MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Show Posts

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 ... 12 13 14 15 16 [17] 18 19 20 21 22
401
123RF / Re: Do you make $100/month at 123RF?
« on: November 23, 2008, 09:51 »
About 500 images online. Estimated earnings this month will be about $60. It's increasing slowly every month.

402
Cameras / Lenses / Re: How often do you do PIXEL MAPPING?
« on: November 22, 2008, 17:22 »
Recommendation on an olympus SP 350 pocket cam my dad has is once per year per the manual.

403
General Stock Discussion / Re: PDN Article
« on: November 21, 2008, 21:33 »
Quote
Some of these guys are simply choosing not to be a part of it, and they're still making excellent money. What does it matter if they don't give a crap about your forums?

And likely they're just too busy to be bothered. All the warm and fuzzy faving and networks meant to smooth photog egos I think and there is very little, if any, value to buyers. Instead of fluff architecture, any site is better served by building better features for buyers in order to find what they need in an efficient manner.

PS Yes I believe Yuri is Danish.


404
Off Topic / Re: Sticks and Stones...
« on: November 21, 2008, 16:51 »
As the forum is the private property of the owner, he has every right to remove inappropriate content, and the degree of inappropriate or distasteful is at his own discretion.

You are however welcome to go out into any public street wearing a sandwich board proclaiming your views for all to see.

405
Off Topic / Re: Generating a bar code
« on: November 21, 2008, 16:47 »
Believe it or not the Inkscape free vector program will do it.

The program is a free download, no strings. Go to Effects>Render>BarCode

Make sure you know the standard needed, such as UPC 5, etc.

You can then output the barcode as a vector or export a bitmap.

This is one of the few reasons I keep Inkscape around. It does have a few useful functions, but for commercial vector drawing it pretty much sucks.

http://www.inkscape.org/

406
Site Related / Re: Microstockgroup light
« on: November 21, 2008, 16:07 »
Now... how about creating a private little world for Shank?  ;)

 ;D ;D

 :D :D :D

407
Shutterstock.com / Re: 2nd attempt and rejected again
« on: November 21, 2008, 16:06 »
I just got accepted today.  It was my 3rd attempt.  I listened to advice from people on this forum and applied it to my submission.  They approved 9 out of 10.

Good for you. Now don't forget to feed the beast  :)

408
General Stock Discussion / High Speed Images
« on: November 19, 2008, 18:38 »
Awesome collection of high speed photography. You just have to see some of these.

http://www.smashingmagazine.com/2008/11/02/when-time-freezes-50-beautiful-examples-of-freeze-photography/


I dabble in high speed from time to time, have had a few accepted to stock. But I only do it when I have the time to do the cleanup afterwards  :)

409
Very good industrial does well.

I have been left notes by a few people at DT telling me about how the image will be used. Unfortunately it's something that can;t be realistically encouraged, but the notes are nice when you do get them.

Sold one just the other day where the buyer is already putting together a Valentine's Day ad.

410
Dreamstime.com / Re: Copyright
« on: November 19, 2008, 17:45 »
Well just got home from a bunch of errands, so whooped a little right now.

But here's my quick take on reading the links you provided. Since they even applied for a trademark registration, even if abandoned, it tells me that there was a desire for protection of the use of this mark. And it looks like now things in a bit of legal limbo.

But really, if they reject yours, the rest should come down too. Let us know how you make out.

411
Dreamstime.com / Re: Copyright
« on: November 19, 2008, 11:16 »
It had to be the RSS icon. Rss is something I have not done any research on with regards to rights. Otherwise, everything else very generic. I would really contact support. They should either restrict all with RSS, and set a policy, or accept the image if it has commercial value and meets tech requirements.

Here is a Wiki link for that recycle image I referred to. But whoever posted this wiki is wrong. The image is indeed a trademark in Germany, not public domain. A release is needed for any publication. SS will bounce this if the reviewers are on the ball, and I believe the DT people are familiar with it as well.

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Gr%C3%BCner_Punkt.svg

You will however find this image on stocks, the remnants from before the crackdowns.

412
Dreamstime.com / Re: Copyright
« on: November 19, 2008, 11:00 »
Can you post a watermarked version? Reason I as is that there are a few out there that people think of as common shapes, but there are a few companies that have cracked down on stuff. One is from a German company and looks very similar to the common recycle symbol. Can't recall the specifics right now. And others here may have comments too.


413
General Stock Discussion / Re: Adequate keywords?
« on: November 19, 2008, 08:46 »
I guess the images would be no good for 2010 then  :)

414
General - Top Sites / Re: "Personalities" of the Big 5 (or 6)
« on: November 19, 2008, 08:18 »
All of them even including the Trad Alamy should be tougher in acceptance. Technical perfection is just a starting block, goes without saying. Should be no rooms for dilletants here, only at the moment there are, hence the overflow of irrelevant material and spammers.


You're right. Some of the content on Alamy is absolutel horrific. But as they passed technical muster, they are there for sale.

A few comments about some others:

At 123, well over 500 images there and still waiting for my first rejection. I don't upload crap, but still the results pretty stunning.

AT DT, it seems my "cute and pretty stuff" sells more there, so I am thinking more females in the buyer population. I sell a lot of wedding theme stuff there for some reason.

StockXpert - sales of all varieties, but I think the buyer base has shrunk dramatically because my sales have yet to recover since the Photos.com debacle.  I had a BME in July and it has not been the same since.

SS - Does well on almost everything I send up. It's hard for me to make any analysis here.

FO - last on my upload list, but fancy food does well here.

415
General Stock Discussion / Re: Adequate keywords?
« on: November 19, 2008, 01:08 »
Plus the Roman candles sold here in the US are kind of wussy. Usually the kind of stuff that is shot off in the backyard. These bursts more powerful and are likely from standard round commercial shells.

And Celebration/Holiday appropriate but 2009 is not.

You would not be out of line in reporting the images if it is your wish to do so.

416
Mostphotos.com / Re: Mostphotos 3.0
« on: November 18, 2008, 11:57 »
magnum,
for me, the start would be to eliminate the members rating and opinions.
that's so amateurish, and reminds me of that other place ... (no name mentioned).
i deleted all my photos just due to that. i will join them again, as soon as i see
that.

Hali you nailed it. When micro was new, there was a place for this. It got people excited about submitting and encouraged a new segment of shooters. But now that microstock has validated itself in business, there's just no place for it.

From a buyer's point of view, like when I used to buy on iStock several years ago, I found the ratings and comments, fluffy networks etc very annoying. As a buyer, not something I needed. As a buyer, I needed good photos that fit my criteria both aesthetically and technically that were relatively easy to find based on keywords I provided. Nothing more, nothing less.

If MP truly wants a new generation site, integrate features that will help buyers, not fluff the egos of the photogs. The only thing that matters is sales.

The logo is pretty much crap by the way.

417
General Stock Discussion / Re: Which Site Will be Next to TanK?
« on: November 18, 2008, 11:17 »
With recent economic stress and recent closure of PhotoShelter and demise of Dig Railroad...

Kind of funny how there's an ad for DRR in the November issue of Communication Arts, basically mocking microstock. The sub-headline reads, "Not microstock - standout stock. Find it at DRR.NET"

Wait, who just shut down? And who is still up and running?

 ;D


The irony of that is both sad and funny at the same time. But also kind of pathetic. I don;t know how the deadline dates for pulls in in CA magazine, but when I used to work in industrial advertising, I could pull an ad sometimes as little as 30 days before shelf date, sometimes even less time with a smaller circulation. As an advertiser though, your still liable to honor the insertion contract whether the ad runs or not, so maybe they just said . with it. Even so, the professionals involved with it should be embarrassed. Looks like the rug was pulled out from under very quickly.

418
General Stock Discussion / Re: Alamy and RF images??
« on: November 17, 2008, 18:12 »
I can remember looking through those catalogs in complete awe of the imagery. Always a motivator. Times are a bit different now aren't they.

Best,
J



The times are a bit different  now indeed.

Was cleaning out some old books and ran across an old ASMP annual from about 1985. Still stunning stuff. Couldn't bear to toss it. And all of the stuff achieved from film without Photoshop tricks.

419
Off Topic / So You Want To Shoot The Big Time
« on: November 17, 2008, 14:56 »
Have a look at what it's really like through the eyes of the great David Burnett. If you think you "just show up and shoot", well that isn't true at all.

See "The Olympics You Didn't See" at

<iframe src="https://player.vimeo.com/video/2184882" width="500" height="300" frameborder="0"></iframe>


He even took his Holga  :) Very enjoyable video.


420
General Stock Discussion / Re: Alamy and RF images??
« on: November 17, 2008, 13:24 »
Hi Storm Chaser,

 I can only speak for Getty, Corbis and Jupiter when I speak of the big Macro companies. Now just Getty and Corbis. They do not want this to take place. If it is their own collection their contract will not let you put up a Macro RF image on their site and then let you put it anywhere else, Micro, Macro or the Moon.
 This has been standard practice until the birth of third party agencies that distribute to several hundred agencies including all three / two big agencies. Even the respectable third party agencies will not allow you to place the same image with them and anyone else. Every Macro RF image I have produced was sent to one original company for distribution and they are the ones that take it from there to further distribute. They are the ones that I sign an exclusive contract for that body of work with for 5-7 years as a standard. However I cannot send that same photo elsewhere myself with the exception of an image trade for the location and sometimes the talent. This is how the industry has been run from as far back as I have been part of it.

Good Typing with you,
AVAVA

Left Getty and Corbis out of my comments as Alamy and Photoshelter (deceased) are more in the common denominator on this forum for those wishing to enter traditional, or higher paying macrostock.

I go back to Tony Stone and trannies, so know exactly what you're saying here.

My own opinion is that if you try to play both ends, meaning identicals both on micro and Alamy, you are slitting your own throat professionally. Eventually there will be problems like refunds to the buyer.

I really think Alamy should take a good look and rewrite their submission terms. Times have changed, and the boundaries have blurred. But in the race of "the one who dies with the most images wins", maybe they are attending to other things. If Alamy management has no awareness of the problem, then they are turning a blind eye. There certainly has been enough micro bashing over time on their forum. Usually the query of "can I submit my Shutterstock images here" will be blasted immediately by the regulars. But then the new submitter will then go somewhere else, read another "opinion" that say's it's ok, and just do it anyway.

I like micro. It's some fun for me. But they are treated as their own entity in my work.

421
General Stock Discussion / Re: Ready Images?
« on: November 17, 2008, 04:02 »
Ready Images will be partnered with Alamy and drawing on the existing pool for image procurement. So it's not another agency to submit to if anyone is looking to jump on board a new one. It is to be part of Alamy's "Novel Use Scheme".

See the story on PDN

http://www.pdnpulse.com/2008/11/copyright-clearance-center-launches-stock-service-with-alamy.html
 

422
General Stock Discussion / Re: Alamy and RF images??
« on: November 16, 2008, 19:23 »
At the end it's the buyers choice to get their images at the price they want. But then Alamy want to know where else I sell my images. Maybe they won't accept me because I am from microstock.

Anyways I don't know exactly how to make an isolated 3.5mb image going up to 46mb. I upsized the image but then it needed additional unsharp mask. Alamy merging with a micro agency would be easier for me

My brother was in Shutterstock and DT before Alamy, and he did note it. No problems with his acceptance.

From AVAVA

"I have found that most larger Macro agencies do not want you putting your Macro RF on the Micro RF sites and visa versa but I think this area is going to become grayer and grayer as time moves on."

PhotoShelter was really the only one to come straight out and forbid it, and that was only after the crossover was brought to their attention by some of the haughty "pros" on there who got crazed and stomped their feet a lot on the forums there.

423
General Stock Discussion / Re: Alamy and RF images??
« on: November 15, 2008, 23:40 »
The last time I really looked, I found no specifically written rules against it. However, with those long time shooters that are very involved with Alamy, I can tell you it is highly "frowned upon".

I keep macro separate from micro, as I feel it is ethically unsound to have such a spread in price points for the same image. And most of my Alamy stuff goes in Rights Managed anyway except for some digital art. I think though that I am even going to swing the new art stuff over to RM though, as those that are RM get better stats than the ones I submitted long ago as RF.

424
Shutterstock.com / Re: advice for submitting to SS first time
« on: November 15, 2008, 12:15 »
thx foto and storm.
wow storm, 3K since march. this sounds incredible, but like you say, small commission is ok as long as the site can bring you the volume.
i will check out the sites you gave me and get serious. cheers once again.

I have had particularly good luck with about a dozen niche images that sell over and over and also do some illustrations.

There is the usual whining about no sales on the SS forum, but taking a look at the complaining portfolios, it's easy to see why. Same old crap over and over. You get back what you put in. I worked very hard the first few months, now I can relax things just a little.

Be sure to continue to upload. Right now I try to get at least 25 new up per week there, an achievable goal for almost anyone.

425
Shutterstock.com / Re: advice for submitting to SS first time
« on: November 15, 2008, 10:23 »
Submit your very best work, both aesthetically and technically, and ensure you have a variety of subject matter. This is the basic of what has been advised over and over again.

Step back and look at you images as an editor would. Forget about "your favorites". Ask yourself if the image is commercially viable. How could the image be used to sell a product or convey a feeling? Yes you can throw in a flower, butterfly or nature shot, but it had better be very good aesthetically and technically superior.

When selecting subjects, run the spectrum. Indoor, outdoor, isolated objects, sports, food, business. 

As far as small images, my opinion is "why screw the buyer?" I always submit the biggest I have. On initial submission, reducing may alleviate some noise problems. The reviewers are harder on initial review, but things ease up a very tiny bit once you start regular submissions.

Critique forum there - you may get some good feedback with regards to composition, commercial value etc, but unless full res cuts are posted, impossible to fully critique the technical aspects. Browse through there at least and read the posts - see how you can apply that learning to your own work.

As far as return, no not a waste of time. SS outperforms Dreamstime for me by about 40%, and in the scheme of things, DT does quite well for me. iStock not a fair comparison yet because the portfolio there is small.  SS is a volume machine, and that is what gives you a good return. So when starting, even though your image goes for $ .25/DL, multiple DLs give you the numbers. On SS since March, I should reach $3000 level there soon.

Pages: 1 ... 12 13 14 15 16 [17] 18 19 20 21 22

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors