|
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 - vikavalter
51
« on: May 17, 2008, 09:33 »
Im thinking on sending invoice, I'm pretty sure I can find his post address if try hard.
52
« on: May 17, 2008, 09:10 »
I found one of my pictures used on other photographers portfolio online http://www.photoarte.co.uk/porgallery.php?page=08Just to make it funnier, I'm the model on it aswell, and I'm pretty sure I took it myslef at my place how should I approach him and how much should I ask for using it under wrong name?
53
« on: May 09, 2008, 10:38 »
well people put Asanti Luxury Alloy Wheels not because they need them but just because they can spend money on them, everybody gets kicks from differents stuff, sometimes you gotta pay for it.
54
« on: May 09, 2008, 06:37 »
and then you try to focus with smeared grease filter to the upper right corner, and then in the next frame in the center.
55
« on: May 09, 2008, 05:20 »
56
« on: May 02, 2008, 10:36 »
So to the naked human eye there is no effect...
In relation to what the OP is referring to then no, essentially if you had a film camera and a digital camera with the same specs taking the same photo you shouldn't be able to see it, but as it's an impossible thing to test the whole thing is irrelevant anyway.
The thing I said about the lenses is true, we had a guy from Canon come in to see us, it was a long time ago so I can't remember all the details, but I do remember the earthquake thing albeit I may have used a bit of poetic license on the 5000 mile radius, but it was quite a distance.
And before this opens the usual debate I'm sure Nikon probably do the same, I mean they normally copy Canon 
well they didn't copy focus operating system , like hold with one finger a button, scroll infront with another finger if you want the point move up and down and do handheld acrobatics with the wheel on the back with your third finger to move the focusing point from side to side... while still holding the bloody button with finger number one 
57
« on: May 01, 2008, 10:53 »
oh gosh, stop bumping this thread already, pweese
58
« on: April 28, 2008, 00:09 »
hahah, oh my, remember it's a swedish site, so hopefully it will also mostly market over scandinavia and europe. When you described how harsh the images were I got to imagine worse, then you post some pretty closed vaginas? Ok there is some pubic hair or none at all, but still far from porn.
59
« on: April 27, 2008, 02:31 »
this is like mac vs. pc or canon vs. nikon discussions.
I prefer to keep it as AobeRGB even if SS converts all files to sRGB others do that only for preview thumbnails(and I'm not saving different bversions for each site). And I do want the maybe only few times my images are printed to look right and with rich blues. Once AdobeRGB is converted to sRGB the blues and reds and other colors are chopped to limited range and cant be restored when doing backward conversion. Just like noise, the details just aren't there.
60
« on: April 20, 2008, 14:33 »
I submitted a particular (my best-seller) image to Stockxpert, and it was rejected for no Property Release, so I got and uploaded Property Release, and sent Support notification, including ID number of the rejected image.
No response for several days, so I also posted question in their "Technical Ques." No response. So, I figured maybe I should post it in Newbie section, but now I can't even find way to submit a new post anywhere on any forum.
If anyone's been in similar situation of rejection for a Release that you could then submit once you knew they wanted it: HOW DID YOU HANDLE IT:
Would it be best to simply be more patient and wait for them to get around to my communications?
Or, is it standard procedure for contributor to delete a file rejected for no PR, and then resubmit, attaching the PR to to it right then?
Thank you. smiles - Ann
click on the image or somewhereit says edit (a small button) it will open you the page where you can add the realeas on the right side of it.
61
« on: April 20, 2008, 02:31 »
and like this will make a stylish and beautiful ad world together
I bet some will manage to make ugly ads even with such magnificent tool anyway. on other hand that means more downloads for us, hopefully.
62
« on: April 13, 2008, 12:48 »
im strictly told to look at the images I process for a serious comercial photography studio only at 50%
but on other hand we all know that there won't be noise or focus issues at 100% in those shots
still I suspect some reviewers do go furher and zoom at 200 and so, I's sure they do so at Istock, god forbid if there will be "made in ....(not visble ending)" on the tiny coffee mug, that isn't even the main part of the shot itself. And they've got to zoom larger than 100 to spot that.
63
« on: April 13, 2008, 12:39 »
agreed RJ,
but then again..
good composition
good color
if you look at some of the featured photos, that too is HIGHLY subjective.
some looked extremely OVER-PROCESSED
and off focus and even over blase 
one sometimes wonder how these were even selected.
eg. one judge even selected a squirrel as BEST PHOTO?
i liked the squirrel finally something more natural but still well lit in microstock, we need to get easy on all the smiling orange people and get more of the natural but still well done shots
64
« on: April 05, 2008, 13:05 »
65
« on: April 05, 2008, 05:43 »
ohh, another revolution!
66
« on: April 03, 2008, 14:06 »
my sales stied pretty much the same, maybe went bit up after opting out
67
« on: April 02, 2008, 08:27 »
Oh. Thank you very much.
It will take me about 2 months 
btw can I ask you why you don't like my images? I saw you went giving 1's left and right in mostphotos, sorry to use this unreleated thread for this.
68
« on: April 02, 2008, 07:39 »
I love the voting system.
Its fun when 15 year old photographers get a chance to judge others work.
15 years old photographers are even more arrogant than usually.
69
« on: March 29, 2008, 08:40 »
too much of busting balls maybe? there is no formula for Istock isolation just a matter of luck.
70
« on: March 21, 2008, 06:20 »
Not only that, the equipment costs are much higher over here. Just imagine, now it is for me totally worth to buy equipment in the US, pay the shipping costs, pay 19% tax on importing it to Europe (the tax goes on total of price of the equipment AND shipping), and than additional tax depending what equipment it is (Lens starting at 3% going up). I recently payed ~ 35% tax on an iPod which came from the US.
Because of the Dollar I am really glad Ft pays in Euro for me as well as for Panthermedia which goes well for me and pays in Euro as well.
However, I am not right now doing so much stock photography, but for us Europeans it means work harder and focus on quality which is by the way allways good 
where do you buy your equipment? I'm thinking on upgrading but Ebay for a new camera feels a bit too risky.
71
« on: March 20, 2008, 13:31 »
Your shot could be composed to tightly no copy space on either side
even an average designer can add copy space in 1 sec with even background like that
72
« on: March 20, 2008, 10:58 »
really pisses me off when a reviewer is obviously so narrowminded that would reject everything that a is a bit more different from his/her taste
reeeaaally pisses me off beyond imaginable, I wish I could talk to that reviewer tet-a-tet and tell what I think about exposure and where he/sh can shove his/her photography knowhow
73
« on: March 20, 2008, 10:53 »
hey, look at this awfully exposed picture I shot, do you think I shall still give it a try to stock photography and shoot only isolated on white furniture or just dedicate myself to something like gardening? 
74
« on: March 19, 2008, 06:06 »
seems to be 100% not included yesterday uploaded images
75
« on: March 19, 2008, 05:40 »
Im doing almost 8hr/7days and I still can't pay my bills, what I am doing wrong?
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
