|
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 - PaulieWalnuts
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14 ... 120
201
« on: April 21, 2018, 10:00 »
Depends on how sellable your images are as art. I make way more selling art and stock photos direct.
I removed all of my travel images and only sell through my own website as RM or prints, and through a couple other places like FAA. Having images on both micro and art sites you're competing against yourself. If a buyer does an internet search and finds your $30 print on FAA and also for a $1 on micro they will buy the micro image and go print it at Walmart for another $1. You make 30 cents instead of $15.
202
« on: April 07, 2018, 12:22 »
So you bring a treadmill into a coffee shop?
Yes Idiot. I brought a treadmill into a coffeeshop. You drinking again?
I only see this reply now.
Why is this guy allowed to use such an offensive language on this forum?
Where is Leaf?
Seriously? With all the other BS and bad manners going on here, you are singling Laurin out because he used the word idiot? In days past, Ron would have used just as offensive language towards Laurin and everyone else. LOL
Back in the old times Laurin and Ron would have battled until near death. Gladiators, both of them. 
204
« on: March 09, 2018, 12:04 »
My most highly sellable images I only sell through my own business stock/print website or direct to clients at premium prices. Stuff that's oversaturated in micro I submit to micro.
205
« on: February 26, 2018, 21:53 »
Kelly Thompson's rollin in the money
206
« on: February 26, 2018, 21:47 »
Flickr has been around for ages with amazing content given away for attribution only. These are hobbyists, well, thats how it started I think, they have no business in selling photos. So you are preaching to the wrong choir.
Maybe I'm not getting my point across clearly. There are some hobbyists on Flickr who have some fantastic highly sellable work. A lot of them could probably easily license a photo for a few hundred to a few thousand dollars for a single use license. But they give photos away through creative commons or just give them away. Buyers are now used to getting amazing photos for free. If those photographers were taught to sell their work there would be fewer free images available. Essentially people would get used to the fact that there are no more free images and would need to pay for them. As an example, I remember back in the early 2000's there were a bunch of companies offering free dialup internet. The catch was you would need to watch a banner advertisement while the dialup took a minute to grind though the connection process. I saved myself a lot of money per month doing this. That company stopped offering free dialup but I found another. And another. After a while there were no more free ISPs and I had no choice but to pay for internet. Point being, if people are aware there are free options they won't pay. If there are no more free options they have no choice but to pay. Turn hobbyists into sellers.
207
« on: February 24, 2018, 14:32 »
Got contacted by yet another vulture asking for free images in trade for name credit. You can't blame them for trying. If I walked into a gas station and said "LOVE your gas. It's amazing. Could I fill up my tank and in exchange I'll put your company logo in my car window?" and almost all gas stations said yes, I would ask every gas station I went into. And that's the problem. So many photographers say yes that people think it's normal to approach any photographer and ask for free usage.
So I had a thought. What if more photographers were turned into sellers so the answer to vultures would always be no. It would increase competition. Would it also decrease vultures and effectively increase buyers?
I think the answers here to free photo requests, have all been good. If someone wants a free photo, I want some of their service or product free in return. I'll put a compliment on my website and give them credit. I'm sure that they will accept in fair trade, the exposure I give them for the exposure my name on a photo they use will get me. Funny how that usually ends the conversation and they go away.
The answers here on MSG are good. But what about the other gazillion photographers outside of MSG/Stock on Facebook, Instagram, etc who are happily giving stuff away. When you tell the vulture no they move on looking for their next victim. If there were no more victims the vultures would either need to do without or pay up.
208
« on: February 24, 2018, 11:12 »
Got contacted by yet another vulture asking for free images in trade for name credit. You can't blame them for trying. If I walked into a gas station and said "LOVE your gas. It's amazing. Could I fill up my tank and in exchange I'll put your company logo in my car window?" and almost all gas stations said yes, I would ask every gas station I went into. And that's the problem. So many photographers say yes that people think it's normal to approach any photographer and ask for free usage.
So I had a thought. What if more photographers were turned into sellers so the answer to vultures would always be no. It would increase competition. Would it also decrease vultures and effectively increase buyers?
209
« on: February 24, 2018, 09:52 »
Pretty much useless for RF.
I'd agree. Not a Pixsy problem but another disadvantage of RF, subscription, and more specifically using stock companies. The micro stock companies don't provide customer names so how would you know if a photo is licensed or infringed? Even if they did provide names the customer could be a designer who then freely uses each image for dozens of their clients because RF allows nearly unlimited usage. With the huge volume of subscription it would be difficult to keep track of the uses. And most people probably don't register copyrights so what are you going to sue them for? Actual damages of $1? The Pixsy service is probably usable for people who only sell direct from their website, people who don't license images, or obvious infringements like if your watermark is visible. I can't see how this would be usable for micro RF.
210
« on: February 24, 2018, 09:33 »
Yes the end is near but it won't be from a supervolcano.
211
« on: February 18, 2018, 11:05 »
So the answer is 'Yes" you are happy comparing the USA to a third world dingbat state.
So the answer is Yes. It's okay for people and children to be killed in other countries but lets single out the USA. Wow, third world dingbat state? I wonder how many people here live in one of those countries. Seems similar to the statement made by the USA leader you all criticize so much. But let me guess. It's okay for you to say it.
212
« on: February 18, 2018, 10:50 »
Your killing your own children and you're talking about 'what's fashionable' - What is wrong with you people?
There's no other country where people are killing each other?
I have difficulty finding another country -- especially in the West -- where people slaughter so many children at school so often.
Perhaps you can help?
Oh boy. Sure I can help. Why only focus on the West? Has it become acceptable and mainstream for certain countries to slaughter people so let's just ignore them and exclude them from the statistics? Hardly.
Here are some figures by country per 100,000 people which is a reasonable measurement based on percentage of killings by population.
General homicide by all methods. If you sort by homicides it should be no surprise, maybe except for you, that places like El Salvador and Honduras top the list by rate. Even by total count Brazil and India are at the top. It's reasonable to assume children are part of these figures.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate
Killings by firearms. Again, sorting by homicides places like Honduras and Venezuela top that list which shouldn't be a surprise. It's reasonable to assume children are part of these figures.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate
School shootings. You'll notice there are countries on this list other than the United States.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_shooting
The information is there if you decide to look for it. Or you can blindly follow biased news media groups whose goal is to report information in a way that creates the most turmoil/division, gets them better ratings, and makes them more money. There are atrocities happening globally every day. Murder is horrible, Especially children. To say that United States is the only place where people, or children, are "slaughtered" is really naive. All countries have their problems. Quit blindly following the news media and focusing on the United States.
Now that I've presented some figures I fully expect to see responses with statistics being ignored, pivoting away from the topic, and more USA loves killing children drivel. Please proceed. I'll grab some popcorn.
Thanks for the information. I notice that there are far more children slaughtered at schools in the United States than in any other country.
And I"m glad you think it's relevant to compare the US to third-world countries -- many of which are far worse than the US -- rather than other developed democracies, whose gun killings, especiallly at schools, are tiny compared to the US.
So killing children is okay in other countries then. It's only a problem in the USA apparently.
So you are happy comparing the USA to a third world dingbat state.
At least we know where America is heading with 'Make America Great Again'.
What happened to moral leadership?
So what you're saying is "oh those countries kill people and children all the time. We're used to that and it's okay. Let's talk about the USA". Wow. And you want to throw around the word "moral"? Why don't you do something to help those countries reduce their higher rates of murder? Go volunteer. Do something about it. Oh I see. The underlying purpose of this, just like I said, is to bash the USA. Your "make America great again" comment says it all.
213
« on: February 18, 2018, 10:36 »
Your killing your own children and you're talking about 'what's fashionable' - What is wrong with you people?
There's no other country where people are killing each other?
I have difficulty finding another country -- especially in the West -- where people slaughter so many children at school so often.
Perhaps you can help?
Oh boy. Sure I can help. Why only focus on the West? Has it become acceptable and mainstream for certain countries to slaughter people so let's just ignore them and exclude them from the statistics? Hardly.
Here are some figures by country per 100,000 people which is a reasonable measurement based on percentage of killings by population.
General homicide by all methods. If you sort by homicides it should be no surprise, maybe except for you, that places like El Salvador and Honduras top the list by rate. Even by total count Brazil and India are at the top. It's reasonable to assume children are part of these figures.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate
Killings by firearms. Again, sorting by homicides places like Honduras and Venezuela top that list which shouldn't be a surprise. It's reasonable to assume children are part of these figures.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate
School shootings. You'll notice there are countries on this list other than the United States.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_shooting
The information is there if you decide to look for it. Or you can blindly follow biased news media groups whose goal is to report information in a way that creates the most turmoil/division, gets them better ratings, and makes them more money. There are atrocities happening globally every day. Murder is horrible, Especially children. To say that United States is the only place where people, or children, are "slaughtered" is really naive. All countries have their problems. Quit blindly following the news media and focusing on the United States.
Now that I've presented some figures I fully expect to see responses with statistics being ignored, pivoting away from the topic, and more USA loves killing children drivel. Please proceed. I'll grab some popcorn.
Thanks for the information. I notice that there are far more children slaughtered at schools in the United States than in any other country.
And I"m glad you think it's relevant to compare the US to third-world countries -- many of which are far worse than the US -- rather than other developed democracies, whose gun killings, especiallly at schools, are tiny compared to the US.
So killing children is okay in other countries then. It's only a problem in the USA apparently.
214
« on: February 18, 2018, 10:31 »
Oh boy. Sure I can help. Why only focus on the West? Has it become acceptable and mainstream for certain countries to slaughter people so let's just ignore them and exclude them from the statistics? Hardly.
Here are some figures by country per 100,000 people which is a reasonable measurement based on percentage of killings by population.
General homicide by all methods. If you sort by homicides it should be no surprise, maybe except for you, that places like El Salvador and Honduras top the list by rate. Even by total count Brazil and India are at the top. It's reasonable to assume children are part of these figures.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate
Killings by firearms. Again, sorting by homicides places like Honduras and Venezuela top that list which shouldn't be a surprise. It's reasonable to assume children are part of these figures.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate
School shootings. You'll notice there are countries on this list other than the United States.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_shooting
The information is there if you decide to look for it. Or you can blindly follow biased news media groups whose goal is to report information in a way that creates the most turmoil/division, gets them better ratings, and makes them more money. There are atrocities happening globally every day. Murder is horrible, Especially children. To say that United States is the only place where people, or children, are "slaughtered" is really naive. All countries have their problems. Quit blindly following the news media and focusing on the United States.
Now that I've presented some figures I fully expect to see responses with statistics being ignored, pivoting away from the topic, and more USA loves killing children drivel. Please proceed. I'll grab some popcorn.
You should read the links you provided:
"School shootings are an "overwhelmingly American" phenomenon due to the availability of firearms in the United States.[40]"
That's why the US is the only country in the links with it's own dedicated School Shooting Wikipedia page page.
Take a look at the other pages you linked to too. Almost every (every?) country above the US in any one of those tables is either a war torn third world nation or has had like one murder but has a population so tiny that one killing threw the stats off massively. Are these the countries the US should be grouped with or aspire to emulate as the richest most powerful country in the world? Shouldn't it aspire to a positive rank among first world countries?
Or are the pages you linked to also "biased news media"?
Exactly what I expected. Let's ignore and exclude statistics from places that have higher murder rates. It's okay to kill people and children in those countries. Let's not talk about those countries. It's the USA that's evil.
215
« on: February 18, 2018, 09:37 »
Your killing your own children and you're talking about 'what's fashionable' - What is wrong with you people?
There's no other country where people are killing each other?
I have difficulty finding another country -- especially in the West -- where people slaughter so many children at school so often.
Perhaps you can help?
Oh boy. Sure I can help. Why only focus on the West? Has it become acceptable and mainstream for certain countries to slaughter people so let's just ignore them and exclude them from the statistics? Hardly. Here are some figures by country per 100,000 people which is a reasonable measurement based on percentage of killings by population. General homicide by all methods. If you sort by homicides it should be no surprise, maybe except for you, that places like El Salvador and Honduras top the list by rate. Even by total count Brazil and India are at the top. It's reasonable to assume children are part of these figures. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rateKillings by firearms. Again, sorting by homicides places like Honduras and Venezuela top that list which shouldn't be a surprise. It's reasonable to assume children are part of these figures. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rateSchool shootings. You'll notice there are countries on this list other than the United States. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_shootingThe information is there if you decide to look for it. Or you can blindly follow biased news media groups whose goal is to report information in a way that creates the most turmoil/division, gets them better ratings, and makes them more money. There are atrocities happening globally every day. Murder is horrible, Especially children. To say that United States is the only place where people, or children, are "slaughtered" is really naive. All countries have their problems. Quit blindly following the news media and focusing on the United States. Now that I've presented some figures I fully expect to see responses with statistics being ignored, pivoting away from the topic, and more USA loves killing children drivel. Please proceed. I'll grab some popcorn.
216
« on: February 17, 2018, 21:49 »
Your killing your own children and you're talking about 'what's fashionable' - What is wrong with you people?
There's no other country where people are killing each other?
218
« on: February 17, 2018, 11:42 »
But have they actually closed iStock to new contributors? Nobody's answered the original question.
You know you're at MSG right?
219
« on: February 12, 2018, 22:50 »
I understand your concern but I don't think there's any way around it if you want to be a contributor. With all the major data breaches that have occurred already all your information is probably available somewhere anyway. The Russians, Chinese, North Koreans and who knows who else seem to have no trouble penetrating major computer systems so your information is probably more secure with SS than anywhere else. Sometimes you need to take a leap of faith, just like all the rest of us. No sense complaining about something you can't change.
Again, just because it 'has' happened doesn't make it right, nor is there a reason to make it easier for someone to do. And yes - you can change it people voice a concern. It's when no one does anything about it that things like this can happen.
You seem to know whats best. Please take this up with SS and report back with your results.
222
« on: February 10, 2018, 12:49 »
As usual this is an "exciting" deal with very little detail on why anyone should be excited. So if Google uses a Getty image in one of their products how does this benefit contributors? What products? How much is the sale amount and how much does the contributor get?
If Google wanted to help both buyers and artists they should add a search checkbox/filter that allows a buyer to select an image that is for sale so buyers dont need to wade through a bazzilion non-licensable images.
223
« on: February 09, 2018, 10:08 »
We understand that these changes have caused a lot of concern among Contributors but rest assured, the coming phase would be good news for Contributors.
OMG, bwahahahahaha they can't be serious. I can just imagine the execs sitting around the meeting table. "Okay so we need to reduce contributor commissions. Let's not tell them and when they eventually figure it out give them the old 'we have good news' line?" (everyone laughs) Fast forward a couple months. "We're excited to announce we've launched some great changes that will benefit all contributors. We've adjusted (lowered) royalty percentages for contributors and have improved (raised the goal bar really high) contributor goal levels. This will benefit contributors (123rf) by encouraging you to contribute a higher quantity and quality work. You will make more (less) money through increased sales volumes (falling sales). We're proud to support our wonderful contributor community with these exciting changes. FAQ Q: How will this impact my income? A: You will somehow miraculously against all mathematical theory make more money from reduced commissions and lower sales volume. Aren't you excited? Q: Are my royalties being reduced? A: Reduced is such a harsh word. We prefer to use the word "adjusted" which is much more pleasant and doesn't specify a reduction. Q: How do I benefit from these changes? A: There will be absolutely no benefit to you but we'll spin it so it sounds exciting like you'll somehow benefit. Q: Can I opt out of these changes? A: Absolutely. We believe in freedom of choice, fairness, and strong relationships with our contributors. You can request to close your account or if you prefer you can openly complain on the internet and we'll close it for you. Humor aside, it will be interesting to see what the "good news" is.
224
« on: January 23, 2018, 19:16 »
You will not get paid 100% of the time where you do not ask to get paid.
Not necessarily.
Ok ok. 99%.
225
« on: January 22, 2018, 22:39 »
You will not get paid 100% of the time where you do not ask to get paid.
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14 ... 120
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
