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 - eppic
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13
276
« on: March 19, 2009, 19:15 »
I've been a pretty solid 80% acceptance over the past 6 months. The only places where I have higher acceptance rates are stockxpert and canstock
277
« on: March 18, 2009, 22:37 »
I began uploading to DT last November. Currently I have just over 300 images online and 30.00 in sales, with sales now happening on pretty much a daily basis. It took a couple months before sales started coming, but now it seems fairly steady and I still have a number of images left to upload, so yes for me I think they're worth uploading to.
278
« on: February 21, 2009, 02:09 »
MY FTP uploads have been wonky lately too. I see they're uploaded in File Zilla, but they don't show up in DT.
279
« on: February 17, 2009, 00:26 »
I used PS for awhile back when they still were selling stock through their collection. I've since moved to Zenfolio and bought the premium account which is far nicer and more intuitive than PS ever was. Zenfolio offers digital downloads through four different licensing options now.
280
« on: February 10, 2009, 01:21 »
This one sells fairly well for me:
281
« on: January 27, 2009, 20:59 »
What about Isnap (for Mac users) for a name? Hmm SnapCaster, ShutterDreams, SnapXpert, 123SnapDream, YayDreams, FeatureVillage, StockDreams, DreamsXpert,
282
« on: January 06, 2009, 01:15 »
I normally enjoy about an 80% acceptance rate at SS, but my last batch was an 80% rejection, so yeah maybe some reviewers did get coal in their stockings.
283
« on: December 31, 2008, 00:10 »
Yes cutcaster would be my number one pick for the "new site I hope will make it" category. I have over 500 images there now and no sales as of yet. Doesn't mean that I'll throw in the towel there though since I think John's a great guy and I want to give him a fair shake.
284
« on: December 31, 2008, 00:06 »
I wonder too if more agencies will be pushing the exclusive envelope as it has been correctly noted that there are literally millions of images out there with many of these images having been submitted to more than one site. Again, only top sites could pull it off since the sales must remain in order for a contributer to trust a sole MS site with their port. Some smaller MS sites I see are trying the exclusive route but a contributor will only stick around so long if there's no sales.
285
« on: December 14, 2008, 14:18 »
Yeah it would be nice to see some EL sales! There's certainly are alot more ways of making some money through StockXpert now.
286
« on: December 14, 2008, 14:14 »
I just started with StockXpert about a month ago and sales have been alright, but then that could also be due to tossing almost 500 fresh images onto the site.
287
« on: December 09, 2008, 23:36 »
The subject that I would most consider to be my niche is rain forest photography since I have a fair bit of subject material close at hand.
288
« on: December 02, 2008, 21:00 »
Jalbum is excellent! Check out the chameleon skin which has a paypal module built into it as well as watermarking and other cool features. Coppermine is also a nice open source software that works well for photo based websites.
289
« on: November 27, 2008, 20:26 »
I don't think MostPhotos even reviews the images as they are immediately made live, but I've seen alot of junk get submitted as a result too. StockXpert seems to accept almost everything I submit, but I find they're very picky about model releases even if it's an unrecognizable person.
290
« on: November 22, 2008, 21:24 »
Do people actually make that much at 123RF?
291
« on: November 16, 2008, 20:55 »
I use a G9 as my back-up to my DSLR but I would never consider using anything above ISO 100 for stock. ISO 400 in my opinion is unusable for stock. I've seen some photos at 100% from the new Panasonic LX3; the noise control at higher ISO's is better than the G9 but there's still that ever present Venus engine smear on the photos even at ISO 100. Perhaps have a look at the Sigma DP1
292
« on: November 16, 2008, 20:50 »
I used to use the Oly E-510 which worked well in RAW at ISO 100 or 200, but I always hated the JPEGs from the 510. The E-500 which I owned before was much better with noise control in both RAW and JPEG.
293
« on: November 15, 2008, 20:41 »
BUMP! IS has been the best for me for landscapes and nature photos; especially my old growth Pacific North-West coastal rainforest stuff. SS has been good for me too, but I've made alot more money with IS.
294
« on: November 15, 2008, 20:32 »
As far as small images, my opinion is "why screw the buyer?" I always submit the biggest I have I've taken the position of keeping my images smaller like 2800 pixels on the long end for SS since size doesn't matter so far as royalties go. My full-size images go to those who pay according to size. Since SS is so picky about noise and artifacting, proper downsizing makes the images look cleaner therefore a higher acceptance rate.
295
« on: November 12, 2008, 21:27 »
Plus I am way more open about the inner workings of our company than most others. I'll second that concerning John's approach at Cutcaster. Plus I was also able to call him up on a whim and chat for awhile. My personal opinion is that CC is definitely worth the effort on my part as a contributor even though I was recently burned with Photoshelter. I for one would love to see the CC model succeed and will do my part to help make it happen.
296
« on: November 12, 2008, 21:21 »
I pulled out of SS a couple months ago even though I was on the threshold of "THE BIG RAISE" since I had nearly 500.00 in sales, but I'm tired of their two-bit royalties. I have some stuff on with SV but since I pulled out of subscription sales I've had no sales; again, pretty much two-bit royalties there too. IS used ot give me about 70.00/ month in royalties but since August it's been down to about 15.00 I just got accepted to StockXpert and have uploaded 400 images there so far and they've accepted pretty much everything I'm throwing at them. No sales there as of yet but it's only been a week. I'm also dabbling with Cutcaster, Panthermedia and Alamy. Good thing I shoot 14.2MP so I don't have to upsize too much for Alamy. Either way, it's a crapload of work for a very little bit of money.
297
« on: November 01, 2008, 16:22 »
I would agree with the viewfinder difference between the 350 and the 900. Pentax makes a 1.2x viewfinder magnifier that works with the 350 to give a viewfinder similar to that of the A700 and costs around 40 bucks. I have yet to get one of those. Personally I bought the A350 as a transitional camera as I waited and saved for a FF. If sony comes out with something more like a 16mp ff dslr then I'd be all over that.
298
« on: October 31, 2008, 15:37 »
Hali, Take a look at this thread over on the Dyxum forum: http://www.dyxum.com/dforum/forum_posts.asp?TID=13972It's a great discussion about recommended lenses that are inexpensive yet are of excellent image quality. A good way to get the best bang for your buck lens-wise.
299
« on: October 30, 2008, 22:55 »
I guess you have to ask yourself what you want to use your DSLR of choice for. Personally, I think the A900 with 24MP is overkill unless you plan on doing some harsh cropping or making alot of poster prints. I bought the A350, which was 700 bucks body only at the time so I had extra cash to begin building a lens system. So far I still have yet to purchase any Sony brand lenses since there are so many excellent quality and affordable legacy FF lenses available which work wonderfully on the A350. I also love the live view system of the A350 and find it quite freeing to be able to make images at angles and points of view that would otherwise be very difficult without a flip-out live view screen. At 14.2MP, it's more than adequate for "XL" size on Istock and involves only a slight bit of upsizing if you submit to Alamy. Just think of the extra 2,000 bucks you can spend on lenses as opposed to getting the A900.
300
« on: October 29, 2008, 21:32 »
I'm on CC as well and I didn't opt in for E.L.'s either for two reasons: 1. No specifics on what exactly the EL can be used for compared to regular RF 2. No options for a corresponding higher price for an E.L.
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|