Quote from: leaf on June 27, 2008, 09:18

Quote from: chellyar on June 27, 2008, 09:06
Lowest I've gone is 24c by the looks of it, but how did you get that level of Detail miz?  I had a look at the stats page and I can't see where to get the per sale breakdown.

when you are on this page
http://www.istockphoto.com/my_uploads.php

you have to click on the $$ amount in the royalty column.

Arrrr, gotcha...

This is the one I'm about to use for some self portraits, which is based on the IS one.

Edit to your hearts content...   

I've got an L308 as well.  Great little meter for studio/setup work, and use it a bit for window light portraits or other really contrasty ambient setups.

The white paper trick works well as well, and I do that if I'm meter-less and the camera seems to be getting it wrong (Ambient, not flash light)

When I'm doing multi-head flash setup's I find the flash meter is the only way to go, but for a single light, or where you've got a high level of diffusion the white paper is just as good if you've got the time to shoot'n'set a couple of times.

Some large setups like sports teams the meter is the only way to go, when the camera is 20+ feet from the subject, and you've got 2000WS of light on two heads.  The other issue there of course is that you loose a wad of credibility if the sports team arrives early and you're piddling around like that...  With the meter you set the lights to your usual setting, take one reading, set the camera and you're hot to trot.

As an aside, I do a bit of child photography, and I find that having the kids play with the meter plugged into one of the strobes is sometimes an excellent ice breaker for nervous kids as well...

Cheers, Me.

Lowest I've gone is 24c by the looks of it, but how did you get that level of Detail miz?  I had a look at the stats page and I can't see where to get the per sale breakdown.

I've had a couple, a wee while ago now, they sat for a while, but I can't remember how long now.

I think mine got that way through potential copyright/property rights issues..

Cheers, Me.

How long after the sales wasn't it updated?  I know the stats page seems to take about 12 hours to catch up sometimes, although I don't watch it all that closely..

I've never had any concerns about the tech side of I.S. they seem to have everything well under control....

Now that explains something...

A while ago i found an image of mine on someones site that had never registered a sale on any of the sites it was on. 

Hmmmmm.

Quote from: Void on June 16, 2008, 02:36
Bitch about the rejections, but NEVER take them personal

Don't mess with our god-given right to whine and moan in online forums about things we have little control over, it's one of the constants of online business and communities.  It's what some of us live for! :-)

Oh, and 'Me too' I'm getting a high rejection rate with FT, Although a few new ones got in this month, breaking my loosing streak that started in mid may when I started uploading again...

As a person with a small portfolio on IS (353 images with silver canister)......

I really can't see the value in going exclusive.

So far this year they only make up just over 29%of my microstock income.  Is going exclusive going to tripple my income from them?  I think not.

I'd get a 10% hike in royalties, and I can't see the preferential search placement etc. helping enough to make up the difference.

If there was some hard evidence that it was hugely to my benefit I'd consider it, but for small contributors it doesn't seem to make sense.

That forumla is just getting double the diagonal size of the sensor..  (Pythagoras' theorem)

The 'Standard' lens for any format is the same focal length as the diagonal size of the sensor, hence 50mm being the 'standard' for full frame 35mm, the diagonal is actually 43mm, but lets not split hairs...

In theory double the standard length is meant to be a good flattering perspective for a head&shoulders portrait.  I seem to remember that coming up in the one photography course I ever did, ages ago.  Hence 85mm lenses with big apertures for portraiture.

All of that said, just use what looks nice....   

Quote from: Chode on June 09, 2008, 10:15
I have one, in combination with canon ef 28-105mm f3.5-4.5, nice camera. but I plan to buy eos 40D very soon.

IMHO, you'd get more bang for buck in image quality if you replaced that lens.

The 40D is a nicer camera to use than the 400, but the image quality isn't that much better, just the ergonomics and physical strength of the thing..  (And focus system, metering...  OK, there's lots of differences)

Anyway, what I meant to say was, that if you're just using the camera for stock, upgrade your lens, not the camera..  If photography is your hobby, get the 40D and a new lens. 

One would assume that they'll have an opt-out though, as many Alamy contributors are probably old-school anti-micro folks...

Interesting statement about the state of the industry though....

Hi-ho,

The short answer is yes, it's a good camera for shooting stock....

I normally shoot with a 40D and 20D, but used a borrowed 400D as a second body at a couple of events while my 20D was away having a new shutter fitted.  (I also use an old 4Mp 1D for sports)

Shooting in raw I found the images were very good compared to the 20D, and in most cases on par with the 40D if the exposure was right (The 40D has a slight advantage due to the 14bit raw files)

In JPEG I found the images were a bit over processed, and I saw some red channel clipping on images that were fine in raw.  (Shooting raw+jpeg)

Any current dSLR on the market is up to the task as long as you know how to use it properly, the most important part of the equation is the bit between the viewfinder and the shutter button! :-).

If you've got the kit lens with it you may have some issues with image quality in high contrast light, or low light, but once you get to know it's quirks you can get good results from it.   (I was using an EF 24-70 F/2.8 L on the one I borrowed, stunning lens).

Good luck.

December '05 for me, and I can upload 2.5Mp images as well, although I never do, all of my stuff on SS is 8Mp or larger, apart from a couple of early ones from my trusty old 4Mp EOS 1D.

To me the hassle of downsizing the images is not worth it for multiple sites, and if you do it would decrease the number of repeat downloads you'd get I would think, as a purchaser is more likely to come back to your profile and look for a specific theme or style if they got a good high res image, rather than a 2.5 or 4Mp down sample.

Just my 2c though...

"Me Too"  - May 31st, not paid yet.

From memory my last one with them took 10 days, but I'm a bit grey on that....

Hi-ho,

A general question or two for the crowd...

Is it worth having referral links on your own websites? 

Does anyone have a dedicated website for referral links and microstock info?

Has anyone got rich overnight from referrals? 

I'm looking at re-developing my website (http://cpix.co.nz) as it's a bit tired, and I need more of a portfolio focus on there, and was mulling over a couple of ideas...

Cheers, Me.

I dunno...

.
.
.

I kinda like his hat...

Hi-ho,

Just got an invite for this site, based in Estonia, for a new RM site..

Anyone a member?  Got any comments?  Having a good evening?

Cheers, Me.

They have FTP for video content I believe, but not for images at this stage.  

There is an offline file upload utility though, the name of which totally escapes me....

I just open multiple upload windows, and click 'submit' on all of them and walk away.   I keyword them etc later on...

Just thought I'd add:

No subscription downloads so far on FL...

Hmmmmmmm,

Because I was not paying attention to microstock for six months or so I missed this storm in the tea-cup.

I've just had a look at my stats slightly more objectively on FT..  302 images, averaging about $20/month, had BME last month with $27.30, very few subscription sales.  Maybe the search engine change was good for me?  We'll wait and see...

What annoys me about FL is the amazing rejection rate since I started uploading there again.  And the weirdness that is their search engine.

Anyway, I wont stop uploading there, but if this were a more serious part of my income I would be considering it. 

Getting rejections for 'Too many images in this category' and then not being able to find any similar engines with their *@#$ search engine is really, really annoying.  Particularly when the same images are accepted on other sites and sell occasionally.

The other frustration is that I get the acceptance/rejection emails with the image number in them, and no useful text...  I then have to go find the image on their site to update my stats spreadsheet.  At the moment I'm uploading about 10 images a week so it's not a problem, but if it was more I'd be pulling out my hair...  (Although it's better that StockXpert, no notice at all....)

I have been wondering if their high rejection rate at the moment (Other people who are much better stock photog's than me have mentioned it) is because they are trying to keep the collection growth rate down due to technical infrastructure limitations? 

Just my 2c worth..

That's a neat idea Leaf...

But, would you mind bumping up my sales a bit so mine look better? :-)

You did' t put an option for unemployed. :-).

I left my old job a couple of months ago, and I've been on 'holiday', just started looking last week...

(It's a tough life, but someone's gotta do it...

:-)

I see that one a bit as well...  I got over it a while ago. :-)