Quote from: sgoodwin4813 on July 15, 2016, 15:08

Quote from: pixel8 on July 15, 2016, 08:56
I carried today when I went out with my entire family to dinner, had pizza and a shake, no one died!

If I felt I needed to take a gun with me to go get pizza I would stay home or move.  You either live in a very dangerous place or suffer from some serious paranoia.

You never know what is going to happen. Not that I ever hope something like this will happen or do I worry that it will happen. When I am backpacking and carry a first aid kit, am I paranoid that I am going to get hurt and need to use it? No.

http://www.dallasnews.com/news/crime/headlines/20160712-robber-with-ak-47-shot-by-waffle-house-customer-desoto-police-say.ece

I do suggest that people who carry have extra training other than at the range. There are specific intense training environments that are available to the public. Once you are in this type of situation several things kick in such as stress, need to read the situation, and heart rate through the roof. Proper training will help you prepare for this type of situation but you never know how you will react until it happens to you. Proper training will also include the mental and physiological aspect of pulling your weapon and having to use it.

First of all my prayers go out to the families here in Dallas.

I agree we need some stricter laws requiring more thorough background checks as well as increased requirements for training. We need stricter and longer sentences for gun violence offenses including mandatory prison sentences for carrying a gun without a license. Automatic death sentence with no appeal process for homicides committed with a firearm.

I for one believe, per the constitution, US citizens have the right to own a gun. As far as the constitutional rights, the militia originally was described as "all able-bodied men who are not members of the Army or Navy (Uniformed Services)". These were ordinary people not in an organized militia until they were called upon which means the constitution gave the right to any able bodied man the right to own a gun. The meaning has been changed over the years by congress.

I preface my next statement with agreement that restrictions need to be made with respect to high capacity assault type weapons. There were approximately 13,000 homicides committed with guns in 2015 and there were just under 10,000 deaths by drunk drivers in 2014 and that does not include all other car accident deaths. Should we take away every bodies cars cause cars are killing people. No, it is the drivers of those cars.

Just my opinion and all I am going to say because the two sides will never agree.







   

and of course some places in the US we like to move letters around for the fun of it, such as.... "I have an idear for a ca". Translation: "I have an idea for a car"   

I have not had any rejected in 2015. The latest batches submitted in August, September, and October had no rejections. So I have not really seen any changes with my submissions.

I have not had any issues.

I am running 350.12 NVIDIA drivers and running PSCC 2015 and LRCC. NVIDIA keeps telling me there is an update but I do not update unless there is a good reason to upgrade.

Quote from: Shelma1 on October 21, 2015, 18:24
The gun incidents here get sadder every day. Four year old girl shot in the head in a road rage incident. I'm more and more in favor of confiscating all privately owned guns and melting them down. Use them to make a monument to the hundreds of thousands of people killed here by guns. http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/10/21/4-year-old-girl-dead-after-albuquerque-road-rage-shooting/

lets take away cars too because of drunk drivers....

So, we take guns away from law abiding people and only the bad guys will have them. I know that is cliche but how do you keep illegal guns out of the US with Mexico to the south.

Why not have tougher laws or better yet uphold the laws we have and hold people responsible.

Quote from: JPSDK on October 12, 2015, 20:21
It is NOT a posive thing if schoolchildren have to be guarded by police when they are in school.

They should be allowed to play and they should feel safe all the time.

Who said they were not able to play or feel safe? My kids were able to play. They did not feel afraid. When the police were not there, they did feel safe. So what is the big deal?

Quote from: john_woodcock on October 12, 2015, 18:34
What amazes me is that someone can put a positive spin on having armed police in a school.

I do not see how it is anything but positive. I guess if someone lives in a utopian world it might been seen as bad. You can have armed police in cars, on the streets, in mall's, in banks, in some government buildings, at events, etc., but then at schools it is bad?

I see police officers as protecting society and that is a good thing. Cops are at schools not just because of guns and I would say all the years my kids were in school they were absolutely not there in case of shootings. They were there to help with traffic, other violence such as fights, a friendly face to the kids, or maybe rare parents/kid custody issues. Whatever they were needed for.

This shows flaws on both sides in thinking about guns and statistics. This was a study by the CDC and commisioned by Obama. Some facts that dispute anti-gun myths which backfired on Obama as well as show there needs to be some control and tight regulation.

http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/human_nature/2013/06/handguns_suicides_mass_shootings_deaths_and_self_defense_findings_from_a.html

Quote from: Shelma1 on October 12, 2015, 11:34
The evidence is clear; gun owners just don't want to see it. Half a million guns are stolen from private owners in the U.S. every year. That's where "criminals" get them.

The right of people to live safer lives outweighs your right to enjoy hunting and clay shooting if it means every nutcase has easy access to a gun.

And I can't tell you how sad I find it that your kids' school had armed police officers. What a way to spend your childhood.

It is not sad at all. My kids got to know the police and the police got to know the kids. That is where respect starts, at an early age. And you do not have to be sad for my kids, they have grown up to be just fine and not scarred for life. One is a commercial helicopter pilot that wants to work as a rescue or medical pilot when he has the experience. The other is training to be a registered nurse and volunteers at a large hospital. So they grew up and want to help others.

I can pretty much travel almost anywhere in the US and feel safe. It is people who keep saying, I have the right to feel safe that bothers me because you are safe in 95% of the places in the US.

Quote from: robhainer on October 11, 2015, 22:12

Quote from: Justanotherphotographer on October 11, 2015, 08:14

Quote from: robhainer on October 10, 2015, 18:05
..........
There are other ways to protect kids in schools besides banning all guns. We could put full-time police officers in every school, control access and formulate safety plans. If having full-time armed security is good enough for our president, why isn't it good enough for our school kids?......

I agree, that is why those lobbying for guns are also super into big government, the nanny state and 90% taxation that would be necessary for this safety planning and constant supervision of their children by government armed troops, sorry security guards.

Sorry. That's crap. A lot of schools already have school resource officers, and they are trained police officers. If safety is important, then we should make schools safer with police protection. Banning guns won't do that.

I live in a rural Texas town and my kids have always had police officers at their schools. They have graduated now but from when they first started school in 1999 and until the last one graduated in 2014 there have been police officers present.

I grew up with handguns, rifles, and shotguns and was taught how to handle those guns with respect. I have taught my kids the same as they grew up. I believe there needs to be some changes in requirements to own a gun. I have seen many go through training to carry a weapon that had no business having a weapon. They would either hurt themselves or it would do them no good in the case for self-defense. Proper training is a necessity and if you are not willing to invest in in-depth training you should not be allowed to carry.

On the other hand there are sports that my family has been involved in such as sporting clay's. My wife, son, daughter, and I enjoy shotgun sports as well as my son and I love hunting.

I think there a lot of people here in the US that feel if you start restricting or regulating guns then that is the first step to taking them away completely. There is definitely the crowd that has that in their sites and would ban guns completely if they could. That is where you get the two sides that can't seem to come to common ground.

I think there are too many variables in the statistics to come to a conclusion. That is why both sides are able to see it differently. If the statistics were conclusive one way or the other it would be indisputable.

just my thoughts..... 

Thanks everybody, much appreciated. I will check out Zazzle.

Hello,

Looked a little bit but can't seem to find a POD site that a client can customize greeting cards with their logo or branding on the back. I have been using FAA for greeting cards but I have had a couple clients ask me how they can put their own logo and info on the back instead of FAA's.

I have found a couple I can order them myself but looking for something similar to FAA where the order is completely handled by the POD.

Thanks,

The last couple of mine were the following:

Country: Worldwide
Usage: Marketing package - Small business, Use in marketing materials, worldwide for 5 years (excludes advertising). This license is for small companies - up to 10 people.
Start: 02 March 2015
End: 02 March 2020
Gross: $38.00

and

Country: Worldwide
Usage: Editorial
Media: Editorial website
Placement: Single Placement
Image Size: up to full area
Start: 01 April 2015
End: 01 April 2018
Editorial web use, multiple placement; rights granted in line with customer agreement which may vary from invoice details above.
Gross: $10.00

I did have a couple $40 gross late last year as well. I only have about 140 images there and they are all RM

They need a new category, Photustration   

Yea, for DT you can disable 30% of your portfolio before the six months and then at 6 months you can disable your whole portfolio. Just about 3 months ago a huge number of mine reached the six months and I disabled them all.

I am not defending them and have not looked at them yet but every site was a start up at one time and who knows who might provide a service that fills a need and can provide better contributor compensation than existing sites.

I am not saying jump onto any site that comes along but why not take a look and research them. But hey, that is just my opinion.   

Just looked and their site looks kind of sad. Trying to navigate around is really a mess. To me it looks like it was just thrown up there to see if they could sell something. 

Hi Jack,

I noticed you support Rights Managed images. I assume the image is determined to be Rights Managed or Royalty Free by us when we upload? Are the prices for Rights Managed images adjustable by the submitter?

Quote from: pkphotos on September 02, 2014, 21:13
FAA is a big con, there are more contributors than customers. We are just making the owners rich through subs. I've sold hundreds of mobile phone cases on zazzle and none via FAA. And I've sold hundreds of prints via other POD agencies but just a few via FAA. I won't be renewing my sub once its up for renewal.

I have been thinking the same thing and am strongly considering not renewing as well

As Nikovsk said, they may not be accepted. That exact same thing happened to me. I submitted 10 images and six passed and 4 rejected. I used those same six and then added 4 others but guess what, not all of those six passed the second time. I guess it just depends on who reviews them.

Quote from: robhainer on May 31, 2014, 15:34

It's like, what, 12 files? 20? I looked at the ones they wanted to use for me, and only a couple were sellers. So it seems to me that if the other partner programs were so important to you, it makes little sense to opt out over 12 rarely sold images that will be used in a short-term test project. You all can click the minus all you want, but it seems to me that a lot of people just don't want to be reasonable anymore.

They are nicely and up front telling you your going to participate and if you don't then you have to pull all your images out of all the affiliate programs. Just another strong arm tactic. If they really thought they had something good (for all of us) we would have received a confidential email asking to use the chosen images in a beta test with some idea of the potential. NOT penalizing us for not participating. This strong arm tactic gives me no reason to believe it will be any different if the program becomes an official program.

If this is your business and the way you pay your bills then any business person that wants to stay in business does not invest product in a business model they have no clue what the potential or return might be. What if it is another deal like the Getty deal and instead of marketing to bloggers they are marketing to corporate advertising. I have no clue but that is the point. As a business I will not invest in a opportunity I have no clue what the impact will be. It could be good or it could be another program that continues the spiral to the bottom.

In business there are such things as Non Disclosure Agreements. DT could send out an email with minimal details with a link to log in to DT and accept an NDA where they would see the details.

Start the Beta with exclusives only that have a significant investment in DT (hopefully ensuring the NDA will be adhered to and severe consequences if not). If you treat your contributors as professionals and understand we are in business together and we both need to make profits for such things as equipment, bills, and taxes then professionalism is what you will get back. If there is no interest in opting-in into the beta opportunity then DT knows there is going to be a problem and the Contributor knows what he is getting into and can make an appropriate decision.

Once the Beta is completed advertise (with details) the opportunity to all contributors as an opt-in option to make more revenue. Advertise how the Beta program went and the results seen in increased revenue during the Beta.

Just my two cents and that seems to be the way professionals work.

Less than 100 images
been there 4 months
first sale in the first 2 months
no sales the last 2 months
all RM

Just started and I have a small portfolio but I hope to be building up. Got a day job that gets in the way   
I do not plan to do RF at the micro's anymore.
Maybe some day if I have a large enough portfolio that can compete I might try Micro's again but with such a small portfolio the one sale at Alamy is more than I made at IS, DT, FT, CS, and 123rf all put together in a year and a half. Most downloads were well under a dollar.