Author Topic: What is you biggest fiasco so far? (Read 14125 times)

KB · « **Reply #25 on:** July 07, 2009, 17:55 »

LuckyOliver

bittersweet · « **Reply #26 on:** July 07, 2009, 18:05 »

Quote from: stockastic on July 07, 2009, 16:04

I agree with you about IStock, and I'd call it a slowly unfolding fiasco. Bottome line - it's just more work than it's worth.

Clearly that is not the case for everyone. If they didn't make money for contributors who do stick it out and learn what they want, there wouldn't be so many people trying to get in.

Quote from: stockastic on July 07, 2009, 16:04

I've made a few sales there but it gets harder and harder to motivate myself to grind through their keywording system, only to see the best ones rejected for "artifacts". They don't pay any more than the other sites, but they demand so much more of contributors.

You know, I haven't had experience with the requirements of other sites because I have always been exclusive to istock. I've heard over and over about their "demands". I still don't know if it's true or not, but I can say that I so far have a 100% approval rating for the 50 or so files I've uploaded to Veer MP, so maybe it is true and I actually learned something during my years of being an exclusive there. Or maybe I've just been lucky so far and the remainder of my portfolio will not fare as well.

madelaide · « **Reply #27 on:** July 07, 2009, 19:33 »

There are so many fiascos, I picked SV here, but then I didn't give them much effort nor had great hopes. I believe LO was really the greatest fiasco, given high expectations.

click_click · « **Reply #28 on:** July 07, 2009, 20:54 »

At the beginning of Luck Oliver I checked out their site and had immediately the feeling that this is not going to work out.

I'm well aware that they poured a lot of work and heart into that project but to me it looked more like a site for male-Barbie users (if something like that even exists).

It simply didn't look professional.

It's one thing to be successful at the beginning but another to maintain success. Look at the dinosaurs of Microstock SS and IS.

SS has the most simple design there is - does it "bother" the buyers? No, I don't think so.

A stock image agency has to provide a powerful, efficient search engine and good images. That's what buyers are looking for and not little piggy bank icons and lollipop illustrations in retro style...

bittersweet · « **Reply #29 on:** July 07, 2009, 21:15 »

Quote from: click_click on July 07, 2009, 20:54

A stock image agency has to provide a powerful, efficient search engine and good images. That's what buyers are looking for and not little piggy bank icons and lollipop illustrations in retro style...

LOL I've personally purchased at least six variations of piggy bank icons over the past few months. It's a subject very much on topic for a lot of publications lately. Not so much with the lollipops.

Clivia · « **Reply #30 on:** July 08, 2009, 01:45 »

There have been some howlers over the years. What about Totally Photos, who ran off with all our pictures? Then there was one, I cannot remember the name, but one of the staff were selling our pictures as their own.
The biggest fiasco has to be istock. When they started they had a really good view of what they wanted to do, and they were ALL contributors. They had real ideals, and made a big difference to a lot of lives. However money counts, and they sold out. Now the welfare of the contributor will come way down the list, with profit at the very top.

goldenangel · « **Reply #31 on:** July 08, 2009, 02:45 »

Quote from: Lcjtripod on July 07, 2009, 16:57

Quote from: goldenangel on July 07, 2009, 16:28
YAYMicro gets my vote. Still no sales there. I only upload because it's easy.

Pissing on the floor is easy too .... but I don't do it anymore!
I just had to do it, cuz you made it so easy!

-Larry

No problem Larry

click_click · « **Reply #32 on:** July 08, 2009, 07:10 »

Quote from: whatalife on July 07, 2009, 21:15

LOL I've personally purchased at least six variations of piggy bank icons over the past few months. It's a subject very much on topic for a lot of publications lately. Not so much with the lollipops.

I'm sorry - I completely worded that wrong (again).

I was ONLY referring to the piggy bank that Lucky Oliver had in their design for your status page or something like that. They used funny icons all over the place. All those retro things etc. While it was pretty to look at for someone who got stuck in the 70s I wondered what purpose it has, not to mention the loading times for all the graphics...

I'm well aware that buyers want to buy images of piggy banks don't get me wrong there