|
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 - Sean Locke Photography
Pages: 1 ... 65 66 67 68 69 [70] 71 72 73 74 75 ... 314
1726
« on: June 26, 2015, 07:02 »
.
1727
« on: June 25, 2015, 21:48 »
"iStock by Getty Images is the only service in the value space that provides a meaningfully different and superior content offering. "
Sorry, no.
1728
« on: June 25, 2015, 06:17 »
Apparently WeatherENG has been banned or quit?
1729
« on: June 24, 2015, 15:57 »
"While the vast majority of our footage licensing business is in HD, we anticipate the 4K format will continue to gain traction and are continuing to make investments to market your content.
With that in mind, we are changing the price of a single 4K clip from $299 to $199. In addition, we will be launching 4K packs for the first time, which will allow customers who need multiple 4K clips to purchase in larger quantities in one transaction."
Lol, one of those things that makes no sense. "Things are awesome and only going to grow, so, we're dropping prices! Yeah!" Silly.
1730
« on: June 23, 2015, 07:24 »
"However I do see many of makeup/beauty shots on Getty, Corbis etc."
... Shutterstock, iStock, etc... Like I said, these may be different and new and high quality for you, but there are plenty of images like those already out there, which reduces the price you're going to be able to ask.
1731
« on: June 23, 2015, 06:44 »
Oh, it would have been nice if Lee had let us know. I was a little worried.
1732
« on: June 23, 2015, 06:42 »
sexy, business, goldfish
1733
« on: June 22, 2015, 17:57 »
But obviously, people can do what they want. If some people believe that putting everything RM on macro is best for them, let them do it.
I am only interested in total returns.
The OP is asking about a set of images they believe are better than their other work, it doesn't have to be all or nothing. Some work is better suited for licensing at higher amounts and some work is better suited for selling at micro amounts. Total returns are better for some images at one price and some images at another.
They didn't ask about returns. They may want RM control, although they did mention RF as well. I guess we can infer that they want more money, but it's likely they're like other "glamour, makeup, etc." portraits. Not much commercial use, even though you spent a lot of time/money.
1734
« on: June 22, 2015, 17:40 »
I thought Stocksy was macro just with microstock prices. Really that's the only difference between the two, if you think you can ask for higher prices go somewhere that licenses your work for higher prices. You could always contact Offset, Corbis, and Getty and see what they say and choose the one you feel best about.
They didn't ask about prices. They asked about RM. Stocksy is RF.
RF can be macro as well. I thought the question was more about higher prices rather than RM or RF.
"Let, for example, say that you made series of your highest quality photos that you believe most or all RM (or even RF if you really want) agencies would accept and sell."
They also didn't ask about micro or macro. In fact they could have been a lot clearer with the query.
1735
« on: June 22, 2015, 17:15 »
I thought Stocksy was macro just with microstock prices. Really that's the only difference between the two, if you think you can ask for higher prices go somewhere that licenses your work for higher prices. You could always contact Offset, Corbis, and Getty and see what they say and choose the one you feel best about.
They didn't ask about prices. They asked about RM. Stocksy is RF.
1736
« on: June 22, 2015, 15:31 »
"Also, let say that those are makeup, beauty studio portraits (not usual isolated on white with microstockish screaming all over them)."
That doesn't sound particularly RM. there are tons like that on Stocksy, for example.
1737
« on: June 21, 2015, 16:08 »
You're not submitting exclusively to IS. You can submit wherever you like. Start by reading your contributor agreement.
1738
« on: June 19, 2015, 19:03 »
I found a site selling framed pictures. The owner of the site is using fotolia photos and using them for commercial purposes. Site visitors select photo, size and frame type then order. Image previews have fotolia watermark.
Is it legal?
http://artpostergallery.ru/catalog/cvety-239
Probably. They likely have a deal to buy an EL when the print is purchased.
1740
« on: June 19, 2015, 08:51 »
Has anyone been able to find the license terms for AS? I was going to ask in the session, but then I got booted.
1741
« on: June 19, 2015, 08:45 »
Ok, OP, this is not the place to spam with links to your videos, so I'm moving the other threads to the garbage.
1742
« on: June 19, 2015, 08:41 »
Mat, how long does the transfer from FT to AS take for new images?
@Sean, I don't know the answer to that question. I will ask.
-Mat
I got 50 approved images yesterday, and today they are on AS. So it is very quick.
Today I received mail 11:06 AM and now is 12:09 and it is there.
Wow, yes, new uploads are already there. Super quick. Good system.
1743
« on: June 18, 2015, 13:29 »
I would love for them to be marked somehow. That should be understandable as they are being sold on a 'partner' and it's good business to track how that is going.
1744
« on: June 18, 2015, 13:28 »
Can we keep the AS talk in the AS thread?
1745
« on: June 18, 2015, 13:26 »
Hongover -- thanks for your post and thoughts. and welcome to the site. as you can see, there are bitter members that are always ready to jump on a newbie. It happened to me. You appear to have thick skin which is good. It is unfortunate that some here feel being rude, arrogant and hateful is acceptable. but cyberbullies are just a reality i guess.
It's got nothing to do with being a newbie. WeatherENG is a newbie and he's joined just fine. It's coming in with a condescending attitude, trying to tell us what's what, after being rejected from SS for two years, selling $500 worth, and having the history of licensing a few photos in his day job.
1746
« on: June 18, 2015, 11:22 »
Does anyone know where they will be posting sales information on sales from Adobe Stock?
Will it be on Fotolia?
Or will they post sales information on the Adobe Stock website (which means that we will have to register on Adobe Stock to get that information)?
AFAIK, they're just mixed in (unmarked) with your regular FT sales.
1747
« on: June 18, 2015, 10:40 »
The fotolia categories are driving me crazy. There is no category for objects or just still life and the drop down menu is often unlogical.
It is a really, really painful way to upload like this.
Seriously, if they want more content, why not make it easy and elegant?
Try to find "Halloween".
1748
« on: June 18, 2015, 02:51 »
There are opportunities even in Microstock if you've seen what I've seen. There are always emerging trends in microstock. When the iPad first came out, I was looking for well-composed photos of people holding iPads in different settings to use for websites. Guess what, there were none and this was months after it was released.
Hopefully this can help some of you improve your sales by producing images that fit what the market needs. Gee, thanks. We've all seen what you've seen. You're not unveiling any secrets here or making any revelations. You're just reveling in a bit of "ignorance is bliss" here. I guarantee you, with the size of the crowd, and the experience "we" have, images of the Apple iPad were being uploaded (as editorial) within minutes of unwrapping. Either you didn't know where to look, or you didn't realize the editorial restrictions. Have the common sense to realize that you can't understand other people's reactions to a decade of experiences you haven't had.
What she said.
1749
« on: June 17, 2015, 21:37 »
Heh, heh.
1750
« on: June 17, 2015, 20:04 »
"People in general dislike change, and the industry is constantly changing. " Thanks for today's lesson. 
Pages: 1 ... 65 66 67 68 69 [70] 71 72 73 74 75 ... 314
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
