|
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 - Mormegil
51
« on: May 16, 2008, 13:43 »
I recently picked up a Samsung 2253LW (I believe - I'm not at home right now). It's 22", and 1000:1 constrast. Looks great after calibration (some complain uncalibrated, it's a little too "vivid"). Res is decent at 1680x1050.
For $600, you can get a pair at CostCo and go dual monitor. I highly recommend a dual monitor setup.
Response time isn't an issue, unless you're a serious gamer.
52
« on: May 16, 2008, 13:35 »
If it does turn out to be a heat issue, and an open case helps, consider getting a new case or some serious case fans.
I've been pretty happy with a Cooler Master case I got (Centurion, I think). Dropped my case temps at least 10 degrees (I was was running really hot - which lead to a video card burn out).
53
« on: May 15, 2008, 14:35 »
You can learn alot about lighting from that Strobist blog, but you need to bear in mind that Speedlites don't put out a lot of power. That necessitates using a higher ISO, which wouldn't usually be a problem, except for in the microstock industry - where pixel peeping reviewers won't approve of the higher ISO noise.
You can use a lot of the techniques, and just scale it to strobes. Not as portable, but still very useful.
54
« on: May 12, 2008, 14:49 »
If you have a wireless router, make sure it's secure, using encryption (WEP). Otherwise, somebody can log onto your network and leach (or send thousands of spam mails).
Another possibility is you have a trojan on your computer, and is spamming or doing DOS attacks behind your back. You can check that with a Spyware searcher, like Spybot Search and Destroy.
55
« on: May 11, 2008, 10:20 »
I use a MS Access database, but Excel would be fine.
With Access, I have a column for file name, and a 3 of columns for each agency - index number, check box for accepted, and notes.
Once I upload to a site, I put in the index number. So blank index numbers mean I haven't uploaded to that site (lots in iStock, due to my current 25 upload/week limit).
If it's accepted, I put a check in the accepted collumn, If it's rejected, I put an "r - noise." If I feel like correcting it, I'll also blank out the index number, so, so it's once more obvious that it needs to be uploaded/resubmitted.
I don't bother with individual pic sales stats, as it's far too time consuming and not worth it to me. If I want to see how well a pic is selling, I just use the site tools.
56
« on: May 10, 2008, 02:24 »
The San Diego Zoo / San Diego Zoological society is a private corporation.
I'm pretty municipally owned zoos are OK.
57
« on: May 09, 2008, 15:20 »
Sometimes when I have a series of different shots, I'll throw in some in B&W when it warrants it. They get accepted and get sold.
One of my top sellers in a B&W image of a couple's first dance at a wedding reception.
58
« on: May 08, 2008, 22:35 »
I guess part of the fun is the challenge in shooting. But yeah, I can see how a lot of the shots would just be easier to do in Photoshop.
So I suppose photographers enjoy them, because they're fun.
59
« on: May 06, 2008, 15:11 »
SS is my number one seller by far. I put up a lot of editorials of parades, travel, events, sports, etc. They've even got me press passes for a few events.
So I'm pretty happy.
60
« on: April 28, 2008, 12:50 »
Another easy contact method is to call Congress, and ask to be connected to your Senator or Representatives office.
Number is 877-762-8762 (or 877-SOB-U-SOB to remember it easily - no joke).
61
« on: April 17, 2008, 14:40 »
Fotolia seems to only search for the first 7 keywords on your list. So make sure the most relevant words are at the top.
I neglected this, and just had everything in alphabetical order. Since I've started going back and correcting, my sales have picked up (which I realized this before uploading a thousand images).
62
« on: April 15, 2008, 04:09 »
One thing to consider is you'll get better AF performance with the f/2.8 lens. Of course if you're shooting in darker situations, the 3 or 4 stops of IS outdoes the extra stop of aperture (as long as your subject is still).
The AF with f/2.8 lenses is not only faster due to the larger aperture and narrower DoF, but the camera goes into "High-Precision" AF mode with the center AF point - getting focus within 1/3 DoF, compared to 1 DoF with an f/4 lens. So that's 3 times more accurate AF (though most consider 1 DoF accurate enough).
63
« on: April 15, 2008, 04:05 »
I bought the Sensor-Film, and am pretty happy with it. I guess it would have been cheaper to go with Disco-film, but couldn't find a supplier (didn't really try), and since hearing about it on the podcast, just went with that guy's product.
It's true it won't get rid of oily / greasy dust - and I've had a couple of stubborn spots like that over the year I've been using this (2 or 3 cleanings so far).
I usually go with Rocket Blower first, and if it's still dirty, Copperhill, and then finally Sensor-Film.
I'd like to point out I don't like the idea of "bananaing" up the pull tab, as if the battery runs out (hasn't happened to me yet), and the shutter closes, it could get caught in the shutter. I juse use a tweazer with non-metal tips (found it in the pharmacy). Besides, the sensor film is so thick, you can't really scratch through it unless you deliberately pushed down and accross on the sensor.
So all in all I'm happy, and I end up with pretty clean sensors. Handy for those days I plan on doing landscapes.
64
« on: April 07, 2008, 17:22 »
You don't have to limit yourself to "commercial" stuff.
I shoot everything under the sun that interests me. Sure it doesn't sell as well as the more business oriented stuff, but I enjoy it so I keep shooting. Inevitably, somebody needs it and buys it. So each of my images may not sell super well, but they do sell - so I guess I make up for it in numbers. Royalties have paid for my gear several times over, and justify my gearhead purchases - so I can't complain.
And most importantly, I enjoy what I shoot (lots of vacations, nature, editorial / events, abstracts, etc).
65
« on: April 07, 2008, 17:16 »
Back in the film days...
Got a great exposure of a whale breaching mid-air with my girlfriend in the foreground smiling. Exposed right onto air. Misthreaded the film - realized it when I was at shot 42 of a 36 exposure roll.
Decided that day I needed to go digital (luckally Canon obliged me a few months later with the "affordable" 300D debut - bought it the day it came out).
66
« on: April 07, 2008, 17:09 »
Guess I've been going about this all wrong. I put more clothes on them - costumes.
I've done 3 shoots with 2 models - with nobody getting nekkid at all (1 guy & 1 girl). What I did was set up a TFCD shoot for each, stating I would also try a few shots out on microstock sites, and if they sell, I'd hire them back.
I've hired back the other one for what I called TFCD+cash ($50 + CD). I made that back in stock sales after a month or so, and they keep selling.
I plan to hire back the other model when I get a little less busy.
67
« on: March 26, 2008, 02:37 »
Nice thing about exclusivity on DT is you can specify exclusivity after the images has been accepted.
DT and SS are the only microstocks that take editorial pics. So if DT takes an image that SS doesn't, I mark it after the fact as exclusive. Unfortunately, that doesn't happen too often.
68
« on: March 25, 2008, 13:41 »
I must chime in here. Being a reviewer for a long time and being able to see what everyone is using, I wouldn't buy or give a canon Rebel,XT Xti to anyone. If I reject stuff for noise it is ALWAYS from these 3 cameras.
I've got a theory on this. Since most people start with a Rebel series camera (I did), you're more likely to be reviewing an image from a less experienced photographer when the image comes from a Rebel. The less experienced phtographer is more likely to: A) Shoot in JPEG, and not Raw - Rebel's have a stronger Sharpening setting, which brings up noise more B) Not nail the exposure, so fixing it afterward (with an 8-bit compressed JPEG), will yield more noise than a 16-bit RAW file. C) Have slower glass, requiring higher ISO, which has more noise. I'm not saying all Rebel shooters do this, just likely a higher proportion than 40D, 5D, or 1D/s shooters.
69
« on: March 23, 2008, 12:59 »
1358 since Aug 05. That's with about 2500 images so far.
70
« on: March 12, 2008, 10:20 »
I recently took editorial images of the Chinese New Year parade in Los Angeles.
Should I check that a property release is required for photographs of an artistic creation, such as the dragon dance dragon?
Edit: Nevermind, I'm pretty sure I do need to check required.
71
« on: March 10, 2008, 13:04 »
I'm in Southern California. Anyone around here know a good agent?
72
« on: March 10, 2008, 11:53 »
Anybody have any recomendations on what's an insurance company with decent rates to cover their equipment? Maybe even some liability insurance?
Since we don't do this full time, the limited hunting I've found makes some insurance companies cost prohibitive.
And don't say Homeowner's insurance - as they don't cover business stuff - and I've got a website that mentions I sell my images (plus tax forms...etc).
73
« on: March 05, 2008, 02:10 »
Holy cr@p! Spoke too soon.
I just got a sales notification from Scoopt this morning. $900 sale! Well, I'll get 40% of that, but I'm not complaining.
74
« on: March 04, 2008, 13:41 »
I'm in the same boat that FT has suddenly gotten more picky.
What I like about IS, is they take more artistic pics - like Lensbaby shots. I find those more fun to shoot.
I just wanted to point out a couple of things in this thread.
IS submission is a lot easier if you use LightStock or ImageManager for submissions. I never use the web interface anymore.
There was also mention of the "Plastic Fantastic"beign a 50 1.4. It's a 1.8 lens, the 1.4 costs a bit more and isn't so plasticky.
75
« on: March 03, 2008, 16:25 »
For SS, since there's no difference in royalties based on size, I just find it easier to downres if something gets rejected for focus.
Part of the issue of SS to me seems the reviewers don't get selective focus. If the center area where they default zoom isn't sharp, they seem to reject the whole thing, even when a different area is meant to be the sharpest.
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
