Hi everyone,

I hope this meet everyone well and in a happy mood. 

Frankly, I am offended by the idea that I am Yuri Arcurs in disguise or that he is using me to sell his images. Working my butt of like a mad man, I have produced every single one of my images by my own hand and that has nothing to do with Yuri. I have worked hard, and I mean really, really hard. I have invested hundreds of thousands of dollars in equipment and production, I have spent countless hours researching, planning, hiring people, scouting for locations. What to speak of the months on end in Capture One and Photoshop. Just because I happened to have the wits to approach the world's number one micro stock photographer in order to learn the business, that does not make me less of a photographer or contributor than anyone else in the business. Please see things in the right perspective. 

Yuri and I sometimes help each other out, and that gives both me and him an edge. The profit margin is of great concern to any good business man. Who wouldn't want to cut one's expenses? I will encourage anyone serious about this business to apply that same principle. For your information we have never shared models. Over time we have independently, on different shoots, hired a few of the same models, because we have used the same model agencies, but we have never shared a model. I can point so several other photographers on iStock that have used many of "my" models, because they are producing in the same city as I am. Just like this guy: www.istockphoto.com/4774344sean on iStock. He has used many of the same models as me, and I don't even know who he is.

And for the record, if you go to Getty you will find tons of the same models used by different photographers. That is the way the pro version of the business works. If you shoot in your garage with a few of your friends, then you won't run into this problem, but if you travel to top stock production locations then this is the situation. Sometimes I get slightly discouraged when I see a batch of fresh images by some other photog with a model I have just shot. But hey, that's the game. I wipe my eyes an run back into the game! 

I could make a long list of people who shoot images with similar style like Yuri. And why is that? Because IT SELLS. I produce images that sell. Why not credit me for that. For all you know I may have taught Yuri a thing or two about lighting.

I have chosen a simple life with least possible headaches in terms of upload and management. That is why I am exclusive to iStock.

I understand that when going forward as fast as I have, there will be a lot of jealousy and a lot of curiosity. I will ask you to please respect my privacy and please be professional in your approach. I am in this to produce great images and I don't claim my method will apply for all. For your information I have invested more than $500.000 in microstock and I expect to break even within 3 years of startup. My sales and income reflect that. I studied practically all aspects of the industry before investing in it. That would be VERY essential for anyone erase wanting to do the same. Otherwise one may loose a lot of money and waste a lot of time.

If you care to know, even before starting to shoot stock I was a successful photographer.

Kind regards,
Daniel

Hi Leaf,

This question is odd since you can only answer yes or no:

Do you have any employees or do you work as a team?

Kind regards,
laflor

Quote from: laflor on November 26, 2010, 08:40

Quote from: RT on November 26, 2010, 08:25

Quote from: laflor on November 26, 2010, 08:17

Just see the "25th"-comment. What is that all about??

Most of us are probably asking the same question. (the 25th comment is your one)

Nope, mine was the 26th comment. I was referring to your 25th December-comment, indicating that I think Yuri is jeepers creepers of Nazareth (probably because of his Arab looks and long beard), not the 25th comment counting from the beginning of the post.

Well I wrote that in reply to your strange statement that I highlighted,  I thought the way you went on about how peoples criticism of Yuri was "rooted in envy and lack of faith in God" made him out to be the next messiah.

In my view it seemed that you either didn't understand my philosophical statement or purposefully tried to twist it through the medium of ridicule. Now it seems you misunderstood it. Point is that if someone is busy ridiculing or putting someone else down then that is rooted in envy; ultimately envy of God. God created everything including persons and wealth, so if one is unnecessarily criticizing someone or something then one is indirectly criticizing God. Do you understand this point? So, also if someone is busy claiming others being the cause of their misery (less dollars for them) then that also means that they do not have faith that God will provide them exactly their allotted quota. Simple point. Naturally, that doesn't mean one should not stop injustice on the claim that it is indirectly sanctioned by God. Of course not. But then the situation is vastly different in that the criticisms is used to serve the purposes of God, namely justice. So, my question is if that is what's going on, or if the situation is just good old useless blah blah of unnecessarily criticizing others, in this case someone named Yuri. My post was meant to expose events of gossip about a friend of mine, on philosophical principles. I am not targeting specific individuals, just the tendency for unnecessary criticism. I most cases doing a move like that will create even more criticism, of me. But hey, I'm just an insignificant servant of God. Criticize me all you want.

Kind regards,
Daniel Laflor

Quote from: laflor on November 26, 2010, 07:09

n essence:
...
Further comments and getting a bit rough:
...
if you ask me.

What a drama queen blablabla post. Nobody "accused" YA of anything. You just thought somebody accused him. YA is fine. Your "rough" comments served no purpose whatsoever since nobody will feel targeted. But if it made you feel good, that's great. If you feel sick, take a walk outdoors and go vomit. 

Over time I have read countless comments on how horrible it is that Yuri is sharing his knowledge and that he is ruining the business because of it. It is that kind of ignorance that I am targeting. Perhaps the comments in this thread were said in a joking mood. Perhaps not. There is plenty of glorification of Yuri and plenty of defame and envy too. Just see the "25th"-comment. What is that all about?? If not envy, I have no idea what. Why the ridicule? Why the sarcasm?

Hi All,

 Every month since I started seriously uploading to Istock ( a little over a year now ) has been a new BME with the exception of one month that missed it by a few dollars. Love to see growth.

Best,
Jonathan

Same here

This is perfect news for me. I can't get my arms down. I was sooo close to making it to the next level (a difference of less than 3 weeks of sales), and I guess there must be hundreds of artists on iStock that are really close to the next level, and who would have just not made it by only a few downloads.

Those pulling their art from other sites are still in a good position: they are closer to exclusivity, which I think is a very wise decision.

Yours sincerely,
Daniel

Will it work with photoshop Elements 5.0

In some cases PE 5 can use scripts from Photoshop, but I don't know if mine will work. Why not give it a try?

I found this link where you can experiment and see if it works:

http://graphicssoft.about.com/od/pselements/qt/actions.htm

@Xalanx and danabeth555 Great to hear! Hope it frees up a little more time for shooting

All the best,
laflor

Quote from: sjlocke on January 05, 2010, 07:31

Quote from: Yuri_Arcurs on January 05, 2010, 07:03

I used that one before. Laflors action script is much better. As in MUCH faster.

If you say so.  All it is doing is an imageSize:
    activeDocument.resizeImage( final_width, final_height, final_dpi, ResampleMethod.BICUBICSHARPER ); 

There's nothing else in the action.  Any benefit from resizing (apparent loss of noise, sharpening, etc.) comes from just sizing down.

Laflors let's you do it as an action in the sidebar. The resizeimage only works as a script under file/scripts/resizeimage.... That's 1 click versus 3 clicks. I prefer fast workflow and prefer Laflor's. Thank you again Laflor. Excellent work! (Excellent stock photography by the way, see you at the top!)

Thanks Yuri. You are the most time efficient and intelligent business man I have ever met, so to me that says it all 

Thanks. I'm sure it will come in useful in future for hiding artifacts. 

Yes, that is one of the perks of the system

Just be careful not to loose out on sales because of too much downsizing. My experience tells me that when shooting with Hasselblad H3D, you can go even further up in the otherwise horrible ISO because of the ability of downsizing the 39 megapixel files. But with anything else but the H3D (or other medium format apparatuses) I wouldn't use it as a noise/artifact reduction method. I'd rather bring out the gaussian blur ...

Regards,
laflor

Here's a script from 2007 that does that:
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=59163

I'll just stick to imageSize .

Interesting. Hadn't seen that before. He has indeed done something similar.

My 2009 version could be considered an upgrade to the 2007 version for the following reasons:

- comes with a set of six actions to go with six individual script (2007 is a single script with no actions included)
- you can jump several levels down instantly whereas with the 2007 you have to click between 8 and 24 times to get from XXXL to M (24 if you don't make your own action for it, which I think many won't)
- works both ways; it both downsizes and upsizes (you really have to know what you are doing if you use it to upsize though)
- you get the prompt version asking you for a specific size in megabyte

The 2007 version does have the advantage of asking you to choose the resampling method, which can be handy in rare situations (although it can't actually upsize, which makes the relevancy of the function ever more rare). By default my 2009 version uses "bicubic sharper" to downsample and "bicubic smoother" for enlargement: I would say that covers the needs of 99,9% of photographers. I would say keep the ImageSize for the odd case of downsampling gradients and use my system on a daily basis for photographs.
Just my 5 cents!

Yours sincerely,
laflor

Look like congrats are in order, Daniel.

Front page of IS, Photo of the Week! That can't be bad for business, eh? 

Thanks Nosaya!
It's great publicity and will surely generate some extra sales.
I'm both happy and honored

Well, according to your blog entry, you've sold 5000-odd since Nov 10th. Hitting Diamond by the end of Feb is not out of the question for you __ or at least getting close enough to be ushered in under their 'leniency' rules.

I've noticed you appear to have been uploading entire series of images, presumably in the chronological order that you have them on your hard drive. I seem to remember you also saying that you had 4000 images ready to go? You'd probably be better off  out the most likely best-sellers from those images and concentrate on getting them uploaded first. Don't forget that 60% of your sales will likely be generated from just 10% of your port so it will be a big help if you can identify the images with the most potential and get them working for you ASAP. Good luck!

That is great advise. I've sort of begun doing it for my VETTA nominations but I'll strongly consider doing it for my "normal" uploads also. Thanks!

Without knowing people's December sales, you're not going to get much useful info from asking about the change from December to January

Just like people normally see a decrease in December similarly there must be a trend for January. It's that trend I'm after.

I'm not sure how you expect to make 10,000 sales in less than two months, but I think you're the exceptional contributor if you can.

I've had a consistent increase in sales since March/April (where I went exclusive) of 30-45% per month. Even with virtually no Christmas images in my portfolio December was still even better than November. December was my best month of the year with a little over 3.000 downloads. If January has a tendency of being 40-60% better than December, then it is still possible to reach 25K before the 24th of Feb. Especially if Feb tends to be 15-20% better than Jan (if Leaf's experience is valid for me too).

Given that you get to make diamond at 25K downloads even after Feb 24th I don't think you need to worry  either way.

Since Lisa and Sean "revealed" that there is no royalty increase between Diamond and Black Diamond I must agree with you totally