|
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 - Sean Locke Photography
7076
« on: March 23, 2009, 09:18 »
Read the comments there. I agree, taking a vacation and shooting a few pictures for iStock doesn't qualify as a tax write off.
Gosh, I hate these "easy to make money" articles.
7077
« on: March 23, 2009, 08:28 »
It's more restrictive. Just to the youtube business usages (including their promotion and such)...
"However, by submitting User Submissions to YouTube, you hereby grant YouTube a worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free, sublicenseable and transferable license to use, reproduce, distribute, prepare derivative works of, display, and perform the User Submissions in connection with the YouTube Website and YouTube's (and its successors' and affiliates') business, including without limitation for promoting and redistributing part or all of the YouTube Website (and derivative works thereof) in any media formats and through any media channels."
7078
« on: March 23, 2009, 06:04 »
Thanks leaf. Carolyn Wright seemed to agree that it looks like a grab as well: http://photoattorney.com/
7079
« on: March 22, 2009, 19:39 »
iStockphoto does not have exclusivity per image. Just exclusive artists with an entire portfolio of exclusive RF.
7080
« on: March 21, 2009, 22:55 »
That's true - if people post too often or too much nonsense, I drop them. Hopefully, I'm careful enough to post mostly interesting business stuff with the occasional personality bit.
I dropped @Cutcaster because John had promotional auto-tweets setup to go off every few hours which bugged me. He uses discount coupons, so he can see exactly how much revenue he's generating through Twitter - quite smart. While he's using it to drive sales, I'm clearly not his target market. I use it to build relationships and hope that by providing value (linking to interesting stuff, breaking news, spreading rumors, etc) I can build authority in the microstock niche, which helps my blog. Neither my method or Johns is more holier than the other, but they do represent different value opportunities to followers.
That's the beauty of Twitter. It is what you make of it. If you want to muck about and pass time, you can. If you want to use it for pure business, you can. It's just a tool. Use it in whatever way works for you.
Yes, I did too. He's a nice guy, but all I got were cutcaster ads and coupons out of it.
7081
« on: March 21, 2009, 21:16 »
I'm still experimenting, but I think twitter is overrated. Too much nonsense chatter, not enough business.
Yep, I had the same observation, but with some people I enjoy the nonsense chatter. I have two accounts. @microstock which is purely business, and @leetorrens which is my nonsense chatter. I think if you choose carefully who to follow you can keep your timeline pretty free of nonsense chatter. I hear @nytimes is rather light on personality. 
That's true - if people post too often or too much nonsense, I drop them. Hopefully, I'm careful enough to post mostly interesting business stuff with the occasional personality bit.
7082
« on: March 21, 2009, 20:40 »
I'm still experimenting, but I think twitter is overrated. Too much nonsense chatter, not enough business.
7083
« on: March 21, 2009, 14:52 »
You really shouldn't sell your royalty free imagery for logo purposes, as the user would not be able to trademark or "own" it, since there would be other copies floating about the universe. You could make a similar piece for him, though.
7084
« on: March 21, 2009, 14:27 »
Stuff like that is very useful for texturing in 3d work. Id buy em for sure. maybe not Vonkaras snow-track...
if you're really trying to hit the texture market, be sure you're far enough back to get a good large sample, so the user can cover a large area, or be able to make their own non-repeating tileable texture.
7085
« on: March 21, 2009, 14:23 »
On the positive side, there are some very nice lines to work with, and with a bit of work this might prove to be a moderately good seller. Consider adding a woman with an umbrella or two people with backpacks (and maybe even a dog) walking on the road to market it as a 'rainy springtime', 'exploring nature', or 'spring adventure' shot. Those with a more business slant might stick in a businessman with briefcase and umbrella to make a creative 'trouble on the horizon' shot, but it might be tough getting that to work well.
I don't know. Just from that image, I don't think adding people to it will make it any less dreary. I mean I can't picture anything in there saying "spring adventure" or "exploring nature" - I'd want to see people in those, in a park with green leaves and rain coming down through the trees. This one says "lonesome traveler", or "lost on vacation" or something.
7086
« on: March 20, 2009, 06:32 »
not for the agency as a whole in the long term.
Depends if buyers enjoy not churning through the same same from the factories everytime they search. They get a better variety from more contributors on iStock. Since exclusive contributors will enjoy more sales, you'll find more variety, also satisfying the buyer.
7087
« on: March 19, 2009, 21:00 »
Which is nice about iStock, because they are all independent, they can't fill the queue with their entire portfolio at once.
This kind of short-sighted protectionism will turn sour on IS sooner or later.
Why would it?
7088
« on: March 19, 2009, 13:50 »
Now that the major production companies are putting the same old, same old but new images into micro in great volumes, the same problem could arise there.[/i][/size][/font]
Which is nice about iStock, because they are all independent, they can't fill the queue with their entire portfolio at once.
7089
« on: March 19, 2009, 11:40 »
Name me an area in MicroStock that is not over saturated. Fact is that if the images are good or better than other images of the same subject they will sell.
My point was, that there are plenty of adequate blurry rivers, random mountains, colorful flowers and flying bees out there because absolutely everyone has access to some sort of natural phenomena. You'd really have to dig to get out of that hole.
7090
« on: March 19, 2009, 07:27 »
Problem is, a lot of people shoot amazing pictures of birds, flowers and insects, because they are right outside your back door. It's a very saturated market.
7091
« on: March 18, 2009, 19:58 »
As mentioned, if you are non-exclusive, or are not submitting exclusively, you can submit your content anywhere you like.
7092
« on: March 18, 2009, 08:29 »
What do you know about that, then.
7093
« on: March 18, 2009, 06:09 »
No (at least on iStock). Why would an inadequately keyworded image get more exposure? Maybe your simpler images are actually better?
7094
« on: March 17, 2009, 21:29 »
I don't really keep an eye on things like that. Too many images to track.
7095
« on: March 17, 2009, 20:32 »
This image was uploaded on March 12, 2005, and flamed today:  This was uploaded on January 18, 2008 and flamed today:  Now what?
7096
« on: March 17, 2009, 07:17 »
I'm almost 2000 images behind there now, and it's only going to get worse. I'm a long way from my next canister, and that fabled 25 uploads a week...
You could have an upload limit of 250, but that wouldn't help sales. Your portfolio looks to be mostly series of women standing about in swimwear or lingerie. Another 2000 of the same thing isn't going to improve your sales there.
7097
« on: March 16, 2009, 22:43 »
... a discussion that needs to be backed by something if you are going to be taken seriously. Like, when you are complaining about your portfolio not selling, you are taken more seriously, if we see ... you guessed it ... your portfolio.
7098
« on: March 16, 2009, 22:41 »
Anyone one who expects a professional business that deals courteously and in a timely fashion with them, and pays out regularly and with no issues, yet doesn't want to provide proof of their identity, should just be ignored.
7099
« on: March 16, 2009, 20:17 »
I managed to get a few accepted, none have sold. You have to keyword everything in their unique scheme, and it's tedious. Some of the rejections made at least some sense, others were just off the wall. Reviews and appeals take weeks. There's more, but why go on. ..
Way too many hoops here for me. If they ever sell one I might submit some more.
They should change their name to PITAphoto.
Why don't you link to your portfolio, so we can see what you are not selling?
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
