|
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 - Sean Locke Photography
2851
« on: October 16, 2013, 13:05 »
Thanks for the quick responses, any chance you could pop your version just so i have something to go off and check all is ok with mine
I know its cheeky but im sure you was in my shoes once 
I just use my old version of the IS release, and sometimes the Stocksy one.
2852
« on: October 16, 2013, 06:14 »
Normally you don't need an image of the person to accompany it.
Just fill out what the release says (assuming you have a good release).
2853
« on: October 15, 2013, 10:48 »
I was shortlisted with 3 out of the 7 images in the shortlist. Didn't get it. Thought I had a really good chance.
2854
« on: October 15, 2013, 08:53 »
I read the mail and thought, boy, people must be having a hard time getting to the payout amount! It speaks to sales volume dropping, more than kindness.
2855
« on: October 15, 2013, 05:07 »
It doesn't fill me with a lot of confidence 
2856
« on: October 14, 2013, 20:29 »
Carry on then, nothing to see here. 
Sean, have you experimented much with pricing? I think those images are worth a lot more than $5 for web res.
If I was selling an avalanche, I'd agree with you, but I only license 3-4 a month. The point with EVO was to see if there was an audience there. I had people buying very simple images that had gotten into Agency on Getty for $3-400, so I wanted to see if 123RF had an audience like that. However, since the images don't reliably, or at all, show up in the search, it isn't proving productive at all. JoAnn, here's a search - "blue santa" refined by last 3 months. 2 pages of images, and none of mine show up. Now, refine by EVO, and there they are. http://www.123rf.com/search.php?word=blue+santa&start=60&t_lang=en&exclude=woman&imgtype=0&num_ppl=1&srchgender=0&color=&searchopts=search_all&selectFresh=6&itemsperpage=60Weird, huh?
2857
« on: October 14, 2013, 11:25 »
Works pretty well. Looks like there's a strong element of color search in there. A search on light bulb, and then a similar on a bulb on a green background brings back lots of bulbs on green, not necessarily matching the composition or orientation of the first. Same for a bunch of red Christmas presents. I get a lot of red images back, including hearts and things.
Still, fun to play with. At first I missed the slider in the find similar box. Then it was a bit hard to go all the way to 100% with it without going past.
2858
« on: October 13, 2013, 10:30 »
I was trying to find a higher priced outlet I could put some work on, and I discovered EVO at 123RF (no subscriptions!). I've put up a few hundred files, and no sales yet. I find an issue with their search paradigm, and was wondering if anyone has had any different results there. Basically, the EVO images hardly show up when searching with the "all images" filter on. In fact, if you just try to search within my portfolio with "all images" checked for various things, absolutely nothing shows up. Try searching for "santa" or "student": http://www.123rf.com/profile_seanlockephotographyThe only way to get them to show up is to refine with the EVO filter. This is bizarre to me, and while trying to discuss this, I've been told that only after things like sales, or picking favorite images, etc., do they start to show up under "all images" (even though I have 15 santa images as favorites). "All images" actually means "all images" to me, and not "a magical subset of what is actually all images". EVO should be a subset of "all images", like editorial would be a subset, etc. I can't imagine I'll ever make sales when the images don't show up at all in a search! So, does anyone have any EVO images, and do they show up in a return? Do you make any sales? Is this just me thinking this is crazy, or does anyone agree?
2859
« on: October 13, 2013, 09:54 »
Thank you all for the replies.
It is amazing that there are those two options only, isn't it?
If any alternative/creative ideas comes to mind, please share them.
Thank you.
The illustrationist.
What are you looking for? Either you license them, or somebody else licenses them and pays you the royalty.
2860
« on: October 12, 2013, 10:41 »
you are missing the other account and also the millions he must have got paid ahead
SS alone with 4k sales a day makes 120k sales, lets pretend he had 1$ RPD that is 120k a month or 1.44M a year
so yep 5k downloads at IS even at 20$ RPD its only 100k $
I would gnaw of a limb for 100k a month
Don't forget your 100 employees!
2861
« on: October 11, 2013, 13:27 »
2862
« on: October 11, 2013, 10:30 »
If you search "smiling girl" on Istock, you will find 1,25 million results. So the question is, why do you continue to waste you time shooting this kind of subject?
People look for what fits better in they project, someone cares about the price, someone not. Somebody spends 300$ for a signle photo, somebody 3000$. For somebody 30$ is to much. I mean, you only have to care about how is your target.
Look, I don't care what you decide to do. I'm just pointing out that you're competing with the entire world when you're creating content entirely within software, and the rest of that world is probably going to be lower priced then you if you turn exclusive.
2863
« on: October 11, 2013, 10:09 »
Yep. Once you've built up a library of models and textures to use, global lighting like that is pretty simple in programs like 3dsMax. Like I said, people around the world have nothing better to do then sit around trying to make cool renders like that. Alex was just an example of a portfolio of quickly duplicated ideas.
Now I understand better why it is "Sean Locke Photography" and not "Sean Locke 3D render"
I worked for 9 years in the computer animation department at Disney. I'm pretty sure I have a handle on some of the basics  Here's a tutorial series that teaches you about using Mental Ray in Maya, for instance: http://simplymaya.com/autodesk-maya-video-tutorial/lighting-and-rendering/the-dark-art-of-mental-ray/?tut_id=307The point is not that it takes five minutes to create a more detailed render. The point is that there are plenty of people around the world that have the time, inclination and equipment to do it.
2864
« on: October 11, 2013, 09:53 »
lol
Have you an idea of what is high quality 3d modeling, texturing and rendering?
Certainly nothing to do with the example that you gave
I think that Vinne speaks about works of this level:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bbb3viz/7333048902/#in/photostream/
http :// vimeo. com/7809605
Do you think that it is so simple to duplicate?
Yep. Once you've built up a library of models and textures to use, global lighting like that is pretty simple in programs like 3dsMax. Like I said, people around the world have nothing better to do then sit around trying to make cool renders like that. Alex was just an example of a portfolio of quickly duplicated ideas.
2865
« on: October 11, 2013, 09:21 »
I don't understand how a 3d render (high or low quality) can be easily duplicated.
You must have the model, the material/textures so?
What do you mean? Can you explain better?
You don't need a certain ethnicity of model or location to shoot an image. All you need is a computer and software. So, some teen in India can sit all day creating 3d work on his laptop. This Russian guy was well known for duplicating the concepts that others did, pretty quickly. www.istockphoto.com/user_view.php?id=614972
2866
« on: October 11, 2013, 06:39 »
Hi all,
I would like to clarify a doubt. I don't want to ask you if I should or not became an exclusive at Istock. I know that nobdy have the right answer to his question and I also know that, this days, this aswer would probably be no more than yes.
I want to make a practical example and have anwers based on your experience. So I am refearing to people how became exclusive or leaved his exclusivity.
Let say that I am a Gold level, with a portfolio of high quality 3d renders and elaborated pictures, and that I earn, from Istock, 1000$/month. So I am at a 18% royalty level. Going exclusive I will jump up from 18% to 35% royalty. This means that, only by that, my income will swich from 1000$ to 1944$. And so far it is ok.
Now the question: what else more (from higher prices, vetta, getty, more visibility, other things I don't know...) should I aspect to earn?
I don't want pricise amounts, but only rough estimations. I think this is not a difficult question to answer for how have an experience about that.
So, let's go with your experience...and thank you for that.
"High Quality 3d renders" are easily duplicated by people around the world, who sell non-exclusive, so you will be competing against the same content at cheaper prices.
2867
« on: October 10, 2013, 14:29 »
I don't think you necessarily need money if you are running something small. Money always helps though.
If it's a coop that is going to offer the work of more than a few artists, it'll take some money to get set up with the necessary equipment, servers, IT infrastructure, etc. I suppose it might be a little cheaper in the beginning to go with a hosted solution, but even that isn't going to be really "cheap" in order to get the kind of setup that has provides adequate site speed, bandwidth, storage, etc.
Good design costs money. Could you get away with cheap design? Sure, but a cheap looking site doesn't sell. You'd need to spend money on a good site design, a logo, etc.
I guess you can do things cheap or free, but if we're talking about something that has a real chance of working, I just think there are some things you won't be able to cut corners on.
I agree and I don't think it would be too hard to find a couple hundred contributors willing to throw a few thousand in if the project looks promising.
Yes, it would. You're talking about the people that want "100%" royalties.
2868
« on: October 10, 2013, 13:40 »
I just went back to check it out. It's changed since I saw it. I almost laughed when this one came up: "Every single image on iStock has been closely inspected by our editors for artistic merit, technical excellence, uniqueness and a whole lot more."
Isn't that a "truth in advertising" thing?
2869
« on: October 10, 2013, 12:49 »
What's this all about?
It's getting cheers on iS forums.
It headlines "Bring your original idea to life with content only available from iStock."
When you search in the search box, it takes you to iStock, and gives a regular iStock search, Exclusive, pseudo/quasi/faux-exclusive and indie content as usual.
I'm clearly missing something. Again.
http://discover.istockphoto.com
It's just a entry into the site for a certain marketing campaign. I got it a few weeks ago in an email - it might have been part of the "free the creatives" thing.
2870
« on: October 10, 2013, 06:00 »
2871
« on: October 09, 2013, 19:15 »
Private forums? So buyers will have no interaction with contributors? Nice.
With all these people so happy since they don't use those features, it's amazing those features affected anything. Lol...
2872
« on: October 09, 2013, 16:47 »
Laughable, but apparently worth a woo yay there. Desperation.
2873
« on: October 08, 2013, 16:33 »
No, a room full of ferrets in exercise wheels.
2874
« on: October 08, 2013, 15:43 »
The only thing different (that people here would want) is an open membership as opposed to a more select membership, but it's what is being talked about. A small group of people willed it into existence, by it's own legal terms it belongs to the members. Profits are distributed after expenses. Etc.
2875
« on: October 08, 2013, 15:37 »
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
