|
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 - brmonico
1
« on: March 14, 2013, 06:58 »
I am not saying this complex for you !!  I am saying editorial concept is complex. An editorial file could be different for a news worth file and the description of a news file must be done almost as a little journalist text . I am sure you can do it right .
2
« on: March 13, 2013, 18:20 »
Do you have a representative sample image of the type of work you're doing, that might help?
interior pictures at galleries, museums, music gigs, etc
Places where photography is not allowed?
of course it is allowed, do you want to reply seriously or joke around?
I don't think that it is a joke. Those places are normally privately owned and limit who is allowed to take photos inside the venue. Without permission I know Istock would not accept images from any of those locations and wouldn't allow images of art unless it was in the public domain. There have been numerous discussions on here about music venues limiting who is allowed to take photos. A lot of museums and galleries forbid photography as well.
Here is what MoMA says: http://www.moma.org/visit/plan/guidelines
If you want help you have to be willing to listen.
You are both right. We cant take images from a painting if we take the image in a correct angle to reproduce the painting as an image "ready to print", pictures of a public museum or gallerie can be allowed in they are wide angle views and not details, also depends the museum and the art objects in there. Now to Luis, the best thing to get permission for these is work like a press member with press identification. This is valid for news usage images and editorial work. Again , work as a press member will force a valid press ID and a press code work ,. Photo journalists dont take details of art , they take news/editorial usage images and provide their ID in the museum....They take images for publications and many times this interest to galleries too because they receive the publicity and the credits in the article. Is different when someone ask permission to shoot saying "this is for me and to sell in stock agencies" or saying " This for news articles with the credit to your gallerie. Can you provide me a text to illustrate the image?" ... this is press work ! The text you use to illustrate the image can be the difference between get the image accept or not in editorial agencies. For me the best and more dedicated agency for that, with a simple process to accept contributors is Alamy. They have the news section too, you can see their how contributors write texts for news images. www.alamy.com/news/This is a very complex matter.
3
« on: March 13, 2013, 17:56 »
4
« on: February 19, 2013, 19:27 »
For clarity for those who aren't familiar with the way Alamy reports sales, is the $292 the amount you got, or did you get 50% of that, or 30% of that if it was a distributor sale?
Many people report the full Alamy image price (gross), rather than the amount they themselves got (net) which can be a surprise to those who are used to micros only telling you the amount you got, not the amount the buyer paid.
Anyway even if it was $146 to you or $87.60, it's still better than you were likely to get on most micros, so congrats. 
I got the 50% . It was $146 commission . I report the total amount because i think is good to everyone , special some people that dont know Alamy see the prices they use to sell our images. It was a 54mb tiff download and RF license , not RM . Today im happy, i beat my commission record .
5
« on: February 19, 2013, 19:08 »
Well , some days ago i start this topic so i will put an upgrade. Last year Alamy provide me a sale that bring more money and more value compared to all stock agencies i submit...Now i will provide an upgrade to this topic showing how much Alamy is valious. My last Alamy RF license :
Alamy ref Your ref Pseudonym Date purchased / refunded Licence Details Amount
CY1JPJ dinheiro01 Bruno Monico 18 February 2013 Royalty-free 54 MB
5315 x 3543 pixels
2 MB compressed
$ 292.00
Total sales $292.00
Today was a good day. I must say that agencies like this one must be supported by all of us. This agencies bring us value.
PS: the image i sold here was refused in all microstock agencies. Distorted pixels, dont have value, issues in edition..all bad........This is one of my best images , i love this image and appears that this image have a little bit value to someone. Thanks Alamy!
7
« on: February 15, 2013, 12:37 »
and again I ask myself, how far can we go before agencies end up business with us?
we seen many cases of kicking out for less but contributors willing to offer XS licenses for FREE and this new one giving EL for 2$ look they are still safe...
$2 EL .....no comments....
8
« on: February 15, 2013, 12:27 »
Cyberduck for mac...i love it.
9
« on: February 14, 2013, 18:36 »
Claro que e so no fim de receberes. So fazes irs uma vez por ano. Antes de receberes nao existem retenes na fonte.
10
« on: February 13, 2013, 13:42 »
Just to bring a new feedback.
- Now site is supporting ftp upload with dedicated accounts;
- Contributor agreement and tutorial is setup;
- Site i receiving first uploads , photos, vectors and video footage
- Site is very new with only 3 weeks online, including setup time and domain registration. I am registering 150 views a day. Im happy with it.
Opinions, good or bad ones, are welcome. Thanks.
11
« on: February 13, 2013, 11:23 »
You must provide the license agreement in purchase policy. You set all licenses here. Then you must create a digital profile with extended license option and set the galleries were you want this appear. buyer must agree with purchase agreemet before buy and download. you must set this to. You can see mine at www.newlightagency.com .
12
« on: February 11, 2013, 06:39 »
Hi , i will advice to edit the background to pure white in some compositions. You some shadows that you can avoid. In Hand and coffee cup the background should be more white that the cup....In the pills image i think that you must choose between put the girl in image or not....but the hair is very intrusive. If you put the girl, give us a girl detail like a face expression or something , not only the hair. Appear that some accidentally get in front of lenses....
The Portrait is really good.
13
« on: February 10, 2013, 03:51 »
I put all my metadata into my images anyway; they can't know the details about many types of shots - locations, species, ethnicity, etc. - so I wasn't sure how good a job they could do. I didn't see the value of PNG conversion for all files - which at the time they were planning; those files with transparency seem to be the primary target for PNG. Perhaps now it's just for selected files.
100% agree, how can someone do a title and an accurate catalogue of keywords for a work that dont belong to them.....
14
« on: February 10, 2013, 03:39 »
You aren't selling from your own site, so you aren't privy to the statistics. The link almost everyone clicks on is "View Original Image." This takes you to the image itself (watermarked in our case), not the web page where potential sales occur.
Nobody clicks on the tiny "Visit Page" button. Our statistics prove it, and so do Dreamstime's, and those of GLStockImages.
OK, im not defending Google . I am in the same boat you guys are. And for someone who is starting is even worse get images stollen and gain people trust. What i want say is if people are getting less sales on a significant mark compared to last year in same month . I had one family dinner few time ago and we talk about that. One of my cousins have a blog about pets and animal medicine ... she never bought one image and have many stollen images there and watermark deleted. This really mades me upset , we almost have a family fight at table. She looking for images in Bing , not Google. And whem she goes to an agency is to get free images from free section or free images with easy watermark removal. She is one of manys who bring traffic to agencies but never will buy anything. I told her that maybe one day she loose that blog. The worst part is that she do money with it , and good money. I tell this because is important to notice what less traffic means . You are right when you says that i dont have stats, but in your stats you are notice a significant sales drop or simple traffic drop? I believe many traffic come from curious and pirates who looking for free images in agencies and not from serious buyers.
15
« on: February 09, 2013, 18:33 »
In addition, many hosting solutions allow you to disallow hotlinking right in your control panel for those that aren't comfortable working with .htaccess files.
Disable and change the .htaccess in out of question. Which agency will take an action to get their images and tags out of search engines? This is insane!
Why do we need our images in search engines if they don't link back to the web site? I think a lot of savvy websites will soon block the Google Images bot, which is easy to do in robots.txt.
If someone finds one of the images from my website in Google Images, their only course of action is to ignore it, or download it without my authorization. They can't click on it and be taken to the purchase page, so what's the point of having images indexed by Google at all?
BTW, if someone chooses to DL the image illegally, they use your bandwidth too.
Sorry but the new search engine provide a relink to page and site for people buying the image. You have 3 options : - image details - Visit page - send you to the site were image is. In case of an agency, send to page were it is on sale. - See image in original size (indexed size) - in case of agencies will present watermark. - Even provide the copyright message at the end of page - So i dont see Google like an enemy here....I see many people are uploading files to web without conscience. All images that appear in google from my site have watermark, the same size as showed page, relink to agency and page for people buy..... Not much different of Pinterest .....
16
« on: February 09, 2013, 18:14 »
In addition, many hosting solutions allow you to disallow hotlinking right in your control panel for those that aren't comfortable working with .htaccess files.
I have the right click disable but this is not the problem. The problem is not in Watermarked/small files . Is in big files , legally bought used without conscience . Disable and change the .htaccess in out of question. Which agency will take an action to get their images and tags out of search engines? This is insane! If agencies provide a way to buyers get the files with proper size and mark for web at the same time they can have the HD file. Do incentives to get people attention to these problem will be the right thing to do or at least what agencies can do in a easy way. Search engines function is looking for something people need. If exists big files on web they index them. But search engines are our best friends to, if they dont exist how people find us. People can find us looking for images to. Socials networks are very problematic to. Do you imagine how many images exist in Facebook of families, babies, childs, events.....all in maximum resolution FB allows . All free images for pirates. I am thinking if someone just try to do a research of stock market sales before and after Facebook  Off course , now, all of us must live with it and share the good things it have! Facebook have good things to. What Facebook dont have and Google dont have is a way of people add auto watermarks to their files. Google have so many things and utilities, why they dont provide an online skill to resize and mark files ? Facebook have so many app and developments , why someone dont invent an Facebook app to mark and resize images with customize watermarks ?
17
« on: February 09, 2013, 06:51 »
OK, mystery solved. The image was downloaded from Bigstockphoto but I didn't know that Until 2012 their standard image license permitted images to be embedded into PowerPoint templates such this. After that date, newly purchased images may not be used in PowerPoint templates, although templates using images purchased before that date may continue to be sold.
So , the image is legal, right? This is a happy ending .
18
« on: February 08, 2013, 11:16 »
No I don't. Email them asking from where and what license did they buy nicely and politely.
Is it possible that Standard License allows to use in template without an EL but everything is possible in the MS game.
Will see what will come out.
Well alex, you must go to all agencies were you submit this file and have sold it and check for their license agreement . This is public information , you can do it without noise. I advice you to see their partner programs to, and partners licenses, see if they put the file in sites like Pinterest without watermark. Pinterest forces a RF license (almost an EL) for images we put there. Never put anything in Pinterest without watermark. Check Facebook pages, im sure this company have a Facebook page and see if they "like" some particular agency were you submit to...this is your work if you are not an exclusive contributor. I believe that you can find a license in some agencies allowing personal web use of files, even in templates. I dont believe any agency sold a RF regular license allowing resale the images in web templates and unlimited prints/seats . Be aware that the image could be a legal file in a legal use or can be a copy from Google/Bing . If you want to contact the buyer simple start the conversation with a "Thank you for choosing my files" then, ask them in what agency they acquire the image with the only purpose to you be able to do your own poll and stats for your work. Depending on what you get from their response you see all !
19
« on: February 08, 2013, 03:55 »
I do not believe it is, if they are selling your photo as part of the template. I would send them a email and or certified letter
Yes, and they can do it if they have buy a license for that. When we sell images is for people use. In this case the designer create all the content and choose the images for the design . The buyer cannot claim the copyright of the photo , but he can claim the copyright of all content together as part of one creation. He his not forced to say who made the site bottoms , the icons, the letter type, the images.....he only claim the copyright of all content as part of a finished product, avoid or trying to avoid the content , design and images being used by others when he bought and pay for them. Now, are this allow under regular RF license? It always depend at the the agency were he acquire the image and the type or license they sold, however , in 95% cases all agencies will claim one extended license for multi seats, web template use and re-sales as part of finish products. So, do you receive commissions according to extended licenses or do you sell extended licenses of these file?
20
« on: February 07, 2013, 19:18 »
21
« on: February 07, 2013, 12:26 »
I went to my management area and saw more views and zooms too , i dont see sales since the one i mentioned.
I receive a mail saying they are build a completely new site. Maybe they are with lots of work....
22
« on: February 07, 2013, 12:05 »
Hi , i upload to Alamy for 3 months i think... After 15 days my first upload of 4 RM files i got one sale of $62 . I have a happy day Now, after more than 2 months i have 80 files RF and 15 RM and no sales...no sales at all in files i have been sale on micros . My question is , how is your experience with RF sales at Alamy ?
23
« on: February 07, 2013, 11:06 »
On your second point, subscriptions are low enough and royalties are low enough. How much less would you be happy receiving for smaller images, maybe 3 cents an image for blog sized sales?
I agree that prices and royalties are too low. I would put prices up and call them the same or less.
I would be subtle about adjusting prices. The subscription prices would not essentially change. A regular subscription would be branded as a web use subscription. Same prices but access only to web sized versions. Perhaps even a slight reduction or maybe a few more images for the same price to sweeten it.
The prices for access to all sizes would also stay the same for the beginning - but the amount of content offered would be reduced. Call it premium. Many do not use their quota anyhow.
This is easy to do ... but the top 9 agencies most all agree will these ! The last point is almost impossible to happen. I deleted my port from DP for this motive. They are selling sub for 0,15... I refuse some commissions payments. When i get $0,08 from IS commission i wrote on their forum that i deleted all my 30 files (LOL) if they pay me that value again. In my point of view is not my 30 files that are important , is my work and my conscience . They can do all promotions they want, but must exist a "stop" mark in commissions value ! Today i visit a middle tier agency site...the most expensive file i saw costs $6...i think F***** The files i saw dont have that WOW factor or anything that surprise me, probably i refuse to my site 70% the files i saw , but $6... man, i sell 20x15 prints for 4 in weddings... Even the prices i set on my site are low in my opinion.....but i cant mark more to get chances ! I think we reach the "Stop" point and now we need some braves top agencies to make prices useful for everyone (nothing against clients) there are agencies paying acceptable commissions out there , DT for me is one of the best . 0,20 and 60% commission for exclusive members is perfectly fair . I believe if top agencies provide watermarks for free , or a free 600px file with a watermark in corner and non intrusive like (legally acquire from thisagency.com) everytime a buyer download a large file or xlarge f, this problem will disappear with time. Buyers , without work, have the file legal watermark for their sites and keep the original.
24
« on: February 06, 2013, 12:08 »
Pois de facto verdade. As agencias de microstock fazem retenes ficais mas nao pedem comprovativos, recibos , facturas ou outros documentos. O modo mais facil declarar apenas no irs anual esses rendimentos , uma vez que , vao aparecer as retenoes e tem de bater certo.
...Recibos verdes, so aconselho que desenvolveres a atividade comercial diariamente. So para microstock , no aconselho.
25
« on: February 06, 2013, 08:23 »
In general it is lazyness and ignorance that lets designers and self taught users upload full size images to be resized on the fly
There would be fewer full sized images to find on Google if photographers were to limit the size of pictures which they allow to be sold on subscription sites.
Or the subscription sites could take a lead by introducing less expensive plans specifically aimed at bloggers and limited to typical web sizes.
You cant upload less than 4mp to SS..........all starts here! 4mp in web is a huge size. Using programs to upgrade files size any print made in a plotter like a "Rolland" extend this to 1 meter or more with full quality. Problems with copyright always have one way to start . If the problem is not in sellers is in buyers. Buyer spend money , upload a big file (without resize) and without watermark . Loose the file on web. Will think twice next time. Buy again or copy one? Off course this is valid only for personal blogs. - No one likes to spend money unnecessary . I believe stock agencies can do a program or offer free downloads of generic watermarks to their clients. - law most enforce web providers like Facebook, HI5, windows live, wordpress, Blogger and others to legally protect all files with possible copyright value. Facebook already do this with videos. They dont allow videos with copyright music. Is so difficult turn this to images? Google and others only grab the the fruit...free fruit ! If the fruit is a 100k file or 10mb file , with or without mark, is not their problem. I will do this in my little site. I will provide free download of watermarks and a free tuturial teaching how to use them. This little step can be very important if all of us in our sites and agencies too do the same. A Web Image Educational Program (WIEP) . Is not good to buyers see their files stollen to...many of them probably dont know how to protect them .
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
