| Author | Thread |
|
|
10/22/2004 06:05:29 PM · #51 |
I disagree...It wouldn't be viable for them to send $1.50 cheques to anybody that uploaded a few pictures, then asked for their payout.
Most stockphoto sites like this have the same threshold for sending out earnings to photographers. I think it makes sense for the sake of cost effectiveness and incentive for photographers to 'stick around' and keep uploading photos... |
|
|
|
10/22/2004 10:46:03 PM · #52 |
I was able to upload photos tonight using the alternate to the activex method. I did get booted off the internet a couple of times while uploading, but not sure if the problem was on my end or the internet end. Anyway, just wanted to say the other way did work eventually. Hope they get appoved after all this:)
|
|
|
|
10/22/2004 11:27:48 PM · #53 |
I tried to upload 40MB worth of images with the fancy method...I'm on dial-up, so this would have been a four hour task so I submitted and left for the evening.
I just got back and I got booted as well, so it looks like none of my images made it! |
|
|
|
10/22/2004 11:34:59 PM · #54 |
I just finished 87 MB of the activeX and it worked fine on cable.
Erm, nevermind. It finished, but wouldn't FINISH. Ya know?
M
Message edited by author 2004-10-22 23:56:51.
|
|
|
|
10/23/2004 12:05:52 AM · #55 |
The ActiveX component is only 130kb! (less than a MB)
We are going to look into massive transfers over the AX -- but i would start off uploading 5-10MB at a time... we are getting lots of images this way - and it seems to work..
We haven't tested huge amounts of files - like 40MB. |
|
|
|
10/23/2004 12:18:43 AM · #56 |
Understood - but the whole point of a mass uploader is for me to do 50 and walk away. :) I don't want to have to 'browse' 50 images. That manual way is the suck.
|
|
|
|
10/23/2004 12:23:40 AM · #57 |
So what is the earning potential of using sites like ShutterStock.com? Is it worth the effort? How much royalty do most people make a month using them?
|
|
|
|
10/23/2004 12:34:37 AM · #58 |
I just checked back and all of the four I uploaded have been approved:) That was really fast, especially at this time of night! I will definately be uploading more.
|
|
|
|
10/23/2004 12:38:35 AM · #59 |
Just did my first 10 using the non-active X. We shall see. :)
M
|
|
|
|
10/23/2004 12:50:19 AM · #60 |
I'm thinking I should uninstall that program since I will be uploading the non-active x way - does anyone know under "programs" what it would be called so I can uninstall it? I can't seem to find it - unless maybe that was the problem to begin with that it didn't really download. Thanks in advance - I'll be signing off for the night:)
|
|
|
|
10/23/2004 01:10:39 AM · #61 |
I emailed a couple of questions but haven't heard back yet ...
When you say "no embedded copyright" do you mean only visible notices on the image, or what shows up in the title bar if you fill out Photoshop's "File Info" fields?
How can you upload the model releases electronically? |
|
|
|
10/23/2004 01:15:56 AM · #62 |
Question: What's the most frustrating thing to see after trying to upload 10MB worth of data on dial-up?
Answer:
Proxy Error
The proxy server received an invalid response from an upstream server.
The proxy server could not handle the request POST /upload.mhtml.
Reason: Document contains no data
I know these guys are working to get this stuff fixed...fair enough...
|
|
|
|
10/23/2004 01:21:02 AM · #63 |
Originally posted by thatcloudthere:
I know these guys are working to get this stuff fixed...fair enough... |
I'm just glad I only have to (rarely) program a very static site! I simply try to report bugs as I find (or anticipate) them ...
I'm going to try an upload now, so I'll see for myself : ) |
|
|
|
10/23/2004 02:24:12 AM · #64 |
Pretty cool site. One problem is the login and payment information page is not SSL protected. Your info can be easily intercepted if you submit any payment info using this page. :( Bad news.
EDIT: I take it back, it's only the images at the top of the subscription page that are not secure. The rest is. Might confuse users but it's an easy fix.
Message edited by author 2004-10-23 02:42:58.
|
|
|
|
10/23/2004 02:27:06 AM · #65 |
| I uploaded four files (5.26MB total) using the "regular" browse method -- took about six minutes and seemed to work fine. |
|
|
|
10/23/2004 08:13:56 AM · #66 |
I made my first $0.20....woo yay!
|
|
|
|
10/23/2004 08:53:03 AM · #67 |
I've only uploaded one photo there. It only took a couple of hours for approval.
One thing I find odd though is that you have to register twice if you want to both submit and participate in the forums or any other part of the site. I guess that's one way to keep designers and photographers separate.
|
|
|
|
10/23/2004 09:40:06 AM · #68 |
I got one rejected for no model release as well. It's the BACK of someone's head. There is NO WAY I need a model release for this shot. Wtf. I think I'm done with people shots. Too much headache for stock.
@Shutterstock -- Model releases are only needed when a person is "clearly identifiable." Tell your inspectors. Please.
M
|
|
|
|
10/23/2004 10:11:42 AM · #69 |
I am apparently very clueless about stock photography. I doesn't seem like 20 cents an image is very much. What am I missing? I know this is how people end up making money in fotog but i would need to sell a heck of a lot of them at those rates.... someone please explain : )
thx
|
|
|
|
10/23/2004 10:42:34 AM · #70 |
You don't make a living at it, but it's money you didn't have before. Using my own totals and estimating, if you had 1000 stock photos on Istock for a year at my download rates (probably very low) - you would end up with approximately $1400 US a year. That's a new 20D body for some of us, an L lens for others. Istock is non-exclusive, like Shutterstock, so you could theoretically put those same 1000 images up on 4 or 5 sites and make 5000 or 6000 for the year. :) With images that are still yours to do with what you want - as opposed to Corbis, AgeFoto, etc.
M
|
|
|
|
10/23/2004 12:56:26 PM · #71 |
From what I read, shutterstock isn't exclusive either.
|
|
|
|
10/23/2004 12:56:41 PM · #72 |
My four photos were approved : )
However, I've been having a lot of trouble logging in to the site; I get a "Your browser doesn't support cookies" error on a somewhat random basis. |
|
|
|
10/23/2004 12:59:11 PM · #73 |
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
From what I read, shutterstock isn't exclusive either. |
Originally posted by mavrik:
Istock is non-exclusive, like Shutterstock |
Do we disagree and I'm missing it?
|
|
|
|
10/23/2004 01:09:16 PM · #74 |
Originally posted by mavrik:
Originally posted by cpanaioti:
From what I read, shutterstock isn't exclusive either. |
Originally posted by mavrik:
Istock is non-exclusive, like Shutterstock |
Do we disagree and I'm missing it? |
Obviously, I read your statement incorrectly. Oops.
|
|
|
|
10/23/2004 02:45:38 PM · #75 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
However, I've been having a lot of trouble logging in to the site; I get a "Your browser doesn't support cookies" error on a somewhat random basis. |
We are fixing this strange cookie problem now.... Give us a few hours.
not sure why its happening.
Jon |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 05/19/2025 03:05:21 AM EDT.
