|
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 - Sean Locke Photography
Pages: 1 ... 307 308 309 310 311 [312] 313
7776
« on: January 20, 2008, 08:51 »
So in short. If an image has EVER been sold as RF you CANNOT EVER sell the image as RM
I forget where, but we were discussing this. I was of similar opinion. However, I now agree with the other person who was saying that unless the RM agency you are listing with makes some guarantee as to the history of the image being available, you can do this. Mostly because you are making no claim to what else is out there, and just that Mr X. now has permission to use it for 3 months on a cover. I wouldn't offer it concurrently, however.
7777
« on: January 17, 2008, 16:26 »
The system picks the first meaning if I don't pick one? OMG, that is awful.
Sure, if you don't pick a meaning, it has to pick something as a meaning.
7778
« on: January 16, 2008, 18:44 »
Can't see 'em. Is "modify.php" your edit page?
7779
« on: January 14, 2008, 08:57 »
So, no one's really taking a stand against anything then here, right?
7780
« on: January 12, 2008, 22:49 »
Leftover credit from a while back, that's all.
7781
« on: January 11, 2008, 23:44 »
Just as an FYI, they would be reading this thread. It will turn up in their referrer logs, plus anyone in marketing over there worth their salt will have a vanity feed set up with Google Alerts and more extensive monitoring services. Less for snooping, more for PR disaster avoidance. When people are talking about you, you need to know about it because things - particularly bad things - spread very fast online.
People, the admins are just ... people. They read blogs and boards and stuff. One of them probably just came across the post in one of many places.
7782
« on: January 10, 2008, 17:28 »
If you email support, you can discuss selling your rejects as non-RF elsewhere. I've heard it done in the forums.
7783
« on: January 09, 2008, 21:06 »
No. It's not from Dreamstime and it's not publicly available anywhere. Are you by any change very sceptical natured? 
We did not leech this info from some websites front-end. Think about how long time that would take, getting 600000 clusters of keywords and then you would still be missing the search patterns!
That's not what I meant. I meant since dreamstime just came out with data that shows a link between keywords searched and image sales, that they have been stockpiling that data. As I said, I don't know any other company that publicly makes it known they have this data.
7784
« on: January 09, 2008, 08:42 »
Very interesting! I know people on iStock have been asking for this, although I don't really see the use.
Well, is dreamstime the only place to offer this? Since it is there for the taking, maybe that's where this information has come from.
7785
« on: January 08, 2008, 20:40 »
Yuri:
May I ask how many searches were in the research data that you based your findings from?
This will give us a better idea of how good the results are.
I'm not doubting your research, just wondering what sort of data you are basing the result on.
My point exactly. The adult and adults are useless, and almost never lead to sales. I find it hard to believe a leading agency released all their searches and and cross referenced those to tracked sales for you just because you asked nicely. Forgive me for questioning a little bit.
7786
« on: January 07, 2008, 17:45 »
Since we don't know what site you've managed to secure this mysterious back end information from, it may be more site specific than you think.
7787
« on: January 07, 2008, 10:23 »
You may be misunderstanding my point. Increase has to match decrease.
No, I understood. You want 20% minimum increase to offset your past drop in projected gain.
7788
« on: January 07, 2008, 08:28 »
The thing is that being down with about 20% in the Christmas months (the total of 5% is over 4 months), January and February has to be up with about 20% to make it even out, and to make a progress they have to be up with a lot more. If January and February are only up with about 20%, that means I just lost a 40000USD investment and the time put into it.
If an increase of "only" 20% is a bad thing, I doubt anyone here can offer you advice.
7789
« on: January 06, 2008, 22:16 »
40 grand is a lot of coin.
7790
« on: January 04, 2008, 13:59 »
Seriously, if ideas and concepts were copyrighted, we should all pay Yuri Arcurs when we do a shot of smiling dynamic businessmen around a flipchart. He's hardly the first to shoot people in a business situation.
7791
« on: January 04, 2008, 13:38 »
You can't copyright an idea, like vegetables with faces. I don't even know why you'd contact them. Do your own thing and don't worry about them.
7792
« on: January 02, 2008, 18:07 »
The thing is, that it is becoming increasingly easy to beat IS in income on other agencies. Maybe all the other agencies only amount to half the Alexa traffic of IS, but at twice the commission or more, they win in both income and ethics.
Maybe that's because everyone on the internet knows you're available on the cheap at places like SS. You're part of your own problem, wouldn't you say?
7793
« on: January 02, 2008, 09:23 »
The cardboard has a nice look, but the perspective is off, especially on the lid pieces. That could be fixed though.
7794
« on: December 30, 2007, 17:46 »
Sure can, but why would someone buy it for 10 times the price when they could get it for a couple bucks. Separate your work. Upload some here, some there.
7795
« on: December 05, 2007, 21:42 »
Amazing it wasn't Joe-Bob working out of his basement, but the head of Porsche media. Funny how that happens.
7796
« on: December 05, 2007, 09:54 »
Congratulation, wishing you many more sales and a quick first pay out. 
... and a dictionary, so we can be sure to be able to read more of the OP's future posts.
7797
« on: November 28, 2007, 20:48 »
Nope. No money. Waste of time...
Depends what you put into it.
7798
« on: November 25, 2007, 20:45 »
BTW, I thought the images were fine, but if overall, you're having problems...
7799
« on: November 25, 2007, 20:44 »
Don't listen to Sean, he's blowing smoke... those illustrations are great. Like someone else said, just resubmit in a few weeks when nobody is watching and they'll probably be accepted. Some inspector was having a bad day an probably liked your work too much and thought it was competition for his own work...
I'm not "blowing smoke". Each agency has a "kind" of image they like to accept. If you and iStock aren't a match, why force it? I submitted a some to PhotoShelter, and they denied 90% of them. Ok, I know what they want, I'm not going to submit stuff they don't want and argue about it. Simple logic...
7800
« on: November 24, 2007, 22:46 »
Why try to force yourself through? Maybe you and iStock are not a good pair. Maybe try finding an agency that accepts your work easily.
Pages: 1 ... 307 308 309 310 311 [312] 313
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
