|
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 ... 45 46 47 48 49 [50] 51 52 53 54 55 ... 72
1226
« on: September 01, 2009, 12:43 »
Is it only me or is $5-$15 for a written article completely inadequate. It's a single sale on a specialized topic.
It's only you.
You bunch already spend your free time working for nothing supplying images to your agencies at a loss, then spend more free time over here writing about it for no remuneration at all.
The dude is giving you 5 shiny bucks for something you now do for free.
The ill informed jump in again to sort me out. I NEVER do any shooting for free. Well maybe for my mother-in-law.
1227
« on: September 01, 2009, 10:49 »
I did a research and the average amount paid for a blog article by specialized agencies is 3-5$. You can buy the ready-made content for your site from those agencies for even less.
We are not one of those glossy journals, who are ready to pay hundreds per an article are we are not targeting authors of those either. We are a private site at the very startup and we are seeking individuals who have knowledge, but only about to try themselves in writing. And we did have received a few proposals as of yet (we have only started this initiative).
What others do and what is right are two different things. What others agree to do for you and what is right are also two different things. Providing examples of someone doing wrong does not make it right.
1228
« on: September 01, 2009, 10:11 »
Is it only me or is $5-$15 for a written article completely inadequate. It's a single sale on a specialized topic.
1229
« on: August 31, 2009, 13:08 »
I understand the stock sites on the right, but I want to buy images Royalty Free for an agency for a set price per image. I don't buy images on a per download basis. My image suppliers are people that submit to the agencies on the right and I buy their "seconds" for lack of a better term
Anyone who can translate?
I agree with cidepix, this is very difficult to understand.
1230
« on: August 31, 2009, 10:17 »
Hi Fotoart,
$70 dollars an image for buy out seems like a good offer for any Micro shooters, and a buy out does mean you sign over the copyright. It's done all the time in Macro stock. I have done by outs before but I don't have any seconds. Sounds like a reasonable offer to me for many here. If you want to resell them or line your living room walls with them I don't really think it matters one way or the other. How many of you have an overall RPI higher than $70 per image in Micro, that is an average of $70 per image over it's life. There are a few but not many from what I read here.
Good Luck,
Jonathan
$70 per image for a guaranteed 150 or 200 shots bought from a one day shoot is a fairly good deal. Used to be able to get 2 to 3 times that much not long ago but I don't know what the going rate is now. I don't like selling dribs and drabs. Waste of time most of the time.
1231
« on: August 31, 2009, 10:08 »
Take it as a great opportunity to move on.
1232
« on: August 30, 2009, 15:33 »
Regarding the clip; that's what I was trying to say but could never do it so eloquently.
1233
« on: August 30, 2009, 15:02 »
It quite simply doesn't work in my opinion. They get free images and you get nothing. A credit line is worthless. If it makes you feel all warm inside and you get to show off to friends and this is important to you then it might be worth it. If you think it will jump start your career I doubt it. What are you going to do, show it to a prospective client who will likely understand that you worked for free? Getting paid isn't all that difficult.
1234
« on: August 27, 2009, 15:07 »
My ad agency is finding holes in the image libraries all the time. Of course I ad these missing items to my shot list. 
I'd be happy to contribute to your Xmas fund for this list.
1235
« on: August 26, 2009, 21:21 »
Good, question, I think it is worth noting that microstock itself has spawned a great many pro photographers. Folks who got in early and are making a career out of it. There are also the established pros who entered and are entering. The The upward evolution of price is only natural considering the increase in quality.
1236
« on: August 26, 2009, 09:53 »
Up to now I have been using the same release for all agencies. Seems like going forward it would be a good idea to have them sign my generic one and also istock's specific one.
Lisa, you should be able to use Getty's new release which is good for all micros anyway. This should save you some time.
1237
« on: August 25, 2009, 15:03 »
Hi Card Maverick,
You wouldn't think a national brand would risk that chance to save a couple of dollars on a photo but I have just had many of my Micro images just used to launch a new Glidden paint campaign. I think they used 5 different shots. On their cans and paint swatches. I was pretty surprised. Still, our RM images are still our best returners, so far. 
Best,
Jonathan
I find this as surprising as you Jonathan. However as surprising as it is it is much more infuriating. Everyday the business sinks a little lower into the quagmire. I'm not pulling an Old Hippy here I am just looking at the business as it once was, as I'm sure you know much better than I. Every now and then I find it good for the soul to go on a rant. I understand the nature of business, the need to match goods and services with demands and market conditions. However it doesn't make it any easier watching the constant erosion of an industry just because you know why it's happening. I think this is true for Micro as much as for macro. Peter
1238
« on: August 25, 2009, 09:44 »
I used to be very bullish on stock photography but obviously not so these days. There are still plenty of opportunities but it's a lot harder now.
1239
« on: August 21, 2009, 11:59 »
28-80 f2.8 16-35 f2.8 300 f2.8 and a 90TSE. Haha, well depends what shape your in. I use to hike with tons of gear, Medium format, 617 pans etc. Week and longer trips. Now I have a G7.
1240
« on: August 20, 2009, 21:00 »
I'd guess the video card but don't know for sure. I have a older G5 as well which drives my 30". I get a funny patterned screen once every couple of weeks. Only way out is to reboot. Then good again for a couple of weeks. I'd like to make due for another year until this economy turns a bit.
1241
« on: August 20, 2009, 10:51 »
All you have to do is place a few images with them exclusively and you will know. Although doing this sort of research is important, nothing beats first hand experience. My experience , for the few images I placed exclusively, is inconclusive.
1242
« on: August 09, 2009, 19:27 »
Most ad demographics tend to look bigoted or sexist in one form or another. Most people who shoot stock understand that there us a target ethnicity, age, sex, intelligence etc. to most ads. How many retirement magazines are sporting ads for G.I. Joe right now, or why would you use a bunch of caucasians in an ad targeting a predominantly black neighbourhood?
1243
« on: August 09, 2009, 15:06 »
This is old news LOL
Until you get it. Canada just ordered 50 Million doses of vaccine, which is a bit of mystery since we have only 30 odd million people. There was a run on antibacterial lotion and N95 masks for a while although now you can get both easily enough.
1244
« on: August 08, 2009, 11:03 »
We're starting construction of a new studio/guest house in about 2 months time. Very exiting.
1245
« on: August 04, 2009, 19:12 »
1246
« on: August 03, 2009, 14:28 »
I've asked this before, but - what on earth is the point of demanding upsized images? It's just a huge waste of time, bandwidth and server resources. If a customer actually wants an upsized image, Alamy could produce it automatically, on demand, instead of filling up hard drives with big images that will never sell.
It's a historic thing. Most trad agencies still ask for this. Now of course with huge sensors files have to be reduced in many cases to meet the requirements.
1247
« on: August 02, 2009, 10:57 »
[ Istock alone expects fiscal year revenue to exceed $262 million by 2012, add in all the other microstock agencies and you could be talking $600 million, then add in traditionals and maybe $1 billion, so you can see that even Yuri's revenue is a drop in the ocean.
David 
Your numbers are way out of whack.
1248
« on: August 01, 2009, 17:07 »
If it gets me more sales I think the partnering thing is great but being "naturally inquisitive" (read nosey bugger) I'd like to know which partners. I dont think it would be too much work for an agency to list somewhere in the submitters areas this the list of partners do you want to opt in? then we could say hey agency xyz is great and really doing things because they have 3.14159 partners etc. Or is there some reason for keeping it secret?
So that nosey buggers stay out of the business end of things thereby reducing the size of the pi too much.
1249
« on: August 01, 2009, 16:23 »
agefotostock has been around for ever, maybe longer, certainly longer than a lot of the complainers here have been alive.
1250
« on: August 01, 2009, 09:43 »
Microstock images are frequently misused, and the loving couple at the beach can as easily be used to market condoms or a medication for STDs ... and imagine how the owner of the beach resort who used it to market his resort feels when flipping through a magazine and sees the SAME image used to sell STD drugs? Or to see the same image used to promote a competing resort? When downloads in the thousands are required to profit on a microstock image, the probability of it is great. I am a bit surprised more image buyers are not staying with Rights Managed models so they can "know where there image has been." After all the images they use to market themselves are the image by which their customers will percieve them... as well as any other associations with that same image.
That's not misuse it's a sensitive use issue. Images get used for everything. As for multiple use issues, well that's what RF does not provide. RM is still strong and alive, where it used to be the only license, it now shares the market with RF, both macro and micro. But RM is a long way from dead.
Pages: 1 ... 45 46 47 48 49 [50] 51 52 53 54 55 ... 72
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
