|
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 - PeterChigmaroff
Pages: 1 ... 36 37 38 39 40 [41] 42 43 44 45 46 ... 72
1001
« on: June 20, 2010, 09:53 »
The business is on a downhill road leading nowhere.
I don't think it's leading to nowhere. It's leading toward convergence. Minus the elite pros, typical macro pros and ametuer community contributors will eventually all be under the same roof.
Do a search on Getty and also Istock. Pick any search term. I'm guessing you'll find Istock has a larger available selection. No wonder why Getty is recruiting ametuers.
I think they refer to this sort of thing as mediocrity.
1002
« on: June 19, 2010, 19:04 »
according to someone on another forum it looks like Getty is offering 20-30% depending on something (probably RF vs RM, etc). That is a pretty big slice for Getty to take considering someone else did all the work but the licensing (no keywording, no inspection of unwanted images, no running a search engine, etc. etc.).
It will be interesting where that goes in the long run... and how many end runs are done around Getty once people realize that both the buyer can save 50% and the photographers can make 50% more if they can cut out Getty.
But you contribute to iStock that takes 80% just like Flickr/Getty. I'm confused.
1003
« on: June 19, 2010, 11:52 »
These sites should be encouraged to either charge the going rate or quit. Nothing is accomplished by dragging prices down.
1004
« on: June 18, 2010, 23:23 »
There are roughly X number of images licensed in the world. Starting a new agency and selling DLs does not increase the number of images licensed in the world it only displaces some sales from somewhere else. Therefore taking less for an image on DreamerStock just diminishes the amount of money generated by picture sales which diminishes everyone's income. It's kinda simple. Best thing to do is not contribute a single image and let DS die before they a get even a sputtering of life.
1005
« on: June 17, 2010, 22:06 »
I don't know that anyone can answer that question for you as it depends on several factors. What I do, however, is give everything I shoot to my RM agencies and the ones they reject go to microstock.
In other words less successful takes are landing in micro, right? So there is no difference in subject, just technical quality?
Yes typically technical quality is more stringent in microstock.
1006
« on: June 17, 2010, 14:54 »
Jeez he looks like he's got anorexia.
That's funny. No actually the baseline for weight has shifted so dramatically towards the obese that anyone of normal weight looks anorexic. Pudgy is the new normal.
1007
« on: June 16, 2010, 18:08 »
The knee-jerk reaction to this is to say "free is stupid." But I agree with the minority here... it's possible to envision a scenario in which something is given free and leads to payment by some means afterward.
What happens when everyone is doing this, and they will? Does it become 4 of the price of 3? Or 3 for the price or 2? Or 6 for the price of 1? Lost leaders are to get customers in the store but I don't see more images being used because of it. So it becomes the same number of images selling for less on average.
1008
« on: June 16, 2010, 09:18 »
For myself , I have never found this to be true. Usually market forces like increasing dilution hinder doubling income. It's more like double portfolio increase income by 50%. When you look at these these things you have to assume some constants otherwise it's meaningless. You can say stuff like it all depends how good your images are which is of course true but it make this analysis useless.
1009
« on: June 15, 2010, 18:36 »
I'm sure someone is thinking of way to go from giving images away to having you pay to place them and pay for someone to use them.
Free i.e. no one is paying you. Even from a microstock perspective that's a big jump down.
1010
« on: June 15, 2010, 14:43 »
One of each.
1011
« on: June 13, 2010, 11:30 »
So what we have now is micro-micro stock. Is that like 10 to the -12? That would be Pico-stock 
1012
« on: June 12, 2010, 10:09 »
Paying to have a portfolio uploaded is a positive step. One of the few I've seen in the past while. Collectively, there is a continuous drive downwards. Whether it's the many methods used at Fotolio or decreasing the number of uploads per week at iS or increasing the number of rejections. In the long term they all contribute less to a photographers (or illustrators) earnings. Simply changing the payout like Veer did does a similar thing.
Regarding the dash for cash program. These type of promo tends to be a slap in the face to those members who chose to believe in the agency from the start and upload their portfolios early. For me, I have nothing left to upload so I can't participate. So it seems fitting that I should take my images down instead and have done just that.
1013
« on: June 11, 2010, 18:40 »
Hi All,
I think Jim probably does what he does because he is one of the best and has a track history that stretches decades. In many cultures the people value the knowledge of those that have experienced a great deal on a particular subject. Like a good college there are quite a few people teaching in their prime years, their knowledge has a great deal of time invested. You can learn about law from a book or some young new layer but I would prefer Harvard.
Best,
Jonathan
Ditto
1014
« on: June 10, 2010, 15:58 »
I hate to be repetitive, but I use PhotoMechanic which allows you to build keyword lists for as many subjects as possible. Then you can just paste as many lists as apply to your images and save a ton of time. Just a little cleaning up after to remove irrelevant words.
I agree, I use Expressions Media which guesses what you want so typing "ma" gives you "man, men, male, person, people, adult" or what ever else you want. All across as many images as you want in a single move. Cross reference to previously keyworded images and it's really not much of job.
1015
« on: June 10, 2010, 10:18 »
Oh lord, give me strength to keyword my 300 new photos..
Any advice to overcome this challenge?
Sorry if this post is a bit too pointless, but as we all know, keywording make you do strange things
Once you get keywords properly grouped in a good dam package I find you should be able to populate about 500-750 keywords in 8 hours.
1016
« on: June 08, 2010, 14:43 »
In a gargantuan effort at perfection there is the collateral damage. That's you this time. Don't agree with it though.
1017
« on: June 07, 2010, 18:39 »
ok, but you must admit when microstock is so shaky lately, only smartest idea is to start own agency, microstock or not. no ?
No, there was an idea early on that the web was going to be the great equalizer and all you had to do was "build it and they would come". But that just didn't happen. I think some speciality sites do well enough with sales but I have my doubt about another happy face on white being a success.
1018
« on: June 04, 2010, 20:39 »
iStock rejected this image while Shutterstock took it and it's selling. **** Thousands of microstockrs.
1019
« on: June 04, 2010, 18:13 »
I use an older addition of iViewMediaPro. Very easy to to generate keywords with.
1020
« on: June 04, 2010, 08:59 »
The 5D first IMO.
1021
« on: June 03, 2010, 21:15 »
Nobody heard of it, or had anything to do with it? http://www.photaki.com/
I thought for sure it was Vietnamese/Japanese fusion restaurant.
1022
« on: June 03, 2010, 10:58 »
Wonder what the "F" means if you get my drift...
True... if they were referring to f-stops then a small f should have been used. Capital F does stand for Force in physics though. So maybe there's a bit of Star Wars in them.
1023
« on: June 02, 2010, 13:30 »
I was just going to post the same question. Can someone at Veer clarify this? thanks.
1024
« on: June 01, 2010, 09:59 »
There's no huge Yawning smiley I can use. How come?
1025
« on: May 29, 2010, 22:00 »
Real stock photographers doesn't need to pay to get their images online.
Think about that!
That should be "don't". I'm curious what do you think the 50%-80% of the net sale retained amounts to?
Pages: 1 ... 36 37 38 39 40 [41] 42 43 44 45 46 ... 72
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
