|
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 - artfilmstock
1
« on: October 22, 2011, 01:23 »
We are sorry. But as of October 22, 2011, we are out of business.
We want to say special thanks for our artists who took their time to upload images to Art Film Stock and our partners and colleagues all over the world.
We are deeply sorry that we wasted your time. We really are. It aches my heart to see how many of you uploaded GREAT photos and took a lot of time to point us the bugs in the site, and yet getting no sales.
The reasons for this are various, economical situation is one thing and market is another.
But honestly we lack resources as well as the necessary business network to make this thing tick.
So we thought it's better to raise our hands at this point, before we waste more of your time.
It was honor to collaborate with you and I want to say personally thanks for you.
We have securely deleted all your photos and personal data.
If you have any questions or concerns contact me personally by DM.
2
« on: October 01, 2011, 09:16 »
That's interesting. I wonder how many people have any idea about how to convert digital to B&W. It's not just about desaturating. Even Nik software's Silver Efex Pro program doesn't seem to get the same tonal range that a good B&W neg will provide, so maybe you should be looking at going the whole way and stipulating film only.
Time to dig the Tri-X out of the freezer?
Exactly, and that's why we're going to educate our artists about B&W conversion, tone mixing, etc. Tri-X sounds great, dig (and scan!) them by all means. We also support very high resolution film scans, higher than our competitors.
3
« on: October 01, 2011, 09:14 »
Wow, that has to be the biggest risk I have ever seen a site take. You would be much better off converting all colour images to monochrome and giving the buyers a choice. The monochrome market is going to be tiny in comparison to the colour market.
Surely we can't touch or convert the original images uploaded by our artists, that just wouldn't be right. We leave that choice for our artists. The market might be tiny in comparison, but even if we can get to 1% we're pretty fine with that. It's better to have that 1% of 100% than nothing. Plus, there's going to be much less competition between our artists when the amount of images stay lower.
4
« on: October 01, 2011, 01:08 »
Starting from today, we are only accepting and selling monochrome images. So that's our niche.
It's much easier to market our site now that we have a very concrete / visible difference to other stock sites, we're monochrome! I know you probably think that now we're totally lost our marbles and that might be so.
But we think this will work for us and our contributors, since customers are likely to notice our new theme, and it's pretty good thing.
We're sorry for those whose (non-monochrome) images got rejected/deleted, but we welcome you to do some monochrome mixing in your best shots and reupload if you so choose.
5
« on: September 11, 2011, 22:57 »
We are now accepting editorial images.
Only exceptions are sports or famous people, and sensation photos just after some big accident.
6
« on: September 08, 2011, 04:26 »
We have released our Spotlight Blog. http://www.artfilmstock.com/spotlight/In this blog we feature our contributors and their works. We will also feature some insider tips for stock photography.
7
« on: September 08, 2011, 04:21 »
I hope your strategy works and I will be watching to see how you differentiate the site. We really need sites that do things differently. Photocase seem to be doing a good job selling more artistic images, so there might be a market for art in stock. Many people have said that art and stock don't mix but there is some art selling well with the big sites.
Thank you for your comment. I also want to say thanks for your uploads. You have great technical execution and skill.
8
« on: September 03, 2011, 18:40 »
The problem is going to be getting enough images to make the buyers interested. I don't see any point in advertising when you have a tiny collection, that's a waste of money. I would like to see a site get past this problem but if we aren't paid to upload, what's our incentive? I like giving new sites a chance but there's already so many selling the same stuff.
Let me say again, this isn't "hobby project" for us. We are going to do "Featured Photographers" thing soon. The idea is to promote photographers works and also help them in their own career, for example wedding photographer, sports or studio photographers. And we are going to get some serious traffic to their pages. If someone wants, we're happy to interview him. We are well aware the most microstock photographers are probably not interested about such thing and prefer to remain anonymous. That's ok. But then, we are NOT just another microstock agency. Everything we do is based on the thought that we are not selling the same stuff. We are all about unique shots with artistic twist, and we don't especially care about "micro masses" of isolated objects, ordinary smiling people, etc. Sure at the point we do accept such to our RF collection and we sell them, but our featured photos or exclusive collection is all what we are about. That's the core of our thinking. Our niche is art that goes into photos. We know people who want to get that business handshake shot, he can go to iStockphoto and then the problem is solved. If person wants well executed, artistic photo and the original large film scan of it (what he can use for big print advertisement, for example), he can come to us. We're going to have tons of these. We didn't put "art" to our name just for decoration. That's what we're all about.
9
« on: September 03, 2011, 08:40 »
Of course. We have had trial run of ads in various medias, banner ads, and google adwords. We are now planning something bigger and are preparing for it by analyzing the data we've got.
Let me just say, we are taking this really seriously.
10
« on: September 02, 2011, 17:05 »
To specify what I wrote earlier about "individual frame exclusivity", it should be "photo series exclusivity" or something along that line. So we are going to require that all photos from a certain photo shoot with same setup, model, etc. need to be exclusive. Of course artist can choose what to upload.
Anyway thank you for your suggestions.
11
« on: September 02, 2011, 15:32 »
I like the idea of exclusive images but I see two big problems. Lots of people think they can take 2 fairly similar photos and have one as exclusive and the other non-exclusive. I think it will be hard to police this, how are you going to stop this happening?
There's going to be contract and yes we have some mechanisms we can use to detect such thing. Fundamentally however, and what we've seen so far, is that most artists are honest creators. We start with that thought.
12
« on: September 01, 2011, 19:47 »
We are starting a new collection in our site. In lack for a fancier name (Vetta?) we are just going to call it Exclusive Collection for now. Here is the idea: We accept most unique and artistic and strange images, especially full size film scans that can be very large in size. We hand pick these. Only thing we require from artist is individual frame exclusivity. We don't require photographer exclusivity. We only sell one size, the original size, and each of images will cost $300 which artist gets half from. These images will get priority in our site over the standard royalty free images. In a nutshell, this is our version of Rights Managed files. If you are interested, please sign up on the site and submit your work to our site. Then shoot us email at: [email protected] with subject field "Exclusive Collection" and our editors will review your images.
13
« on: September 01, 2011, 08:18 »
I sent you the FTP info by email.
14
« on: August 30, 2011, 16:47 »
Our new site is live now. Thank you for all your positive feedback. http://www.artfilmstock.comPlease, welcome to the site!
15
« on: August 27, 2011, 01:08 »
We are contacting the contributors directly.
Please contact me also, I want a ftp account. Do you sell only jpeg illustrations, or I can upload vectors also?
Thank you
Sure, we will contact you shortly. Our team is now moving all files to the new system. We plan to go live next week with it. Can we ask you to wait until then?
16
« on: August 24, 2011, 04:56 »
We are currently working with a major update for the site. Mainly this means that we're changing into a new platform that is much more flexible. I tested the new java uploader which allows files to be dropped to it, imports metadata automatically and works much faster than the current one. This should beat FTP by all means.
I really want to say personal thanks for all of you who have taken time to send us feedback of the site. We are listening each of your comments and we take them into careful consideration.
We will announce timetable when this major update will go live.
17
« on: August 23, 2011, 22:48 »
We had a server issue. Now we're up again.
18
« on: August 20, 2011, 23:01 »
How do I upload videos?
We're still working with video system. We let you know as soon as we start to accept them.
19
« on: August 20, 2011, 22:44 »
How do I upload videos?
Also I have to mention, you may want to upgrade the upload system, including a kind of unfinished files section. It's just boring to wait every 10-20Mb file to upload and then categorize, etc.
Also I have the same doubts as csproductions, how do I decide if an image it's enough artsy for you. Technically speaking there are some exact things, like size, noise level, subject, cropping/composition, keywords. But if I find art an old, dusty paraffin lamp, or a very old man's portrait, not all of us will find attractive or good photo. Except uploading 100 files and watching the rejections, there are some other fixed points?
What about video content?
Framing is first we look at and all the basic rules of photography apply there and you know that I'm sure. We are not very big fan of isolated objects on white background although we accept some of those if they are unique. For example this one: http://www.artfilmstock.com/photo/10333.htmlThe subject is just a tomato but this is interesting because it looks also.. hmm.. all kinds of things! The photographer discovered unique way of portraying a tomato, and it works. We have accepted over 90% of submitted images and we continue doing so. Please try us. We are working hard with the upload system. If you don't want to mess with the categories, just put some there and inspectors will take care of it. No worries.
20
« on: August 20, 2011, 22:36 »
Just to make sure I understand your USP (Unique Selling Proposition): You sell stock imagery that's decidedly more artistic than what's generally available on the big 4, am I correct? If so, then the inspection process would even more subjective, would it not? I mean, how would one recognize an image that's more "artistic?" What would it look like? What inspection criteria would be applied? And does it mean that you don't accept an image which would be accepted on the big 4 sites? Please understand that I'm not trying to be difficult - just trying to clarify. I don't think I would be a good match for the site because I'm all about furthering my technical knowledge and abilities while creating commercial imagery that appeals to the broadest clientele possible. If that means an image of shaking hands that's evenly lit and sharply focused, I'm more than happy to do it. I'm not the stereotypical artist with a superior attitude; neither do I feel like I have to prove anything to anyone. I do have to balance my creative itch with my empty stomach! 
Carl, thank you for reply. Yes, that's right. But truth is that we do have to get some volume and we are currently accepting even these what we call "safe images" which mean more mainstream things (as long as they are not handshakes!). Sure, we understand that we need that kind of weight to get moving. And if the photos are well took, I can't see why we should reject them. We highlight best (and most artistic) of these in a kind of spotlight thing and they form the backbone of our site. For example, we have stuff like this: http://www.artfilmstock.com/photo/cabin-boy.htmland http://www.artfilmstock.com/photo/woman-shooting-photo.htmlWe'd love to have these kind of images more. Also what we do differently from others is that we understand the difference between film grain and sensor noise. What that means is that we really embrace film photos and we think grain is part of the visual delight of a film image. So you don't have to worry to get obscure noise rejection when you upload that perfect film image which you've worked super hard with. In any case, you are more than welcome aboard if you like.
21
« on: August 18, 2011, 14:49 »
We do require releases.
What comes to horse race thing, yeah, we are having ongoing debate about this. Same thing goes for any kind of sail ships or nautical vessels which design is very recognizable.
22
« on: August 18, 2011, 08:25 »
Thank you!
23
« on: August 18, 2011, 06:55 »
Sure!
Yes indeed, we are seeing surge of new contributors now.
I want to say personal thanks to everyone who has joined. We really appreciate your time and effort to upload to our site.
We will do our best to advertise your files so that they will get maximum exposure.
24
« on: August 17, 2011, 17:03 »
1 credit = 1 dollar (payout to artist is not any different)
Small 1 Credits
Medium 5 Credits
Large 8 Credits
X Large 10 Credits
Original 15 Credits
Not attractive for me. On Pond5 I price most of my clips at 50 USD or 70 USD. And they do sell well enough.
I don't want to cannibalize my sales there.
Yawn... Please wake me up when I can earn money on your site.
Sayōnara 
In this video you can see the standard video pricing: http://www.artfilmstock.com/video/9452.htmlBut the thing is that we're not 100% online with video yet.
25
« on: August 17, 2011, 17:01 »
Isn't $50 kind of high for a starting stock site, one with only a hand full of contributors and images?... IMO, even though I personally don't know the amount of buyers you guys can generate,(in this new market format you're creating) that amount of money sounds kind of unrealistic for a new agency, don't you think?...sounds to me that it would take years for anyone to reach payout there, if ever... Not good news. 
I understand. You're right. We took this into consideration and we now start making payments at $25. We can even do at 10 if artist so desire. Just let us know your pay point and we'll take care of it.
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
