|
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 - rene
Pages: 1 ... 18 19 20 21 22 [23]
551
« on: November 16, 2007, 05:14 »
I had one 2$ and one 3$ commissions right now. We are in StockXpert world. Way to go (up).  Which microstock site is next ?
552
« on: October 23, 2007, 04:27 »
I'm looking for good P&S too. I'd like to have always a camera with me and DSLR is too heavy.
Maybe Canon Tx1 can be a good choice ? It seems that you can even make stock video with this one.
553
« on: October 21, 2007, 04:38 »
How can you see if one image is available or not for suscription sales ?
I've opt out but I cannot see the difference. There is still subscription information under my photos.
554
« on: October 11, 2007, 07:09 »
Sales: promises, promises, promises. I stopped uploading for now. A year at LO is a typical 2-3 days at SS.
Ditto. I've given them one year and it's over now. I'll better try Albumo et Snapvillage.
555
« on: October 03, 2007, 06:04 »
1 year, 600 photos portfolio and 29 downloads! LO is not for me. I stopped to upload this month. I give them 6 months, if nothing change I' ll delete all my images.
556
« on: August 02, 2007, 03:32 »
Thanks Achilles.
How professional.
FT could do with taking a few customer service lessons from Dreamstime.......
Very professional... and nice blank home page  . I start to worry about all this microstock world. It seems to be little amateurish. No clustering, no fast backup, no informations.
557
« on: July 27, 2007, 09:04 »
63% - 425 files portfolio
558
« on: July 27, 2007, 08:59 »
Thanks, I'll wait 2 weeks before uploading more.
559
« on: July 26, 2007, 06:24 »
I've uploaded 250 files on Albumo and now I'm hesitating to go 1000. What about 250$, is this real money ? Enybody got them ? - in your paypal account I mean . Thanks
560
« on: July 20, 2007, 05:36 »
I've checked my referral credits and something is wrong here. My "total revenue from affiliation" ("Affiliation Credits" tag) is different from a sum of total revenues off all my affiliates ("My Affiliates" tag).
561
« on: July 18, 2007, 05:17 »
None on StockXpert, 2 on SS, 7 on FT, 7 on IS, 1 on 123rf, 1 on DT.
562
« on: July 04, 2007, 11:09 »
I've tried to remove one of my images (just testing). It doesn't work! I've stopped uploading.
It was fixed. They are fast. Now we can remove our images.
563
« on: July 03, 2007, 06:57 »
I know that those with low sales shouldn't throw stones BUT this from their front page has me wondering
"After your images have been uploaded and approved, we'll buy them. Your account will be credited with $25 right away! "
Does we'll buy them mean that they are paying you ten cents an image to use the image however they see fit? Afterall, according to their website thy just "bought" 250 of your images for $25.00
judy
They changed this. Now we read : " After your images have been uploaded and approved your account will be credited with $25 right away! " I've tried to remove one of my images (just testing). It doesn't work! I've stopped uploading.
564
« on: June 29, 2007, 09:54 »
It looks good. For 251 uploaded images you get 25$, it's better then my 7 months on Featurepics, LO and Canstock
565
« on: June 29, 2007, 05:38 »
I did the same thing around Christmas time...bought photos from people who had helped me the most throughout the year. :-)
I did the same (Karimala included ).
566
« on: June 29, 2007, 05:34 »
If you plan on adding photos to the Sideshow after the 90-day trial phase ends, you will need your credits to participate. Each photo added to the Sideshow will cost one credit.
thank you for reply Karimala. That's exactly what I want to do, try the slideshow. But I cannot pay for it - it's against my religion  . I will never pay for selling my photos. I like LO but not this idea.
567
« on: June 28, 2007, 08:54 »
Hi,
I have LO tokens and I don't need them. If you have some credits on LO we can make barter. Just PM me.
568
« on: June 25, 2007, 10:35 »
Hmm,
I start to like this site, and one reason is the prices and second, in fact, you do not need to keyword your files, they do it for you! But you are allowed to.
And I found this in the FAQ:
"Can I create my own titles & keywords?
Sure! Youre welcome to upload titles and keywords, but you dont have to. We know that most of our photographers would rather be out taking pictures than sitting in front of a computer filing out forms so we are willing to do the work for you."
If every agency would do that.. we really would have more time for photography...
Massuploading will be available soon too aparently.
I also found a blog of them:
http://blog.snapvillage.com/
No categories, no titles, no keywords. Great idea, I love Bill 
569
« on: June 21, 2007, 06:58 »
same
570
« on: June 21, 2007, 05:28 »
yes...too lazy to minimize them and too time consuming to do so too.
Not at all. I use xnview (freeware) to downsize hole folder with 2-3 mouse clicks. You can do the same with photoshop's scripts.
571
« on: June 20, 2007, 11:10 »
I have never understood why people downsize images at some places especially at SS.
In my opinion the majority of buyers on SS download photos even if they don't need them. So the size of 4 MP is not a problem. They will buy your photos anyway.
If the buyer need your picture, in 90% of case 4MP is enough. In other case, if he need a huge size picture, he can still find it on another site and you get 3$ and not 0.3$.
Thats a peculiar way of seeing it.
1. It's not a matter of buyers using or not your photos. They see them anyway and they will prefer the higher quality over the lower quality ones.
2. 90% is ok 4mp? not true ..... my vast experience at other sites will tell me that at least 25% of the buyers buy Large+ size. (6mp+)
3. Do you really think a user will go to another site to look for your image at a higher resolution? no mate, Let's be realistic if you find a buyer that wants your photo at a high res and can't find it at SS they will move on and buy another one they are there.
They are not going to search the whole microstock for your photo until they find a suitable size so it's a sale you just've lost.
Low res submissions = lower sales.
Higher Res submissions = more sales
Do you see yuri arcurs, kirsty, liv-friss, and ALL other top submitters downsizing images?
If we are talking about all these isolated strawberries and happy (18 years old) businesswomen (on white) shots you are right. There are hundreds of them. But take a look here : http://www.crestock.com/blog/photography/the-crestock-photography-contest-2007-57.aspxI think that Eco (and others) can get more money if they put small size pictures on one site and huge size on another. There's only one way to be sure, you have to downsize your photos and compare the numbers...
572
« on: June 20, 2007, 07:24 »
I have never understood why people downsize images at some places especially at SS.
In my opinion the majority of buyers on SS download photos even if they don't need them. So the size of 4 MP is not a problem. They will buy your photos anyway. If the buyer need your picture, in 90% of case 4MP is enough. In other case, if he need a huge size picture, he can still find it on another site and you get 3$ and not 0.3$.
573
« on: June 20, 2007, 06:49 »
I downsize to 4MP for SS and 5MP (size L) for IS.
What if SS brought out a minimum 5mp rule (or IS a 6mp minimum) in 18 months time and deleted all your photos.
(note. when one of the agencies, FT?, increased the size from 2mp to 4mp, old users could still upload at 2mp so I am not suggesting this will happen, just a posiblity.
If they delete all my photos... it's a good thing. I can reupload all my images. New files sell much better.
574
« on: June 18, 2007, 10:19 »
I submit hi-res files only to IS, FT, FP, StockXpert and DT. They pay more for bigger size files.
SS, BS, 123, LO get only 4mp photos. For me there's no reason to give more for less money. Another reason : with smaller files I get less rejection (noise, artifacts etc).
Pages: 1 ... 18 19 20 21 22 [23]
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
