|
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 - rimglow
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 ... 30
26
« on: November 16, 2015, 13:56 »
GL Stock Images is pretty close to perfect, except they can't attract enough buyers.
27
« on: November 11, 2015, 07:59 »
I've recently been trying to design a watermark for my images and it's actually tough to get one that works well in all circumstances. Seems to be a case of now you see it now you don't depending on the image makeup.
Same here, i have tried creating one in the past for myself. It never works well on 100% of the images, 100% of the time.
My favorite solution so far, is iStock's watermark. I've tried to duplicate it in style and preview size, on my web page. (watermark opacity is set at 35%) 
28
« on: November 10, 2015, 11:43 »
The watermark that I see on my images looks good and covers the whole image. I suppose I am seeing the new version.
What's a V1 look like compared to V2 or V3?
There is no V3. There was the original preview that you saw a year ago. Then, on October 21st, they rolled out a new larger preview with weak watermark. (version 1 of the new) Then on October 24, they rolled out a newer version with a better and larger watermark. (version 2 of the new) V2 is easily recognizable by the dark grey footer.
29
« on: October 19, 2015, 16:46 »
Old Thread alert!!!! Real old!
30
« on: October 16, 2015, 18:03 »
It's fixed now.
31
« on: October 16, 2015, 16:07 »
Here's what I see when I click on the email verify link: 
32
« on: October 01, 2015, 11:04 »
It seems to be run by Vasile Tiplea. Quite an impressive portfolio of achievements according to his Linkedin page. https://www.linkedin.com/in/creative27There is a review process, and metadata doesn't travel with the upload. It has to be added manually.
33
« on: September 28, 2015, 15:03 »
Anybody know anything about this site? They only have 229 images. Can't tell if there is a review process. Where are they are located?
34
« on: September 13, 2015, 15:45 »
Anybody else get this email? I thought it was suspicious, so I forwarded it to Paypal, and they confirmed it was real. I called PayPal and the person answering the phone said there are no upgrades going on. The links are so full of tech gobbledygook that I can't tell what I am supposed to do. PayPal service upgrades.
As we have previously communicated to you, PayPal is upgrading the certificate for www.paypal.com to SHA-256. This endpoint is also used by merchants using the Instant Payment Notification (IPN) product.
This upgrade is scheduled for 9/30/2015; however, we may need to change this date on short notice to you to align to the industry security standard.
Youre receiving this notification because youve been identified as a merchant who has used IPN endpoints within the past year. If you have not made the necessary changes, we urge you to do so right away to avoid a disruption of your service!
Because these changes are technical in nature, we advise that you consult with your individuals responsible for your PayPal integration. They will be able to identify what, if any, changes are needed. Please share this email and the hyperlinks below with your technical contact for evaluation.
Testing in the Sandbox is one of the best ways to make sure your integration works. Sandbox endpoints have been upgraded to accept secure connections by the SHA-256 Certificates.
Full technical details can be found in our Merchant Security System Upgrade Guide. In addition, our 2015-2016 SSL Certificate Change microsite contains a schedule of our service upgrade plan.
Thanks for your patience as we continue to improve our services.
35
« on: August 11, 2015, 13:18 »
They look like snapshots from your vacation. Nothing remarkable.
36
« on: August 05, 2015, 16:28 »
If you want to attract the big ad agencies, the higher the resolution, the better. They spend big bucks on campaigns that involve Marketing Collateral, Circulars, Brochures, and Packaging. Low res photos won't make it in that Market. That said, I think 28 mp would qualify as hi res, for the foreseeable future.
37
« on: July 23, 2015, 16:55 »
500px is primarily a photo community site. We didn't want to create a new company or abandon what we had already bulit. We're the same company, doing the same community site stuff we did before (and always will do) but now with a licensing platform tied to it due mostly in part by the demand of buyers in our community who wanted to legitimately license content. It's not for everyone and as a photographer, there are a few platforms I don't have the time for or don't want to participate in too. I think that's completely normal.
Here's an idea. Branch off into a Stock department. Let the community dabble in their licensing without watermarks. But get serious about selling real stock images, to the big ad agencies. That's where the money is. Your site is attractive, and has the interest of the photographers in this forum. But your lack of a genuine watermark is a deal breaker. Have a stock division and the "community" wouldn't be bothered. You would have a new community of stock photographers that have decent watermarking. How about 500pxstockphotos? I will make you a deal on rights to the domain name.  You must have some interest in stock photography or you would'nt be here.
38
« on: July 23, 2015, 14:03 »
Excuse me, but is this your idea of a watermark?  If so, it is completely useless! Watermarks need to be up to the standards of even the small microstock sites. It is a priority, industry wide, and the first thing new sites get right.
39
« on: July 09, 2015, 20:32 »
What I've done is to cut out my own images and save them as PNG files. When submitted, these seem to go straight through and begin to sell shortly thereafter. Never had one rejected or deleted.
That's what I've done too. So far, it's been very successful!
40
« on: July 09, 2015, 19:01 »
I have already uploaded about 1800 images, most of those looks they are in pending cut-out situation (what ever it means?). About two three weeks ago I first time checks out my online images and there was 880 and now 871 images.
At the moment I do not upload any more, I wait, what's going to happen for cut-out and online images.
Pending cut-out means they are in a long queue of images where Canva intends to cut-out the background.
Its only a guess, but I have the feeling that the original business plan with isolated objects has changed, and those files waiting will never be cutout/finished.
They seem to have a lot of success without all the unnecessary work and costs of isolating.
From Reply #490: "I recommend you don't hold much expectation for isolated files being cut out by us. We already have close to 1 million in the queue, and we pay a high per-file price to have them cut out to a high quality standard. We're looking through the queue for super high quality files on the subjects that are in demand from our customers, and prioritising these. And it's still going very slow due to the cost. It's possible the files you have in the cutout queue will come through shortly, but it's more likely they'll take years, and certainly possible that some will never be done. So that's why I encourage you not to have your expectations for isolated images too high."
41
« on: June 28, 2015, 09:42 »
You have to ask yourself, would a proud gay model be able to object to his image being used in a ad promoting a straight agenda? I don't think so.
42
« on: June 22, 2015, 13:25 »
Is there a way to differentiate what files Adobe sells, and what files Fotolia sells?
43
« on: June 22, 2015, 11:54 »
Alamy has been very good for me! 767 RF files. 
44
« on: June 17, 2015, 09:55 »
Matt,
the watermark is too simple and not covering enough. There is still possibility to balance interests of designer and vendor. Comp quality is too high for the comp, for my opinion.
I agree that the watermark for the "Save Preview to Desktop" doesn't cover enough of the image. I think iStock's new preview (which is even bigger than Adobe's) handles the job better. Even adding a crosshatch, outside the existing logo, would be an improvement. As a buyer, I welcome the bigger comps. You can't really see what parts of the photo are in focus on the smaller previews. Many times I've been disappointed after buying a photo, before realizing that the shallow depth of field, made that photo unusable in certain projects.
45
« on: June 17, 2015, 08:35 »
What level do you have to be at, to raise your price?
46
« on: June 16, 2015, 16:42 »
Did anybody notice that the "Save Preview to Desktop" in AdobeStock, is twice as big as that in Fotolia? I like it! Shows more detail. Here's an example shown at 75% of actual size. 
47
« on: June 08, 2015, 06:45 »
No problem for me.
Mac 10.8.5 Safari
48
« on: May 28, 2015, 15:54 »
For me it's Fotolia and SS.
I agree.
49
« on: May 28, 2015, 15:49 »
In the United States last weekend was Memorial Day weekend. This is the unofficial start of Summer and a lot of people go on vacation. Don't expect June to be much better.
50
« on: May 27, 2015, 11:18 »
And by the way not all the people,newspapers,magazines,studios...etc, in the world know about stock agencies
All the successful ones do. 
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 ... 30
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
