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 - MatHayward
Pages: 1 ... 55 56 57 58 59 [60] 61 62 63 64 65 ... 76
1476
« on: September 16, 2012, 15:07 »
1477
« on: September 16, 2012, 15:05 »
I just had an image rejected by Dreamstime with the message "We do not accept images of children with cigarettes." I found this an interesting decline reason. As a parent I don't disagree with the premise. This image isn't loaded with commercial potential so I'm not all up in arms about it. It is however a shot of a child in a costume with a toy cigar. Seems harmless enough so I guess it just took me by surprise. I wonder if it was a moral issue for the reviewer specifically or if that is an actual policy. Here is the image in question: http://us.fotolia.com/id/34969274
1478
« on: September 10, 2012, 22:31 »
How many photos can I produce in a week? Well, last week in addition to my full time job I shot 12 bands during a festival on Saturday. Three days later I shot the bands Refused and Sleigh Bells. I did a senior portrait session, a portrait session with a rock band and I shot nearly 50 other bands during 3 non-stop days of Bumbershoot. All said and done I produced around 20,000 images last week.
If you mean to ask how many salable stock images can I produce in a week on a consistent basis...90 would be a tough goal. The tricky part would be to create a unique shot list week to week to create enough diversity in your portfolio.
1479
« on: August 30, 2012, 11:26 »
241
1480
« on: August 27, 2012, 21:21 »
So what now i need credentials to shoot the Christmas Parade ? 
I doubt it. Well, unless of course Coldplay is performing during the parade. I think the intent of their policy is more about trademarked, mainstream events. I shoot a ton of concerts..an unhealthy amount really. The one thing in common no matter how diverse the acts is that the fans will have their phones and point and shoot cameras up in the air during the entire performance. I see this requirement as a way of assuring that those aren't the shots that end up for sale. It's a bit inconvenient but at the end of the day it's pretty minor.
1481
« on: August 27, 2012, 01:05 »
I have gone through the re-approval process with SS. From what I recall I had to simply re-upload and attach a link to a photo of my photo pass for the event in the editor note box. You will be better served by doing it the first time as they don't seem to have a system in place to add the pass after it's been reviewed. Like I mentioned before, I usually leave a note mentioning who issued my credentials and have a cell phone pic of the pass uploaded somewhere to confirm it for them. Here is an example of a link I sent the last time: http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10151155614913707&set=a.266244318706.142413.784688706&type=1&theaterThey just want to make sure we are legit is the impression I've got. It doesn't need to be too in depth. -Mat
1482
« on: August 24, 2012, 01:04 »
Regardless of the event, I recommend you write a note for the editor explaining how you came to get access to shoot it. If you are just a fan in the stands of a commercial event you are probably s.o.l. If not, in my experience they've been pretty gracious in the review process.
The Red Carpet access program is a bit tricky. You need to contact the Promoter or Manager of the event then forward the information to SS. Essentially, they provide a letterhead or validation that you have a place to publish your work rather than just feeding your own ego and/or web site with no benefit for the artist, team or whatever. I did recently receive an email from SS offering to give me access to a pro soccer game here in Seattle. I couldn't do it due to a scheduling conflict but that message did show me that there are opportunities that do come up. The people working in that department are very responsive and helpful.
Mat
1483
« on: August 23, 2012, 14:32 »
Just add a note stating who your credentials were issued through if you don't have a physical pass. I would speculate that motorcross events won't be as stringently monitored as NFL, MLB and major music acts.
I've been issued the NFL vest too but they also give you a lanyard with the date and game info on it for security check points.
As for writing directly to promoters and asking for credentials for nothing other than the sake of taking pictures....good luck. You have a better chance of winning the lottery I've found in my experience and I do have a lot of experience. In order to get legit credentials for events you need to have a publication apply on your behalf. In other words, there needs to be a benefit for the promoter such as media coverage. Someone mentioned buying a photo pass for an event..I've never seen or heard of that before. They are always non-transferable and the will call counter holding the passes will undoubtedly ask for your ID.
1484
« on: August 23, 2012, 12:52 »
It is not easy to acquire photo passes. In music it is not uncommon to have to sign a waiver or contract with the band ensuring that we will only use the images for the publication approved for the pass. With the evolution of phone cameras and point and shoots the quality of fan photos is getting better and better. This leads me to believe that agencies are at risk by allowing illegally obtained photos to be put up for sale. If I had to guess they probably got a cease and desist letter from a lawyer that gave them a fright. I've seen images of bands in the SS database that I know for a fact do not allow the syndication of their images without explicit written permission. If you are shooting from the stands, you are taking a risk. If you had permission to be there and to shoot then simply re-upload and attach a link to your pass. No problem!
Mat
1485
« on: August 23, 2012, 12:26 »
Oh My Gosh! That was friggin awesome! I have got to try it!
1486
« on: August 23, 2012, 12:19 »
Yes, this is pretty common if you are shooting a sporting event or concert. It was frustrating at first because it is a PITA to re-upload and keyword but now that I know it's what to expect I simply snap a photo of my pass with my phone, upload it to Facebook and post a link in the comments for the editor page. I will also mention who the photo pass was issued through. When I do that the images are approved without a hitch.
1487
« on: August 22, 2012, 21:59 »
If I were to have a batch of similar images that I wanted all approved (not a big stretch right?) I would consider uploading them at separate times, keywording them at separate times and submitting them at separate times. Do you really think the editors are going through your entire portfolio when reviewing?
You can only submit 70 images per week anyway..might as well switch it up.
Though it could be connected to the Kennedy assassination. Maybe he has the Kenyan Obama Birth Certificate? Just a thought.
Mat
1488
« on: August 22, 2012, 18:06 »
What can we conclude, except that something totally corrupt is going on?
Something TOTALLY corrupt must be going on! Gasp! If I've told you once I've told you 100 MILLION Times...Don't exaggerate! "Something totally corrupt"....oh brother, are you kidding me?...what would be the corruption? Maybe he's trading drugs for approval? Maybe DT has a huge gambling debt and this photographer is the bookie? Give me a break. Wouldn't there be...oh, I don't know...MORE photos in the portfolio if he or she is running some giant conspiracy to undermine all the legitimate photographers? I think it's sad when people...especially anonymous people choose to single out a photographer that isn't involved in the forum in any way to talk about them, make fun of them and invent conspiracy theories involving them. There are enough crappy photographers that are involved in the forum that should be able to occupy your time and effort in this sad, insecure attempt at feeling better about yourselves. Have fun. Mat
1489
« on: August 09, 2012, 11:24 »
Sometimes people bite back, and you have been criticizing me endlessly during the last couple of years. So let's look at your arguments, Sean.
I have to say Yuri that I am incredibly impressed with the patience you have shown this far. I kid you not, every time you make a post here I predict an over/under on how long it will take Sean to chime in and turn whatever you say (or anyone who praises your work for that matter) into something negative and ugly. For me, I simply feel sorry for him. "Me, Me, Me!" is a sad way to go through life in my opinion. It can be argued by the darkest pessimists of the world that there is no true altruism. Even if you were to turn around and give every penny you earn back to the community you would receive a good feeling therefor a form of reward. It is simply impossible to make everyone happy. As for your original post I agree on all counts. I've had a large number of images sitting in the queue at Dreamstime waiting week to week for me to keyword. I'll get out of the uploading mode so it turns into about 70 images every 6 weeks or so for me. Not very profitable. SS is paying me pretty OK and their upload/review process is 2nd to none making it a much more pleasant experience in general. IS I just cannot justify uploading to. 15% is scandalous at best and a little piece of me died inside every time I tried to upload through their archaic, unintuitive system. I truly wish you the very best of luck Yuri. I understand that if you allow other photographers to contribute to Peopleimages your income flow from the other sites would have to be shut down. I predict that you are going to do it anyway down the road when your customer base increases so count me in as an eager contributor. All the best, Mat
1490
« on: July 31, 2012, 00:31 »
You can create a nice HDR image with one raw photo. Underexpose it in Lightroom and export, Overexpose it and export and expose it just right and export. Combine the three in photoshop the way you like it and you won't have the ghosting you mentioned. That being said, I used the HDR mode in my camera before a big concert festival was about to start. It got picked up by the Lumineers and shared on their FB page before I realized there was guy in the pic that had been walking when I shot. As a result he was chopped in half! Oops! http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10150992993875073&set=a.423972735072.182978.46835910072&type=1&theater
1491
« on: July 27, 2012, 14:40 »
I agree with the others. You stole from a fellow contributor and are now looking for sympathy about not being paid for your thievery? Good luck with that. Your forum name is appropriate in my opinion.
Mat
1492
« on: July 20, 2012, 13:05 »
It appears the changes have reverted back to the old way regarding extended licenses and the default settings for free images. I'm waiting to hear back about the SS# visibility.
Thanks,
Mat
1493
« on: July 20, 2012, 02:38 »
There are complaints on the Fotolia forum about the loss of extended licenses. The Moderator says he's looking into it.
What I am seeing different is that in the traditional upload process you cannot opt out of offering extended licenses. However, in the mass index program you still can. Also, the default does appear to have changed to yes when asking about free images. As soon as I hear back about whether this is a short term glitch or an intentional change I'll post in the FT forum. Mat
1494
« on: July 19, 2012, 12:43 »
1495
« on: July 16, 2012, 00:41 »
This is a disappointing practice to say the least. That being said, I think it pales in comparison to 123rf's practice of deducting promotional credits from the purchase price and ultimately commission.
We as contributors have no say whatsoever in how many credits they choose to give away and based on my royalty rates I'm finding after breaking out the calculator my assumption is that there are more giveaways than purchases.
1496
« on: July 13, 2012, 18:28 »
Fair enough. I appreciate the feedback! Different ... but you lost me on that first page. I need some "words" to feel welcome.
1497
« on: July 13, 2012, 18:27 »
they don't "kill more people than any other animal in Africa". That dubious honour belongs to the Plasmodium parasites.
In defense of my poorly written script, I don't consider Plasmodium parasites to be animals. Admittedly, I had never heard of a Plasmodium Parasite until I just googled it. On a side note, when I was in Tanzania I had so much fear of mosquito's going in...malaria pills, I brought nets, all kinds of thought and effort went into preventing a mosquito bite. I saw a grand total of 1 mosquito. 1.
1498
« on: July 13, 2012, 18:23 »
This is awesome feedback! Thank you so much! I had made a conscious decision to put the feature pic back further in the gallery and didn't really think that a viewer would be looking for that specific image. I will change it right away.
The grammar check is so helpful! I've been scrambling to write in as many galleries as I could and knew I must have been making some mistakes, the specific critique really helps me out. Thank you so much!
Also, the port vs. gallery thing is a bit screwy. I had been struggling to get the images to fit in the page, I probably need to just make that section go away until I add a shopping cart and fresh new images.
Thanks again!!
Mat
1499
« on: July 13, 2012, 13:44 »
Hi guys, I've been working on updating my personal work web site (again). It's a dramatic change from my old flash site. It's not complete by any means and I don't expect it ever will be as it should be evolving fairly regularly as new shoots come in to play. Any initial thoughts? Love it, hate it, could care less either way? I'd like your opinion. www.mathaywardphoto.comThanks, Mat
1500
« on: July 05, 2012, 16:30 »
submit.fotolia.com
Pages: 1 ... 55 56 57 58 59 [60] 61 62 63 64 65 ... 76
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|