|
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 - cshack
51
« on: May 02, 2008, 21:28 »
johngriffin,
So what makes you think this is going to work. There are so many small sites that have little or no sales. What is going to separate your site from the rest? How are going to market the site to clients?
52
« on: May 02, 2008, 14:05 »
For me it says;"Your approval ratio is 70.8%. This means that you can upload 50 images per day."
When I was at 82% it was 100 a day. I can live with 50 no problem.
53
« on: May 02, 2008, 08:07 »
Now it's back....No idea what the problem was but it seems to be okay now.
54
« on: May 02, 2008, 06:45 »
I went to look at my portfolio on IS and it was gone? I can still see the approved/waiting images but the public view just isn't there for some reason. I sent a support ticket. It's just a computer thing I hope. 
55
« on: May 02, 2008, 06:21 »
I could only wish to have Yuri's success. I may never get there but I'm not jealous of his great accomplishments in microstock. Someone is always going to be at the top of there game. If you work hard you can be there too. Just be prepared to work your butt off for it.
Now go take some pictures and stop worrying about what someone else has. What would you like IS to do anyway....cut him off so you can have more.....PLEASE DUDE!...Get real.
56
« on: May 01, 2008, 07:19 »
John Harrington is a fool for thinking micro will go away. Change...Yes!...go away "No way".
57
« on: May 01, 2008, 06:54 »
I pulled out about a week ago. The upload system and my computer didn't like each other. Not to mention it took almost 2 weeks to get 5 images reviewed. Between the upload interface, slow sales and review time I'm done with SV for now. I may go back in 6 months or so as things improve I hope.
59
« on: April 29, 2008, 16:03 »
Nice idea but I don't think it will ever work. Any idea about the rules there. If you're going to sell images for $20 wouldn't you need to only upload that image there and not on other micro sites?
I also looked at some of the images there and they seem to accept almost anything.....I mean ANYTHING!
60
« on: April 29, 2008, 08:09 »
I was with PD for about 2 months. I've since pulled all of my images because of their rules. The site and the rules are just dumb. Why would anyone want to have a exclusive deal with a site that sells so little.
However, with the way they run the site I would think that it takes very little in the way on manpower to manage it. So I guess slow sales won't hurt them really. PD isn't for me, that's for sure.
61
« on: April 26, 2008, 12:58 »
I would say that with SS you need to make sure your first 10 are VERY STOCK WORTHY images. No real estate or landscapes snapshot looking images. The first time I submitted at SS I uploaded all the wrong images. I got in the second time and now have a 85% approval rate. On the first 10 I think they are expecting to see the best you have to offer. If they see a group of 10 just so-so images you get rejected every time even if the images are technically superior. I guess they figure that if you're not submitting worthy stock for the first 10 then they don't need you.
I stopped using any noise reduction all together because I did a look back and it seemed to hurt more than it helps. I use Neat Image almost daily for other stuff so I do like it but I think it's not so hot for stock. One thing I have learned is this. If you're having to do a lot of post processing you're chances of acceptance at SS and IS are greatly diminished. I used to spend hours editing photos making them look great to me. However what I like to hang on thw=e wall and what they want for stock are completely different. Since then I realized that it's a huge waste of time to spend hours post processing a not so good image for stock. The bottom line for the top 4 anyway is to shoot with near perfect focus and exposure. If you're not getting that out of camera then you need to figure out why. Fix it and watch you're acceptance rate rise quickly. I say this from recent experience. IS changed my whole approach to post processing and it seems to be working. I was one to slam IS for being to critical. After calming down and taking a serious look I realized that it was me and not them.
Bottom line is this. Take a long hard look at your work. Then take it to the next level for stock. What works for portraits and weddings won't work at all for stock. I've been taking pictures for over 30 years and getting into stock has been a whole new learning experience for me to say the least.
62
« on: April 26, 2008, 07:42 »
I too would like to see SS and IS offer exclusive images. If they did that I would gladly participate in both. The thought of overall exclusivity just seems a bit too much for me. Of course I'm no where near being able to go exclusive at IS so I really don't have a dog in this fight. But when my puppy grows up I'm still going to let him roam the neighborhood rather than keep him locked up in a pen.
63
« on: April 25, 2008, 07:35 »
What sites will and won't accept shots of new homes without a PR? I only ask this because we have a new area that is dead-on for home shots. Every aspect of the home and yards are perfect. But if I need a PR then I won't waste my time shooting and submiting. By the way I would be shooting each shot from a public road.
Thanks in advance for your help.
64
« on: April 22, 2008, 10:00 »
First time....very few rejections after uploading 90 images. Strange given my acceptance rate at IS is only 29%. Strange how this varies so widely from photographer to photographer.
65
« on: April 17, 2008, 07:22 »
Not me...What is it?
66
« on: April 15, 2008, 19:23 »
Granted Ive only been in the stock business for a few months but I still dont understand the business model for IS. Yes Ive read all the pros and cons of why they do things like they do but it still makes no sense at all to me.
Heres a scenario for all of you skeptics. Lets say a new toy comes out that may take the market by storm. Stores like Wal-Mart will try to get it first and more of it. Thats how they beat the competition like K-mart. They offer the best products at the best price and carry as much of a item as they can. I think SS is the Wal-Mart and while sales at IS are good I cant see how they expect to compete down the road with their current way of doing business. To be honest, they operate like they have a monopoly on the microstock business. Well I have news for them, they dont. Sites like Fotolia and Dreamstime are growing at a pretty fast pace. Those sites or others like them will pass IS sooner or later and be leave IS scratching their heads wondering what happened.
Lets look at the real numbers;
As of today this is the number of images online at (4) of the big (6)
SS = 3,471,223
FT = 3,482,242
IS = 2,964,072
DT = 2,776,981
Here are my personal numbers
SS = 75 files approved with $29.30 in sales this month
FT = 105 files approved with $5.94 in sales this month
IS = 20 files approved with $2.65 in sales this month
DT = 55 files approved with $1.80 in sales this month
The numbers dont lie. People keep saying hang in there, IS is the best for long term. Thats just BS coming from the butt kissing istockers. What makes some of you think differently about this is anybodys guess? IS is working towards a bunch of Exclusive photogs to keep things fresh there. However they are way behind the eight ball. When Yuri goes exclusive at IS then you better take a look. Until then stay as far away from Exclusive at IS as you can. Youre only cutting your nose off spite your face as they say. Also out of the other big (6) IS is days or even a week or so behind the rest when it comes to offering up new images. Why would a designer buy a subscription at IS knowing he or she isnt seeing the latest the photogs have to offer? Why would a designer want to buy a sub at from a IS when they could have 500,000 more images to choose from at SS? The only reason I care is because of the hype. IS IS IS IS IS over and over again. Well you know what, remember this post in a few years. Not taking a stand as a group is the very reason we cant change their upload limits and slow review times. Not helping each other to make the market better will hurt us all in the long term. Granted, IS has a strong place in the market today, but its my guess that this will soon change if IS doesnt change their ways. The sad thing is they could be number (1) but I think they have waited too late to even hope for that spot. You mark my word on this. Ive been in the photography business for over 30 years and I have never seen anything like IS make it for very long as a driving force.
67
« on: April 15, 2008, 08:06 »
I've found that they are a lot tougher on logos than any other site I upload to. I have had buttons with blurred writing and other barely visible logos refused after being accepted at all the other major sites.
I just fix it and re-upload and they get accepted with no problem. That's the only reason they have ever refused my images so they are quite lenient in other respects.
I agree, however, I can't seem to find what they are talking about. That's the part that gets me!
68
« on: April 15, 2008, 07:22 »
In the past 2 weeks I've had two rejections for "Logo/Branding" that are totally unwarranted. They sent me a email about the 1st one saying the had a new reviewer "cutting teeth". Well it happened again yesterday. Yet another "Logo/Branding" rejection. I sent them a email asking for them to point out the Logo or Branding because I can't find it to save my life. I also stated that I would stop uploading if the stupid pointless rejections didn't stop. Given my sales there it really wouldn't hurt me at all to close my account at 123RF anyway.
Anyone else had this type of rejection in the past few weeks?
69
« on: April 14, 2008, 05:08 »
Anyways, hope that helps someone
Why would you want to help someone build a portfolio to compete with you?
I thought that was why we were here....to help each other?
70
« on: April 13, 2008, 07:20 »
I was wondering if anyone knows the image approval process form a technical standpoint? In other words, what software do they use to view the images? Are they looking at them at 100% or is the inspection at 200% or greater? I guess Id like to know the process itself. How they do it form step one to finish. This way I could try to save myself some grief by pre-inspecting my images as they do rather than how I do it now.
We all know what they are looking for to reject but the bottom line is HOW they do it step by step?
Thanks
71
« on: April 12, 2008, 11:52 »
Cool, thanks. I guess I should have thought of that!
72
« on: April 12, 2008, 10:12 »
I tried your Threshold method and I really think it showed me things I never saw before so THANKS! Second, how do you remove all EXIF data for your images? I want to do that as well.
73
« on: April 12, 2008, 09:12 »
My first batch of images to IS were all on white backgrounds shot in jpg rather than RAW. I only did a slight curves adjustment and healing brush to remove dust and hot pixels. They approved 9 of 15.
After that batch, I started shooting in RAW and getting rejections one after another. Since then I started shooting the Alamy way.
Now I shoot in RAW, adjust as needed in RAW mode and save it as a upsized TIFF, reload the TIFF and save it as a JPG and size it back to the original size. This has seemed to raise my acceptance rate a little.
I started doing my editing like this because I was accepted at Alamy and thats pretty much what they want you to do. Alamy also wants you to do a (6) pixel Gaussian blur followed by doing a Fade Gaussian Blur 100% Color right after you do the blur located under the Edit menu. "Strange but it seems to work"
My eyes dont seem to see what this does really. But it gets me accepted at Alamy as well as 80% acceptance at the rest of the micro sites. I still get rejections but they are down to a minimum for sure.
I kind of see things this way. Find what works for IS first. Then do a little more if you want for the others.
I also have to wonder if IS uses the EXIF data to see what youve done to the image and reject it for what ever reason because of too many editing steps? This is only a theory of mine but I have a pretty good suspension that they look at the EXIF data to determine editing? I could be way off base and completely wrong but its just my opinion.
I also think the bottom line with IS is perfect from the camera is what they really want. Minimal editing for sure! Thats also why I shoot everything stopped up as well as stopped down just to cover everything. I use a light meter for everything I shoot in my studio so lighting control and exposure are dead on in most cases. The other thing I can suggest for isolation shots is this. Meter the background first. Then meter the subject. The background needs to be at least (1) to (2) stops over exposed when compared to the subject. This keeps the back ground from being so gray. I use two soft boxes on the subject as well as a hair light and umbrella heads for most of my on white shots. The umbrellas are aimed at the background and the soft boxes are aimed at the subject.
I hope this helps. Im sure some will differ from this and thats fine because the bottom line is finding what works for you and not me. If this helps you then Im glad I could help. If is doesnt, then you should find YOUR mix that works best. This should provide a good start anyway.
74
« on: April 12, 2008, 08:04 »
Since February 2008 I only have 19. My acceptance rate is only 30% so I have my work cut out for me. Sales are low too.
I've been at SS since March 08 and have 65 images there and sales of 95. It really makes me wonder is IS is really worth it for me at least?
75
« on: April 10, 2008, 09:58 »
I don't seem to have much of a problem with SS, DT, BigStock, 123, CanStockPhoto or any of the other smaller sites. However, for the past 2 weeks IS has turned down everything I uploaded. Yes 100% rejected at IS. Now keep in mind that I submit the same images at every site. I really have to wonder if they are trying to get me to close my account? It's almost like they really don't want any new photographers all of the sudden. My acceptance rate at IS is only 30% while at all the others it's 80% or better. What gets me is I shoot with a Canon EOS 20D on white using a 6 light flash system and a light meter for everything. At first when I signed up they accepted about 60% of my shots. I've not changed anything in my studio, nor have I tried anything new on photoshop. But for the past 2 weeks that have really gone way overboard with the rejections. Should I just give up or is this the IS way? If they don't want my work then fine, they should just say it and save me the frustration of constant rejection.
P.S. SS has been very good for me. My acceptance rate there is above 80% and more than 50% of thise images have sold. After only 2 weeks on SS I have sold 80 images with a portfolio of only 60 images. I have only submitted 72 to them. SS is at the top of my list while IS remains at the bottom!!!
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
