pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Show Posts

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 - Gel-O Shooter

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8
151


Alistair, we find these to be a usual case of replicating content. .............
Wow.  This makes me exceedingly glad that I have had the good sense to never grace any forum with my real name/portfolio links!  Apparently it makes the target practice for rude, arrogant agency reps way too easy.

152
iStockPhoto.com / Re: IS Payment Report
« on: May 20, 2013, 12:46 »
Thanks for the link, Tick.  That was one app that I needed and didn't have.

153
Shutterstock.com / Re: Shutterstock down - again ?!?
« on: May 17, 2013, 20:38 »
My "waiting for inspection" files are not showing up on my contributor profile page.

154
iStockPhoto.com / Re: iStock simplifying collections
« on: May 15, 2013, 10:31 »
Well, iStock really got a conversation going with this announcement - it's already about twice the length of the April Sales Thread.  And then we get this (see
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=353725&messageid=6887259 )

"Especially when on one hand you have photographers like Yuri Arcurs and Cathy Yeulet (who are non-exclusive), and on the other hand iStock has many Exclusive hobby photographers who specialize in extremely low quality photos of their pets . "

I bet that's going to get some riled up; wonder how long it will be there..

Regards

I noticed that some indie told them on page 5 exactly what they thought of that whopping 15% commission.  The comment was ignored (of course), but it's still there.  Lobo must be too busy with all  the exclusive whining going to remove it.

155
This would be cool in HDR...if the ferry wasn't moving.  Nothing drastic, maybe 3 exposures at -1, 0, +1. 

156
Adobe Stock / Re: My images always refused by fotolia
« on: May 01, 2013, 16:30 »

I finally stopped submitting to them last month.  2 or 3 accepted for every 10 rejected just wasn't worth the effort. My shooting style is geared toward SS anyway, since they provide most of my paychecks.
You can't please everybody all the time. If anyone has a portfolio that is 80% accepted and sells well on all of the top 4, then I would love to see it.

157
So who is it that gives these images away?

People who don't know any better and people who haven't changed their default setting and their images get dumped in the free bin by default without them even really knowing.

The default was "free".  When I was doing wedding photography I didn't check DT for about 2 years (only had about 50 on there).  I was quite surprised when I did check it and found that 3 of my old ones were free, since I NEVER agreed to give away photos for any reason.  I deleted them very quickly and shot an email off to DT to complain about it.  The DT reply was the explanation about the new "donate/delete" program and they said that "donate" was the default option if you didn't reply to the email they sent.  It was partly my fault for not checking my account or reading their emails.  I still thought it was a sneaky, underhanded way to "kidnap" some freebies for their benefit, certainly not mine.

158
Shutterstock.com / Re: OMG Attila just got me!
« on: April 24, 2013, 14:45 »
Outdoor shots in full sun is poor lighting

So I guess you're saying you should shoot outdoor stuff only when it's cloudy, raining or at night?  Thanks for the valuable photography lesson.

159
Shutterstock.com / Re: Offset invitation?
« on: April 24, 2013, 13:49 »
I got excited when I found this in my mailbox this morning.  Then I read it again and realized it will be an invitation to be a buyer, not a contributor.

160
Shutterstock.com / Re: OMG Attila just got me!
« on: April 24, 2013, 13:47 »
Can we see some pictures or are you just going to debate how bad the huns are?

No thanks.  First, I value my anonymity, and second, I know the favorite sport here is to rip someone else's work to shreds.

161
Shutterstock.com / OMG Attila just got me!
« on: April 24, 2013, 12:59 »
Had 12 images in the que....nearly all of them outdoor shots in full sun.  100% rejection for "poor lighting"!

162
Stocksy / Re: Stocksy - Are you in or out ? Experiences.
« on: April 19, 2013, 09:40 »
Well, I'll probably be tarred and feathered for saying this but....

I just don't see Stocksy as being a viable alternative for the majority of us peons anytime in the near future.  I didn't apply to that particular fraternity during rush week, and I probably won't ever apply to them as I had enough of that click rejection BS in high school.  (Congrats to Gillian, though for getting "pinned").
 I have been accepted at every stock site I have applied to without having to beg for a chance just to apply, "tweak my shooting style" or take a chance on an unproven business concept.  People actually pay money for my photos every day.  In a world where everyone has a digital camera, they all fancy themselves photographers, and plenty of them will jump at the chance to give photos away for free, I will keep in mind that this is no small accomplishment. 
The way I see it, I would have more to lose by joining Stocksy at this point in time than they would.  Letting my best photos sit on their site exclusively for months or years waiting for it to either fly or crash and burn is just not that appealing to me right now.   

They should be sending out emails asking for that privilege from those of you willing to do it, not the other way around.

163
General Stock Discussion / Re: Fotolia and Travel Pics
« on: April 11, 2013, 22:35 »
My definition of a travel photo is "when I look at the photo, does it make me want to go there?"
So if you are already there it is not a travel photo?

Well, I suppose if someone took a photo of the inside of my gypsy travel trailer (where I look at other people's photos), I might not be inspired to make an epic journey (an already-there photo).  However, a really nice shot of the swamp down the road might entice me to drive a few miles (travel photo).

164
General Stock Discussion / Re: Fotolia and Travel Pics
« on: April 10, 2013, 15:14 »
My definition of a travel photo is "when I look at the photo, does it make me want to go there?"

165
Newbie Discussion / Re: New to microstock
« on: March 30, 2013, 23:50 »
I thought about it briefly once....then I thought about how mortified my daughter would be if her photo showed up in a tampon ad....and I was paid 38 cents to deal with the drama that would ensue.  :o  No thanks.


good point as I head into teenage years with my free models :) ... but surely a tampon ad would be deemed sensitive use?

Gillian, I would think it would be.  The question is do I trust an ad designer to see it that way?  What about something a little less innocuous, but still worthy of public humiliation....like maybe zit cream or stinky foot powder?  Any of these would have caused enough angst to at least merit an emergency family relocation to Siberia for 6-8 months. 

Good luck with your little models and enjoy them before they go off to college!

166
Newbie Discussion / Re: New to microstock
« on: March 30, 2013, 21:27 »
Always examine your photos at 100% (200% even better).  Trust me, if you see noise they will too.

Do you have photoshop and do you know how to clone out trademarks? 

None of my stock photos are people shots. I have some cute teenagers (ok, they are gorgeous), but I have never used them for models.  I thought about it briefly once....then I thought about how mortified my daughter would be if her photo showed up in a tampon ad....and I was paid 38 cents to deal with the drama that would ensue.  :o  No thanks.

A good tripod is your best friend and can go a long way toward getting a well-lit, sharp photo.

167
Photo Critique / Re: Help me to pass 3 photo test
« on: March 30, 2013, 17:22 »
Can of a sad to see folks still interesting in the death star--- :-\

Lobo, I am your Faaaather.  Tab, even mosquitoes and vampire bats have a purpose in life, I'm sure IS does too.

Abu,
I don't know if they judge your audition shots on content nowadays or just the technical aspects.  Flowers and kitty cats are generally frowned upon as submission subjects.  Already "well-covered in the database", or is that Fotolio I'm thinking of?

168
Photo Critique / Re: Help me to pass 3 photo test
« on: March 30, 2013, 13:43 »
I like the first one, but IS would probably reject it for lighting/shadow issues.  From my personal 9 year history with them, they seem to like sunshine and studio lights.   ;)

169
You also might want to take a look at what bigstock is doing to demotivate contributors these days.
A big +1 for this.

Bigstock isn't a problem for me any more.  I removed my portfolio weeks ago.  >:(

170
Scott,
First let me thank you for coming here and talking to us in a non-arrogant and non-condescending way.  You have already set yourself apart from your nearest competitor just by doing that.  ;)
I think what some of us are all trying to tell you is that we would love to see Offset succeed and would be more than willing to do what we can to help you achieve this goal IF we can be a part of that success with you. 
I'm sure you know the business better than I do, but I can tell you that on the few occasions when I have bought files, there is no way I would have even considered paying $250 for an image if I had the slightest inkling it could have ever been bought on another site for $5.

If I were you, I might consider taking fotografer's advice very soon and at least make a public attempt to single out a few of the uploads you get every day for possible future inclusion in the Offset collection.  The longer you keep Offset as Off-limits to the people who supply the content that pays your bills, the more you are going to piss them Off.

171
"Currently the process is highly selective and by invitation only".

Looks like the party has started and we're not on the guest list.  Are we really surprised about that? I think we all need to remember that these agencies are not our friends, and most of us are quite expendable to them, no matter how much $$ we have made them in the past.

That's ok, they are even more expendable to us.  Personally, I am looking forward to the day when we have an integrated platform where we can all sell our files as a co-op and keep 90% of our profits.  When that day comes, these agencies will be out of business in 6 months time.

172
Nikon / Re: Upgrading Nikon D200
« on: March 25, 2013, 13:15 »
Thanks. Will I notice a massive jump in quality from the D200 to the above examples you mentioned, or just a little ?
Well, the files are certainly more massive.  The image quality is better, but I don't know about massively better. The one thing I was disappointed in was  the noise level in low light.  I really don't think the D800 is tremendously better with noise than my old D200 was.  But then again the huge pixel count might just make the noise level more noticeable? You really can't go on my experience so much as I am just now in the process of upgrading my lenses to full frame.  Bear in mind that most of my DX lenses were pretty old.  I was anticipating upgrading to full frame for a couple of years and haven't bought any of the newer DX lenses.
I can tell you that the D800 plus my 50mm 1.8 prime produces a very good photo.  If you do a lot of cropping, you will love the D800 and those huge files.

173
Nikon / Re: Upgrading Nikon D200
« on: March 25, 2013, 10:11 »
I just upgraded my D200 to a D800.  If all you have are DX lenses, be prepared to drop another couple thousand on some decent full frame lenses.  I have found that photos taken with my old DX lenses on a D800 body look like crap.  Also be prepared to upgrade your computer equipment.  Those files are HUGE and it seemed like they filled up my 500G harddrive in about 24 hours.  ;)  I got an external 1T harddrive, and that helped.
I like my D800, but if I had it to do over again, I would probably settle for the cheaper D7000 and get a really good lens or two with the extra $$.  It still has an excellent 16MP sensor, and it does HD movies. Your DX lenses will work fine on it too.
Hope this helps.

174
iStockPhoto.com / Re: istock update for non-exclusives
« on: March 21, 2013, 18:33 »
I am sooooo done with these jerks.

I have one remaining active image, which brings in a few dollars.  I'll leave it there to keep the account active in case IS is sold, or reorganized, and becomes something that makes sense. 

Otherwise, I'll stop thinking about them.

  Unless they have some real changes someday, I'm done with them too.  I have disabled anything that had even a hint of a person in it.  I'll leave a few there since I've already gone through that excruciating upload process, but they will never get another new file from me.

175
General Stock Discussion / Re: Acceptance at Alamy
« on: March 21, 2013, 12:17 »
Aly, if you're already on some micros, you can do what I did to get in.
I went through my records and found 4 shots that passed IS, SS, and DT.  Gee, I knew those guys were good for something besides a few pennies per sale!  ;)
I got in within 48 hours on my second try.  I think my first batch failed because I had one photo taken 5 years ago that I had saved to jpg several times.  They are not joking when they tell you not to do that.
Good luck!

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors