I do a year long release for my kids, my parents (both mine and in-laws) and my spouse. So far no problems except with Getty. Getty still make me do a unique MR for each shoot, and it's a bit of a pain, especially as they are hit and miss on even accepting an Easy Release MR (even though they state it's approved by them). But, really,  it's not really that much work to make a new one each time if you're using an app that pre-fills all the info in.

Quote from: marthamarks on July 03, 2019, 09:09

Quote from: Clair Voyant on July 03, 2019, 07:20

Quote from: gillian vann on July 02, 2019, 19:23

I think you are on the right track...

Not even close.

She was trying to offer encouragement.

Martha... I completely understand that. Sometimes the truth needs to be said even if it is a bitter pill to swallow. There is a clear reason why none of their 700+ images sell.

haha, what's funny is that usually it's me being brutally honest. I was indeed trying to be encouraging, cos I remember what it like to be a newbie. We all started out shooting the easy, dumb stuff, it's part of the process.

Quote from: gillian vann on July 25, 2019, 03:54

Quote from: wds on July 24, 2019, 08:28

Quote from: gillian vann on July 24, 2019, 00:48

sold 2 videos to Foxtel (Australia's #1 cableTV company) for .... 78c each. meh.

Yikes! is that 78c as in $0.78 each?

yes. 2 drone videos, 78c per video. I am very unimpressed.   the videos aren't spectacularly original, except they are of the beautiful coastal area I live in (northern sydney), and i flew my drone from my balcony so effort was low.... but 78c!! effyuu getty.

78cents is insulting. I lament the old days when prices were much higher.

when were "those days" supposedly video is still the only place to make money. Getty has closed the gap on that very quickly.

you know people only see Trump in this, and not Hillary Clinton. she hid this side of her nature, but the public knew she was toxic and chose the less toxic option, the one that didn't hide his ugliness. I don't think the lesson has been learned yet, we might see a repeat.

I've been blessed to always be driving my dream car. I've loved every car i've ever owned, from Mazda to the Land Rover Defender to the Porsche. We love cars.  Currently have the pocket rocket VW Golf R. but, dream car would be one of those 1950s convertible jags, or porsche, not fussy.

?? i just drag and drop. no ftp at all. easy.
although the rest of the process is a bit painful, sure.

I think you are on the right track, you just need to start shooting unique topics. flowers and fruits are a waste of time, you must have hundreds of those. Don't worry, we all started out doing that too. I literally have the same files in my portfolio from the early days: lollies, nuts, flowers, etc, they rarely sell cos you need to be in the top line of the search and those areas are oversaturated. Also when I first started out my editing was a bit poor so even if the shot was good the editing isn't. A lot of of your studio stuff seems to be back lit or side lit, needs a touch of light in the foreground to really pop and be a clean isolated image. when you shoot fruit in studio be sure to remove spots etc. random cats won't sell. You have many similars, you have 100 photos of shampoo bottles?  How many actual "shoots" do you think you have? Other general things like white balance, crooked horizon, dull landscapes, poor lighting...  I'm not seeing anything that stands out. I saw a nice tulip shot, but i'll bet there are 10K plus photos of tulips on Adobe, that are nicer than yours. I'm sure wherever you live you can find something unique and shoot it in a beautiful way. and no, that doesn't mean you go and shoot coffee in your local cafe, also been done to death, find something new to shoot. good luck.

Glad it's working for you, Gillian,

One note though, when I click on any Stocksy portfolio link from here, it either takes forever to load or simply hangs and doesn't load at all. Totally off-putting in the 21st century.

no idea, works fine for me. they are constantly tinkering and optimizing their display, they are more 21st century than anywhere else.  Agencies like Shutterstock/Offset openly copy them.  I was a bit worried they'd fallen into a data driven geek nirvana for a while, and there was so much focus on optimizing the site, but it seems to have settled down now.

Quote from: gillian vann on June 26, 2019, 06:05

Quote from: sgoodwin4813 on June 22, 2019, 09:05

Based on the two people who have rated Stocksy in the survey and gave it a 500 I assume it must be going very well - that is the highest by far of any agency listed.

sorry, what survey?

I am presuming they mean the "Microstock Poll Results" top right of this page.

yes I assumed that, how would anyone know the entries made?  how can we see that "2 people gave it a 500"?

Now that there is advertising on the Unsplash site do the photographers realise they've been taken for fools? I'd laugh, but it's not funny.

In the past year I became a grandmother and also gained 4 new great-nieces and nephews,. I am white as are my 3 siblings, my husband & his 3 siblings and all our nieces and nephews, but out of the 6 children in this newest generation (one who is three years old in addition to the 5 new babies), 3 are children of color or mixed race (one Asian, 2 African/Caucasian), and to me, that is so heartening, that despite so much bigotry still existent, this generation of Millennials are marrying for love without any prejudices, and our families are so much the richer for it.

I'm sorry, but you are sounding as though you think your families are better (my synonym for "richer") than others because of your "diversity".  I'm sure we are all the richer for lack of prejudices, even if we marry people who match our skin colour. Part of me wonders if the ethnic side of the family feel the same way? (in my personal experience, the answer is: no, but Aussie ethnics tend to only be 1 generation deep).  And dare I suggest your "diversity" is still culturally predominantly American. I married an immigrant, but he has white skin, so that doesn't make us "richer", right?   This whole conversation is just weird, and so very 1st world. Like veganism, this is something only a rich society can afford to argue about and indulge. We should feel blessed.

I get it, it's hard to show "diversity" in photos without some obvious clues, so here we are. How you show LGBT stuff is a head scratcher, without resorting to sexy stuff, which I think crosses over into "using women's bodies" feminist territory. My gay friends tend to look and behave the same as me.... although sure, they spend more on clothes as I have school fees and children to waste money on.  I also have some vegan and far left friends, I gotta say they are far more "diverse" to me than my Chinese/Aussie neighbour.

@ swisschocolate  America isn't the only "melting pot" but the problem of the "diversity" angle is that it's all "american style diversity", so actually the american (californian) culture is being forced on all of us... and let's face it, America is a bit of a mess right now. What they want doesn't work in Australia and NZ, the Uk and Europe, let alone actual Asia, where diversity is not celebrated.  Will the diversity that Adobe recommends resonate worldwide? I doubt it. I'm a Stocksy contributor so i've already seen what passes for "diversity" there, and what is favoured.
at the end of the day we will all know within our own portfolios if the "diversity" stuff sells well, and that will be what drives us to create more, if we so choose. I don't think our society needs saving via the "richness of diversity", frankly a little unity would be good. America already is pretty diverse, probably more diverse than any other nation, why do they beat themselves up about it? it's a tough job to mix races and cultures, we keep pretending it should be easy. I know this convo has gotten a bit more intense but I'm glad for that, our society needs more civil, interesting discussion, and less name calling instead of thoughtful rebuttal.

Quote from: gillian vann on May 23, 2019, 03:37

also in ACR. i haven't done any adobe tutorials, how does it differ to Clarity exactly?

It is a question of "frequency"
It is explained clearly here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=3&v=Hlsy2VsCWrE

well haha, i said i hadn't watched any tutes on this new feature, was looking for the 5 word definition, rather than watching a 15min waffle on video.  Although having watched it, it was very good, thanks.
I rarely use Clarity, it's too much for most scenes. (depends on what you shoot of course)