|
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
6676
« on: September 21, 2010, 11:14 »
Heh, I just realized how much the lyrics to NIN's Terrible Lies relate to how I feel about iStock at the moment.
NIN 
6677
« on: September 21, 2010, 11:13 »
regarding my modest earnings they are in 4#.. so they are worth!
6678
« on: September 20, 2010, 09:03 »
congrats nice photo!
6679
« on: September 19, 2010, 17:37 »
We built a worldwide antiques business from scratch, with no prior knowledge.
That sort of gives us a background in determination. :-)
The quickest way to learn is from our mistakes, so we are not frightened of getting it wrong...
When I started I didn't have any knowledge also so everything is possible, hard work get us there sooner or later (depending on what we give to the market..)
6680
« on: September 19, 2010, 16:47 »
I am nobody at microstock but I can tell you that you need to get what stock really is (do some research on agencies, photos, concepts, style).. then the hard work begins.. it won't be easy to start but you will get there if have some skills (with time they will certainly grow).. the next BIG "problem" is giving better stock photos than the "competitors".. (I think I am in the middle of these two..) 1 - what is stock? (research hard..) 2 - do it very clean and give the best (not easy) 3 - work........! but I can tell you that reaching sharply ain't easy...  (I am not talking about the niche but the HIGH quality photos he can deliver..)
6681
« on: September 18, 2010, 18:39 »
That's just been my experience mostly with Istock. So it's all I know. (The other Micro sites have been recent additions to the list I submit to.)
I've submitted photos in the past (to test the waters) in which I had the right exposure, removed the color noise in the RAW converter, did minimal (if any) processing, saved the JPG at level 12 in Photoshop and they'd still send it back for artifacts and noise. I'd take it and run it through some noise reduction and it would get accepted. To me, it looked like I was removing detail. So irritating.
What about Alamy? Anyone?
For now I have just a few photos at Alamy but no rejections.. try small batches
6682
« on: September 18, 2010, 17:32 »
One of the thinks I've always hated about Micro is that I have to apply noise reduction to get nearly anything through the inspection process. I hate it because I know there is more detail in my photos than what I'm supplying. I can't always shoot at ISO 100 to get the right exposure. I don't mind taking out the color noise but to get rid of the ISO grain all together for Micro... I hate it.
So, with that said do have to make everything look like plastic for Alamy too? Do skys have to be completely grain free for Alamy?
honestly you sould try to be always at 100.. you can believe or not but I have never reduce noise in my pictures, got a few at on 200, 400 and some 800.. and were approved! (not talking about Alamy but all other stock agency) you can always have a tripod around
6683
« on: September 18, 2010, 17:19 »
A quick look at contributor charts (TOP100)
- 2 are removing files
- 12 have 0 uploads in last 30 days
6684
« on: September 18, 2010, 17:06 »
wow.. 75 new contributors on a day! and 5 more exclusives! more 13K files.. 85k sales! wow IS you are so poor
6685
« on: September 18, 2010, 15:13 »
And sugar in the end after woohaying.
This image without stickman who is opening umbrella someone clever exclusive want to bee Stokas or exclusives logo or they want to apply on T-shirt on some of Stokalypsy 
SUBMIT IT!
6686
« on: September 17, 2010, 14:28 »
too much space.. sometimes they don't care.. the majority of agencies accepts it..
AGAIN! please forget IS for a while... they don't deserve us (big or small contributors)..
What about zoom IN the picture (or get closer) and vertical perhaps? it would be more appealing and would fill the frame a lot better!
6687
« on: September 17, 2010, 14:19 »
This isn't going anywhere if people are balking at a $1000 investment - in terms of generating startup capital that's chicken feed. And getting 1000 semi-pro people to pony up that amount: you're already seeing the odds are long, so good luck with that. Personally, I wouldn't go anywhere near it unless you were asking for a $10k minimum investment and had a board of directors selected who together had decades of experience in dot-com startups, internet marketing, and stock photography.
I agree with you too.
so 10M ?
6688
« on: September 17, 2010, 13:45 »
Of course it's easier to buy an existing agency, it will spare a lot of time regarding many aspects. As long as its features would take less time to change (to fit our needs) than to build new ones from ground up.
I guess a new brand would be nicier once many buyers or contributors are not happy with those existent agencies.. What are the steps to create this new agency?? After getting the $...? Getting a web designer?
6689
« on: September 17, 2010, 07:09 »
I think you are Thai, right? I read some Thai on a note next to the sausages. Don't to forget to remove that kind of stuff or you won't get accepted for copyright.
The girl's face is too flat. You could change that with a friend holding up a reflector in the sun and certainly shoot her against a sunny background which will be overexposed. Don't crop her face on the chin: the composition is lousy this way. Portrait would have been better than landscape. Clone out her skin defects. Let her smile or express some emotion.
I guess that's a lot to start but 100% right
6690
« on: September 16, 2010, 17:48 »
Next you guys are going to tell me you guys didn't know that inspectors can self-inspect their images (or at least they used to be able to).
cool feature!
6691
« on: September 16, 2010, 17:38 »
the problem on that crop is that you will crop a lot of the photo.. have any new shoots?
6692
« on: September 16, 2010, 17:07 »
uploading to IS? yeh maybe later!
6693
« on: September 15, 2010, 18:35 »
nice feature, too bad I cannot see it
6694
« on: September 15, 2010, 18:19 »
no sales for contributors.. referrals? LOL
6695
« on: September 14, 2010, 15:41 »
Got the email payment also, too bad the 10% cut because of taxes but ok
6696
« on: September 14, 2010, 15:22 »
I am happy for the big contributors, you rock guys!
6697
« on: September 14, 2010, 11:42 »
6698
« on: September 14, 2010, 08:57 »
and you can't put "lego" word in keywords, title or description.
at this right moment we could.. I guess on the highest court the trademark can be approved but until then there is a gap I guess.. this new is more accurate and from this month (days ago) http://www.prokerala.com/news/articles/a166982.html
6699
« on: September 13, 2010, 18:49 »
FWIW I got 3 downloads on Stockfresh today, more than doubling my total $ with them. That is completely out of the ordinary. Would not be surprised if that was a buyer who was referred by one of the folks that's driving traffic there. If so, hope it continues
congrats Lisa, still waiting but honestly no problem once if top contributors have just a few, I imagine my humble pictures
6700
« on: September 13, 2010, 18:45 »
at least they are paying more than 20%... I guess they lack a lot on communication, but lately have improved on my side..
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
