MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Fotopedia  (Read 3124 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: February 20, 2010, 20:54 »
0
Do you know Fotopedia? What do you think about collaborating with them?

- You are credited for images used, with a link to a page in Fotopedia with your bio and photos (I guess we can add a link to our portfolio elsewhere).
- You can choose among several Creative Commons licenses, the most restrictive of which allows sharing but with credit (what we know is impossible to enforce). edited: you can set an "all rights reserved" instead of a CC license.
- You can upload only small versions (recommended minimum is 800x600, but it is not limited to it).
- Watermark is not prohibited, but not recommended.
- You can use images already uplaoded to Flickr.

I was thinking of using some old 640x480 pix or some 1280x960 downsized, which are useless commercially but could generate some marketing.  
« Last Edit: February 20, 2010, 21:10 by madelaide »


« Reply #1 on: February 21, 2010, 15:50 »
0
Nobody has an opinion?

I've added four images here. I'm not sure you will be able to see it without having an account.


« Reply #2 on: February 22, 2010, 02:26 »
0
well it is an interesting concept but I am not sure it is a way to earn from photos at all - if that was the question.  It would be nice if we could post a shot from a stock site and when they clicked the image they would be taken, for example, to Dreamstime.

« Reply #3 on: February 22, 2010, 03:58 »
0
I've added four images here. I'm not sure you will be able to see it without having an account.

I guess so since I land on a page about an Iceland project. It's a nice and well programmed site, and I'm sure you'll get a warm feeling being there. But does it make money?
We all need to focus on our work and on our sites that sell. You can drown, if you want, in forums, community sites, show-sites, that give you "exposure" and no money. At the end of the day, it's the money that counts so perhaps this is another waste of time?

RacePhoto

« Reply #4 on: February 22, 2010, 11:27 »
0
I've added four images here. I'm not sure you will be able to see it without having an account.

I guess so since I land on a page about an Iceland project. It's a nice and well programmed site, and I'm sure you'll get a warm feeling being there. But does it make money?
We all need to focus on our work and on our sites that sell. You can drown, if you want, in forums, community sites, show-sites, that give you "exposure" and no money. At the end of the day, it's the money that counts so perhaps this is another waste of time?


I think it's random as I landed on Mount Hor Jordan. Of course the site could be psychic and know I'm interested in archaeology? ;)

Fotopedia is the first collaborative photo encyclopedia. Anyone can join the community and help build the encyclopedia.

This gets a vote from me: Artistic and overprocessed photos (including HDR) don't belong.

I don't see any marketing here, it's a world photo Wiki. I don't see buyers coming to find things on a public sharing site, that they would go to a photo selling site for in the first place?

Nice pictures!

« Reply #5 on: February 23, 2010, 19:23 »
0
I saw that as the same oportunity of Flickr, perhaps better if doing well in websearches.  Someone looking for photos of a specific place may find them there, and if interested may try to make contact - the same way as people reported having had through Flickr on occasions.  My first sale ever was in fact someone who was searching for images for an article and saw my travel report at Geocities.

I got an email asking for larger photos, 800x600, and I replied I don't have them, they were all 640x480 originally.  Well, I have slides I could scan, but I won't waste time for this.  My images got a low rating because of that, and have now a negative score.  So unless people give it good ratings, they won't be selected.  Let's see if they change that after my email, but if not then this is the end of the story.

« Reply #6 on: February 23, 2010, 19:30 »
0
I saw that as the same oportunity of Flickr, perhaps better if doing well in websearches.  Someone looking for photos of a specific place may find them there, and if interested may try to make contact - the same way as people reported having had through Flickr on occasions.  My first sale ever was in fact someone who was searching for images for an article and saw my travel report at Geocities.

I got an email asking for larger photos, 800x600, and I replied I don't have them, they were all 640x480 originally.  Well, I have slides I could scan, but I won't waste time for this.  My images got a low rating because of that, and have now a negative score.  So unless people give it good ratings, they won't be selected.  Let's see if they change that after my email, but if not then this is the end of the story.

I think that anyone that ponders about "given photos for commercial use in exchange of being credited" she/he is disseapering as professional to become an amateur, or, if she/he wasn't professional, never will be.  That itsn't bad, amateurs deserve respect too, but is what it is.


 

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors