Good luck. I guess I'm more of a realist in that I don't see photo of professional baseball players as a potential big seller. For one, only newspapers could buy and use the photos. Newspapers want shots from the night before, not shots from a year ago. Also they normally get those shots from either their own photographers, the AP, or Getty.

Anyway, be sure to tell us when you have your first sale.

I'd take time to learn the sport before photographing, or at least observe them a little while before trying to photograph them.

If they're in a skate park observe where they normally hit the rails. When you find that spot, focus on the rail at that section so the lens is in the range of where it should be focus wise. Pre-frame the shot and when they enter the frame hold the shutter (I assume you're using the multiple-continuous frames setting).

If they're on a half-pipe don't try to follow them. Pick one side and do basically the same thing. Again observe which side they prefer to throw tricks on (most have a preferred side). For more dramatic shots get really close to the half-pipe and shoot upward so there is a lot of sky in the back ground. If it's a small half-pipe you may have to lay on the ground.

That is amazing to know!  (And I thought me selling 22 on SS yesterday was awesome!)

You're link to your portfolio on SS doesn't work, or there are no photos in your portfolio.

Thanks for your input.  I have quite a few on IS and doing better every month, but know I would do better with a specific market.  Will you share the macro sites with me?
Thanks in advance.

They're not sites, their actual agencies. Check out the "Photographer's Market" book (every barnes & nobles / border's carries that book).

You could check out www.westernhorseman.com it's a magazine that will buy what you're selling. Click on "Writer's Guide".

Does anyone out there ever heard of a micro stock site that specializes in western images? horses? cowboys?

I know of at least 2 macros, but I think that is too specific for micros.

Good thing she did the lawsuit before the playboy spread. Yingyang, can jump in here, but it's my understanding you usually have to show damages to win a suit. If she made money from the , uh, exposure, the suit might have been a tougher sale.

Well, in the US, you would have to show damages if you're going for a right of publicity suit, but I wouldn't sue under that. I'd go for a privacy suit such as appropriation and/or false light. Appropriation is using a person's name or likeness (aka photo) for the defendant's benefit or advantage. Most states now have a statutory version of the common law tort, so you'd have to check your own state, but generally don't have to show damages under a privacy suit.

Since this happened in Brazil, I have no idea (I don't even know what legal system Brazil uses).

I really have a fundamental problem with changing the rules in midgame.

A business has to be able to change and adapt, otherwise it is a dead duck. I think people should wait to actually see what they are doing before criticizing it.

Why should the casual submitters, or those who have lost interest, benefit from the raise?

I don't see the logical connection. The raise is mainly dependent on how long you've been there. A person that joined in 2003 or 2004 and completely stopped uploading in 2005 or 2006 would probably be benefiting from the raise.

$1.20 per photo at IS.

(note: in terms of total revenue IS is 3x as much).

I was curious if their comment made sense.  I believe these people may see themselves there and believe it is them (if they live in Rio and if the use to walk early by the beach), but does it configure a situation in which a release is needed?

Regards,
Adelaide

If the subject or his/her family can tell that it is them in the photo, then you're in trouble. I bet the guy and his family on the left could because of his distinct features. Not sure on the guy on the right. Better to be safe then sorry.

If you buy at B&H in NY, they add NY sales tax which is an extra 8%??

If you get them sent to the UK,and they are discovered by customes, an extra 17.5% will be added for VAT I think.

I don't think you would be charged both because I don't think you would have them send them if you actually went to the store. You'd want to get them out of the boxes and use them while you're on vacation. VAT is a crazy thing so I don't know if you have to pay VAT when you come back across after declaring it on the customs form. If you do, I think I would renounce my citzenship to whatever european country you live in. wink.

I think the notebook itself, although I removed all brand names and stickers, is so noticeable a Sony Vaio that this should have been the major copyright concern. 

This is the image, already edited:
http://www.stockxpert.com/browse.phtml?f=view&id=794877

Wouldn't be copyright. Maybe trade dress, possibly design patent, but not copyright.

I was very surprised to have 3 images refused at IS today - one for using brand names in my keywords (the brand names were part of the CV)...

The CV was taken from Getty, which sells editorial. You can have brand names for editorial shots, but not for commercial stock. They were suppose to be rejecting all band names since they introduced the CV. I don't think you'll win that scout one.