|
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 - fljac
101
« on: January 19, 2009, 09:35 »
My point is that, even in micro, I think there is no need to reduce prices even further through subs.
Regards,
Adelaide
............................
EXACTLY!
IMHO the low priced SUB's only exists becaurse it to the agencies benefit AND becaurse WE the CONTRIBUTORS actually do obtion IN on the SUB's programs.
If NO contributor accepted it, then the system would'nt be there...
I would'nt be surpriced if the agencies easily could pay twice the current amount, but why do it?` - The contributors are still obtioning IN for the 30 cents...
Best regards
Flemming
102
« on: January 19, 2009, 09:23 »
So are people here noticing better results in PM? Regards, Adelaide ...................................................... I have had a small collection there for about a year now, and no sales. I actually get a lot more clicks on my images on StockXpert or any other agencies in a week, than I get on PM in a year  Surely it would be great if they can make it, but up untill now, it has been a complete waiste of time and effort. Note that the upload and preparations are quite time consuming and the review takes like forever, most of the time... I'm not impressed, to say the least  - Perhaps my problem is that all keywords is in english - NOT in GERMAN ?
103
« on: January 18, 2009, 16:38 »
It seems that the reviewers are working overtime - on a sunday!
I got two batches reviewed and approvet 100% today. The last batch no more than one hour after the submission... And yes, StockXpert seems to be doing very well at the moment.
Like them a lot, and I'm looking forward to see just what the upgrade will be offering
104
« on: January 18, 2009, 15:45 »
105
« on: January 18, 2009, 10:48 »
Reply #160 on: Today at 11:24
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I average roughly 1% of my sales there (including this month). nothing spectacular but it is a regular payout and it is 1% I didnt have for very little work (I find them one of the easiest to upload to). I played with pricing last year. had been $2 early on, put it up to $5 and it increased my overall $ then went to $9.99 and my sales disapeared. so now I am $5 with no resize and am happy
Phil
..................................
Just tried to edit published images... As far as I can see, the system does not work?
...Anyone else having problems editing price and resize obtions?
106
« on: January 18, 2009, 09:15 »
That sounds very strange!
a .TXT file can't show any handwritten signatures, witch is required in all cases.
Most agencies accepts the scanned release, saved as PDF, and some agencies, including StockXpert normally accepts the scanned release form, saved as JPG.
Are you sure that they ask for a TXT file? - I could imagine that they are rejecting it due to the content, not asking for a txt file...
/Flemming
107
« on: January 16, 2009, 08:15 »
Just took a quick look at the site, and apart from a few system errors, I noticed this:
---QUOTE----
Your Royalties build on a per image basis with your sales as shown below
Sales Percentage Exclusive Non-Exclusive
Base Level (0-24 Sales) 20% 20% 20%
Exclusivity Bonus 5% 25% -
25 - 99 sales 1% increase 26% 21%
100 - 149 sales 1% increase 27% 22%
150 - 249 sales 1% increase 28% 23%
250 - 349 sales 1% increase 29% 24%
350 - 549 sales 1% increase 30% 25%
550 - 699 sales 1% increase 31% 26%
700 - 899 sales 1% increase 32% 27%
900 - 1999 sales 1% increase 33% 28%
2000 - 2499 sales 2% increase 35% 30%
2500 - 4999 sales 2% increase 37% 32%
5000+ sales 3% increase 40% 35%
At moodboard we won't make you jump through hoops to see higher earnings.
If your pictures are strong enough from the outset, and we agree image exclusivity, we will team them with the collection that enhances their best features.
Our experienced editors don't just tick boxes but will help you think commercially about pictures.
Your sales reports can be customised so you can view them in the way that makes sense for you and we've made our upload function as easy as possible, so you can spend the rest of your time taking pictures that matter.
---END QUOTE---
This seems to be rather low royaltees for US, perhaps not making it worth the effort of uploading to yeat another site with close to NO downloads? - Or?.....
108
« on: January 11, 2009, 11:57 »
Lool! - How many downloads on this one? - And did he sign a model relase... for minors?
109
« on: January 07, 2009, 17:42 »
I have downloaded and modified the form used by Your Arcurs. I don't suppose that Istock rejects his images based on that form? He's form clearly states: " Model release form for all agencies"
So I thought that if it's good enought and valid forhim, then surely it must be for me as well
Everybody can download it in word format from his homepage.
110
« on: January 05, 2009, 05:50 »
I just had a batch reviewed within 10 hours at fotolia... That's what I call FAST!
111
« on: January 02, 2009, 19:14 »
112
« on: January 02, 2009, 12:40 »
... And still, the contributors seems to continue uploading loads of images...  Perhaps it's about time to stop doing that - at least for a while.. No images, no agency.... Then perhaps they might consider a more contributor friendly model and approach? I won't waiste anymore precious time on them, that's for sure!
113
« on: January 01, 2009, 18:47 »
Agree...
The discussion never ends......
One practical detail.. Whgen choosing a zoom lens, have in mind that if you plan to use it in a studio, you might wan't one with a fixed f:stop value in all of the zom area. Othervise you'll have to adjust the exposure whenever using the zoom functionality...
When using stuidioflashes, you're running on manual. There's no automatic obtions awailable...
114
« on: January 01, 2009, 18:38 »
When speaking about numbers, there are some numbers that would be nice to see...
The turnover for each agency - and ofcourse thair # of downloads, year by year....
Is it a good or bad year...? Above mentioned figures could help determine that..
The reality must be this...:
Each egency has a significant increase in thair portfolio's. Theis means that for each day, every single contributor/image has to compete with even more images than the day before!
Is it a good year.. ? It might be a good year, even with a drop in downloads, provided the relative drop in downloads/&earnings, is smaller than the relative growth in the overall stockagency portfolio.
There must be a limit as to how big the increase in demand can be, and maybe the sum of buyers really ARE downloading more and more... Maybe they just have a lot mofre to choose from?
The above mentioned figures could help determine this....
115
« on: January 01, 2009, 17:47 »
Taking everything into account, I would suggest that you read a few reviews and while doing that, keeping in mind that the EOS 40D was put to market about two years ago, and the D90, only a few month ago. The D90 consist of the latest technology, where many elements are taken from the D300 / D3. D300 & especially D3 has been highly reccomended for thair outstanding technology. I have absolutely no experiences with the D90 and I have absolutely nothing bad to say about Canon, (I use the D3) but given the current aggressive development and marketing from Nikon, I would maybe think twice before switching away from Nikon right now. It seems that many professionals currently are switching from Canon to Nikon. Up untill the launch of the latest models from Nikon, starting with D3/D300 and then D700/ D90, there's no doubt that Canon had some advantages, but now... Right now, I would for sure stay with Nikon. That's my honest opinnion, and I'm sure that many of the Canon guys and girls will disagree, but that's life.. You should make your own choice after the review reading. I'm sorry to say so, but you'll never find anything but opposite directed reccomendation's, when asking this question in forums such as this (sorry for the language as I'm not a native english speaker) /Flemming
116
« on: December 29, 2008, 20:25 »
117
« on: December 27, 2008, 22:08 »
I use Carbonite.. Cheap and above all, unlimited storage for almost no money! http://www.carbonite.com/raf/signup.aspx?RAFUserUID=336374I've been using it for quite some time and it seems to be working great! It does not slow down the internet connection while backing up. It might be worth a try  /Flemming
118
« on: December 23, 2008, 07:13 »
Hi araminta, You mention a lot of completely different lenses. Be carefull not to waiste your money on something that might not be good enough. Since you're not mentioning anything about wide angle, I would reccomend that you focus on something close to 20-70 mm. (for street canind, I would expect that your 200 mm. would be best, not the 70 mm.) When investing in new equipment, it's important to know that maybe 90% of the good image, is directly dependent on the LENS! - So don't make the same mistake as many others before you. Don't buy the cheapest lenses. Price and quality really does have a connection. No doubt, the Canon 24-70 f:2.8 IS the BEST! - Regardless what the reviews of the Sigma or the Tamron lenses say! The Tamron 24-75 f:2.8 comes highly reccomended, BUT!!! Be very certain that the downside is this: Tamron delivers very inconsistant quality, meaning that only a very few of them, are in fact as good as some reviews say. I bought one myself, and I was quite lucky to get a very nice and sharp one. Unfortunately, the electronic for controlling the aperature, is broken! - That is the SECOND time that happens! - So, I have that great lens, I just can't use it - or sell it! Completely waisted money, even though the optics is great! The Sigma lenses has a reputation for being quite good and quite consistent in quality, these days. Sigma offers low price and "professional" lenses. Please read reviews carefully - and go for the expensive line... Here's a review page... http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Sigma-Lens-Reviews.aspx and please do search for more reviews! I did'nt read the review completely, but I noticed that a weap point is that the 24-70 sigma produces lots of lens flare.... So.. this is not to scare you away, but the overall message is this. There is NO such thing as a CHEAP professional quality lens! Later on, you'll proporly regret not investing just a little more in the lens.. Then rather save a little on the camera housing.... But at least... study reviews carefully - read more than one review before buying! /Flemming
120
« on: December 19, 2008, 05:06 »
Well, since Josh is actually reading this thread, then maybe he would be kind enough to address some of the complants directly - and in details.....?
Maybe Josh would be kind enough to explain just WHY we should continue to upload?
It seems to me that most of the agencies - especially the ones as small as Crestock, actually does have an interest in the contributors. With Crestock, it seems to be quite the opposite? The less contributors, the better! So Josh, please expand on this... The official and the non official Crestock policy for contributors...
I for one would certainly like to know if I should consider uploading more images...
/Flemming
121
« on: December 13, 2008, 17:26 »
LOOOL! Well, maybe they actually ARE trying thair best to close down the site and scare all the contributor away LOOL
122
« on: December 13, 2008, 15:42 »
Hi all, I just reciewed a nice rejection percentage of 100% 105 images uploaded, all of them rejected. Many of them are in fact good enough for all other agencies, including Alamy. But aparently not for CRESTOCK! L O L !! At the very least, it proves that there actually ARE some one working, even on weekends.. Must admit that I did'nt waste time on reading all of thair reasons for rejection... This I do know, I won't upload to crestock any time soon /Flemming
123
« on: December 12, 2008, 15:37 »
At least it sounds like there actually ARE someone who's reviewing images - at least ocassionally LOL
- As for the rejection percentatges of 100%, that must be becaurse they must have all categories fully covered by now. How much is thair current stock? 5-10-20 millions of images?
I just noticed today, that todays best / worst images has not changed since I think it was last monday... So it seems that there's more or less no one to look after the store....
The more I read and the more I wait for my first batch to get reviewed, the more I get the feeling that it's not worth the effort. A pitty though, becaurse the site and the concept seems pretty nice.. It's hard to understand why they are so determined not to get it up and running...
/Flemming
124
« on: December 10, 2008, 20:48 »
Hi all,
This is a very interesting debate...
How about this thought....
If we, the suppliers stick together.... Could we then determine who lives and who dies?
Are we, the suppliers / contributors, able to decide exactly witch agencies will prosper in the coming years?
If we can agree to terminate a LOT of accounts on specific sites, and focus on sites with a better prining, could we then make the customers follow the images, where ever they go?
At the end of the day, the customers needs certain kinds of images. Isnt it likely that the customer will follow the image, where ever they are?
Everybody seems to be very happy about especially ST and IS - and a few more.. Per sale, they don't generate much income... But if they did'nt have that hyge stock of high quality images, then they would'nt attract all those customers.
If those specific images that they like to buy, only were awailable at sites, charging slightly more per download, I think they - the customers would find the images and simply just buy them.
My opinnion is this... IF you really need THAT specific image, then you would buy it, no matter if the prise is $5,00 or $10,00
In my opinnion, we the contributors are making a fool out of our selves, by constantly accepting to give away all those great images, almost for free! While doing this, we are undermining our own income...
This might be taken as a provocation, but this is certainly not intended. It's more like a very clear contribution to the debate...
... and please excuse my english, as this is not my native language.
Does anyone have an opinnion about this?
/Flemming
125
« on: December 10, 2008, 17:18 »
Hello everybody,
As far as I can read, many of you seems to do it in quite a hard way....?
Of course this depends intirely on each and everybody's workflow.....
I normally view my files in Bridge... double click on my RAW (NEF) witch opens the build in RAW converter in CS3.
At this stage - as the FIRST thing, I upsize from 12 to 17.5 MP.
It seems to a general opinnion that the upsizing should take place as early as possible! And above all, before ANY post processing.
When doing like this, and I might add... If I don't sharpen, then Alamy normally accepts the files.
If I need to sharpen a little, I normally use USM - figures 10-5-0
/Flemming
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
