|
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 - borg
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 ... 68
152
« on: September 27, 2013, 17:41 »
But you have to admit that you did not expect such kind of topic... 
153
« on: September 27, 2013, 17:30 »
Post a 100% crop? I am really curious.
I know you are, but I don't want to publish, until I get any confirmation from some "connoisseur" that could be "something" in that direction... Reason for that that I 've seen many "serious" UFO images far worse than mine... 
154
« on: September 27, 2013, 17:24 »
people contact the tabloids every day with "UFO photos".
Which are nearly always insects caught in motion - apparently sharp in one plane but blurred in another. Insects close up can look like weird objects in the sky. And with no way of gauging the distance they can look more distant.
Interest in these sorts of stories peaks when there is a book or a studio movie being promoted.
I have RAW format to prove it's authentic...
Lol.
Do you know for sure how to change and save a RAW image without any sign of manipulation...?
155
« on: September 27, 2013, 17:20 »
The only thing I know is that it will be interesting to hear your comments ...  We have here lot of completely different characters, from scientific population to totally religious people who who believe in the apparitions of saints... So, "insect theory" is something what can be true... But I was trying to do the same several times in place with lot of insects and I didn't catch anything even close to object on that photo... That photo was sky above the sea, there is not lot of insects.... Also there is reflection of the Sun on that object... Object is very symmetric...
156
« on: September 27, 2013, 11:03 »
Jeez if there is anything worse than a so-caloled "photo of a UFO", it's someone claiming they have one, but not showing it to you.
I just ask you do you know I good way to publish or sell this kind of photos...? I am not searching for proof is it or not... Of course that I will show you here, if someone who need or is familiar with this kind of photo tell me that photo has "a weight"!
157
« on: September 27, 2013, 10:49 »
Thanks! If they tell me that is valuable... I'll post here! Otherwise, I can only embarrass myself here...  Whole afternoon I'm trying to get same effect onto my camera... With water drops, dust, etc. but nothing even close...!
158
« on: September 27, 2013, 10:43 »
Fox news?
Really!? But how to check it or prove it, if this can be UFO... ? I saw these days many "extraordinary UFO photos" over Internet, many of them are quite similar to mine, all are JPGs, but I have RAW and also original photo is still in camera...
159
« on: September 27, 2013, 10:39 »
why Editorial? UFO trademarks? 
Who knows? ;-) Photo doesn't have stock quality, but I have RAW format to prove it's authentic...
160
« on: September 27, 2013, 10:36 »
Maybe, I accidentally photographed an unidentified flying object (UFO).
What I know about photography tells me this should not be a "technical" error...
So, what do you think is the best way to sell these kind of photos? Editorial on Alamy or...?
161
« on: September 20, 2013, 09:02 »
My sale are back but less than usual before new site... I hope that will reach old level...
Another thing what is problem to me on Zazzle is tax... They are taxing all sales not just US based...
162
« on: September 04, 2013, 07:03 »
It's a ripe time to support friendly sites...
163
« on: August 22, 2013, 08:10 »
I was there for 10 months, without any sale... I think that stock photos are not their niche...
They are more for weddings, happenings, editorial etc.... For target customers exactly...
164
« on: August 20, 2013, 08:56 »
Does it Henrik the VIII?
165
« on: August 18, 2013, 13:55 »
I am sick because such kind of questions and hypothesis... We are listening this "crow song" from begining...
No, never! Microstock is just marketing type for selling photos...
Question is the same as "Do we stop to buy merchandises over the internet!"
No, it could be just better, Internet brings possibility to avoid dealers (agencies, etc.) and for sure wil
shorten the time and distance, from the producers to consumers...
Shall we say goodbye to the agencies, likely? Their time is questionable?
166
« on: August 15, 2013, 08:14 »
167
« on: August 14, 2013, 07:24 »
I'll raise too, to 50%!
P.S.
To become pro seller you need to pass 1000$ of payouts... Then you will receive an email about it...
168
« on: August 14, 2013, 07:20 »
istock will win this game not now but next year when half contributors will dropp one or two royalty levels
iStock will win when story will be over as with Stocxpert, and all buyers will be redirected to getty and thinkstock... It is expensive for Getty to have double infrastructure...
169
« on: August 12, 2013, 14:29 »
I don't know why you are losing your time on Yuri so much...
170
« on: August 10, 2013, 14:17 »
It's a giant mess actually. I just want to get to $50 and get out of there. All of mine are set to 20%. No way am I going to change it. It's like a commission cut where those that have more than 15% won't get noticed and if you set it all to 15%, unless you're a pro seller and whatnot, still not likely to get seen in the millions of products on the site.
For me it's a no win situation
I am a pro seller and this is "lose-lose situation" as it seems...
171
« on: August 10, 2013, 12:30 »
I don't know what it will mean to buyer if you make changes in several percentages...
If you make change to your royalty rate from 30% to 20%, that would mean only difference of 10%, but only on their base price...
So if something costs 20$, with your royalty of 30% buyers pays 26$, and after your change to 20% buyer will pay 24$....
Difference is just 2 dollars!!! My experience told me that buyers don't care for 2$, if they like some product...
Zazzle told that after 1st July, they won' promote stores with +15% royalties, but that decision was even before but on 25%...
Whole the time my royalties are on 30% so they didn't promote my works even before famous new site...
So, I don't know what to think...
172
« on: August 10, 2013, 03:19 »
Today is 40 days without any sale!
1st July was fatal to me...
173
« on: July 26, 2013, 03:08 »
No because physical laws of light... Maybe in editorial photography (where we need information, not quality)....
174
« on: July 25, 2013, 08:45 »
According this topic: And then Fotolia will have max 1,567% less images on site... Customers won't even notice... ------------------ I have another idea! We have to found one of agencies which will be ready to give us 100% of earnings in next year... But, at the end of a year agency should to be transparent and give us insight to business books... Then agency should make "list of costs" or "estimated budget" for next year, and then contributors who want to participate one year more, have to give money regarding with size of portfolio, profit, etc. What do you think!?
175
« on: July 25, 2013, 03:06 »
What is your royalty percentage?
If you have rapid fall in sales in July do you have royalties set above 15%?
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 ... 68
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
