|
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 - JPSDK
Pages: 1 ... 58 59 60 61 62 [63] 64 65 66 67 68 ... 74
1551
« on: September 18, 2012, 04:22 »
Its right, we are selling pop. Cliches, and cliches have to be exaggerated to be comprehended in a glimse of an eye.
So nothing ridiculous there.
Compares to" love me forever" in pop music.
And there is a lot of money in "love me forever"
1552
« on: September 18, 2012, 04:15 »
Ha, its a wellknown classic. The shops at the border to Germany always did that, so that people when they crossed the border and wanted to pay in their own currency, they could, but the exchange rate was lousy and they did not make a good bargain.
Point is, everybody only did that once, not returning to the shop again.
So the shop had to live on first timers and fools.
Real business is not made by adding financial manipulations to the profit, but by providing value for the buyer.
When I worked with a 150 year old industrial heavyweight, they clearly stated in their business politics...that, no business decisions should be taken on the basis on currency movements or relative gains, but be based solely on one currency, in this case Euros. The company did not want to get involved in customers losses due to currency movements, and certainly not in manipulations of exchange ranges.
Just shows the amateurish approach by Is.
It also shows how desperate they are.
I mean, commision ranges in the 90-80% area and they still cant make the business work.
There must be a lot of people dressing eachothers hair in that company.
Its called profit optimization, and can be wise enough, but it still has nothing to do with the original business where the value and profit originates from.
1553
« on: September 16, 2012, 05:34 »
Transferring the halflife notion from atomic physics to image life is an artefact.
Whereas halflife excists with isotopes it does not with image sales. The formulars are simply not applicable.
To determine the life of an image you should use other formulars, or none at all, since it is very random.
So maybe chaos theory can better be applied, or even good old fashioned superstition.
Like what about talking about the LUCK of an image?
Which would be influenced by:
How soon a picture gets its first sale.
Strike out effect in thumbnail size.
Keyword relevancy.
+ other idiotic factors, like hurrycanes and olympic games and tsunamis.
1554
« on: September 15, 2012, 08:31 »
To bring it down to earth:
Suicides happen.
Media needs photos of suicides.
Photos are provided by photographers.
Its better the media choose a "homemade" stock photo, than a photo of the real thing.
I also have suicide photos in my port.
I really cant understand that anyone can be offended by a photo, or a drawing.
To take offence is something you choose, or let loose.
You can easily choose not to.
And offence taken because of moral reasons, is the route right to the inquisition.
And I hate that.
1555
« on: September 14, 2012, 22:24 »
What happened to freedom of speech?
1556
« on: September 12, 2012, 12:45 »
you might be right.
1557
« on: September 12, 2012, 12:44 »
used nikon d 200
1558
« on: September 11, 2012, 04:19 »
I agree on that, Sue.
Style is very important and very difficult.
Im not there, yet, my style is too random.
Funny thing is, a style can be developed in little steps over the years and cemented in a photoshop action.
I have a couple of actions I run on my pictures, sometimes it works.
1559
« on: September 11, 2012, 03:50 »
Yes, thats what everybody think.
And yes, people on white are in demand.
But everybody takes them, so there is an oversupply.
And if you want to venture into that market and be competitive, its not about 50 pictures of a model in different poses with laptop or not.
Its about 500 models, and 30.000 high quality pictures with a unique style.
it is all about style, and that might come both from the camera, the subject and from postprocessing.
1560
« on: September 11, 2012, 03:16 »
I find that quality of the camera is quite irellevant in microstock photography.
The quality of your postprocessing means more, and first and foremost, your subjects and compositions.
1561
« on: September 11, 2012, 03:13 »
Gosh!
1562
« on: September 11, 2012, 01:56 »
The real question here is: "How many photos can you take that has not already been taken, and done better by someone else?"
Anybody can put a model in the studio and take 50 pictures of her in different poses. Headset and laptop and all.
Or take a red rose from upside and down.
Wont work, has been done to death.
But how many concepts can you make, and can you make that special image, that becomes the icon of the concept?
Not to mention to find a new concept?
1563
« on: September 11, 2012, 01:54 »
BTW Keyindia... How do you manage to transfer so many big files back and forth?
1564
« on: September 11, 2012, 01:50 »
yes, you MUST have releases for the photos for the ss application if the photos are not editorial, and in that case they must be newsworthy, and have a titlle and description (heading) that says that. Check the form of the heading, they will reject you if it is not correct. Example of Heading COPENHAGEN - DEC 7: Opening Day, meeting at "G77 and China", delegates in the Bella Center at the UN Climate Change Conference on December 7, 2009 in Copenhagen, Denmark.  I dont know about IS.
1565
« on: September 10, 2012, 17:32 »
This is an example of Information Entropy.
A real danger to microstock.
1566
« on: September 10, 2012, 17:21 »
Its the panels inside a burning spaceship, thats easy to see.
1567
« on: September 10, 2012, 17:16 »
I can produce one photo a week at the most.
If the photo should sell, it would take a couple of months to produce it.
And thats as long as it takes to rear a butterfly species from egg to adult and take 1500 stacked macros of it all.
But yes I can go to a museeum and photograph rockets and cannons and, then it is much easier and I can upload baches of 20 shots from one day.
I can also photograph my son while he is out hunting, and get a decent portion.
Point is, it does not pay to just shoot and upload, you just deteriorate your portefolio. Every new picture you upload must be better or on par to what you already have.
There are so many pictures I do not upload, and even more I do not take.
Istocks limit has never been a problem for me, it does not pay anyway.
1568
« on: September 06, 2012, 13:46 »
It is really a new move to let the sales go directly through paypal.
Thats innovation, and I like that concept. Cheaper for both them and us.
Ill let my pictures there stay for a while, and give them a chance.
Despite Im in deleting mode.
1569
« on: September 06, 2012, 13:38 »
There are many kinds of buyers.
There are those who work in the marketing department of a big company. Such a company just pays the bills, and the designers just download pictures. Noone thinks about the cost of the pictures. Only once a year, when budgets are made, or budgets have to shrink, there is a debate about if "we really need this or that". It might end up in a rule: Only buy on credits and only download exactly what you need.
Then there are buyers from small freelance agencies. I bet they know exactly what they download and pay for.
And then those in between.
A real danger to a microstock agency, is to press prices to the level where it comes to the budget makers attention. That is when they begin to seek other and cheaper solutions.
That would often mean that they try another agency for a period. If there are quality issues, or search machine issues they will look back at the old agency again when the period expires. AND here lies the real danger for a picture selling agency, if quality declines and state of the art pictures are not provided, a customer is lost for good.
As well as the microstock agencies squeeze profit out of both the contributor and the customer, they also have a double edged sword hanging over their head. The business can shrink double as fast as a normal business, that only makes profit out of one of the sides.
yes, I have worked in the sales and marketing department of a big company.
1570
« on: September 06, 2012, 13:14 »
Soon we can categorize is as a low performing agency, with bad commisions.
Maybe they will even have to do something about the annoying upload procedure, and try to get people to upload to them.
That will make me smile.
1571
« on: September 05, 2012, 22:34 »
This is absurd.
You have your picture represented by an agency, who is reprecented by an agency.
It is a circus.
Or maybe it is not. Maybe I should make such an angency, and represend pictures and let others do the saleswork.
Guys and girls, cant you see how it all goes in circles and how we loose control.
I had about 200 pictures on yay, and had one sale, and again some of my best sellers had many views but no sales.
I have now deleted them.
1572
« on: September 05, 2012, 15:37 »
I can read and understand Norwegian.
I know the system there.
I just say...
research is good.
1573
« on: September 05, 2012, 15:19 »
linda is Linda Lgreid Johannessen
Try a search of that
Just to get informed.
The Norwegian tax department shares info.
1574
« on: September 05, 2012, 12:05 »
I think they are aiming for a new customers segment.
Would they scare the old customers away? I dont think so. Anybody who buyes pictures would know the exact price, credit system or not since they actually pay and press the button.
I also think their prices are too high, microstock is supposed to be cheap, thats the whole idear.
1575
« on: September 05, 2012, 04:45 »
They should. Your pictures are good.
Pages: 1 ... 58 59 60 61 62 [63] 64 65 66 67 68 ... 74
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
