of each site can get away with it. At the advice of my accountant, he just reminds me to maks sure I attach the 1099's to my return when I file it away pending any autits....OH MAN...did I just say AUDIT?? Let's hope not!!!!!
5414
« on: February 05, 2011, 20:54 »
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=298792&page=1
Have to say I'm not very excited. Wish they would hold off on new features until they've fixed the ones that are broken.
Lots of wooyahs however
My sentiments EXACTLY. I am amazed at their lack of operational planning skills. All it's done is pissed off contributors, buyers, driven fraud through their system, soak contributor income that's pipelined to Getty and it won't end. Trust me. I like Istock (or liked them a while back) but they are the most discombobulated organization I've seen in a long time. Danny Devito
5415
« on: February 05, 2011, 20:41 »
1 week is the usual, you can use also deepmeta to upload (google it)
Yes aweek is usual when things are working over there, but two weeks should be expected now and then. Also I stopped using Deep Meta because they all get upped at the same time and most go to the same inspector. If they have a hard on about your images you get LOTS of rejections. As soon as I went back to the single upload process (a royal pain, I'll admit) I went back to the normal 80 percent acceptance rate, wheras 50-60 % was typical with Deep Meta. Just my experience, of course. Others may vary. Maxwell Smart
5416
« on: February 05, 2011, 20:35 »
Just wait. They have itchy trigger fingers over there when you don't follow their rules.
5417
« on: February 05, 2011, 20:29 »
Interesting because there is SOOOOO MUCHHHHH JUNK on SS and your image is very interesting and well composed for copy. I get very frustrated at seeing some of the point and shoot "studio junk" some of their contributors get accepted. Wait a week and reup in hopes of a different inspector. By the way, the other thing that bothers me about LCV is that are all inspectors designers? NOPE! So what makes them the expert? At least at Istock they take pretty much anything as long as it meets their tough standards. Why? They are smart enough to know that designer needs are endless.
Agent 99
5418
« on: February 02, 2011, 18:52 »
Istock is announcing tomorrow another pay cut to pay for this new VP.
5419
« on: January 30, 2011, 16:15 »
You don't have to wait for the forms to do your taxes. All you need to know is your annual income from microstock and make sure you report it on your taxes. Keep the 1099 in your tax folder in case you get audited. I do it that way every year.
5420
« on: January 30, 2011, 10:56 »
Overall I am down 10% on 2009, having increased my portfolio by 17%. Which to be honest, is less of a drop than I expected. Like Gostwyck mentioned, I did pretty well the first few months of the year, but started seeing a downward trend mid year where sales were less than the same month of 2009.
I have always been heavily reliant on Istock, so the instability there has very seriously affected my overall sales. Shutterstock, Fotolia, and even Bigstock all saw gains for me, but they were not enough to compensate for the drop in sales at Istock. And unlike exclusives, the drops in sales numbers were NOT compensated by hikes in prices.
Lisa, Same here. My last quarter at IS was horrible (down 25% in $) and it continues through today. So I have five straight months of lower sales at IS and I don't anticipate as a non exclusive it will improve for me much even though I uploaded 500 new images in 2010. Alamy has bailed me out with about $3500 in sales AFTER the 60/40 split. So overall I am about even, maybe a little up. Now that Fotolia is screwing their contributors it will make 2011 extremely challenging to beat 2010. I just keep shooting and uploading. Interestingly, on Fotolia after I posted some negative feedback on their forum about the royalty cuts, my ranking went from 1000 to 2000 within a day or two of that post. And my sales have all but stopped. Them and Istock are like the Mafia...you say anything negative about them and they cut your jugular. And your port is amazing, so it's horrible to hear your feedback isn't in the black.
5421
« on: January 30, 2011, 10:38 »
I was on Alamy for many years with no success; they loved my stuff but nothing every sold.
With Alamy, you HAVE TO HAVE VOLUME. They have over 20 million images, albeit a lot of it is junk. And we're talking one-off sales in contrast to Pay as you go packages or subscription. So buyers aren't using Alamy like they do micros in terms of number of buyers and download frequency. Instead they pay $30 to $300 + bucks for one image. Just keep uploading, build volume and make sure you have marketable content. I too enjoy a nice sale now and then but for the most part it's hit and miss...sometimes 6-8 weeks goes by before I get any sales.
5422
« on: January 30, 2011, 10:32 »
While I mainly agree with your observations here, my conclusion - based on current uncertainty across microstock - is against exclusivity.
And if the time will come (and I hope it doesn't) for exclusivity, it's better to already have our full port everywhere.
That's the key. Upload everywhere in anticipation that consolidation will occur. I've pulled my port from a few sites but regret it today because of exactly what ^ said.
5423
« on: January 21, 2011, 20:14 »
I pulled my portfolio quite awhile ago. I had about 2,000 images and dint make a freakin dime in 1 year. Waste of time.
Pages: 1 ... 212 213 214 215 216 [217]
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
