Or so many internet filtering systems seem to think.

I have been unable to access several microstock sites from differrent wifi hotspots due to the filtering systems employed by the system admins of these locations. So much for freedom in 'Amerika'.

Anyone else have similar experiences?

I think that the owners of the major microstock agencies should contact the makers of these filtering systems to get their sites unblocked.

[/quote]
Well that's because an LCD has a higher contrast than a CRT. I always process my own shots on an LCD, also to see banding. If it's OK there, it will be very OK on CRT. Anyways, for web use, most customers will use LCD, so what's the point of doing postprocessing on CRT?[/quote]



While I agree that most customers will be viewing on a LCD for web use, if that were the only option for stock use, we would never sell anything other than an x-small image, eh?

I doubt that Yuri Acurs started using a 39 megapixel Hassi because he expects all his clients to only use his shots on the web. These resolutions are good for billboards and double truck magazine spreads.

Therefore color and sharpness need to be spot on. CRTs still rule for this with the exception of the very high end LCD units.

The real problem is how to prove such a thing is going on, eh?

Seren,

What was your reason for dropping your exclusivity?

I bought a small handful of shares a while back. 
Not much movement up or down (it went up just a few weeks after I purchased them, but has tanked since then).

I have no plans to purchase more at the moment.

Now if IS offered a purchase program (credits vs shares), I might (emphasis on might) be tempted to go in that direction.

Very well though out analysis RP.

I do get the 'overfiltered' comment from IS from time to time...but I always use an escape route in my processing, so I just dial back my top layer and re-submit. Seldom have a rejection after I do that. I have never had the 'not stock' rejection. Just lucky so far.

Other threads indicate that the exclusives on IS get a separate inspection queue that seems to let a lot more shots through.

I have noticed some shots that seldom sell on IS, do sell on DT or SS though. That is one reason not to go exclusive I suppose.

Hey, thanks for the UBB code link! Thats great 

Thanks again,

-Joe

Araminta,

I see that you have over 7K of downloads from a portfolio of only 337 images! That is impressive to me.

What do you think you might have achieved if you had been an exclusive all this time at IS?

Also you mention a "Huge & Risky Bet", but my understanding is that one may opt out of being exclusive if it does not work out. Am I missing some fine print there somewhere?

OT, How do you get your lightboxes to show up at the bottom of your profile? I never have figured out how that is done.

Thanks,

Joe

I use White Lightning, which is also a Paul Buff product. They do exactly what they are supposed to, and the service department is top notch.

I would not hesitate to use the ABs either.

I have a friend that started with a continuous light set up, which he quickly abandoned for a WL set-up. He is very happy with his decision.
In short he feels like he is now in the "real world" of photography.

Softboxes and umbrellas give a similar look, but there are advantages to each. Umbrellas are light weight and can more easily be carried for a location shoot. The downside to them is they scatter light over a larger area than a softbox, which tends to be more directional.

In my mind, in a smaller studio it is easier to control the direction and spread of light using a softbox.

With the new 12+ megapixel dSLRs being crop sensor cameras, I feel that these entry level offerings are not going to be great for stock. Can you say 'chromatic abberation'?

The fact that the Canon 5D still has not been seriously challenged on IQ (at least at lower ISOs) speaks to the fact that the laws of physics have not yet been made moot.

I think you should call it the Clorox Bleach brush, it gets things hygienically clean, eh? 
Maybe you could come up with an oder eaters brush for old socks too!

Does anyone know of any models that have had their careers launched or enhanced by appearing in stock photographs?

I know that I have seen one pretty blond Austrailian model all over the web and in print ads in the back of throw-away magazines, yet I have never seen her face in any high profile professional ads.

So, my guess is no...but I am hoping I am wrong.

Hi all,

Here is a strange one, to me anyway.

I have a shot on IS that has had 468 views, and not a single download.
Now, I could inderstand if it was a nude or model in a bikini.
There are those that would just want a closer look in those cases, but this one is just a simple portrait of a pretty woman.

Anyone else have similar shots?

Joe

Now for a digital artist, you've probably been drawing since you were 4 years old, you develop some talent (hopefully), plus years learning design at college, then spend a blummin' fortune to buy the software and upgrades, many hundreds of hours learning multiple pieces of software, have a very high spec machine and OS that has to be upgraded frequently to keep up with that software."
Interesting observation, so here is my history. Took my first people portrait at age three (honest, used my dad's twin lens reflex camera).
Cut my teeth in dad's darkroom at age five. Had my own darkroom by age twelve. Worked as annual staff photographer for my high school yearbook.
Studied photojournalism, commercial and industrial photography in college.
Ditto everything you said above about software and computers (Mac Pro 2.66gh dual with four drives).

Putting together a shoot: Set up my $3000 lighting set. Arrange and coordinate for the model, make-up artist and hair person to show up on the same day and at approx. the same time (time invested, several days). Put up with flaky models that often call at the last minute with a lame reason for not comming or don't even bother to call. Feed everyone that does come. Pay them. If everything comes together, shoot the session with my $10, 000 plus photo gear (camera body, lenses, lighting modifiers, remote flash triggers). Time invested in actual shoot, five hours.

Go through several hundred photos to cull out the 30 or so real winners.
Post process, including (depending on the models skin quality) 20 to 30 minuted of retouching.

And for all of this, I get to sell a web size image that nets me $0.20?

OK, end of MY rant.