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 - increasingdifficulty
Pages: 1 ... 33 34 35 36 37 [38] 39 40 41 42 43 ... 74
926
« on: September 13, 2017, 00:55 »
Yes they can and with the benefit of hindsight I should have bought some but I'm not about to now.
Oh, the things we would do and buy if we could see the future.
927
« on: September 12, 2017, 10:01 »
Just a fun little update a day later, it's now at 487,462 views! This kid is going places.  Low ad revenue is about $300 per day. It's probably more.
928
« on: September 11, 2017, 09:56 »
This is interesting, but what makes you say it is $100-$150/day? I'm using an Youtube earnings calculator indicating something as low ~$47/188k views. True, it may be more, based on the quality of the advertisers.
Normal Youtube earnings lie between $1-2 per 1,000 views, but it's a bit more complicated than that of course. It depends on what countries the viewers are in, what network the YouTuber is affiliated with, and many other factors. "Clean" content will earn more (this video would be that). But watch time also plays a big role, and has become more and more important. As this is a video that likely gets lots of watch time it will earn a bit more (more expensive ads, unskippable pre-rolls). $47/188k is low on clean content (approved for all advertisers). By the way, it's now 201,000.  Personal example: I found one of my videos with around 180,000 views in June and it earned $280.
929
« on: September 11, 2017, 09:03 »
How would he realise $10,000 (unless it's a contract up front)? Not on microstock, thats for sure.
First of all, $200-300 from YouTube in the FIRST TWO DAYS alone. Of course no one knows how many views it will get but $1,000-5,000 is very likely. More is somewhat likely on a video like this. Why not on microstock? That film can be broken down into about 20-40 timelapses, some of them very unique (where he enters the ports for example). That stuff sells a lot. A good timelapse can easily make $1,000-2,000 over two years on microstock. Many make much more. I think $10,000 is conservative. On top of all that of course custom requests to use the footage as the YouTube video gets more and more views.
930
« on: September 11, 2017, 03:44 »
80,000 shutter actuations for this one (D750): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AHrCI9eSJGQBut a timelapse film like this is worth at least $10,000. Most likely much more if he sells some of the clips as stock.
931
« on: September 08, 2017, 11:44 »
Just wondering if timelapse photographers have wrecked their shutters with so many exposures. I'm sure some have, but I haven't. Yet.  are they far more resilient than expected?
Yes. I believe so.
932
« on: September 08, 2017, 11:22 »
No I am talking about another few images. The back lighting I understand.
Like this one in a subway

Does it have to be a sun? Many subway systems have artistic lighting. I know this one is added, but I don't immediately think "sun".
933
« on: September 08, 2017, 10:09 »
People don't want realism. They want enhanced reality.
934
« on: September 08, 2017, 07:33 »
Even if you use the free version of LRTimelapse, you still need Lightroom....
No. You don't. You need an image sequence. How you obtain that is up to you. Just tried it, to confirm. It's fun arguing about pointless details, but at least just do a tiny bit of research before posting whatever comes to mind.
935
« on: September 08, 2017, 07:21 »
But it's the conversion that needs to be avoided.
936
« on: September 08, 2017, 07:15 »
Sure, that's exactly what your advice was about, lol!
I'm sure you're a good photographer, and I don't doubt one second that your timelapses are great and sell, but reading comprehension might not be your forte. This is exactly what my advice was: Information request: Free software to put together timelapse. (no other information specified, other than that the friend would like to try timelapse, so they haven't tried it before). Answer (one among others): LRTimelapse. That is all.
937
« on: September 08, 2017, 07:03 »
Ok. I give you that. Nevertheless, I believe it is only fair to assume that asking the question on a microstock forum denotes the intent to use the product for microstock.
And if you are honest with yourself, you should admit that this is exactly what you thought.
Anyway, in the best case, your advise was misleading.
Just admit you were wrong and went on a train of thought to the planet Insania, involving minimum frame requirements, sunsets lasting 3 hours and so much else. Out of the blue really. I doubt a beginner who doesn't even know how to put together a timelapse would start with the holy grail with 1,600 pictures...  I'm actually a bit surprised you didn't post that without a full-frame DSLR with 40mp+, don't even bother trying to make a timelapse. You see, many people at this forum have friends who are not interested in pursuing a commercial career in photography or videography. They might just want to do it for fun (hence willing to use free software). And no, that is not exactly what I thought. I'm sure anyone interested in the software can read the license agreement and decide for themselves.
938
« on: September 08, 2017, 05:18 »
...and now I finally got the report.  A nice big spike with the usual 2-3 days worth of sales combined. As expected.
939
« on: September 08, 2017, 03:41 »
Just remember that, regardless of the duration, LRTimelapse is not free to be used for commercial purposes (wrongly advised on the first reply to OP's question)
Not at all wrongly advised. Can you please point out to me where OP wrote that his friend was going to make timelapses for commercial purposes? I think you need to read posts more carefully or you might miss something.
940
« on: September 08, 2017, 02:54 »
Lets stop innovation all together and go back to the days of taking a dump over a hole in the ground and bloodletting 
You have a hole? Civilized rich snob!
941
« on: September 08, 2017, 02:42 »
We have over 12 thousands of video files on Pond5 and then such days happen;
Well, maybe for you, not for me. I'm telling you, I never have more than one day of no sales. And that's always a Sunday (reported later in the week). And that only happens maybe once or twice per month. Three days with no report is a site error. A quick look at the P5 forum will confirm. Friday (reported) is always a good day for sales on P5. Saturday is usually the best (reports Wednesday sales).
942
« on: September 08, 2017, 01:40 »
Yes, there will definitely be a big catch-up day soon. It happens a few times per year that they don't report for 1-3 days, and then a huge one. I never go 2 days without sales, and I haven't seen any reports either these last three days. 100% reporting issue, not a sales issue. I wouldn't worry. You will be rewarded shortly.
943
« on: September 07, 2017, 07:46 »
I'm not from Malaysia, but if there is no tax treaty I'm afraid they will always take 30%.
944
« on: September 07, 2017, 04:09 »
Might as well blame the inventor of the digital camera and the internet. Once it became easier and cheaper to produce and distribute high quality images it was always going to happen. Just like any comparable industry.
I would blame the development of civilization, allowing more and more people to not have to work as farmers so they can focus on unneccessary artistic endeavours. There will always be the good old conservatives, "back in the day, it was so much better". Every decade it's the same. You can be bitter, even angry, but the only thing that works is adaptation.
945
« on: September 07, 2017, 04:05 »
the only problem with it is that if it is pointed up or down the zoom ring will creep.
That's a pretty big problem for timelapse...  ...but I guess a little piece of tape will fix it.
946
« on: September 07, 2017, 01:14 »
On my 50mm that's the only way I HAVEN'T got flickering ... in manual why would the camera change anything at all when your intervalometer triggers? Internal software change or something?
No, every time you take a picture the aperture closes down to f8 (or whatever you set it to) and then it opens back up to fully open (1.8 on your 50 mm perhaps?). The aperture blades are mechanical and do not close down EXACTLY the same every time = flicker. Just look into your lens and you can see it yourself. That is why the lens twist method is used, to lock the aperture in place.
947
« on: September 05, 2017, 14:52 »
I'm doing more and more work in After Effects, and it amazes me how many new things and methods I can discover each week. I've been working with adding realistic camera moves (dolly in/out, left, right etc.) to static footage, and I'm just curious if there are methods I haven't discovered. Sometimes it works really, really well (looks almost 100% real), but other times it's a struggle. I know the standard camera mapping / camera projection way, but it's clumsy inside After Effects and takes quite a while to model (for me, I'm not that fast) in other software like Cinema 4D. As far as I can tell, you are limited to projecting onto flat planes in AE, which makes it hard to work with more advanced scenes. The Displacement Map in AE works well sometimes but I would like to be able to do it in z space. I know FreeForm Pro lets you do that, and I will probably buy it, but are there other ways of displacing in z space within AE? Simple corner pinning works sometimes too if the scene is flat with nothing sticking up, but making displacement maps are more fun.
948
« on: September 05, 2017, 04:07 »
I haven't used iStock myself, but I just tried searching for a number of common search terms and, while returning fewer results (about 30%) than P5 or Shutterstock, the overall quality seems to be higher. At least what you're first shown (I suppose "Best Match").
Is this something you feel also, those of you who know their library better?
949
« on: September 04, 2017, 07:12 »
thank you for your reply no not all subs i have SODS and ODDS
Then use that number.  Only you can decide whether the payoff seems to be worth your time or not. You will only really know 1-2 years from now of course, but you can always make an educated guess. Since no two photographers (should) have the same images it's kind of pointless to compare. 100 perfect advertiser-friendly people portraits with good tagging may be worth more than 10,000 average snapshots from a beach vacation.
950
« on: September 04, 2017, 07:00 »
All subs? That would be $8.25, say an even $10.
Multiply by 18 to get 3 years worth of income and divide by however many hours it took for you to upload those images.
Then you can be the judge of whether it's good or not for you.
Pages: 1 ... 33 34 35 36 37 [38] 39 40 41 42 43 ... 74
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|