Hello, I would like to clarify some statements here. 1. Pixmac is a Czech company, but not owned by Denisa Haveldova. The owners are guys who have a lot of experience either in selling stock photos and making big website portals. 2. Pixmac is selling third party pictures, as stated in the blog: http://blog.pixmac.com/2008/11/24/why-do-i-have-my-photos-at-pixmac/ and in the Infocenter. 3. The site is under heavy development. We at Pixmac are working hard to make it the most usable microstock site. So, we are sorry for these spelling mistakes now present on the site...
Thanks for your comments, I guess that's what you get for believing wikipedia.
If pixmac is so 'under development' then why has the photographer submission area gone live? Why were there so many, shall we say "promotional comments" about pixmac made on forums and blogs a few months back?
I thought what I had written was a fair view of the site as it stands at present?
Hello Steve, thank you for the article. It's a fine revision of Pixmac. I just wanted to sort out some things to make it even better. Trust me :) I'm siting right next to Denisa Haveldova in the Pixmac office. I'm also the guy responsible for the UI and user experience. To proove it, visit the Pixmac Blog and you'll see my name there. Thank you, Vitezslav
Thank you for this review and the comments. I looked at the site carefully, but will not try to upload anything. Hopefully they can employ someone who knows well both English and the law. Personally I do not like that heavy focus on celebrities together with reselling Fotolia images. Reading the "sell you your photos" section gave me a feeling that they learned from other microstock agencies (iStockPhoto and Shutterstock for example)what sells well. Namely - isolated images on white background and people shots. So that way they hope to make big money because they will focus just on those two types of photography. Well... what is the priority then? I also checked several (quite a large number) of contributor portfolios and started laughing. Some of them with prescribed by Pixmac (isolated objects, people shots) and fine quality images all around 1000 or more in number and for 1.5 year on Pixmac revceived no sales or some pitiful 4 or 5 photo sales. Wow - that is a record. I reached those numbers with only 9 pictures in my portfolio within the first 4 days on Shutterstock.
Thanks for the data, it mirrors what I see, I've had at least 5 months with 99 accepted images and earned nothing. (Edit Oct 09 - Had a couple of direct sales in the past few months, but still nothing significant)
Rss
Updates via Email
Twitter
Facebook
Subscribe to Microstock Insider by Mailchimp
Printer Version
PDF version
Clarification of data:
Vitezslav Valka (not verified) on Mon, 2008-11-24 10:27Re Clarification
Steve Gibson on Tue, 2008-11-25 23:33Thanks for your comments, I guess that's what you get for believing wikipedia.
If pixmac is so 'under development' then why has the photographer submission area gone live? Why were there so many, shall we say "promotional comments" about pixmac made on forums and blogs a few months back?
I thought what I had written was a fair view of the site as it stands at present?
Steve
Microstockinsider.com Editor
Trust me
Vitezslav Valka (not verified) on Fri, 2008-11-28 10:07pixmac strategies and results
Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 2009-08-17 14:38Quick Update
Steve Gibson on Mon, 2009-08-17 23:45Thanks for the data, it mirrors what I see, I've had at least 5 months with 99 accepted images and earned nothing. (Edit Oct 09 - Had a couple of direct sales in the past few months, but still nothing significant)
Steve, Microstockinsider.com Editor
quotation
Vlczak (not verified) on Mon, 2010-12-06 13:39