|
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 - fotoVoyager
Pages: 1 ... 17 18 19 20 21 [22] 23
526
« on: March 23, 2012, 03:07 »
I just took the first few shots with our D800, and so far, I'm extremely satisfied with the image quality. Straight out of the box (no custom settings, yet). I'm impressed with the low noise levels at higher ISO, and it's dynamic range. Image sharpness is fine, but I can't wait to compare it with the D800E we also ordered. (It'll be a long month waiting) Zooming in to 100% on a 36MP image is awesome, although I think that thrill will wear off soon.
Despite its Magnesium alloy body, it does feel a bit cheaper than the D700. The buttons and dials feel less sturdy than those on the D3x and D700, but it handles identical (which is no surprise).
As Expected, you'll need to update the Camera Raw. Standard issue PS CS5.1 can't read D800 RAW files, nor can Lightroom 3. However, Adobe issued a pre release ACR 6.7, which does the job, and so does Lightroom 4. Apparently, so does the latest version / update of Aperture, but I can't verify that.
Two high res snaps (Each ~19MB JPEG):
800 ISO: http://www.corepics.com/D800/D800_DSC0016.jpg
100 ISO: http://www.corepics.com/D800/D800_DSC0018.jpg
I didn't buy it solely for stock. In my commissioned work, I notice an increase of image size with quite a few of my clients for various reasons. Covering large office walls with a photo is one of them, ability for clients to crop themselves and still make a decent sized print is another. I bought two, because I work in camera unfriendly environments, where switching lenses can be challenging, and my other bodies are wearing / have worn out. I thought of getting one D4 as substitute for one of the D800's, but decided against it, because I expect the difference of a future D4x to a D4 to be similar to the difference between the D3 and D3x. I much prefer the D3x, and not to mention the additional costs.
Now it's time to take this puppy out for a real spin and let it earn it's money back 
How do you think the D800 compares to the D700 for noise and dynamic range?
527
« on: March 20, 2012, 04:05 »
http://www.dpreview.com/previews/nikonD800/7
dpreview just came out with this, I think it looks comparable to 5d mark II quality with a lot more megapixels. I won't switch but hopefully Canon will come up with something to match Nikon with soon.
That's really useful. The D4 and the D800 don't look that much better than the D3s or D700 for shadow noise at ISO800 which is where I want improvement. Waiting to see the video tests now.
528
« on: March 18, 2012, 15:02 »
Hello
I am a travel photographer and take all types of related photos. But I can not submit these to stock agencies (except landscapes) as because none of these has model release. I face a similar problems if I visit a market place and photograph human behavior and interaction. I am referring to photos like these: http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-18783154-arrogant-gunners.php?isource=EN_PHOTOFMA
How am I suppose to obtain Model releases in these cases?
Thank you
Getting strangers to sign a model release is a special talent entirely unrelated to your skill as a photographer. Some people are just really good at it, have the charm and chat to pull it off, others don't. Many photographers in a place foreign to them will work with a local fixer who will translate and cajole for you. I'm not entirely convinced that some of the shots you see from developing countries have properly informed consent and some photographers are just lying and filling in the m.r. - especially with kids I think. Don't disregard selling your images as editorial, there's definitely a market for this. If you look at the work of the guy you use as an example I would guess that he's a Chinese Canadian with either roots in that region, the connections or language skills to let him get those shots model released. Using the advantages you have is a great way to get ahead!
529
« on: March 09, 2012, 12:24 »
There's no market for panoramas, move along...  Actually, I'm working on a panorama masterclass ebook / site / app whatever so I may have something to help you out in due course.
530
« on: March 02, 2012, 10:25 »
iStock exclusive:
February 2012 compared to:
February 2011: $ -17% DL -57%
February 2010: $ -32% DL -63%
Still, at least inspections are fast and accurate now the queue is low and no-one's uploading.
I can't even get views on my images let alone sales nowadays.
what makes you say no one is uploading?
Size of the queue and length of inspection time.
I'm talking slightly tongue in cheek here of course.
the size of the queue and inspection time don't indicate anything mathematically
if the queue was shrinking that might indicate something but it has been relatively stable at a lower level
and inspection times are a product of this, if there is no backlog then inspection times will be shorter.
You obviously know better than me.
531
« on: March 02, 2012, 06:16 »
iStock exclusive:
February 2012 compared to:
February 2011: $ -17% DL -57%
February 2010: $ -32% DL -63%
Still, at least inspections are fast and accurate now the queue is low and no-one's uploading.
I can't even get views on my images let alone sales nowadays.
what makes you say no one is uploading?
Size of the queue and length of inspection time. I'm talking slightly tongue in cheek here of course.
532
« on: March 02, 2012, 02:30 »
iStock exclusive:
February 2012 compared to:
February 2011: $ -17% DL -57%
February 2010: $ -32% DL -63%
Still, at least inspections are fast and accurate now the queue is low and no-one's uploading.
I can't even get views on my images let alone sales nowadays.
533
« on: February 02, 2012, 12:44 »
iStock exclusive.
Compared to January 2011:
DL -42.2%
$ -19.8%
Compared to January 2010:
DL -57.8%
$ -11.7%
I don't track how many images I create each year, but I guess it's about 1500 to 2000. Current portfolio size 8000.
^^^ I'm staggered how many contributors with mature portfolios, both exclusive and independent, are reporting a decline in sales of 40-50% over the year. That's huge and it's difficult to believe that the slack is all being taken up by newbies with growing portfolios. If that pattern continues for much longer ... it really will be unsustainable.
Have you made a decision at what point you will pull the plug on exclusivity?
Probably long after I should have, desperately hoping someone at iStock will see sense and make it worthwhile to remain.
It's a big job adding all the metadata to my portfolio but I've started it.
Assuming I'll pretty much destroy my income for a year when I'm forced to jump means I have to save up enough to cover that period.
might be worth asking any one can they do something programmatically through the API
providing an xml file with the file id, title, description and keywords
I did think of that and you don't need access to the api since all the data is in DeepMeta which can export a CSV. Unfortunately the flaw in that plan is that my images aren't tagged with the iStock image number or exactly the same title so you can't automate the process. That'll learn me for not adding the metadata in LR at creation time.
534
« on: February 02, 2012, 12:19 »
iStock exclusive.
Compared to January 2011:
DL -42.2%
$ -19.8%
Compared to January 2010:
DL -57.8%
$ -11.7%
I don't track how many images I create each year, but I guess it's about 1500 to 2000. Current portfolio size 8000.
^^^ I'm staggered how many contributors with mature portfolios, both exclusive and independent, are reporting a decline in sales of 40-50% over the year. That's huge and it's difficult to believe that the slack is all being taken up by newbies with growing portfolios. If that pattern continues for much longer ... it really will be unsustainable.
Have you made a decision at what point you will pull the plug on exclusivity?
Probably long after I should have, desperately hoping someone at iStock will see sense and make it worthwhile to remain. It's a big job adding all the metadata to my portfolio but I've started it. Assuming I'll pretty much destroy my income for a year when I'm forced to jump means I have to save up enough to cover that period.
535
« on: February 02, 2012, 12:16 »
iStock exclusive.
Compared to January 2011:
DL -42.2%
$ -19.8%
Compared to January 2010:
DL -57.8%
$ -11.7%
I don't track how many images I create each year, but I guess it's about 1500 to 2000. Current portfolio size 8000.
^^^ I'm staggered how many contributors with mature portfolios, both exclusive and independent, are reporting a decline in sales of 40-50% over the year. That's huge and it's difficult to believe that the slack is all being taken up by newbies with growing portfolios. If that pattern continues for much longer ... it really will be unsustainable.
Have you made a decision at what point you will pull the plug on exclusivity?
Its also funny how only Sean reminded people of the huge fraud that jacked up stats for jan 2011. The bigger the contributor the bigger the fraud. So, you can knock of a good % reported as decline as what it really was "inflated numbers".
I am staggered that some indies never went exclusive when IS held 70% market share and paid out double to exclusives.
My figures are correct. Most of my fraud took place on Boxing Day ($2.5k!!) and over the Xmas holiday period before January.
536
« on: February 02, 2012, 07:13 »
iStock exclusive.
Compared to January 2011:
DL -42.2%
$ -19.8%
Compared to January 2010:
DL -57.8%
$ -11.7%
I don't track how many images I create each year, but I guess it's about 1500 to 2000. Current portfolio size 8000.
537
« on: January 30, 2012, 12:42 »
Great post. I fear you might be the lone voice of sanity shouting in the copyright jungle! The problem with this case is really how badly its been reported.
Its only when you read the case that you find out that the second image isn't even a photo, but a photoshopped collage from 4 different photos, and a 5th one from iStock which is of part of a bus put over the top.
If anyone's interested, I've done up a bit of an article hopefully explaining what this all means: http://travelphotographyreview.com/uk-copyright-case-different-same-same
For those who produce conceptual images, if there is a copycat that reproduces a lot of your catalog, this is the sort of case that can help you. The difficult part in most of these cases for people alleging copyright is to prove that the copycat actually had knowledge of your image and set about re-creating it, rather than it being an independent creation of similar ideas.
For general photography around and about the place, it means very little.
538
« on: January 26, 2012, 04:32 »
It seems nonsense on the face of it, but if you dig deeper it appears the judgement is based partly on the argument that the tea company had previously seen the original image then went out and deliberately copied it rather than licence the original.
539
« on: January 20, 2012, 12:19 »
I'd like to say that having met them both last year, JJ and Kelly are two of the nicest people I have met in my life. very sincere, to the point that it sometimes came across poorly when communicating to contributors. on a business note, this is a frightening day for exclusives in particular. on a personal note, I will miss them both and their involvement. even when I didn't agree with it, I knew they meant what they said.
Same here.
540
« on: January 11, 2012, 17:44 »
Things are not only going bad for independent contributors, for example, today (I'm exclusive) sales are dead for me, I think today is the worst working day in the last 3 years regarding $$$ and dls. There is not a logic for this sudden plummet of sales (beginning of january 2012 has been slow, but not THIS SLOW)
Has anyone here also experienced a substantial drop in sales today? any possible explanation?
I'm dead in the water too after a couple of normal days. Can only assume there's some technical problem that's buggering up the search and therefore sales.
541
« on: January 10, 2012, 18:20 »
Good luck!
542
« on: January 07, 2012, 12:32 »
I had to go through the same process. I ticked 'sole trader' since that's my tax status at HMRC.
I only use PayPal to collect my iStock earnings and pay for the odd thing online and it hasn't made any difference or attracted any extra charges as far as I can tell.
Did ticking 'sole trader' not push you into their business accounts?
It mumbled something along those lines but made no practical difference to me. It's just a status flag on your profile, everything else seems to stay the same. It might make a difference if you send or receive money to other people I guess, but since iStock use mass payment and the charges are covered there's no change. Just the continuing crappy currency conversion rate as yet another mega-corp dumps on individuals. Viva la Revolucin!
543
« on: January 07, 2012, 11:41 »
I had to go through the same process. I ticked 'sole trader' since that's my tax status at HMRC.
I only use PayPal to collect my iStock earnings and pay for the odd thing online and it hasn't made any difference or attracted any extra charges as far as I can tell.
544
« on: January 06, 2012, 17:13 »
It'd never work, move along.
545
« on: December 26, 2011, 16:28 »
I am Istock exclusive, always been
I got almost 15000 files in IS
Yesterday December 25th I sold 3 images for a total of 7 dollars
last year same day I sold over $150.00 same day
Today is Monday 26, I have sold so far $23.00 (2:00 pm ET), last year I sold December 26 more than $300.00, and last year December 26 was a Sunday.
Something very serious is going on in IS, something that happened Friday and is affecting not only non exclusives but exclusives as well. Please if anyone else is having similar results let me know, this is like 90% decrease in sales and will put me out of business in a heart beat if not fixed.
My figures match yours pretty closely. Xmas is on a weekend this year so I'm not panicking just yet. If January doesn't pick up, that's the time to *really* worry.
546
« on: December 23, 2011, 03:55 »
This is the trick Peter Lik uses to get people to part with huge sums for his images.
Combined with carefully lit galleries, great salesmanship and bucket loads of hype of course.
547
« on: December 21, 2011, 13:27 »
If there's one thing exclusives love, it's being favoured at the one time of the year when nobody is buying.
Ha! This latest shift isn't doing me any good despite being exclusive because it's so weighted towards new files. My test searches for locations I've shot show that if I haven't uploaded images from there in the past few weeks, I ain't gonna be selling any, any time soon. Who knows who's benefitting from this version.
549
« on: December 15, 2011, 05:12 »
I like doing videos but haven't put much effort in to it yet. It's more difficult to do clips that will sell. I think timelapses are a good option for still photographers. I'm improving but still a long way off what some people produce. My referral link for Pon5 is in my signature, they sell more than the microstock sites for me and accept everything I upload. Here's my timelapses media bin. http://www.pond5.com/video-sound-effects-music/1/clipbin:54654.html
I notice you've got material that would be classed as editorial on iStock - what's the deal with unreleased logos, people, landmarks and that kind of thing on Pond5?
550
« on: December 14, 2011, 07:27 »
With so many best-selling exclusive contributors from Istock recently opting to become independent it occurs to me that there is a huge potential to raise significant sums of money for charity via Shutterstock's referral programme. At 3c per image sale it could literally raise millions for a charity such as Medicines Sans Frontiers/Doctors Without Borders.
Is this a practical proposition and if so how could it be implemented? Perhaps leaf could provide some guidance here?
What are your thoughts on this issue?
I think that's an excellent idea to bear in mind. Is it 3c per image for ever or up to a certain limit?
Pages: 1 ... 17 18 19 20 21 [22] 23
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
