|
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 - click_click
2751
« on: September 03, 2009, 17:37 »
... If I could find a ton of opportunities to take pictures like that it would be great.
Find??? You have to create those opportunities. Do you seriously believe that any successful photographer "found" those opportunities of great models, studio locations and assistants by accident? You have to work for that! I doubt you rented those ducks for the shoot to have them walk exactly the way you photographed them, did you? You have to understand that you will never stand out from the crowd ( or become successful) by taking pictures of things that anyone can do just by pressing the shutter release of things that surround us? Think of different angles. Lay on the floor and take a pic of the mother duck from down below shooting upwards. I bet you get a killer image but probably you won't "find that opportunity". Don't take this post too seriously but you will have to "work" for good shots... No matter what.
2752
« on: September 01, 2009, 13:09 »
I thought after some people already reached a payout at Veer it could give us a little "start-off" trend. Nobody is obligated to vote.
2753
« on: September 01, 2009, 12:51 »
So, now we got the status page on schedule. How happy are you now, to see your total sales?
Give us your vote about your future upload behavior!
2754
« on: August 30, 2009, 12:11 »
The "Display as table" link doesn't work.
I can't sort images by sales. It only shows my top sellers. Other than that I have no clue what image sold unless I wade through the "approved list".
I hope they will sort that out soon as well.
2755
« on: August 27, 2009, 18:46 »
I don't understand that people get pissed at Dreamstime for programming a flash game on their site but Marketplace can hang on to a status page forever.
It's a status page and not some unnecessary rinkydink feature.
As mentioned above, funny enough that a status page wasn't even in the plan when they started programming the site - I'm speechless.
2756
« on: August 27, 2009, 15:54 »
...I want to ask what you would shoot ...
Haha, nice try. Asking the competition what to shoot - so you can steal all our downloads.  Sounds like you packed everything you need. Be sure to check online for good locations. Try to get in touch with the locals who can show you great spots that are not listed in the travel guides.
2757
« on: August 27, 2009, 14:29 »
Your business is very important to us, please upload more until we get enough money to have contributor related bugs fixed which going to be around 2015 :-)
I think this is a very funny but true statement 
2758
« on: August 27, 2009, 09:21 »
Well, two more business days and the month is over.
Making a statement that the sales overview will be done towards the end of this month (or last week of the month) seemed a bit risky. It more looks like the very last day of the month - if even.
Images have been up and selling and for many of us it is literally a waste of time to click through all pages to hunt down sales.
This is really lousy.
I wonder what Brian's next announcement will be.
2759
« on: August 27, 2009, 08:22 »
Way overdue.
After most of SS's competitors realized how successful a subscription plan can be they started adopting it.
Now SS realized that that this works the other way around as well.
This new "plan" boils down to a credit based system camouflaged as a subscription.
I'm fine with the quite low commission on that one because SS won't be overwhelmed with customers buying that sort of subscription. Their strong side is the monthly subscription or higher.
They just fill the gap within their own agency to stay competitive with other agencies.
2760
« on: August 26, 2009, 09:25 »
Up to now I have been using the same release for all agencies. Seems like going forward it would be a good idea to have them sign my generic one and also istock's specific one.
You bet. Better safe than sorry I'd say.
2761
« on: August 24, 2009, 08:07 »
It's ok.
They tell you what to fix and then you fix it.
They are helpful to straighten it out and you will be uploading more images in not time.
In the end it kind of makes sense to add the country of the model since they get releases from all over the world. It's a lot easier on their administrative side if they have all that information.
2762
« on: August 22, 2009, 21:11 »
Isn't it three images per application? Well, obviously you need to select wisely which three out of your portfolio you upload. The most important thing to me was to upload something that not most of the photographers have access to. Therefore I would say: Forget shots of money. Anyone (who has money) can take a picture of it. Not challenging at all. Same as for the baby. While they might be harder to find than money (in most countries) you are trying to measure yourself with excellent shots that are already in their collection. Be more creative with your composition. The matches are just a pile of matches - what's your message? What does it sell? The camel shot isn't too bad but why wouldn't you try to make a step or two to the right so that the one camel you take a picture of is isolated over the blue sky without the other camels' heads in the background. They are quite distracting. It's the details. Same thing with the clip. Straight forward shot over white - what are you selling with that image? Furthermore, don't look at other people's images or what has been approved recently. If you do that, you won't start creating your own style but copying just other people's work instead. Also don't forget. No matter if other people's piles of matches got accepted - will they sell - that is the question you have to ask. Create images that most buyers want if you're in the game of making a lot of money in a short time  That means that the images have be technically fine AND you need to approach it in a way that hasn't been done already so many times. I have to quote Yuri on that one. He said: "The more effort it takes you to get a certain shot the higher the chances are that you create an image that hasn't been done before or at least not many times. This gives you much higher chances to achieve sales." Or along those lines. Check www.arcurs.com it's somewhere in his video blogs I believe. Don't point your camera just at a cigarette and click away. Use an ashtray, a lighter in your composition and if you can, a pretty woman out of focus in the background wouldn't hurt either  You get my drift. Keep going. Good luck!
2763
« on: August 18, 2009, 10:34 »
Technically it's no problem as long as he transferred the copyright to the exclusive photographer.
2764
« on: August 18, 2009, 09:13 »
While most Istock Exclusives know how to take properly exposed, focused and composed images I do have to agree that quite a bunch of inferior images get through the exclusives queue.
While some stuff is plain out of focus many images are just snapshot like IMHO.
But what gets me most is the stats of some exclusives.
The other day I tripped over a guy's portfolio with 155 images and 39.000 sales. He's exclusive since 2007. 155 images in 2 years.
39.000 sales.
He (or she) only uploaded 3D images. Nothing out of this world but nicely executed I have to say. Although, I see many of the same or even better from other artists that don't even get close to this guy's sales figures. I'm stunned.
2765
« on: August 06, 2009, 16:34 »
Hi All -
Just to clarify that further:
- stats/metrics tools
- portfolio links/search by contributor
...are scheduled to launch before the end of August (likely the last week).
- Brian
Thanks Brian!
2766
« on: August 06, 2009, 15:22 »
I'm real inclined to read "a month or so" from this bunch as pretty close to 30 days.
I hope you're right. I see some sales as well now. It's just beyond me how the programming of a stock image site can not have the royalty status page included in v.1.0 People are trying to make money here and status is quite some important factor for our work...
2767
« on: August 06, 2009, 15:03 »
...
That feature and a few others are in progress, and we will be rolling them out over the next month or so.
Regards,
Ryan
Marketplace Team
...next month or so.
2768
« on: August 04, 2009, 16:34 »
Do you know of any shortcut to these facts? I refuse to check every single file. Got better things to do...
No shortcuts - just the agonizing frustration of an agency that has been selling stock images for at least 8 years but failed to implement sales statistics and other important features for their contributors.
Speechless.
Macro agencies do not all provide up to the minute live stats for sales, or do they? I seem to remember hearing that Getty reports on the 15th of the month for the previous month's sales, and that is all the info you get. Sell something May 1, and hear about it on June 15.
Well I know that Macros don't do "real time" but Marketplace could have at least a stats page - come on.
2769
« on: August 04, 2009, 15:48 »
Do you know of any shortcut to these facts? I refuse to check every single file. Got better things to do...
No shortcuts - just the agonizing frustration of an agency that has been selling stock images for at least 8 years but failed to implement sales statistics and other important features for their contributors. Speechless.
2770
« on: August 03, 2009, 06:27 »
Any news on the link from our name to the rest of the photos in our portfolio?
No, no changes yet.
2771
« on: August 02, 2009, 10:25 »
Thankyou for your suggestion. Sorry I'm too excited to ask many questions.
Which type of off camera flash you are using? Is Vivitar 285HV Flash a good off camera flash?
That flash is $87 with free shipping at Amazon.com I shoot with Nikon's SB-600 so I can't give you a recommendation for this flash. However, some photographers just buy any cheap off-camera flash and remote triggers just to have a "cheap" portable light source. You will be using light modifiers as well like bounce cards or silks so it doesn't really matter which brand you buy. I suggest to read a lot about off-camera flash units. It could save you some money in the long run! Also consider that you might need a light stand to mount the flash on, including the bracket! Those are additional costs. But you can build that yourself if you're good at improvising.
2772
« on: August 02, 2009, 08:48 »
thank you
I have a polarize filter. Do I need to remove it when I do indoor shooting?
Dear chl, I suggest you take a beginner's course in digital photography. Don't take this as criticism, take it as advice! You will learn the basics much faster this way than asking this forum all your questions from A to Z. If you don't have the money to take a class then use the internet to read more about the questions that you have. There some fantastic tutorials online that will help you a lot. Also they might be written more detailed than many of us can write - because we're also trying to get some shooting done The polarizer filter will slow your shutter speed down in any given situation. That means it becomes harder to get sharp images because of longer exposure times. Depending on what lens you are using you might have to adjust the filter every time you re-focus because it rotates the end of the barrel where the filter is attached. You have to learn about the advantages and uses of filters. Simply do a search online for tutorials. On-camera flash will very rarely give you proper light for portraits. I suggest you get an off camera flash with remote trigger. On ebay you can find cheap solutions. I bought a wireless trigger for my off-camera flash and I can even use it now for my new studio lights. It cost me $30 instead of buying the pocket wizard. Good luck!
2773
« on: August 01, 2009, 11:34 »
Downsizing means reducing the image size in pixels.
For example your original file is 3008 x 2000 in Photoshop you goto "IMAGE" and then "IMAGE SIZE" (CTRL+ALT+I) there you can enter a smaller value than 3008 in the width field.
Let's say you chose 2500 pixels width, then your image will be downsized from 3008 to 2500 pixels in width and the height should be reduced proportionally so that the aspect ratio stays the same.
If you have little noise which could get you into trouble, reducing or downsizing your image can help to get it through the review process but on most agencies you won't get as much royalties since the image will be sold in smaller sizes than the native resolution.
It's always best to make sure that you take the picture with correct camera settings as well as a tripod, remote shutter release and other tricks to get the best results!
Try to google for some tutorials about basic camera settings and tips for good exposures.
Good luck!
2774
« on: August 01, 2009, 08:14 »
The halo almost looks like the effect you get with HDR or if the kites were added to the picture.
But I don't think it was the OP's intent to create an HDR... He/She would have mentioned that, I'd assume.
2775
« on: August 01, 2009, 08:04 »
There is major color fringing going on around the shapes of the kites and their tails.
The colors seem to be off. I'd say the base color of the kite is white and then there is a design painted/printed on them. The white doesn't look white. The kites with the green design have a pinkish hue in the white. The one design in red has a turquoise tint in the white. I could be wrong, could be part of the design.
The sky has been ruined. You must have pushed the saturation too much and created "banding". Furthermore the clouds contain a lot of artifacts. Always edit in 16-Bit RAW and when you're done convert it down to 8-Bit.
Also around the edges of the clouds you can see the color fringing.
It's a nice concept but the big amount of clouds make it impossible to separate the kites from the sky. So it would have made a big difference if there were few to no clouds that day.
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
