|
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 - PeterChigmaroff
Pages: 1 ... 57 58 59 60 61 [62] 63 64 65 66 67 ... 72
1526
« on: December 19, 2008, 18:46 »
1527
« on: December 19, 2008, 18:40 »
I spent a couple of months there last year. San Diego is rich with things to do. It depends a little on what sort of photography you like to do. Balboa Park as others have mentioned is good. Gaslamp Quarter and Convention Center down to Seaport Village and beyond to the aircraft carrier and tall ships is all good. Old Town. Of the Zoo and Wild Animal Park I preferred the Wild Animal Park by a fair amount. Both seemed to have no problems with any kind of photography. Coronado Island has some nice features and beaches. Try out the glider park, great soaring images to be had. Take an extra $150 for a tandem ride. I did and well worth the money if you have any interest in flying or soaring sports.
Two days though, hmmph. Not very much time. Plan on no or little sleep.
Pete
1528
« on: December 19, 2008, 00:39 »
We just stopped resubmitting rejects to Istock if they don't take it the first time then we move onto new work and stick it into the Istock reject folder ( the only reject folder we have ). We have wasted to much time in the past trying to figure out their process and fix their rejects. Like I said before I have enough images right now to keep me uploading for 6 years at Istock with their limits they have set at this time. I will deal with all the rejects the last three years. Within three years from now a lot will take place, actually much sooner than that.
Best,
J
J, Don't fix anything, just group similar rejections together and pass them on to Scout to take a whack at them. I get a really good acceptance rate this way from rejected files. I wouldn't fix them either especially when there ain''t nothin' to fix. P.
1529
« on: December 18, 2008, 20:14 »
Way down. My ranking is also way down.
1530
« on: December 18, 2008, 17:46 »
We just had 13 of 15 rejected by Is with our last upload. All 15 passed all our other sites.
AVAVA
AVAVA, I look at your work and I just don't get this. Is there some wildly jealous reviewer that can't stand seeing such good photos? What are you getting rejected for. Artifacts on shoelaces? Peter
1531
« on: December 18, 2008, 17:28 »
Thanks for the additional info. I have a G7 which only shoots jpgs. I should try and see if it works with the micros. I got two sales in the past couple of days on Alamy shot on the G7 so it works there.
Pete
Amazing. I wouldn't submit anything to Alamy from the G10 if I had one, getting something from a G7 accepted is interesting.
When I said I have photos from the A400 3mp camera on micros, there's an obvious point. None of the sites that require something larger than 3 mp shots.  Just pointing out that a $99, outdated pocket P&S, shooting JPGs, with not so good resolution and minimal features, plus a small 1/3.2 " sensor, can get accepted on micro sites, if the photo has good lighting and good exposure. Shot at ISO 50.
The world outside of micros has lived with upresing for a long time. It was established that a 50 MB 8 bit file was the best size to offer clients. So everyone upsized to this standard. Only certain cameras are acceptable for this. Micros think this is taboo and I guess it is, if it is done wrong. Even though I read the fine print I initially submitted to micros upresing to 50MB because that's how my workflow works. I was accepted to iStock using this technique and submitted quite a few images upsized. I've since changed things around since it's easier to submit smaller files. All this will change when I retire my trusty 1Ds for the 5DII. But don't think because micros don't technically allow upsizing that it can't be done with good results.
1532
« on: December 18, 2008, 13:37 »
[/quote]
I have G6 photos accepted micro, shot ISO 50. 10D photos accepted at micro and Alamy. Others with the G10 have had them accepted on many sites, including Alamy, with their 48mp size requirement. Heck I have Canon A400 3mp photos accepted at micro sites, the G10 should be much better.
When you, edit, adjust and reduce the image to micro requirements, to compress the pixels, it should pass fine. Real manual settings, RAW, plus size should make it an excellent entry level camera for someone starting out and learning. Wired remote is an option I like.
1.7 15mp pixel packed sensor. I wouldn't expect it to be as good as anything with a larger sensor, even with less less resolution.
DMC-LX3 looks like a very nice camera too. 1.6 10mp sensor, no optical viewfinder, however sleeker design. G10 has more control options available, but I can never tell if someone would need most of them.
B&H prices, G10 = $419 / DMC-LX3 = $419
Both very similar cameras at identical prices.
I'm still happy with the G6 but I wouldn't mind moving up to a G10.
[/quote]
Thanks for the additional info. I have a G7 which only shoots jpgs. I should try and see if it works with the micros. I got two sales in the past couple of days on Alamy shot on the G7 so it works there.
Pete
1533
« on: December 18, 2008, 12:10 »
Looking forward to getting mine. Thanks,
Peter
1534
« on: December 18, 2008, 00:25 »
I thought so too a week ago but it's ho-hum again.
Pete
1535
« on: December 16, 2008, 17:54 »
Will be acceptable at iStock though? It has most of the info required but...
1536
« on: December 16, 2008, 16:07 »
Touch wood; my rejections are way down after going on a complaining rampage. Hit 100% on last weeks.
Peter
1537
« on: December 16, 2008, 16:05 »
Good to hear that the cameras are coming in faster than they expected. I do have a preorder, hopefully something comes through soon.
As I mentioned earlier it depends who you want to believe. I have my reservations about Vistek and their customer service as well. I'm fairly certain I'll be steaming mad in a month or so. Pete
1538
« on: December 16, 2008, 15:28 »
I have no idea really. It's what you choose to believe. I was at a local shop in Vancouver yesterday and they told me it would likely be late Feb to March if I ordered now. I called Vistek just minutes ago and they said they were filling October orders right now but a fair number of people had backed out and that the cameras were coming in faster they figured maybe early to mid January. I took my chances with them. B&H is showing 7 to 14 days for order time. But there is about a $250 difference with the US price plus Vistek is free delivery plus no PST when ordered from Vistek. I guess the thing to do was order earlier. I figure I'll get annoyed around Feb. if I don't see it by then.
1539
« on: December 15, 2008, 17:59 »
And wouldn't one think too that the recession should be bringing more customers to the micros from the trad agencies? I mean even in bad economic times images are still needed ... one would think a bad economy should be a boon to the micros?
No, I don't think so. Pictures are usually a very small part of the overall advertising budget. The problem will worsen when companies die or stop advertising completely.
1540
« on: December 14, 2008, 15:08 »
Always set as L.
Always set as No Releases unless you have one.
Always set all countries.
Peter,
My concern is that, saying they require a release that I don't have when this release is actually not necessary, may keep buyers away. If the image can be used for commercial use - advertisement, postcards, whatever - I would like to clearly allow mine for this too.
Regards,
Adelaide
I agree it seems a stupid process and a cover-your-ass reason. You need to get the ticks right. If you have a release fine, if you don't you don't. Peter
1541
« on: December 14, 2008, 14:37 »
Peter,
Of course it depends on the child. My father lent me his camera (nothing amazing, but good anyway) when I was at that age. I would not however lend mine to my 17-yo nephew. I was even unsure to lend him my old 2MPix Finepix when he traveled, even though I don't use that camera anymore. He is an expert in breaking and forgetting things wherever he goes. 
Regards,
Adelaide
True enough, I wouldn't lend my nephews a dollar. However, if they truly showed a keen interest and already owned a DSLR body I would honestly rethink this. Peter
1542
« on: December 14, 2008, 14:34 »
Unless there is good reason.
Always set as L.
Always set as No Releases unless you have one.
Always set all countries.
There is a decent enough market for pure editorial and this will put you in that market.
Peter
What's a good reason in your opinion to not set L?
http://www.alamy.com/licensing.aspThe above URL gives license differences. I don't think the chance of exclusive license is very likely. This also limits distribution and adds a headache if by chance you do get an exclusive and you have the image on other sites. I distribute non exclusive to other sites and I find the extra sales from them out weighs any potential exclusive sales with Alamy. I guess the arguments for RP with Alamy are similar to going exclusive with iS. Peter
1543
« on: December 14, 2008, 13:46 »
Unless there is good reason.
Always set as L.
Always set as No Releases unless you have one.
Always set all countries.
There is a decent enough market for pure editorial and this will put you in that market.
Peter
1544
« on: December 14, 2008, 13:43 »
Some of you are nuts...she's 14 and probably doesn't have a clue how to use a camera properly yet - and you want to get pro-version glass for a 14 yr old?
75-200 or whatever they have now is fine. Learn to shoot first, buy the good stuff when it makes sense.
I'm curious if some of you who object have children? I'm getting my 7 year old a G10 for Xmas. She has proven long ago that she has the ability, coordination and talent to use a camera like this. By the time she is 14, and if she has the desire she'll have a 5D(XX). I can't think of a better way to raise a neurotic than that tell them they can't handle things or to not give them real responsibilities -- beyond feeding the goldfish that is. Peter
1545
« on: December 13, 2008, 15:47 »
Reality check time - don't consider a pro-grade lens for a 14 year-old using an entry level camera. Honestly, I don't know what some of you are thinking.
My own philosophy is to always get your kids the best gear you can afford regardless of activity. The lens will stay as the camera is replaced with newer models. It holds its value very well of a long period of time. Peter
1546
« on: December 11, 2008, 16:47 »
The hospital down the street from me has touch screen internet in all the room on an arm over the bed. Give the buyers a day or two to recover 
Your allowed to flippant as i am sure your great portfolio will always attract sales.Other contributors though feel that if istockphoto gets to greedy, buyers will just buy there images elsewhere.
Hopefully other vendors will see this as an opportunity to raise their prices. Although a price increase in the midst of one of biggest financial downturns in recent history is ballsy that's for sure. Peter
1547
« on: December 11, 2008, 12:36 »
Today I'm even with all of last months sales. Still really lousy but better than slap up the side of the head with a frozen salmon.
Peter
1548
« on: December 09, 2008, 20:52 »
- why would a buyer spend $25 (for example) on a "top tier" level image when they can buy it for $5 at another site?
This happens all the time. $25 is nothing for so many image uses. It would take someone longer to find it elsewhere then sign on and buy some credits etc etc. It's easier just to buy the thing. Do you think people who put their micro images up on Alamy make zero sales? I agree on one thing and that is its time for micro image prices to go, a lot. There is a lot of room for price increase. Peter
1549
« on: December 09, 2008, 19:32 »
I find it interesting that it all comes down to keywords, lack of perceptible noise, artifacts, filtering, shadows etc. and seems to have little to do with the actual image.
Peter
1550
« on: December 09, 2008, 15:48 »
Independents get a reward in raised prices for regular imagery. That's not too bad, is it?
Of course it's not bad. But I'd take a 50% cut in rates with a guaranteed placement on the first page of every search. Better. Peter
Pages: 1 ... 57 58 59 60 61 [62] 63 64 65 66 67 ... 72
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
