|
MicrostockGroup Sponsors
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 - massman
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 14
1
« on: March 07, 2011, 06:53 »
Sorry guys, I'm suffering from maana syndrome. I've received 10 cards so far and they are all fantastic, I've really enjoyed getting them. I promise I will post mine this week, I can't stand the guilt any longer.
2
« on: February 10, 2011, 11:36 »
Show me a non-micro search engine that works better than SS and provides more choice.
Google?
4
« on: January 24, 2011, 11:59 »
Try them in orange.
5
« on: December 16, 2010, 13:15 »
Yup, count me in, sounds a bit different, I'm all for that.
6
« on: December 09, 2010, 11:20 »
Now everyone will be taking web development classes rather than photography classes.
It's always been about the marketing.
7
« on: December 08, 2010, 11:14 »
I've always done better at DT than FT and the gap is getting wider. DT is now my second best microstock earner, mostly because of higher level images.
8
« on: December 07, 2010, 16:19 »
Dan Heller has some interesting views, if you want to peep over the microstock fence, his blog is well worth a read.
My tip - learn SEO.
9
« on: November 23, 2010, 11:27 »
The 10,000,000th image has been awarded to Lunamarina with this shot
congrats
Yes, congrats, but I can't help but see odd lighting and irrelevant keywords. What's going on in the top left corner?
10
« on: November 16, 2010, 15:46 »
My motivation: bills that keep appearing in my mailbox.
Yeah, what's up with that, they keep sending them, every month!!
11
« on: November 16, 2010, 04:10 »
I can't see better topic to ask - do you have any problems with PM site? When I open address all I can see is white page since yesterday. Do you know anything about PM problems?
It's still there and still selling. http://www.panthermedia.net
12
« on: October 23, 2010, 15:09 »
 If you compare this screen shot with the previous one you will notice that the pixel dimensions are the same even though the resolution has changed. Keeping it simple, as a photographer/illustrator the information that is important to you is 'Pixel Dimensions'. Search google and do a bit of reading, resolution and scanning is too big a subject to write about here.
13
« on: October 23, 2010, 14:52 »
 Open your image and make your 'image size' dialog box the same as this one, start with the resolution and then the pixel dimensions. This screen grab is based on your image size of 14000 x 9900 down-sampled to create an uncompressed file of less than 100MB, you will suffer no loss of image quality. Save as jpeg. This will give you the solution you are after.
14
« on: October 22, 2010, 09:52 »
I'd rather stay at 20%. Cancel all the battle royals and other BS like this.
Does the battle royal come with cheese?
15
« on: October 22, 2010, 08:45 »
i am not printing it at this moment, my purpose is to prepare a file to sell as a stock like in alamy.
i scanned as 1200 dpi, and this is the file i got
132mb TIFF, 14000x9900 pixels
i want to convert to jpg, i click photo 'image size' and there are pixels dimension and document size, i saw the document size is showed as 1200 pixels/inch
i am not sure what the setting i should get my jpg, do i have to change it to 300 pixels/ inch in the 'document size' setting? and i notice if i change to 300 pixels/inch the pixels dimension change to smaller sizes.
should i just ignore the pixels/inch and only adjust the pixels size to get a jpg size i need?
Okay, you have scanned a file at 14000 x 9900 pixels, this is what is important. For now, forget about file format, size and DPI. You have a bitmap image that is 14000 x 9900 pixels, you have created an image that is 138 mega-pixels, a huge file. What size file do you want to create?
16
« on: October 22, 2010, 04:27 »
This may help: http://www.scantips.com/calc.htmlIf not, post a specific question and I'll try and answer it for you. Google is pretty good at finding stuff 
17
« on: October 20, 2010, 05:21 »
Is there a way for independent stock sites to work together as peers in order to drive traffic? A directory of sites would be a beginning but lists are not so useful. A hub needs to provide search across multiple independent sites. One site which takes people to other sites.
There would need to be agreed standards from go. The independent peer sites perhaps all submitting their updated keywords, links, comp links, to an agreed format and structure. The hub would be a database of that data. And to be completely cell like perhaps everyone in the guild also puts that search box on their own site as part of the agreement. Then everyone is linked to everyone else. Any ideas ?
http://cyclo.ps/
Yeah you got it..... but the difference is each independant would be responsible to host their own images themselves or through third party hosting services NOT THROUGH WELL KNOWN MICROSTOCK AGENCIES. As well each independant would be part owner and responsible to maintain and administer the hub NOT THROUGH A THIRD PARTY WEBSITE.
Nightmare.
18
« on: October 20, 2010, 04:37 »
Is there a way for independent stock sites to work together as peers in order to drive traffic? A directory of sites would be a beginning but lists are not so useful. A hub needs to provide search across multiple independent sites. One site which takes people to other sites.
There would need to be agreed standards from go. The independent peer sites perhaps all submitting their updated keywords, links, comp links, to an agreed format and structure. The hub would be a database of that data. And to be completely cell like perhaps everyone in the guild also puts that search box on their own site as part of the agreement. Then everyone is linked to everyone else. Any ideas ?
http://cyclo.ps/
19
« on: October 20, 2010, 03:20 »
I read it as this:
Normal referral commission: $10 sale x 20% = $2 commission
Referral commission on discount: $10 sale - 20% = $8 sale x 20% = $1.6 commission
20
« on: October 20, 2010, 03:08 »
Is there a way for independent stock sites to work together as peers in order to drive traffic? A directory of sites would be a beginning but lists are not so useful. A hub needs to provide search across multiple independent sites. One site which takes people to other sites.
There would need to be agreed standards from go. The independent peer sites perhaps all submitting their updated keywords, links, comp links, to an agreed format and structure. The hub would be a database of that data. And to be completely cell like perhaps everyone in the guild also puts that search box on their own site as part of the agreement. Then everyone is linked to everyone else. Any ideas ?
I'd support something like this.
Thank you Whiz for showing your nice site...look what you have started now... 
Thanks Alias, I definitely like that idea. In other words...the hub would not need to carry any images, it could basically be a search engine hooked up to our sites. Search results would show thumbnails and images residing on our servers. One or two person would need to be paid to administer the hub. Quality guidelines, rules, price schemes, type of licenses and contractual terms would need to be established and accepted by all wanting his site hooked up to the hub. The buyer would have the choice to either search images from the hub or thereafter search an individual independent site.
sounds like an angency to me
Pie in the sky.
21
« on: October 14, 2010, 16:00 »
This happened weeks and weeks ago, I was locked out, Keith got my login working again. Nothing has really changed. Slow sales as normal. Still waiting for requested payout.
22
« on: October 01, 2010, 14:53 »
Check the credit purchase dates, it's quite likely they are old credits, with a lower value.
23
« on: September 24, 2010, 09:59 »
imagine how many image downloads he would have in total.
Well done
its probably a staggering number. SS always outpaced my iStock by 5 or 6 to one. Just imagine his SS account vs. his iStock which probably has a ton more photos (don't have time to look)
He hit 1000 per day at SS a few years back.
24
« on: September 23, 2010, 12:19 »
Ann -- you have the right calibration settings.
Massman is correct that the default for the Mac is a gamma value of 1.8 (up to version 10.5); although the new default is a gamma value of 2.2 (version 10.6 upwards). See http://support.apple.com/kb/HT3712. However, regardless of the default gamma, all digital content producers should be using a gamma value of 2.2 when calibrating their monitors. Check out Gary Ballard's website for more information.
Monitor calibration: http://www.gballard.net/photoshop/hardware_calibrate_monitor.html
Color management: http://www.gballard.net/psd.html
Hope you enjoy the new Mac.
Thanks for the correction. Always learning. Sorry if I sent you down the wrong path Ann.
25
« on: September 23, 2010, 11:35 »
^^^If this is as good as the previous sensor, 21mp will be no problem. These files can be enlarged a lot without much noticeable loss in quality. They should look better than any 21mp camera. Hopefully they will also put this sensor in a compact, like they did with the old one.
Looks like an exciting camera. As I understand it though for the purposes of submitting to Istock, to submit the images as anything over 15MP you'd technically be upsizing the image, and it would be against the submission terms. Great shame really.
Yes this is the case. There was a big discussion about it on IS forums 3 or 4 years ago. It's the resoultion of the single sensor, not the total of the three. I'm looking forward to this one, could be a good solution for fine art landscapes.
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 14
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
