|
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 - luissantos84
5451
« on: July 24, 2011, 19:58 »
quick question, what agency Laurin?
5452
« on: July 24, 2011, 14:06 »
SS and DT, makes up for it AND more, thats why Im contemplating on maybe getting out of IS, altogether, saving lots of irritation and wasting time uploading new stuff.
ahahah days ago you told on IS forum that you do 500$ on a day! 
5453
« on: July 23, 2011, 18:29 »
my comment was regarding newest pictures and isolations.. not the subject or the quality of pictures
5454
« on: July 23, 2011, 17:56 »
Or it could help being a staff member for a (non specified) stock agency to have a serious boost.... ahum...
Patrick.
You got that right Patrick, that would be great!
I dont anything against you or FT or other agency but looking at your port it does look you have a lot of advantage no? tons of similar? and some isolations that arent actually cleaned or other? do you have any sort of review?
5455
« on: July 23, 2011, 08:37 »
it is official.. you are nuts 
5456
« on: July 23, 2011, 07:34 »
7D is 18 megapixels right? downsize it to 12 or 10 see how it goes.. it will bring overall better sharpness (not that your picture need, it doesnt) but it will reduce a little the noise.. what are you planning to send more?
5457
« on: July 22, 2011, 18:15 »
I have a bridge picture that sell "very well" and has like 2 years.. 3 or 4 months ago a very similar one got in, only the sky aint bright and blue, that picture is taking me sales but I cannot say the person copied me but might be..
http://us.fotolia.com/id/12830930
http://us.fotolia.com/id/26800123
They're definitely different. His has more of the bridge - check the edges
the weather is a little different too, my point is that FT should have rejected his picture.. he his taking some sales from mine for sure
5458
« on: July 22, 2011, 12:38 »
I have a bridge picture that sell "very well" and has like 2 years.. 3 or 4 months ago a very similar one got in, only the sky aint bright and blue, that picture is taking me sales but I cannot say the person copied me but might be.. http://us.fotolia.com/id/12830930http://us.fotolia.com/id/26800123
5459
« on: July 22, 2011, 11:50 »
I can say yes once I dont do anything else (but I could do a lot more than what I do).. I dont have a "big" house to pay, actually I share with brother/sister, and we are far from starving but I wasnt never a crazy guy spending without having, so I am going with the flow but carefully spending and keep expenses as low as possible (almost 0), I have just spent money on gear not much, I really try to pull the max I can with what I have (props, family, stuff).. yesterday got a gorgeous lens 24-70 that I have been saving for a while I am close to the 1k $ which is still ridiculous small but I think I can go further if I work more and better, if things dont go well I will have to deal with it.. 
5460
« on: July 22, 2011, 11:41 »
I have a few 7 cents. My lowest ever is on pixmac 0.042 cr.
Yeah, we were pioneers there. Luckily it's now $0.25 minimum even if we download the images for internal use.
that was only once, have a few other quite nice but still havent reached first payout
5461
« on: July 22, 2011, 11:40 »
Too dark. Maybe too much noise reduction.
yep, pull exposure a little up like 0.10 or some fill light on camera raw
5462
« on: July 21, 2011, 17:14 »
you can use the raw converter recovery tool for the neck or use two exposed (through raw) versions and combine. It is however a static bird. You need a nest, flight, feeding chicks, eating fish or something else going on. Not enough on its own
LOL make it with an Ipad
5463
« on: July 21, 2011, 16:31 »
We could have a rank of the most ignored.
that too.. Tyler wont have more time to stock, only forum
5464
« on: July 21, 2011, 16:29 »
still a lot of noise and underexposed, go with a middle version
5465
« on: July 21, 2011, 15:25 »
two days ago I was on 13.. I am now on 16 persons ignoring me.. p.s: might be my profile pic scaring people
5466
« on: July 21, 2011, 14:21 »
dont know much about taking noise but if you can do it without any artifacts etc on picture yep do it.. regarding the neck I really think that wont be the problem, I think noise is the issue, overall I like the picture it is right on his habitat.. for application I dont know.. but if you take the noise it does look nice and perhaps show you are a "nature" photographer but are they looking for it these days? I have a few heron birds on IS too but they were right on the beach on Maldives, more like 50mm not 400
5467
« on: July 21, 2011, 14:01 »
I have a few 7 cents..
my lowest ever is on pixmac
0000197563 2009-09-14 07:55:51 Image sell 0.042 cr. Image: 000032580363 0.1 MPix
5468
« on: July 21, 2011, 13:45 »
they will say noise, artifacts and his neck over exposed, pure white actually.. it was a 400mm picture at 1000s was it on tripod? did you tried some at iso 100 instead of 200?
5469
« on: July 21, 2011, 11:32 »
the question regarding microstock remains on how far will agencies go? (and yes I am talking about royalties %) I am saying thats the question once regarding contributors it will never stop, some will leave but a few more will appear but overall the volume of pictures will never end and will go until agencies say we are closed for new contributions (which will never happen) some top contributors have said here that they have reached a max regarding earnings and some talk about stepping back too, some maybe because lack of uploading but other kept it.. the real problem is "newbies/less pro" that have uploaded some pictures and are actually taking other sales, that is what we are doing everytime we do another picture (everybody knows it) we are screwing others business, and we have the idea that it wont damage us and we will keep on increasing, which might be true but for how long? how far will we go regarding royalties %? to almost 0%? I am sure by that time other business would appear but until then we will keep on feeding their pockets, I am not saying we should cut top agencies, of course not.. my guess is that agencies should be more strict and watch every upload even more close.. but what for?? better to have new contributors submitting more stuff, thinking that other might leave later and they have their back covered.. stock is great!
5470
« on: July 21, 2011, 10:58 »
like we are here asking for this and that.. how about a profile feature showing how many people we are ignoring?
5471
« on: July 21, 2011, 10:44 »
even 1000 is so low.. in a industry that agencies make Millions and Millions.. every big business is so greedy.. how unfair is microstock rewarding that low who work hard.. where will it be in 5 years? (which is half of his current life)
5472
« on: July 21, 2011, 10:10 »
Whats the other site?
I was thinking of iStock once there is one quite recent but not that negative..
5473
« on: July 20, 2011, 17:30 »
(Just out of interest you don't have a pseudonym as Lobo in another place do you?)
busted...
5474
« on: July 20, 2011, 16:03 »
curious I never had much sales from the USA at SS (other we dont know I guess) but there from 9% to 16% (monthly %)
5475
« on: July 20, 2011, 12:54 »
The email starts with "Congratulations! You've had a large number of your files downloaded from the Shutterstock site."
Ha. Ha ha ha ha. If only that were true.
I think maybe it means some threshold number was crossed and this request was triggered automatically. But it seems to be an error.
LOL thats a very weird email.. are you all from the USA or outside too? I havent received anything
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
