|
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 - sensovision
101
« on: January 27, 2008, 17:10 »
nicely photos, Adelaide! Flowers and landscapes won't make you rich, but you should not refrain from submitting them to IS. I realize that wouldn't get rich with such photos, I actually have different priority right now i.e. make money for good camera and if I achieve this I could think seriously about making money with photography. But you should try to have other subjects as well, to show your abilities. Isolations have a good weight for IS. I have a lot of different kind of photos, actually I've tried myself almost in all genres, it's just the matter of that nature attract me most  As for isolation it's new to me so I'm going to read some material on how effectively achieve it. StockXpert accepts my flowers too. Curiously though, the rapeseed one was rejected twice for "we're not looking for this type of image" - an odd thing since I think it's one of my best and because rapeseed is in current demand for the biofuel industry boom. yeah, it's loud about it now so not sure why it's was rejected, maybe reviewed wasn't aware what is it and how it's used? And thanks for links to galleries, I'm checking them now.
102
« on: January 27, 2008, 16:54 »
I used to have a noisy compact camera and I got around the problem by taking two or three photos and joining them together in photoshop and then reducing the image size.
thanks for sharing idea, sharpshot! I've stitch a lot of panoramas but never thought about using it to minimize image noise, I'm going to try it out when got free moment.
103
« on: January 27, 2008, 16:45 »
Denis,
The ironic part is, both Dreamstime and iStock took a ton of my flower photos. They were accepted for the most part at Shutterstock too.
Shoot creatively with good lighting, maybe try some macro work too. Stand out, in other words. Good luck.
Thanks for advice and cheers up, Dan! I've got a lot of macros and while it's winter I have time to select something from my collection I think. Will check your collection also to see what kind of flowers they are looking for.
104
« on: January 27, 2008, 16:29 »
If I submit image as exclusive to DT and later decide to sell it elsewhere would I be able to cancel it's exclusivity?
And vice versa situation: would I be able to make image exclusive once it's approved if I decide to stop selling it elsewhere?
If it's possible is there any grace period between changing status of images?
Thank you!
105
« on: January 27, 2008, 16:12 »
It was done with my old 2mp camera so I didn't upload it anywhere except FP: http://www.featurepics.com/online/Waterdrop-574306.aspxIt wasn't sold there but I've sold it many times directly from my site(have no idea how people actually found it as it was uploaded in folder and doesn't have even description). Actually this photo make me think that maybe I'll be able to earn cash with stock agencies for new camera if publish more of my pictures and they got good exposure.
106
« on: January 27, 2008, 15:59 »
I did it!  I'm finally manage to post answer for thread as each time I've hit reply there was message about new replies Thanks a lot for help, folks, I really appreciate this!
107
« on: January 27, 2008, 15:58 »
if that is a 100% view that is probably fine... as long as you didn't take away all detail in other parts of the image (like the ground, or trees or things)
yeah it's 100% crop of image. It also looks like there is just as much pixelation (from a compact camera that compresses the files) as anything, but noise ninja helped lots.
yeah, when I took this photo I had small SD card at my possession and used standard compression settings instead of fine. Although I have to say that Fine compression doesn't help much anyway, so my only hope is neat image and GIMP. Try to stick to more well lit subjects, and apply denoise only in the sky. Indeed, Adelaide, that was sunset time picture, and on daytime I've got less noise and it's more easy to clean. you've mentioned Noise Ninja, is it works better than Neat Image? As I've tried trial version of NoiseNinja and it seems to work not as effective as NI. what is a good camera to you? In time when I bought Dimage Z3 I have Minolta F200 which was very slow zooming and focusing but produce great images(but it have bugs with batteries and keep hanging up), Z3 have very quick focus which was must have feature for me in future camera, have more suitable zoom for closeup work and have possibility to attach filters. I didn't suppose to sell my photos at any point so noise and image resolution wasn't big issue to me. Now I would definitely go to dSLR as I really wish to have a way to control DOF which isn't possible with P&S, have a way to work with wider lens when needed, have low noise sensor or good processor which in result produce clean images without lot of noise(as I frequently do night shots but they came out very crappy). As well, I think thats a ridiculous amount of noise in the unfiltered one and shouldn't even be there especially at ISO 50. I think that you're exposure is definitely off and if you correct that you might be able to fix the noise issue, but I can't tell since the crop doesn't give any indication to the rest of the photo. yeah, I've messed a bit and didn't have time to setup camera manually as tried to catch bird flight. I didn't upload full picture so it wouldn't use up my bandwidth. But I'll send you link to it in PM so you can check full image. That's a ton of noise reduction so unless you just applied applied it to the sky (where I can still clearly see noise) I would be concerned that it ruined the detail in the other areas. If so, you reduced the noise but now may get an overfiltering rejection. Hi Nazdravie! I've looked for details and I don't think they are lost but I'm not sure if such kind of picture would actually be interesting for stock, I'll send you PM too if you don't mind  You need a DSLR. Even a cheap used one from a few years ago like a D50/D40 or Rebel XT/350 would be a huge improvement. Yeah I wish to get either Nikon D50/D40 or Pentax K100D, but any of these cameras would cost me two month salaries that's why I joined microstock.
108
« on: January 27, 2008, 15:47 »
Even though they'll take 4MP images it would be a tough ride getting through the application process. Same with IS, DT and SX. doesn't sounds very optimistic But Bigstock will take as low as 800X600 and 123RF will accept 2200x1700. What about Bigstock and 123RF are they have comparable amount of traffic as DF and IStock for example? As I've got feeling that they are drive less sales than rest(not only from the poll on this site, but from feedback of other people and reviews I've read).
109
« on: January 27, 2008, 14:20 »
My camera originally output very noisy images. I just submit few photos to DT and waiting for review. In the meantime I've select another image which have a lot of "clear" sky where noise become really obvious. This photo was taken on ISO 50 and shutter speed 1/500 so on good camera I think noise wouldn't be apparent. I've attached two images, one is unfiltered with uncorrected WB and filtered one(with neat image), but I'm afraid it's still have a lot of noise. What do you think is cropped part of filtered have acceptable amount of noise or not?
110
« on: January 27, 2008, 13:30 »
I uploaded many 2272x1704 images when I had a Canon A520. I still have images taken with it that I should edit and upload, but I've been focusing on the newer material.
Adelaide, do you remember if uploaded anything after changes in the rules to 2400 x 1600? (as I still didn't get response from support).
111
« on: January 27, 2008, 13:28 »
Have you noticed that IS still accepts 2MPix images? And StockXpert's minimum is 800x600pix? Yeah I've saw that IS have lower margins for resolution but unfortunately they explicitly tell that not looking for flower and landscape photos which are both my passions actually... so they was third on my list as I have not much submissions to them probably. As for StockXpert, I didn't consider it yet and not checked their policies. Do you think they may be interested in flower images?
112
« on: January 27, 2008, 12:03 »
I came across a beautiful bouquet of flowers while out shopping. And of course, I immediately thought "photo opportunity." I like the results of what I have shot, and for what it is worth, they are getting a high approval rate at Shutterstock.
Hi folks! Just spot this thread and since gardening is my second hobby I've got a lot of photographs of flowers individually. I wonder which agency would be best to market them, as IStock explicitly tells that they don't need them anymore, you're telling that DT also not keen about them. What about Fotolia and others, could you recommend a good place to sell them except SS(as I thought about registering with them later)?
113
« on: January 27, 2008, 08:10 »
Wonder how you post process photographs before submitting them to stock agencies. Are all photos getting post processed or only those which have wrong white balance, need cropping, or something else?
114
« on: January 27, 2008, 07:58 »
Thanks for answer, takestock! I haven't noticed any trend for agencies to avoid lower resolutions.
I think if the image is strong enough and within the limits it will be accepted.
glad to hear this, as after looking on best selling images which seems all have big resolution, I was afraid that most agencies would simply avoid 4mp shots even if they are good. Only thing is, because of lower size you can miss out a bit in the revenue generated. yeah, realize this but right now I need to use equipment I already have.
115
« on: January 27, 2008, 07:54 »
Thanks for response, ldambies! I switched a while ago from 4 to 5MP it makes a big difference overall for submissions . My 4MP shots did not do the cut for SS.
I decide not to bother myself with SS for now and feel the market better before doing any submissions to them. You can be a second hand on ebay like a Lumix FZ5 I still use it from time to time.
Thanks for advice! But I use my camera very heavily so guess second hand wouldn't be good idea for me as it may quickly die  As for eBay it have cheaper prices comparing to my country but when I order from overseas I'll have to pay high custom taxes no matter new equipment or not so after all it would be cheaper to buy camera here. Also this website could be useful : http://web.forret.com/tools/megapixel.asp nice tool, thanks for sharing! I'll keep it bookmarked. BTW I was choosing between Lumix FZ and mine camera but choose Dimage Z3 because it have quicker focus and my previous camera was Minolta... now I think that made wrong choice as it produce much more noise than Lumix.
116
« on: January 27, 2008, 06:59 »
Sensovision, you need to buy a new camera.
wish I could maybe that's why he is starting microstock
You're reading my mind, Leaf!  The only reason I've decided to sell my photographs is because my camera getting old and some functions not working already, and I don't have any spare money to buy new one. So I've thought that maybe would be able to sell my works and accumulate money to buy myself long wished dSLR.
117
« on: January 27, 2008, 05:52 »
I've never personally submitted one that size. However technically it should be OK as it is actually GREATER than their minimum requirement.
2400 x 1600 = 3.84 megapixels
2272 x 1704 = 3.87 megapixels
Thanks for response, Jimi! I'm aware that it's greater than what's required but it have different ratio and I thought that this could be the problem so didn't submit any images to them yet.
118
« on: January 27, 2008, 04:07 »
Yesterday I've finally registered to Fotolia and when it's come to submitting there, I've discovered this: "Photo resolution must be greater than or equal to 2400 x 1600 (4 Million pixels)."
I've wrote to support to see if they accept such images or not but didn't hear from them yet.
If anyone submit photos from 4megapixel cameras with different resolution like 2272 x 1704?
119
« on: January 27, 2008, 03:08 »
Thanks for response, Mark!
What about agencies' preferences do they most likely approve higher resolution images or you didn't spot such tendency?
120
« on: January 26, 2008, 14:29 »
Wonder what images resolution typically you submit to stocks?
Currently I'm using my KM Dimage z3 camera which have 4megapixel and it's look like very close to lowest margin on some agencies, wonder if agencies would avoid such low resolution images or not?
121
« on: January 26, 2008, 07:38 »
I upload to the big 6 agencies and get quite a bit less than 1/3 of my earnings from istock so to me it doesn't make sense to go exclusive there. Even at diamond canister level there (which means you have to have sold 25000 images) your commision would only double which wouldn't make up for the lost earnings. The only reason that I can think of for going exclusive is if you hadn't got time or couldn't be bothered to upload to multiple sites
Thanks for info fotografer! Wonder which agency except shutterstock bring most exposure to your images?
122
« on: January 26, 2008, 06:55 »
There is obviously some overlap between sites, but a number of us submit to 4 or 5 sites and find it a very reasonable way to increase our income. Fotolia sells more in Europe; iStock has some exclusive content, so some buyers start there; Shutterstock is subscription and some buyers like that model, etc.
thanks for info, it sounds reasonable. I knew that Fotolia was targeting audience from Europe so that's why I decide to participate there along with DT. I agree that you want to be selective, but iStock is one of the big players in the microstock market. You can do well selling there.
I've only submit pictures to DT and they should be reviewed in 68 hours, so I can still delete them. Do you think it's worth to try be exclusive on iStock or it probably wouldn't pay out as Big 6?
you mean that I need to have there images for 6 months at least?
yes don't see a problem in this, the only complication is that I wouldn't be able to sell exclusive rights for image in other stocks. Or there are more hidden rocks in this rule? With decent images and a reasonable size portfolio, many of us are earning that in a month via the microstock sites. It really depends upon your portfolio.
nice, I could quit my job with such earnings You'll be glad to know that it's possible to earn that and more each month once you get established and have several hundred good stock photos up at all the big 6 sites.
Thanks for cheers up! I've seen earnings reports on the web but thought it could be trick to lure people to sign up through affiliate links.
123
« on: January 25, 2008, 20:41 »
Wonder if you agree to sell rights(I mean full buyout) of your images?
And if so would you tell how much you've earn on this?
124
« on: January 25, 2008, 19:19 »
Thanks for reply jsnover! I am fairly sure that Fotolia only requires image exclusivity, so you are entirely at liberty to sell other images elsewhere. thanks for clarification! I don't think that Fotolia has the volume to make exclusive images there worthwhile, however. I sell there, but don't have exclusive images anywhere.
So you may confirm that same image could be sold on different sites at high rate and that buyer audience on these sites are quite different? If your Photoshelter images are sold RM, you could even be exclusive at iStock and do that. iStock requires artist exclusivity for RF sales, but RM is OK.
I decide to wait with registering on IStock for now as don't think that would have time uploading to all agencies at once. I also wish to get feeling of what stock agencies are looking for as guess that most of my photos aren't desired. If you do sell via Dreamstime, be aware that there's a 6 month commitment for uploaded images.
you mean that I need to have there images for 6 months at least?(I think that read it on some site but wasn't sure if it was DT, as I've studied a lot of stock agencies lately and have mess in my head ). I have no idea what you've done so far
I've registered with FeaturePics first as liked their price model, but after searching a bit on forums and looking at my own photos spot that FP got very low traffic, so I decide to look for alternative, otherwise I would stay with one agency. Later I've registered with PhotoShelter and send them best works in my opinion which was matching their criteria. While I'm waiting for approval in PS I decide to upload some pictures to Dreamstime. but before you decide to unload your less good images on the micros, you should see if you can get them accepted - standards on the micros have given some folks difficulty when they erroneously assumed that low price licenses meant low quality.
I'm not going to upload crappy photos of course I've registered with Photoshelter to sell my works which have something special for me and I wouldn't feel good to sell them cheap as I've put a bit of myself in them. I wouldn't start to sell my photos at all, as I never going to do this but my camera is getting old and buggy and I don't have money to fund new one... So I thought that I have no choice here and need either start to sell my works or leave my hobby. Regarding DreamsTime and possibly Fotolia, I'm not going to upload bad photos in them, I'm designer and web developer so know what kind of photos are required for templates and other things, so I'm going to specially do technical photographs for this purposes and sell them there. BTW am I dreaming or it's possible to earn about 600 or 1000$ for dSRL in one year term?(Right now I've got Konica-Minolta Dimage Z3). Thanks for your help!
125
« on: January 25, 2008, 17:08 »
Hi folks, I'm new to stock photography business so would appreciate some advices.
what do you think about being exclusive to Fotolia? Maybe someone is working on this scheme, or did this in the past? Would appreciate your feedback on this matter.
Also I failed to find on their site about definition of being exclusive, does it mean that you can sell all your photos through them?(asking because I wish to sell my best photos through PhotoShelter and the rest through DreamsTime and Fotolia)
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
