|
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 - nicku
Pages: 1 ... 13 14 15 16 17 [18] 19 20 21 22 23 24
426
« on: May 08, 2012, 00:50 »
For audio Apple - for the rest ( including photo processing Windows 7 professional )
very important the hard were.
I have worked with both. for the price of a Apple you can get a much better PC.
PS. The Nvidia Quadro graphics are the s**t the s**t, the s**t. give an example: 3 Canon 7D video (around 350MB/min) running in the same time (on different programs) CPU at 40%.
427
« on: May 04, 2012, 03:03 »
I don't believe will have a HUGE impact on the top agencies... Yuri is still selling stock there ( and will do in the future). Regarding the commission cuts i expect possible cuts on IS, FT and 123RF not on SS.
If things are getting very threatening for SS probably they will take off the ace in sleeve.... The exclusivity program.
I think if his site becomes successful, it would be a logical next step to become an agency in its own right. It's human instinct to want to expand.
agree...
428
« on: May 04, 2012, 02:26 »
I don't believe will have a HUGE impact on the top agencies... Yuri is still selling stock there ( and will do in the future). Regarding the commission cuts i expect possible cuts on IS, FT and 123RF not on SS.
If things are getting very threatening for SS probably they will take off the ace in sleeve.... The exclusivity program.
429
« on: May 03, 2012, 00:43 »
Regarding the US IRS..... I live in an EU member country; what i don't understand is why i must pay 10% (of my income) to the IRS for the earnings that came from US buyers???
in the world are around 200 countries and USA is the only one with this rule.... hmmmm
430
« on: May 01, 2012, 14:36 »
Overal +20% more earnings (4th BME in a row)  The pie slices: SS - 70% by far, faaar my best earning agency.DT - 10% ( -15% les than last month) DT is slowly gowing down  FT - 12% Normal month 123RF - 8% (+30% compared with previous month) 
431
« on: April 21, 2012, 10:04 »
Genial...
432
« on: April 18, 2012, 06:34 »
same here... starting from last night ( Europe).
433
« on: April 17, 2012, 09:37 »
my best selling photos are mostly the same on all top 4 agencies.
434
« on: April 10, 2012, 23:58 »
If DT will increase the prices even more.... than this measure will be the tombstone for this agency. I hope they see the market direction and eliminate that lvl system, or reduce him to 2 max. 3 lvl. Fewer and fewer wants to pay 7, 9 or 11 credits for a EXTRA SMALL image. The majority will just migrate elsewhere (that why FT is above DT at this moment).
435
« on: April 05, 2012, 00:00 »
90% AF; in what i do manual focus just take to long...
436
« on: April 03, 2012, 05:41 »
They could only do that successfully if they owned all the microstock sites. That might seem like a good idea for us but with no competition, they could set commissions much lower than they are now.
or if they offer exclusivity..... with all contributors migrating to there site and not uploading to any-other websites
looool SS exclusivity will kill a big number of stock agencies. in the present SS is earning 65% of all my microstock income. A possible SS exclusivity program will be very appealing.
437
« on: April 03, 2012, 05:37 »
BME with SS ,+ 40% more income compared with my previous BME. BME with FT (by far my second earner) +25% more revenue than my previous BME. DT, steady decline in sales and revenue with every month  123RF normal. The total revenue pie : SS - 65% FT - 20% DT - 10% 123RF - 5%
438
« on: April 03, 2012, 05:31 »
I am used with 1 week review time (although it is frustrating) ..... its happening for over 2 months.
439
« on: April 03, 2012, 01:48 »
They probably wouldn't be in business much longer?
+1
440
« on: March 27, 2012, 01:37 »
No 1. equality DT, FT with the rest... no problems.
441
« on: March 24, 2012, 05:11 »
Update at the original topic question:
No!
442
« on: March 22, 2012, 14:04 »
nop.... not here.
443
« on: March 22, 2012, 07:50 »
We are in complete agreement, I was just checking that was what you meant.
You must photograph/scan the image from the original source (book) , and you must have the means to proof that if will be necessary ( specially on SS and IS). Many accounts were closed because of that.
444
« on: March 22, 2012, 07:35 »
Eiffel tower is a good example, if I photograph it in the day I don't have copyright of the Eiffel tower's design, but I do have copyright of the photo I just took.
From what you are saying it sounds like I can just download all the images you have scanned from old books and sell the same scans on stock sites under my name. Are you saying that that would be okay?
I think you did not understand what i trying to say..... No you can not download my images and resell it. BUT YOU CAN scan the same image from another book and sell it; and YOU CAN NOT sell the rights of the scan ( say.... using SR-EL license from DT or other means). Regarding the Eiffel Tower example..... in this example is involved much more elements/details than a flat scan of a drawing or artwork .
445
« on: March 22, 2012, 06:25 »
And no you don't have to make the image or scan yourself. Easy example. NASA photos are available on the web, for download, free and you can use them. There's already enough misinformation without people making up their own facts.
That's because the actual photos/ images in that case are in the public domain. We were talking in the context of works that have fallen into the public domain because of their age. In those cases someone needs to digitize the image by photographing/ scanning it, and also often put in all the hard work of cleaning it up/ retouching it. They then own the copyright for those particular scans or photos. Of course they can wave their rights and let you use them for resale.
If this is incorrect please let me know. I don't think anyone reading the thread would have read our comments any other way than above.
If you copy/scan a image and clean/adjust it you don't have any copyright of the image. The only way that you can hold some copyright is wen.... example: you scan a B/W image and modify it like colorizing the subjects. you have turned a B/W PD image in a Color image. You can hold the copyright ONLY ON THE COLORS/COLOR VERSION OF THE IMAGE, not the whole subject. A more practical example is the Eiffel Tower.... The tower in day time is Public Domain , BUT in the night when is illuminated the tower is copyrighted.
446
« on: March 22, 2012, 01:57 »
Hi Phillip,
We've done some preliminary checking, a customer downloaded the same image 3 times, we've emailed and asked if this is what they wanted, so we're still awaiting their answer.
Do standby for any corrections in the reporting. It's very highly likely that the other 2 will be reversed but you'll keep 1 
Thank you.
Alex, the money sum is the right one $360 for 3 PEL???
447
« on: March 22, 2012, 00:49 »
For me 1 week seems to be the new SS norm.
for me 1 week approval time norm on SS is for about 5-6 weeks.
448
« on: March 21, 2012, 07:33 »
The PEL license is 50 credits...... so is a system error (the money sum), contact support. Maybe the PEL (50 credits) sales are real....
449
« on: March 21, 2012, 06:01 »
Your problem is where you get the PD images from. If you take them off the internet that will fall foul of IS - you need to actually take a picture of the artwork in situ or scan in from a hard copy book and provide that as a "releasee". You have to show you have "created" it. I know - it sounds odd, but without citing a source you are opening your portfolio to deletion depending which agency it is. Public domain is just that - make as much of profit as you want with impunity, but if it's queried where you derived the image from (which it will be in time), you need to say, I scanned it in from such and such, or photographed it from such a place. Don't try a Google images search and expect to get away with it. These images sell very, very well, so proceed with caution.
Didn't think to mention this.
Yes, if you decide to go down this road you need the original PD source and to take the scan or photo yourself. Obviously nothing off the internet.
Even if the original source is PD the photo or scan of it probably won't be, it will belong to the person who took the photo or scan.
There are lots of people on ebay selling antique books and the like that could be possible sources.
Yes, you need to take the photo or scan yourself, BUT that don't mean that you hold the copyright of the photo/scan representing the artwork. The design is still in PD regardless who take the photo/scan. Buyers pay for a high quality copy of the PD artwork not for a design, concept that you created. At this kind of work is permitted to sell copies but is not possible to sell the rights ( in DT SR-EL license, case) because you practically sell the rights for something that you just copied not designed.
450
« on: March 21, 2012, 01:13 »
My best selling pictures across all agencies are Public Domain photos. if the design, artwork drawing, sketch etc. is in public domain that means that the image is waved of any copyright; you can use that design, image, drawing , for anything including commercial use. SS, DP and partialy FT have understand this and allow PD pictures to be sold as RF. DT,123RF, are not, and request to be submitted as editorial. Course in SS case you will need to provide all the info, time of the creation, author, year of publication etc. In the end if a PD image is not copyrighted and can't be according to all international laws .... who will sue you for selling that image ( specifying that is not yours and is a PD picture) 
Pages: 1 ... 13 14 15 16 17 [18] 19 20 21 22 23 24
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
