|
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 - madelaide
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 ... 295
76
« on: February 20, 2013, 20:11 »
What is an iQ sale?
I got one today, RM, very wide usage and even any size, for just US$73.
http://www.alamy.com/customer/help/alamy-iQ.asp
Thank you, but if I understand it right, it's a service that is just about managing licenses for a client, right? This sale I had allows a very wide usage, and this looks more like a discount price - does iQ include that? ---- Country: Worldwide Usage: iQ sale: Text book, editorial print + digital use, any placement, any size, multiple reuse for a single client. Industry sector: Banking & Finance & Insurance Start: 19 February 2013 End: 19 February 2023
77
« on: February 20, 2013, 11:52 »
What is an iQ sale?
I got one today, RM, very wide usage and even any size, for just US$73.
78
« on: February 18, 2013, 18:30 »
I tried ICE with some of mine and it just says 0% and nothing happens. Probably my old XP computer with 2GB memory, or the files are too big. Uninstalled, and I'll try again fresh tomorrow. I thought it worked a year or two ago. Odd. I use it in my WinXP, 3.2GB memory PC with very full HD. Is that an installation error?
79
« on: February 18, 2013, 18:27 »
Sorry to hear that, Dan, it must be frustrating. 
80
« on: February 17, 2013, 14:24 »
Madelaide, using a different projection might help that lake, but I'm really not sure. I doubt if it would help the sky - and is that polarised or is it a different exposure? Are you setting your exposure manually and sticking to the same thing in each shot? Normally there is only lens vignetting that needs correcting, not a dark central area. I used a polarizer in the photos shot for the other lake, I'm sure. I have noticed in my manual stitched workflow that this can be an extra problem, because even with the same exposure, tones may vary in the overlapping areas. Anyway, the Venice show is quite amazing! What is a multi-row stitch?
81
« on: February 17, 2013, 14:21 »
One funny thing is that people in Shutterpoint - where we can see if someone downloads a comp image - constantly complain about the ability of any visitor downloading a watermarked 700pix image (and we can put any watermark we want, in any position we want), but are fine about having their photos in FAA with that useless watermark just because they sell there.
82
« on: February 15, 2013, 17:52 »
I haven't checked lately, but their small watermark placed at a corner was the reason I didn't upload much there. I have some floral shots in which the watermark was on the black background - totally useless. In Imagekind's forum, members criticize those who insisted in at least an option for watermarks - which in the end was introduced.
83
« on: February 15, 2013, 17:44 »
Madelaide, Hugin might be useful for that lake of yours. I think I tried hugin a long time ago, the name is familiar. In which way would it be useful, for the general look or the polarized sky? I think the very-wide-angle look may be the attractive point in a pano, more than just an image that looks like a regular one that is cropped. It' s bit too much in the previous, but I like it here: 
85
« on: February 14, 2013, 12:33 »
You should be using at least a panoramic head to avoid parallax, but you can use a macro rail instead for single-row panos. You will need a spherical head (on your tripod, no surgery required) for multi-row panoramas. Most appropriate outlet for these is a specialist agency; these panoramas can be a lot of work, and I very much doubt RF pricing will generate a positive return. Wow, a lot of technical info. Maybe it's the landscape panoramas I've built, the best ones were shot with a non-wide angle setting, so I don't have big parallax problems? Some with wide angle lenses do present a lot of distortion. The other day I shot in a stadium and I was at a corner. The stitching itself looked good, but the overall look was a bit odd - one would say the stadium was not oval.  Still, the wide view is appealing. I haven't tried multi-row yet, but I planned to.
86
« on: February 14, 2013, 12:03 »
Do you mean for a website or for a direct negotiation? In a direct negotiation, I put the restrictions in the invoice. I believe however this may be not very wise legally, but I don't understand most of the legal text in any TOS anyway. So I put in very simple terms what is allowed and what is not.
87
« on: February 14, 2013, 11:59 »
http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/UM/redmond/groups/IVM/ICE/
Is commercial use allowed? Oh, do they say anything prohibiting it? Argh! My previous manual stitching procedure kept most of my to-be-pano shots sitting in the HD. I've only built a fraction of what I had in hand because of the amount of work required!
88
« on: February 13, 2013, 10:33 »
I used to take my photos horizontally until I noticed it was stupid most of the times. The only problem is that I have more difficulty keeping the horizon straight - of course, an issue only when not using a tripod, which is the normal case when I travel. These ones with the sea also pose a problem with the ripples and I have noticed that generelly using less photos spreading a wider angle of movement can be better than using more photos just slightly moved. In either case, I do some retouching in the overlapping areas to correct the lack of alignment of ripples. For Alamy - I will submit a couple to them to try - I suppose I shall mark these were digitally manipulated, even when it's just the stitched image? I wouldn't consider 16:9 a "real' panorama image, although one of mine has more or less this proportion. I would think that 2:1 or more would fit better in this definition. I have several above 3:1 and above, and they do look too skinny, that was my concern. They cover a very large angle of view however, like viewing from a lookout, but then I can not see much use for such an image, even if I have seen some for sale as posters (I have no idea if people buy them).
89
« on: February 13, 2013, 10:04 »
Hi all, I have been enjoying lately the art of making stitched panoramas. ICE by Microsoft has made my life much easier... Anyway, considering the stcck photo market, is there a proportion between height and length that is considered more adequate? Of couse this depends also on the subject, but I was wondering if there is a proportion I should be aiming as a thumb rule. This is my latest, from this morning. 
90
« on: February 13, 2013, 09:56 »
If this is what a long-time exclusive contributor gets from them, it is a serious sign. I'm sorry for Sean, not an easy thing to go through. Gladly, though, he will find many doors open to him.
92
« on: January 29, 2013, 11:34 »
Early last year I had occasion to review my portfolio and was shocked to discover about a quarter were marked RM. These images were all up elsewhere as RF. How these got in as RM I don't know. I would guess these images, if you marked them correctly upon uploading, may have people in them without MR. Even if the people are just dots in the image, you have to mark that there are people in it and that automatically will make an image RM. If you didn't mark and they find, they will change it. I would expect however they would send a note, even as an alert.
93
« on: January 21, 2013, 20:47 »
Is mine one of them? Geez, was there somene else as late? 
94
« on: January 10, 2013, 10:12 »
It is an annoying system, but the loigcs between the three categories of keywords is great for relevance purposes. I wished however that they would respect the composed keywords (they end up using the separate words, even if as a much less relevant result) and did not consider the artist name as another keyword (I appear in probably any search for anything releated to Adelaide, Australia).
95
« on: January 09, 2013, 16:14 »
96
« on: January 05, 2013, 22:59 »
No, just a common bike!
My passion for the last 20 years and a great partnership for photography!
Yes, and I hope a bicycle would help me go around more and farther, although that doesn't really limit me. I end up going everywhere on foot or public transportation.
97
« on: January 03, 2013, 21:39 »
Motorized Bike?  No, just a common bike! A freind, her sister and I are going to take lessons. Though I believe I will never be able to ride one without those extra wheels. 
98
« on: January 02, 2013, 20:24 »
When I go walk early in the morning, I often stop for a couple of photos with my mobile. I was photographed by a newspaper photographer when photographing today.
99
« on: January 02, 2013, 20:21 »
Learn to ride a bike.
100
« on: January 02, 2013, 20:20 »
I received an email today from Alamy QC saying the images were approved and are now in the regular finishing area for keywording and such. That's cool.
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 ... 295
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
