|
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 - Mantis
Pages: 1 ... 23 24 25 26 27 [28] 29 30 31 32 33 ... 219
676
« on: September 16, 2017, 08:59 »
I wish they took underwater stuff. I would gladly pull al of it off micro to work with Stocksy.
677
« on: September 11, 2017, 08:43 »
I can upload but I haven't since they turned the system back on.
678
« on: September 10, 2017, 21:00 »
Can I delete or deactivate my account?
Accounts can not be deactivated or deleted. The account along with all of its activity is permanently stored in the blockchain.
Alrighty then. No thank you.
679
« on: September 08, 2017, 09:06 »
Lets stop innovation all together and go back to the days of taking a dump over a hole in the ground and bloodletting 
You have a hole? Civilized rich snob!
LOL
680
« on: September 08, 2017, 09:02 »
LRTimelapse is NOT free (except for the trial version able to use only 400 frames)
Only 400 frames? I don't have a single timelapse / hyperlapse for sale as stock longer than 400 frames. For a beginner who doesn't even have a tool to put together an image sequence I would say that is plenty. 
And by the time they have made even close to 500 they will have realized that After Effects is the way to go.
Maybe that's why you have not reached 500 euros 
To properly capture a sunset or a sunrise, stretching over 2 hours in real time, you need something between 1,200 to 1,800 frames.
1,200 to 1,800 frames @30fps represents 40-60 seconds. Viewers are not willing to invest that much time in viewing a clip. I produce day to night timelapses of 8-10 seconds. Even then a buyer will often cut it to three seconds or less, especially when using it as a transition between real time video.
Have a look at what is being used in television shows, the timelapses are very short. A good example is the series Breaking Bad. It has hundreds of sequences which are very short but they are very effective.
I shoot 30-45 second time lapses all the time. Generally, if there's good variance in lighting I cut it into 2-3 sections 10-12 second clips and upload that way. But I would not waste my time shooting & uploading a 45 second time lapse of a static shot of clouds moving over a mountain. That is a 5-10 seconder at best.
681
« on: September 07, 2017, 13:09 »
Is there any sense to upload 4k video on iStock?
I have HD videos, but I am thinking to buy camera for 4k videos.
Read reply 1
682
« on: September 04, 2017, 17:59 »
Come back in 5 years and we'll see how optimistic you are ...
That's pretty optimistic thinking that this business will last five more years 
The industry is not going way in five years. It will just continue devolving.
683
« on: September 04, 2017, 10:12 »
Videos make about $6-$8 regardless of whether they are 4k or not. In other words you do not make more money with 4K. For HD, in comparison, you generally will make $23 per HD sale on SS (sometimes less and sometimes much less) and $7 on Istock (never more unless you are exclusive). I think IS is struggling on video, concluded from their recent survey. I do have some HD clips there, they have not all of my work and zero 4K of mine. I primarily support Pond5 and Videoblocks.
684
« on: September 04, 2017, 09:06 »
Recently I had an uploaded batch go AWOL so I reloaded only to find two batches a couple of days later!
Yep. Over time that has happened I just email them. Usually they find the images and tell me to just wait a few days. But with my Internet speed it only takes a few minutes to upload images, but video is a different story. And they have a limit on video per upload, so if you have a lot to upload that is a very strategic process to undertake. FYI there is a 30 gig limit on uploads at 123. If you are uploading Pro RES 422 that can easily be filled.
685
« on: September 04, 2017, 09:03 »
I am new here and this is only my second post but I have read most of the recent topics and I can't help but notice the huge amount of frustration and disappointment and even discouragement sometimes ! I guess all newbies know that it's not a huge business, doesn't make u rich or even close but I think many of the friends who post and comment here are really discouraging. I know they are being realistic, I totally understand that, but you can be realistic and at the same time keep some optimistic views for those who are eager to try and go through this. I think one can be realistic but in the meantime supportive and optimistic.
Sent from my SM-G928C using Tapatalk
There is nothing to be optimistic about when your royalties keep getting cut, when you keep producing commercially viable content yet your income keeps going down, when another agency comes along and gives everyone hope then either tanks, cuts royalties or both, when one agency learned of another agency's sneaky ways to cut commissions then copies it, when your work is copied by others and you are in essence competing against yourself, when someone steals your content and you have to fight tooth and nail to get it taken down, when you make 28 cents and your images is used out of terms when you should have received $28 and the agencies do nothing, when your content is mirrored on another site without your permission and sold for $1 and you make next to nothing, when your work sells for $300 and you make 30 cents, when a distributor makes more than you and the agency and when management tells you that money isn't what makes contributors happy, you will too will not be optimistic for all of the right reasons.
686
« on: September 04, 2017, 08:51 »
To be fair, although they're a bunch of foetid dingoes' kidneys, my rpd is much higher than it was in 2007, but vastly lower than it was subsequently up to 2015, when they chose to join the race to the bottom.
However, downloads are far, fewer.
But why now? What's changed? What has changed is how they report $$. Given the defection of artists, a highly probable defection of buyers, I can only conclude that the reporting was very inaccurate in the 'older days'. My personal evidence is that when this ESP reporting started in Jan I more than doubled to almost tripled my income from about $200 a month to $500-$600 a month with doing NOTHING. This happened only after they transitioned to the new reporting system, so it was quick, not gradual over time. Leads me to believe there either is or was very inaccurate reporting. I bet IS/GETTY would CR_AP their pink panties if their royalty system was audited for the last 10 years.
687
« on: September 01, 2017, 20:21 »
I deemed 500px scum bags when kelly thompson took over. When i deleted my port it took a couple of attempts with the word attorney in my emails. Finally left and good DAMMMMM riddance.
688
« on: September 01, 2017, 09:16 »
I shoot a low of time lapse and use After Effects for processing the videos. But I have a friend who would like to try time lapse, but doesn't have access to After Effects. Can anyone recommend a free program for converting photo sequences in to video files. Thanks.
Does he have any software? Like photoshop? After Effects is not the only Adobe product that will create time lapses. You can do it is ps if he/she already has it.
689
« on: August 31, 2017, 22:21 »
Why dont you just conract your credit card company and let them know these are unauthorized charges.
690
« on: August 31, 2017, 20:21 »
Here we are in the 11th hour. I am hoping for a miracle to make my month average!!
691
« on: August 31, 2017, 20:20 »
My last sunset I think was around 1600 frames, and I squashed it to one minute ...
Be careful here!
The correctness police will explain you the difference between sunset and day2night time-lapses.
Sorry, I couldn't resist!
PS. Get an external 10,000mAh battery pack and you will be able to go on the whole night, or as much as your memory card allows you to.
When capturing the sunset you just kind of guess, day to night I'd probably just aperture priority it and leave it :/
I can't invest any more on camera gear this year, dumped like ... probably a good $600 already and I'm bringing in pennies with the camera. Unless sunsets, product photos and macros start making a ton, my amateur-professional photography career is dead. lol
You either have to leave the aperture completely open, or use that trick: press the DoF button and slightly rotate the lens to lock the aperture at the desired value. This helps eliminating the annoying flickering made by mechanical imperfections.
Magic lantern is a good option if you use Canon, but I prefer to be in control, so I use an external Android app to control ISO and exposure time, throughout the whole sequence, without touching the camera.
If you do that, you can easily compensate the exposure variations, in post, with the holy grail method (google it)
That works well on some systems. Won't work on my Nikon but in the past I've used it VERY successfully. However, you lose metadata with this method and if you're using LRT you won't have any data.
692
« on: August 30, 2017, 19:34 »
September hasn't even started but my month is looking FANTASTIC!!! 
693
« on: August 29, 2017, 20:06 »
Maybe these are the 87 cent to $2 sods i keep getting.
694
« on: August 27, 2017, 13:31 »
Non-existent.
695
« on: August 27, 2017, 10:57 »
You have a lot of similars. That limits your portfolio value. And you have squirrels, too 
Hi Mantis,
Can you explain me better what you said?
Thank you in advance.
You have a lot of images that are of the same subject, same shoot (similars). Packing your portfolio with similar images will not help you grow revenue. Diversify, shoot lots of subject matter and upload only your best. Regarding squirrels that was more of a joke but not totally. Very low commercial value, meaning they do not sell much.
696
« on: August 26, 2017, 09:56 »
Is SS going to follow iStock in its footsteps as the next big stock business slowly sinking under the weight of its own size and mismanagement? I'd like to think SS is fundamentally different from iStock/Getty, but maybe it's the same kind of corporate/technical mess after all.
IStock compounded incompetence with unique pressure on finances thanks to their role as a debt vehicle for financiers. This led them to continually squeeze contributors to the degree that many people left or stopped uploading. Shutterstock aren't there yet, fingers crossed they aren't about to cut our royalties, that would be the indicator that they are stuck in the downward spiral.
In some way they have done it about one year ago (sneakily): less and less Enhanced and Single & Other sales
And, theoretically, push new contributors up who get paid less.
697
« on: August 26, 2017, 09:54 »
I reckon I've been reading about the imminent doom of SS for the last 5 or six years. Seems to me they are currently having some difficulty maintaining their wildly over optimistic growth projections and controlling costs and are overvalued. But not about to go over any cliffs. The success or otherwise of any individual's portfolio is not really an indication of how SS is doing any more than Farmer Brown not being able to sell his milk at Walmart indicates Walmart is on the verge of bankruptcy.
agree on most parts but there are a lot more (some very high end artists) artists than just Farmer Brown stating that their sales are down big time. The SS Ship is big but even the Titanic went down which many felt was unsinkable during her day...
Its a possibility I just don't think we are there yet another bad 6 months and the iceberg might be close.
When SS used to tank, it would usually rebound in two weeks or thereabouts. For me currently, I am on my fourth month of 40-50% less revenue. The spikes I do get to maintain my current revenue are video sales. Otherwise video seems to have dried up too. I find it odd that my video AND stills have dried up. Because of that it makes me believe that the drop in sales is indeed based on linking the search to elements of individual contributor's (rank, tenure, revenue, etc.) and not so much more competition. So for example, I must fit a specific profile that the search adjustment targets. It's the only logic I can muster with literally an overnight drop from my $1200 April to my $526 May and beyond. August is trending to hit $500, maybe a few bucks more. I believe what is happening is, for the most part, controlled and not so much organic.
I would plan on only making $500 a month on SS. The days of making over a grand a month are gone I fear...
Agree. Glad I have a day job. 
698
« on: August 26, 2017, 08:45 »
I reckon I've been reading about the imminent doom of SS for the last 5 or six years. Seems to me they are currently having some difficulty maintaining their wildly over optimistic growth projections and controlling costs and are overvalued. But not about to go over any cliffs. The success or otherwise of any individual's portfolio is not really an indication of how SS is doing any more than Farmer Brown not being able to sell his milk at Walmart indicates Walmart is on the verge of bankruptcy.
agree on most parts but there are a lot more (some very high end artists) artists than just Farmer Brown stating that their sales are down big time. The SS Ship is big but even the Titanic went down which many felt was unsinkable during her day...
Its a possibility I just don't think we are there yet another bad 6 months and the iceberg might be close.
When SS used to tank, it would usually rebound in two weeks or thereabouts. For me currently, I am on my fourth month of 40-50% less revenue. The spikes I do get to maintain my current revenue are video sales. Otherwise video seems to have dried up too. I find it odd that my video AND stills have dried up. Because of that it makes me believe that the drop in sales is indeed based on linking the search to elements of individual contributor's (rank, tenure, revenue, etc.) and not so much more competition. So for example, I must fit a specific profile that the search adjustment targets. It's the only logic I can muster with literally an overnight drop from my $1200 April to my $526 May and beyond. August is trending to hit $500, maybe a few bucks more. I believe what is happening is, for the most part, controlled and not so much organic.
699
« on: August 25, 2017, 18:15 »
I just emailed them and if you want your 4K to be offered in 1080P you have to upload two separate files. That was per their email to me roughly 6 months ago. Perhaps they've changed their technology.
That doesn't make much sense since they've been offering 4k, HD, SD and Web for all clips for a long time now. All of my 4k clips these last 2.5 years have been automatically downsized (to HD, SD and Web).
if you filter on hd, your 4k does not show up as an hd option so you have to upload 1080p if you want your work to show up with an hd filter. Thats why you need to upload two versions.
700
« on: August 25, 2017, 18:04 »
But SS requires you to upload separate 4k and 1080 files.
Uhm, no, they don't.
How long ago did they make that change? I am trying to scrape up the email where they told me I had to upload two separate files. But I do see if I filter on 4k it comes up with an HD option. I would not have communicated with them if that weren't an issue. Anywho, glad to see you can have the best of both worlds.
Pages: 1 ... 23 24 25 26 27 [28] 29 30 31 32 33 ... 219
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
