|
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 - LesPalenik
Pages: 1 ... 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 18 19 20
326
« on: December 04, 2013, 08:22 »
The original question was posted in August. I think at that time, the system behaved slightly differently. It is much more streamlined now. So I think, we can close this thread.
327
« on: December 04, 2013, 03:20 »
So, I sold the coots, but a different image with the same birds. Only 0.33:-( Congratulations to your sale! Looking at the clock, I'm guessing it was an European or Australian buyer. At 33 cents for the flock, it works out to about 4 cents per bird. If those coots were a little bit plumper, they might bring more to the table. Slightly, off topic - a few days ago, I spoke with two colleagues, who recently returned from a month-long trip to SW Florida, and they both reported a very noticeable decrease of the waterbirds both in the conservation areas and on the beaches. One of them is suspecting an increasing numbers of raccoons who are very adept at raiding the bird nests. In USA and in Canada, every year millions of honey bees and butterflies perish, most likely due to the agricultural pesticides. I believe that in Europe there is a ban on some of those pesticides, but not on this continent. Whatever kills the bees, it would affect also other insects and indirectly many birds. Any other theories?
328
« on: December 03, 2013, 19:09 »
That's fully understandable. I also find the hunting permit prices outrageous. Almost as bad as the new Adobe CC subscription fees.
329
« on: December 03, 2013, 18:17 »
A possible problem with your birds is that when viewed by an average American, they might be perceived undernourished.
!!!!!!!!!!!
(my keyboard has stuck) 
Do Americans eat coots and/or swans?
I was once served a combination of a domestic (on the fatty side) and wild (dry) goose with the resulting fat content approaching quite acceptable levels, and found it delicious.
Goose yes, but coots and swans? Can't be done here. Coots and swans are protected; plus all swans belong to the Queen, except those which have been swan-upped (they used to be eated at banquets).
(getting OT, sorry)
Susan, in absence of Queen, there are several USA states and Canadian provinces that allow limited swan and coot hunting. Attached is an excerpt from the Manitoba Hunting guide that you can consult when planning your next trip to Canada. Just imagine, you could get very saleable pictures Before and After.
330
« on: December 03, 2013, 17:19 »
25,000 swans on SS. Much better odds than tomatoes.
331
« on: December 03, 2013, 17:10 »
A possible problem with your birds is that when viewed by an average American, they might be perceived undernourished.
!!!!!!!!!!!
(my keyboard has stuck)
Do Americans eat coots and/or swans?
I was once served a combination of a domestic (on the fatty side) and wild (dry) goose with the resulting fat content approaching quite acceptable levels, and found it delicious.
332
« on: December 03, 2013, 16:51 »
A possible problem with your birds is that when viewed by an average American, they might be perceived undernourished. The trick is to shoot animals with which the buyer can identify. Here is an image of a healthy Canada Goose specimen, suitable equally well for a Sunday dinner table or contemporary stock: http://www.shutterstock.com/pic.mhtml?id=116377882 </img>
333
« on: November 27, 2013, 05:34 »
Photoquote has been around for at least twenty years, but the blog post in the second link is timely and priceless.
Good find, Ron!
334
« on: November 18, 2013, 17:04 »
same here! Only 3 sales for .36 heck even Fotolia has 6 sales for about $5
Yep, same here. having an unusually good day at FT with all dl's and no subs. 
Here is your solution -- quit or shut down all sub sites!
335
« on: November 07, 2013, 01:37 »
Thanks for sharing the article, Leo Good observations. Among other gems, there was a section that sounded somewhat familiar: Despite this outreach a couple posters turned against the celebrity for not properly acknowledging his or her existence while engaging other members' questions. Their admiration quickly turned into brutal malice overnight with brutal verbal attacks on the celebrity and the "sheep" who worshiped him.
336
« on: November 07, 2013, 00:17 »
FAA ain't self hosting
OK, that moves direct sales, incl. Symbio from 3rd place to 4th place
337
« on: November 06, 2013, 23:46 »
I believe it is very possible to sell 1-2 images on your own site for every 100 on SS. I would say, it's more like 1 to 1000 (on SS subs) but compared with other agencies, the ratio goes down drastically. @ Luis never seen a symbio site with that kind of values, are you including FAA numbers on self hosted? Yes, I'm adding FAA and Symbio in self-hosted option. I don't know what values are you looking at, but if a mid tier agency generates only $5-$10 per month primarily from 20cents subs, it's not difficult to beat it with a combined/average month on FAA+Symbio even if those sales don't happen regularly.
338
« on: November 06, 2013, 23:29 »
^
I just looked at the dollars - in my case or some other contributors who reported similar results
339
« on: November 06, 2013, 23:17 »
I checked Microstock poll results and was very surprised to see the new classification, especially 'Self-hosted' (Symbiostock) on third position. If it is true, it is a revolution and very good news but I am rather skeptical. If you have 1,000 or more images on Symbiostock and FAA, even one sale may put the combined self-hosted option above mid-tier agencies.
340
« on: November 01, 2013, 15:05 »
Is the $2.00 image price the success recipe?
Anybody else got any sales there? And at what price level?
have mine at 5 pounds, 1 sale only!
Your images are too good. You need cropped off subjects and tilted horizons to make sales there
Thanks for the tip, Ron! And I was worried that it was my own picture in the profile. Just to see if the price is the main factor on this site, I'll add a set of different pics at lower prices, and will report next year the outcome.
341
« on: November 01, 2013, 08:23 »
Is the $2.00 image price the success recipe?
Anybody else got any sales there? And at what price level?
342
« on: October 30, 2013, 14:13 »
I uploaded right after their announcement a few months ago about 100 images and priced them between 10-20. Didn't get too much action first, then about 50 of them were "starred" which lead to higher view count and produced in total over 800 views, but still no sales.
Some images (not mine) that are offered there for a 1 or 2 show hundreds of views and maybe they sell, but it seems to me that site visibility is still the main problem.
343
« on: October 30, 2013, 00:17 »
I agree with Cathy, that it's not that difficult but it can be time consuming to learn all new tricks. After all, you'll have to find your way not only around Symbiostock, but also the Wordpress, and your host's setup.
Having said that, setting up a second site would be a breeze.
As to the host's options, I would recommend to add the site backup. That is usually cheaper than a backup to some cloud service, although you may consider the latter option as your portfolio grows. Having the host doing daily backups for you means that you can relatively easily restore your site and images with a version from an earlier date.
344
« on: October 29, 2013, 23:02 »
Let's say I had a real tangible product to sell __ a really good homemade jam for example. Here in the UK we have the 'Big 4' supermarkets (a bit like we have the Big 4 agencies). Now I could do an exclusive deal with just one of those supermarkets. They would then be able to sell it at the optimum price and both they and I would achieve good margins for the product. However, if I sold my jam on a non-exclusive basis to all the supermarkets, then it might sell in 4x the volume. Price competition might mean that I made less margin on each sale however the greater volume might mean I made far more money. Good analogy. However, not only would you get a lower price for each jar, but the total volume would add up to less than 4 times one-store-sales, since some shoppers are checking prices in multiple stores. And typically, they would buy the item in the store with the lowest price. Some jam-makers are starting to sell their products at little exclusive stands and boutiques with a strawberry logo now where they keep all the sales profits.
345
« on: October 17, 2013, 18:00 »
Thanks, Ron. Due to my limited knowIedge of Wordpress, I have always used just the left justified text.
How do you specify the full text justification?
346
« on: October 17, 2013, 02:22 »
347
« on: October 09, 2013, 20:50 »
I'm looking at the Adobe's Camera Shake in PS CC, Topaz In Focus, and DeblurMyImage to fix some old images taken handheld with a long lens.
Is anybody using these tools and what's your verdict?
348
« on: September 29, 2013, 21:37 »
i've friends here doing exhibitions, fine-art, news assignments, documentaries, there's a whole world outside stock and they get decent money out of it I don't think selling at exhibitions and art fairs is a viable solution. Maybe at special venues or for very talented artists. At the fairs I've visited, I see every year new hopefuls in their booths and after trying it once or twice, they count their losses and never return. Even many established artists stopped going to fairs (except some proven moneymakers) or if they do, they use it to promote their workshops. Saturation is everywhere. There is a need only for so many workshops and there is space on the walls only for so many pictures. One buck is not so bad for an image, considering that many reported sales are subs at less than 20 cents. First step in addressing the problem is to stop submitting images to agencies who pay such low commissions.
349
« on: September 14, 2013, 06:26 »
Congratulations! Great way to start the day.
Beats 50 subscription sales on Fotolia.
350
« on: September 12, 2013, 19:53 »
Steady and consistent growth eventually makes for a nice tall solid tree, right? Yes, it is important to see the steady and consistent growth. The engine is much smoother and more powerful now than just a few months ago. Considering the challenges, starting from zero, with a totally new concept, IMO, the Symbiostock growth has been phenomenal. Volume of online images is growing exponentially, and we are now adding almost 40,000 images per month. That's with 100 contributors. In six months, the network can easily grow to 250 contributors and 100,000 new images every month. The big challenge is to let the buyers know about the new world order.
Pages: 1 ... 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 18 19 20
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
