Comments on: Microstock Sites Spring Clean http://www.microstockposts.com/microstock-sites-spring-clean/ An offbeat look at the microstock industry; the stock photography phenomenon which tore up the rule book Wed, 02 May 2012 21:39:40 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.4 By: claudio http://www.microstockposts.com/microstock-sites-spring-clean/comment-page-1/#comment-234 claudio Wed, 24 Mar 2010 10:38:32 +0000 http://www.microstockposts.com/?p=1429#comment-234 the buyers' side has been redesigned - I think the general look of the search page is now better, although I dislike drop down menus as well unfortunately, the upload process for contributor is still the same - despite promising an update since months; it's very time consuming, with lots of choices sales are very few but credit prices are high, so if they only had a proper upload process it may be worth uploading portfolios there the buyers’ side has been redesigned – I think the general look of the search page is now better, although I dislike drop down menus as well

unfortunately, the upload process for contributor is still the same – despite promising an update since months; it’s very time consuming, with lots of choices

sales are very few but credit prices are high, so if they only had a proper upload process it may be worth uploading portfolios there

]]> By: Microstock Posts http://www.microstockposts.com/microstock-sites-spring-clean/comment-page-1/#comment-233 Microstock Posts Tue, 23 Mar 2010 07:00:08 +0000 http://www.microstockposts.com/?p=1429#comment-233 Claudio, has Panthermedia been redesigned? It looks the same to me. Although I must admit I seldom look at the site. I really dislike the drop down menus, just makes it confusing. Claudio, has Panthermedia been redesigned? It looks the same to me. Although I must admit I seldom look at the site. I really dislike the drop down menus, just makes it confusing.

]]> By: claudio http://www.microstockposts.com/microstock-sites-spring-clean/comment-page-1/#comment-231 claudio Mon, 22 Mar 2010 11:54:09 +0000 http://www.microstockposts.com/?p=1429#comment-231 I agree that the redesigns moving towards simpler graphics are good: "less is more" Besides BigStock and 123RF, I like the Panthermedia redesign as well. I agree that the redesigns moving towards simpler graphics are good: “less is more”

Besides BigStock and 123RF, I like the Panthermedia redesign as well.

]]> By: Microstock Posts http://www.microstockposts.com/microstock-sites-spring-clean/comment-page-1/#comment-230 Microstock Posts Mon, 22 Mar 2010 10:44:07 +0000 http://www.microstockposts.com/?p=1429#comment-230 I agree with you about editorial reviews on Bigstock. I haven't bothered sending them my last few editorial photos, as I'm starting to think what's the point. The few editorial images I have with them sell ok, so it's frustrating that they seem to be so strict on what they accept. Although Shutterstock is now Bigstock's parent company, they have not aligned as much as people initially thought, and they are definitely showing that they still have their own identities and business strategies. It also appears that they still have a different criteria when it comes to image reviews and my feeling is that's the way it will remain. I've only uploaded a handful of editorial photos to 123rf, as they don't support ftp for editorial images yet and I have really bad internet. Usually I just upload to <a href="http://vds.isyndica.com/Affiliate/Komar" rel="nofollow">iSyndica</a> these days and I don't bother with the agencies I can't syndicate my images to. As for Istock, yeah it would be great if they accepted editorial images, but that decision would lie with Getty and due to their own editorial collection maybe they are not in favour of it. I agree with you about editorial reviews on Bigstock. I haven’t bothered sending them my last few editorial photos, as I’m starting to think what’s the point. The few editorial images I have with them sell ok, so it’s frustrating that they seem to be so strict on what they accept. Although Shutterstock is now Bigstock’s parent company, they have not aligned as much as people initially thought, and they are definitely showing that they still have their own identities and business strategies. It also appears that they still have a different criteria when it comes to image reviews and my feeling is that’s the way it will remain. I’ve only uploaded a handful of editorial photos to 123rf, as they don’t support ftp for editorial images yet and I have really bad internet. Usually I just upload to iSyndica these days and I don’t bother with the agencies I can’t syndicate my images to. As for Istock, yeah it would be great if they accepted editorial images, but that decision would lie with Getty and due to their own editorial collection maybe they are not in favour of it.

]]> By: David Fowler http://www.microstockposts.com/microstock-sites-spring-clean/comment-page-1/#comment-229 David Fowler Mon, 22 Mar 2010 09:21:03 +0000 http://www.microstockposts.com/?p=1429#comment-229 I totally agree with you that the two re-designs are a great improvement. Much cleaner and fresher looking. 123RF also seems much quicker to load and navigate (without the constant delays and error messages that I used to get). Now if Bigstock could just sort out their Editorial reviews -latest batch of 10 rejected as "not newsworthy" despite having already accepted other images from the same event. And, needless to say, the same images accepted and selling on parent company Shutterstock! Like many, I long for the day that SS accepted images are available directly to BS buyers (in the same way that images accepted on Istock automatically appear on Photos.com and Thinkstock.com -providing you have opted in for that). Meanwhile, I have been busy uploading Editorial images to 123RF ahead of their Editorial launch (hopefully soon) and have found uploading to be fast and simple on the new site. Now, if we can just get Istock to take Editorial images I'll be happy! Regards, David. I totally agree with you that the two re-designs are a great improvement. Much cleaner and fresher looking. 123RF also seems much quicker to load and navigate (without the constant delays and error messages that I used to get). Now if Bigstock could just sort out their Editorial reviews -latest batch of 10 rejected as “not newsworthy” despite having already accepted other images from the same event. And, needless to say, the same images accepted and selling on parent company Shutterstock! Like many, I long for the day that SS accepted images are available directly to BS buyers (in the same way that images accepted on Istock automatically appear on Photos.com and Thinkstock.com -providing you have opted in for that). Meanwhile, I have been busy uploading Editorial images to 123RF ahead of their Editorial launch (hopefully soon) and have found uploading to be fast and simple on the new site. Now, if we can just get Istock to take Editorial images I’ll be happy! Regards, David.

]]>