|
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 - dnavarrojr
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 17
251
« on: January 27, 2010, 08:15 »
They'll have ten million images on line next month. That's a nice marketing hook. Though, I think they would be wise to weed out the oldest non sellers as they move forward. If an image hasn't sold in four or five years... it probably never will. I think we're gonna see a new marketing strategy from them touting the "freshness" of their images and video given the huge delay in review times at iStock, particularly for non-exclusives. "If you want fresh images today, you're only going to get them here" kind of deal... I've talked to some marketing people at a couple of footage agencies that are planning to attack iStock with the same type of strategy.
252
« on: January 27, 2010, 08:06 »
I'm a few dollars from payout there and given the slow pace, I don't epect to hit Payout until late february or march.
253
« on: January 25, 2010, 21:44 »
I can't believe there was nothing in the sales contact of the remaining shares of StockXpert that prohibited the founders from entering into the microstock market again for some period of time. Especially considering the buyer. Seems odd that Getty/istock leave out such a clause. Many many moons ago I had a business partner eager to buy me out of the business. His initial offer was good, but it included a non-compete for two years... so I said no. In the end he wanted it bad enough to modify the non-compete to 6 month which I agreed to. It's possible that Getty wanted them out bad enough to compromise on a non-compete clause.
254
« on: January 23, 2010, 06:26 »
I've brought up the subject of revenue sharing between artists on RevoStock: http://bit.ly/74RIMLPlease check it out and chime in if you have an opinion.
255
« on: January 23, 2010, 06:24 »
I am not into video (except for my lovebirds  ), but here is a site I saw the other day: http://www.clipcanvas.com/index
Yeah, ClipCanvas has a lot of nice features and is VERY easy to submit, so I've added it to my rotation. What I especially like is they are a European site targeted at the EU market. A market I think is underserved by the major sites. I haven't sold anything yet, but I'm hopeful and wishing them well.
256
« on: January 23, 2010, 06:14 »
I haven't seen any mention here yet of just the differences between the reviewers... When I went through the shutterstock process of submitting 10 images it was a nightmare. The first time I got 6 images out of 10, so the next time I replaced the 4 they didn't like with 4 others. Those 4 got accepted, but 5 of the original 6 got rejected. Totally frustrated, I submitted the EXACT SAME 10 the next month and 8 of the 10 were accepted.
In every rejection it was issues with artifacting or focus or lighting (these were all CG, no photos). Issues that made no sense when I looked at them.
In the end I chalked it all up to different people seeing different things. These days if I get a rejection, I'll look at the image to see if I can find what they're talking about and if I can't, I'll make some minor tweak and resubmit. Most of the time it gets through on the second try.
It's just the world of stock now... I've learned to stop getting angry about it and move on to other stuff.
257
« on: January 13, 2010, 16:50 »
Thanks for the input. Keep it coming.
AVCHD ... is that the format used by the HDD units? Canon Vixia HG21, for instance??
Would the tape-based units require less computer power?
HDV is essentially an MPG2 format which is designed for fast "decoding" so that less powerful devices can playback MPG2 video. AVCHD, on the other hand was designed for encoding. Getting lots of data in a very small space and it takes a bit more power to decode the data, especially if you are recording at the full data rate. I have the Canon Vixia HF11 and I record 1080p at the highest bitrate. My previous dual-core system running 64-bit vista could not decode it realtime. However, my current quad-core Windows 7 64-bit system can. Although, I think that partially has to do with Windows 7 natively supporting AVCHD files now. The HV40 is a great camera and HDV is still very good for doing stock work. I just didn't want to deal with tapes. Between the built-in 32GB and my 16GB card I can record 6 hours before having to unload my camera. And I've never come close. The most I've recorded was a concert at my daughter's school and that was 90 minutes. You'll find when shooting stock that you tend to shoot tons of little clips. I usually end up with about 200 to 300 small files at 45 seconds to 90 seconds average.
258
« on: January 13, 2010, 12:07 »
Pond5, RevoStock, ShutterStock, iStock, and CanStock are my primary agencies.
I got frustrated with StockXpert and deleted my video portfolio there. I hadn't sold anything in over a year even with wasting time submitting new stuff. When Fotolia pulled their HD subscription crap, I deleted my portfolio there as well but a few friends have told me it's worth downsizing to SD and submitting so I may do that.
Right now I'm just trying to balance my portfolio across the agencies I currently support (over 800 clips online at Pond5 but less than 200 each on the other sites) and get about 300 new clips online from my recent California trip.
Personally, I have discovered that balance is the key. Pond5 sales have been phenomenal for me last year, but so far this month they are dismal. RevoStock also tanked last month and has continued to be a disappointment this month. ShutterStock and iStock have both done a great job in picking up the slack, but they performed poorly in previous months. So a down month at one site could be an up month at another.
259
« on: January 13, 2010, 11:56 »
You need a very powerful computer for AVCHD with at least 4 GB of RAM, although I wouldn't use less than 8 GB. Not sure what's needed for HDV, but since it's a less spec I imagine you could get away with a dual core or even single core system.
I personally back everything up on an external RAID box. I couldn't afford a Drobo, so I bought a similar device for $100 and I stuck four 2 TB drives in it. Right my library of 1400ish clips plus AE projects, etc.. uses a little over 1.5 TB. Part of that is because I keep a lot of my raw AVCHD files around for at least 6 months.
260
« on: January 05, 2010, 14:15 »
This is one of those "your mileage may vary" kind of things...
As for my personal experience... Yes, I have direct sales attributed to stuff I have posted on my Flickr account. I even had a book author find one of my stills on Flickr and license it for his book cover. So, yes, there are a LOT of buyers using Flickr as a search engine.
But it's a crap shoot whether or not your images end up being legitimately purchased or stolen. For some, it's not a risk they're willing to take. For others, like myself, I find it more beneficial than harmful.
What I am finding *very* interesting is that I have been posting a lot of 3D renders on Flickr with links to my TurboSquid portfolio where I sell 3D models and I've seen my sales on TurboSquid jump as a direct result.
261
« on: November 19, 2009, 21:37 »
Print the model release with EVERYTHING filled in, except for the signatures. Then photoshop in new dates using the same font.
262
« on: November 19, 2009, 21:35 »
Another thought. Even if you see a company using the image, it is not necessarily the buyer - and since it's advertisement, it's likely another company purchased for their client's use.
Indeed, I used an image I bought from DT for a client's print ad. My company name was no where on the ad, so if DT or anyone else looked for the client's name, they wouldn't find it in their records. They'd have to contact the client who would then give them my company's name.
263
« on: November 04, 2009, 19:33 »
SS basically knows they can do what ever they want and while everyone will whine about it, very few will actually leave or stop uploading there. The Micros are in total control of the industry now, and contributors are just lap dogs following their master's will.
264
« on: October 22, 2009, 17:32 »
Fortunately, I'm taking some classes at the local community college, so I qualify for their $30 upgrade to Windows 7 Pro. Otherwise, I would not have upgraded now. I would have waited until my next round of microstock payments next month and bought the $109 OEM upgrade.
265
« on: October 22, 2009, 16:15 »
I ran the RC for Windows 7 very briefly after it first came out, but I had a hardware issue that caused me to go back to Vista. However, I've since upgraded my hardware and decided to jump on the bandwagon and buy Windows 7 this morning.
I did a clean install of Windows 7 Pro 64-bit and so far I'm impressed. It has no problems with my two 1.5TB hard drives or my 16 gigs of RAM. And it boots up almost twice as fast as Vista did. I am still re-installing all of my apps, but MS Word 2003, PhotoShop CS4 and AE CS4 all launch faster in Windows 7 than they did in Vista.
Since I mostly deal with footage, the biggest surprise was that the native AVCHD files (.mts and .m2ts) from my camera are now supported in the OS and they play without stutter in Windows Media Player. THAT more than anything was worth the upgrade for me. It will improve my video editing workflow significantly.
I use the Home Edition of AVAST! Antivirus and it's not playing nice with Windows 7. It works, but Windows is bugging me that it's not up to date, even though it is. But all of my other apps seem to work just fine.
Installing apps is not as obnoxious as it was in Vista. But they spread all of the customizable features for the desktop theme across 3 different control panels. So it was a PITA to change colors, turn off animated windows, etc.
So far I'm liking the Windows 7 upgrade.
266
« on: September 17, 2009, 20:09 »
August was my "Best Month Ever" for sales on Pond5. I'm very pleased. Still on track to start making a full-time living from footage by the end of the year.
267
« on: September 17, 2009, 20:03 »
Actually, this is probably a good place to put images rejected by other sites, since, in effect, they would be exclusive.
269
« on: August 11, 2009, 00:40 »
As someone who sells 3D models, let me also point out that TurboSquid has made some major policy changes that have ticked a lot of people off. And T3DS is getting a lot of new sellers and visitors as a result. So now is probably a pretty good time to join.
I'm in the process of moving my models off TS this weekend and onto T3DS.
270
« on: July 22, 2009, 15:04 »
"One man's trash is another man's treasure." Appropriate for stock as well as life. I think Pond5 is on the right track. I only wish they'd do more about keyword abuse.
271
« on: July 22, 2009, 14:57 »
StockXpert has dried up for me. I am "no where near" any kind of payout at the moment and am lucky to game a couple dollars a month. I'm gonna convert my earnings to credits, find someone nice who is near payout and buy something of theirs, then delete my portfolio.
272
« on: July 22, 2009, 14:53 »
I have not only sold footage as a direct result of my twitter posts, but I have a growing number of "shops" that follow me. It all depends on how you use it.
I have a "business" account and a "personal" account and I don't mix the too. That way my business contacts don't have to hear about what cute thing I daughter or chihuahua just did.
But then again, I do a lot of editorial, so it pays for me to do a lot of my own direct marketing.
274
« on: July 11, 2009, 17:52 »
I would agree about the photographers not doing enough networking, I was reading this post by Larry lcjTripod, it is worth a read about half way down the first page, he says how he works to promote his portfolio on BigStock by uploading local images and contacting local organisations to promote them, I am sure people would say he should have his own website and send them there, but buyers may be happy purchasing through BigStock.
new-search-options-on-BigStock-great
I agree completely. Since most of my footage is shot "locally", I spend time every month marketing to local news stations, production houses, etc... and that promotion has paid off for me. And I don't mind passing that business off to my favorite agency. Dealing with a web site, etc.. is a major PITA. I've also been somewhat successful at referrals of watermarked images posted on my Flickr and Facebook accounts resulting in some really nice sales.
275
« on: July 11, 2009, 17:22 »
One thing to mention... Just because an image is being used illegally or improperly on a web site, that doesn't necessarily mean that the people who own the site intentionally did wrongdoing... Sadly, a lot of "web designers" steal images without the knowledge of their clients and use them.
The client only finds out later when they get a letter/message from the copyright owner or agency, and they do the right thing and immediately take it down. In that case, the culprit you're after is the web designer, not the owner of the site.
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 17
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
