|
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 - sharply_done
Pages: 1 ... 14 15 16 17 18 [19] 20 21 22 23 24 ... 73
451
« on: February 05, 2009, 18:41 »
Veer HQ is in Calgary, Canada, only a short 6km walk from iStock HQ. Check it out:
452
« on: February 05, 2009, 18:25 »
453
« on: February 05, 2009, 12:43 »
Interesting feedback, if a little grumpy folks!
However you haven't addressed one the substantive issues in the original post:
How would you feel about no DL information in the public domain about images?
(Woo) Yay or Nay?
Cheers
NS
Definitely a (Woo) Yay for me. As far as the stats page not being updated goes, it's not a big deal for me. I use a different method for tracking my IS sales, and only visit the stats page to verify my data.
454
« on: February 05, 2009, 12:29 »
Congratulations Sharply and well done on finding a railway track on a planet with two suns 
I love that my world is filled with such things. Better that way than the alternative universe, where beyond the immediate is a white nothing background void. Good job, and lucky you found it. I've never stayed past the Obama photo.
It was a fluke find - I had BigStock opened in one of my tabs, and when I clicked over to close it my image just happened to be there. Then I clicked around a bit and saw cdwheatley.
455
« on: February 05, 2009, 02:13 »
Looks like things are going my way - I'm on the front page at BigStock, too! (wait for it or click on image 4) Another prominent member here, cdwheatley, is unmistakable as image 9 ... congrats, cd!
456
« on: February 04, 2009, 21:28 »
It's a real-life 'Where's Waldo?' puzzle - I found Denzel Washington!
457
« on: February 04, 2009, 13:32 »
Hey, that's our own Sharply Done. I wish for you it was Istock IOTW Sharply so you could see some nice sales, but nice for your to get the attention from Snap. Your scrapbook must be getting quite full with all the recognition you have been acheiveing. Nice work as always.
Yep, that's me - thanks for noticing, pixart! Funny you should mention IS - they're the only place I submit to that hasn't singled out my stuff ... guess I'll have to go exclusive for even a chance at that ever happening!
458
« on: February 03, 2009, 22:52 »
Yeah, I find the whole notion of accurately and thoroughly titling, describing, and keywording my images for as wide an audience as possible quite boring, tedious, and unnecessary, too.
Lately I've taken to using "Picture of Thing" as a title and "Thing I took a picture of to make some money with." as a description for all my images. I use an absolute barebones minimum for keywords, too. I hate sites that insist on using more than two of them (I'd only use "picture" and "thing" if I could get away with it). My sales have really skyrocketed since I started doing this ... give it a try!
459
« on: February 02, 2009, 15:36 »
...
I don't shoot in RAW either. I used to, but found the extra steps too cumbersome. I find it faster and simpler to shoot JPGs - the smaller file sizes don't slow my computer down so much, and I haven't experienced any technical quality rejections since making the change. I suspect that JPGs created by my camera (Canon 1DsII) might be better than the ones produced by a lesser model, but this is only a guess.
460
« on: February 02, 2009, 13:33 »
I can see the noise mostly in a plain blue sky. And since I'm a landscape photographer more than a stock photographer, it's a problem. I also get it with my infrared shots because of the longer exposures (sometimes 20 seconds). I would also like to do star trails, which are much longer exposures (30+ minutes) and the 400D would produce so much noise that the picture wouldn't look nice.
You'll have to use a noise reduction program to clean up the sky - I use Noise Ninja. But your problems won't end there: skies are notorious for producing banding, and getting a striking sky without banding requires plenty of practice.
461
« on: February 02, 2009, 01:18 »
I gave up on their FTP ages ago. Try their Flash uploader - it's never down!
462
« on: February 02, 2009, 01:14 »
Yep.
463
« on: February 01, 2009, 18:44 »
I agree with cdwheatley & gostwyck: getting a used 5D will easily give you the biggest bang for the buck. On the downside, you'll only be able to make XL images on IS with it. As far as a vendor goes, I highly recommend B&H - go here to check out their used camera inventory. On a semi-related note, here's on old post showing my income from XL and XXL images on IS. Is it worth upgrading solely to make larger images? I made 26% more by using an XXL camera, and I would have made 13% more by using an XL one - if your sales volume is large enough you can reach payback within one year.
464
« on: February 01, 2009, 13:45 »
...
After last month's comparison with Pixart, I wonder if there is any value in this ranking?
Regards,
Adelaide
I think there is, but only when compared with data in the iStock Contributor's Chart.
465
« on: February 01, 2009, 12:38 »
Isn't it possible that you're misreading the termination clause? I think that what they're addressing is that they have the right to take 30 days to stop selling all the content if you leave the site altogether. IOW, that this clause isn't talking about a switch from exclusive to non?
If it's an issue for anyone, I'd suggest contacting contributor relations to see if this delete your exclusive uploads interpretation is really correct.
Yes, I'll grant that it's possible I misread/misunderstood it, but I think either is extremely unlikely. And here's why: If it was possible to turn exclusivity on and off in 90 day intervals without incurring a penalty, I'd jump aboard that ship in a second. When I wasn't exclusive I'd upload only to SS, FT, StockXpert, and 123. After 90 days I'd remove my images from those agencies, switch back to exclusive at IS, then upload my new images to them. After 90 days I'd cancel my IS exclusivity and repeat the process. This would give me the best of both worlds, allowing me to have similar/identical portfolios on all agencies, effectively nullifying the exclusive image advantage that IS enjoys. But then again, maybe it is possible to do this, but nobody's tried it yet. If this is the case, you can bet that IS will shut that door pretty quickly now that it's been mentioned on a public forum.
466
« on: February 01, 2009, 12:18 »
That makes the XSi an oddball in the Canon lineup.
467
« on: January 31, 2009, 23:20 »
what about Panasonic Pro High Speed SDHC (class 6 ) 16 gb. ?
...
Maybe that will work on Canon too.
Nope. Canon dSLRs use CF (=Compact Flash) cards. Yours is an SD (=Secure Digital) card. Totally different thing. Edit: wait a minute, a Canon 1 series can use both a CF and an SD. I doubt the 5 series can.
468
« on: January 31, 2009, 14:25 »
Germaine Greer ... heh, good one!
469
« on: January 31, 2009, 12:36 »
You should be aware that if you decide to drop your exclusivity with IS, all the images you uploaded as an exclusive will be removed. This is done so that people do not take advantage of the increased upload limits and then switch back to non-exclusive once their portfolio is 'large enough'. (Here's the contract - see Section 12.a.(i)) Those deciding to go exclusive would do well to take this into account before 'making the jump'. A good strategy might be to hold back on uploading your best imagery until the two or three weeks immediately preceding your exclusivity application.
470
« on: January 31, 2009, 12:17 »
...
I am pretty upset about all of this, though I realize for many it is working out. I am not fooling myself that they care whether I remain exclusive or not. but if this continues for more than a month, I will be checking out some of the other sites. I don't want to depend on IS completely.
From my perspective, I think your IS income will remain relatively unchanged for at least several months. As I understand it the only thing to be further implemented in the best match is some sort of mysterious ranked keywording tweak, whose purpose is to place a lower rank on and/or weed out images that the buyer probably isn't looking for. Your ranking in the search query, and thus your income, will most likely remain unchanged. Your income is only going to change when they introduce the next best match change, which happens something on the order of three times per year. The Sept 07 best match change caused my sales to level off. My sales have dropped in the last two consecutive best match changes: one in May 08, and one in Sept 08. Although this latest best match change has seen my sales improve to 70+% of their 'previous normal', I had to suffer through eight months of lowered IS income to get it <see chart>. You'd be wise to plan for something similar.
471
« on: January 31, 2009, 10:30 »
The only notable thing about 123 for me this month was that I got 123 DLs.
I had BMEs on FT and StockXpert, though.
472
« on: January 30, 2009, 17:52 »
Here's the pixmac blog that describes the offer. You might want to change your blog to link to this page instead of the pixmac home page, xposurepro.
473
« on: January 30, 2009, 17:48 »
Here's the caveat : Their contract states you have to keep your files online there for two years. You might consider revising your blog to reflect this, xposurepro. Albumo has already done something similar to this, but with a 400 day 'stay of execution'. From what I know of things, it left a sour taste in the mouths of most people who chose to participate.
474
« on: January 30, 2009, 14:19 »
Just got another DL on this image - if that was you, alias, thank you very much!
475
« on: January 30, 2009, 12:00 »
Why not buy my 'racing cyclists' shot?
Is it for charity?
No, but it's only four DLs away from jumping to the next level, which would give me an income boost. Unlike most here, I do this full time, and every little bit helps ... "If you look after the pennies, and the pounds will look after themselves."
Pages: 1 ... 14 15 16 17 18 [19] 20 21 22 23 24 ... 73
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
