|
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 - DallasP
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14 ... 22
201
« on: November 28, 2017, 23:47 »
Why do you guys always keep dead threads on trending for so long? Gold and Bitcoin aren't terribly similar ... in event of an EMP disaster hopefully you printed out your wallet info but, unlike gold, bitcoin is quite a high yielding asset, and should continue to be for quite some time.
Are you sure that you mean "high yielding"? As far as I can see, Bitcoin has even lower yields than cash on deposit.
Perhaps you mean capital appreciation, which is very different.
Would it not yield quite highly if you for instance invested when the cap was thought to be $100 and cashed at $1,000 ... Seems like a yield to me ... Capital appreciation and likewise, exchange rates aren't something that most people concern themselves with ...but, it quite similar in one thing being worth more or less than another. They are methods of exchange, would your goods be worth $10, or $1,000 ... if it were more desirable would it be worth more than that? It's the same * cow, it doesn't matter what you label it.
202
« on: November 28, 2017, 15:53 »
Why do you guys always keep dead threads on trending for so long?
Sorry if we ruined your day.
Do you have a usable list of rules that we can obey to better handle ourselves on the internet?
No, shove off ya hoser. I don't really care  there was nothing else interesting to comment on today ... it seems the internet is still on holiday vacation.
203
« on: November 28, 2017, 15:23 »
I agree with that I just don't agree that Bitcoin is "like" gold. The only similarity is that some people use it as a "store" of value. The differences are bigger in my view in particular Gold is a physical thing.
Gold is physical because the technology we have today wasn't invented thousands of years ago. Do you still write letters? Do you still start up your projector and load a roll of film to watch a movie?
Gold only has value because enough people say it has value. Just like Bitcoin. Just like money. Just like a gemstone. Just like a piece of art.
Why do you guys always keep dead threads on trending for so long? Gold and Bitcoin aren't terribly similar ... in event of an EMP disaster hopefully you printed out your wallet info but, unlike gold, bitcoin is quite a high yielding asset, and should continue to be for quite some time. In event of a nuclear holocaust, gold will still be a lump of rock that will be nice to look at from time to time. They're similarly volatile but, I'm sure you'd agree that your gold can't grow at a rate of even 6%-20% as a decent investment portfolio could ... and could possibly just ... ya know, half in value like it did back in 2008 ... Sure wish I'd had invested in a a few bitcoins when I first heard about it .... much better ROI than this Microstock crap. An ounce of gold is back up to ... $1,320 :/ still down ... *. EDIT: Years wrong, it was 2013 with a 27.6% drop followed by 2 years declining another 12%
204
« on: November 21, 2017, 20:36 »
What other sites are good to use to open your e-mail accounts. I use Google Chrome and lately it has been very slow. What about (I heard of) Internet Explorer? Please list others or the one you use that give you good results. Thanks--Oscar Williams
and if your beef is with Chrome, I've heard that the latest release of Firefox is way faster.
205
« on: November 21, 2017, 20:17 »
I don't have Mac. I have windows. What can I use for it?
Thunderbird is decent
206
« on: November 19, 2017, 17:19 »
umpteenth flower shot.
umpteenth? probably ... umpmillionth
207
« on: November 15, 2017, 18:16 »
Two threads were started about me specifically this week.
How many have been started about you specifically?
None ...
208
« on: November 14, 2017, 19:54 »
I would rather listen to someone who has demonstrably been very successful in this business, like michelle, than follow lists from anonymous forum posters no one even remembers. And don't get me started on books, classes and portfolio reviews from people who's performance has been pedestrian at best.
She's a success? I wouldn't know financials, but from the complaining about lack of sales, downward income, dropping earnings, plus other surveys motivated by attempts at intimidating agencies, plus obvious dissatisfaction, that a success? I'd think someone who's a success would actually be happy instead of always finding things wrong?
I disagree with 19. Dont try to analyze this business. We can analyze as we wish, use math and just don't over analyze. Don't find conspiracies or patterns where there are none, like people do about sales times or regions or up and down swings in downloads. The natural swings will be up and down, without outside interference, not up and up. This whole market is unreliable and unpredictable, don't have unrealistic expectations based on some random good days.
33. The agency is not your enemy. But they aren't your friend either.
Why don't you tell us who you are, and we can compare successes? I'm assuming since you're on the SS forums you're not McBurney, but you sure sound like him.
Never mind, figured it out.
I didn't bring that up, I was answering this, and asking. I guess it's wrong to ask a question and always get slapped by some unhappy person, who never stops complaining how bad it is, but then someone else says that's success? It is? I'd say if I'm happy doing this kind of work, that's a measure of success.
I would rather listen to someone who has demonstrably been very successful in this business, like michelle, than follow lists from anonymous forum posters no one even remembers. And don't get me started on books, classes and portfolio reviews from people who's performance has been pedestrian at best.
I say make the forum without anonymous people I'd be all for that. Lets here from people their opinion of that? Or stop blasting anonymous people, just because they disagree with you or you disagree with them, as a way to discredit anything they write. More than half the people here are anonymous, are we all unable to post what we think because of that?
I thought the OP was posting a joke, now it's all flames and serious.
You're not anonymous. And starting a thread with a joke about a specific person isn't particularly funny.
You've been complaining on this forum since 2009. You have a blog complaining about Getty. And you started a thread here complaining about what I'd been saying on the SS forums. I don't believe I've ever started a thread about you...have I?
I don't think it was specifically about you, it was meant as a joke I presume ... poking the fire. I do however think that it's just another ploy to promote his book and to stir up this forum with their pitchforks and all ... I think he singled you out because you do have a history of ... being honest and blunt. Why don't we ditch this thread and start up a preliminary December 2017 thread?
209
« on: November 13, 2017, 15:05 »
I just meant successful at microstock (or business in general). I'm not here to pry into people's personal lives or make assumptions about it.
Huh ... that's the most pleasant thing that I've read in this forum for a few months. Get this man a beer.
210
« on: November 06, 2017, 14:19 »
I for one wish I could just have stayed with Ft since I had ten times more sales then before this merger with Adobe. I recon I know why. Two week back I suggested to an AD at an ad-agency to look for four of my shots at Adobe and he said " adobe?  why? its a programming company"!
I dont think its sunk in that they are also dabbling in stock?
Sounds like that art director isn't keeping up with Adobe products. Anybody who uses the creative suite should know that images are integrated in from the apps.
Are you saying, you still believe stuff he's saying despite been caught making stuff up many times?
Oh come on dont be like that! I'm a nice guy, I swear to god! oh well Allah then. 
^ Isn't quite sure who he's praying to. ^
211
« on: November 05, 2017, 17:12 »
There is no doubt that the traffic is diverted to Adobe and the Fotolia interface will probably be soon discontinued.
But that doesn't mean that Adobe is discontinuing the stock image business. Actually Adobe position on the creative market could be a very powerful platform for microstock sales.
I must admit that I have some doubts about Adobe willingness in this direction: Maybe they are seen microstock as only a way to leverage the position of their core activity
I think mainly their acquiring of FT and merge into microstock was a way to provide more, and get more recurring revenue from subscribers. At this point CC has pretty much reached market saturation, I'm sure new subscriptions have declined into single digit percentages but, offering images (at I think $10 a pop) and image subscriptions give them other ways to expand revenue ... diversifying a bit if you will. They're also beginning to jump into the 3d space it looks like, I haven't had a chance to dabble with whatever new software they just launched but, I used to love doing 3d back in school ... so I might play around with whatever their new software was called, if winter is slow. I don't think that they're "killing off" Fotolia, quite the opposite really. Since Adobe acquired it I've seen an increase. The Alexa ratings falling is probably more a result of duplicate content than anything ... in which case the new Adobe Stock portal would take the hit as well. We could probably sit and make assumptions all day but, in reality, both are publicly traded companies. We could compare the last three years and I'd imagine see a positive trend.
212
« on: October 24, 2017, 17:24 »
lol. Someone shooting timelapses and then uploading each frame?
213
« on: October 21, 2017, 14:13 »
This has been tried before and was not too successful, but not for lack of enthusiasm. You might want to look up past discussions about Symbiostock to see what was done previously. That one was basically free but my impression is it required too much effort to get started. These ideas are easy to come by but difficult to implement. You should think about it carefully and come up with a really good idea before proposing much here - this bunch is pretty jaded after all of the previous attempts to do this. The problem is marketing - oops, somebody just beat me to it, see previous posts.
It was easy to start ... it was ... poorly received and implemented.
214
« on: October 21, 2017, 11:17 »
I think I figured it out once with my RPI that somewhere around 4000 images would pay the bills ... assuming the relationship was linear. It's not but :/ meh
215
« on: October 14, 2017, 14:39 »
https://www.fotolia.com/id/63950072
I actually like this photo a lot. It not that typical, spectacular stock-style image, just a simple shot of a moment. But looking at it really gives me nice, familiar feelings of walking in the fields in winter on an overcast day. Such calmness, cold and space. Now i really started to look forward for these times of the year. I can almost feel the winter smell of this kind of surrounding.
But I don't think it will sell-well  . Which is a pity. I'd prefer thing like anywhere instead of smiling people
That's what I was going to say, it reminds me of something I'd shoot with my old gear and/or in a hurry. Stock-like, absolutely not; decent, yes. I think being "Not Stock-Like", is probably a good quality to have these days
216
« on: October 05, 2017, 21:20 »
And if you do still want to make long posts, break them a bit with bullet points and subheadings.
Haven't entirely read a single one.
217
« on: October 05, 2017, 13:54 »
The proof is in the eating of pudding though......if I search "aardvark" I get lots of pics of birds and other random animals......
Yup, I just bought one of "Bottle of Juice" surrounded by coffees and teas.
218
« on: October 01, 2017, 17:29 »
lol. Consider yourself lucky then. Shutter for me didn't even bring in a penny.
219
« on: September 30, 2017, 13:18 »
What was the original title? I missed it.
Victory for the fatties - Getty images notice on retouching commercial images.
lol. what. This whole thread ... lol Personally, I don't edit people's body or shapes but, I did give a guy new teeth a few weeks ago :/ I'm not sure why anyone cares much about this rule ... find models that portray your message ... or just simply not submit to Getty ...
220
« on: September 23, 2017, 17:34 »
So heres whats in my mind: selling my stock vectors through my own website. I know its gonna be dead hard to compete with the big sharks but Im fed up working my ass days and nights to be paid cents! So Im thinking of selling via my site with tremendous amount of self promotions. Again, I know its gonna be hard and slow but I think selling 10 files a month from my site might be better than selling 100 files from stock sites for 5 months. Is there some holes in my basket you could fix? Is anyone already sailing through this route I can get some directions from? Thank you
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I had one vector sale while we were on the Symbiostock train ... the one $10 sale was more than I think I got all year on the micros ... It's probably not that difficult to generate more than on the micros but, enough to make it worth it? Probably not.
221
« on: September 07, 2017, 16:52 »
3% royalty on DP, doesnt get more optimistic than that, or 0.01c royalty on Istock. Or have royalty slashed from 70% to 30% because it is better for sales, is also quite optimistic. Or have ELs go from 28$ fixed to 30% of sales price. All very optimistic.
The only optimistic thing that happened was the closure of the Dollar Photo Club. Unfortunately not so optimistically was that I got kicked off Fotolia for fighting for our rights.
Lol. I just re-registered after the adobe purchase ... I wasn't given the boot though, I requested out. Maybe you can get back in?
222
« on: September 06, 2017, 22:46 »
Or, you can just set it out there at something like ... iso 100, f/8 and 1/30s put the lens at infinity, set it and forget it ... but, whatever ...
I'm afraid I was not clear enough. Let me try once more:
When you set your aperture at f/8, you don't always get f/8. You get +/- 1/3 stops (maybe even +/- 2/3 stops) because of the unavoidable mechanical imperfections of your diaphragm.
This exposure variation will result in a nasty, annoying flickering. Yeah, you can run the final sequence through a flickering reduction software, but it is much better to eliminate it from its cradle, if you can.
On my 50mm that's the only way I HAVEN'T got flickering ... in manual why would the camera change anything at all when your intervalometer triggers? Internal software change or something?
223
« on: September 01, 2017, 17:26 »
Well, for me September is almost double projections already ... Not in Microstock of course ... the microstock checks do make bad months look better though :/ I'm not sure how some of you guys that depend on microstock income are surviving really.
224
« on: September 01, 2017, 16:34 »
My last sunset I think was around 1600 frames, and I squashed it to one minute ...
Be careful here!
The correctness police will explain you the difference between sunset and day2night time-lapses. 
Sorry, I couldn't resist! 
PS. Get an external 10,000mAh battery pack and you will be able to go on the whole night, or as much as your memory card allows you to.
When capturing the sunset you just kind of guess, day to night I'd probably just aperture priority it and leave it :/
I can't invest any more on camera gear this year, dumped like ... probably a good $600 already and I'm bringing in pennies with the camera. Unless sunsets, product photos and macros start making a ton, my amateur-professional photography career is dead. lol
You either have to leave the aperture completely open, or use that trick: press the DoF button and slightly rotate the lens to lock the aperture at the desired value. This helps eliminating the annoying flickering made by mechanical imperfections.
Magic lantern is a good option if you use Canon, but I prefer to be in control, so I use an external Android app to control ISO and exposure time, throughout the whole sequence, without touching the camera.
If you do that, you can easily compensate the exposure variations, in post, with the holy grail method (google it)
Or, you can just set it out there at something like ... iso 100, f/8 and 1/30s put the lens at infinity, set it and forget it ... but, whatever ... While you guys are arguing about it ... I wouldn't really exceed more than 29.97fps it gives Premiere fits anyway ... not sure about others. When I was trying to squash mine ended up rendering it and then squashing the rendered video ... course, it could be fixed or the whole * thing could be broken on the very next adobe update.
225
« on: August 31, 2017, 18:20 »
My last sunset I think was around 1600 frames, and I squashed it to one minute ...
Be careful here!
The correctness police will explain you the difference between sunset and day2night time-lapses.
Sorry, I couldn't resist!
PS. Get an external 10,000mAh battery pack and you will be able to go on the whole night, or as much as your memory card allows you to.
When capturing the sunset you just kind of guess, day to night I'd probably just aperture priority it and leave it :/ I can't invest any more on camera gear this year, dumped like ... probably a good $600 already and I'm bringing in pennies with the camera. Unless sunsets, product photos and macros start making a ton, my amateur-professional photography career is dead. lol
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14 ... 22
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
