|
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 - Phil
Pages: 1 ... 53 54 55 56 57 [58] 59 60 61 62 63 ... 67
1426
« on: May 09, 2008, 03:54 »
april was down a few hundred dollars on march and has been quiet for me until 3 days ago when it seems to picked back up.
1427
« on: May 08, 2008, 15:35 »
Hi, just converted to tokens so now I have 7 tokens  this will equate to $2 for the photographer. I dont really have a need for images so if anyone is $2 short of payout, reply and I will spend it on yours. Phil
1428
« on: May 08, 2008, 07:38 »
if it was a planned move then lowering payout was an decent and honourable thing to do...they could have left it at $100 and a lot more people would be owed money...they could have just turned the servers off and walked away, at least this way the most any contributor will lose is $24.99... about 1/3rd of the polariser I just bought... not as much as it cost me to take my kids to mcdonalds....
1429
« on: May 05, 2008, 17:43 »
I didnt vote as I dont use them (never even took enough notice to see what they are for) but I didnt want to click take them away, because I dont care if they stay or not.
1430
« on: May 03, 2008, 16:17 »
I used to get 80-90% acceptance which is about what I get everywhere except istock about 60%. But I had 11 of 30 last batch, and 7 of 28 this batch. All 'type of photograph' or overabundant category. I can live with changing standards, i can accept that some categories are 'full' but they are so inconsistent. If they come along and say to everyone, hey we dont want images of xxx anymore etc etc. it would save people a lot of time and anguish and them a lot of reviewers time / money. I average between 30-50 uploads a week, and going through the last few hundred rejections I cannot work out what they are saying is full etc. background rejected last week, similar accepted this week. Personally I hate their upload with the 7 keywords and there horrible catgories and have always actually prefered even istocks to theirs (of course StockXpert / 123 are much better). I think I need to take a break from them. end my little rant and now I feel a bit better Phil
1431
« on: May 01, 2008, 17:37 »
He also told me that the key is to join every new site you find and that biggest photographers are on 13-15 microstock sites...
What a waste of time! I can't believe that is good advice.
the 'top' people to me seem to be a pretty even mix of those that exclusive and those that aren't.
1432
« on: May 01, 2008, 16:03 »
deleted
1433
« on: May 01, 2008, 05:55 »
Microstock will not die, it will evolve into something better. There are so many customers and so many good images in the industry that sites are beginning to launch mid/macro stock models to sell the best images from contributors at higher prices. It makes sense, sell the normal "Ok" images for $1-20 and sell the really good images for $20-140.
Two sites already have come up with such models, Fotolia Infinite and EVO at 123rf; I know others have it in the works.
What will happen? microstock sites will have the quality, variety and quantity of both photographers and customers to actually become THE best place to buy photos.
just another one having a bitch and complaining. Of course the top 500 or so people in microstock will all of sudden find it boring and pull their images off every site. But I think it will become as hard to get into microstock as traditional stock is. I've had the rejections early on. While now I see why I was rejected, saying sorry we dont take images taken with your brand / model of camera is garbage, Deliberately providing misinformation by some people, and being so elitist even when half you library is full of very average photos doesn't help your industry. Every agency would say its not our job to provide advice or assistance to those aspiring people, but because then noone does those people go elsewhere or feel that maybe there images are only worth $1. Personally I see the traditional dying, I think we will see micro and midstock. the smarter traditional agencies getty, jupiter, corbis, inmagine see it too and have lowered traditional prices, and got involved in micro. Alamy now has 'novel' use, essentially midstock which will start to come into effect soon. camera relaed production costs are now too cheap and decent photography is too easy (decent, I didnt say brilliant) and there has been too many stock photographers for 10-20 years for the premiums being charged. The only way i see macro's dying is because the entire stock industry has died. Phil
1434
« on: April 30, 2008, 23:56 »
major 'ebbs and flows' april was all over the place.
overall if it had been a 31 day month, I would have scraped in a BME for micro sales
IS 45% BME
SS 17% Down (only 70% of last month)
DT 15%
123 6% BME
FT 5.5% BME
StockXpert 3.5% Down (only 70% of last month)
BigStock 2.5% Down (only 65% of last month)
FP 1.3% BME (150% of last month)
ZYM! 1.1% BME (pretty good for less than 10% of portfolio approved in beta site)
SCAN 1% BME
CRE .7%
MOST .6% BME
SNAP .5% BME
CAN .4% Down
Most, scan and snap have 55-60% of portfolio.
Phil
aargh, always the way someone comes in with a 30c sub sale at 3 seconds to midnight on a site just after you have finished the tallies...
1435
« on: April 29, 2008, 22:25 »
I just submitted thirty, its telling me 28 hours my submission from thursday went through yesterday
1436
« on: April 28, 2008, 22:14 »
Just wondering if any of you have ever had a toned image ie. Sepia etc. accepted by an agency?
I have plenty, I dont think I ever get rejections because it being sepia or black and white. And for some images sepia is a lot nicer or more appropriate than colour (IMO). I dont think my sepia stuff sells or is accepted any better or worse than colour. But to put that in context the images that to me lend them themselves to sepia (ie old stuff) aren't subjects that are big sellers. (I couldn't image andresr's business / lifestyle shots in sepia  ) Phil Oh, dont submit both sepia and colour versions on same day
1437
« on: April 28, 2008, 16:04 »
Geez they're taking their sweet time to announce this one, doesn't it go into effect in less than a week (next Thur)? They said that it will happen in the first two weeks of may. From the official thread:
We expect to be able to announce the raise to you during the first two weeks of May. It will be effective immediately.
Meanwhile 100,000 contributors sit and wait... no pressure guys take your time!
lol!!!
1438
« on: April 27, 2008, 18:43 »
what a great thread. my eldest daughter now 16, learnt the alphabet and taught herself to read (a biggish part from sesame street she hit school at 5 already reading books. I have a degree, masters degree and almost finished phd, I have the more advanced vocabulary but even at 16 she writes better and easier than I ever will, for her it just comes natural and easy. my son is in 5 year and sitting with the year 8 maths textbook. skims a chapter of instruction in a few minutes and then does the end of chapter review. occasionally he makes a simple mistake. his teacher complains he doesn't show working, he says he just sees the answer, to show or even do the working is extra work not a process along the way (personally I think he does it, but it is just that fast). I know more maths than him, but I worked hard with lots of practice. as long as he stays interested he will be well beyond what I know with only a small amount of work. I have done so much logic and problem solving I often get problems and come up with a solution or two and people look at me strange. I try to explain that the answer is really not that hard, and really is obvious that just look even stranger. makes me also think of movie good will hunting. I think if I was to put 100 hours a week into golf, I dont think I'd ever be as good as tiger woods. BUT back to photos Nowadays I look at an area and see the shots (or how a shot isn't going to work) I see more or better than I did a couple of years ago and that was better than a few years before (but it was always there). The problem I still have is getting my vision of the scene into the camera, and even more so through photoshop. The vision is there, just have to get the mechanics of the rest of it to happen. I also look at some pro photographers around the place and see that really dont have it. I looked at a people workshop and come away with if thats what your showcasing then I aint interested. I looked at studio specialising in headshots and would have cut what they showed in half. beyond bf/ff images there was a lot of images that were just bad artistically. I started to write that it is all just learnt then editing and changing while I write I seem to have gone the other way. really I feel that you can be extremely good with a lot of hard work but to be in that extreme greatness it is born. I also think everyone has there own talents, my people skills are poor (stereotypical academic but my 2nd daughter will know everyone in the room within minutes
1439
« on: April 24, 2008, 16:28 »
mine are at $5 for the moment. I have opted out of subs, is anyone opted in? are you getting sub sales?
Phil
1440
« on: April 20, 2008, 00:39 »
How stupid is this?? Here one snatched from Lumaxart2D, the artist who does all those Gold Guys.
The Zillman version
http://www.dreamstime.com/golden-cup-image4566239
THe Lumaxart2D version
http://www.dreamstime.com/baseball-sports-trophy-image596707
Ok I'm done - this one was the topper for me and the ultimate in thieving stupidity.
OMG how stupid can you be to take one of the gold guys?? I surprised it didnt ring alarm bells with the reviewer. I looked through his port and none of them mine at first yay! then I thought about, none of my images were even good enough to be stolen  oh well, just keep learning
1441
« on: April 20, 2008, 00:24 »
Woo-Yay! Way to go IS!!!
Oops, wrong forum
LOL
1442
« on: April 20, 2008, 00:21 »
I was keen on top 50 until it went down and then I had an image get 74 sales in a week. I was annoyed but then found that purchasers cant see the top 50 only submitters. then I am glad it was broken. I think its only use is to look and get ideas / copies, and shutterstock encourage this.
I entered into a similar discussion on istock. being able to sort by and see the number downloads, stops people thinking about what they are buying (it must be it has lots of sales) and reduces photographers being creative (by saying it has lots of sales, I'll go do that.
Phil
1443
« on: April 17, 2008, 21:54 »
I have heard many times how being a favourite is required to succeed in stock...but always in context of a client ringing / walking into an agency to see their account manager. Who would have a think and pull out the transparencies / slides of the images he/she liked and showed those to the client. With clients doing their own searching I think it may not be so obvious / appropriate? shutterstock -> primary methods -> age, not many variables here. - most popular -> some sort of algorithm based on sales vs time so basically length of time between sales of an image. dreamstime -> primarily factored on portfolio size, acceptance rate etc. BigStock mentioned istock -> primarily number of downloads or best match based heavily on number of downloads, number of views and age. I wouldn't be surprised to find it has a hidden starting rating, but I think after that its up to the image. I think most of it is pretty obvious weighted on images that sell well go to the top, people who get lots of sales go to the top. pretty much standard business? you dont put the stuff that doesnt sell in the shop window and hide the stuff that does down the back. (well, perhaps you might if your shop was into discretion / illegal activities now that I got this far, I wonder about the point of the original post, to say "hey the agencies are companies and they are behaving as such? doing what it takes to make money? phil
1444
« on: April 15, 2008, 20:00 »
snip
If I want people to gush over my photography, I'll show my family. If I ask or post an opinion here or on any decent board, I'm going to expect and hope for brutal honesty. Otherwise, I've wasted my time and everyone elses.
your lucky that your family gush, if I want brutal honesty I show my family the reviewers are more forgiving LOL
1445
« on: April 15, 2008, 19:49 »
do a swap, find someone who will buy your images if you buy theirs at least then you get a third back (at least those who have more than 75 tokens).
1446
« on: April 14, 2008, 18:25 »
get up early this morning wanting the sweet light. make a coffee, think I'll check email / sales, fall asleep in my chair. wake up, make more coffee, breakfast etc. Look at camera think about what I need, throw some stuff in a bag, think the battery must be close to flat as I hadn't put in on charge so I swap batteries. finally an hour or two later having missed the dawn light, I get going.
get to where I am going, realise I didn't bring a wide enough lens. So I think I'll do some pans. so I get setup. grab my remote, nothing. my remote is flat. alright then I'll use the self timer. a whole 3 shots later camera battery is flat, this the one I just picked up???
aargh!!! now I am closer to work than home, so I get to work 7:30am this morning. oh well maybe tommorrow.
1447
« on: April 14, 2008, 18:05 »
ring flash gives a very flat light. but it is supposed to be good for stamps, documents, teeth etc. Many people prefer the nikon r1c1 style thingy with two flashes on the sides (I think there is a canon equiv.?). if you are in US promaster do a cheaper version that is sort of half way between the two, but I am not sure how well it works (I stopped looking at them when they didn't answer me emails as to whether the pentax version actually works oh if you shoot pentax, there isn't any on the market (at all
1448
« on: April 14, 2008, 18:00 »
And yet, they show this example as the "image of the week"
Granted, they claim it is a temporary image place holder for the 3 millionth image online, but still - an interesting example of something that they'd never allow us to upload.
maybe it belongs to a reviewer LOL
that was my first thought too when I saw this image
1449
« on: April 14, 2008, 17:55 »
I've been following this on the forums for a while now: every time some poor devil posts something critical or less than flattery, they immediately get pounded, patronized, their portfolios reviewed (negatively), etc etc by a whole bunch of 'loyalists' who are much harsher and less flexible than even the actual site admins???
Is this some misguided pride or exclusivity or some other pathological psychology?
put it down to the nature of the beast. Unfortunately a lot of these photogs are ill-educated, self-employed egomaniacs and they exist on eveyr forum. None of these numb nuts would get a team job never mind function in one hence their inability to handle any type o' criticizm. That said there are some really good guys on here too but very much in the minority fraid to say.
WOOYAY!!! you tell them. LOL! (I agree, and they're there on every sites forum)
1450
« on: April 13, 2008, 19:34 »
Hi, my kids carry stuff my 10 year old son is pretty keen on reflectors, tell any kids that age 'here's something shiny, use it to reflect the sun onto a person, object, frog etc and they're happy' have to keep on eye on them though too often it is more entertaining to make the 'spot' dance around the walls, trees etc. I convinced my wife to do some keywording, she did for a few hours and then got a job the next day so there went that... someone to keyword and submit would be the first person I employ... Phil
Pages: 1 ... 53 54 55 56 57 [58] 59 60 61 62 63 ... 67
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
