|
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 - maco0708
126
« on: October 06, 2007, 11:53 »
127
« on: October 05, 2007, 10:10 »
One print sold:  http://www.istockphoto.com/file_closeup.php?id=1869399I have 247 files online. The print was 11x14" and I got $2 for it. The prints generate very little income but it is kind of a free money. Actually I am surprised that iStock bothers with it since it seems like lot more work for them.
128
« on: October 02, 2007, 21:04 »
Some OK tripod: $100
One advice about tripods: never buy an OK tripod. Buy a good tripod, one that is very sturdy with a pan-head or ball-head. Tripods that are not sturdy enough, can in worst case be worse than not using one.
Some of the Chinese brands (Benro among others), are good as well as cheap. Check them in the shop before you buy.
Here's a link to a very good article about tripods:
http://www.bythom.com/support.htm
I disagree. First let me start that I myself have a great sturdy tripod (Manfrotto 3001 PRO and RC322 head - about $250 combo). And if you are planning to shoot a lot of things from a tripod definately buy a great tripod and cut the list somewhere else (maybe don't buy flash). BUT, I think if you know what you are doing and are very careful you can get great shots from a $20 tripod. I took this picture: http://www.istockphoto.com/file_closeup.php?id=3875408from a SUPER cheap tripod and it is totally sharp (no motion blur). I was home in Europe and I just couldn't take my normal tripod. All I am saying is that if you are planning to take ~1% of your shots from a tripod and are on a tight budget you will survive with a cheap tripod. It's not a solution for me but that is what my brother does (and he has $3000 worth of stuff, he just doesn't like to setup stuff on a tripod and for those rare shots it is enough).
129
« on: October 02, 2007, 12:50 »
I guess I am in the same club with perrush.
Available slots for upload: 12 (those 3 were for the egg challenge:))
Sales on 1 October: 7
Sales in September: BME (133 downloads)
And all that with 247 mediocre pictures.
I have no idea why but I had 3 BMEs in a row at IS (and I don't think that I am doing anything special.
132
« on: October 01, 2007, 14:11 »
I vote for the Canon.
Also if money is tight I always recommend Canon 50mm f/1.8. It is super sharp and I think it is perfect for taking stock type images.
133
« on: October 01, 2007, 13:18 »
well i was thinking just a 'running' winner to end winner.. but someone might be the 'leader' this week another person the leader next week. I was thinking to have a competition every month and then when the leader changes in a certain competition then it would be shown on the site. - if that made sense.
Sounds good! WHAT IS THE CATEGORY FOR OCTOBER??? Batteries are charged, memory card is empty, lenses are clean and my finger is on the shutter release... I just need the "go" 
134
« on: September 30, 2007, 22:53 »
Overall BME:
IS: 50% (BME)
SS: 31% (BME)
FT: 8%
BS: 6%
DT: 5% (down 60% from August, I have no idea what happened)
Overall I am quite happy, especially since I broke the $500 at SS and got the raise (finally).
135
« on: September 30, 2007, 22:34 »
OK, I did my part. I uploaded 3 pictures and now it is up to iStock if they pass or not.
I hope that at least one of them makes it.
I am a little surprised that none of the 12 pictures in the lightbox sold.
LEAF: When are we going to declare the winner? Few months later, a year, 2 years???
136
« on: September 26, 2007, 15:32 »
Going exclusive with IS now, only makes sense for some of the photographers with a relatively low production. With a large production, and due to the upload limits at IS (at the moment: zero), the portfolio at other sites will always be much bigger than that on IS. For the "old" exclusives, the situation is entirely different. They built their portfolios when the upload limits were much higher, and due to their "elevated" status, they can still upload more or less as much as they want.
The earnings per photo may be better at IS (in my case, they aren't), but that doesn't matter much if your portfolio is much smaller.
There's also the case of rejects and photos selling at different speeds at different agencies. I have photos that sell great at some agencies, but haven't sold a single copy at IS, and the other way around.
Epixx, Do you consider yourself as someone with high production. I looked at your IS portfolio and you have 444 files and you have been there since March 2006. Do you max out the upload limit? I would really like to know how many people max out the upload limit (I can see Yuri Arcus, Phil Date,...). Maybe if you just sign up and have 200-300 files to upload it suck but after a year you should have good amount of pictures there. I am just curious. I wish I had enough time to process enough pictures to use the upload limit.
137
« on: September 26, 2007, 15:09 »
Not that I really care much but the upload limits have been reduced again (15/week for bronze). This doesn't matter one bit to me (since I won't fill up the 15 either) but I was wondering if any of you are really maxing out the limit every week? And if iStock buyers go somewhere else it is not particularly bad for me since I am on most of the other sites (and they will eliminate the competition from exclusive contributors ). I am curious what is going to happen in the long run (i.e. few months)
138
« on: September 26, 2007, 13:32 »
Hey yingyang0,
What made you go exclusive at iStock at bronze level? Were you really making so much on iStock that the loss of other agencies didn't matter?
Or you just didn't want to deal with so many different places?
139
« on: September 26, 2007, 10:55 »
I do understand those who went exclusive a few years ago, that made sense back then. But I don't understand why someone would go exclusive nowadays.
firstly, it doesn't pay off. IS makes only around 35% of the total income of those who contribute to multiple sites. So even when you double your royalties (diamond) you're still losing money.
I think you are writing from your personal experience. Right now I have well over 50% of my income from iStock (it is around 60%). I have pretty much the same pictures on 5 of the big sites (I don't have pics on StockXpert). SO if I would be at the diamond level I would go exclusive now (I am bronze now). I am not particularly huge fan of istock but they do make the most money for me right now. And I don't blame them for treating exclusives better than the rest of us, exclusives are the reason iStock is #1 site (sales wise).
140
« on: September 25, 2007, 12:02 »
I will try to be nice and alleviate the problem a little by not checking my stats every 20min  I wonder how much traffic is due to contributors just playing around (forums,...)
141
« on: September 24, 2007, 13:42 »
I just got accepted to stockxpert. I guess I will wait with uploading till this issue is sorted out. 
142
« on: September 19, 2007, 23:19 »
I logged on to BS few minutes ago and I had a message that the prices will go up in November. No more information given except that the price increase will be mostly for large sizes (same as IS and FT, they will probably introduce xSmall picture size).
The only question is weather the contributors will get a raise.
143
« on: September 19, 2007, 14:16 »
When this happens to me I change the image in some way (downsize, curves, levels, saturation) and resubmit it. Sometimes I'll wait a day, but I usually include it in my next batch. If it isn't accepted this second time I'll forget about it.
Thanks a lot sharply_done. One question: When you resubmit after those minor corrections (downsize,curves,...) do you write a note to the reviewer that is is a "resubmit"? I feel same way as you. I had a lot of rejections where I understand why it was rejected but these few I really like and I think they would do quite well.
144
« on: September 19, 2007, 09:52 »
Is it just me or shutterstock has one angry reviewer? I usually have most of my pictures accepted but this week I got two entire batches (I always submit 3 in a batch) rejected. And I honestly disagree with the rejections because I think that the material is good enough.
So I would like to resubmit. Is it against the rules to resubmit the same EXACT image (absolutely no modifications)?
What do you guys do?
I was thinking of resubmitting the pictures and spread them out in between different batches.
Also, is it possible to have incorrect white balance for a black and white picture?
Thanks a lot!
145
« on: September 18, 2007, 14:38 »
Well...
my experience is quite different - with more than 1450 DLs I have never had a single XS sale...
Best regards
Tom
I find that VERY surprising! I don't have a lot of them but it is a significant amount (I would say about 15% of all sales).
146
« on: September 18, 2007, 14:36 »
Hi,
I have been going microstock for a year and I have been selling at IS,SS,FT,DT,BS.
I applied to Stockxpert a year ago and I was rejected so I didn't bother for a year. Then a week ago I applied again and now I am accepted.
So, I have about 300 photos that I would like to upload. What is the best strategy? Small batches (10 or so) or just use the 50 limit?
What is their current review time? Should I make each batch diverse (different type photos) or it doesn't matter.
I will appreciate all opinions.
147
« on: September 18, 2007, 14:21 »
Congratulations Whiz!
I am also about to reach a milestone. I am at $499.70 earned so I should the 30cent downloads soon.
148
« on: September 18, 2007, 14:18 »
I am pretty surprised that iStock is having this kind of technical problems. It isn't such a big deal since the sales are still coming but considering they get 80% of money from our sale you would think that could afford some good servers.
I am curious how much iStock will grow. I think they will get up to 10million pictures and then they will get VERY selective.
149
« on: September 18, 2007, 14:12 »
Yeah, but they got only about 2 pixels for it:)
When iStock started the xSmall size I didn't think that I lot of people would buy it. I stand corrected. But overall I am still pretty happy with them.
150
« on: September 10, 2007, 12:34 »
That's not the first time I've read someone mention how it's worth it to go exclusive once you are at the Diamond level. Why Diamond and not before?
Because the extra royalties are dependent on your level: non exclusive - 20% bronze ex - 25% silver ex - 30% gold ex- 35% Diamnond ex - 40% so let's say I make $100 on istock and $100 on all others I need to be diamond to offset the loss of income from other agencies. For some other people it might be worth it to go exclusive before diamond.
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
