|
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 - GeoPappas
Pages: 1 ... 29 30 31 32 33 [34] 35 36 37 38 39 ... 51
826
« on: February 17, 2007, 12:04 »
It was said here before (I don't remember who said) that sometimes people buy from different sources because the sites do different things when downsizing the images, so they may look better in one site than another.
I would think that it would be cheaper to buy the original (large) size, then purchase credits from multiple sites and download different versions.
827
« on: February 17, 2007, 08:36 »
One interesting thing mentioned in the interview is that iStock is going to "allow contributors to get keywording services performed through them for a fee sometime in the future". Sounds a little like what DT is offering.
828
« on: February 17, 2007, 07:21 »
In my stats page, I get 123 downloads this year in the "Download, Print, BuyRequest and Extended License Purchases". Right below it, in the "Regular Downloads By File Type", I get just 111 under photos (default).
Well, I don't sell anything else than photos at IS - I even checked if something would appear in other options - so why this difference? 2006 figures are ok, so are January's. I have about 3-4 downloads a day, so if this is not as updated, it is quite behind (although they say "updated daily")
I have noticed the same thing and chalked it up to a different update cycle. If you check it again this weekend, the two stats should become more aligned if my theory is correct, since there are less sales over the weekend.
829
« on: February 17, 2007, 07:20 »
Has anyone noticed, they have been changing the alogrithm again the last few days at istock. Wonder what they are up to. I know because the photos that i see in my portfolio on the first page has been changing every other day......
I checked a few of my images and did not see any changes. How old are your images? And how much are they changing position? If your images are new, they will change positions more drastically from day to day than if they are older.
830
« on: February 17, 2007, 07:18 »
This may be a strange question/comment. I find that sometimes I get photos that are rarely downloaded or in some cases never downloaded suddenly purchased on more than 1 site on the same day. Sometimes 2 sites, sometimes 3 sites.
I have had the same thing happen, but can't figure out why it happens besides that it is a random event of some kind. I guess my question is: Can downloading the same photo from multiple sites actually act as a type of extended license? They would be additive, right?
Extended licenses are generally used for resale of an image on another item, such as a t-shirt, mug, mouse pad, etc. So, no it is not the same.
831
« on: February 16, 2007, 16:17 »
If I remember it right, images that had not been selling for over an year and were technically not up to the standards today would be sent to the dollar bin. So probably this one sold well in the past but not in the last twelve months.
It probably hasn't sold since they changed the Best Match algorithm... 
832
« on: February 16, 2007, 14:27 »
Here's a technique I use eliminate those ever-present dust spots. I make two passes at the image, first going up and down in columns, then inverting the image (i.e. making it a negative) and going back and forth in rows - this works particularly well on blue and gray areas such as skies.
Can you explain this part a little more? I don't understand what you are doing in each "pass". Are you using some tool from the toolbar?
833
« on: February 16, 2007, 14:24 »
So you want to know what search terms are most likely being used to deliver the most downloaded images?
Basically, yes. Here is my thought on how a transaction would work: 1. A buyer searches for "flag". Receives too many images of flags from around the world. This phrase would not be saved, since it didn't result in a purchase. 2. Buyer then searches for "flag american". The buyer pages thru these searches and finally purchases one image. This search phrase should be saved with one hit. If more than one image is purchased, then it should receive a hit for each purchase. Then each day, or week, you could create a report with the keyword searches that resulted in the most sales. Something like the following: "business hand shake" - 3000 hits "business female headset phone" - 2500 hits "pet dog" - 2000 hits I know that this system isn't perfect, but I think that it can give some more info on what buyers are purchasing.
834
« on: February 16, 2007, 10:29 »
...once a photographer, always a photographer.
http://rinderart.net/photosite/page.php?page=Profile
That makes more sense. I figured that he was involved in photography at some level for quite a while, but there was no mention of it in the first article.
835
« on: February 16, 2007, 10:22 »
Also, if you subscribe to the StockXpert monthly newsletter, we provide the current popular searches. The problem with popular searches is that it doesn't directly relate to purchases. For example, popular searches will contain searches from other artists that are checking out the competition or to find out where there images fall in the search results. It would be more useful if you could provide searches where images were purchased. That would tell us exactly what people are buying.
836
« on: February 16, 2007, 09:59 »
He is a man of many hats 
http://www.discomusic.com/people-more/41_0_11_0_C/
That is a great article. It is interesting to see that there is no mention of him as a photographer as of 2001. So it looks like he has come a long way with photography since then. He is definitely a man of many hats.
837
« on: February 16, 2007, 06:09 »
I've wiki'ed most of the files just like yours that contain these keywords because they are spam.
yingyang0: Sorry, but I don't agree with your assessment. 1. I think that spam is a strong word for a case like this. It's not like he used "sexy", "nude", and "business" as keywords. IMO, usage of the word spam should be reserved for cases where the word obviously doesn't belong (such as using the word "sexy" for a photo of a church). In this case, there is plenty of room for argument. 2. Photography is art. Photography is not science. As such, every person that views an image will describe it differently. It is impossible to describe an image with scientific precision, and if you try to, then you are removing one of the most important elements from it - the art itself. I think that iStock has gone overboard with their usage (or non-usage as the case may be) of keywords. There are plenty of concept photos that are going to be ruined by the new rules. For example, according to their rules, the word love should never be used in the keywords of ANY photo. Why? Because you can't see love. It is something that you feel. So to put the word love in ANY image would be against their own rules. The same is true of all other feelings, such as beauty, anger, happiness, etc. On top of that, there are many images that were specifically taken for a concept, but now will not be able to be sold for their original intent. For example, I have a photo that I created specifically for a few concepts. Here is the photo:  I created the photo for two concepts: the sacrifice that Jesus made on the cross, and the medical industry. As such, I used keywords that would describe those two concepts, because those concepts were the reason that I created the image in the first place. But now, the image will be described as a red water drop. Here are some of the words that were added to my image (as part of the Wiki process): Concepts (Concepts & Topics), Digital Display (Text), Digitally Generated Image (Image Manipulation), Fine Art Portrait (Portrait), Representing (Non-moving Activity), Ideas (Concepts), Computer Graphic (Art Product), Vibrant Color (Color Intensity), Multi Colored (Descriptive Color), Vitality (Concepts), Color Image (Image Type), Horizontal (Composition), Close-up (Composition), Nobody (Image), Stationary (Non-moving Activity) Multi Colored (Descriptive Color)? What? I only see one color in the photo - red. Fine Art Portrait (Portrait)? Huh? What does this image have to do with Fine Art? Digital Display (Text)? What does that even mean? Vitality (Concepts)? What were they on when they were looking at this photo? How is this conceptual keyword any different than the conceptual keywords that I chose? Stationary (Non-moving Activity)? This is an image that shows movement if nothing else. Digitally Generated Image (Image Manipulation)? Sorry, but the image is a photo. The only thing I did to the image was change the color. The image was not digitally created. So I don't think that the Wiki'd keywords are any better than the un-Wiki'd keywords, and in my opinion are worse. But that is just my opinion. 3. The assumption that iStock makes is that buyers know exactly what they are looking for. But in many instances, I have not found that to be the case. Many buyers are small business owners, churches, non-profits, etc. They are not professional designers that buy images for a living. As such, they don't know exactly what they are looking for and can use help in finding an image. Conceptual keywords can help with that. There is an example given by someone that said that they had accidentally uploaded the same exact file twice (on iStock), but one of the files had many more keywords. Well, the one with more keywords sold more times (by a large amount). And many of the keywords were conceptual keywords. I have found the same thing to be true of my images. If I add conceptual keywords, then the image usually sells much better, by a large margin.
838
« on: February 15, 2007, 16:04 »
This data is used to access your web account in supported stock sites and it is never passed through the Internet or in any other way neither to any third party not to ProStockMaster web site. That is an ambiguous statement. It says that it never passes info thru the Web, but then states that the info is used to access your web account.  I know what he means, but it was worded weird.
839
« on: February 15, 2007, 16:01 »
...makes the deal with Microsoft and istock a little more bizare... Actually, I think that this is just standard MS business: First, partner with an expert in the business to learn the ropes. Second, create your own product that will put your partner out of business!
840
« on: February 15, 2007, 09:26 »
It would be very helfpful if you could:
1. Write up the features that the software provides on your webpage.
2. Post screenshots of the product on your webpage, so that potential users could see what is offered before they download and install the product.
3. I would also suggest that you eventually (once all of the kinks have been worked out) add a Paypal link so that people that enjoy the software can contribute.
Good luck.
841
« on: February 15, 2007, 07:26 »
check these prices in your country and let me know:
Sony A100 (with DT 18-70 lens) $US749
Canon EOS 5D body only $US2454
Canon xti (single lens kit) $US755
Here are the cheapest prices that I could find. Sony A100: $670 (bhphotovideo.com) Canon 5D: $2789 (Buydig.com) Canon XTi: $680 (bhphotovideo.com) So I was able to find both the Sony A100 and Canon XTi for cheaper. I am a little skeptical on the price on the Canon 5D. Is that after rebate?
842
« on: February 14, 2007, 17:59 »
Series, which exist on some sites, are a way for a photographer to show more shots from the same topic within their own portfolio.
I don't have a problem with allowing an artist to group their images into different "series" and then having a link allowed from their personal page or homepage. This way if a buyer likes a specific image and wants to see more of what the artist has to offer, they can click on the artist's name and be brought to the artist's homepage, where there would be the option of different "series" that have been setup by the artist. But as you said, this would be different from a lightbox.
843
« on: February 14, 2007, 17:14 »
Void --- what's this Zazzle thing? I must have missed something!! Was this on the blog or... where'd did you get that info. PLEASE, fill me in.
 -tom
Check here: http://www.luckyoliver.com/info/user_agreement
844
« on: February 14, 2007, 15:15 »
I would prefer to have this option available along with the personal portfolio, without having to send it to 'others'. A check mark would be a good way to make it public if we wanted to. Just a suggestion
If public lightboxes are allowed, then I feel that a public lightbox should have a maximum % from one submitter. For example, limit a lightbox to a maximum of 25% of the total images. This way if there are 40 images in a lightbox, then only 10 can come from one source. I personally don't like the implementation of public lightboxes at IS. There are many lightboxes at IS that have dozens of images from a single submitter and then only 1 image from someone else. That is basically just another way to pimp images. Remember, lightboxes are for the buyer. They should be a way for a buyer to see many different variations on a theme. Not a dozen or so shots from the same photo session from one artist.
845
« on: February 14, 2007, 12:26 »
You have to love technology - making life easier.
I was hoping that Canon would release a firmware update that would handle the changes to DST. I sure hope that the new 40D will have this built in.
846
« on: February 14, 2007, 08:48 »
In 2007, it will start a few weeks earlier (on 03/11/2007) and last a few weeks longer (until 11/04/2007). This means that you will have to change some devices up to 4 times.
Why 4 times? there is still only one begining and one end isn't there?
Some devices automatically change DST, but don't have the 2007 schedule (for example some VCRs or thermostats). For those, you will need to change it twice in the Spring: once in March (based on the 2007 schedule), and then the device will change it in April automatically but you will have to change it back. You will have to do it twice in the Autumn as well.
847
« on: February 14, 2007, 07:58 »
I also have an LCD monitor and depending on the angle of view, the lightness/darkness of the image will vary.
I would guess that a calibration tool will work at exactly a 90 degree angle to the monitor. So, we should be looking at the monitor in the same way.
848
« on: February 13, 2007, 13:51 »
For those of you that live in the States, Daylight Saving Time has been changed by an act of Congress. In 2007, it will start a few weeks earlier (on 03/11/2007) and last a few weeks longer (until 11/04/2007). This means that you will have to change some devices up to 4 times. So remember to change all of your electronic devices (that don't have the new change built-in), including your cameras. You can read about the changes here: http://geography.about.com/cs/daylightsavings/a/dst.htm
849
« on: February 13, 2007, 06:33 »
don't the price increases happen in 2 days, on the 15th.
I think it will be around 12 days before they reach 1,000,000 images.
According to DT, it seems that the new prices won't take affect until next week. They didn't give a date, but I would guess on Monday, 02/19/07. http://www.dreamstime.com/forumm_6421_pg11
850
« on: February 12, 2007, 19:14 »
litifeta --- Who/where? You forgot to tell us which outfit is rejecting you..... -tom
He posted in the SS forum, so I would guess that is the site that he is referring to.
Pages: 1 ... 29 30 31 32 33 [34] 35 36 37 38 39 ... 51
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
