|
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 - Tabimura
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 8 9 10 [11]
251
« on: October 31, 2011, 02:28 »
The best match affected me, it pushed some of my best sellers far back. But having a rather large portfolio, the income was only minimal hurt. However, I salute SS' decision of showing up in an independent forum and communicate the status of the ongoing work on the issues. One more reason to put Shutterstock always in front of any other agency.
252
« on: October 27, 2011, 17:13 »
In this case I would return the lenses if I were you. And because you're on Nikon, I think you'd be better off with the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 DG EX. Regarding bokeh cream is only second to Canon's f/1.2L. Sharp wide open, I have quite a few images shot at f/1.4 on SS and the other websites.
There's a Sigma 85mm f/1.4 too - not exactly as great as the Canon's 85 f/1.2L, but at least as good as Nikon f/1.4 (again, bokeh quality).
Anyway, very fast primes are prone to focus shifting, but that's when stopping down. And some of them can have focus problems wide open around the minimum focusing distance
253
« on: October 27, 2011, 16:57 »
I am using KeePass, it's very good and also free. http://keepass.info/Of course, you'd better choose your passwords for something else than "john1970", which can get you hacked by your teen neighbour. Also, have different passwords for different sites. Protect your wireless with passkey and so on.
254
« on: October 27, 2011, 16:51 »
Shutterstock's "strange" rejections most likely mean that they have tons of the stuff you supply and unless you come up with something really unique and extraordinary, your shots will... not... PASS!!!
255
« on: October 27, 2011, 16:47 »
It can take a while to get accustomed to shoot wide open with lenses f/1.4 or faster. Think for example that if you're doing a closeup and you focus, then re-compose, you maybe have moved your camera slightly changing the angle of the focal plane. For a razor-thin DOF in the case of f/1.4, you'll most likely have the focus somewhere else. One good thing to do is focus and when recomposing try not to lean camera (and consequently the focal plane) forward, try to keep it in the same plane where it was when you framed it. The best way to check whether is something wrong or not, is to have your camera on tripod, make some test shots at f/1.4 at various distances and use the microadjustment if necessary. If the focus point is way off when you shoot from tripod, then go back to nikon and tell them if they don't fix it you'll smash their front elements to bits. 
257
« on: October 23, 2011, 01:58 »
Even 90 / 10 contributor / portal would be adequate looking at how things are right now. Where is the sorting method of search results? By date, by downloads, most popular, etc?
258
« on: October 22, 2011, 19:07 »
I recommend the MkI human eyeball for 'calibration'. It's well proven and it's most definitely what buyers will be using when they decide which images to buy.
That, and MkII for those with lasik surgery. I go by the idea that if your monitor is really off you HAVE to notice without being told by a device. If you're not seeing it, then you'll always have problems.
259
« on: October 22, 2011, 17:14 »
So the business is relocated, this should have no effect on us. But I wonder what were the reasons behind this move.
260
« on: October 20, 2011, 03:12 »
but why couldn't they make the new camera for example 24 mpix
Because they couldn't make it to shoot at 12 fps with 24 MP. Or, if they could, the production costs would have been very prohibitive indeed. I think 5d3 will have more MP, but perhaps somewhere around 3 fps.
261
« on: October 18, 2011, 17:45 »
For instance, let's say that you have a niche and you often shoot with available light, because you go to places where you can't take your studio strobes, and also you need to "catch the perfect moment". Shooting real people, not models - as an example. Here, very good high iso performance, the latest AF system and the 12 fps will certainly help.
If this camera will have 5d2 iso 800 quality at iso 3200, it's a win.
263
« on: October 18, 2011, 12:43 »
Wow, what a bad move! I also took a hit and I only hope it's temporary. Search for "woman fitness" for example, you'll get on the first page irrelevant glamour shots, nudes, lingerie, a girl sitting on a beach...
Looks like Jon's nephew dropped his Lego toys between SS server's cog wheels.
264
« on: October 18, 2011, 12:37 »
AGAIN! DO NOT SPIT ON THE HAND THAT FEED YOU AND YOUR KIDS! THINK ABOUT THE PUNISHMENT!
Why are you shouting? Do you think it sounds more... prophetic?
265
« on: October 18, 2011, 09:46 »
Leaf, I've had my eye on the same Pentax. If you look around, you'll find reviews aren't that great for that body. I've decided against it - I don't want to invest in a new system if it's not going to perform. It would be a very expensive mistake.
I guess I have more research to do. I just started considering that camera today after reading a good review for it  I'll have to look for some of the bad ones
If you're going to spend around 10k, how about this one? http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/823183-REG/Mamiya_020_00928A_DM_Series_28Mp_DSLR_Camera.html28 MP is overkill for microstock anyway, and I'd take Mamiya over Pentax anytime.
266
« on: October 18, 2011, 04:30 »
If the iso performance will be spectacularly good, I will seriously consider buying it.
267
« on: October 17, 2011, 17:33 »
Although it could be a feeble attempt, I heard many fellow photographers that send different sizes to different agencies. The idea is to limit cannibalizing your sales from agencies that pay well.
The drawback would be that you could lose some XL-XXXL sales (from lower paying agencies), but that would include also sub sales for this size. For example Fotolia - how do you feel getting $0.26 for a US sale at XXL size?
How do you balance it?
268
« on: September 06, 2011, 14:32 »
possibility to create a "favorites" collection like 123RF has, with effect on search positioning. Also possibility to display this collection on the above mentioned contributor info page.
269
« on: September 06, 2011, 03:38 »
At this moment my latest batch just approved is not visible in search results or in my portfolio. This means it's going to be buried under the next photos. Again, a big issue never really solved by Shutterstock. If I complain to them now, I will get that "wait for 72 hours..." automated answer, which is of course useless, since in 72 hours there will be thousands of new images approved. I told them once to fornicate off and not give me this stupid machine answer - they were not pleased and therefore sent me the 72 hours answer again.
270
« on: September 06, 2011, 02:47 »
I think this whole phenomenon it has not only to do with Shutterstock raising the bar, but also with them hiring clueless poorly payed uneducated new reviewers to cope with the tens of thousands of images uploaded.
I am in the top tier (0.38 camp) for some good while and it's not unusual to have my studio images rejected on a random basis. That is - let's say I produced 50 images today and I'm splitting in 2 batches, 25 each. Upload one today and the other one tomorrow. Exactly the same setup, same lighting. One batch has 100% approval, the other one let's say 30%, having rejected most of them because whatever button comes first - focus problem, lighting, exposure.
I believed at some point that is at least one reviewer who does not review images at all, but simply runs them through a software (like AcdSee for example) and clicks the "show me clipped highlights" button and that's all. If the software has wrong settings and it "clips" at 250.250.250, then you'll have all your perfectly in range images rejected.
That reviewer is probably payed by the number of images he/she reviews, therefore he/she will "review" as many as possible, with quantity in mind.
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 8 9 10 [11]
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
