|
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 - mtkang
Pages: 1 ... 27 28 29 30 31 [32] 33 34 35 36 37 ... 48
776
« on: November 13, 2010, 06:15 »
when one mention natural light, does it mean outdoor light?
777
« on: November 13, 2010, 04:46 »
sound like software cost and a good hardware is something to consider.
thanks all for sharing.
778
« on: November 12, 2010, 02:19 »
hi all,
I saw some very good rendering images that looks like a photos, when i browse around internet.
It seems some of them are using 3ds max, and i checked out the website there are 3ds max and 3ds max design, it mentions one is more for animation, and one is more for product design. Does it really make a lot of difference? basically i would like to render some interior design, but may try to make some game style figures or even animation, so does it mean i need both to do it?
I saw most interior design is with V-ray, so i need this software to integrate with 3ds max to achieve some realistic lighting?
what kind of software u are using?
thanks.
779
« on: November 08, 2010, 09:25 »
all the stocks are not fresh anymore, it is just some leftovers. 
780
« on: November 08, 2010, 08:06 »
i think most digital camera files are big enough to get accepted in Alamy, it seems some people still get confused seeing the 24mb uncompressed file size. It used to be 48mb? but 24mb uncompressed size is achieved by mostly 6MP camera. just open up the jpg in photoshop, maximise the jpg windows in photohshop and you can see a 'tab' under as 'Doc:34.9M/34.9' something like that, that's uncompressed jpg size. the one alamy refers to. I thought I wanted to put some material on Alamy until I read the requirements. I sell on the micro sites, and they all warn against interpolating and upsizing. I was surprised to see that Alamy requires it. So is it really worth upsizing, and keeping a separate folder in my system just for Alamy material? If so, what's the most efficient way to upsize that you've found? (I'm using Photoshop CS4.)
I normally start my workflow by batch processing to create 8-bit tiff files from my raw images. The tiff files are usually in the 25mb range. The resulting jpg files are normally in the 5 mb range. Assuming that you upsize the tiff files, how much would you upsize them to result in a 24+ mb jpg file, per the current Alamy requirements?
Thanks in advance for the input.
781
« on: November 08, 2010, 07:59 »
Snapshots can make it too, just try to use basic photography concept, like for the 1st portraits, try to look for a clean background. for your 2nd portraits the depth of field bring attention to the face, but there seem not enough of contents to tell what the lady is doing, looking at something? relaxing?
we all are started with something what we are shooting, one can get improved through whatever they are shooting. It also doesn't make sense to start shooting lady business model or some concepts shoot that needs more experience or equipment.
Just enjoy what you are shooting but put more consideration on technical skills, and you may come out with some portfolio strong enough.
782
« on: November 08, 2010, 06:53 »
i guess as long as it is a good images with commercial value, agency will still take it. but i notice both of your shots, the sign, and the mouse toy are under shades, it is under exposure and too small (mouse). basically it takes some good images to sell, but since it is for fun, you may just start with what you had taken. Personally, dreamstime is the one many beginner tried out since there is no approval is requested to start uploading, then fotolia. Shutterstock and istock needs to get approval by submitting some good enough photos. you may check out a post in my blog http://wp.me/pPDGb-24 to get an idea of those agencies. it takes some time to get some consistent earning, and remember to check out alamy.com. It maybe a better place to sell photos for some photographers, especially occasional photographers. If your purpose is just to get some photos to be sold and get some returns, shutterstock is the one you have to try the best to get in. enjoy it.
783
« on: November 06, 2010, 02:31 »
the last time (last week) i submit to Alamy, i guess it is still 1 failed and all batches failed. when i checked out those sold images that post by alamy contributors in their forum thread, i found out that a lot of 'editorial' kind images can be like a 'snapshot', a sink with dirty dishes, a potholes on the road. It is quite different than what i thought a stock photo as. I had mentioned some links in my blog http://wp.me/pPDGb-2H or u can just go alamy forum to check out what found alamy images that had been used. It seems like alamy accept any kind of shots since their sales results showed that their customers bought all kind of images. But dont get me wrong that i criticize those shots technically poor or suggesting we should submit that kind of photos to alamy. But they are shots that will reject in many agencies. But those shots i refer are more 'editorial' and not using in advertising.
784
« on: November 05, 2010, 09:37 »
it seems some images will be accepted by some agencies.
So if i take a picture of a close up shot of Nike shoe on a runner, and i had removed the tick. It is accepted by an agency and sold to a buyer. The buyer put it on a banner of a new gym and even the shoe looks without the tick, but Nike still can recognize it.
The buyer will be in troubles or the one who took the pictures?
785
« on: November 05, 2010, 06:49 »
are you seriously think that dirty sink photos are technically more difficult than taking some attractive models in studio? that sink photos can be creative if someone use it in some ways, but it is definitely just serves as a dirty sink in that website.
it is not creative, not newsworthy, not eye catching, not difficult to take,
Totally disagree.
The 'creativity' is in realising that a certain shot might have a value.
What's less creative about composing a pile of dishes in a sink than sticking a lot of fake-looking 'businesspeople' in front of a white background?
A pile of dishes in a sink certainly catches my eye (more than said fake businesspeople every would), because it has relevance to my life.
Who'se to say how difficult pics are to take. Maybe it's easier for someone with plenty of attractive models, a big studio and all the equipment to take the fake businesspeople shot. In my kitchen, it would be pretty difficult to take the sink shot because of lack of space to set up a tripod. Even though I almost never use a tripod, I know it would be necessary for that.
Of course, there will be many more sales for the FB shot. That's why I said originally, it's a big market, but not the only one.
786
« on: November 05, 2010, 06:39 »
it is not creative, not newsworthy, not eye catching, not difficult to take,
Totally disagree.
The 'creativity' is in realising that a certain shot might have a value.
What's less creative about composing a pile of dishes in a sink than sticking a lot of fake-looking 'businesspeople' in front of a white background?
A pile of dishes in a sink certainly catches my eye (more than said fake businesspeople every would), because it has relevance to my life.
Who'se to say how difficult pics are to take. Maybe it's easier for someone with plenty of attractive models, a big studio and all the equipment to take the fake businesspeople shot. In my kitchen, it would be pretty difficult to take the sink shot because of lack of space to set up a tripod. Even though I almost never use a tripod, I know it would be necessary for that.
Of course, there will be many more sales for the FB shot. That's why I said originally, it's a big market, but not the only one.
787
« on: November 05, 2010, 05:55 »
what i am trying to say those alamy sold photos are more like editorial, or just some photos that simply to accompany some essays or news. I don't think the buyer think about how it looks, is it eye-catching, noise, sharp.
most aren't used as advertising, it is just a photo that snapped by anyone.
it is not creative, not newsworthy, not eye catching, not difficult to take, and to my surprise that kind of images get sold aren't just random and low percentage.
788
« on: November 05, 2010, 05:20 »
ok, i just find it interesting to know there are some kind of images are selling instead of technically okay images.
Those are images that won't get into most microstock agencies, not much newsworthy too.
789
« on: November 05, 2010, 03:14 »
790
« on: November 03, 2010, 11:15 »
does it mean we can start upload images with people? is there a problem with uploads at the moment? Items in the "Upload Queue" don't seem to move to "Pending Approval" when you hit "Submit for Approval"
I am pretty sure it stays in the Queue until the reviewers move it to a pending area. It looks like they have been busy. What went up overnight is a lot of people stuff.
791
« on: November 03, 2010, 10:59 »
if istock is not doing an honest business, isn't it breaking law? can we sue them? 
792
« on: November 03, 2010, 10:07 »
I just tried connecting with the ftp command from the Mac OS X terminal. No problem reported.
it is quite frustrated, coz after 2 files are successfully, the rest keep failing to connect to server. hard to tell what is wrong, all i can do is wait another day.
793
« on: November 03, 2010, 09:34 »
anyone face problem ftp to big stock?
got this message of filezilla
Error: Critical error
Error: Could not connect to server
since yesterday..
794
« on: November 03, 2010, 07:34 »
US sales are like 10% of my sales..consider low as l thought major buyers are from US.
what about you?
796
« on: November 03, 2010, 02:48 »
if one can't get sale on big agencies, i don't see a reason one can get sale on small agencies.
797
« on: November 03, 2010, 02:39 »
i guess it got the collections for somewhere else? have it been opened for all contributors to submit images with model release?
798
« on: November 02, 2010, 05:29 »
thanks, but it seems most major income sites are US-agencies that paid in US with tax holding.
need some confirmations about the tax on the following:
123rf.com: US$-Moneybookers/Paypal (Tax-No)
Graphicleftovers.com: US$-Moneybookers/Paypal (Tax-No)
Canstock: US$-Moneybookers/Paypal (Tax-No)
Depositphotos: US$-Moneybookers/Paypal (Tax-No)
Crestock: US$-Paypal (Tax-No)
Cutcaster: US$-Moneybookers/Paypal (Tax-No)
after a search in their website and google, i found no tax related information.
799
« on: November 02, 2010, 04:04 »
hi all, I have consolidated some informations about agencies i am contributing. check it here: http://bobobuha.wordpress.com/2010/11/02/currencies-paid-by-microstock-agencies/i paste the list here and let's me know if there is any mistake so i will edit it. It may help you to squeeze a little bit cash. 1. It seems better get paid in EURO since US currency is weak. (remember to registered fotolia through their european or UK webpage) 2. Some agencies that is US based will have a significant tax(30%) on US sales for contributors from some countries. 3. Moneybookers has lower exchange rate than Paypal. I am not so sure those agencies that get paid in US but no tax, so if you had get paid with them before, please just correct me. Agencies that Paid in US$ and Tax for US sales: Shutterstock: US$-Moneybookers/Paypal (Tax-yes) Dreamstime: US$-Moneybookers/Paypal (Tax-yes) Bigstock: US$-Moneybookers/Paypal (Tax-yes) Veer: US$-Moneybookers/Paypal (Tax-yes) fotolia: US$/EURO/UK Pounds-Moneybookers/Paypal (Tax yes), If you want to get paid in EURO or UK Pounds, please remember to register through a EUROPEAN or UK fotolia website, however it seems sometimes the website will direct you to US based webpage, so just watch out. Agencies that Paid in US$ not holding tax for US sales: istock: US$-Moneybookers/Paypal (Tax-No) 123rf.com: US$-Moneybookers/Paypal (Tax-No) Graphicleftovers.com: US$-Moneybookers/Paypal (Tax-No) Canstock: US$-Moneybookers/Paypal (Tax-No) Depositphotos: US$-Moneybookers/Paypal (Tax-No) Crestock: US$-Paypal (Tax-No) Cutcaster: US$-Moneybookers/Paypal (Tax-No) Agencies that Paid in EURO and not holding tax for US sales: Zoonar: EURO Paypal (Tax-No) Yaymicro.com: EURO Paypal (Tax-No) Panthermedia: EURO Paypal (Tax-No)
800
« on: November 01, 2010, 07:32 »
i notice crestock got mostly subs download, may i know do u mean your 5 sold files are subs download? BME on Istock and Fotolia, 123, DT, SS average, also BME on Crestock (haha) with 5 sold files. That means something for sure! (with the mention I have on Crestock about 150 images compared to BigStock where I have nearly 2000 and they earned me the same as Crestock).
Pages: 1 ... 27 28 29 30 31 [32] 33 34 35 36 37 ... 48
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
