|
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 - Uncle Pete
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 17 ... 195
276
« on: November 03, 2024, 14:41 »
I'm not so sure about the quality of a 400mm and a 3x converter? What's the light loss on that? 2 stops or more? Oh I looked, $1,300 lens and then add a converter?
400mm on a micro 4/3 system is equal to 800mm on a full frame. If you add a 1.4 converter, you get about 1200 mm, if you add a 2.0 converter, you get 1600 mm.
Yes, the aperture is proportionally compressed, but at such focuses you need a large depth of field.
Look at the price on eBay for used ones, $1000 is a normal price for good condition.
I'm talking about optics for a micro 4/3 system.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micro_Four_Thirds_system
Field of view, not telephoto for free. 400mm is still a 400mm and you can get the same image, by cropping an image larger sensor camera. You can't fool physics. (or Mother Nature) Think about this, if the free telephoto, made the image 1200 or 1600mm, the focal plane would be different. Since it's the same, the image is identical... you are only getting a cropped portion of the projection, not a magnification.
277
« on: November 02, 2024, 12:24 »
That is strange. Worth investigating. Even in these market conditions, with 31,000 images you should be making several hundred dollars a month. I absolutely agree with you and I don't understand how it came about.
One observation I made... I normally had about 4,500 views per month and a number of zooms.
These views dropped from one day to the next to about 400 views per month - I don't know why, but if you suddenly only have 9% of your previous views, hardly anyone buys anything.
Presumably Alamy also uses some algorithm to ensure that you appear in searches or not - and I was probably simply downgraded.
I can't think of any other explanation, but if anyone has any ideas - let me know 
I'm going to assume you have 10 supertags for each image, and a full caption that includes most of those supertags.
Try this: Put "BHZ" without quotes in a regular tag of any one image (not in the caption or a supertag). Do this for any other pseudonyms you have. Wait a day or two for the database to update. Search for BHZ. What page is your image on? If your image(s) is/are well back of halfway down the 33 pages, you're in trouble. I would suggest moving your best images (sold or zoomed) into a new pseudonym that should land you close to the middle of the field in terms of ranking. See if the zooms/sales of those images improve. Also check using BHZ.
True, BHZ game is entertaining, and just what you said, plain tag on an image. Everyone starts in the middle, until you have what Alamy calls a significant number of sales. I think that number might be 100, from email that they sent me long ago. The good news is, anyone who hasn't had 100 sales, will be "in the middle", of course, everyone can't be in the middle, but that's the position. Your theory of adding a Pseudo may change nothing. The search, the whole views and all that. There are web spiders or whatever they are called, the go out and search. If I look at the report for FAA, I get all kinds of views, but few sales? But then comparing, they almost all come from the same cities, where the web searches are collecting data. Point being that, placing too much importance on views for Alamy and rank, may not be statistically valid. But click through/zooms are. The other question for the thread is how are sales? One Alamy sale, can often equal a year or five on DT for me. One good Alamy sale can usually surpass a year on IS, for me. But the truth is, the volume is small and the sales are scattered. I'm not a good or busy or serious as many other people. Just over 3,000 images in lets say, 15 years. 8 sales in 2024 $430 x 50% = $215 which is just fine with me. Some are junk and minimal, but now and then, one good sale, makes me happy that I have some images up there, just for the possibilities.
278
« on: November 02, 2024, 12:06 »
1. How many kg does your lens that shoots at 1.8 weigh?
2. You think in terms of the capabilities of the past millennium.
3. Only the lens that is always with you and installed on the camera is effective. And only light-weight lenses can provide this. In this case, the photographer is always ready to meet a good shot.
4. Probably old heavy lenses give better quality if they can pull out the number of megapixels that modern cameras give out. But only dinosaurs or bodybuilders walk with huge lenses.
5. Your 1200 lens is cringe! As I already wrote, Panasonic 100-400 + teleconverter = 1600. And such a lens is not heavy, weighs 1 kg and is small in size. 
I don't use IS
I see, you also carry a 6 kg tripod with you!
I use a monopod, no tripod. Yes, I could have a 600mm and 2x (no I don't have a 1200 that was wish list and just for fun, not serious) I'm not so sure about the quality of a 400mm and a 3x converter? What's the light loss on that? 2 stops or more? Oh I looked, $1,300 lens and then add a converter? I'm not a body builder, but I do get a workout with the big old lenses. I'm not so sure of pulling quality and pixels and all of that, but I can say, the 400mm f/5.6 I have is just fine, but lighter and not as fast or bright as the f/2.8 version. Value is important as well as travel. I like the smaller one. All the debates about can the lens match the camera is nice to think about, but the eye and the image is what matters in the end. Film is not better than digital for 35mm. Even if technically it is, it's still not. And how does that argument run into, can the lens equal the resolution of the sensor. Can a lens equal the film resolution. A lot of math mambo-jumbo. How do you make a great lens into a good lens? Add a tele-extender.  Tools of the trade:  Sometimes there's no open photo hole, especially when it's on an oval: Shoot through the fence.
279
« on: November 01, 2024, 13:29 »
I understand that you want to keep the heavy lens with aperture 1.8. The only thing that is not clear is what to shoot at 1.8....
And I understand the small setup, which I also take with me. EF-M 55-200mm f/4.5-6.3 so that one will never shoot at f/1.8! And to answer the question and another question, I don't use IS and I don't shoot at f/1.8. It's kind of like going to buy a six pack, driving a 400HP V-8. You can only go the speed limit and have so much fun. I will say though that the quality is more than the f/stop. The images are brighter, sharper and if you put them side by side with a smaller, lighter lens, you can see the difference. How much does anyone need for Microstock? Not the big white lenses. My Saturn Vue (the current piece of junk car that I'm driving) will go get groceries the same as well as a 2023 Dodge Challenger SRT Demon 170 with 1,000 HP. Maybe better, but when it comes down to stepping on it, if you need to, the Dodge can do 0-60 mph in 1.66 seconds. The Vue has a Honda v-6 which is actually pretty sporty. 0 - 60 mph 8.4 s So what I'm getting at is, I can have fun with a brighter, sharper, old bulky clunky white lens and if it needs to go fast it can? Kind of like, why would I want a 1200mm lens? Not very useful, maybe for some special interest, astronomy or birding or something, but really, I wouldn't be driving around in a car that cost less than my camera or the lens.  I don't use live view, I don't chimp a whole lot, once I get my settings, I've never owned a 30-D, but I had a 1DS that was too slow, even if it takes wonderful photos. My best camera right now is a 50-D, which is good enough. I tried an R, I don't like the ELVF flickering. EOS 10D Feb 2003 6.3 mp EOS 20D Aug 2004 8.2 mp EOS 30D Feb 2006 8.2 mp EOS 40D Aug 2007 10.1 mp $50 EOS 50D Aug 2008 15.1 mp $99 They all use the same battery, memory cards and lenses.
280
« on: October 31, 2024, 14:27 »
Shutterstock became very worst for me, Adobe stock is working well for me.
All of sudden sales and earnings on Shutterstock dropped this year, 40-60% earnings down.
After the earnings down...
Like some people said before, Shutterstock kept those earnings within limits. Not earning more than some limit.
I only wish they would do that for me. Feb/March are triple what Jan and other months are. June way up, July and August dropped down. There's nothing even or limited.
281
« on: October 31, 2024, 13:57 »
Uncle Pete, You are not confused, at focus 200 you have aperture 6.3 or 1.8 ? 
I'm not sure what you mean. F/1.8 with a 1.5 extender would be f/2.2 and 300mm 
282
« on: October 30, 2024, 13:00 »
And plenty of people still have growth with normal photos and videos.
In this October, with the images uploaded in 2024 on SS I had 425 downloads, on Adobe Stock 38 downloads. (from Stock Performer)
The images are almost the same (about 800 images), I have almost 100% acceptance rate.
On Adobe 160 images are missing because they are still to be reviewed.
Why this difference? My only explanation is the competition from AI images on AS.
Not an argument so much, but how much did the 425 DLs on SS earn vs the 38 on Adobe. You don't have to divulge $ numbers, Just round percentages, or average RPD.
283
« on: October 30, 2024, 12:31 »
$33 is around where SSTK should be. I've always said it was a valid $30 stock. The crazy boom when it was up to over $120 was the people who jump on a hot stock and drive it up and up. Institutions, tips for Granny, growth and new. The shine has worn off and now it's back to reality or some new, hot stock. Probably AI or whatever is trending in the news. "...the level of the decline is shrinking." There's the statement. In other words, things are still sinking, just not as fast. For our side, leveling off and the flat line, which I hope isn't death flat-line, would be nice. But personally, the level of decline, "shrinking" doesn't make for anything positive or hopeful. SS I make in a year, what I used to make in a month. Same images and more. That tells me what I need to know. And SS admits, things are still in a decline.
284
« on: October 30, 2024, 12:09 »
There is certainly factor of randomness but not 100%. Atlas comet photos were reviewed overnight as there was very narrow window such images were of interest.
The most disturbing thing to me is total lack of transparency. "It might take up to 8 weeks" - not saying why or anything, in addition it takes much more than 8 weeks. It is disrespectful. Whatever the case, Firefly must take over, make your pick - but please tell us what is happening.
And after you wait a few weeks... "Thanks for giving us the chance to consider your image. Unfortunately, this image doesn't meet our quality standards so we cant accept it into our collection."  I know, yes, the same images have been accepted and sell everywhere else, but wouldn't it be nice to have at least a hint at WHY? I have continued to see the pattern of overnight reviews for photos with property releases versus long waits (2 months+) without.
Oh, and the property-release reviewers don't work weekends
285
« on: October 30, 2024, 11:58 »
upvoting is buggy
click it, then wait, maybe click again, wait again or try a different browser
it seems to work better via my computer then via my tablet
True, except if you click and don't wait long enough and click again, that erases the + vote, so it looks like the vote isn't working, because it reverses the process. Upvoting works strange on this site. You have to click on the + sign once, then wait for several seconds.
Also true and it takes 8-20 seconds now. The whole forum has been SLOOOOO for months.
286
« on: October 30, 2024, 11:53 »
Uncle Pete, only dinosaurs walk around with such heavy lenses.
Smart people buy micro 4/3 optics and put all the telephoto lenses in their pockets. 
Stabilization in Panasonic cameras allows you to shoot with any lens without a tripod.
Correct on all of that. And I am a dinosaur, someday, maybe soon, probably extinct. I did get an EOS-M6 last year (already had the original which didn't have the features and quality I wanted) and the Japan zoom, that I don't believe was sold in the USA? Canon EF-M 55-200mm f/4.5-6.3 IS STM, which is smaller than the hole in the catch fences at the race tracks, so I can shoot through the holes in the wire mesh, instead of using a big white Tele and shooting through the mesh. The EOS M6 camera has 5-axis Digital Image Stabilization and an APS-C sensor, 24MP. I can clip it on my Black Rapid as a grab camera. Being mobile is important for motorsports. Even if there's almost no demand and not much money, it's what I do and love. Long days, Sunrise to Sunset, hours of culling and editing, and the news demand is somewhere between 1 hour and the next deadline. But... those big heavy lenses have great sharpness, brighter colors and you have to admit a 200mm f/1.8 is a nice toy for the collection? Add an extender and it's a 300mm f/2.2  M6 photo with the 55-200, shooting through the chain link holes.
287
« on: October 29, 2024, 11:16 »
I do exactly this, but for me the interesting stuff is the stats for each photo. You used to be able to see these, but not anymore. Juggling the number of Sets is also difficult, I'm at the limit of 999 sets, and whenever I want to create a new set, I have to delete one...
Too bad I missed that, it might have been interesting. 999 sets, you sure are busy! I thought I had a bunch and I just hit 49. In general I do them by concept or subject or type, like illustrations or scenic or sports. To get the sales and download information for one photo I'm interested in I create a set called Test and put that photo in it, then I click on that set and it will show the stats ie: dollars and downloads for that particular photo. I then delete it from that set and add another and so on.
That's what I do when I'm looking for ideas and trends. I drop them into Test and see how something has worked. As for individual images, I think I can see by most downloads and tell what's popular or not. The money follows. Or I can just look at https://submit.shutterstock.com/en/earnings/top-performers?page=1&date_range=0&sort_direction=desc&per_page=100 Top Performers. I don't see the point of looking at image by image, in sets, when Top Performers shows what has sold, DLs and money? Anyway, that's the way it is and SS just sends us to Top Performers when we click set statistics.
288
« on: October 29, 2024, 10:42 »
Lol, no - the sony rx5 is not necessarily "better" than the p900. The are a different class of camera. It's like saying apples are better than shoes. Makes no sense - they are different. Both are good.
The RX5 is good for night shots, slow motion (1000 fps), and has a 1" sensor. Unfortunately, the zoom is very poor.
The P900 is very good for 'general' zoom shots. It's not great on quality though.
And lol - yes, I have both - so I know what I am talking about
With the $15k camera - I don't recall. I was just going through some brush (I think I was doing some bird shots) and ran into him - and was like 'what what kind of camera is that?' (Because he had the super supppppppppppppppppper long lens). I think it was a DSLR with a 1200 mm lens, but don't recall. But it was huge/massive. Kind of like the picture pete posted, except I think it was white. Don't recall which brand, just that it was a big massive setup.
Done for the humor of, yes you can hand hold one of these. It's a 400mm Canon f/2.8  The Sunshade makes it look bigger. 5.37 kg = 5370 g = 11 pounds and 13.421 ounces kind of heavy. I sold it, as the lens was worth more than my car and I didn't use it often enough. I managed to find a used, pristine, 200mm f/1.8 which I plan on keeping forever. If I have to sell all my other good lenses, I want to keep this one. Originally released November 1988, discontinued 2003, EF. Some would say the f/2 new version is just as good and balanced better. Yes, I could buy a used car for what I paid for this one. The 300mm I have now was much more reasonable.  200mm f/2.8 - 200mm f/1.8 and the 300mm f/2.8 with the R coming in, I'm pretty sure that all of these are discontinued. Or in Canon speak, may be made on demand, in the future. I've seen many of these, not my cup of tea, and $4,000 and up? Canon EF 200-400mm f/4L IS USM Extender 1.4x Lens (Canon EF) I suppose it would be nice for someone birding. Maybe that's what you saw? For sports it's a nice variable length. Something looking like this, with the lens hood and a Lenscoat: 
289
« on: October 28, 2024, 11:33 »
Shutterstock response:
Im afraid that this option is no longer available and has been removed from the legacy version as well. You may wish to use the feedback link to let the development team know.
Just use https://submit.shutterstock.com/catalog_manager/ the legacy version and click on the set, on the left, which shows the correct stats: dollars and downloads.
290
« on: October 28, 2024, 11:24 »
I also stopped uploading to Deadtime. It's simply not worth time & effort for <10 / month. In many ways DT symbolizes everything that is wrong with microstock - total lack of QA that resulted with swamp of low quality content. In addition to silly payout policy, rigged photo contests etc. It's a shame because it was once really great agency.
I'm $10 short and then, cash out. The plan is, close the account. If they get some spare change, after that, I don't care. I know some people do better, but aside from easy reviews, the 35 downloads, just don't add up to $100 fast enough. Maybe 2025 or 2026?
291
« on: October 28, 2024, 11:16 »
Back to topic, I heard back from Bigstock, and it was a legitimate e-mail. I have requested my earnings. I used to wait until they hit $100, but that takes so long there now I guess I need to start doing it as soon as possible. Boy they really went downhill after 2018 or so.
Like others, I dropped BS long ago, and have no account there. Isn't this the usual for SS though? New code, untested and it's unleashed on us.
292
« on: October 28, 2024, 10:57 »
"How this for a fake" It's a trackable link. Marketing emails are sent out with this to see who clicks them. The link resolves to submit.shutterstock.com.
It's funny because click.esvc.shutterstock.com is a subdomain, just like submit.shutterstock.com is, which you've linked as the right URL to use.
It's a genuine email, but could have been written better using the {{FirstName}} attribute.
Thanks for the better information. I'm not willing to click some bogus looking like to see that it's real. I did a whois and that says, "You have entered an invalid domain name". I don't understand how to check click.esvc.shutterstock.com for being legitimate, without clicking it, and I'm a bit cautious of that. Thanks for better information. I believe you... It still looks scammy and like phishing, when I know they don't owe me money, and it says I should go check because "You have earnings in your account! If this amount is not claimed ASAP, your unclaimed earnings are at risk of being transferred to the appropriate US tax authorities in the state of the home address we have on file. " which I don't, and all my tax information is up to date. It's under $10 so not over the threshold. The support link is also foul looking: https://click.esvc.shutterstock.com/?qs=6fda450ec6360709d711ba89eafdab6b46b5cbb0de65d761d3d8939ef15b639369b440c10f53b84aa8362e64e48832ceaf4828269a987003What the heck? It takes me to: https://submit.shutterstock.com/en/contact?utm_source=sstkemail&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=CONTRIB_D_OTHER_CollectUnpaidEarnings_ENUS_V1_202410&utm_id=89042&sfmc_id=72171826&subscriber_key=SSTK-101802064
293
« on: October 27, 2024, 11:18 »
The sloMo would be nice, but way beyond any money I have. Here's something entertaining: Canon FL 1200mm f/11 Super Telephoto FL/FD Mount. Probably can be found for $1,000 to $1,500. Would have been cheaper a couple years ago, but the mirrorless cameras and use the FD lenses. Mostly manual, but the exposure can work. 
294
« on: October 27, 2024, 11:04 »
Today I received this. I am afraid to click these links; it looks like a scam. What do you think? When I checked Shutterstock or Bigstock directly, no information about this appeared.
Hi Shutterstock Artist,
You have earnings in your account! If this amount is not claimed ASAP, your unclaimed earnings are at risk of being transferred to the appropriate US tax authorities in the state of the home address we have on file.
Here are the steps you need to take:
Complete a Tax form: To receive payments, all contributors must have an approved tax form on file. If you dont have one on file already, read how to submit a new tax form in a few easy steps here.
Request a payment: On the main page under 'Commissions' in your account, you will see the 'Payment Preferences' area. Select (or edit) the payment email address for electronic payments to be sent to an existing verified PayPal or MoneyBookers/Skrill account by clicking on the button next to your choice. Then, simply click the 'Request Commissions' button and your request will be sent to us.
Once again, please take action on this ASAP.
Contact our support team if you have any questions; well gladly assist you!
Thank you,
The Bigstock team
Same here. I did not click the links. This has to be in error.
NOT AN ERROR it's a scam, not from SSYup it's an error, poorly worded, false information and a mistake from SS. I got the email too. It amazes me how incompetent they are, they aren't even able to stop their emails since I got mine about 8 hours later than your post.
Today I received this. I am afraid to click these links; it looks like a scam. What do you think? When I checked Shutterstock or Bigstock directly, no information about this appeared.
Hi Shutterstock Artist,
Thank you,
The Bigstock team
They are on a roll.
295
« on: October 27, 2024, 11:02 »
The address is: [email protected] not the real SS email. Hi Shutterstock Artist,
You have earnings in your account! If this amount is not claimed ASAP, your unclaimed earnings are at risk of being transferred to the appropriate US tax authorities in the state of the home address we have on file.
Take a moment to log in and collect the money you have earned! Here are some possible reasons why you have not received them:
Missing tax form:To receive payments, all contributors must have an approved tax form on file. If you have not submitted one, or your old one has expired, simply go to the Tax Center and follow the simple instructions to submit a new form. Its easy to submit a W-9 electronic tax form, and these forms are reviewed and approved almost instantly!
Payout settings: Ensure you have a valid electronic payment account linked in your settings . We issue payments via PayPal, Skrill, and Payoneer.
Minimum payment threshold: Ensure that your minimum payout limit is not higher than your unpaid earnings amount.Hi Shutterstock Artist, not a name? But this is how people lose their accounts and money when the details of payment information is entered at the fake site. How's this for a fake? https://click.esvc.shutterstock.com/?qs=6fda450ec6360709c882accab3d1af0b7ebec8e05d9f6367f270c366013554e523d7dc6ee96f91cb683b27b677c0d0315318a45cab39a53bHere's the real SS account settings page: https://submit.shutterstock.com/account/settings
297
« on: October 21, 2024, 12:45 »
Inflation has hit everyone, and while stock agencies have lowered what they pay contributors, am wondering if they are charging their customers more?
If we're getting the same percentages of what they charge, then the logical conclusion is, they are charging less and we get less. Start with the easy one, 15% at iStock. Then move to, SS we don't se subscription sales much, just Single and Other, sometimes on demand, which both are some negotiated price, netting us dimes. DT is pretty consistent at 35 I don't know what that means. Adobe moves up and down, based on the package and the price, but most of mine are in the 90+ area. No I don't think they are charging the customers more, I think they are charging less.
298
« on: October 21, 2024, 12:31 »
Anyone received Adobe firefly bonus from wirestock?
I have many videos which sold many times through Adobe stock from from wirestock.
But till now wirestock not added any firefly bonus amount to my account, and no information about it yet.
There's no connection. Sales are sales. Firefly uses by Adobe have nothing to do with sales.
True, if they are on Adobe and were used for training AI, we should get a credit from Wirestock.
Has anyone asked WS where the pay is?
I am asking about the earnings that added by Adobe stock to wirestock for using videos to train firefly.
And yes I mailed them, but there is no response
Yes, I agree, they should answer and we should get something. I just saw the word "sales" and it's not, but now I understand what you mean, the license to use our images to train the AI. I wonder what the answer will be? Even if it's a sharing plan, that's better than nothing at all.
299
« on: October 18, 2024, 11:19 »
Downloads were okay average. RPD was miserable.
Consistent for IS. Magic, a background concept image, that I uploaded years ago, somehow, got a $9 commission. I wonder what the use is? Lifetime sales since 2016 = 1
300
« on: October 18, 2024, 11:08 »
For my part, I have blocked the profiles that only express a permanent pro-AI logorrhea, because the discussion is futile.
The only effect of expressing a divergent opinion can only make one feel alone and powerless.
Or you can stick your head in the sand or someplace else, and ignore anyone who has a different opinion, even those who might be right, where you could learn something? 
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 17 ... 195
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
