|
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 - araminta
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 ... 14
51
« on: April 21, 2009, 08:34 »
I have sales every day or two... but to me StockXpert doesn't look dead.
Well, considering that StockXpert has been #1 for me some times in 2007 and that with twice the portfolio size I should earn this month less than 1/5th of my BME... it may not be dead, but I would not tell it's alive either 
53
« on: April 15, 2009, 07:04 »
keep making more images for microstock, but only if there is going to be sales My advice is to build your portfolio not for instant sales, but for long term sales. Forget about seasonal slowdown: the more high quality pictures you have in your portfolio the more sales you will get. For me, the only season one should not miss is Christmas where sales can increase a lot between october and december if you have the right portfolio. This is the only seasonal trend I take into account.
54
« on: April 15, 2009, 06:56 »
the most important is shooting on a tripod With a cheap lens, you will get a soft photo whatever the tripod you use. During hazy days, you will get a soft photo whatever the material you use. A tripod will not help freezing a moving subject. You will get a fuzzy picture if you use a low quality JPEG. And as you say, a cheap tripod will not help that much. There is no "one rule fits every situation" IMHO and I don't see the point on focusing on the tripod when you have many other parameters in the equation: a good photographer should know the effect of all parameters and know how to set them up depending on the situation. This kind of book is somehow misleading as it tries to make simple something which is complex by nature. And the best photos are most of the time not the sharpest I would say: one should not forget that photography is also an art.
55
« on: April 15, 2009, 06:19 »
I bet no one could make a difference between a photo made with and without a tripod with this setup. I hate dogmas 
56
« on: April 14, 2009, 14:27 »
The batch I've uploaded yesterday has been reviewed within 12 hours. Sales are AWFUL however here 
57
« on: April 05, 2009, 07:19 »
I was confusing the real thing with the photoshop adjust images I've seen that simulate tilt-shift selective depth of field.
You can indeed mimic some TS effect in Photoshop, but it is quite limited. And the miniature look is not the main purpose of TS lenses: they are really useful to control the DOF in product or macro shots.
58
« on: April 04, 2009, 05:32 »
There is a mix of positive and negative and the values are most of the time low (+/- 5%). I would say this is just normal variations which show that sales are more or less stable since the begining of the year.
59
« on: April 04, 2009, 05:21 »
You are saying the bold color, contrast and the vibrant highlights, making the people and everything look like miniatures, are all because of the lens? That seems a little odd? What if someone wants to take normal looking photos with the tilt shift lens?  The photos look processed.
The miniature look (due to shallow DOF) and the highlights (which are bokeh) are indeed the direct result of the tilt-shift lens and you can take a normal photo with such lens because you can adjust the tilt and shift amount: at 0, you have a normal lens. I don't know however if there is some post-processing concerning the colors and contrasts, but I guess this is only camera settings.
60
« on: April 03, 2009, 13:22 »
I challenge everyone who contributed to this thread to describe how they've been able put this information to effective/valuable use.
As soon as IS accounts for >60% for three or more consecutive months, I may consider becoming exclusive 
61
« on: April 03, 2009, 13:13 »
What Effect, Action or Plugin gives that look of models? I can't imagine him processing all those frames one by one, so it must be a multiple frame batch.
No postprocessing is required... only a tilt-shift lens. I'm still waiting my Canon TS-E 90mm lens. I just haven't found a way to rationalize it yet when other purchases seem to be getting priority.
It's easy to rationalize it if you shoot products or food for microstock: controlling the DOF so precisely will give you some unique photo almost nobody else can produce
62
« on: April 02, 2009, 03:18 »
March was a good month for me. Only place I saw a sales decline was 123RF. Everywhere else was up slightly on Feb. Royalties broke down as follows:
ISP 43%
SS 15%
FOT 15%
DT 12%
StockXpert 7%
BigStock 5%
123 2%
Crestock & Canstock 1% each
Interesting... almost exactly the same for me: ISP 43% SS 18% FOT 15% DT 12% StockXpert 8% BigStock 2% 123 2% StockXpert is very disappointing while ISP is very strong: I suspect that Getty is now pushing IS one way or another and let StockXpert die slowly.
64
« on: March 08, 2009, 06:21 »
With the 100mm macro, you don't need a ring flash: a speedlite with a diffuser works quite well for me.
I've also purchased the Canon MP-E 65mm and the focus distance is so small here that a speedite wouldn't work. I've purchased a macro flash, but not a ring flash: I've chosen rather the twin lite MR-24EX which give you more control on the light intensity and direction. But it's even more expensive.
65
« on: March 04, 2009, 02:43 »
2. For _any_ type of phishing attack - how can taking site down help?
That's what I was thinking too.
I'd guess it helps prevent hackers from using the stolen credentials and take the money.
66
« on: February 28, 2009, 05:07 »
To reply to the initial question, you don't have to implement anything: this is just a web server configuration. From a technical point of view, it is just plain easy.
67
« on: February 13, 2009, 16:36 »
And there's too much unfounded hype around Macs in recent years, which is really Steve Jobs' marketing genius.
Don't agree. The current hype is not due to Apple marketing genius, but to Microsoft failure with Vista: PC users finally start considering Mac with an open mind and understand now that it is indeed a very nice alternative to Windows. Everybody should be able to choose based on facts: until recently, PC users were not interested in knowing facts about Mac: they were just sure Windows was the only choice thanks to Bill Gates marketing genius... until Vista and Steve Ballmer came 
68
« on: February 13, 2009, 16:27 »
Hahaha, oh yeah, "the spinning pizza of death" (Mac OS X equivalent of frozen wristwatch). I have nightmares about that as well.
The "spinning pizza" (a.k.a. "rainbow wheel") is not similar to the "frozen wristwatch": it indicates that an application is not responsive currently, but it never hang the system or other applications. You can still work in other applications, no problem. It is thus a problem with an application and not the OS.
69
« on: February 13, 2009, 08:59 »
while I still have nightmares about the 'frozen wristwatch' from my Mac days.
Ever heard of MacOS X? Comparing XP/Vista with a pre-OS X Mac is somewhat unfair, isn't it?
70
« on: February 13, 2009, 04:29 »
1). The file browsing mechanism on the PC is much better than the Mac
You should spend some time learning file browsing on Mac: coming from Windows, I would say that you may miss many extremely useful tips & tricks concerning file browsing on Mac. * Spring loaded folders. * Keyboard navigation * Expos * Drag & Drop with Open/Save dialog * Spotlight search in Finder or in Open/Save dialogs * QuickLook * etc. I would not argue whether file browsing is better on PC or Mac, but there are some extremely useful features on Mac which have no equivalent on PC.
71
« on: February 05, 2009, 06:02 »
My own personal info when logged on iStock are not updated either: this is thus just a problem with IS servers.
72
« on: February 02, 2009, 16:16 »
Vladimir the Emperor...
Vlad Tepes the Impaler I would say... Dracula if you prefer 
73
« on: February 02, 2009, 06:53 »
Sure, but that's only cause the MAC / graphics / etc sales reps sell MAC's as better / faster / prettier than PC's. It will be hard for a MAC to beat my PC's performance, considering I have a Core 2 Quad 9300 CPU, 4GB DDRII 800Mhz RAM and 2x Gefore 9600 GT 3D cards
May be a Mac Pro with two Quad Core Xeon Harpertown CPU, 32 GB DDRII 800MHz and 2x NVIDIA Quadro FX 5600 1.5Go?
74
« on: February 02, 2009, 04:15 »
I currently use a Canon Xti 400D. The noise on that camera is horrible, even at 100 ISO. I really want to upgrade BADLY!
I don't believe you. If you have bad noise at ISO 100 with the 400D, you should have a look at your exposure. I use a Nikon D80 for microstock, a camera that is supposed to make more noise than your 400D, and I haven't had a rejection for noise in ages.
There are many good reasons to upgrade to a 5D or 5DII, but noise at ISO100 is not one of them.
Agree. I had a 350D and now a 450D and there is no noticeable noise at ISO 100.
75
« on: January 30, 2009, 09:33 »
If you were the only contributor to a site that pays 50% and does $1,000,000 in sales, how much would you make?
$500'000 If you were one of 1,000,000 contributors to a site that pays 50% and does $1,000,000 in sales, how much would you make?
$450'000... if you are the best!
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 ... 14
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
