Hi y'all

if anyone's interested, we've got some detailed info on the planet5D blog - including a visual how to install guide for the new firmware.

http://blog.planet5d.com/2009/06/start-your-downloads-the-new-canon-eos-5d-mark-ii-firmware-is-available/

Quote from: dbajurin on March 03, 2009, 00:37
I have the same experience when I was shooting commercial. Everybody keep asking when we will start shooting with real camera aren't we have enough of testing So we brought big JVC HDV camera with hard disk recording to fool the client

Which commercials did you use the 5D mk ii on? Are they online somewhere?

Well, we keep thinking that it isn't a "pro" level camera, yet lookie here, a Puma shoe commercial shot on the 5D mk ii! - please see my blog http://bit.ly/hHTUQ (url shortened to track clicks - here's the full url if you want to see it: http://www.planet5d.com/planet5d/Planet5d_Blog/Entries/2009/3/2_The_5D_mk_ii_Does_Commercials.html )

Quote from: leaf on February 27, 2009, 22:58
me, Trying out Canon 5D mark II

the feeble 10 videos i have online so far, with one piddly sale, was from a Canon HV30

I got the 5D mk ii specifically to do some stock footage, but quite frankly, I've been so busy with the wiki and blog that i haven't had time to shoot much video with it

I know sjlocke got a 5D mk ii, but don't know if he's using it for stock yet.

Quote from: dbajurin on March 01, 2009, 13:09
Well, I have finished shooting my first TV commercial with Canon 5D MKII.

Dario, that's cool - is there a copy online somewhere we can see?

Hi y'all

by no means complete, I've got a wiki devoted to the 5d and have tons of information on the video stuff...

This page is dedicated to the video issues. Still needs lots of work tho.
http://wiki.planet5d.com/index.php?title=Mii_video

Quote from: Perrush on January 29, 2009, 13:45
I followed her by coincidence because one image of her interfered with my best selling.  I was amazed she had such an amount of dl's with such average portfolio.

Average? HUH?

I see others like Sean (SJLocke) have put in their comments, but i have got to stick up for my good buddy here. I'll simply say this. She is in that position simply because her portfolio speaks for itself. An "average" portfolio (like mine LOL) will not get 150k+ downloads. To call her portfolio "average" is just an inaccurate choice of words.

Sorry I'm late to this conversation - have been very busy working on my website and ignoring my stock stuff.

Quote from: donnelt on November 13, 2008, 12:57
Micth .. looks like you were onto something.  I contacted a couple of experts in the field of metadata.  One of them (David Riecks - www.controlledvocabulary.com) pointed out that the PLUS coalition has established some advanced principles for embedded release information.  You can see the structure at http://ns.useplus.org/LDF/ldf-XMPSpecification.

Darn, i guess they aren't gonna name it after me then LOL!

Good work.

Quote from: download on November 07, 2008, 05:22

Quote from: rinderart on November 07, 2008, 05:02
This is getting silly........... Again. you Honestly think 100,ooo photographers are going to do any of this stuff, ?? Please get real guys. Just a simple attach release to this image is suffient. your WAY Over thinking this if you want to succeed. Think of the lowest common issue. if I started asite tomorrow. my biggest concern would be ease of use. Not some stupid spreadsheet listing your Model releases. no one does that except geeks. and people with 50 releases.  sorry.

Agree!.............

And I guess I must be a geek and a person with 50 releases (but I'm planning to have 3 million releases some day  ) and I STILL want it to be easy - and that would be because I'm lazy - no, really it's because time is money and all that.  So I guess I better temper my reading of the forums, unless it's the really good stuff - like this!

This is something I agree with Rinder about.  Please keep it easy and trouble free.

Ken

I can't think of a more simple solution than integrating IPTC data with model releases... that way the site's system and your personal system are easy to manage. Sites could even implement a "show me more with this model" very simply. A spreadsheet is not the right solution.

Granted, for people like Rinder with 6000 old images, that would be a total pain in the tush to go back and update all images. But going forward, it would be so simple if all sites were to come to an agreement and did it the same way (yes I'm a dreamer). Someone's got to start and set an example...

Everyone loves how easy it is to put keywords in the IPTC once and all the sites use those upon upload... why not do something similar with model/property releases?

I think that you should just use the search parameters that google uses... they're the leader in the field and i expect every site to work the same way these days. Why make people learn multiple systems?

model / property releases... what about a totally new system? Suppose that a photographer were to embed a special code in the IPTC data (one of the rarely used fields - say maybe the 'writer/editor' or some other field) that had a specific key to their model / property release. Then, when the photo is uploaded, it could be matched to an uploaded model/property release. Obviously, the release upload would have to have that same special key in it - that way the files could be matched.

Doing it this way would even save the photographer time since once the release is uploaded and the photog puts the release numbers in the IPTC data, then for each subsequent file, they wouldn't have to do anything since the system could automatically pick up the model release out of the IPTC data and match it to the existing release.

I'd use a unique code made up of my name and my own release number - say something like "mitch-aunger-MR001'. This wouldn't mess up the keywords, and would still allow everyone to know which release went with which image very easily especially if the site managed releases based on this same unique key. The data would be imbedded in the files, so things would be easy to keep track of.

All of the sites could easily use the same methodology and maintenance would be much easier on everyone as long as everyone found the same IPTC field to use (which might be the only sticking point in this scheme?)

Obviously, it would be up to the photographer to ensure that the special IPTC data were applied to files with the model in it (not including just the table example).

Any site that is able to sell my images for big bucks is compelling to me.

I have no idea how to PRICE images - who the heck knows what the buyers will pay? With images selling for hundreds of thousands of dollars down to $1... i have no clue.

Quote from: tan510jomast on July 22, 2008, 23:04

Quote from: volk65 on July 22, 2008, 22:56
Simple: It's a national guard, a soldier in his uniform. He cannot provide a model release even if he wants to.

hmm, good point. i never thought of that. no national guards, or any guards for me, for sure ! cheers volk65.

another thing, without a MR no buyer will take your image anyway, right?
they know they can't use it without a MR.

ah, there's the rub... there's an assumption there that buyers know about when they need model releases. Haha - people buying a $5 image for a blog don't know a fig about MRs - maybe the big commercial buyers/magazines etc do - but i suspect that at least 50% of the buying public doesn't know when they need an MR'd image or not. Heck 1/2 the photographers don't know either!

Quote from: 9lives on July 23, 2008, 04:00
I have to jump in here and say what's always said....but here it is yet again.  From a designers perspective, we'd rather have a completely unfiltered image to work with.  They blow up better and retain more original data which makes it possible to filter it to our needs. 

A good stock image is one that can fit the widest array of uses and situations.  An image that you've sharpened or saturated may look great on your screen but cause huge expensive headaches when blown up for a large print job for example.

I seriously doubt it has anything to do with them being like "spoiled children" and more to do with providing sound images to clients.  But heck, what do I know?

I have to jump in here - I've read this a billion times, yet time and time again it is shown that this is maybe only 1/2 of the market - look at any of the top selling images on IS and on SS and you'll see they've been manipulated to some degree. Yes, some designers need unfiltered images... but face it, there's a huge market for COMPLETED images that can be used as is. Not everyone has the talent / skills / or time to make the image the way they want. I don't disagree there's a market for unfiltered images, but there's also a market for ones that are finished.

Quote from: cdwheatley on July 07, 2008, 23:35
I thought about the horizon but didn't straighten it because I didn't want to lose the hand in the top right hand corner. Usually that is the first thing I do in photoshop. I think I remember trying it and liked it better this way. Its not cropped so I didn't have much room. I figure they can always crop it later or not. My eyes are drawn to the girl and mood first, only after staring for a while do I notice the crooked horizon. Probably different for everyone. Also, the table and chair would be tweaked if I move the horizon.

In that case, why not straighten the horizon by cloning it down without moving the girl or the rest of the image... it is blurry enough you could fake it pretty easily... would make for a more marketable image

it appears that the site is back up!

However, they've changed their goals

"NaturalLifeStock is not a Microstock or Royalty Free site! All images have limited use licenses. Click below to read the Licensing terms. Thank you!"

maybe the owner is only selling his own images? I don't see anything about other sellers and my old login doesn't work.

Quote from: Zeus on June 15, 2008, 18:17
That's a pretty specialized type of image, a great image, but specialized because of it's proportions. Why not try Panoramic Images for, yes, your panoramas. You can deduce that that is what they specialize in.

Banners are indeed a great use for panoramas... and banners are all over the web

well, the strategy got your account deleted, but my experience is that buyers don't read descriptions... they just buy what they see. I had an image on one site that i uploaded an newer much nicer version to (instead of contacting support to ask them to replace the image - i was being lazy) and so i put in the description the link to the newer image - the buyers kept buying the old one! So, my experience is that either they don't care or don't read.

when something like this comes up, we seem to forget that microstock is all about volume. It isn't about the big bucks for a single photo - that's the other guy's game.

+1 for me.

Maybe when they worked on the commercial, there weren't production Xsi cameras available?

i should check with y'all more often... i tried the same batch of files 2 times yesterday with no result - guess i'll have to do some deletin'

you know the offer isn't so special... even i got one

Quote from: fotografer on May 29, 2008, 06:53
I have seen whole portfolios that I wonder how they ever got accepted where the photographer has just walked around their home taking photos of everything in sight from every possible angle making images with virtually no use to anybody.

On the other hand, one never knows what is going to sell and even the most mundane shots indeed do sell and are of use to someone. As the famous SJlocke once told me, "find a niche" and that's what i'm doin

That's nice, but why can't i click on each term and go to the results? Seems pretty basic for that to be there (i'm a web developer and would have designed it that way heehee).