|
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 - Tabimura
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 ... 11
51
« on: December 19, 2012, 13:12 »
doesn't 123rf still pay a higher % than shutterstock? Am I missing something?
Yes you are missing something. Shutterstock pays me $0.38 per sub download and 123RF pays only $0.36.
52
« on: December 19, 2012, 07:06 »
Hi there,
@tabimura, if you feel that we've made some wrong calculations on your total, please write in to [email protected], we'll be happy to verify your figures with IT.
Thank you very much,
Alex.
Done.
53
« on: December 19, 2012, 06:30 »
Yea, and Chrome, I forgot to mention it.
My wife has S2 and ICS, she's very looking forward for the update to JellyBean. Hasn't come out yet.
54
« on: December 19, 2012, 06:19 »
Nope it's working fine. Galaxy S3 with Android 4.1.2 JellyBean.
55
« on: December 19, 2012, 06:15 »
Your calculations are again wrong. According to this page: http://davidgilder.com/misc/123RF_credit_calculator.html which I found to be correct and I verified it in the past, I am at 4979 credits right now. According to your math, I am at 4786. I did the math myself, manually - and you're wrong. From January 2012 until now. Things stay the same - you cut me short to 45%, I'll cut you short of 10.000 images. Your bosses might think they're in istock's shoes but that's far from the truth.
56
« on: December 18, 2012, 07:59 »
Sorry if this question should be in the newbie section, but why do people buy images from Alamy. I mean the prices are a lot higher than in microstock, right? What extra do they get out of buying from Alamy?
Rights managed .... exclusive rights to use the image for specific purposes....
No. I assume that OP was asking why someone would be bothered to buy RF from Alamy when the same images could be found on microstock, as there are lots of photographers with the same portfolio on SS and on Alamy for instance. The reality is that buying RF from Alamy will ensure you the most permissive usage for the image among all agencies. Basically everything is an EL, even more than that. Unlimited use and such. Another thing is that each agency has its own customers who are in many cases (not all but enough) not scouting the internet for lower prices on images. Also they have special discounts on some products - and all the other marketing stuff that they do to attract clients.
57
« on: December 18, 2012, 05:21 »
I'm almost at 4800. I made a test, not uploading for about 3 months this year to them and the sales were just the same. Therefore I'll probably leave my images on the site for a while, lets say a month or two. They won't get anything more from me. If I see net income drop I'll just pull my portfolio. I'm not kidding. Sorry 123RF, you're just not big enough to pull stunts like this. I will also recommend to everyone I know involved with stock photography and who's unaware of the ripoff to pull portfolios or at least stop uploading. And of course, to every client I know personally to avoid this agency.
58
« on: December 12, 2012, 13:53 »
And I would be interested, if you lived closer to Bucharest. I'm sure you'll get British 'togs willing to shoot you and your frame. 
59
« on: December 10, 2012, 16:08 »
Pfff, with a stock agency at the other end of the globe, with requirements for payouts like this I just request the payment 2-3 days before the month is over just to be on the safe side. Then I can just leave it at that and forget about it.
Exactly. I missed payment one time because of this. I requested in the last day of the month, but for their Aussie servers was already next month, hour 00:25. Missed by 25 minutes, figure that  Don't worry JoAnn, you'll get the cash. And it'll be worth it, I had a file in a bundle a month ago and it earned me over $1000.
60
« on: November 25, 2012, 15:11 »
I contemplated the idea of getting a D800 for stock. After contemplating phase I grabbed a D800E and made a few shootings with it and the following lenses: 14-24, 24-70, 70-200, sigma 50mm, nikon macro 105mm. The conclusion is like this:
- the highly acclaimed dynamic range is almost useless if you expose correctly. It's just not there...
Huh? Were you shooting jpegs or RAW? Low contrast or high contrast scenes? There is plenty of headroom both in the shadows and highlites if shooting RAW. Holding detail in those requires both proper exposure and a sensor's wide dynamic range. The greater the dynamic range of the sensor the less you will need to rely on HDR techniques to hold detail. I've shot mountain scenes at dawn with snow-covered peaks in sunlight and the FG in shadow and have been able to hold detail in both without resorting to exposure blending. Can't do that in every situation but it certainly is better with the D800 than anything I've used in the past.
If you're shooting low contrast scenes in flat light then you won't need or appreciate the D800's dynamic range. But when shooting RAW in high contrast situations where holding detail in the highlights and shadows is important I find the dynamic range of this camera to be very valuable...assuming proper exposure, of course.
So, I've got to respectably disagree with your statement that the dynamic range "just isn't there".
The dynamic range is there. Its usefulness is not there  I shot a lot of scenes, from high contrast landscapes, to studio glamour portraits and there is not a single shot that a 5D Mark II couldn't handle.
61
« on: November 25, 2012, 13:14 »
I contemplated the idea of getting a D800 for stock. After contemplating phase I grabbed a D800E and made a few shootings with it and the following lenses: 14-24, 24-70, 70-200, sigma 50mm, nikon macro 105mm. The conclusion is like this:
- the highly acclaimed dynamic range is almost useless if you expose correctly. It's just not there...
- noise is on par with 5D2
- sharpness seems a bit artificial for me, it's not "clean", like files were applied a sort of unsharp mask after writing to card
- the buffer holds a few burst shots, then it takes ages until you can shoot again in burst-mode
- files are ENORMOUS. You need to upgrade your hardware. This means - at least i7 class cpu for processing, if you do really advanced Lightroom or Capture One processing, and big hdds
- for outdoor shots the jpegs resulted saved at quality 12 will be huge in size, which means that 123RF (for example) will reject for being too big and upload will take more than for a 5D2
- zoom lenses don't do justice to this sensor, 24-70 is awful on edges and in corners, 14-24 less - but still not ok.
There are more things to say, but the bottom line is - do you really think you can justify the excess of MPs by selling many XXXXXXXXXL images? I think not.
Therefore I stayed with Canon and I'm quite confident that I won't buy the 40-something MP rumored, either.
21-22 MP are more than enough.
62
« on: November 21, 2012, 16:05 »
I sent an e-mail and got this reply:
"We are apparently having an issue sending payments at the moment, our apologies for the delay, we should have this corrected shortly."
thanks for checking into it
I got the same reply. I don't know how they measure "shortly", but surely the days are much longer here. I wonder how does Shutterstock manage to send 2 or more payouts every month never late than 10th?
63
« on: September 18, 2012, 17:46 »
Yea, the money finally arrived.
64
« on: September 18, 2012, 01:08 »
I haven't got this month's payment yet. Anyone in the same situation? It's 18th already. This little agency keeps getting better and better.
65
« on: August 29, 2012, 08:51 »
I stopped uploading to them many months ago, being really pissed on their shady way of deducting customer discounts from us. I am around 3k right now so I'll probably "just make it" into 50%. Anything less and I'll drop them, or I'll just collect the earnings and never send them anything anymore.
66
« on: August 23, 2012, 00:50 »
1. Zoonar - no sales for a long time, very ugly relation with the dishonest support team (I assume that's only Michael)
2. Stockfresh - very few sales, got tired of Peter's "nothing happens overnight" line for years. Should be changed to "nothing will ever happen here".
67
« on: August 17, 2012, 15:29 »
Anyone else noticing a slow down in review times?
Anyone else noticing them?
68
« on: August 13, 2012, 16:39 »
This dashboard issue is extremely annoying, combined with the poor sales in the last weeks.
69
« on: August 13, 2012, 16:28 »
I'm surprised they haven't made the 'Bridge to Bigstock' more widely available to more contributors by now. It must be costing them plenty to review so many images at both SS and BigStock, especially from established contributors with large portfolios who have recently given up exclusivity.
Yes and that's the reason I've stopped uploading to Bigstock. If SS was still doing the bridge program, it would make sense for me to pay attention to BS. I have 10k images on SS and only 6k on BS, not worth wasting time to upload the difference for less than 100$ income monthly.
70
« on: August 11, 2012, 12:40 »
I completely agree with you Christian. It's not enough for us to complain endlessly about the situation in the micro industry. We need to lend our support to trying to improve things. For anyone who's on Warmpicture, consider helping out where you can. I knocked out a blog article in about an hour. Doesn't seem like too much to do once a month or so.
For those who aren't on Warmpicture, yes, it is a fairly selective group, but if you have a strong portfolio and/or skills in SEO, advertising, willingness to contribute some time and effort, I am sure you have nothing to lose by applying.
I "applied" once, sending a PM to Dan, he never answered back. At the time, I believed that Warmpicture will have some results. But now I seriously doubt it.
71
« on: August 11, 2012, 05:40 »
Also many people suffer from the misunderstanding, that their postprocessing is better than the automated jpg production in the camera.
I think you're the one who misunderstood the whole thing.
72
« on: August 11, 2012, 05:23 »
I doubt the sites owners will care too much about this. Those interested in breaching copyright (aka theft) already know where these sites are.
73
« on: August 10, 2012, 11:20 »
Canon Medium format...Hmm. A very nice little rumor
Yea but they don't have glass for MF sensors. What are they going to do - make adapters for Mamyia and Hasselblad lenses?
If they were truly going to the trouble of developing a medium format, they would also go to the trouble of developing lenses for it.
But in that case there would be lots of rumors. They can't just pop up with a MF and 2-3 lenses just like that, can they. Of course I would be very interested in a MF and 2-3 primes for studio and landscape. I just don't see it happening.
74
« on: August 09, 2012, 14:44 »
Canon Medium format...Hmm. A very nice little rumor
Yea but they don't have glass for MF sensors. What are they going to do - make adapters for Mamyia and Hasselblad lenses?
75
« on: August 07, 2012, 15:23 »
Hassleblad isn't a cheap brand, I'm sure Canon can do it cheaper than them. There's a big gap between FF cameras and the cheapest medium format. If the rumour is true, wont Canon be looking to fill that void?
http://www.canonrumors.com/2012/08/canon-medium-format-cr1/
You can read here their take that this is a misunderstanding and it's really a rumor that a high megapixel FF is coming out not a MF.
I'm all ears about a new Canon high MP FF body.
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 ... 11
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
