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 ... 28 29 30 31 32 [33] 34 35 36 37 38 ... 73
801
« on: May 17, 2008, 23:00 »
slow but steady. sad truth is, all sales totaled on all my other agencies together, do not equal what I do on either SS or IS. Go figure. =tom
This is true for all but the elite. Earnings from DT only begin to count for something when you have a lot of level 3/4/5 images. Once you hit Emerald level (10k+ sales) on FT you can significantly raise your pricing. Until you reach those levels you'll have to be satisfied with three-figure monthly earnings from those agencies. It's a fair guess that only the supra-elite are pulling four-figure dollar amounts from any of the other places just yet.
802
« on: May 16, 2008, 15:27 »
You should be aware that your timing isn't the best - summer is the slowest time of the year.
803
« on: May 16, 2008, 15:24 »
Yes, it's normal to wait a week for reviews at IS. If you want quicker service you'll have to become exclusive with them.
804
« on: May 16, 2008, 15:20 »
What industry? Are you asking about photography in general, art or just microstock? ...
Given that this is a stock photography forum, and by the nature of the questions, isn't it obvious that the industry being referred to is the stock photography industry?
805
« on: May 16, 2008, 13:16 »
Given the results of the recent poll about SS tier levels, I'm curious as to what people's ambitions are.
How do you see yourself fitting into this industry?
806
« on: May 16, 2008, 12:48 »
Then you'll need to (or at least you should) brush up on sharpening techniques if you plan to use this lens for macro shots. You might also want to play around with the aperture so that you know it's 'sweet spot'. The camera seems up to the task, though.
... good luck!
807
« on: May 16, 2008, 10:47 »
Apart from looking a bit too soft, the image is fine. What aperture did you use?
808
« on: May 15, 2008, 14:36 »
... Gathering the best images is what matters.
Yes, and if you 'gather the best images', you will be in the top SS commission tier in short order. As I said before, nobody who's serious about shooting stock has an excuse for earning less than 36c per DL for more than a few months. So you're unhappy getting 25c/33c/36c. What are you going to do about it? Complaining and whining won't help, uploading marketable images will. The ball is in your court.
809
« on: May 15, 2008, 14:11 »
Thanks for the input sharply done, I really need to research lighting more as I am lost when it comes to using reflectors, umbrellas etc. Maybe I need to drop this lighting idea and buy a D300 instead hah.
Need to know more about lighting? No sweat - go here.
810
« on: May 15, 2008, 13:58 »
Environmental portraiture sells much better than in-studio work. It's also easier and more interesting to do. Take a cue from Yuri, who says that that finding a good location is a top priority - so much so that he even outsources the job!
You should strongly consider ditching the softbox in favour of umbrellas (they're more portable), and get only two 1600 Ws flashes (800 Ws will not be enough in bright locations) with strong battery packs. Get three Pocket Wizards (or clones to save money if synch speed isn't a factor) so that you can be completely flexible in how you shoot. Get three stands, and make two of them booms so that you can place light wherever you want/need it. Use the third non-boom/non-flash stand to hold a (gold, silver, or white) reflector. Technique-wise, learn about shutter drag and key shifting so that you can squeeze as much out of every location as possible.
... good luck!
811
« on: May 15, 2008, 13:22 »
C'mon, people, stop complaining so much. It's embarrassing. As elnur said in related thread, if you've been seriously working at this for any time longer than one year you really have no excuse for not getting a 27% boost in SS income.
As far as the casual people are concerned, this isn't a free ride; like anything else, what you'll get out of it is proportional the effort you put into it. If I was a part-timer/amateur/hobbiest it would be a no-brainer to go exclusive with IS - if you're that upset with SS, and stock money is used to supplement income from your day job, you should very seriously consider this route.
812
« on: May 15, 2008, 13:06 »
I get this type of stuff regularly, and charge $100 for high res (17MP) and $20 for small (< 2MP). Nobody has ever balked at the price, and one customer even paid me substantially more. I include the following boilerplate in my initial response: The licensing terms are as follows: You may use the image as you see fit in perpetuity in both print and electronic form. You may not claim ownership or copyright of the image, nor may you sell or redistribute it. Attribution as "Stephen Strathdee" or "Copyright 2008, Stephen Strathdee" is optional and at your discretion.I've been thinking lately that I should charge more, but the requests have so far been simple derivatives of existing work which take me perhaps ten minutes to manufacture, and I'm just not that greedy. ... so from now on it's money up front ...
For smaller clients I use Paypal, and don't deliver the image until I receive payment. I send larger clients a 30-day-payment invoice. Depositing the cheque is about the only time I go to the bank nowadays!
813
« on: May 13, 2008, 20:56 »
*bump*
814
« on: May 13, 2008, 11:49 »
Yeah, .38 is low too. I would have assumed at least .40 for high end earners. Will be interesting to read what the big guys have to say about this....
Yes, $10k is far too low for the highest tier.
815
« on: May 10, 2008, 19:43 »
Let's get it right, guys. Acceptance rate means nothing: it's sales that matter, and in this regard Crestock is lacking in both quantity and quality.
Bottom line: Until you have a proven track record it will not pay to upload to Crestock, and even then the payoff will be marginal.
816
« on: May 10, 2008, 14:22 »
... One of the reasons I love being a photographer is the freedom it gives me to direct my own career. I would never let a customer try to dictate where/how I should sell my work.
This, I think, is the best aspect of this industry: I can shoot what, how, and when I want. Unless you have a 'name', this amount of freedom isn't possible in the client-driven (i.e. not stock) marketplace.
817
« on: May 02, 2008, 13:16 »
And May is sure starting off slowly because of it ... let's hope for a bumper crop of DLs next week!
818
« on: May 01, 2008, 12:27 »
I'm not tellin'.
819
« on: May 01, 2008, 12:06 »
What you see is what you get: The only reporting system they have is the royalty statement thing, which is almost worthless for tracking sales.
820
« on: May 01, 2008, 12:01 »
... There certainly seems to be some level of industry-wide contempt for these sites and those of us who have submitted to them. ...
Yep, there is. I recently received a somewhat terse email from a non-micro site with a 'heavy recommendation we hope you'll heed' to remove my images from iStock. While they didn't come out and directly say it was their policy to exclude micro contributors at their agency, they appear to be holding my uploaded images in limbo until I decide which side of the fence I want to be on. Whatever ...
821
« on: May 01, 2008, 11:46 »
So if description/keywords are wrong should not it be annotated and send back to describing queue for correction?
Yes, that's the way it should work in the ideal world. In the real world, however, you have to correct your mistake and upload the image again. This is true for all agencies, and not just Crestock.
822
« on: May 01, 2008, 11:29 »
Anything less than 40 cents/image would be a joke/insult to us. ...
I think you should prepare to be insulted. Sure, it would be nice to get a 33+% raise, and I'm all for it, but that would be too good to be true. And if it's too good to be true, it just isn't true. They have a history of increasing commissions by 5c, and I think they'll continue that trend. The difference this year might be some sort of bonus based on monthly sales volume (e.g. 1000 DLs=+5%, 2000DLs=+10%, 4000DLs=+15%, 8000DLs=+20%). A bonus system would place the onus in the hands of the contributor: you'll have to upload in-demand imagery if you want a better commission.
823
« on: April 30, 2008, 20:25 »
I think the voting categories are still a bit whacked - too many categories above $5k, not enough in the $1-5k range.
824
« on: April 30, 2008, 18:57 »
In terms of making money, it's really a Big Four followed by Small Three. You need to be uploading to DT. With the exception of 123, forget about sites that aren't on the 'Big 6' list. Here's an attainable monthly income end-of-the-year target for you: - IS + SS: $550
- DT + FT: $275
- StockXpert + BigStock + 123: $175
... good luck!
825
« on: April 29, 2008, 12:03 »
... I don't mind if my photos end up worst of the day but paying us just $0.25 for a download is making me wonder why I am there. ...
That's about how I feel, too. Crestock is by far my lowest earner.
Pages: 1 ... 28 29 30 31 32 [33] 34 35 36 37 38 ... 73
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|