MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Show Posts

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 - JasonM9

Pages: [1]
1
General Stock Discussion / Re: PC recommend compare to imac
« on: June 04, 2014, 09:58 »
$1000 for all that? Specs report please.

I'm primarily a Mac user but less than a year ago I built a PC with specs significantly inferior to yours, and was at $1200 (not counting the monitor).

Windows 7 Professional
4-core i7 3.4 Ghz (4770K)
16GB RAM @ 1833 Mhz
120 GB SSD (only 1 of them)
3 TB HDD (only one of them)
2 GB video card (GTX 660 w/ 960 cuda cores)

Granted, I paid for a new case, power supply and motherboard as well ($350 additional), but still, that would have been $850. . . your specs sound a too high-end for a $1k build, even with only the 6 comparable items listed. If I matched your specs, even with the case, PS, MOB, etc., I'd have been looking at around $1700+ instead of $1200 because 4GB is a serious video card. Oh, and 8 core processing isn't cheap either. Your claim of these specs for $1k sounds like an exaggeration. I don't believe it's possible to buy these parts new from retail or online sources for $1k. Did you buy used?

How is it possible you got all you mention for a grand?

And this is one of my points. What's on the monitor, by way of the Windows working environment, are some of the "uglies" I refer to.

I'm concerned with getting the job done and getting the most bang for my buck. I have 8-core 3.6GHz, 32GB RAM, 2 240GB SSD, 2 2TB HDD, 4GB video card for around $1,000 Windows 7 Ultimate. No way that I could afford a Mac with those specs.

Having worked on Macs in the past, I don't find the GUI to be any more attractive, but that's just me. To each his own.

That i7 was half of the cost of your computer ;) I'm assuming he went with an AMD chip.

Ha! Well, it was only 22% to be precise ($300 out of $1350 total w/o monitor), but your point is well taken. I knew AMD was cheaper than Intel but I didn't know it was that much, for so much more in terms of cores (and perhaps click speed?) Still wouldn't buy one though.

Still curious what elvinstar got with a 4GB video card and for how much, though he makes a good point that he shopped carefully over a period of months. Elvinstar?

2
$1000 for all that? Specs report please.

I'm primarily a Mac user but less than a year ago I built a PC with specs significantly inferior to yours, and was at $1200 (not counting the monitor).

Windows 7 Professional
4-core i7 3.4 Ghz (4770K)
16GB RAM @ 1833 Mhz
120 GB SSD (only 1 of them)
3 TB HDD (only one of them)
2 GB video card (GTX 660 w/ 960 cuda cores)

Granted, I paid for a new case, power supply and motherboard as well ($350 additional), but still, that would have been $850. . . your specs sound a too high-end for a $1k build, even with only the 6 comparable items listed. If I matched your specs, even with the case, PS, MOB, etc., I'd have been looking at around $1700+ instead of $1200 because 4GB is a serious video card. Oh, and 8 core processing isn't cheap either. Your claim of these specs for $1k sounds like an exaggeration. I don't believe it's possible to buy these parts new from retail or online sources for $1k. Did you buy used?

How is it possible you got all you mention for a grand?

And this is one of my points. What's on the monitor, by way of the Windows working environment, are some of the "uglies" I refer to.

I'm concerned with getting the job done and getting the most bang for my buck. I have 8-core 3.6GHz, 32GB RAM, 2 240GB SSD, 2 2TB HDD, 4GB video card for around $1,000 Windows 7 Ultimate. No way that I could afford a Mac with those specs.

Having worked on Macs in the past, I don't find the GUI to be any more attractive, but that's just me. To each his own.

3
Its hard to see how Gettyor anyone, reallycan claim with a straight face they are creating an innovation . . . and a few sentences later, says they have no choice but to take this course of action.

There is zero innovation that comes from having one choice. Thats what people with blinders on do: the only thing they can.

So which is it??? Innovation or no choice? Its not both because it can not be both. If they really had no choice then stop claiming this as an innovation. Disruption, yes. Innovation, no.

4
Quote
I get some sales on several other art sites

Hi Sharpshot

Which Fine Art sites are you successful on? I've tried Smugmug without much success, but haven't ventured further.

I don't really understand why my sales have taken off in the past 3 months - most of them shots of Washington DC, funnily enough. Maybe I'll be back in 3 months saying that it was a flash in the pan and sales have dropped to zero!

steve
Hi Steve . . . nearly 3 months along, how are things holding up for you on FAA? Still strong?

5
@mantis, thanks again. I guess I have to learn about this. I just did the calibration tool in Mac. But you mention SRGB. Is that the standard? I though Adobe RGB 1998 was standard.

goofy & paws, Ill keep trying SS, thanks. If I post here, how should I upload? Just small crops at 100% or the full pics? I assume I should use stronger compression cause some of these are 10MB pics at full size.

@jatrax, no offense taken. I wrote about my failures willingly because I want to hear it. I need to step up my game, but I also havent been stepping with the right tools, since all I have done so far is try to dig out and de-noise old images I made without much thought to noise at 100%. I havent shot exclusively for shutterstock. But I will. And I do have maybe 4 or 5 that can pass muster now. As for their forums, should I upload full size pics or just crops @ 100%?

One other point, you mention that unless I go macro with travel and such . . . well, is that a viable option? Thats what I have now, should I just focus more on macro-stock? And what else would that be except Alamy? Ive uploaded 2 dozen travel type pics to Alamy to start.

@gillian, thanks for your post as well. What top 5 are you now restricting your submissions to? Ive been reading Steve Heap and he seems to use around 20 places, but since Im so slow that may now be a good idea for me. Aside from trying to get into SS, Im submitting now to IS, FT, DR, P5, 123. The latter two, no sales yet. I was thinking of joining can stock and big stock, maybe deposit but they seem to be hated more and more so maybe I will pass.

6
Thanks very much to all three of you for replying.

@Mantis: I think volume will just be a matter of getting there over time, through improvements in workflow. Salability is something I have to work on, since I am new and need to learn more of what buyers want. Technical quality I can do with new images but older, already noisy images are problematic to work with. Ive long since grown a thick skin and am happy to ask for image critique. But I see the critique forum is not very active. What do I need to know about monitor calibration? Im completely clueless in that.

@JPSDK, thanks, I do enter/embed keywords in the IPTC. What do you mean photograph keywords? But yeah, Ive spent a lot of time repairing things. I maybe should bag that. Ive got several hundred new ones I can work on, half of which may be viable for stock.

@farbled, one reason I didnt get into Lightroom yet (though I will reconsider) is the fact that when you enter keywords, it doesnt retain the order you put them in, while Photoshop keeps them in the same order. This, despite both being Adobe products. Doesnt make sense! 2nd reason is I presume I can do all the same edits in Photoshop that Lightroom allows, and then some. But yes, if Lightroom speeds up the workflow significantly, Il have to consider how important it is to keep keywords in the order I want them.

Most of the noise Im dealing with at ISO 200 from my D300 pics are of polarized blue skies. Its not an issue where there are details. But heck, I have a D7000 now, which is supposed to be even better regarding noise, but I shot some similar polarized blue sky pics at ISO 100, and I still see some noise in them. Frustrating, though its not terrible. Id be glad to send you my 100% images to show you.

Good final advice. Ill keep shooting stuff I enjoy first, but want to learn and add studio white backgrounds as well anyway since it should help the income and is worth learning.

7
Hello everyone, I'm Jason. I've been quietly learning from many in this forum for 3-4 months now, and as a newbie have had little to say, but now that I have made a bit of a go of it, and have about 2 months of actual participation, uploading, and a mere 11 files sold, I thought it was time to write a post in order to (a) share my early experiences as a stock photography newbie in 2014 (I missed the gold rush, but I only learned photography in '07, and the idea never occurred to me until last fall), (b) hope that some veterans and recognizable microtstock group members can chime in with some advice, and (c) ponder if it's worth it going forward, since this is clearly a tough racket.

I am only doing this part-time, so it's not like I can upload hundreds per month, but I do hope to actually have enough to make some rrasonably decent extra income by the end of the year, so I am hoping to have 1,000 images at the various agencies by the end of the year. I'll need to start getting to about 90-100 per month.

I am presuming I will never be an exclusive anywhere, so I am not spending as much time as possible making as many new shots as I can and delivering them to iStock then moving to the next batch. Rather, I am spending a lot of time (too much probably) on the computer, going through old photos and submitting each one of them I process to multiple sites (5 so far), and trying to learn how to be better with Photoshop and how to establish a more efficient worklfow. My portfolio is, for now, oriented toward travel and architecture and landscape, probably typical of people like me who started photography with no intent to make money. The made-for-stock oriented shots are a totally new thing for me, and learning how to shoot with studio lighting is also new. But of course I will add more of these types of images in, trying to do things more commercially. With that said, I'll write a little bit about what I have learned/observed, some of the issues I am facing, and ask for anyone to offer ideas. All comments/criticisms are welcome.

1. Workflow. This has been the hardest thing so far. I shoot with Nikon so all I ever did before was process RAW using Capture NX2, which I like, but is somewhat limited, and is very poor for embedding keywords. I am also learning Photoshop techniques (helpful for real distortion/perspective correction, as well as for the filters I can play with in case I want to make snazzy/stylized versions for Fine Art America (I probably do), and for Nik Dfine noise reduction.

It turns out that one of my major impediments to developing an efficient and faster workflow is the fact that most of my shots were shot with a Nikon D300, which was kind of noisy even at the lowest native ISO of 200, especially with rich blue skies, which I frequently shot with a polarizing filter, if viewd at 100%. I had no idea back then it would cause headaches for me today. And I am finding that the challenge of striking a balance between de-noising and retaining non-blur/focus, in order to avoid getting dinged by the likes of shutterstock and fotolia for one or the other, is a particularly tall order, given the somewhat noisy images I have. I realize I could shoot only new shots and only at ISO 100 from now on, but I have some good images of great places like Paris, Istanbul, Great Wall, and others that I consider commercially viable (proven by the fact that 6 of my 11 sales so far are this type of image), and I really want to put them up. That may be a mistake and I might be better off only uploading images shot knowing what I know about stock now, and I am shooting some, but I lean towards mostly wanting to get my old shots online because I have more to learn at the computer than anything. And I don't know how to make this faster other than by slogging away putting in the time and just hoping I improve. I keep thinking I should learn lightroom, but one reason I haven't gone ahead with that is that when you enter keywords in your specified order, it re-orders them alphabetically, which I gather is fine for some sites, but not for the others (I forget which ones) which have a search engine that recognizes the leading keywords most heavily. So I keyword in Photoshop, even images I edit initially and export to jpeg from CaptureNX2 (ouch).

2. The sites. So far, I am submitting to istock, Fotolia, Dreamstime, 123RF and Pond5. I am planning to add BigStock, Canstock and Deposit. Why not Shutterstock? Mostly because I suck. Sometimes I feel like they are unreasonable (I know I'm not the only one) but it's their site, and I have to tow the line. I've been rejected 5 times with them so far, by trying to de-noise old images. It was a bad idea because then the problem becomes "focus." On several submissions, I've had them say as many as 3 images "would have" passed, then turn around and reject those that they said were good enough, the next time, by the next reviewer. Yes, I have had a total of more than 7 images that have been deemed good enough at one time or another by SS, but never all at the same time, and I don't dare include them all in the same submission next time because 5 of those have also been subsequently rejected, after having been considered passable during an earlier submission if the others were also good. And two of them, they said the only problem was the category, which next time were submitted with the correct category but then they decided composition was inadequate. I maintain the composition was creative, unique and interesting, yet not standard and not stock-oriented and thus, in the line of fire. I understand though. The owner of SS didn't get to be a billionaire by having low standards. The onus is on me to get into SS on their terms. Their standard are, if at times unfair in comparison with other crappy images they already have in their collection, clearly extremely high and I am determined to eventually get in. But I learned that noise reducing usually doesn't earn a pass with them because the blurring inherent in noise reduction becomes the issue.

Fotolia is the 2nd most dofficult for me to get images accepted at. My acceptance rate is less than 30%! I'm sure the de-noising/focus slapbacks SS has given me have negativelyu affected my acceptance rate here too. But either way, it's rough going over there. But despite only having 22 with them so far, I have sold 3 files there, and the first was when I was stuck at 16.

Dreamstime can be tough, and while not as tough as Fotolia, they have rejected some that Fotolia, the toughest (non-SS) site, have not only accepted, but sold. 2 of my 3 files sold on Fotolia were rejectd by Dreamstime. This makes me scratch my head but whatever.

123RF accepts almost everything, but what sucks about them is they have actually accepted some of my lowest quality submissions, which I'll be surprised if they ever sell, while rejecting some of my best shots, again, including some that have sold at Fotolia. 2 to be precise. Weird.

Pond5 seems to accept everything, and indeed, almost convey the impression they are just oh-so-grateful to have images at all, since they send a thank you note. I sell very few at $10 & up, keeping most images there low priced because even half of that will be more than I have made on any sale so far, but still no sales there despite 78 images.

iStock seems to be very strict in their application process (a friend of my was rejected with good shots) but accepts almost everything once you're in, with the single area of strict judging is as it applies to logos and faces. They even ask for model releases where I have blurred faces beyond recognition, so they are hyper-rigid about it but I take it with a grain of salt. Aside from 3 sales each at DT and FT, my 5 other sales have only come from iStock, and all were basically backgrounds of some sort, except for one plate of diced cucumbers. My first file sold was at iStock through the partner program.

3. The pics. I haven't yet submitted a handful of my best images, almost because I am considering them to be worth more thhan 27 cents and looking at better options for selling them (maybe Alamy, maybe Symbiostock, maybe FAA), especially since I am not really making any real money at this point, and just learning. This is only several dozen or so. Otherwise, I'm almost being random about what I am choosing to upload now. I've done some textured backgrounds, and 4 have sold at istock. I need to get better at those and I can. I see tons of textures now around town and I am shooting them as I find them and have the time (again this is a part-time thing). Plus, I am trying to learn white background shooting, so I am about to start a new process soon: cook my meals, shoot my meals on white background, eat my meals. And oh yeah, assemble some food too, for staged props. I've been looking around on iStock to get a feel for what sells. I have no real ability to shoot people for now, as I live far from family and won't hire models since I don't know what I'm doing.

So that's my early experiences.

I'm already starting to think about how long this will/should go on, and if I should. I'm not stopping now because I don't have enough images online to go by. The thing about this is, none of the 11 images I've sold so far, have sold for more than 75 cents. I realize my portfolio is too miniscule to form a firm judgement, but while I was pleased to have sales, I have to wonder how much effort will have to be put in to make decent money. I've put in a lot so far and yet don't have many images up. It's a slow process, and a hard slog, for sure. I wish I had some suggestions for being quicker.

As for money and return, I have read with keen interest the idea of Return Per Image, and what it should be. For non-exclusives, shutterstock seems mandatory to have a reasonable RPI, but while I see some people say $1 per year per image is reasonable, especially for Alamy, I wouldn't continue if that's all I earned, given how long it takes me to process, keyword, describe (embedded in Photoshop), upload, and categorize every image on the various sites. It would be nice to get to $5 annually per image, but that won't happen til I step up my game as a photpographer *and* as an image processor, and also not until I get into SS. So I'd say $2-3 RPI annually for now is a target to shoot for, and then see how close I come to getting there. And from what I read, I think I should judge this on the basis of how many files I have *on average* per site. Is this the correct way to determine it? I have 78 on Pond5 (when they approve my 11 pending), 61 on istock (11 pending), 55 on 123rf (11 pending), 34 on dreamstime (11 pending), 22 on fotolia, 15 on Alamy. That's 265 total, but only 44 images per site average. Should I then think that (assuming I will be on shutterstock soon), if I consider it reasonable to earn $4 annually per image, the current portfolio should earn $176 annually and $14 this month? Even without shutterstock, I could only expect to earn half that, which is $7. I'm not even sure I will earn $7 this month, which is the $2 annual RPI mark. So while I am not yet considering throwing in the towel (it's far too early, and I have been enjoying learning) it's clearly not worth it financially to continue at this rate for much longer, or shoot stuff I don't enjoy. My total so far is somewhere around $4.50-$5 in the 5 weeks since files started to sell. What I am more likely to do is increase my portfolio tenfold before really deciding. Or, make that eleven-fold, getting it to 500 images average across the sites. If I can yield $4 annually/image, that's $167 per month. I'd continue at that rate. Any less than $3, I'd probably bag it, or quit as a regular thing I work at, shooting stuff I don't enjoy, and only uploading when I have stuff I really enjoyed shooting.

I know there is no way for anyone to tell me how much I earn, but I am thinking out loud here. I just hope I can improve my efficiency and workflow so I can get to 400-500 images rather quickly, and improve overall both at the computer and with my camera. Thanks for listening, and sorry for the long post to anyone who may have read this far and been disappointed. :) I'm looking forward to continuing to learn from everyone here.







Pages: [1]

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors