|
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 - sharply_done
Pages: 1 ... 26 27 28 29 30 [31] 32 33 34 35 36 ... 73
751
« on: June 06, 2008, 20:11 »
Geez, you sound bitter, marcopolo.
But it doesn't have to be that way.
Shoot what you like and how you like to make it.
Create imagery that matters to you.
Produce work that you can look (back) upon and feel proud of.
Trust that you will be successful if you are passionate enough.
Be the best you can be at making your kind of stuff and you will be rewarded in far more ways than money can ever matter. Go for it.
752
« on: June 06, 2008, 18:43 »
Didn't they already do this a few months ago?
Maybe this is your first payout since they began asking for ID.
753
« on: June 06, 2008, 18:19 »
TFP/TFCD is a common practice in photography all over the world.
...
This argument shares much with giving away your imagery in exchange for credit or mention: just because it's common for people to do it doesn't make it right. By not paying a model you are taking advantage of his/her ego in the same way that the photographer's ego is misused by unscrupulous/cheap photo "buyers". If you don't believe that it's right to give your work away for free, why is it that you expect someone else to give their work to you for free?
754
« on: June 06, 2008, 18:07 »
...
Here's the next connundrum. How does one determine a rate for amateur models? A kid would likely have a working threshold of about an hour.
Do you still give a cd?
I have no strong desire to use kids over adults, but the opportunity might be there for me.
You should arrange a test shoot before doing a commercial shoot - giving them a CD of the untouched images will be enough for this. Try to include the parents and family pets and shoot on location if possible - the more the merrier! The purpose of this first session is to see how comfortable your models are in front of the camera, how long their "window" is, and how well they look in the untouched image. There are people who you just *cannot* take a bad picture of, and there are people who always look "funny" in photos, no matter the setting. As far as what to pay goes, this is a very regional thing. You should telephone a few commercial photographers in your area to determine what the fair hourly and day rates are for inexperienced models.
755
« on: June 06, 2008, 15:59 »
TFP or TFCD is actually quite a common practice. It's a fair trade for individuals who want to build a modeling portfolio. There are plenty of parents who would like to build a modeling portfolio for their child. Trading a model release and time for free images is a good bargain.
That may very well be, but most pros (certainly accredited ones) only use TFP/TFCD non-commercially. The proper place for this sort of arrangement is when the photographer needs test shots and/or is building a portfolio. I'm with sjlocke - if you're going to require a model to sign a release (i.e. you're going to use the images to make money), the ethical thing to do is pay the model for his/her time.
756
« on: June 06, 2008, 15:52 »
Wow, only one payout after 1.1/2 years ... ack!
I guess success is relative ... I think I'm doing quite poorly there at a measly $100+ per month.
757
« on: June 06, 2008, 15:43 »
LOL @ pixart. or i'll try to make one with a gold fish jumping from seat to seat.
@ sharply. Yes. you are right. i should have.. well to be precise i did not email the buyer, but sent a PM. anyway i should have done like you said.
But how to define the price? for something like i did now 100 $ would be a bit excessive, wouldn't it? could i asked for 50$ ? 25? 10 ? 30 cts?
I guess you can chalk it up to a "live and learn" experience. Is $100 excessive? Nope. It's even a bit on the cheap side. You have to remember that they are buying a one-off custom image from you, which is totally different than buying one of the images you have for sale in the stock marketplace. Furthermore, the buyer would not have contacted you if there was an image available that was "good enough" - he/she expects to pay more. I've never had anyone balk at the price, and a few people have paid more without me asking for it. Still, $100 figures about the right amount for me to charge. It's a nice round number, anyway. If this seems too much, charge whatever you're comfortable with. It doesn't take much to beat the typical microstock sale, or even EL sale, that's for sure.
758
« on: June 06, 2008, 15:31 »
...
I believe CS refers to Canstock, not Crestock.
Nuh-unh (grin), or at least some people don't think so. jsnover reports that Canstock's sub package and pricing are different than the "CS" one reported in the original posting. <see the posting 5 above this one> But yeah, there needs to be a better abbreviation so that there's no confusion. Maybe "CA" and "CR" would work better. Or maybe "CAN" and "CRE".
759
« on: June 06, 2008, 15:22 »
A bit a late reply, sorry. But anyway thanks for the tips.
I made the change, uploaded it and PM'ed a reviewer to review it quickly. Then i emailed the buyer... and ... he bought it as subscribtion.... sight....
well. at least i made one buyer happy.
Let me get this straight - even though you had the client's email address you still sold the custom image through StockXpert? Why didn't you give the client an off-site price? This sort of thing happens to me on a fairly regular basis. Most times it's an "I need it bigger than what's on the site" request, for which I typically charge $100.
760
« on: June 06, 2008, 15:14 »
I'd be more selective than to send out something with every package. Choose only the most marketable kids that live fairly close by, and use a hand-written note. Something like "I really enjoyed taking these photos of Jennifer - she's an adorable little girl and a very natural model. Would you be open to allowing me to work with her to make some commercial-type of photographs?" would probably flatter the parents and open the door for you.
With the right approach there may be lots of "happy girls in sunny wheat field" shots in your future ... and lotsa cash, too.
761
« on: June 06, 2008, 15:06 »
Too bad you did not take in consideration SS, that is where I have a lot more images and more sales.
I do not believe it is possible with SS since they do not report out as DT and IS do ...
Mark
And even if they did, I would expect a "nice" speedometer reading would mean something like 3000+ DLs per month there. And I don't think there are too many people are in that club.
762
« on: June 06, 2008, 12:44 »
I dunno about the MkIII, but I always have NR on with my MKII. Maybe there's a glitch with the MkIII? If so, perhaps there's a firmware update for it.
Metering mode is largely redundant on dSLRs. Keep it on the default, shoot in aperture mode and use the big black dial to adjust exposure to suit your preferences. It'll sometimes take a couple of shots to get the exposure right, but once you have it you're home-free. One aspect of exposure that camera manufacturers have yet to clue-in on is "exposing to the right". Or maybe I'm wrong, and the newest models can do this. If so, that's the exposure mode you want to be in.
Selectable AF points are a feature that I don't use with this camera. The only time I used it was with my 1D MkII when I shot sports. I prefer the old-fashioned focus-first-then-frame method rather than framing and selecting the focus point by pressing buttons and twiddling dials. In trickier situations, I focus first, then switch the lens to manual focus before framing the shot.
763
« on: June 06, 2008, 12:27 »
Yes, there is that. Not sure if the guys doing it will be willing to sign releases though...
From what I've seen of your work, hubbie should be able to easily step in as a worker after the real ones have left for the day. As far as the real workers are concerned, you may want to approach them from a "I'll give you the images for free if you sign model releases so I can use them in my business" standpoint. I'm sure anything you shoot could be made into a nice brochure for them.
764
« on: June 06, 2008, 12:14 »
Custom settings? Like what?
Although I don't have a MKIII yet, the only things of note I remember changing on my MkII are second curtain flash synch and number of focus points (down to 11 from 42).
765
« on: June 06, 2008, 12:06 »
Though i understand your post i don't know what iota actually mean?
I used it in an abbreviated context. It's normally used in the common English phrase not one iota of difference to signify a meaningless distinction.
766
« on: June 06, 2008, 11:23 »
... Yes, I can brag now, and I most certainly will, but I seriously started considering other options.
Tearsheets don't count for one iota in the stock business. Sure, it's nice to get a prominent placement, but the only thing to benefit will be your ego. If you were a client-driven commercial photographer, this would probably open a few doors, and you could certainly approach a few notable and well-connected agents with it. As it stands, though, with you being a part-time amateur, the only thing you'll get out of it is bragging rights and a feeling that you should have been paid more. I can imagine the look on people's faces when you tell them that you received only $22.22! Kind of embarrassing, huh? On the flip side, this is the kind of publicity that may really benefit IS. Potential customers that may have previously dismissed microstock as being "amateurish" may now take a serious look at it. Which is good for all of us.
767
« on: June 06, 2008, 11:13 »
Even so, I don't think a subscription there would be a bargain. Their image collection is not competitive with the more popular sites.
Yes, I think Crestock should be charging more for weeding out the dross, not less.
768
« on: June 06, 2008, 11:04 »
Only one IS sub sale for me so far: a $2.00 medium size yesterday.
I hope there will be many more like this.
On the flip side, I've had a handful of 27c subs at FT.
769
« on: June 06, 2008, 09:22 »
Yes, it's pretty obvious that his MO is to use other people's imagery as components in his own. I wouldn't be surprised to find that he's stealing the idea for his compositions, either.
"Gee, I didn't know you weren't allowed to do this" ... sure, yeah, right. Come on, Chad at FT, get with the program!
770
« on: June 04, 2008, 14:50 »
What seems to happen (not just at iStock) is that the sites fiddle with their placement of search results and you'll see some threads about sales falling through the floor...
...
If my sales slump with istock, the other sites keep going and I don't have a huge drop in earnings.
Yep, my IS sales have recently fallen victim to this. Although I'm considering eventually going exclusive with IS, I'm glad that I'm not that way now.
771
« on: June 04, 2008, 02:51 »
Probably a long time - they've featured an image on their front page for ages where a woman is noticeably missing a large part of her abdomen. C'mon, go look for it, you know you want to!
772
« on: June 03, 2008, 13:46 »
I can see how people are going to get discouraged about their 'meter readings' - maybe things should be tweaked a little to avoid this.
If I could make one more suggestion it would be to have the gauges reflect sales rate (e.g. DLs/month) instead of sales volume + portfolio size. This is, to me, a more meaningful measurement of expertise than total sales and/or number of images online.
773
« on: June 03, 2008, 11:14 »
Yes, these look much better.
I think the IS meter needs to be tempered a little, though - there's no way I was going that fast, officer!
774
« on: June 03, 2008, 01:54 »
Good work, leaf!
Hmm, perhaps a speedometer type of graphic might be clearer. Or maybe a number between 0 and 99.
775
« on: June 01, 2008, 00:31 »
Yeah, that's about true. They should be trying to equal what SS is paying. Give it time: subscriptions are a new and unknown market to them - by the end of the year they'll be confident enough in their position to give us more. Or not, who knows?
Pages: 1 ... 26 27 28 29 30 [31] 32 33 34 35 36 ... 73
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
