| Author | Thread |
|
|
10/27/2004 04:40:15 PM · #126 |
| I have discovered a real problem though ... that "Download Statistics" link is nearly as addictive as the "Update Score" link here : ( |
|
|
|
10/27/2004 04:41:17 PM · #127 |
...and yields similarily disappointing results!
Edit: For me, anyway. How are you doing, GeneralE?
Message edited by author 2004-10-27 16:41:37.
|
|
|
|
10/27/2004 04:48:49 PM · #128 |
Originally posted by thatcloudthere:
...and yields similarily disappointing results!
Edit: For me, anyway. How are you doing, GeneralE? |
Surprisingly well ... I have put 15 photos up since Saturday and have been getting 1-2 downloads/day pretty consistently. Just 3 of the photos account for all of the downloads though! |
|
|
|
10/28/2004 08:50:51 AM · #129 |
I have 7 downloads at .20 of my photos and three from other photographers at .03 each total of $1.49 and still uploading more photos...Great site!
|
|
|
|
10/28/2004 08:52:53 AM · #130 |
Originally posted by melking23:
I have 7 downloads at .20 of my photos and three from other photographers at .03 each total of $1.49 and still uploading more photos...Great site! |
Hey Melissa.. I'm curious why you don't go for IStockPro, you definitely seem good enough.
|
|
|
|
10/28/2004 10:56:19 AM · #131 |
Originally posted by PaulMdx:
Originally posted by melking23:
I have 7 downloads at .20 of my photos and three from other photographers at .03 each total of $1.49 and still uploading more photos...Great site! |
Hey Melissa.. I'm curious why you don't go for IStockPro, you definitely seem good enough. |
Hi Paul, well I am glad you think I am good enough! thanks! I have no idea why I am not going for IStockPro....Guess it is because you need high end photos, I need a better camera first I guess...and a better light setup! Maybe I will do that later
Thanks for asking
Melissa
|
|
|
|
10/28/2004 11:40:31 AM · #132 |
yea mel! Do it! Ditch the sony :-) I hear 20D's are going pretty cheap and we all know you're making the big bucks online now hehehehehe
|
|
|
|
10/28/2004 11:58:33 AM · #133 |
| Heey don't write off the Sony already. (I'm not ready for that). It is still a very respctable camera and is capeable of taking very good images! (I hope) |
|
|
|
10/28/2004 01:14:09 PM · #134 |
Originally posted by aKiwi:
Heey don't write off the Sony already. (I'm not ready for that). It is still a very respctable camera and is capeable of taking very good images! (I hope) |
The 717 is a marvelous camera. Capable of taking fantastic pictures. It just has some limitations.
About shutterstock. I wish they had a nice listing of your pictures where you can click on the picture and edit the information, all they seem to have is what has been approved and what has not been approved and it lists them in batches, really akward if you ask me.
|
|
|
|
10/28/2004 01:15:44 PM · #135 |
Originally posted by Damian:
Originally posted by aKiwi:
Heey don't write off the Sony already. (I'm not ready for that). It is still a very respctable camera and is capeable of taking very good images! (I hope) |
The 717 is a marvelous camera. Capable of taking fantastic pictures. It just has some limitations.
About shutterstock. I wish they had a nice listing of your pictures where you can click on the picture and edit the information, all they seem to have is what has been approved and what has not been approved and it lists them in batches, really akward if you ask me. |
yeah they definatly have their quirks.. hoefully they will get more user friendly as time goes on. It has only been a few weeks now since they started accepting photos.
|
|
|
|
10/28/2004 01:21:25 PM · #136 |
Originally posted by leaf:
Originally posted by Damian:
Originally posted by aKiwi:
Heey don't write off the Sony already. (I'm not ready for that). It is still a very respctable camera and is capeable of taking very good images! (I hope) |
The 717 is a marvelous camera. Capable of taking fantastic pictures. It just has some limitations.
About shutterstock. I wish they had a nice listing of your pictures where you can click on the picture and edit the information, all they seem to have is what has been approved and what has not been approved and it lists them in batches, really akward if you ask me. |
yeah they definatly have their quirks.. hoefully they will get more user friendly as time goes on. It has only been a few weeks now since they started accepting photos. |
Lets hope the system Admin still visits this thread to look at our suggestions. Shutterstock has the capability to be a VERY good stock site. Im very impressed by this new site.
|
|
|
|
10/28/2004 01:26:21 PM · #137 |
We read this thread!
Thanks for the suggestions.
Jon |
|
|
|
10/28/2004 01:28:49 PM · #138 |
Originally posted by Damian:
Lets hope the system Admin still visits this thread to look at our suggestions. Shutterstock has the capability to be a VERY good stock site. Im very impressed by this new site. |
They also have a forum on their site where you can leave suggestions on the improvement of the site and also address any questions or concerns you may have. |
|
|
|
10/28/2004 02:25:04 PM · #139 |
Originally posted by GoldBerry:
yea mel! Do it! Ditch the sony :-) I hear 20D's are going pretty cheap and we all know you're making the big bucks online now hehehehehe |
What do you call Cheap? If cheap to you is $1999.99 CAN then I guess it is Cheap...then you still need lens....I think I will be a while before I give up my SONY...I may just get some new Lens for it!
|
|
|
|
10/28/2004 02:30:36 PM · #140 |
Originally posted by melking23:
I have 7 downloads at .20 of my photos and three from other photographers at .03 each total of $1.49 and still uploading more photos...Great site! |
And I'm glad to see that someone thought one of my pics was worth downloading. And I only uploaded it yesterday...
edit: OK, is my forum sig better now...?
Message edited by author 2004-10-28 14:32:11.
|
|
|
|
10/28/2004 02:37:43 PM · #141 |
Originally posted by shutterstock:
We read this thread!
Thanks for the suggestions.
Jon |
Thank You for taking them into account.
A better lay out for our pictures would be fantastic.
Keep up the great work!
|
|
|
|
10/30/2004 10:53:51 AM · #142 |
Originally posted by thatcloudthere:
That's why it says the current cut per photo is 20 cents...As the site begins to grow (it seems they barely have 450 photos now), the price must go up or the costs come down!
|
Jon (the founder) told me a few days ago that they are approaching 20,000 images. Most of these images came from a few of their own inhouse photographers. As you know, they just recently decided to allow outside photographers to participate (and give them 20 cents for each subscriber download). They review images VERY quickly, compared to iStock and Dreamstime. Impressive. You can sign up dy going here:
//submit.shutterstock.com/?ref=203
.....although I presume everyone that's interested, has already done so by now ;)
QUESTION for Jon (if you're "watching": when a contributor uploads, say a 2000 x 3000 pixel image, your software makes two smaller images for downloading, but it also make a "super" resolution image available that is exactly TWICE the resolution of the contributor's original upload -- what kind of interpolation are you using for this? |
|
|
|
10/30/2004 01:33:58 PM · #143 |
Heya
We are reaching 25,000 photos - with almost 3000 submitted in the past week. We are hiring a new submitter to make the submissions even faster - and will be introducing ftp uploading in the near future!
The interolation used is similar to what Genuine Fractals uses to supersize the images.
Jon |
|
|
|
10/30/2004 01:42:33 PM · #144 |
Originally posted by shutterstock:
The interolation used is similar to what Genuine Fractals uses to supersize the images.
Jon |
I am assuming it works well, or you'd have had to have changed it due to customer complaints by now : )
One of the suggestions I posted at ShutterStock was to give us the option of breaking out the "By Picture" view of the downloads by image size, so that we have some idea how they're being used, and to optimize shots for the most popular uses. |
|
|
|
10/30/2004 01:44:13 PM · #145 |
Yes - we have no complaints about quality..
Working on your other suggestion soon...
thanks!
Jon
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by shutterstock:
The interolation used is similar to what Genuine Fractals uses to supersize the images.
Jon |
I am assuming it works well, or you'd have had to have changed it due to customer complaints by now : )
One of the suggestions I posted at ShutterStock was to give us the option of breaking out the "By Picture" view of the downloads by image size, so that we have some idea how they're being used, and to optimize shots for the most popular uses. |
|
|
|
|
10/30/2004 02:58:06 PM · #146 |
We just got the (very requested) FTP uploading module done!
so -come over and let us know how it works for ya.
Jon
ShutterStock |
|
|
|
10/30/2004 03:45:45 PM · #147 |
| Wow. You guys approve images really fast! I was wondering if I could upload both a black&white and a color version of the same picture. I don't want to clog up everything, but some folks don't have the ability or the inclination to do the conversion themselves. I don't want to do it for every picture, just a few of them. |
|
|
|
10/30/2004 03:50:06 PM · #148 |
Can anyone else get the FTP to work? If so what was the Host address? I cannot get it to work! I was trying Cute FTP and also EI
Melissa
|
|
|
|
10/30/2004 03:56:24 PM · #149 |
It worked for me. The host name is shutterstock.com The username is your email and the password is your password. I use ws_ftp.
Minor bug though (I think). I just uploaded a random photo on my desktop to test the upload, planning to delete it rather than submit it for approval. However, the description box says "Pictures must be at least 2,000,000 pixels (2.5 megapixels). This picture is 640 x 453 = 289,920 pixels." and there is no link under the remove column. How do I delete this?
Message edited by author 2004-10-30 15:58:34. |
|
|
|
10/30/2004 04:44:50 PM · #150 |
dont worry - it gets ignored .. and removed from that list by itself.
Originally posted by mk:
It worked for me. The host name is shutterstock.com The username is your email and the password is your password. I use ws_ftp.
Minor bug though (I think). I just uploaded a random photo on my desktop to test the upload, planning to delete it rather than submit it for approval. However, the description box says "Pictures must be at least 2,000,000 pixels (2.5 megapixels). This picture is 640 x 453 = 289,920 pixels." and there is no link under the remove column. How do I delete this? |
|
|
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: 07/20/2025 04:23:16 PM EDT.
