|
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 - mantonino
Pages: 1 ... 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15 16 17 18 ... 23
301
« on: January 21, 2009, 14:50 »
Use away! 
302
« on: January 19, 2009, 17:27 »
yeah i just assume anything that someone MAY own is going to get rejected on StockXpert They're the biggest sticklers for property release by far.
303
« on: January 15, 2009, 17:37 »
At least they are not heterophobes and they don't mind to figure in straight ads.  This may have been said in jest but it's probably the most poignant thing in this thread. You're right - I never ask my gay models about appearing straight. You are completely right and I take it back - I wouldn't care if that were my photo. I hadn't thought about it this way...very smart stuff.
304
« on: January 15, 2009, 13:53 »
I would not care if I was the model. Only 12 years old think being gay is bad. At least I hope it's the case in the 21th century
Slander is an untruth that could hurt someone's reputation. Whether YOU are homophobic or not (and most people aren't now - which is good), it could hurt the model's reputation for sure. Maybe not with you. But with others, as dragon_fang said "a lot of people are still very homophobic." Personally don't care - maybe the model IS gay or maybe they asked.
305
« on: January 15, 2009, 13:36 »
Well I'm an A so maybe that DOES explain it.
306
« on: January 15, 2009, 13:35 »
Gotta admit - wouldn't be pleased if that were my photo. That being said, we lose control once we upload so....
307
« on: January 15, 2009, 02:53 »
Strange - I just got paid less than 15 mins ago.
308
« on: January 15, 2009, 02:52 »
Sorry, mantonino, but *yes way*. Like ^^^^Freezingpictures said, there are a lot of people here who's portfolio earns much, much more than $3-8 per image in one year, let alone three. Yeah, there are definitely contributors that's true for, I suppose. Obviously people are interested in selling their collections as this comes up from time to time. The reason remains the same - buyer expectations for what they'd pay and seller expectations for what they'd take are obviously *not* on the same page.
309
« on: January 14, 2009, 14:18 »
Definitely not a fan of upload limits. I do wish SS would cull the non-sellers. Been on the site 3 years with zero sales? Bye bye!
310
« on: January 13, 2009, 18:14 »
I've had 3 sales there but I use it because it's a full rez backup of all your images AND you can make sales sometimes. I don't count on it though.
311
« on: January 13, 2009, 18:12 »
In previous discussions, the general rule seemed to be that artists would expect a price of around 5 times the projects annual earnings of a portfolio. So if a portfolio generates $50,000 a year for an artist, their selling price for the whole lot would probably be around $250,000.
This is why it never happens - people are using a business model that isn't *POSSIBLE* in microstock. Traditional businesses sell for 3-5 times annual profit. Microstock is never worth as much as it is today. It's a declining business model. Someone's current portfolio is worth about 1-1.5x their last year's profit from those images. Not 5x. 5x is a great model for like a wedding business - you can anticipate the biz would generate 5 years of the same. That's not true in micro. I'd pay $1-$3 per image for every image someone had or $3-8 per image if I got to select them. There's *no way* EVERY single image of someone's is going to make more than that in the next 3 years. The difference between buyer expectations and seller expectations is why it never happens.
312
« on: January 13, 2009, 11:53 »
In honor of the fact that this type of thread/question pops up almost everyday, I just added a few ideas for NOT getting your initial submission rejected here: http://www.niltomil.com/archives/361There are a ton of great tips already in this thread too so I tried to not duplicate too much.
313
« on: January 13, 2009, 00:13 »
Wow, your port is actually VERY nice! A bit pricey for us, I'm thinking - which is unfortunate! I like the idea of purchasing a few whole collections and yours is top of the line. I will PM you with some thoughts.
314
« on: January 12, 2009, 09:40 »
Don't know that you can. I've heard people saying that they had to do it one by one. Tis the price you pay for going exclusive. 
315
« on: January 12, 2009, 09:19 »
Thanks Leaf.
Sad to see another go. However speaking "business-wise" I don't see what their angle was ever going to be. I think it's fully possible for someone to startup right now and kick some tail but there has to be one thing these other startups aren't getting - serious investment money in advertising. And a site that kicks tail.
The only one that's *close* to being able to pull this off right now is Yay and so far I haven't see ads anywhere but places *I* go.
316
« on: January 12, 2009, 09:06 »
I would say that you will get no good reason to choose Canon over Nikon or Nikon over Canon: both brands are a good and safe choice and whatever you choose you will have everything you need to do excellent photos.
...
This is thus a strange situation where you have to choose with no good arguments to help you... but whatever you choose, you win +1 - This is exactly my thought on the matter. As a full time photo pro who gets to shoot Canon regularly and Nikon irregularly, I can say the differences have only ever come in how well I know how to use a particular camera. So get one, learn it, learn it some more, and then learn it a bit better. That's the best camera - the one you know.
317
« on: January 12, 2009, 09:03 »
right - you wouldn't sell your portfolio on a site - you'd sell your images offline, transferring copyright, and that person would then reupload the content as the sole copyright holder. give us a link and an estimate?
318
« on: January 09, 2009, 12:56 »
I never set any 2008 goals so that's kinda hard to judge, but these are some 2009 goals:
- Reach 20.000 images
- 50% extra $
- Have fun at what i'm doing 
Good luck! I'll be watching this one for sure!
319
« on: December 31, 2008, 12:41 »
please add a "none" choice in case we increased our portfolio and earnings at each of the sites.
320
« on: December 31, 2008, 04:17 »
I've done a *VERY* thorough test and after saving approximately 200-250 times on JPG 10 and comparing it at 200% to the JPG 12, I can honestly say I can see *no* different. not "some" not "a little" but "NONE" so I save at JPG 10. Saves a ton of room and the quality is *identical*
321
« on: December 27, 2008, 19:20 »
we don't live in a dream world. Nobody will make a massive run in 09. If they do, it'll be YayMicro or Crestock.
322
« on: December 27, 2008, 05:02 »
Seriously easy one for me:
Shutterstock
Dreamstime
Istock
Fotolia
123RF
Bigstock
StockXpert
Beyond that, I'd work on things other than agencies. If anyone is making "real" money at MostPhotos, Canstock, Crestock, etc. that's awesome for them but rare from what I know. Those 7 are the "it" list. If you really want a "full" list, just look to the right - that's an earnings rating. Crestock falls behind BigStock though not by a tremendous amount. SnapVillage, Canstock, both under that. Literally those 7 though and it would cover 99% of most people.
323
« on: December 27, 2008, 04:59 »
Yes, I was happy with 2008 - I increased from an average of $80 to an average closer to $500 per month and rising.
No, I wasn't happy with 2008 - I wanted to end the year over $1000 per month.
325
« on: December 27, 2008, 04:55 »
I'm not uploading now - I'm done until 1/2/9
Pages: 1 ... 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15 16 17 18 ... 23
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
