|
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 - FD
Pages: 1 ... 48 49 50 51 52 [53] 54 55 56 57 58 ... 82
1301
« on: March 25, 2010, 10:46 »
1302
« on: March 25, 2010, 10:16 »
 3D render illustration loudspeaker speaker mic microphone communication broadcast broadcasting device electronics object megaphone address addressing public sound loud amplification voice amplifier amplifyThe title should not be "loud speaker" but simply "megaphone illustration". I heard (gossip circuit so perhaps not true) that especially East-Europeans joined the keymasters bandwagon for the easy $bucks$. They should limit that program to native English speakers with extensive experience in stock photography tagging. You should report it on the DT forum or with support, so they can get rid of people keywording that badly. The essential keyword "megaphone" is missing. (nice illustration!)
1303
« on: March 25, 2010, 07:34 »
$1.25 Avg dl
141 Number of dls
$176.89 grand total
Cost of trip $1250
Thanks for that report. Travel for microstock alone is, certainly at current low prices, not a sustainable cost. It can be very viable at marginal cost, when you have to be somewhere for other reasons, and the shots just cost the click and the depreciation of your equipment. My China photos (some editorial on a business trip in factories) are still highly profitable, but I didn't go there for photography. The Lypses could be profitable for IS exclusives since they have a higher commission than non-exclusives that can't make up on other sites since the shots can only be uploaded to IS. If I would participate in any event, I would prefer the Vegas shoots since you get a proper training there by one of the best, plus you can upload the yield to all sites, and break even faster. Another idea would be a non-agency bound gathering, for instance in one of the cheaper European countries, where everybody brings his own light (cheap bus lines allow much more weight than planes, some can use their car) and where models and hotels are not expensive. If I remember well, Dolgachov proposed to organize such event a couple of years ago, and also a prominent stock shooter from Belgrade.
1304
« on: March 25, 2010, 07:00 »
The backpack will never leave my back.
not the backpack, just its content will leave your back
at least here in italy, not only in philippines
 - You got my point perfectly. That's why I prefer a frontloader, or if it has to be a backpack, wear it on the front in dangerous urban areas. Anything of value has to be under my eyes all the time. A frontloader also has the advantage that your cam is in and out fast if you have a shoot opportunity. Another advantage is that even a large frontloader with pockets for lenses is not counted (and weighed) as a separate piece of hand luggage on budget flights and that you can wear it easily together with a large backpack on your back. My Lowepro Toploader Pro 75 AW is deep enough to have my cash and wallet at the bottom, but I wouldn't recommend it for ease of use. The zippers are all on the wrong sides.
1305
« on: March 24, 2010, 19:59 »
I want to carry my DSLR while cycling around town and it will have to be in a backpack to escape vibration. Err... I don't know in which gentle town you live but in the Philippines, everything in a backpack would be gone faster than you think. Sharp razor blades can cut easily through any fancy canvass.
1306
« on: March 24, 2010, 19:51 »
This is what I was hoping to avoid, even though i have already done this a little, sifting through countless posts and reply's on every different micro stock forum looking for information, I was hoping there was one good source for most of this information but apparently there isn't. Yes that's how it works: sifting through Google, through forums. I'm also looking for a mother of all tutorials like that, so when you sifted through all the noise on the net, please put a clear compilation online, that covers every aspect from start to finish in front of me so I don't waste time on the learning curve. 
1307
« on: March 24, 2010, 18:46 »
For now CS2 is OK. +1 - unless you're Yuri Arcurs and some others, it makes no business sense to buy a software package of that price (almost double in the EU) when photos are valued ) 0.25$. CS2 will do.
1308
« on: March 23, 2010, 10:48 »
donding made a post in error, he was referring to another site. He has since corrected his post. Pssst...  Donna is a "she".
1309
« on: March 23, 2010, 01:13 »
True, but did you see the "Survey of the Month" for Feb. asking how many files do you have on IS? Clearly the members here are way above the IS general population. The two populations are probably partly mutually exclusive or biased since an IS exclusive won't answer the SS poll. The opposite can also be true. I know one large uploader that contrates on SS, and that, since he is working alone, doesn't find the time to upload to IS any more. Guesswork...
1310
« on: March 23, 2010, 00:37 »
Closed -- What's closed? His mouth? His brain? The headphones? Oh, his eyes! How about eyes closed then? Thanks for your long reply to my rant. What I meant is "pushing ears" and "eyes closed" (the same discussion as in the DT flagging thread about compound keywords). I wasn't aware you could enter short phrases as IS keywords. Yepyep, it works well when you search for "Closed eyes". Thanks. I figure you will have to enter them between quotes. Useful rant anyways, also the link to the forum. "Fine art portrait" is imposed by the CV, where you have the choice between portrait as image orientation, and portrait as fine art portrait. I rather meant head shot. I always use portrait when an image is cropped around a person's face or the focus is on the face with not more than shoulders visible.
1311
« on: March 23, 2010, 00:25 »
Can't seem to find the thread. Here.
1312
« on: March 22, 2010, 23:14 »
my guess is that someone has embedded the image into their blog? Hotlinking by the IMG tag always bypasses any processing (included counting) by the site.
1313
« on: March 22, 2010, 22:51 »
The poll results are a bit surprising. Given that it is not that hard to get to 0.36$, but much harder to get to 0.38$ (the gap between 3K$ and 10K$ is huge, compared to the others), I would expect statistically that the majority would be in the 0.36$ group. But they are only at 23%. The conclusion would be that respondents follow a bimodal distribution with mostly beginners and experts and that the middle-class is underrepresented. A "normal" distribution would be a pyramid with a fat belly and a tiny spear on top.
1314
« on: March 22, 2010, 22:24 »
No, I just think they tolerate it with exclusives doing it but aren't prepared to increase the queues even more (or pay more inspectors) to do it for independents. Which makes no business sense at all because IS earns the most money per DL from independents, e.g. "Large Regular 2.78" (10 credits).
1315
« on: March 22, 2010, 21:58 »
- keyword minimally to avoid rejection for keywords Just an update on this, as I was crawling through my "can resubmits" last night. My last reject purely for keywords was this: Descr: Portrait of Korean punker pushing headphones to his ears, eyes closed, listening to music. Isolated over white. IS:  The following keywords used for this file do not appear to be fully relevant to the subject.
{[ Fine Art Portrait (Portrait), Human Ear (The Human Body), Human Eye (The Human Body), Closed (Physical Description), Pushing, Lifestyles]}
Some of the keywords used for this file do not appear to be fully relevant to the subject.
Under the new controlled vocabulary system that we now use, images need fewer keywords to do well in searches. The site automatically handles translations and synonyms, so you do not have to.
Please provide a set of simple, descriptive, focused keywords for this image before resubmitting. So the keywords will be: one person, isolated (cut out), male, Korean (Asian ethnicity), listening, music. But wait, maybe he is listening to a speech of Obama = music. And who says he is listening? He was probably pondering how much his model fee will be = listening. Is he really Korean? It wasn't mentioned on his ID, so Korean. So the "focused keywords for this image" will be: one person, isolated, male. Of course they will reject it then for "feathering" so I will save one round by applying my brand new 2MP-IS action: resize from 5616 to 1800 longest side (bicubic sharper), select #FFF (0 tolerance, non antialiased, not contiguous), feather this selection with 1.5px, edit>fill>white. The final reject will then be because the Model Release has a dog-ear. 
1316
« on: March 22, 2010, 09:21 »
at Shutterstock it was rejected few hours after been uploaded for commercial use. I uploaded it again as editorial, it took them around a week to reject it again. Don't use SS for editorial. They just accept "news".
1317
« on: March 22, 2010, 08:50 »
that's been my argument for years... I dont know how many times I have waited a few weeks and reloaded the exact same file...... and it is accepted AND it sells. I prefer to play the game openly till the end. I just resubmitted the "feathering" rejects downsized from 21MP till 2MP. I want the original reviewer to lose his face. I also refeathered the originals up to 3px. Of course it destroys part of the image, but any interested buyers can still find it at DT and SS, full size. IS abuses the independents to subsidize its exclusives. For 20-30 depreciated dollars per month or much less than 10% of my microstock income, I don't care. They are game.
1318
« on: March 22, 2010, 08:16 »
iStock can think what it wants. I can think what I want too. They reject for artifacting and feathering, that's fine with me. I just created 2 actions in Photoshop especially for iStock = reduce to minimal size. That is 2MP. Since I never get downloads above medium, most at XS (an insulting 19-30 cents), it won't hurt me nor them. If they will reject Canon D5II 21MP 100 ISO downsized to 2MP shots for "artifacting", I'm just going to make fun at them. I'll probably reupload all my best sellers at 2MP, and see what they say. For 19 depreciated dollarcents per download, they can go ...err...
1319
« on: March 22, 2010, 01:07 »
I just discovered I had a payout 2 weeks ago on Paypal, but the sum is not deducted yet from my current earnings. If there are glitches in their accounting, it works both ways. They are not trying to fool us. Hopefully, it all gets settled soon.
1320
« on: March 22, 2010, 00:57 »
Why on earth would you keyword minimally? Proper and adequate keywording is one of the cornerstones in getting good exposure - you are literally selling yourself short by spending a trivial amount of time with keywords. I leave out most concepts (unless it's the focus) or emotions. Those are the ones that reviewers mostly reject. It's better to have it accepted with sparse keywords than not have it accepted at all.
1321
« on: March 22, 2010, 00:43 »
8 more sales today Yuri Arcurs isn't there yet. They have a great collection for now, but still limited. I was scouting end last week for a media issue about " senior health lifestyle couple" to appear in the weekend-edition. On DP, I only got half a page of search results. On DT I found 27 pages, and exactly the one I wanted for the article. A Yuri Arcurs shot, sigh... 3 credits only for a 800px portrait-oriented perfect shot that matches a newspaper column. I had the same fee just for finding it. Stock is crazy...
1322
« on: March 22, 2010, 00:10 »
There are several ways it can work. Credible 3rd party reviewing services, paid by sellers, could be part of it. Many of the review criteria - like noise, "artifacts", white balance, sharpness - today seem to require skilled reviewers but in reality could be evaluated by software. A new standard file format could embed a digital signature and a bit of code that allows the image to be rendered (viewed) only a fixed number of times - sufficient for the buyer's own review. A downloadable application and encrypted JPGs could do the same thing today - giving the buyer a right of inspection and return. Correct. A clearance house for rights and releases, a warranty, a technical evaluation, payment, controlled downloads.... What you are talking about is a... stock agency.
1323
« on: March 21, 2010, 20:51 »
No, it's not a conspiracy - it's just one of the benefits of being exclusive: no more keyword rejections. Given that you keyword correctly and minimally, in my (independent) experience, IS will not reject an image just for keywords. If they do so, you will often see that they reject the image at resubmit for other reasons. As to the famous "distortion/overfiltering", I had a very borderline shot accepted recently because it was at a unique location regularly in the news.
1324
« on: March 21, 2010, 11:20 »
Very regular users need cheap content. I need a Cessna since I'm tired of all this local transport here at 25km/h over mud roads. I really honestly do need it. And I need it very cheaply, let's say for 8 DT credits. Got the point? A regular user can ask what he wants, but nobody is forced to offer or to produce it for the price that user wants to or can spend. If the images are too expensive, he can always go out and shoot them himself.
1325
« on: March 20, 2010, 11:29 »
My guess, and it's only that, would be that one of the "exclusive benefits" will eventually be the ability to opt out of the PP. I suspect non-exclusives will one day be herded into it whether they like it or not. In that case I'm gone. They won't make it mandatory, they will just kick you back some pages down the Worst Match.
Pages: 1 ... 48 49 50 51 52 [53] 54 55 56 57 58 ... 82
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
