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 - ShadySue

Pages: 1 ... 600 601 602 603 604 [605] 606 607 608 609 610 ... 624
15101
Alamy.com / Re: 24 is the new 48
« on: May 26, 2010, 16:53 »
Well, how ironic is that. I slave away at the micros just so that I could earn the gear I needed to submit to Alamy without upsampling. I thought Alamy was my 'natural' niche. How wrong was I? 4 sales in 14 months, and less $$ altogether than almost every week on iStock; and now they're accepting pics that I could probably have submitted with my original camera. Huh - talk about backing the wrong horse!!!  :o
IN the interests of transparency I should say that I got my 5th Alamy sale today  ;D - but still far from payout  :(

15102
I know this is an old rant and it happens occasionally to everyone, but I just had an image rejected for at least a dozen keywords where every "not fully relevant" keyword is something which is actually in the photo.  I'm talking about objects, construction materials, plants and colors.  I gather that the inspector in this case is a newb, or badly hung over, or else Istock just put a severe fright into the inspectors by threatening to can anyone who allowed irrelevant keywords to pass.

Just for the record, if there are red flowers in the photo, but the photo is not primarily of the flowers, is "Red (Descriptive Color)" considered to be spam?  Or does a color have to be one of the "main" colors in the photo to be promoted to keyword status.

It's a good thing that I didn't add keywords related to the concepts implied by the photo but which were not literally present.

You'd need to post a link to the photo here, or on iStock's keywords forum. We can't comment without seeing the image and the list of rejected kewords.

15103
I had to try several times to get in at work about 31/2 hours ago at work (IE) but got in first time when I got home on FF. Maybe we both hit the same glitch?

15104
iStockPhoto.com / Re: istock partner programs
« on: May 26, 2010, 02:21 »
You'll get paid the flat rate for any size not matter what the end usage is UNLESS the buyer doesn't take out a subscription but opts to buy it as a one-off at a huge rate, then IIRC you get 20%. Don't hold your breath: generally they'd be better to take out a one-week subscription.
Yes, the same images can be sold at the PP and iStock except exclusive files under 18 months old, which can only be sold at one or the other.
I don't know how it's going to work for iStock. They originally told us it was different markets, then hit their biggest buyers with a newsletter advising suggesting they take out a Thinkstock subscription. That was when I opted out and I no longer care. However, the subscription model is quite restrictive, and the T&C (hahaha) state that images can't be stockpiled but must be used during the period of a sub. (not that there's any way of policing that) Not so good if you have a huge job needing many images one week, but also some flat weeks when you need very few, whereas with an iStock bundle you can buy files as and when you need to.

15105

I'm sorry, but I can't agree with you. You can keyword your images poorly and spend 2-3 minutes per image. But for a good keywording of one image you should spent at least 5 minutes (if not 10). That means maximum 12 images per hour.
12x0.4=$4.8 per hour. Now find me someone who will do it for less. If you think this is a stealing, then sit and try to keyword 1000 images yourself :)

In my opinion, the only problem if you send images to Dreamstime for keywording, is that not all images will be accepted. So, you will again have some images to keyword manually.

i dont think i've ever spent 5'  on one image & generate 10-20 kw / image - if you have a good vocabulary,it's just not that hard - plus, i rarely keyword less than3-5 images at a time and even rarer are the times i have to start keywording from scratch -  i uslly have a siimila;ly   keyworded image that i can cut n paste

i average about 50 images an hour - that's writing captions, keywording, adding iptc info, but i wouldnt do it for someone else for less than $50/hr

s
Not everyone speaks English as a first language, or even any other stock library languages. Even though I've got a bit of paper which 'certifies' that I "know French" (hahahaha), I'd spend hours if I had to keyword in French, looking up dictionaries and cross-checking meanings.

15106
Off Topic / Re: Jeepers! IS POTW
« on: May 23, 2010, 18:20 »
Puts me in mind of the old Natrel deodorant adverts, but I can't find one online ATM.

15107
I've got a RAID system, but now my pics go straight onto an external HD. I copy all the pics from a shoot, keeping them still on the CF cards. I then go through them, deleting the obvious no-hopers (mistakes or people walking into my pictures etc). Then I back all of the rest onto a DVD before doing anything else. Then I go through the set again, deleting the 'seconds'. before starting any processing. At that point, if I think it's likely to be an important set (for any reason, not necessarily stock), I'll backup onto another DVD. Also, even if I've put the originals onto the external HD, and an image is sent to iStock or Alamy, the jpeg will then go into the appropriate folder on the HD and be backed up by the RAID system.

15108
It's my understanding that you have to buy a new license for each website if you would like to use the same image for more than one project.

I could be wrong though.
Nope, not only can one buyer use it in as many projects, print or digital as they like (that's the whole point of Royalty Free), they seem to be able to syndicate articles to loads of websites. I have a photo which has sold only once and it's accompanying a broadly similar article published across many websites.

15109
iStockPhoto.com / Re: Fresh exclusive feedback
« on: May 18, 2010, 14:11 »

Thanks for sharing, but in fairness, December is notoriously one of the very lowest earning months of the year, so a December to April comparison is going to be heavily slanted.
My December has consistently been 3rd top for dls and $$s for the three years I've been with iStock, with Nov being top and Oct being 2nd each time. That even included 2007, when I had not one Christmas/Chanukah pic in my port. In each case, December vastly outdid April.
Hope the same applies this year; although my downloads are still on a steep downward slope, my $$ continue to rise comparing with comparable months in previous years.

15110
Thinkstock.  I hate Thinkstock.  And many of you do too.

Oh yeah, good point.  I was only thinking of the agencies I submit to.

As we have already agreed, "hate" is a strong word.  But I will admit I definitely wish Thinkstock a speedy demise ;)
Me3

15111
General Stock Discussion / Re: How much to charge?
« on: May 17, 2010, 02:15 »

If you do 'sell' a photo to Scottish Farmer, I'd be aware of this............they sell their photo's on:

http://thescottishfarmer.newsprints.co.uk/prices/db/0/0

Thanks for that. That is standard practice with local papers round about here if the photo has been taken by one of their 'regulars' and it's probably the deal if staffers take the photo for SF. If they want this photo, I won't allow selling on, and besides, who would want the photo apart from the farmer himself? However, it's an interesting guide to print prices.

15112
General Stock Discussion / Re: How much to charge?
« on: May 16, 2010, 18:30 »
Have you tried any of the estimators ... association guidelines, etc?
http://photographersindex.com/stockprice.htm

Also, ASMP (American Society of Media Photographers) website might offer some help.

As for pricing event photography, I tried the SmugMug trial but decided I couldn't make enough at local events to pay for the professional version.


I wasn't asking for what I should charge the magazine, should they even want to use one of my pics - I'm guessing as a reputable mag, they'll have a set payrate. And it will almost certainly be printed small on the page. (What goes in America isn't what happens here. LOL)

I've read the replies with great interest - not the responses I was expecting, and gives me plenty of food for thought. This particular farmer lives over an hour's drive away, not somewhere I could just drop into.

Ironically, a couple of months ago, I was approached via a work colleague to to some photography for a much more local farmer who breeds Highland cattle - he particularly wanted me to be there for the calves being born. I didn't even begin negotiations, because none of my Highland Cattle pics sell on either iStock or Alamy, so I guessed there wasn't much market for them (not just my pics, but there aren't many sales on iStock at all for Highland cattle, except for one absolutely classic in front of Buachaille Etive Mor). And that would have put me in the position of having to haggle over time and price for prints - which is really what my query here was about.



I

15113
Alamy.com / Re: Alamy Questions
« on: May 16, 2010, 16:01 »
Per their site -

Jupiterimages is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Getty Images, the world's leading creator and distributor of still imagery, footage and multi-media products, as well as a recognized provider of other forms of premium digital content, including music.
Yebbut they don't seem to be "shut down".
(Odd that their current 'featured collection'  is Corbis.

15114
General Stock Discussion / Re: How much to charge?
« on: May 16, 2010, 15:13 »
I've sold 7x5in prints for 8+p&p.  Or, if your image sells at the magazine, give him the prints for free, that would be nice.

Just a remark: handing out a IS card may give the expectation that you will sell images cheap, and I believe this is not the case for a magazine.
Yup, it's the only card I have (must think about that!) and as the pics would never be iStockable it wasn't relevant, but it passed over my phone no and email addy more neatly than scribbling on a piece of paper.

Does anyone know where there's a good MR for editorial shots? I've asked this before and didn't get an answer, other than 'you don't need them', and googling 'Model release for editorial' just gives the same information.

15115
Alamy.com / Re: Alamy Questions
« on: May 16, 2010, 14:27 »
Re: Also, you haven't mentioned Jupiter.  Do they not figure in your work?

Jupiter aka Stockexpert was bought out by Getty last year.  They were shut down. 

Really?
What's this then: http://www.jupiterimages.com

15116
General Stock Discussion / How much to charge?
« on: May 16, 2010, 14:07 »
Yesterday, i was photographing at my local Cattle Show, mainly for practice though I'll probably send some to Alamy, not that last year's batch have done me any good! A few different people (officials) asked if I was shooting for Scottish Farmer magazine. http://www.thescottishfarmer.co.uk (I guess it was the 5DMk2!).
A farmer asked me particularly to photograph his cow and calf. In fact, I'd noticed them earlier and had taken several photos. At the end of the Champion of Champions round, he held back for a few seconds (the Grand Parade was about to start so it was literally a few seconds). He asked for my card (lucky I've got an iStock Moo card, though a bit irrelevant) and gave me his email addy.
So I processed the photos and shoved them some on my website http://www.lizworld.com/General/CattleShow.html and emailled him. I assumed he might want to buy a couple of prints, and had no idea of how much to charge. (Photographers go out of business within a year or two round about here, whether they charge a little or a lot - can't get enough people willing to pay anything.)
Turns out he's the bloke who writes the report for the Scottish Farmer, and he's emailled them and suggested they use one of my photos of his cattle. (What's the point of writing the report if you can't feature your own winners?!). He's not sure whether or not they'll use a picture, and I guess if they do, my rubric is "... at your usual rate."

He has also asked about gettting prints, and said specifically that he "didn't want big ones" I fobbed him off for a bit - I haven't a clue how much to charge, especially as I'll be submitting to Alamy. In other circs, I could exchange them for MRs for iStock, but I can't imagine there would be any interest on iStock, and anyway most of the pics have other people in the background, or objects which would need PRs.
I could do inkjet prints (I've got an Epson 1400), but thought I'd use Photobox, which I've used about three years ago. An 8x6 costs 37p there +p&p, so I thought 3 + p&p.
I know all you USian photogs wouldn't get out of your bed for under 100, but this is rural Scotland.
TIA
After I wrote the above, I thought that IF Scottish Farmer use one of my photos and IF the fee is good (which is by no means certain; I haven't located any info about fees on their website yet) I should send him the small prints free for the contact.

15117
Hmmm. I looked in 'birds', and got a huge list of error messages
"Warning: getimagesize(stock_photos/i_118107834.jpg) [function.getimagesize]: failed to open stream: No such file or directory in /home/bestimag/public_html/i_gallery_photos.php  on line 29"
 and no visible images with firefox.
So I tried with IE, and got a security message I've never had before: "Do you want this website to access your clipboard?" Huh? What's all that about?
Anyway, in IE, I get the same error messages in Birds and also in the Wild Life subcategory I saw earlier in FF.

15118
Ha, well people will be very disappointed if they buy subs there: there were hardly any images in the sections I checked out. And their keywording is beyond hysterical. There was a photo of a wild Rhino and its calf in Lake Nakuru NP. It's title was "animal, wild life" ("wild life" being a subcategory of 'animal' it wouldn't surprise me if all the few pics there are titled identically), and keyworded:
Animal,  Birds,  Butterflies,  Zoo,  Reptiles,  Wild Animals,  Pets,  Nature,  Environment,  Lion,  Tiger,  Wolf,  Cat,  Dog,  Human Friends,  Aquarium,  Biology,  Eco Tourism,  Ecotourism,  Fish,  Marine,  Marine Life,  Nature,  Sea Life,  Sealife,  Tank,  Under Water,  Underwater,  Aquatic,  Aquatics,  Dolphin,  Dolphins,  Fauna,  Habitat
So you'll notice that " Rhino" or its location aren't even in the title or keywords.
Stay well clear, folks.
(If you want to license that one image, it's $79)
Actually, the whole site looked pretty similar to another site we dissed here quite recently.

15119
I'm fortunate to live in Canada, where healthcare is taken care of.

... and donuts and bacon rain from the sky!  ;)
At least Canadian Bacon is edible (it's what we call 'Bacon').  ;D

15120
Very general question, but if you were consistently pulling in over $150 to $250 a day (weekday) from microstock and revenues actually were going up from month to month as u put more time in it, would you do this fulltime? Im just curious on the ones that jumped on the fulltime boat if this was roughly the amount of income they started with...
Too general by far. I would (but I'm nowhere near that amount!), but only because I'm almost at the age I can apply for early retirement and that would make up the difference. My pension is in place, but will be reduced if I go 'early'. Certainly not if I had to live on that with no other income. A lot would depend on where you lived - in some countries, that would be a phenomenally good salary.

15121
When I get downloads of Christmas images in April, it makes me wonder WHY?
Because the designers are on a long lead-in time?
I get regular views and occasional sales of my Christmas and Chanukah pics all year round.

15122
Alamy.com / Re: how does the search on alamy works?
« on: May 09, 2010, 17:40 »
I still can't understand why people are complaining because Alamy finds exactly what the user is searching for and not something else.
If I were a buyer I'd hate all the totally non-related stuff that comes up in every search I've tried (other than a few where there were very few 'hits' for an obscure topic, obviously). Sure, some related stuff is in there, but you generally get a really high noise-to-signal ratio. Like anywhere else, of course there is poor keywording: spamming or genuine mistakes. But with Alamy, it's compounded over and over because of the actual system they have chosen to use.

15123
iStockPhoto.com / Re: istock...arrrrrrrrrrrrrrrggh!!!
« on: May 09, 2010, 16:21 »
[wouldn't it make more sense to spend your time posting on iStock's keywording forum...
Yeah but first you have to know about all these mysterious "players", and forums where you you're supposed to "hang ou" etc.    Why can't it just be between contributor and reviewer?
I guess that would be too personal and open to abuse. Besides,these are the guys with the keywords expertise.
If you can work your way around the msg forums, you can work out the iStock forums too. If you want to.  ;)
I'm an exclusive on IS, know my way around the forums and know the people involved but I can see where this user is coming from.
The keywording process is convoluted and suffers from major problems, some of which are even acknowledged by IS including the very existence of the keyword forum and initiatives such as wikiing, and the recent removal of the keyword privileges from some exclusives. And as I recall you yourself have been a critic of keyword spam on many occasions ....
Absolutely and that is still my position; but my point is that it's better to work to try to resolve the problems on iStock than to shout into an effective vacuum here. (Though I know it's good to vent!). I still contend that iStock's search is usually best, but that there's still a way to go. The more I understand the process (and I'm only a smidgen out from the starting post on that), the more I see it would be difficult to get 100% results every time, but that shouldn't stop us from trying to have the best possible search. Personally, I think both the keyword forum and the ability to wiki are extremely positive. There isn't another site I've visited where my wiki finger doesn't constantly twitch with frustration. However, the keywording team is really overworked and don't 'reach' the wikied files as quickly as I would like, but every company has to decide where to prioritise their resources, with every department shouting, "Us, Us ..."

15124
iStockPhoto.com / Re: istock...arrrrrrrrrrrrrrrggh!!!
« on: May 09, 2010, 13:04 »
[wouldn't it make more sense to spend your time posting on iStock's keywording forum...
Yeah but first you have to know about all these mysterious "players", and forums where you you're supposed to "hang ou" etc.    Why can't it just be between contributor and reviewer?
I guess that would be too personal and open to abuse. Besides,these are the guys with the keywords expertise.
If you can work your way around the msg forums, you can work out the iStock forums too. If you want to.  ;)

15125
iStockPhoto.com / Re: best match Churn
« on: May 09, 2010, 05:24 »
Maybe a combination of Ebb and Flow and tens of thousands E+ files with the extra artifical best match push.

There has been no evidence, at least as far as Thursday evening, of any best match push for Exc+ files. In fact, some exclusives have complained about them shooting down in the best match, but that was in the bizarre shakeup of a fortnight ago (contributers, exclusive or independent who had a high dl/ul ration were getting a high rating, which was screwing the best match search, because they were appearing at the top of searches they'd spammed, so the best match results were throwing up a lot of irrlevant searches and the BM2 'advantage' was lost. Thankfully, they realised the error of that scheme fairly quickly and are back to nearly where they were before.
Still, some exclusives have complained that their Exc+ files have been getting fewer sales. I've been quite lucky so far, but I had a distinct strategy, and have only used up 25% of my allocation.

Pages: 1 ... 600 601 602 603 604 [605] 606 607 608 609 610 ... 624

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors