Quote from: PrecariousPosition on May 16, 2008, 16:02

I'm in the process of setting goals (this experiment kicks off at the start of June) and I am looking for some input from some more experienced shooters.

So I am wondering if you have even put in an application to Shutterstock or iStock yet? A high number of good photogs get rejected the first time around.  WIth Shutterstock, it is then another 30 days to re-apply. So that puts you out till July. Just wondering if you have considered this scenario since Shutterstock is one of the moneymakers. Or will acceptance be automatic for you?

In my opinion, in no way do these flower pics relate to Valentine. Cut one, put a ribbon on it, light it properly, and shoot in studio or equivalent. Then maybe I'll buy the valentine keyword.

On the silverware, yes I have to watch what I use. I usually try and buy generic styles from a restaurant supplier, along with the plates. No Onieda flatware, no Lenox china.

And yes, wallpapers can be an issue as well, with the new "designer lines" that have come along. Likewise, designer clothing for models that come in distinctive prints even from discount stores (like Kmart and Target), because some of them are "designer lines" and have famous names attached.

So even though I understand the intended spirit of the above posts, it unfortunately is becoming a big issue issue with stock shooters.

Quote from: sharpshot on May 08, 2008, 23:24
As we can set higher prices with cutcaster, I hope to see more images that are not on the micro sites.  Having the exact same images as all the other sites might be one reason why no new site has made an impact in the past 2 years.

They do offer a higher commission rate with exclusives too, so will be sending them at least a few. Exclusive is selectable per image, like at DT.

For a preview of the new uploader, see this blog post

http://niagarashooter.blogspot.com/2008/05/preview-of-cutcaster-uploader.html

Like I said, they may have had many requests lately and may just be putting the blinfolds and earplugs on.  When you start to ave a mass exodus, there is a tendencey to want to stop it. Their solution - just ignore the problem.

What started out as a small ball of fire is now a faint fizzle.

Anyone who can, get your money and run.

Quote from: nativelight on May 08, 2008, 23:28
I found this on IS:

Zoological Locations such as Seaword, San Diego Zoo, Busch Gardens, etc - Logos, images from theme parks, shows, attractions, products, animals, productions, characters or wordmarks are all protected and cannot be photographed for commercial use.

For clarity this policy applies to ALL zoological locations.

But I think they're being overly restrictive.  You can find images of San Diego Zoo animals on Getty.

The difference is that on Getty they may be RM and not RF. They could be used for editorial. For instance, if they had a sudden death of the flamingo population at the zoo, that photo could definitely be used in a news item. Otherwise, to restrict the use of the photo would be in violation of first amendment rights in the USA.

But the poster is right about commercial purposes. Even the local zoo here instituted such a policy, and it is a small zoo.

Quote from: Velvia on May 09, 2008, 04:23

Quote from: takestock on May 08, 2008, 20:35
That's the way it is Velvia -  and you wont be hearing from them.

All you can do is log in and delete your images one by one - one per day!

Wow!
Are you serious!

Better get moving!

Seriously, I feel bad for you. I was lucky and as I think I mentioned before they closed mine in a few days (back in Feb). There may be fear there of the mass exodus. For them to not even answer you at all though, what a bunch of losers. Good luck to you.

Helix,

It's nice to hear an opinion from an intelligent voice rather than the snivelling rah-rah from one of the cowering masses. Yeah it get's old for me very quickly.

Next, can you try and get rid of those "First download of May" and "last download of April" threads? A giant waste of time, and I too have mostly stopped with corporate forums. Just a quick look in a couple of times a week now on SS.

Quote from: Slimshady on May 04, 2008, 12:54
How many people have photos that are selling 800 times?

I used the 800 as an arbitrary figure, and I did say HOT photo, not a puppy or kitty pic. Take a look at this image on DT. It presently has 345 DLs. Being that the image has good appeal and probably an excellent lifespan, it is likely it will receive many more good DLs in a relatively short period of time. However in the RM market, I see this photo with the potential to bring in much more.

http://www.dreamstime.com/beach-image112560

So how many people? Not many. But as you see it is not outside of the realm of possibility. It does indeed happen.

I actually came across micro back about 2004 as a photo buyer doing design work for several firms. I used to do the bulk of the buying through iStock.

A shooter for many years, involved in traditional stock during the dinosaur days of submitting trannies. Use micro now mainly to sell illustrations.

Is the failure occuring with the pen in all programs, or only with Photoshop? If so, what version of PS are you using? There are several threads out there in Forumland on the web about problems with the Aiptek tablets and Photoshop CS versions. Do a Google search on Aiptek tablet  with "pen problems" in quotes. Apparently there is trouble with Photoshop CS versions recognizing te pen pressure properly. Old PS 7 supposed to work ok.

Also, does the manufacturer have a support area on their website? That would be the best place to go.

And yes I ave heard that some pens have batteries, so definitely check on that too.

Quote from: Slimshady on May 04, 2008, 00:27

I come to the conclusion that I'm either being ripped off by the microstock sites or their is more money available for purchasing photos with the higher end buyers.

Only you yourself can decide what your whotos are worth and where they should go. Microstock is merely a different business model that fills a need for lower budget users.  It is a volume game for the photographer. A hot photo may be downloaded 800 times and earn you $800 in this volume game over time. The same photo, if offered as Licensed and Rights managed, can earn you $1500 or more for one sale.

Please note that it is not proper business practice to ffer micro as Licensed on rights managed sites. It is unfortunate that some of the Rights Managed sites do not spell this out implicitly - they are so afraid to use the "M" word (microstock). I do believe Photoshelter has taken steps to clarify their kanguage since of of their contributors had photos listed as RM that were already selling on a half dozen RF micro sites.

Licensed is there for a reason, so that usage of an image can be tracked. Once it is out in the market as RF, it is up for grabs. That is why this "exclusive buyout" that Dreamstime offers is quite the joke, although it does happen. A buyer would be stupid to do an exclusive buy on an image that has already been DL'd 250 times.

If you are interested in earnings potential for an image, the price calculator at Alamy.com is open to use without logging in. Do a search on a subject you shoot. Pick any image as long as it is "L" not RF. Then use their price calculator on it. Choose different criteria when doing this, for instance, choose one use as "Front Cover" and another price as Inside Page. It will help give you an understanding of how RM pricing works. BTW, on Alamy,  the quality of the image you select won't matter. So don't worry if the image you select is trashy (unfortunately there is a lot of garbage on Alamy Alamy does not edit content, only technical quality)

I do micro mainly for my illustrations - but most of my photos go RM. I have 150+ RM on Photoshelter but just in a holding pattern there to see where things go with it.

The guy who sold the 2 for $5K on PSC is a seasoned pro already having a track record with major magazines.  Just wanted to discourage any rush of upload mania there because there will be disappointment in watching every day for sales. It does not happen that way in the RM world. It is not unusal for an image to be considered by a buyer for weeks, and if it does not fit in the final product, there is a chance of the image being returned.

Some of the above cited is why FeaturePics will ultimately fail - they don't knw how to market properly for RM, and many of the contributors there that are offering images for $10 or $14 as RM (what a joke), haven't a clue as to what it is all about. Offering RM, a bulk of their (FeatPics) income should be generated from it. But they have no idea as to how to manage RM models and do not actively market such content. One of the reasons I quit FP.

As for the higher end buyers - they are out there. And only on rare occasions do they go micro.

On Albumo I got my account deleted back in Feb by simple email request. They never sent me even a courtesy reply, but on looking a few days after the email was sent, all the images were gone and I could no longer log in.

On subsequent posts regarding Albumo though, some say they are completely ignored in making such requests, so good luck there. Perhaps there is an exodus in progress and they are trying to put the brakes on.  You can delete one photo per day there - if you have a large batch this will take ages. Just go to the image as if you were editing keywords, and there should be a delete option there.

Just be polite in your email - I just said I no longer had time to maintain or upload.

Can't advise on SV. Much luck to you.

Hnestly I have tried some of the magic solutions you have listed just for fun, and for me they are an attempt at canned solutions that just don't work in all cases. I even hate the stupid extract tool in Photoshop, because it guises itself as an "easy solution" when t really is not. It's a reall pain in the butt for me, a lot of window dressing. I tried it twice and have not used it since.

I have been doing masking and composites since Photoshop 5. You don't need the fancy stuff and instant wizards for composites, you just need a thorough knowledge of your tools and how to apply them. Without learning how to use Photoshop properly, then yes, the money is wasted.

In the long run, you will waste more money on the supposed instant or easy solutions, becasue in the hands of inexperience, none of them will be satisfactory, and you are likely to hop from one to the next.

No opinions here

See the threads

http://www.microstockgroup.com/index.php/topic,4389.msg43874.html#msg43874
http://www.microstockgroup.com/index.php/topic,3803.msg36645.html#msg36645

I am not one for going exclusive, but don't berate anyone who does. At least the OP has done some proper research in his consideration. That's a very good thing, instead of just looking at the superficial benefits of the cream on top as so many do.

I had looked at this site several months ago and had put it on a "possible" list. Just wanting to refresh in my mind what the site looked like, tried some links, and it looks like the site is totally down.

Hopefully they notified buyers with email as well. Too bad they had to fold.

Quote from: melastmohican on April 29, 2008, 22:22
60 seconds per photo would be great 

I need to learn how to make isolations yet 

Getting it right or close to it, in camera is key. Think about what you shoot.

Shooting raw virtually eliminates artifacting problems, getting white balance right is done in usually one click. I have just about eliminated any need for third party noise reduction software too. My photoshop time in microstock images is minimal these days.

Although Elements is good, alas it does not have the Pen tool. It seems as though the pen tool and cmyk conversion are unique to the pro version. 

You can do some "layer masking" in Elements 5 if you can figure out how to set up a clipping mask there. I think this may have been improved in Ele 6 - not sure. But the best thing really is the pen tool.

Maybe he's bitter because he couldn't pass the 7/10 Shutterstock application.

Quote from: mantonino on April 30, 2008, 00:07

Quote from: snurder on April 29, 2008, 23:48Google?

Unhelpful?



I did a google search first of course - I want to add MORE to my reader than I currently have via a search.  If people have crappy SEO, I still may want to read their blog.  I don't want my reading to be constrained to who understands pagerank.

If people have crappy SEO, the blogs are not worth reading.

Looks like FeaturePics on steroids. And you know where that site is headed.

Google?

I spend about 60 seconds, if that, processing a photo from a raw file. One click for white balance, then adjust exposure, take down noise right in raw processor. Even isolations with pen tool rarely take longer than 5 minutes. If you're tied to photoshop for hours on end, you're doing something wrong. I upload only the best, and forget the 17 different views of a pitcher of milk.

That is a fact. You cannot be affiliated with any micro. For a discussion on PD, see this thread at the Alamy forum

http://www.alamy.com/forums/Default.aspx?g=posts&t=330