MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Show Posts

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 - elvinstar

Pages: 1 ... 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15 16 17 18 ... 46
301
iStockPhoto.com / Your account has been Banned.
« on: March 07, 2013, 12:12 »
I just thought that the wording that iStock uses when I try to access my account after it was closed by my request was fairly humorous.

"Your account has been Banned."

LOL  ;D

302
iStockPhoto.com / Re: Istock exclusive price rise again
« on: March 07, 2013, 11:06 »
I went to MacDonald's last week for the first time in 3 years. The price of a big Mac was $8.60 AUD. I was shocked as the last time it was around $6. Then I though about some of my images selling for $2 and felt a bit discouraged.

The difference is that McDonald's can only sell that Big Mac once, whereas your images sell over and over.

303
Good points. We'll discuss it and let you know.

304
This would actually be my third business. I saw a need and made a move to fill it, but it's hard to compete with free.

305
We've decided that it's not worth putting all of that effort into producing a product for sale when KonaHawaii is going to be releasing a very similar, free, product in the near future.

Thanks to everyone for their interest and good luck to KonaHawaii!

306
I don't know if you have Dollar Tree stores where you live, but that's where I bought mine. If you'd like, I can pick up as many pairs as you need and ship them to you. I should be able to get quite a few pairs into the $5 "If it fits, it ships" box at the post office. Just let me know!

307
I'll have an update for you in the morning!

308
I just bought some stereo anaglyph glasses at the dollar store and now I have a perfect reason to use them!   :D

309
iStockPhoto.com / Re: January PP's on the way.
« on: February 19, 2013, 18:41 »
I'm not seeing anything on the second run-through...

310
Cameras / Lenses / Re: Is equipment insurance worthwhile?
« on: February 18, 2013, 15:53 »
$531 is reasonable for how much equipment?  It isn't reasonable for $5000 in equipment for example.  The cost of insurance is rather dependent on the amount being insured.

For me, that covers $25,000 worth of gear.

311
Cameras / Lenses / Re: Is equipment insurance worthwhile?
« on: February 18, 2013, 11:01 »
I pay $531 for $25,000 coverage with a $500 deductible. It also includes $1,000,000 personal and advertising injury limit and $300,000 damage to premises rented to me.

I guess that insurance is one of those things that I wish I didn't have to buy, but am terrified not to have.  :-\

312
iStockPhoto.com / Re: January PP's on the way.
« on: February 17, 2013, 22:36 »
I have no idea why, but my PP earnings for January are about 5% more than December...

313
iStockPhoto.com / Re: January PP's on the way.
« on: February 16, 2013, 20:53 »
My PP sales are showing through the 16th now...

314
iStockPhoto.com / Re: January PP's on the way.
« on: February 16, 2013, 09:50 »
^^ I'm excited, too!  :D

I'm not closing the account until my final payout is in my PayPal account, though, just in case of some last second sneakiness/stupidity on iStock's part.

Looks like they're up to the 9th now...

315
iStockPhoto.com / Re: Thinkstock image search by username iStock
« on: February 14, 2013, 23:55 »
On a more positive note, I deactivated all of my files except 1 on D-Day and just searched TS for both username and real name, both in quotes, and found 0 images.

Happy day!

316
That's what I was seeing, too. I thought that maybe I was crazy after reading the OP.

317
iStockPhoto.com / Re: sjlocke was just booted from iStock
« on: February 14, 2013, 01:42 »
Despite everyone lumping Istock and Getty into the same hat I think it is important to make a distinction.  When the Google Drive deal was announced the first posts in the Istock forum by admins amounted to "what deal?  Umm let us get back to you on that we need to check with corporate".  They could have been lying but I do believe Istock staff were not informed of this, or at least it never got down to the level of people who post on forums.  The Google Drive deal was done by Getty and it seems they neglected to inform Istock about it until it came out in the wash.

And it is also important to remember that Getty in turn is owned by the Carlyle Group, a private equity group that will have it's own agenda.  The contributor of content is so far down the chain of command here that they don't even register. 

Istock staff may want to sell micro-stock photography but
Getty wants to maximize it's profit on selling stock photography and it's other assets but
Carlyle Group wants to maximize the return on it's investment to it's investors.

See the difference in point of view as you move up the ladder?  Istock staff MAY care about their contributors but their bosses at Getty certainly do not, though they MAY care about their stable of RM photographers and wholly owned collections, but Getty's bosses at Carlyle Group care only about making Getty look good enough to justify their $3.3B purchase price.   Are the people making decisions even thinking about photography?  Or just about how to make the company look good enough to sell?

100 years ago corporate coal barons sat in mansions and laughed at the idea that common miners would dare to argue for better working conditions or even accurate scales so they would be paid fairly.  I have this vision of some suits smoking cigars and chuckling over the idea that a few common photographers would dare to question a deal that might bring millions into the Getty coffers.

I don't think that it really matters to most contributors exactly who is pulling the strings, as we're the ones being hung regardless of who is on the other end.

318
I just tried that search and all of the images that I looked at (which admittedly wasn't all of them) were watermarked by the hosting agency. In addition, clicking on the image brings you (just like it does with any Google image search) to the page on the hosting agency.

Am I missing something?

319
iStockPhoto.com / Re: sjlocke was just booted from iStock
« on: February 13, 2013, 19:46 »
Which makes you wonder what drama is coming up next?

Whatever it is, it won't affect me as I have only one zero-sales image left. I feel bad for people that still have portfolios on iStock/Getty, but I wish iStock/Getty well with their continued destruction of their business.

320
iStockPhoto.com / Re: sjlocke was just booted from iStock
« on: February 12, 2013, 23:35 »
Has anyone who actually removed files been dumped yet?

Not me. Still waiting for PP earnings to post so I can collect my last payout, remove my last image and terminate my account.

321
We're talking to as many people as possible for as aspects of the business as we can get our hands on.

I would have to agree that buyers wants are fairly simple:
  • Good pricing
  • Good search
  • Good images

Sellers want a bit more.  :P

322
iStockPhoto.com / Re: sjlocke was just booted from iStock
« on: February 12, 2013, 00:14 »
Why does it always seem like I get an email about a credit sale at iStock immediately after news of a fiasco?

323
iStockPhoto.com / Re: sjlocke was just booted from iStock
« on: February 11, 2013, 23:08 »
If this doesn't make the few exclusives waiting to see the sun on the horizon realize it's always gonna be a  cloudy day then I don't know what would.

I can't believe that this would make a difference to those still there. If they've been beaten over the head with what Getty/iStock thinks of them for this long, why change now?

P.S. Good luck Sean!

324
In addition, many hosting solutions allow you to disallow hotlinking right in your control panel for those that aren't comfortable working with .htaccess files.

Pages: 1 ... 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15 16 17 18 ... 46

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors