|
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 - Sean Locke Photography
Pages: 1 ... 37 38 39 40 41 [42] 43 44 45 46 47 ... 314
1027
« on: April 23, 2017, 05:07 »
There's a "sort by" pull down at the top right. Recent, relevance, popularity, downloads and undiscovered. There's a filter box next to the search entry that drops a panel with all kinds of options. Not sure how you aren't seeing all that.
1028
« on: April 21, 2017, 17:58 »
I doubt any agency cares what you offer on your site.
1029
« on: April 21, 2017, 17:01 »
what i dont understand is that shutterstock allegedly has valid model releases, so why would they side with the model? if thats the case and they force the photographer to remove the images or else, we might as well just do away with the model release all together.
ss should tell the model to sort it out with the photographer and thats the end of it
Right?
1030
« on: April 21, 2017, 16:12 »
what is the problem to delete these images? are the 38 cent per sale worth the anger?
Lost production cost is unfortunate but if I had disgruntled models in my portfolio I would eagerly remove them.
I wouldn't. Ok, I did, once, because she her muslim relatives were threatening her for showing her face in imagery or something. It was only 12 images with minimal time cost. But otherwise, no.
1031
« on: April 21, 2017, 10:54 »
I think the OP's question is a bit more basic: how to avoid having to repeat typing the same information multiple times for the same image on different agency websites.
If that's the question, the answer is to store the metadata within the image file. The IPTC standard let's you do that, and there are many applicstions that allow you to do that, including Photoshop, Lightroom or also free applications like Irfanview.
This is the only way to do it, imo.
1032
« on: April 18, 2017, 17:59 »
Did you have releases? Did they remove the images in question?
1033
« on: April 18, 2017, 01:16 »
Making a few cents doesn't outweigh the annoyance of you trying to get your family to do things for images while you're supposed to be on holiday.
1034
« on: April 17, 2017, 13:05 »
Not bad. There's a lot of beach images out there, but yours have a straight horizon, aren't blown out, etc. And "business" images with non-Caucasians might sell.
1035
« on: April 17, 2017, 11:22 »
You're doing graphs, handshakes, coffee, trees. It's stuff done a million times already, and done better. It's unlikely to garner much interest.
1036
« on: April 15, 2017, 16:46 »
No, it's just the cheap credit packages that hit me, plus the lack of downloads that started two years ago.
1037
« on: April 15, 2017, 11:28 »
Since they started their new plans, I make a fifth of what I used to. I don't waste time uploading there any longer. Which is too bad as it was a decent amount.
1038
« on: April 12, 2017, 16:15 »
April looks to be about half my higher months. Really disappointed. I expected more consistency.
1039
« on: April 10, 2017, 20:51 »
They took 15% of my payment.
I expect documentation on all taxation so I can get it back.
1040
« on: April 10, 2017, 13:55 »
No, buyers might come back and want an EL or something, so they tell them they can, and give you your royalty.
1041
« on: April 10, 2017, 04:38 »
Hi SpaceStockFootage,
I kind of agree with you about "RF can be commercial or editorial..." But the part I have trouble with is that when an image is RF it can be used for anything. So if I shot an "innocent bystander" on a street corner as editorial that would be ok, but if someone obtained that same photo as an RF they could use it to promote something that the person in the image might object to. I'm not really sure...
You're confusing: royalty free/rights managed with commercial/editorial usage terms
1042
« on: April 08, 2017, 09:00 »
Buyers, especially new first time buyers which was the huge market that micro tapped, are generally not knowledgeable about the ins and outs of fair use, copyright, etc. it's a way of providing a first line of defense for their protection.
1043
« on: April 07, 2017, 17:04 »
I used to make 4-5 times a day what I'm getting now. Rats.
1044
« on: April 06, 2017, 11:44 »
I'm going to guess this image isn't really as interesting as you think it is, and probably isn't worth the trouble. A straw in a glass of water would demonstrate both surface tension and refraction.
Well you guessed wrong. Other people have seen this image and I can assure you that it's a lot more interesting than a photo of a straw in a glass of water (which by the way would only demonstrate refraction - not surface tension.) And I'm not going to fall for your trap by posting the image here. It's not available on the internet at this current time.
Sure it would demonstrate tension. You can see the water clinging to the straw as well as to the sides of the glass. Well, you'd have to get a sufficiently close up image. https://www.google.com/search?q=straw+glass+refraction&tbm=ischI don't care if you post it. When people have posted similar queries, sometimes it turns out it's not as interesting or unique as they had thought.
1045
« on: April 06, 2017, 11:01 »
I'm going to guess this image isn't really as interesting as you think it is, and probably isn't worth the trouble. A straw in a glass of water would demonstrate both surface tension and refraction.
1046
« on: April 05, 2017, 09:49 »
Ok, now I'm lost. Are you making $.08 a month from 3000 images on FT? Or $.08 per image a month on 3000 images? Or what?
1047
« on: April 05, 2017, 06:39 »
Fotolia with Adobe stock is great! I have some 3000 images with them and I get approx $.800 a month give or take.
Either that's a typo, or you have a low threshold for what constitutes 'great'! 
Yep! thats only Ft. SS and I am really cut down there is still around $.2.5-3000 per month but thats with som 4K files. I have some good sellers you see. Was actually much more but the latest search got me quite badly.
Boy, I wonder how things were selling in the heyday, if this is how it is today for long time independents.
1048
« on: April 04, 2017, 13:28 »
Now if you had "beautiful business woman with her team eating Circassian chicken" you'd really be onto something.
Careful. Yuri might be lurking
1049
« on: April 04, 2017, 09:55 »
Interesting.
1050
« on: April 01, 2017, 17:11 »
Pages: 1 ... 37 38 39 40 41 [42] 43 44 45 46 47 ... 314
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
