|
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 - Striker77s
51
« on: August 25, 2006, 11:56 »
I am still stuck with a canon 10d 
I am itching to upgrade in the worst way, but a nice screen to edit photos on, and perhaps another L lens are debatably a higher need.
Not to worry leaf, I'm still stuck with a 10D also. I would like to get the Sigma 120-300 f2.8 lens personally. With a 2x lens and the 1.6 multiplying effect it would be a 384-960mm lens. The 20D and 30D just isn't enough of an upgrade. I'm waiting for the 40D or what ever it will be. My lens Sigma 24-70 EX Sigma 12-24 EX Sigma 70-200 EX Mark
52
« on: August 24, 2006, 08:12 »
Neat Image
Photoshop CS2
Breeze Browser
Capture One LE
PTGUI
WS FTP Pro
Mark
53
« on: August 24, 2006, 08:04 »
Lucky Oliver just started. So if you are willing to upload to new places you have to be willing to have no sales for quite a while. That is the risk you take.  I don't think they will have any significant sales for several months. Mark
54
« on: August 23, 2006, 16:11 »
No income off of the subscription model. No wonder they can charge $13 a week and offer unlimited downloads. They aren't giving the photags any of the profit. So basically it is a marketing scam. They can claim they are giving photags 100% of the profits, they just don't tell you that it is only for single downloads (except in the fine print). And most likely most of their downloads will be from their subscription, which means photags won't get a dime. These marketing tricks drive me nuts. I've lost all desire to try out new microstock sites, unless they have been proven by others.
Mark
55
« on: August 23, 2006, 11:07 »
One thought is that it might be scam. He was just trying to get a hold of a lot of full rez files to re-sell at other sites. A couple of guys in China got nailed for this a month or so back. They were making quite a bit of money.
Mark
56
« on: August 22, 2006, 13:14 »
Amanda
I'm glad you decided to stick around to. kacper can be a bit blunt sometimes but he also contributes a lot of good ideas. My strategy for flaming is to ignore it, replying usually just makes it worse. And probably that is what most people around here feel, and thus no one replied to his comments. I for one don't complain to loudly about IStocks commission. Yes it is low but if the sales volume is much higher than it is worth it. It doesn't matter how much per image per sale I get but the total income per image. But I do agree that they tend to be a little arrogant and their upload process is a nightmare. If another new company copied their upload system they wouldn't get past a 100 images before they died. They have replied to e-mails stating they don't take suggestions so don't bother. I mean come on. But once again from a business point of view if they bring in enough income to make it worth it, you just deal with it. From my point of view istock isn't my highest money maker; shutterstock is. In fact Istock is less than 25% of my income from microstocks. So my desire to deal with their arrogant admins and horrible upload process is lacking. Once again Amanda welcome to the group and I hope to hear more of your thoughts.
Mark
57
« on: August 20, 2006, 14:30 »
I would have to agree with you that bubutim is a fantastic stock photographer. Everything is extremely clean and fresh. Thanks for sharing, unfortuantely I don't have any particular stock photographers that I admire to share.
Mark
58
« on: August 15, 2006, 08:58 »
My idea was to post little flyers locally and refer potential models to a website I registered explaining it all. I have only posted 4 such notices - I've been too busy to fool with it lately - and have had one response leading to an "introductory shoot". I'm sure that when the college kids return later this month I can find more models by placing a few more flyers in places they frequent.
("Earn Spending Cash: www.whomemodel.com")
OH... there will be NO LAUGHING at my website, pitiful as it may be! It was my first attempt ever at html. 
Excellant idea. I agree that your website isn't exactly professional but it was done very well. It gives the feeling of being informal which is what you want anyways. I might try it someday. Mark
59
« on: August 14, 2006, 13:06 »
Of course their target is designers not photographers. But I have never personally seen one advertisement for a microstock agency.
Mark
60
« on: August 10, 2006, 09:01 »
I've been using both the Spyder and the Eye-one. I have a Samsung 213T and it made a big difference. Especially when it comes to white balancing.
Mark
61
« on: August 09, 2006, 08:51 »
I seriously doubt Fotolia will go into oblivion. It doesn't cost them hardly anything at all to store their large cache of photos. Just a single large raid array and extra backup time. Their income is dependent upon their total sales and not the individual sales of their photographers. Meaning if they add a lot of images without increasing their sales Fotolia's total income stays the same. Photographers aren't happy because their $/image drops. I seriously doubt they are hurting and believe that as a company they are probably doing quite well.
Mark
62
« on: August 08, 2006, 14:42 »
In that case, maybe it should be something like  :
5,000 -- Vacuum
10,000 -- Blowhard
20,000 -- Windbag
50,000 -- Super Ultimate Ninja Windbag
I agree with those numbers. At least that is how they should be applied to me. Mark
63
« on: August 08, 2006, 10:07 »
If there was any relationship between number of posts to your knowledge that might be a good idea. But since I'm mostly full of hot air it would give people of false sense of security once I reach Jedi master.  Mark
64
« on: August 07, 2006, 16:40 »
Congrats, Featurepics is slowly moving up.
Mark
65
« on: August 07, 2006, 09:13 »
I'm sure there a several of us from the US but as no one else has posted yet.
New Mexico, USA
66
« on: August 07, 2006, 09:11 »
They changed their default search order. It is no longer the newest images first. Therefore new images don't get a large amount of downloads right off. I wish it wasn't so, but oh well.
Mark
67
« on: August 07, 2006, 09:08 »
Leaf I have three little girls and they destroy our DVDs all the time. So I backup all my DVDs on to DVD+R, and when they destory a DVD I only have to waste $.50 to replace it from the original. At www.dvdrhelp.com you can learn everything you would ever want to know about DVDs. They have a list of common ripping tools at http://www.videohelp.com/tools?s=7#7 . My suggestion is DVD Shrink, it is no longer supported but it is one of the best. And best of all it is free. It will transfer any DVD to a DVD+/-R and will store it locally onto your hard drive. Hoped I helped. Mark
68
« on: August 03, 2006, 17:32 »
GeoPappas that is why leaf is asking you about it. He doesn't want to be the guinea pig so he is hoping someone else will. Actually I wouldn't mind doing it at all, I've been a network administrator so I tend to know a reasonable amount about OS. I'm actually quite excited about Vista their color management is supposed to be a lot better and color management with XP is barely usable. Also the change to 64 bit will be nice, 64 bit XP just is a mature enough system to adopt. I thought about signing up but I just don't have any time, I have a few week old baby and I'm trying to fix up and sell our house. I've been waiting to upgrade my computer until Vista comes out, I plan on getting a dual core 64 bit computer with Vista. Mark
69
« on: August 03, 2006, 13:35 »
You only get 60% if you are the first 30,000 exlcusive photos. Otherwise you get a small 30%.
I thought the same thing and was disappointed when I found out the truth. Personally I think it is bordering on the edge of false advertising, and is a big turn off for me. Mark
70
« on: August 01, 2006, 09:07 »
I agree two backups maybe one extrernal and another optical (to protect against EMP), To protect against EMP, are you expecting a nuclear war?  Mark
71
« on: July 25, 2006, 08:40 »
Sounds like they are relying more on marketing skills (marketing tricks) then they are on just providing decent incentives to upload. If their 60% is only for exclusive photags then I'm going to wait until I see better incentives. I'm not interested in supporting another 30% only stock site.
Mark
72
« on: July 24, 2006, 15:35 »
Erdosain, where does it state that. The only thing I can find is this on their front page. "If your photos are part of the first 30,000 accepted, you'll receive a 60% royalty on each photo." There is nothing that states their are qualifications on it. How did you find out that it is only if you are exclusive?
Mark
73
« on: July 24, 2006, 12:28 »
Well I checked out their site again today and noticed that they are giving 60% royalties to the first 30,000 images. I don't know if I just missed it the first time or what but I think I'm ready to bite and start uploading. Easy uploading and 60% royalties is worth a chance.
Mark
74
« on: July 18, 2006, 08:32 »
I understood that you didn't ban rjmiz but I thought you did an excellant job of handling the whole situation. So once again leaf, great job and you are dong an excellant job of running this forum.
Mark
75
« on: July 18, 2006, 08:28 »
I have a portable drive but I got it several years ago and things have drastically improved since then. I still use mine as it is sufficient, it is just incredible slow compared to current drives. I went backpacking for a week and wanted a cache and it worked well. As far as a battery backup try this. Most internal batteries on these hard drives are 9.6V. The external power source is usually 12V. Take a cheap AA 8 pack battery case ($.99 at Radio Shack) and find the right connector in their bins. (Some assembly might be required) Now you have an external battery case that can either charge your interal battery or run straight off the battery pack. At least mine does. Then you don't have to worry about their internal batteries and it can use the same batteries as your flash (AA).
Mark
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
