|
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 - stormchaser
Pages: 1 ... 11 12 13 14 15 [16] 17 18 19 20 21 22
376
« on: December 06, 2008, 22:22 »
And just an additional note - an iStock employee, or whatever he is there, did indeed post a misleading headline in the post of the press release, saying "Getty Buys Jupitermedia" http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=78556A pretty big and careless mistake by the poster.
377
« on: December 06, 2008, 22:09 »
From Talanis:
Getty bought Jupiter Images, not Jupiter Media. Big difference! This is true. If some would actually take the time to read and understand the release from Getty, you wouldn't have all the kvetching about StockXpert From the release
SEATTLE October 23, 2008 Getty Images, Inc., the worlds leading creator and distributor of visual content and other digital media, today announced that it has entered into a definitive agreement to acquire Jupiterimages, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Jupitermedia (NASDAQ: JUPM), for $96 million in cash. The acquisition will benefit existing and potential customers by making even more digital content easily accessible. The acquisition is subject to the approval of shareholders and the receipt of certain regulatory approvals.
...
Getty Images will retain the Jupiterimages brand and website, and will integrate Getty Images technology, licensing expertise, content, business processes and service. Jupiterimages large portfolio of wholly-owned imagery will allow Getty Images to offer still more versatility and flexibility in providing imagery and other content assets to customers. Additionally, Getty Images global distribution channels will increase international customers access to Jupiterimages products and services, including the Jupiterimages Unlimited subscription product. There is a relationship of course between StockXpert and Jupitermages Unlimited due to the new offering crossover recently implemented, but it would really be just a matter of StockXpert pulling the plug on that offering if that is what the details of the deal include. Of course things can always change a bit after all the ink is dry, butI think anyone pulling ports off of StockXpert due to the pending Getty deal is a bit premature.
378
« on: December 06, 2008, 18:15 »
Well the macros do it, meaning close off contributors. I believe (I heard) Corbis is shut off at this time and is directing new contributors to SnapVillage.
379
« on: December 06, 2008, 17:47 »
From the iStock site Due to some server issues we have disabled the application process until further notice. We will keep you updated as we have information for you. We apologize for the inconvenience and appreciate your patience. There are forum threads on this at IS, and they are usually pretty quick to post updates on their Front Page Blog. No reason to think there's a shutout forever.
380
« on: December 06, 2008, 14:29 »
It's just a simple wire loop, leaving a long end tail of a few inches. Then the long end is bent at a 90 deg angle to form an upright. Works like a charm. The loop base makes it stand up.
381
« on: December 06, 2008, 14:17 »
The quality will of course depend on the quality of your images. When I used to do a lot of trade show work I dealt with this place http://www.bigposters.comThey are on Long Island USA. Depending n the medium you wish to print on, remember that such a project can be quite costly. Notes on Bigposters - they actually answer their phones if you call there, and they are small enough to keep on top of their jobs yet large enough for quick turnaround. Have been using them since about 1998. At that time, they even cut me a small price break for a charity project which was appreciated by the organization.
382
« on: December 05, 2008, 20:53 »
Whatever works is good  I should have mentioned above I always use manual focus for this stiff. Auto will not work. I test my drop, and have a little rig of fine wire that will stand upright. I place it where the drop falls, focus on it, remove it, then continue with my drops.
383
« on: December 05, 2008, 20:50 »
Hi guys!
Where else I can see rejection reason for my photos!?
I found only on Images page when I put cursor on orange circle...
But it is incomplete if text is longer...
I see only (rejection reason: please remove...
What I have to remove (except pic  )!?
If I recall correctly, I think the yellow reject dot is clickable, and you should see more text. Been a long time since I had a rejection at StockXpert, but I hpe this helps.
384
« on: December 05, 2008, 17:27 »
Yes have played arund with some gels on milk. Pretty interesting.
And just thinking about one f my previous posts and the liquid viscosity. I wonder how some chilled jello (dessert gelatin) wound work. I'll bet I could get some pretty funky globules flying around. I have some cherry flavor here. Maybe will try it with a blue gel after I get done with a work project.
Never thought about the colored foam core either. Thx!
385
« on: December 05, 2008, 17:10 »
I'm so stupid. Never thought of a reflector setup. Akthough I have experimented with papers like foil giftwrap to cause reflections on the water, and even colored patterned paper in the water.
386
« on: December 05, 2008, 16:05 »
Here is one of my experiments with Nikon D200, Sigma 105mm macro and continuous frame shooting of about 8 shots with two strobes. I set up a small hot lamp left to try and get some highlight. This was more of an experiment to test the vessel, a purple bowl to see if it produced color and tone I liked. So yes things are possible without triggers, just be prepared to take and ditch a lot of frames. No retouch on this one - it's just straight from the raw file. Raw files will give you best latitude in processing. 
387
« on: December 05, 2008, 15:00 »
THe ideal setup is a dark room, a trigger, and the shortest flash duration possible. Here is a link that is most suited to hobbyists,semipro http://www.diyphotography.net/diy_high_speed_photography_at_homeThere is more complex stuff out there, laser triggers, etc but really for those much more serious about it. Here is the link to the Flickr group - quite useful http://www.flickr.com/groups/highspeed/Here is a rudimentary trigger kit from Makezine. Sort of like a school science project but it works. http://makezine.com/flashkit/And here is a high end kit from Kapture Group. Beyond the means of most, but some good examples and some learning here http://www.kapturegroup.com/main_htmls/photo.htmlAlso see http://www.hiviz.com/Most of my splash work these days happens when I do a coffee shoot. I just strt dropping some cream into black coffee and fire a series using some rapid fire shooting. I'll shoot continuous of about 12 frames for each splash. You have to be really ruthless on the editing using this quick method, else your hard drive will fill very quickly. If I get something good it's a bonus. Most of my splashes are for use as art files and haven't submitted any lately for stock. It really is a good rainy day indoor activity. Have fun.
388
« on: December 05, 2008, 12:45 »
No you're not being an ass. The first one is dodgey in my opinion. The crown splash is hard to get, yes, but in the example you provided I think it may be over Photoshopped. On splash images, there is usually some image cleaning that needs to be done because there are many fine droplets almost like a spray. But I usually try to keep the integrity of the original image. I have gotten a few nice crown splashes. One I did is on black, and even caught the ripples in the water wall that rises when the crown droplets form and spread. High speed stuff can messy and is best done with a trigger, although you can get some good stuff by just trial and error shooting continuous frames with a powerful flash set for the shortest flash duration you can manage. I have gotten some cool results with the Nikon D3 and the SB800 with a SB600 slaved off of it. Water is hardest to get, milk or heavy cream is easier because of the difference in the viscosity of the liquid. If using water, you could try and add some glycerin to the water. It will change the viscosity and the surface tension. Also try and vary the temperature of the liquid a little. I think very cold will result in more residual fine drops or spray, where a little warmer water will provde more of a "soft bounce" and slow down the drop formation. There is a High Speed group on Flickr you might want to check out. Also see this link I posted awhile back here for some inspiration http://www.smashingmagazine.com/2008/11/02/when-time-freezes-50-beautiful-examples-of-freeze-photography/
390
« on: November 29, 2008, 18:35 »
BME everywhere except SS. SS was down about 15% from last month BME, but my uploads were down too. StockXpert finally back to July level. 123 has had nice pickup in sales.
391
« on: November 29, 2008, 18:23 »
Neither. Both a giant waste of time.
392
« on: November 29, 2008, 11:23 »
First I want to thank everyone for his/her answer. I will keep trying the micro agencies and try not to let it bother me. (Fat Chance)
Several things make this particularly galling. I have over 1100 images at Alamy and have never had a rejection there. I am attempting to cross over from the art field which is difficult, and I get rejections for things like composition.
But, so goes life.
Ed, really, with the iSTock thing you have to get passed it or you'll just make yourself crazy and waste time. Hit yourself in the head with a long telephoto lens if you have to The energy is really better spent elsewhere, such as in a little better market research for micro. I say this in all sincerity. When I first started iStock my acceptance rate was dismal. Now I only send what I think will "fit". Acceptance rate way up, and even with a much smaller port there, sales are ok and the RPI is good. I went through a few of the "double rejects" as you have. Take a break from there and rethink some strategy. Alamy - not an edited collection. They base review on technical merit only, not on aesthetics or content. Congrats on your success there with acceptance - for a lot of people the game at Alamy is the other way around. Good luck in the future
393
« on: November 28, 2008, 20:11 »
Unfortunately just more weenie stuff for the masses. When they have to put "New Search Box" as a feature, that's not good news http://www.adobe.com/products/photoshopelwin/features/More info on Cnet http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-10025031-1.htmlI keep a copy of Ele 5 on the laptop just so I can do some raw proofing on the road. The new stuff like Scene Cleaner may be desirable at a consumer level, but not for me. I'd rather let the camera do the work. Upgrade not worth it for me. If you shoot raw files and plan a camera purchase, upgrade may be inevitable though to keep with new converters for new camera models. So another Adobe bonus - planned obsolescence Hope this helps you out.
394
« on: November 28, 2008, 18:12 »
Yes you've made your point several times. Now go and take your medication.
395
« on: November 28, 2008, 18:07 »
OH NO please not again.....
Please don't start this again. I have not calculated the percentage of threads with subjects that are useless vs. photography based ones that shank_ali starrs but it seems like shank_ali is all about starting threads that have little to do with photography or microstock and more about causing unnecessary forum squabble.
Proposed new rule: keep religion and politics out of the forum as much as possible?
Diversity is great, but it also leads to annoying, uneducational rants on forums that are designed for other more productive reasons.
I like shank_ali's participation and effort, but such topics really don't belong here (again)
Ditto. But as long as people keep replying to this moron, oh excuse me mormo m, will keep posting the ridiculous. Ignore the source and it will soon wither and die.
396
« on: November 27, 2008, 18:49 »
To answer the question flat out, out of the big 6 I find 123RF the least picky. Have never had a rejection there. It's not that I upload trash, but some stuff I load there will never see Shutterstock or iStock.
However as Madelaide pointed out, lower standards mean lower or non existent sales. I do ok on 123 in that it is not a complete waste of time to upload, but not nearly as well as SS - not even close.
As micro continues to improve in quality across the board, a strategy of "less picky" will be detrimental in the long run in many ways.
397
« on: November 26, 2008, 09:52 »
For basic modeling and scenes, the amount of memory depends on how bloated your program is. Something rudimentary like Blender will run on just about anything. Fluffier programs like True Space will run more efficiently on a machine with a bump up in memory. It all depends on the architecture of the program and how well the programmers did their job. A bump up in memory is recommended. But some programs will run on 2GB just fine for basic projects.
The memory needs really come into play on Renders, when you generate the final image from your models with textures and lighting applied. In one program that I use, a very basic render may take only a few minutes, but on the final "fine render", where there are many subdivisions to a fine tuned mesh, complex textures like glass or metal and reflections, lighting and shadows, along with rendering techniques like radiosity, inclusion of alpha channels, a final render of something like 8000x6000 pixels could indeed take several hours or overnight.
398
« on: November 26, 2008, 08:12 »
Start with Blender which is free. You can then see if 3D is something you think you would enjoy doing. Some people just can't get past the mental idea of working in 3 planes. You might also explore www.daz3d.com/. Daz program is free, but they try and suck you in to buying their content. Daz is cheezy, and in my opinion does not give great output., but good for a little learning. By looking at these, you can get your feet wet a little without any $ investment. Another option for exploration is True Space at http://www.caligari.com/You can then explore paid program options armed with at least some knowledge. Cinema 4d is very popular with those entering 3D and has a reasonable price point. One of the biggest mistakes by those wanting to try 3D is to sink money into a program they have no knowledge of, then becoming very frustrated with the learning curve. Good luck. 3d is very enjoyable, but takes some dedication.
399
« on: November 25, 2008, 01:14 »
Agreed with above. I usually use Mpix. On my calibrated monitors, if I hold an Mpix print next to the screen with the same photo, pretty amazing. I always select no auto leveling, or whatever their auto "enhancement" is called. What I see is what I get and have never been disappointed.
Very quick turnaround, and everything shipped FLAT, boarded, sleeved, and padded for sizes like 8x10. 11x14. Their shipping dept is A Plus. Unlike another service that shoved 20 prints into a small mailing tube and I had to pull them out with freakin needlenose pliers.
400
« on: November 24, 2008, 11:36 »
Speaking of MRs, does anyone have a generic one that all sites accept? Some sites seem to have slightly different requirements than others.
Yuri says his works with all http://www.arcurs.com/what-is-a-model-releaseAnd a note from him Remember to remove Yuri Arcurs and my logo and replace them with your own.
Pages: 1 ... 11 12 13 14 15 [16] 17 18 19 20 21 22
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
