Quote from: diego_cervo on March 25, 2008, 17:29
Sorry but I believe that the purpose of this forum is to share information among us and help each other   
Clearly, the existance of a new microstock site is not a "confidential information" and, as far as I know, applications are open to everybody. Then, it's their business to decide what is worth to be accepted.

What do you think?

You've misread what I've said, I am referring to the forum on Yaymicro being kept at a professional level not this forum.

I think a place like here is ideal for anybody to ask questions no matter what level of contributor you are, however what sort of impression do you think a potential buyer will get if they look into the forum at LO, it's a joke and makes the site look low class.

There's good reasons why SS, iS and a lot of traditional sites are as succesful as they are, it's because they keep the 'coffee morning' chat private from the buyers, iS go about it in a different way than the others but it works and buyers get the impression of professionalism.

Quote from: mwp1969 on March 25, 2008, 18:29
Many of these buyers have commented on the fact that they find photos at MostPhotos that they do not find elsewhere.

They should employ reviewers then !!!!!!

Quote from: FlemishDreams on March 24, 2008, 23:15
Yap and I'd wish you would have kept it private for a while like all other people did here. 

Well said, when I got my email I was impressed that it was personally written and as a result I've uploaded there.

It would seem now that anybody can contribute, I just hope they maintain the site on a professional level, they've started out well and have a good marketing strategy and background.

For anybody that has joined as a result of seeing this thread I implore you to maintain a level of professionalism on this site, don't turn the forum into something like LO or FP which now come over as sites for amateur snappers, that will kill Yaymicro and we'll all lose out on any potential sales.

Quote from: snoozle on March 17, 2008, 23:53
My understanding was that British notes were subject to copyright, whereas coins were not. I'm not aware that this had changed, but I can't seem to find it in writing anywhere.

If you check the Royal Mint website you'll find the info about coins, they're not copyrighted and can be used in commercial adverts as long as they're represented in a way that doesn't inflict with the conditions as written on the site.

Congratulations Mark,

With a bit of luck you'll reach the $50 payout by the end of next year, of course you'll need to do a hell of a lot self marketing for that because they don't do any.

"Limited commercial value"

Have you guys never heard of the term 'the dogs bollocks' !!!!

I've heard good reports about Lulu.com as Steve mentioned above, and if you don't want to go down the traditional publisher route it could be the way.

Your site sucks,

I submitted my best isolated shots of the first ten things I saw on my desk, I took them all on an off white background (apart from the bit where I spilt my tea) and made sure I used my best torch to light them, then I increased the saturation in Photoshop 4 to +65 and upsized the photo from my native 1.5mp camera phone to 112mp to ensure I could sell it as an XXXXXXXL to get a better commision.
I wrote sexy,bitch,young,stud,money,background,emo,emu,emi,ema and grunge,gringe,gronge in all the keywords.
Out of the nine your blind reviewers accepted yesterday only one has had a download as an XXXXXS for which I've received  $0.00012.
Your search results are clearly biased for anyone who's name is Bryan.

Now if I don't get an appology and the recipe for your wifes lemon ice cream I'm going to remove my portfolio of 24 photo's and take them elsewhere.

Miz,

Don't get upset, I love reading your tutorials now, I used to think they were a complete waste of my valuable time and a blatant attempt by you to drive traffic to your website/portfolios, and as you know I've said before that I thought they were just rip offs of other tutorials written by people who actually know what they're doing.

However like you I went to see my therapist (who charges even more than yours) , they explained that being able to take a break every now and again from the stress of working life and waste some time having a good laugh at something, was in fact a good thing.

So I read your tutorials and then feel relaxed and able to continue with my day.

when.......Your wife can't understand when all of a sudden you're quite happy to have her mother in the shot!

Quote from: steve-oh on March 10, 2008, 20:56
Yup. I work at StockXpert.

I go by "skapsinow" over there.

And without you it would probably fall apart.

Speak to any successful designer and they'll all agree that the most important thing is that the subject is well lit, if it's a good isolation then that's a bonus, if not they might have a bit of work to do.

I work with two very successful design companies here in the UK, both have the same approach to buying stock, they are more concerned about the subject than whether it's isolated or not.

The benefit to doing good isolations as a photographer is that it highlights the subject better in search results thumbnails, a few stray pixels is no big deal to any capable designer if you know what you're doing.

If every image in your portfolio sold every day for 24 cents would you be unhappy?

My understanding is that they thrive on images that are of the moment, if it happened yesterday it's old news.

Not sure my wife will be able to understand what great news this is 

Hi,

I'm no expert on this but I've done some time lapse stuff for clients before and what I use is a Canon TC-80N3 remote, it's designed for this, you'll have to check they work with a 5D and they're not cheap but it is a fantastic little gadget, just set up your camera, put the required time intervals in and walk away, the remote does the rest.

As for software, I'd have thought iMovies is fine, I've used Premier elements.

Quote from: jsnover on February 19, 2008, 20:31
However even as a tier 2 earner it's still earning so I'm still there.

I wasn't aware that DT had a tier structure, according to the T&C's everybody gets 50%.
Have I missed something somewhere, or are you referring to individual images that cost more once they pass a certain number of downloads.

Quote from: maunger on February 19, 2008, 14:34
Everyone should refrain from calling names and talking negatively of other people.

Mitch

But they're the best bits 

Quote from: GWB on February 19, 2008, 02:44
I can see the legal side of this argument, but if you do a search at Getty there are plenty of car and cruise ship images available for sale in their RF (and RM) sections.  Could it be that IS has eaten into their sales of more expensive images?  If it's a legal concern then why are images of similar subject matter still available for sale at Getty?

In regards to John Deere, their green and yellow color scheme is copyrighted.  At least that's what IS told me when I got my my tractor pictures rejected.  However, a search at Getty reveals plenty of John Deere tractor images.  Maybe there is a good reason for this but I am at a loss to know what it is.  All I know is one side can play and the other can't.

I think quite a lot of the time the Inspectors get 'copyright' and 'trademark' confused, and I've no doubt they probably don't understand the difference, to be honest you wouldn't expect them too either as they're not lawyers and to my knowledge I wouldn't have thought iS give them any training into that side of things.
So I'd imagine that when faced with an image which has what could be a borderline decision they probably err on the side of caution.
In answer to your question John Deere's Green and yellow colour scheme is not copyrighted it is trademarked, thats why you'll see images of them on other sites, on these sites the responsability lies with the buyer of the image, in cases such as John Deere there would be no problem using the image as long as it doesn't breach the trademark.
There is a huge difference between copyright and trademark.

If they did go to a 12 month commitment I would leave, I'm considering it anyway as they just don't have the sales there for me, plus the inconsistent reviewing and the 'make it up as you go along' copyright laws that they have.

I would go exclusive with iStock tomorrow if they allowed you to sell different images as RF on Macro agencies (other than Getty) as part of the deal.

Quote from: rjmiz on February 11, 2008, 12:03
RTimages.
I have managed to sell 4,687 images and made $3653.26 on DT alone.

Now my question to you ..... why are you sales so low? Maybe I can manage some time to help you
out, and give you a few tips. Drop me an email, and let me know how I can help you.

Your friend always,
The MIZ

Haha... I was amazed at how you manged to sell so many there as well, it's probably got something to do with the fact that you make loads of posts in the forum there, or the fact that you've been submitting images with them for a year and a half longer than me.

Strange that you didn't bring up your iStock figures or any of the others?

But if you want to quote figures here's some from iStock:
In 2 years and 8 months you've managed to only sell 2913
In 1 year and 2 months I've sold 5256

So in answer to your question, no thanks you would be the last person I'd ask for help.

Why don't you do a tutorial on an image that has then been accepted and sold well, that might give you a bit of credibility, it's a genuine question, I'm just intrigued as to why you do tutorials on images that are either very easy to do or are so small that you can't see the actual effect.

That is very clever, sadly it only proves that I need to do some more work 

But do YOU actually sell many images like this.

Quote from: kgtoh on January 31, 2008, 08:58
Hi Bateleur,
I am currently in Switzerland (Geneva). Everything seems very expensive, and the product choice is horrible. What's the best place to get equipment, online or offline? Thanks!

I use Elinchrom lights, they're made in Switzerland surely you can get them cheaper there?