|
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 - ruxpriencdiam
Pages: 1 ... 29 30 31 32 33 [34] 35 36 37 38 39 ... 42
826
« on: July 25, 2012, 11:15 »
I totally understand curbing people from uploading 20 images that are almost exactly the same
there is a contributor that is just over the roof, half his portfolio at SS is on a single subject and we are talking about objects, over 2k pictures of the same object, not concepts just them "on white" (over 10 sessions on the same stuff)
basically all shoots are 50 of the same object and upload! agencies seem to approve them...
123RF and DP over 10k
FT over 7k
SS over 4k
DT less than 500
IS even less
I am exclusively talking about similarity, nothing against "his/her" work, if I am talking about a subject that cannot be talked or I am unpolite please leaf remove it
And who it may be i wanna go see?
827
« on: July 25, 2012, 10:29 »
I would assume that they want a diverse catalog, and want contributors to fill it with a new and different subject or topic with each file. Unfortunately for them, most professional contributors don't work like that. They work in sets and revisit popular topics, so these rules have the opposite effect. They become overly restrictive.
I think both the similar policy and the payment tiers work as upload deterrents. Why create new files that are just going to undercut your older files?
I also think that from a buyer's perspective having a few similars makes sense. Many times I have though "gee, I wish they would have just turned this way a little, or...". I totally understand curbing people from uploading 20 images that are almost exactly the same, but having a few choices is a good thing. At the time the contributor uploads, they have no idea which is going to become the better seller, or which will never get any downloads.
+1 That's what i have been saying.
828
« on: July 25, 2012, 09:33 »
If they have a plan i am a Billionaire!
And i dont think i am.
If i am a buyer looking for a specific shot and i find one similar and think to myself now this is what i want but i want it from a different viewpoint from another angle and a different focal length, what do i do?
Hmmmmmm i ask them why they dont have any other or i just go somewhere else?
Me myself i go somewhere else.
Just like Wally World they think they are doing the best for the buyer yet when they get the most sold items off the shelf to refill them with something else they think is going to sell better then loose both money and customers who now have to go somewhere else to get what they need.
829
« on: July 25, 2012, 09:07 »
It sucks, their efn dumb a**es and have no idea how much they are costing themselves and how many buyers they are loosing much less what i am loosing!
830
« on: July 24, 2012, 22:42 »
Also, we recommend you upload the selection of images in one batch (the entire series) so that our editors can select the files with highest sale potential. So this is a rejection they have initiated with the similars. Now because of the similar rejections they have that aren't even justifiable they limit how much you can submit at one time right? So how is it that someone is supposed to upload the entire selection of images in one batch? I at times have over 200 Editorial images to submit but cant upload them all as one batch because they limit my uploads due to me not really doing much uploading in the past three or so years because of their ridiculous rejections. So what do you do?
831
« on: July 24, 2012, 22:33 »
Since Fotolia has already been warned about their willful disregard for the Regulations and Internal Revenue Code, it may be time to submit the infringement to the proper authorities. If you send a letter of complaint to the Internal Revenue Service state the following:
1. The name of the Subject in violation, their EIN supplied on the 1099 they sent you and their address.
2. The alleged violation: Non-compliance with IRC section 6103(i)(i) which deals with the Safeguard of private information. Not even employees of the responsible party are to have access to that information. Only those having a need to know; such as Accounting Personnel, Legal Staff and CPA performing an audit. Failure to take proper steps calls for a warning, and then penalties can be applied.
3. Request that the Problem Resolution Officer (PRO) expedite the investigative action so that the issue will be acted upon and finalized within 30 days. Your basis for getting the PRO to initiate and control the action is predicated upon previous attempts to resolve the issue being fruitless.
Glad to see DT is on the ball! I'm not sure, but if Fotolia is an overseas operation, it could pose a problem. If they are based in the U.S, , then they are within reach.
The above information was secured from a reliable source in this matter.
Just my 2 cents.
I just love when people know the laws! Everyone should.
833
« on: July 23, 2012, 16:24 »
You could also retain the nice rich color of the blue sky and maintain the deep green of the cornfield. I am surrounded by tens of thousands of acres of cornfields and also have one in my backyard. Of course the OP can adjust better since they have the original. 
834
« on: July 23, 2012, 13:42 »
I am, the submission page wont fully load, it cuts off at the bottom and wont let me scroll down to click "Submit" once I have categorized my image.
Same here and just yesterday it was fine?  ??
835
« on: July 23, 2012, 13:40 »
@traveller1116 - thanks for the constructive feedback, now I understand some of the mistakes I'm making - going to pay attention to this. Going to make a new one with the magnifying glass being held and improve a few others using your feedback, and see where I can get.
@Lagreek: Hard criticism - but thanks for it, and your time.
@ruxpriencdiam - Concerning the OOF - I was intentionally making the background blurry at F2.8, so I guess I overdid that... Would it be better to increase DOF only slightly, or should it be sharp all the way?
I am not talking about the OOF BG. I am talking about the OOF from a shallow DOF in the front. Shallow DOF needs to go from front to rear. The focus needs to be tack,razor sharp in front fading out to the rear.
836
« on: July 23, 2012, 12:23 »
1)- copyright/trademark, lighting, focus OOF due to too shallow a DOF.
2)- LCV due to framing, cropping and or composition, also OOF with to shallow a DOF.
3)- copyright/trademark, exposure.
Not even going to look at the rest.
837
« on: July 23, 2012, 11:12 »
838
« on: July 22, 2012, 23:42 »
Now look what's started?
"Frankly, my dear, I don't give a *" 
Only cause you haven't found a flange yet!
839
« on: July 22, 2012, 17:28 »
The thought of these people only making a small profit off of our work is why so many dont care about how their images are used or what they are sold for or as.
I get what you're saying, but like the rest of us, you've chosen to market your images RF via microstock images.
Yes understood and that is why i only have 6 images over on Fotolia and should probably remove them all from there as well as dump quite a few other sites as well.
840
« on: July 22, 2012, 16:50 »
I worked in retail a long time ago - but what's your point? If you have some additional insight to offer, then please offer it. Otherwise, what does asking about our employment background do to shed any light on the issue?
Asking about background employment shows if you know and understand how retail works because most of all the long time photogs have never worked in the retail industry yet they try to justify the illegal use of their works by saying that the people selling their images dont make any money off of them when that is pure BS. My Uncle and Cousin were in the Printing business (wholesale) that they owned and operated until my Uncle retired after some 40+ years of working as a printer and they could print anything there was for pennies in any size they wanted on any material the frames were where a little more cost comes in but not much at all especially when you have a framer lined up that works with you. These people doing this do this to make money and do it quite well. They buy their supplies at the lowest cost to them that they can and no how much they need to run off in order to make their profit. And once they have the file they paid for from Fotolia or whoever do you really think they will only run off one print? Comon get real! I myself have been in retail all my life and they have one thing in mind and that is how to turn the most profit off of their merchandise that they can with the least expense being generated. The thought of these people only making a small profit off of our work is why so many dont care about how their images are used or what they are sold for or as. One of those image in that link is selling for a 30x20 for 84.21, the total cost of materials and expenses to produce the print is lucky if it runs them 20.00 the rest is pure profit.
841
« on: July 22, 2012, 14:56 »
The "hundreds of $$$" that these partners are asking for are covering material, labor and other overhead plus profit to offer the products. I'm sure they are not becoming instant millionaires with this business. but they have costs for paper, ink, amortizing whatever printing equipment they buy, staff and shipping in addition to the cost for the image. How many here have ever worked in the retail industry? I bet very few!
842
« on: July 22, 2012, 13:53 »
There's an English version of the site if you go to the bottom of the page. They are not selling wallpapers (as in computer screens or mobile phones) but wall murals/posters -for peoples homes/offices etc. All my images there are correctly credited to me (it's Fotalia for sure btw). I'm guessing this would work on the basis that if somebody buys one of my images for their home, I get a payment at FT. There's actually quite an entertaining feature where if you click on one of your images it gets added to the room set photos at the top -so you can see how it would look on the wall. Well, I found it entertaining anyway -but I should probaly get out more Regards, David.
So then you are saying it is OK for someone to buy it for hundreds of dollars from someone who bought it for pennies so they can resell it as many times as they like and only had to pay some .22 cents for while making hundreds or thousands off of it?
843
« on: July 22, 2012, 08:17 »
Shutterstock does not allow such uses as POD's or wallpapers as do the other sites.
It's all in the terms of use for each license.
844
« on: July 21, 2012, 21:12 »
Lots of the sites we are submitting to allow these kind of uses as well as POD's.
We are in the wrong business as i have said before, we need to buy the images and then sell them as POD's and wallpapers and other things so we can make more money.
Read the fine print on the sites you are submitting to you will be surprised.
845
« on: July 20, 2012, 14:23 »
FTP uploading is broke!
846
« on: July 20, 2012, 11:55 »
Troll's are nothing, you need to watch out for the troglodytes!
847
« on: July 19, 2012, 18:31 »
Ok, il take that advice for the isolation shots, buy some cheap reflectors, tent etc although i think i need to work on the lighting. In the meantime i have been playing with long exposures and have been travelling.
would a shot like this make it into stock? Its not really stock-relevant but iv seen some images like it on istock.
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/73163709/Long%20exposure%20rocks%202check.jpg
Forget the tent they are trash and just bounce light around and limit how you can shoot something and what size it has to be that's for eBay and flicker. EDIT:Do you not know how to resize your images?? You are just throwing your full size image onto the web for someone to come along and steal.
848
« on: July 19, 2012, 11:05 »
My popular has been rearranged once again!?
849
« on: July 19, 2012, 10:51 »
I have insurance through my homeowners that covers instances just like that or even if it gets lost or broken.
But if you are shooting for a living as a business there are other camera insurance companies you will need to use.
But if someone comes after my equipment with a knife they will be in trouble because they will meet my Glock 10mm!
850
« on: July 18, 2012, 16:06 »
Well my most popular has changed once again and this time all of my new stuff is now on page one of my most popular so there definitely is something going on!
Pages: 1 ... 29 30 31 32 33 [34] 35 36 37 38 39 ... 42
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
