pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Does MicroStock lower design standards?  (Read 28707 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Noodles

« on: January 14, 2010, 20:08 »
0
What does a designer do?

I have a $2000 budget to design an A4 ad for a glossy magazine. I found the perfect shot from one of the big boys. Its classy, high quality and perfect for what I need - cost $1000. Or alternatively I buy a shot I found on SS which is average, okay but not classy!

One path would allow me to buy that new Quad Amp I've been eyeing for some time, while the other option will impress my client but not my pocket!

Its a tricky choice for sure. And I'm sure many a designer has this issue often.

I haven't decided yet. What do you reckon?


« Reply #1 on: January 14, 2010, 20:20 »
0
Why not find something classy on iStcok? Best of boh worlds:-)

« Reply #2 on: January 14, 2010, 20:39 »
0
Do you want any more business from this client or anyone else who sees the ad? If not, use the photo you don't feel is the best. Short term gain vs. long term gain.

It's also a false choice to compare only SS to the macro sites - there are several other micros, 3 of which have exclusive content.

« Reply #3 on: January 14, 2010, 21:07 »
0
What does a designer do?

I have a $2000 budget to design an A4 ad for a glossy magazine. I found the perfect shot from one of the big boys. Its classy, high quality and perfect for what I need - cost $1000. Or alternatively I buy a shot I found on SS which is average, okay but not classy!

"Does MicroStock lower design standards?"

Five years ago your choice would be between a classy image and a big white space.  I'd say your choices are pretty flexible now! :)

Noodles

« Reply #4 on: January 14, 2010, 21:09 »
0
Short term gain vs. long term gain.

That probably is the bottom line but its still a hard choice because its possible only a critical eye would tell the difference - what's obvious to me may not be so obvious to the client and their readers.  

IS was the first site I searched - just so happened SS had a better shot!

Noodles

« Reply #5 on: January 14, 2010, 21:19 »
0
Five years ago your choice would be between a classy image and a big white space.  I'd say your choices are pretty flexible now! :)

true but it also reminds me of Pink Floyds lyrics "Got thirteen channels of **** on the T.V. to choose from".   ;)
« Last Edit: January 14, 2010, 21:23 by Noodles »

« Reply #6 on: January 14, 2010, 21:46 »
0
I have seen images on IS that are clearly superior to some from the 'big boys' and vice versa.

It it were me... I would buy the best one for the job. Which in this case is the more expensive item.

As was already stated on this thread, its a question of how short sighted you are, since you obviously don't need the extra cash to eat or put a roof over your head. This was made clear by your desire to use the windfall for an amp.

OTOH, companies such as Dell and HP have used microstock in the past for their 'back to school' ads. Which really begs the question of why go better than 'good enough'.

 

« Reply #7 on: January 14, 2010, 21:54 »
0
Trust me, buy the Quad amp __ irrespective of the current issue. I've been a Quad enthusiast for over 20 years and IMHO it's still the standard that all other manufacturers bid for. Btw, my existing set-up is 15 years old but is still easily competitive with current equipment at twice the new price nowadays.

Noodles

« Reply #8 on: January 14, 2010, 23:27 »
0
I have seen images on IS that are clearly superior to some from the 'big boys' and vice versa.

For sure, and indeed I buy far less from the big boys these days but this job was just one of those tricky images to source.

Trust me, buy the Quad amp __ irrespective of the current issue. I've been a Quad enthusiast for over 20 years and IMHO it's still the standard that all other manufacturers bid for. Btw, my existing set-up is 15 years old but is still easily competitive with current equipment at twice the new price nowadays.

I guess we both have the 405 then hey :)  My 405 amp and pre-amp still work fine but I picked up some nice 200watt plus JBL speakers recently and I don't want to damage them with the low 80watts the 405 pumps out. The Quad99 is rated to 150watts - I'm guessing even at half volume its gonna be pretty * loud.

Placed the SS shot in the mock-up and sent to client  ::) - see what he thinks

« Reply #9 on: January 15, 2010, 01:55 »
0
as others have commented i find it difficult to believe these are the only 2 choices - $1 or $1000

another question is why clients still expect they need to pay $1000 for artwork in the first place - nice for an aware designer, but it's still bloating the client's budget.  sorta like the military contractors who get cost-plus contracts -  no incentive to be frugal

in a global economy those wasted $ add up to a competitive disadvantage for those companies still doing things the old fashioned way

---
s

« Reply #10 on: January 15, 2010, 01:58 »
0
Given the wide variation in image costs available today I'm a bit surprised you are working to a fixed amount. Wouldn't it be better to charge for your time plus image costs, and let the client decide which image to use, at their expense.

« Reply #11 on: January 15, 2010, 02:42 »
0
What does a designer do?

I have a $2000 budget to design an A4 ad for a glossy magazine. I found the perfect shot from one of the big boys. Its classy, high quality and perfect for what I need - cost $1000. Or alternatively I buy a shot I found on SS which is average, okay but not classy!

One path would allow me to buy that new Quad Amp I've been eyeing for some time, while the other option will impress my client but not my pocket!

Its a tricky choice for sure. And I'm sure many a designer has this issue often.

I haven't decided yet. What do you reckon?

Why you don't download both comp images and do your design on both versions and let your client decide which he prefers? That is most fair to you and to client. If client more likes micro image then you'll get more money. If client more likes 'big' image you'll have better reputation on long run... It is only way that I'd made approach to if I am designer.

« Reply #12 on: January 15, 2010, 02:59 »
0
Interesting discussion.

I would surely think that there is some good microstock competition out there - if you can manage to find it.  Check out the istock Vetta, or the Veer collection if you want something 'different' .

I also agree with what Albert Martin said - if you are able, make a mock-up using both images and ask what others think.  Perhaps you are just getting stars in your eyes from the most expensive image.  I think the advertising worth has really made us believe that paying more always gives us a better product.  Even though that is often very true - it isn't always the case. 

« Reply #13 on: January 15, 2010, 04:12 »
0
I guess we both have the 405 then hey :)  My 405 amp and pre-amp still work fine but I picked up some nice 200watt plus JBL speakers recently and I don't want to damage them with the low 80watts the 405 pumps out. The Quad99 is rated to 150watts - I'm guessing even at half volume its gonna be pretty  loud.

I used to have the 405 but upgraded to the 606 (140W) a few years ago __ I was genuinely surprised just how much of a difference to the overall sound quality that extra current-dumping capacity made. You won't damage your JBL's with the 405 but you'll certainly get far more out of them with the 99. Well worth the extra money.

It might be worth contacting the 'big boy' agency to see if they are prepared to sharpen their pencil regarding the price of the image you like. These are very hard times for traditional agencies __ even more so at this time of the year. They might be desperate to make a sale even at a substantial discount.

Noodles

« Reply #14 on: January 15, 2010, 05:56 »
0
Why you don't download both comp images and do your design on both versions and let your client decide which he prefers? That is most fair to you and to client. If client more likes micro image then you'll get more money. If client more likes 'big' image you'll have better reputation on long run... It is only way that I'd made approach to if I am designer.

Yes, its a good point and a fair one. There is always a battle as to how much information you allow a client to see. I believe a good designer trains his client into understanding good design - which may sound strange but true. So in some ways its my call, hence the subject "Does MicroStock lower design standards?" because I'd sure like that Quad Amp!

Gostwyck - I've haggled before and been surprised how much macro prices will drop. I wouldn't even be surprised if I could reduce the quote by half. That will be my next plan if the SS shot doesn't meet the clients expectations. I still don't have a CD player - My Revox looks better and sounds as good anyway, but the kids are nagging at me - any thoughts? Thanks.

Leaf - I didn't check Veer so I will do over the weekend.

Noodles

« Reply #15 on: January 15, 2010, 06:13 »
0
Given the wide variation in image costs available today I'm a bit surprised you are working to a fixed amount. Wouldn't it be better to charge for your time plus image costs, and let the client decide which image to use, at their expense.

Honestly its just the way I have always done it. I just like to quote for the job. If the image costs $1 and the ad takes me 1 hour to design then I can go fishing for the rest of the day. If it works the other way around, then even though I've worked all day and spent up to a 1000 bucks, I still come away with a profit. It all balances in the end.

« Reply #16 on: January 15, 2010, 06:52 »
0
I still don't have a CD player - My Revox looks better and sounds as good anyway, but the kids are nagging at me - any thoughts? Thanks.

CD players almost always sound exactly the same __ honestly. I have the Quad 67, which was widely applauded as one of the 'best in the world' in the reviews, but it sounds exactly the same as a basic Philips player I also own and which cost a quarter of the price. The Quad unit looks nicer, has a few more functions and is able to play dodgy CD's that the Philips unit can't handle but beyond that there is no difference.

The 'music' on a CD is just a series of 1's and 0's which are read by a standard laser pick-up (I've heard that the lasers are all the same as they are patented by Philips/Toshiba). Any electronics between the laser pick-up and your amp, beyond basic buffering, is more likely to deteriorate the sound than improve it.

IMHO there has been virtually no significant improvement (i.e. detectable by the human ear) in either amplifier or CD technology for the last 20 years. Speakers however have advanced hugely __ the quality of speakers today is simply staggering compared to their predecessors.


Noodles

« Reply #17 on: January 15, 2010, 07:32 »
0
IMHO there has been virtually no significant improvement (i.e. detectable by the human ear) in either amplifier or CD technology for the last 20 years. Speakers however have advanced hugely __ the quality of speakers today is simply staggering compared to their predecessors.


I heard that the Quad CD players were very good - I have the Quad FM4 Receiver and that is excellent.
I agree about the quality of speakers today but before I bought the JBL's I was originally looking for a pair of Tannoy's. However, the old ones now sell for ridiculous amounts of money (for example these reds). Sound purists swear by old Tannoys apparently. The ones made in the 1950's (silver I believe) and before that the "blacks" I've seen go for $10,000+ on Ebay.

« Reply #18 on: January 15, 2010, 11:36 »
0
design standards were already lowered anyway if you ask me. In some aspects, micro has actually forced the industry to become more picky about certain flaws .. grain for example. The bad thing is there's a lot of confusion about the actual differences between the traditional concept of grain compared to noise generated from bad exposures and sensor amplification. I could submit a slightly grainy (not noisy) image to a micro and get rejected for quality. On the other hand, I could submit RM or direct assignments to a major publication like Newsweek that have more noise than you can shake a monopod at (not grainy) and it passes QA for a coveted spot on the cover.

As for the reference to money affecting design standards I would say no .. at least not on a major level. I sometimes get contacted by art directors who originally found me through micro and then commission me to do a custom shoot on a much higher budget. Designers for major corporations don't care how much they spend on a shot .. it's not their money .. $3 .. $3000 .. who cares.

I can see the financial differences affecting the quality standards in the smaller freelance sector though. However, you can't group local business brochures and restaurant menus with international corporate campaigns and say that the smaller affects the larger.

RT


« Reply #19 on: January 15, 2010, 13:13 »
0
I sometimes get contacted by art directors who originally found me through micro and then commission me to do a custom shoot on a much higher budget.

Cool, got any examples you could show us?

« Reply #20 on: January 15, 2010, 14:00 »
0
I think that the cost of the image should be somewhat irrelevant...assuming your client will pay for either one, $1 or $1000.

The decision should be based on what is best for the ad and for your client, not what can you buy with the money you save. If you think the less expensive image is just as good as the expensive one, by all means use it. If you think it is inferior, then you are giving your client an inferior product just so you can have a new toy.

Sorry to spoil your fun!

I do also like the idea of comping the ad with both images and showing to the client, as was mentioned earlier.

helix7

« Reply #21 on: January 15, 2010, 14:49 »
0
design standards were already lowered anyway if you ask me...

Absolutely. Microstock has had very little to do with the problems the design industry faces.

lisafx

« Reply #22 on: January 15, 2010, 18:24 »
0
I sometimes get contacted by art directors who originally found me through micro and then commission me to do a custom shoot on a much higher budget.

Count yourself lucky then.  I have been contacted a number of times to do custom work, but when I quote them a price on the low end of the industry standard they either complain and decline, or just disappear.

I have yet to have a single one of these requests through the micros for a custom shoot pan out.  Seems like micro customers, for the most part, just have no idea how much (custom) photography is supposed to cost....!

« Reply #23 on: January 15, 2010, 19:44 »
0
I never quote a price until they first tell me their budget. If they say $1500, I say this is you're lucky day because I can do it $1499. LOL You don't want to tell them $1000 and then later realize they had a photo budget of $3000 and you don't want to lose it by saying $3000 when they only had a budget of $1000.

I actually had one buyer contact me and ask how much I would charge to resize a photo of mine they bought. They bought the XL but then said they needed it resized to 60MP ... for a brochure .. I was honest and told them 60MP was way overboard for their needs but they insisted so I thought hmmmm that's just goofy ... ok send $75 to my paypal. That was a well paid 30 seconds of work. LOL

Noodles

« Reply #24 on: January 15, 2010, 20:56 »
0
I can see the financial differences affecting the quality standards in the smaller freelance sector though. However, you can't group local business brochures and restaurant menus with international corporate campaigns and say that the smaller affects the larger.

That's true - my clients are mostly small to midrange corporate - but far below being called major. As far as I can tell they prefer freelancers to ad agencies because they offer a more personal and cost friendly service without sacrificing quality (IMHO)

Seems like micro customers, for the most part, just have no idea how much (custom) photography is supposed to cost....!

That is a concern for sure. At least you stuck to your guns and didn't give in - plenty would I'm afraid.

« Reply #25 on: January 15, 2010, 21:41 »
0
I've never had a request for a custom shoot, but I did have someone contact me and purchase a RF license from me for $200 for an image that they found on Dreamstime.

RT


« Reply #26 on: January 16, 2010, 05:54 »
0
I never quote a price until they first tell me their budget. If they say $1500, I say this is you're lucky day because I can do it $1499. LOL You don't want to tell them $1000 and then later realize they had a photo budget of $3000 and you don't want to lose it by saying $3000 when they only had a budget of $1000.

Wow you really are lucky, as others have stated most microstock customers do not commission high end shoots or expect the price to match the low cost of microstock, but you've managed to find some that do and not only that they're prepared to tell you their budget. Is that a normal procedure in the states, in the UK you're asked to quote for a job, I guess most businesses over here are more savvy knowing that if they told you their budget you would just factor a quote to fit into it.

I'd love to see some examples of these shoots you've done if you care to share.


ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #27 on: January 16, 2010, 07:16 »
0
I sometimes get contacted by art directors who originally found me through micro and then commission me to do a custom shoot on a much higher budget.
[snip]
Seems like micro customers, for the most part, just have no idea how much (custom) photography is supposed to cost....!
Sometimes I have a hollow laugh when I see the 'request new photos' and see a very complicated requested setup, often involving several models and very precise 'stage directions'. It's obvious that these images would have a 'limited market', yet the requesters sometimes act all hurt if they don't get what they want for their $10.

PaulieWalnuts

  • We Have Exciting News For You
« Reply #28 on: January 16, 2010, 08:10 »
0
I sometimes get contacted by art directors who originally found me through micro and then commission me to do a custom shoot on a much higher budget.
[snip]Seems like micro customers, for the most part, just have no idea how much (custom) photography is supposed to cost....!
Sometimes I have a hollow laugh when I see the 'request new photos' and see a very complicated requested setup, often involving several models and very precise 'stage directions'. It's obvious that these images would have a 'limited market', yet the requesters sometimes act all hurt if they don't get what they want for their $10.

I think they're so used to getting cheap images they don't think, or maybe don't care anymore, about the effort.

For custom shoots that seemed to have limited/no stock value I'd give them a time and materials quote.

Contributors are at fault also. If a buyer is looking for a shot that has high effort and limited buying potential and a contributor does the shot of course they're going to expect it. You know, those contributors who say "it's only 100 miles away and I have nothing better to do so I'll do it this weekend" stuff.

Poor contributor business practices lead to poor buyer practices. Maybe not enough people are saying "no" or negotiating a reasonable cost. "I've had the camera, lenses, car, and gas for a long time so it's not really a business cost anyway right?" Then photographers wonder why buyers expect you to buy your own flaming hoop and jump through it for $5.

Also, buyers seem to automatically assume every shot we submit is profitable and:
- doesn't take much or any time or cost to shoot
- doesn't take any time to process
- gets accepted every time
- sells like crazy immediately and forever
- maybe we're rolling on money, dumb, don't care, whatever, give me my image.

The reality is shots can take weeks or months before they get momentum. And some shots or a series you think will sell may only get a handful of downloads and never even cover costs.

I've had internet people contact me for prints. They want me to make minor changes, print, and mail the images... For a couple  or five dollars. I'm sure plenty of photographers say yes to that. Not including the time to produce the image and processing it costs me:

- Print at local store: $2-5 dollars
- Packaging and postage: $2-5 dollars
- Gas to go pick up the packaging and image: $2-3

That's $6-$13 in just material costs. So what's your time worth to take the shot and run around getting all the stuff? And if you say "just put your photos somewhere they can order themselves" what's the annual cost of that service? $25? $100? Just to sell a few prints?

Micro only lowers design standards if designers choose to use images that lower their design standards. Just like with photographers some designers produce amazing work and some produce work so horrible you wonder who would pay for it.

And that's why costs for quality work need to continue going back up.

{steps down from soapbox}

lisafx

« Reply #29 on: January 16, 2010, 12:23 »
0

Seems like micro customers, for the most part, just have no idea how much (custom) photography is supposed to cost....!

That is a concern for sure. At least you stuck to your guns and didn't give in - plenty would I'm afraid.


I don't really like doing custom work so it was easy to stick to my guns.  I have the tactical advantage of not caring if I get the job ;)

lisafx

« Reply #30 on: January 16, 2010, 12:30 »
0
you've managed to find some that do and not only that they're prepared to tell you their budget. Is that a normal procedure in the states

Not from my experience it isn't.  ???

RT


« Reply #31 on: January 17, 2010, 18:52 »
0
I never quote a price until they first tell me their budget. If they say $1500, I say this is you're lucky day because I can do it $1499. LOL You don't want to tell them $1000 and then later realize they had a photo budget of $3000 and you don't want to lose it by saying $3000 when they only had a budget of $1000.

I actually had one buyer contact me and ask how much I would charge to resize a photo of mine they bought. They bought the XL but then said they needed it resized to 60MP ... for a brochure .. I was honest and told them 60MP was way overboard for their needs but they insisted so I thought hmmmm that's just goofy ... ok send $75 to my paypal. That was a well paid 30 seconds of work. LOL

I checked back on this thread to see if you'd posted any examples of those ''high end commission jobs you've been telling us all about and noticed you've changed your name from Xposurepro and altered some of your posts, reading some of your other posts it seems we really are in the prescence of an experienced pro and I'm eager to see some of your commissioned shots if you care to share, after all most of us come here to learn from the experts.

« Reply #32 on: January 17, 2010, 19:46 »
0
I never quote a price until they first tell me their budget. If they say $1500, I say this is you're lucky day because I can do it $1499. LOL You don't want to tell them $1000 and then later realize they had a photo budget of $3000 and you don't want to lose it by saying $3000 when they only had a budget of $1000.

I actually had one buyer contact me and ask how much I would charge to resize a photo of mine they bought. They bought the XL but then said they needed it resized to 60MP ... for a brochure .. I was honest and told them 60MP was way overboard for their needs but they insisted so I thought hmmmm that's just goofy ... ok send $75 to my paypal. That was a well paid 30 seconds of work. LOL


I checked back on this thread to see if you'd posted any examples of those ''high end commission jobs you've been telling us all about and noticed you've changed your name from Xposurepro and altered some of your posts, reading some of your other posts it seems we really are in the prescence of an experienced pro and I'm eager to see some of your commissioned shots if you care to share, after all most of us come here to learn from the experts.


For the most part a lot of my photography is kept separate from microstock .. exclusive/private. However, I do have one contract example I can give from my micro portfolio.

http://www.dreamstime.com/same-model_img3718002
http://www.dreamstime.com/same-model_img3731575

Those two model were originally shot for a company who contracted me after downloading some samples from one of my microstock portfolios. Looks like I charged $2000 for that shoot. I paid the models $100 each (I normally don't pay models for microstock, only on contract jobs). Spent 1 hour total travel time .. 2 hours on location getting the shots .. 2 1/2 hours for post-edit, backup and delivery. So I averaged $327 per hour on that one .. not including micro sales. Oh I also apparently told that client they could have 6 months exclusivity .. so I did not upload the images to microstock until 6 months after I delivered the images to the client. I remember they weren't very picky and only requested that 30 shots of each model to be wearing a T-Shirt with their logo on it (which you won't find on the micro of course). It was a pretty cut n dry job.

RT


« Reply #33 on: January 18, 2010, 05:03 »
0
For the most part a lot of my photography is kept separate from microstock .. exclusive/private. However, I do have one contract example I can give from my micro portfolio.

http://www.dreamstime.com/same-model_img3718002
http://www.dreamstime.com/same-model_img3731575

Those two model were originally shot for a company who contracted me after downloading some samples from one of my microstock portfolios. Looks like I charged $2000 for that shoot. I paid the models $100 each (I normally don't pay models for microstock, only on contract jobs). Spent 1 hour total travel time .. 2 hours on location getting the shots .. 2 1/2 hours for post-edit, backup and delivery. So I averaged $327 per hour on that one .. not including micro sales. Oh I also apparently told that client they could have 6 months exclusivity .. so I did not upload the images to microstock until 6 months after I delivered the images to the client. I remember they weren't very picky and only requested that 30 shots of each model to be wearing a T-Shirt with their logo on it (which you won't find on the micro of course). It was a pretty cut n dry job.


Thanks for sharing, I must admit to finding it quite incredible that a client has gone to all the trouble of searching a microstock site and managed to find you just by downloading some samples from your portfolio especially considering no microstock site I know off allows buyers to seach for photographers on where they say they're based in their profile, add to that your user name is different to your website and on Dreamstime (which is the site I presume they found you on as it's the only one of your linked sites that has where the photographer is based) the name you have as your full name actually comes back to another photographer on a google search and when I did find you via the name you use on Modelmayhem that site address comes back to a domain hosting site.
And then the client pays you all that money for some simple generic shots using $100 models and allows you to do more stock shots than they've comissioned you to do, let alone being able to have the whole thing done,wrapped up and delivered in 5 1/2 hours - talk about a dream commission !!!

It does lead me to ask why such a successfull photographer like yourself chooses to be a reviewer on a microstock site, obviously it's not for the money , I wonder is it your way of giving something back to the industry.



« Reply #34 on: January 18, 2010, 10:53 »
0
Location doesn't matter so much .. at least in that case. That client was located in Dallas, TX which is I dunno 10-13 hours from me. Honestly, I thought they were asking for pretty generic stuff too (that's why I loved doing it .. easy money LOL) All I can say is some companies have a lot of funding behind them. When you own a company who is bringing in millions on a monthly basis a couple thousand bucks for some photos is not a big deal. That client ran a online dating site. Not only did they spend that on the shoot but a few weeks later they noticed one of my models and asked if I would ask her to fly down there and shoot a 20 second video. They paid for her airline tickets from Kansas City to Dallas, hotel for the entire weekend and paid her a few hundred bucks to sit there and giggle while pretending to chat with somebody online for 20 seconds in front of a camera. Places that have money don't have a problem spending it and the more money they have just means the more money they need to try and spend so their accounts can work those numbers into their expense goals.

I use to have my email posted in some of my profiles as a way of making contact .. but I started getting bombarded with more spam than anything so .. bad idea LOL. As for being a reviewer I actually get paid pretty good. I'm probably not allowed to say how much but it's what most people would call a full time income and I've been doing it since 2004 so it's just second nature at this point. That and it's kinda fun .. my wife says you get to travel the world everyday. :) ... I'm actually thinking about starting up a new educational microstock website that focuses on learning the acceptance/rejection side of micro. Everybody is always talking about not understanding the rejection process on the forums .. since I'm a 5 year reviewer it kinda makes sense for me to start a blog or something on it. (I always need to stay busy LOL)

« Reply #35 on: January 18, 2010, 10:57 »
0
I'm actually thinking about starting up a new educational microstock website that focuses on learning the acceptance/rejection side of micro. Everybody is always talking about not understanding the rejection process on the forums .. since I'm a 5 year reviewer it kinda makes sense for me to start a blog or something on it. (I always need to stay busy LOL)

It doesn't make any sense to start a blog, as it would only help increase your competition's skill level which would decrease your sales.  Take up crochet or something :)

« Reply #36 on: January 18, 2010, 11:08 »
0
I'm actually thinking about starting up a new educational microstock website that focuses on learning the acceptance/rejection side of micro. Everybody is always talking about not understanding the rejection process on the forums .. since I'm a 5 year reviewer it kinda makes sense for me to start a blog or something on it. (I always need to stay busy LOL)

It doesn't make any sense to start a blog, as it would only help increase your competition's skill level which would decrease your sales.  Take up crochet or something :)

 ;D ;D ;D  touche Mr Locke.

moreover, if it's philantrophy, there is a thread on Doctors without border where you can volunteer.

in the late 80's when i was hired to conduct seminars to pro photographers, they paid me  $35/hr . (they charge more now i am sure).
 why not do the same if you feel you have the expertise  to train someone  ;)

i am sure many will agree that we already have too many freebies and cheapies (subs) in microstock.
« Last Edit: January 18, 2010, 11:17 by PERSEUS »


« Reply #37 on: January 18, 2010, 11:33 »
0
I'm actually thinking about starting up a new educational microstock website that focuses on learning the acceptance/rejection side of micro. Everybody is always talking about not understanding the rejection process on the forums .. since I'm a 5 year reviewer it kinda makes sense for me to start a blog or something on it. (I always need to stay busy LOL)

It doesn't make any sense to start a blog, as it would only help increase your competition's skill level which would decrease your sales.  Take up crochet or something :)

ahhhhhh but without competition there is no need to advance. Style will never change and we will be forced to stare at people in business attire frolicking with cheesy grins in front of washed out pastel backgrounds and isolations forever .. couples giggling on a neutral couch in front of a laptop and taking little baby sips of coffee in a kitchen that reminds you of the store displays in Home Depot. It will be like living in an endless issue of better housekeeping.  ;D

RT


« Reply #38 on: January 18, 2010, 11:53 »
0
Location doesn't matter so much .. at least in that case. That client was located in Dallas, TX which is I dunno 10-13 hours from me. Honestly, I thought they were asking for pretty generic stuff too (that's why I loved doing it .. easy money LOL) All I can say is some companies have a lot of funding behind them. When you own a company who is bringing in millions on a monthly basis a couple thousand bucks for some photos is not a big deal. That client ran a online dating site. Not only did they spend that on the shoot but a few weeks later they noticed one of my models and asked if I would ask her to fly down there and shoot a 20 second video. They paid for her airline tickets from Kansas City to Dallas, hotel for the entire weekend and paid her a few hundred bucks to sit there and giggle while pretending to chat with somebody online for 20 seconds in front of a camera. Places that have money don't have a problem spending it and the more money they have just means the more money they need to try and spend so their accounts can work those numbers into their expense goals.

I use to have my email posted in some of my profiles as a way of making contact .. but I started getting bombarded with more spam than anything so .. bad idea LOL. As for being a reviewer I actually get paid pretty good. I'm probably not allowed to say how much but it's what most people would call a full time income and I've been doing it since 2004 so it's just second nature at this point. That and it's kinda fun .. my wife says you get to travel the world everyday. :) ... I'm actually thinking about starting up a new educational microstock website that focuses on learning the acceptance/rejection side of micro. Everybody is always talking about not understanding the rejection process on the forums .. since I'm a 5 year reviewer it kinda makes sense for me to start a blog or something on it. (I always need to stay busy LOL)

Out of interest do you read your stuff back to yourself before posting it and ever ask yourself whether it sounds credible or not.

As for your educational blog, maybe one of the first subjects could be explaining how you've got a significantly higher number of images on the site you're a reviewer at than all the others you submit to. Most people understand the rejection reasons - the reviewer  :D
« Last Edit: January 18, 2010, 12:04 by RT »

« Reply #39 on: January 18, 2010, 12:05 »
0
Location doesn't matter so much .. at least in that case. That client was located in Dallas, TX which is I dunno 10-13 hours from me. Honestly, I thought they were asking for pretty generic stuff too (that's why I loved doing it .. easy money LOL) All I can say is some companies have a lot of funding behind them. When you own a company who is bringing in millions on a monthly basis a couple thousand bucks for some photos is not a big deal. That client ran a online dating site. Not only did they spend that on the shoot but a few weeks later they noticed one of my models and asked if I would ask her to fly down there and shoot a 20 second video. They paid for her airline tickets from Kansas City to Dallas, hotel for the entire weekend and paid her a few hundred bucks to sit there and giggle while pretending to chat with somebody online for 20 seconds in front of a camera. Places that have money don't have a problem spending it and the more money they have just means the more money they need to try and spend so their accounts can work those numbers into their expense goals.

I use to have my email posted in some of my profiles as a way of making contact .. but I started getting bombarded with more spam than anything so .. bad idea LOL. As for being a reviewer I actually get paid pretty good. I'm probably not allowed to say how much but it's what most people would call a full time income and I've been doing it since 2004 so it's just second nature at this point. That and it's kinda fun .. my wife says you get to travel the world everyday. :) ... I'm actually thinking about starting up a new educational microstock website that focuses on learning the acceptance/rejection side of micro. Everybody is always talking about not understanding the rejection process on the forums .. since I'm a 5 year reviewer it kinda makes sense for me to start a blog or something on it. (I always need to stay busy LOL)

Out of interest do you read your stuff back to yourself before posting it and ever ask yourself whether it sounds credible or not.

As for your educational blog, maybe one of the first subjects could be explaining how you've got a significantly higher number of images on the site you're a reviewer at than all the others you submit to. Most people understand the rejection reasons - the reviewer  :D

no RT, you cannot use your reviewer pass to get your own portfolio approved.
that would be  gross conflict of interest  8)
« Last Edit: January 18, 2010, 12:12 by PERSEUS »

« Reply #40 on: January 18, 2010, 12:26 »
0
Out of interest do you read your stuff back to yourself before posting it and ever ask yourself whether it sounds credible or not.

As for your educational blog, maybe one of the first subjects could be explaining how you've got a significantly higher number of images on the site you're a reviewer at than all the others you submit to. Most people understand the rejection reasons - the reviewer  :D

No I just type out real fast they way things are or have happened to myself. I'm not concerned with sounding credible or not. After all it's the internet. Some people will look for credibility while others will take it in and try to spark their own innovations from it.

LOL as for the # of images I actually can explain that .. I paid them off with cold hard cash (just kidding)  ;D. I actually have been a major slacker on uploading and have less images on the site I currently review for. I would also think it was safe to assume that every agency, big or small, does not allow reviewers to review their own images, win contests, etc. All conspiracy theories aside, I think that is or should be a pretty common practice for any type of business in the modern world.

I saw people talking about conflict of interest in another post and I didn't bother commenting on it but my immediate thought was that the reviewer simply clicked on the wrong reject reason. Think about how many times you went to click a category when submitting a file and accidentally clicked the wrong one and had to re-click it .. or more often didn't even notice and the reviewer actually fixed it for you without you ever knowing.

« Reply #41 on: January 18, 2010, 12:45 »
0
Hi Randy,

 I would offer your advice and then save your breath. There are some people here that do not want to try and grasp new ideas they just stick to what works and that is just fine for them. For what it is worth I have had several friends make very large incomes because their work was found in stock. I have my last producer who pulled down 150K this year from one major client because they found her in stock. The work she is doing for them is so boring ( her own words ) and simplistic but yet they flew her to Vegas 5 times this year, they like her as much as her work. This is not uncommon, art directors find peoples work they like and they like to work with, the human element is of importance in business.
 As for asking the budget of a client that is very common on a bid for a commercial job. It lets the photographer know where they can start and if the job pays enough to be worth their while or where they can cut corners if they love the job they are being offered for creative reasons or otherwise.
 The flip side is there are a great deal of art directors that ask for bids only to make the person they already wanted appear reasonable in price to their client. I have been in that situation many times. They have to get a few bids for comparison to please their clients needs. They know you will come in higher than who they want and that convinces the client on the agencies original choice so you go to the trouble of creating a bid that was never really considered for the job, absolute pain. There is a lot to the game of commercial photography that is not mentioned here because this is a stock based site. Maybe you should stick to just stock since several people seemed a bit tarnished by your remarks on commercial work.

Cheers,
Jonathan

« Reply #42 on: January 18, 2010, 13:15 »
0
Hi Randy,
 I would offer your advice and then save your breath. There are some people here that do not want to try and grasp new ideas they just stick to what works and that is just fine for them.
Of course, it's the internet. :) But I figure oh well, there might be somebody come along and use and idea to benefit themselves or modify it and make it even better and hopefully share it with everybody somewhere down the road.

Maybe you should stick to just stock since several people seemed a bit tarnished by your remarks on commercial work.

Cheers,
Jonathan

I think it was here I made some comments about profit margins for studio portraiture once that got everybody worked up for a couple days LOL ..  it was silly  :P

RT


« Reply #43 on: January 18, 2010, 13:16 »
0
Hi Randy,

 I would offer your advice and then save your breath. There are some people here that do not want to try and grasp new ideas they just stick to what works and that is just fine for them. For what it is worth I have had several friends make very large incomes because their work was found in stock. I have my last producer who pulled down 150K this year from one major client because they found her in stock. The work she is doing for them is so boring ( her own words ) and simplistic but yet they flew her to Vegas 5 times this year, they like her as much as her work. This is not uncommon, art directors find peoples work they like and they like to work with, the human element is of importance in business.
 As for asking the budget of a client that is very common on a bid for a commercial job. It lets the photographer know where they can start and if the job pays enough to be worth their while or where they can cut corners if they love the job they are being offered for creative reasons or otherwise.
 The flip side is there are a great deal of art directors that ask for bids only to make the person they already wanted appear reasonable in price to their client. I have been in that situation many times. They have to get a few bids for comparison to please their clients needs. They know you will come in higher than who they want and that convinces the client on the agencies original choice so you go to the trouble of creating a bid that was never really considered for the job, absolute pain. There is a lot to the game of commercial photography that is not mentioned here because this is a stock based site. Maybe you should stick to just stock since several people seemed a bit tarnished by your remarks on commercial work.

Cheers,
Jonathan

Ahh another expert speaks, just to make things clear there I have no problem with anybody sharing their vast experience, my problem is those that do so but can't or won't actually back up their claims. Of course when some claims are blatently BS it kind of sparks a flame with me as well.

I'm sure in the examples you gave Mr Ross the lady in question could and would quite easily show examples if she were the one making such claims, but just to highlight a point it was that the claim was made regarding 'high end commission' jobs from clients finding a photographer through microstock (not that the amounts he claimed are anywhere near high end commissions), as for the commercial budget thing it certainly isn't common in UK I can tell you, which is why I asked if it's common practice in the states.

And please in the future have the guts to challenge me direct, I have no problem challenging you.


It's as the old saying goes "you can talk the talk but can you walk the walk"

I come here to learn and sometimes share things, as I'm sure others do, some people use this site as a personal ego boost which to the gullible folks out there does no good whatsoever.

« Last Edit: January 18, 2010, 13:19 by RT »

RT


« Reply #44 on: January 18, 2010, 13:28 »
0

No I just type out real fast they way things are or have happened to myself. I'm not concerned with sounding credible or not. After all it's the internet. Some people will look for credibility while others will take it in and try to spark their own innovations from it.

Nothing wrong with trying to spark innovations but when the info is misleading or inflated I don't think it does anybody any good, you're not the first and certainly won't be the last that seeks the admiration from your peers, personally I've never understood it.

By the way I do know where you're a reviewer but I'll respect your wishes to keep that info under cover.

« Reply #45 on: January 18, 2010, 13:44 »
0
not sure how the conversation suddenly went astray .. I was asked to give an example with more details so I took a real world example and gave the details. I'm not sure how that can be considered misleading. It's not like I was coming out of the blue for no reason boasting to everybody how I made a million dollars photographing bars of soap in my bathroom. I was asked to give more details so I did. I didn't really feel a $2000 job was such an amazing story that it needed to be backed up by inviting everybody over to my office so they could go through me email correspondences and make photo copies of any contracts, memos and tax statements to verify the example. Did I miss something somewhere?

« Reply #46 on: January 18, 2010, 13:48 »
0
Wow RT,

 Didn't mean to get your knickers in a twist. This has you pretty fired up. My old producers name is name is Inti St. Clair and she just finished another job for AT&T, she won't mind me sharing she is a dear friend and also loves to support photographers. She doesn't bother with this site that is why she hasn't posted but if you would like to get in touch with her I can make the personal arrangements.
 I am not challenging you anything, I was noticing that a few people took it pretty personally about his success and I find that happens here on regular occasion. Why should he have to prove anything to anyone here, he just offered his experience.
 If your last line was directed at me about the personal Ego boost I am sorry you feel that way. I have tried to offer a great deal of information to this site on a regular basis. I am sorry you see that as blowing my own horn.
 Can you explain how my supporting another photographer is for my own ego, that doesn't quite compute. Besides I said other people not RT. Please don't take this so personally it wasn't directed at you specifically it was directed at all those that challenge people here to prove themselves on a regular basis, it is just a handful of participants.
 I also don't understand the statement about walking the walk. Can you explain in more detail.


Best,
Jonathan
« Last Edit: January 18, 2010, 14:06 by Jonathan Ross »


RT


« Reply #47 on: January 18, 2010, 14:15 »
0
Dear Jonathan,

You could never get my knickers in a twist, anyhow for all you know I may be going commando!

Thank you for confirming my statement about the lady you mentioned and it perfectly highlights my point, if someone makes a claim about something is it not natural to expect them to support that claim?  and it's a shame she doesn't come here because there's nothing I like more than reading the experiences of someone who actually is successful in this industry with real world examples. If she has a blog or website please post it or PM me the details.

OK I'll accept you hadn't aimed your remarks at me personally, but do you wonder why these 'few people' keep challenging situations such as these, and can you not spot the common denominator?

Now it's a touch of the touche regards you supporting another photographer for your own ego, did I mention your name  ;)

And finally to explain the walk the walk saying, there is a saying over here (I thought it was worldwide) "You can talk the talk but can you walk the walk" and I've found this explanation on the internet that might help you understand:

It means: talk is cheap, but can you follow through with action? It is similiar to: don't let your mouth write a check that your a** can't cash

Or to put it into context here, if you're going to brag about a job you've done then be prepared to follow it through with real examples of the job, not just (hypothetically speaking) a link to some stock images you've shot.






« Reply #48 on: January 18, 2010, 14:17 »
0
ahhhhhh but without competition there is no need to advance. Style will never change and we will be forced to stare at people in business attire frolicking with cheesy grins in front of washed out pastel backgrounds and isolations forever .. couples giggling on a neutral couch in front of a laptop and taking little baby sips of coffee in a kitchen that reminds you of the store displays in Home Depot. It will be like living in an endless issue of better housekeeping.  ;D

So, you aren't able to better yourself without the threat of someone banging on your door?

« Reply #49 on: January 18, 2010, 14:25 »
0
 Hi RT,

 I guess it is just seems odd to me to here from people that won't reveal their own idendity to question that of others. What walk would you like, a hop on one foot, a silly walk a la John Cleese :) I still don't get what you were trying to say.
 Also are you explaining that the post you wrote directly to me and said a comment about egos was not directed at me, that seems a bit odd. I must have misunderstood maybe you could help explain who you were referring to? Once again I think a person can make a claim here without having to prove it to you or anyone else. I think I have shown proof for what I have added to this blog as much as the next guy.

Good luck,
J

« Reply #50 on: January 18, 2010, 14:55 »
0
ahhhhhh but without competition there is no need to advance. Style will never change and we will be forced to stare at people in business attire frolicking with cheesy grins in front of washed out pastel backgrounds and isolations forever .. couples giggling on a neutral couch in front of a laptop and taking little baby sips of coffee in a kitchen that reminds you of the store displays in Home Depot. It will be like living in an endless issue of better housekeeping.  ;D

So, you aren't able to better yourself without the threat of someone banging on your door?

ok so it's probably safe to guess that 99.9% of stock photos available on the market were not taken by you .. or any of us for that matter. Even the largest portfolio only amounts to a single grain of sand when you look at the big picture. How does posting some tips here and there constitute a global threat of newbies charging in and taking all our money away?

I personally can't wait for somebody or a small group of fresh blood to come in and start mixing up the mainstream, introducing new trends and making the current ones outdated. Right now we are looking at popular trends and styles that were common place well over a decade ago. Change is only a threat to those who are not capable of expanding on their own abilities.

RT


« Reply #51 on: January 18, 2010, 15:05 »
0
Hi RT,

 I guess it is just seems odd to me to here from people that won't reveal their own idendity to question that of others. What walk would you like, a hop on one foot, a silly walk a la John Cleese :) I still don't get what you were trying to say.
 Also are you explaining that the post you wrote directly to me and said a comment about egos was not directed at me, that seems a bit odd. I must have misunderstood maybe you could help explain who you were referring to? Once again I think a person can make a claim here without having to prove it to you or anyone else. I think I have shown proof for what I have added to this blog as much as the next guy.

Good luck,
J


Jonathan, Chumley, Avava

Sending me a PM and then blocking my reply is a bit juvenille, of course if Jonathan is your real name I've lost count of the number of identity changes you've had here.

It's also a shame that you still don't get that phrase, so I'll try and give you a siiimmmpppllleee example:

RT - Hey Jonathan I've just bought a brand new Rolls Royce

JR - Wow that's great can I see it

RT - Nope

JR - Can I have a ride in it

RT - Nope

JR - Have you got a photo of it

RT - Nope but here's a photo of my push bike

JR - That's good enough for me

You see RT made a substantial claim but can't actually back it up, or another common interpretation is that RT bullsh***ed, my way of looking at the above scenario is that RT has not in actual fact bought a new Rolls Royce but he is just trying to impress you hoping you are stupid enough to believe his story despite the complete lack of any tangible evidence, the way I see your attitude to people making statements is that we should all accept that RT bought the car because after all he did show JR a photo of his bike. And that is in short what the phrase is referring to, saying something but not being able to back it up.

Is that clear enough for you or anyone else who isn't aware of that phrase?





« Last Edit: January 18, 2010, 15:38 by RT »

« Reply #52 on: January 18, 2010, 15:29 »
0
I personally can't wait for somebody or a small group of fresh blood to come in and start mixing up the mainstream, introducing new trends and making the current ones outdated. Right now we are looking at popular trends and styles that were common place well over a decade ago. Change is only a threat to those who are not capable of expanding on their own abilities.

Why don't you be the fresh blood then?  Why do you have to wait for someone else to challenge you?

« Reply #53 on: January 18, 2010, 15:30 »
0
ok so it's probably safe to guess that 99.9% of stock photos available on the market were not taken by you .. or any of us for that matter. Even the largest portfolio only amounts to a single grain of sand when you look at the big picture. How does posting some tips here and there constitute a global threat of newbies charging in and taking all our money away?

This is what everyone says about their "make money from microstock blog".  Yet people are constantly acquiring cameras and then stepping in here to see how they can make money like what they read about.

« Reply #54 on: January 18, 2010, 15:52 »
0
ok so it's probably safe to guess that 99.9% of stock photos available on the market were not taken by you .. or any of us for that matter. Even the largest portfolio only amounts to a single grain of sand when you look at the big picture. How does posting some tips here and there constitute a global threat of newbies charging in and taking all our money away?

This is what everyone says about their "make money from microstock blog".  Yet people are constantly acquiring cameras and then stepping in here to see how they can make money like what they read about.

Good point .. and who knows where that could lead .. the next thing you know they'll start writing books on the subject ... then people are going to start going to college and majoring in photography. I even heard a rumor they were trying to get high school kids interested in photography early on. We'll really be screwed then.

Ok I think I got it. The source of the problem is that these people are constantly acquiring cameras. That's where we need to nip things in the bud. My neighbor has a couple old vans for sale. You get me 50 bags of fertiziler and I'll hire some homeless guys to park them in front of the Nikon & Canon distribution centers. Presto Blamo .. the camera stockpiles will dissipate in no time leaving us holding the last known devices to mankind. Threat annihilated and we become microstock gods. Ok who's with me?  ;D

« Reply #55 on: January 18, 2010, 16:05 »
0
Hi RT,

 I had no idea that I have blocked your PM. I do not have anyone else blocked on my PM's, I will unblock it immediately so you can reply. That is the idea when you send a PM is so the other person can reply without having to bother the entire group. Even SJ isn't blocked from my PM's. It is some unfortunate error and I will fix it immediately. I welcome your response.
 Question, why does it matter if someone proves something to you on a blog or not. Why not just take it at face value, I hope you do drive a Rolls but I wouldn't question you on it because the result doesn't matter as long as you are happy.
 Like I said you have kept your identity hidden and you offer a lot of your opinion here as well as critique of others. I think that is a bit backwards that is all. If you are such a proponent of people proving what they say is true then please share your identity with the group?
 Again I ask, If you make a post to me that proclaims something about peoples inflated egos and walking the walk who were you pointing those remarks to? Simple question to answer I would think. Would you please answer it.

By the way I have a pristine 65' mustang fastback, here is a picture of it.  ::) www.andersenross.com/mustang I only drive it on sunny days. I drive my 2006 Range Rover the rest of the time, now that is bragging and ego based ;D

Thanks,
Jonathan

« Reply #56 on: January 18, 2010, 17:18 »
0
10 years ago nobody would touch cheap Chinese junk. Now there is only cheap Chinese junk :-) Microstock will eliminate all other competitors and then standards will not matter if there is no choice.


« Reply #57 on: January 18, 2010, 17:25 »
0
10 years ago nobody would touch cheap Chinese junk. Now there is only cheap Chinese junk :-) Microstock will eliminate all other competitors and then standards will not matter if there is no choice.

very profound,mela. congrats.
much like if you were born listening to madonna and rum dmc or whatnot, and never heard of charlie parker, monk, trane, or even jerome kern, gershwin,etc...
or instead of tolstoy and herman hesse, you were weaned on your local tabloids,etc... you wouldn't even know what you're missing out .
or like from day one you've been fed fast food with pop, you would not like cordon bleu culinary served with a glass of  chardonnay or shiraz, even if you hit your head walking into the restaurant  ;)

fine points,mela.
« Last Edit: January 18, 2010, 17:35 by PERSEUS »

RT


« Reply #58 on: January 18, 2010, 17:34 »
0
Hi RT,

 I had no idea that I have blocked your PM. I do not have anyone else blocked on my PM's, I will unblock it immediately so you can reply. That is the idea when you send a PM is so the other person can reply without having to bother the entire group. Even SJ isn't blocked from my PM's. It is some unfortunate error and I will fix it immediately. I welcome your response.

Great I'll reply as soon as you unblock it, you did the same thing once before, and you've done it to SJ as well, clearly a clumsy error.
Question, why does it matter if someone proves something to you on a blog or not. Why not just take it at face value, I hope you do drive a Rolls but I wouldn't question you on it because the result doesn't matter as long as you are happy.

Because some of the things people post on threads here are worded in a way that may influence others less knowledgable sometimes unintentionally, and I feel it my duty to point out any errors so that the less fortunate are not mislead, I don't ask for any thanks doing this but judging by the PM's I receive it's a welcome service for some.

Like I said you have kept your identity hidden and you offer a lot of your opinion here as well as critique of others. I think that is a bit backwards that is all. If you are such a proponent of people proving what they say is true then please share your identity with the group?

My identity is irrelevant, many people do know who I am and I'll share it via PM with anybody that I feel really needs to know, however like many others I choose not to share portfolio links because I'm not a fan of people copying my work, and any comments I make here would come up in a google search under my business name which I don't think is relevant, something like that wouldn't apply to you because you have so many different identities.
I'll happily prove to anyone any claims that I make here, by PM if need be for confidentiality, but I've never been one for boasting.
Luckily Leaf the guy that runs this forum introduced those little meters under everyone's name for this very reason, and as you can see it indicates I do quite well on iS, it's a good indication as to whether someone knows what they're talking about or not. I wish he'd introduce a BS meter then I (and the few people you mentioned ) wouldn't have to interject.

Just as a reminder the last time we had a discussion via PM I did tell you who I was to which you replied I should share more of my experiences, you've obviously forgotten - old age gets to us all!
Again I ask, If you make a post to me that proclaims something about peoples inflated egos and walking the walk who were you pointing those remarks to? Simple question to answer I would think. Would you please answer it.

Well if it makes you happy then yes I do think you've got an over inflated ego, but the line wasn't intended just for you on this occasion.
By the way I have a pristine 65' mustang fastback, here is a picture of it.  ::) www.andersenross.com/mustang I only drive it on sunny days. I drive my 2006 Range Rover the rest of the time, now that is bragging and ego based ;D

Thanks,
Jonathan

I'm not a car person myself and know nothing about American cars, so I'm guessing that's a good one?

Maybe one day this thread could turn back to the original subject.
 


« Reply #59 on: January 18, 2010, 18:00 »
0
Okay RT,

 Thanks for helping everyone here and supporting those that are here. That is a great energy you bring with it. I do not have you blocked anymore it was a mistake and I did not have SJ blocked, on the contrary he has me blocked, I just started blocking his  "posts " because I didn't find them helpful, but not his PM's.
 It sounds like you do not believe I am Jonathan Ross I can't imagine more than offering my e-mail and sharing my business experience that can be tracked being owner in two stock agencies you can check it out www.BlendImages.com here in the States or www.CulturaImages.com out of Jolly old England just as I am, Bristol actually. Or just google andersen ross you will see a story there on me and my wife from years back when we built a studio in Seattle as well as our web site, I think our actual site is the first link when you type it in.
  I have my web site and direct e-mail attached as well as my real name to this site. If you are going to ask for people to prove themselves then I ask you. Please prove yourself to me as a person of credibility by sharing who are in a PM or quit being a hypocrite.
 I have made every effort I can to prove who I am to you, send me a PM and share please. If I choose to market myself under different names but put my real name jonathan ross behind each of those other names then I don't think I am hiding anything, just marketing.
  I also just noticed you are pretty computer savvy aren't you. You see I think you are someone else on this board and that is why you don't want to share it with me. I have asked before and you never PM me with it. How about it. Walk the Walk sir.

Best,
Jonathan
 

« Reply #60 on: January 18, 2010, 18:19 »
0
Hey guys thank you all for the information. Personally Im glad you are all here and I really do think that most of us can spot misinformation.

RT


« Reply #61 on: January 18, 2010, 18:40 »
0
Jonathan,

I have PM'd you but you are missing the point, I don't care who you are, and I'm not asking you to prove who you are I was just making the point that even you have many identities, and neither I or anybody else is asking anybody to prove who they are only that if they come here and makes some claim of their achievement that they are able to back that statement up, that has nothing to do with identity.
I remember you once accusing someone here of copying your work and you wonder why some of us don't like to advertise our portfolios.

Tell me what have I said that you would like me to prove and I gladly will, if I told everyone I had just shot the latest ad campaign for Adidas I would expect people to ask to see the results, and I would be able to produce an image to satisfy their needs. ( I haven't by the way it was just an example) But for someone to say they've done something and then go onto the complete offensive when asked to give some proof is just ridiculous.

As for being computer savvy or being somebody else, I'm afraid you're not going to win this years Sherlock Holmes award, I'm useless with most things computer related and I'm certainly not anybody else but would love to know who you think I am please PM the details.
This is a bit petty so apologies in advance, but if you don't know who I am in the first place it would be an incorrect statement to suggest I'm someone else.

Now seriously it's getting boring, get off your high horse about identities and accept that sometimes people might actually not believe some of the things others say and strangely they might even ask for examples, another thing you need to accept is that anonymity is allowed here.

PM me with any other messages I'm sure everyone is bored by now, don't forget to unblock me first.



« Reply #62 on: January 18, 2010, 18:50 »
0
I agree Rum Rock.

Best,
J

« Reply #63 on: January 18, 2010, 18:57 »
0
I did not have SJ blocked, on the contrary he has me blocked, I just started blocking his  "posts " because I didn't find them helpful, but not his PM's.


How can you not find SJL's posts helpful? There's only 3 other people in the world that might reasonably claim to know as much as Sean about microstock __ and nobody anywhere near his league offers so much help and advice to others on this and the IS forums. I for one, and I know many others too, really appreciate the input he has here. How f*cking dare you, a puffed-up egocentric microstock nonentity, dismiss him like that?

It's when you make statements like that (as well as all the BS posts about your supposed earnings that are evidently mathematically impossible) that shatters any credibility whatsoever that you might once have had.

I'm with Richard. If it looks like bullsh1t, smells like bullsh1t and sounds like bullsh1t .. then that's most likely what it is. Most times I bite my lip and ignore such posts that obviously contain such painfully obvious inaccuracies, intended by the author to inflate their own ego, but quite frankly it is getting beyond a joke and, as RT has pointed out, is potentially damaging to those who haven't been in this business long enough to detect the difference.

« Reply #64 on: January 18, 2010, 19:07 »
0
I did not have SJ blocked, on the contrary he has me blocked, I just started blocking his  "posts " because I didn't find them helpful, but not his PM's.

You did, by the way, because I went to PM you something in response to your PM, and it was blocked.  So, I blocked you.  Fair's fair, after all.

« Reply #65 on: January 18, 2010, 19:11 »
0
I was waiting for you Gostywick,

  I am not even going there with you. Have a good day. It ain't gonna work this time guys, sorry ;D

Jonathan

« Reply #66 on: January 18, 2010, 19:26 »
0
 Hi RT,

 I would find it pretty hard to prove that you shot a job without revealing your identity. So you are asking him to identify himself. You had trouble believe me about my friend working for AT&T until I told you here name. It is not the question that is the issue it is how it is presented.
 Many people feel chased out of here when they try to help and offer advice and I think the entire site loses from that. I know that is how I felt when I first came here and with the exception of three people here I seem to be helpful to others. I would prefer we could make our own judgements rather than have you policing the site for us all.

J
« Last Edit: January 18, 2010, 19:35 by Jonathan Ross »


« Reply #67 on: January 18, 2010, 19:34 »
0
 Sean,

Send me a PM anytime I do not have anyone blocked. I am sorry for upsetting anyone on this post. I told you I was no longer going to be checking your posts not your PM's I told you this through a PM and then tried 15 minutes later to send you another and you had me blocked.
 There is a mistake here, I do not have anyone blocked from Pm's. You are all free to Pm me anytime.
 Sean I think you and I realize we don't see eye to eye but what gostywk said was not my intention to attack your character, I was just sharing in truth who I have discontinued correspondence with. Until today that is. This is the last post for me guys as it seems to be spiraling out of control and just becoming a lot of name calling.

J

RT


« Reply #68 on: January 18, 2010, 19:53 »
0
Hi RT,

 I would find it pretty hard to prove that you shot a job without revealing your identity. So you are asking him to identify himself. You had trouble believe me about my friend working for AT&T until I told you here name. It is not the question that is the issue it is how it is presented.
 Many people feel chased out of here when they try to help and offer advice and I think the entire site loses from that. I know that is how I felt when I first came here and with the exception of three people here I seem to be helpful to others. I would prefer we could make our own judgements rather than have you policing the site for us all.

J

If you're going to make statements about me make sure they're correct:

- I'm not asking him to identify himself, I know who he is, we all know who he is and have done from the start, you can't seriously be telling me you still think this is all about an identity, what do you want copies of peoples passports!!! IT IS ABOUT THE POSTING OF ACCURATE INFORMATION

-I never queried the story about your friend before or after you mentioned her name, in fact my reply was the exact opposite, why are you making things up?

-As for making your own judgement, what's stopping you? and why am I not entitled to state my opinion, this isn't a dictatorship as far as I'm aware and I'm allowed to query things if I so choose, or do you know differently.

« Reply #69 on: January 18, 2010, 19:58 »
0
You are right Richard,

 You are totally allowed to say whatever you want on this site whenever you want. My mistake, apologies all around.

Best,
Jonathan

« Reply #70 on: January 18, 2010, 20:21 »
0
It sounds like you do not believe I am Jonathan Ross ...

If it can help, I have Jonathan on my Facebook and I know almost everything about his kids' football matches :)
Come on guys, no need to argue about this.

« Reply #71 on: January 18, 2010, 20:29 »
0
Come on guys, no need to argue about this.


having a difference of opinion is healthy. but
let's agree to disagree, but let's also allow the other person to speak up
without being clobbered on the head.

btw, it's nice to see some of the old familiar  names back out here again
, although sadly  another replay of the same unpleasant circumstance.

i thought you guys have all but gone senile and / or left this world  due to a cardiac arrest or CVA during your usual  fit of  tantrum

just kidding.
but really, chill guys, or else the CVA or cardiac arrest may in fact catch up on you.

hate to read your obituary here like..."he kicked the bucket ... screaming his frigging head off, as usual.  poor old sod won the battle but lost the war"
  8)

LIVE LONG AND PROSPER :)

p.s.
i'm not choosing sides, i like both Mr. Locke and Mr. Ross. and yes,
i've metaphorically thrown valuable stout in their faces every once in a while too... and survived  ;D
« Last Edit: January 18, 2010, 21:15 by PERSEUS »

« Reply #72 on: January 18, 2010, 21:04 »
0
Hi Randy,  
I'm not a photographer. I'm a designer.
Due to the nature of my images my acceptance rate is quite good, nothing to worry about. However I would love to hear more about the inspection process, especially if it comes from an insider.
It's interesting and I'm sure I have a lot to learn.
If you find the time go ahead and write the blog.
We will be reading it.

When it comes the the Fear of the Newbie, we, here, have heard the same arguments many, many times before and by now this whole thing is becoming predictable, and quite frankly boring.  
I already know who's going to say what.
It's been happening like clockwork for years, every single time with no exception. They're that repetitive, and I mean it.
(Sigh anyone?)
You just go ahead and help the newbies if you can. They're a vital part of this business and we all need them.  

@Jonathan Ross,
I'm not sure how old you are (why is age brought into this?) but it doesn't even matter, because what you've got is the joie de vivre.
In this business enthusiasm and creativity are decisive and you've got them both.
You don't need to lift heavy weights or run a marathon. You've got assistants to help you with the heavy stuff and even models to wash your car :)

Your portfolio is as good as it gets. Hands down, top class.

Your identity is well known (videos, conference speech, Jonathan Ross was there. Others were not)

Your images stand out from the crowd and speak for themselves. That is something that nobody can take away from you. No matter what, no matter who.
Isn't that great?
Untouchable, the work of a master.

Now go ahead and 'dare' do anything you want. They can't do a thing about it anyway.  
Best wishes,
« Last Edit: January 19, 2010, 10:04 by Eireann »

ap

« Reply #73 on: January 18, 2010, 21:21 »
0



@Jonathan Ross,


Your portfolio is as good as it gets. Hands down, top class.

Your identity is well known (videos, conference speech, Jonathan Ross was there. Others were not)

Your images stand out from the crowd and speak for themselves. That is something that nobody can take away from you. No matter what, no matter who.
Isn't that great?
Untouchable, the work of a master.

Now go ahead and 'dare' do anything you want. They can't do a thing about it anyway.  
Best wishes,


yep, +1. if  i dare say, his (macro) work makes yuri's look like kindegarden work. i bet this remark will keep this thread going for another year.  ;)

« Reply #74 on: January 18, 2010, 21:30 »
0
 Hi Gang,

 Thanks for the support folks but please realize it takes to to fight and I was just as responsible if not more so for the disagreements that took place. I am glad that I have been of help to some here and I hope to continue as time passes. Once again thanks for the kind words and support, it means a great deal. I know I can't make everyone happy but that's life anywhere you go.

Best,
Jonathan

« Reply #75 on: January 18, 2010, 21:47 »
0

EDITED FOR BREVITY
 it takes tWo to fight and I was just as responsible if not more so for the disagreements that took place

you got that right too Jon.    but it also take a bigger man to admit he flipped his lid .

take care old fella  :D


« Reply #76 on: January 19, 2010, 16:57 »
0
Thanks Perseus,

 I have a resting heart beat of 40-45 so don't worry about this 50 year old valve blowing, that is the same as Lance Armstrongs resting rate. I run 3 miles a day and go to the gym every day as well. Dropped 37 lbs. this year and am in the process of replacing the fat with muscle by adding another 20 lbs. back but in muscle. Us old guys need to stay in shape to keep up with this young crowd ;)

Best,
Jonathan


lisafx

« Reply #77 on: January 19, 2010, 18:09 »
0
Hi Randy,

 I have my last producer who pulled down 150K this year from one major client because they found her in stock. The work she is doing for them is so boring ( her own words ) and simplistic but yet they flew her to Vegas 5 times this year, they like her as much as her work. This is not uncommon, art directors find peoples work they like and they like to work with, the human element is of importance in business.

Out of curiosity, Jonathan, did they find your producer through work she has in microstock, or traditional stock?  

I can very easily see how clients who are used to paying high prices at the traditional agencies would not balk at paying thousands for a custom shoot.  

However every single approach I have had from a microstock customer has vanished in thin air as soon as I mentioned price (and less than Xposurepro charged).  

Maybe I have just been unlucky or perhaps could use lessons in how to better price a job.   I have nothing but respect for people who can manage to successfully pull in and complete custom work based on their stock portfolio.  Your friend sounds like a very impressive example. 

Even so, I stand by my assertion that most micro customers are out for a bargain.

« Last Edit: January 19, 2010, 18:15 by lisafx »

« Reply #78 on: January 19, 2010, 18:30 »
0
Even so, I stand by my assertion that most micro customers are out for a bargain.

Yep.  Every quote I've ever given to someone makes them disappear, not to be heard from again.

lisafx

« Reply #79 on: January 19, 2010, 18:40 »
0
Even so, I stand by my assertion that most micro customers are out for a bargain.

Yep.  Every quote I've ever given to someone makes them disappear, not to be heard from again.

Actually, that is a big relief for me to read Sean. 

If micro customers aren't willing to pay custom prices for work of your caliber then it probably isn't something I'm doing wrong after all.

Thanks for confirming my impression :)

« Reply #80 on: January 19, 2010, 19:06 »
0
Hi Lisa,

 That's a good question, I'll ask her. I saw the shot they chose her for and I can tell you it didn't look anything different from a Micro stock shot of a person using a cell phone. She is pretty savvy and I am sure her personality had a lot to do with it. She was a great producer. if I had wanted into NASA she probably could have gotten us in on a trade. Just like my new producer, some people can get in anywhere, not me I am the one they run from and hide their babies :D

Best,
Jonathan

P.S. I have had two of my past assistants get commercial work from their stock work with a collection a 1/10th of mine and know one has asked me to shoot for their fortune 500 company. Maybe my work sucks or it is a matter of timing. I am counting on the latter.

« Reply #81 on: February 15, 2010, 17:02 »
0
One more interesting happening on focalpop about assignment called 'girl shopping' is to be mentioned here as brilliant example.

I will only give you the link and would like you to read what was the problem. But, you can't read initial seekers request because it was changed after we started to criticize it.
It was $75 offered for 6 teenager models shooting setup. No way somewhere on stock finding similar image to requested. After our critics request has changed but also not many of us (photogs) submitted our photos because even that was misery payment! Still, besides that there was submissions seeker didn't selected any of images uploaded!

Here is link:

http://www.focalpop.com/request/view/teen-girls-shopping#toption-tabs-details

« Reply #82 on: February 16, 2010, 03:53 »
0
It was $75 offered for 6 teenager models shooting setup. No way somewhere on stock finding similar image to requested. After our critics request has changed but also not many of us (photogs) submitted our photos because even that was misery payment! Still, besides that there was submissions seeker didn't selected any of images uploaded!
Thanks for the read and the site. The asker was a bit funny. He actually wanted to see what concepts photographers came up with, then let those copy by his local photographer. He wanted to pimp his site too. Some people have guts, and I hate those referral and web traffic hunters in disguise.

That site is great to have an idea what real life buyers are looking for, and it might help to find selling concepts. If it happens you have the requested shot in your port (or on your disk, not processed yet), it's easy money. I just bookmarked the site.

« Reply #83 on: February 16, 2010, 07:44 »
0
... I'm actually thinking about starting up a new educational microstock website that focuses on learning the acceptance/rejection side of micro. Everybody is always talking about not understanding the rejection process on the forums .. since I'm a 5 year reviewer it kinda makes sense for me to start a blog or something on it. (I always need to stay busy LOL)

I disagree with the comments on this. I think this is quite a good idea, I would be happy to read such a blog. This is a path I never walked on so I am sure it would be interesting and educational to read.

macrosaur

    This user is banned.
« Reply #84 on: February 18, 2010, 14:41 »
0
"Does MicroStock lower design standards ? "

YES.
Definitely.

Because in one way or another it reinforces designers and buyers into thinking images are worth few cents
and after some time they'll think it's true and they'll pretend discounts.


helix7

« Reply #85 on: February 20, 2010, 19:21 »
0
Yep.  Every quote I've ever given to someone makes them disappear, not to be heard from again.

I've always experienced the same. I guess because I sell a set of vector icons for $10 in mocrostock, they think I'll make a custom set for the same price.


helix7

« Reply #86 on: February 20, 2010, 19:26 »
0
"Does MicroStock lower design standards ? "

YES.
Definitely.

Because in one way or another it reinforces designers and buyers into thinking images are worth few cents
and after some time they'll think it's true and they'll pretend discounts.


Wouldn't this be the lowering of stock image standards, and not design standards? Buyers might view your images as being worth less because of microstock, but the cost and the value of graphic design isn't likely to be affected by microstock prices.

I feel like we're getting into two different discussions here. Microstock prices have an effect on the perceived value of stock images. But not design. However you could argue that other forms of crowdsourcing have an effect on the perceived value of graphic design work. Contests, bid sites, spec requests, etc.


« Reply #87 on: February 23, 2010, 11:36 »
0
I want to attack this question from a different angle.

Does microstock encourage or discourage lower design standards among contributors?

And how will this trend impact the quality of available artwork in the long run?

I believe that every image uploaded falls into one of two categories, which I'll call "commodity" images (those which offer nothing truly unique and are similar in subject and style to countless thousands of other images) and "unique" images.  And based on which type of image you primarily upload, you're either a "commodity" or "unique" contributor.

Microstock punishes the commodity contributor and rewards the unique contributor.  In theory, this encourages photographers and illustrators to think outside the box, knowing that if they simply upload more of the same, their work will be commoditized, and the only way it will sell is if it catches a buyer's eye at the top of the "most recently uploaded" search results.

Long story short, microstock encourages creativity among its contributors and could in the long run be ushering in a new era of outside the box thinking. 

Call me Mr. Glass Half-Full

macrosaur

    This user is banned.
« Reply #88 on: February 24, 2010, 07:23 »
0
well it's always about supply and demand.

you can't expect to get rich shooting apples and bananas.

maybe if you shoot 100.000 apples and bananas in an endless different ways
you can earn some money but otherwise your chance of flooding the market
with easy-peasy photos is very low.

microstock is usually made of edited collection, and they only care about few categories of images.
that's a very small perimeter compared to RM.

and being so small it will be harder and harder to make sales in the long run.

i can't see why designers should pay more than 1$ for a photo of apples and oranges,
but they sure have good reasons to pay 200$ for a hard-to-find image they badly need
in their design.

but this factor alone won't lower design standards unless their customers realize the pictures
are worth pennies.

i've seen some calendars recently sent me by my local bank, all the pictures were clearly
from microstock, how cheap !



 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
3 Replies
4528 Views
Last post November 21, 2006, 11:48
by FunkMaster5
9 Replies
6344 Views
Last post December 05, 2007, 15:58
by ManicBlu
104 Replies
27959 Views
Last post June 22, 2009, 11:00
by Jonathan Ross
143 Replies
43738 Views
Last post August 29, 2011, 04:03
by sharpshot
59 Replies
22111 Views
Last post March 10, 2011, 15:05
by djpadavona

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors