|
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 - araminta
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 14
176
« on: November 25, 2008, 18:08 »
I started "seriously" with 3D about two year ago and the most important piece of advice I can give you is to spend some time to carefully choose your 3D package and then stick with it: 3D softwares are quite complex to use and very complex to master and if you try to use too many different softwares, you will just spend most of your time learning them instead of learning 3D. Cinema 4D is an excellent and well known package I would recommend. Oh, and don't spend too much time with Poser characters if you want to produce microstock images: we are still a few years away from photorealism  I think that trying to produce simple microstock 3D renders (which are not rejected) is a good way to learn 3D basics as you can get very simple 3D scenes which sell very well. One of my best seller this year so far is a 3D render of an isolated milk box 
177
« on: November 18, 2008, 02:48 »
And please, don't ask why so many contributors with so many silhouettes of such sexy girls in their portfolio do not put the source photo as well which would sell like crazy 
178
« on: November 17, 2008, 14:05 »
It won't be much use in a studio using flash. The flash exposure is so fast, there should be no possibility of visible camera shake.
This is not true as soon as you have some ambient light I would say. I like monopods too, but a monopod is not intended to replace a tripod. I would say a monopod is a little bit like an external image stabilization systems. A lot more practical to use than a tripod, but definitively not as stable. And this is not a $500 monopod because the heads can be used on a tripod of course. Anyway, thanks Yuri for sharing your tips & tricks
179
« on: November 15, 2008, 15:02 »
There are a variety of factors in this result: age (results ordering by dowloads last years to change, people gets more or less the same results there than six months ago; that would create a boring and repetiive best match result), dls/month, ratings, etc.
My photo: 833 downloads, 4786 views (17% purchase ratio), uploaded 2007-02, 1 review (5/5), 6 public lightboxes The photo before mine in best match: 7 downloads, 288 views (2.5% purchase ratio), uploaded 2005-06, 1 review (5/5), 2 public lightboxes Myself and the contributor of the second photo have both almost an identical number of files and downloads. How can you tweak the numbers to explain this order? Just curious. On the other hand, pushing exclusives carries to the front the photos that any other agency has. That's good for the customers and for the agency. An then, for exclusives. After reading in forums like this how much are doing many of you (as stated by you) independents on others sites, if istock wan to retain their exclusive unique strength, probably the extra comission and other little perks are not enough.
Losing independants would be bad, but losing exclusives would be even worse. After all, there's a clear surplus of new photographer's and lost independants woukld make room for new ones.
I have no problem with a fair advantage towards exclusive contributors, even a strong advantage (but it should be officially admitted by IS), but as far as I have read on IS forums, many exclusive do also complain on the new best match algorithm. And a question to Sean: I don't know whether you benefit or not from the change, but how do you feel to make business with a company which can so deeply affect your earnings without giving any reason or explanation? I do not complain that much with IS new best match because I cannot do anything, but I'm now very happy not to be exclusive with them and I don't trust this site anymore for the forseeable future: this is just neither a fair nor a serious way to treat IS contributors IMHO.
180
« on: November 15, 2008, 14:29 »
I like the Alamy way of doing it because it is based on precise algorithm and criteria and Alamy provide very useful tools to analyse your own ranking and thus imrove your keywords. And the whole thing sounds logical to me.
Concerning IS new best match, whatever the criteria or result, I cannot see any good explanation to the fact that an almost blue flame photo (i.e. which buyers do like a lot) which is ranked #3 when sorting on number of download is ranked when using best match after an older photo with 7 downloads... but from an exclusive photographer.
181
« on: November 15, 2008, 13:58 »
There are two different usage for a designer for an "isolated" image: use it as it is on a white background (on a web site, a magazine or a newspaper... shadow is required here) or use it as a design element (no shadow). I always keep some shadow on my isolations because I think it is very difficult to add a realistic fake shadow while it is quite easy to remove a light shadow by using simple Photoshop adjustments. And I think that the market for the first usage of isolations is bigger than the market for the second usage, but this is just my guesstimate. Concerning the fact that you cannot call "isolation" a photo with a shadow, it depends on the definition of the word "isolation" I've never had any rejection for that reason.
182
« on: November 04, 2008, 11:58 »
Seems quite clear to me that IS do not require exclusivity for RM images: IS allow you to sell ANY photo on RM site.
Since the point of exclusivity is to create a collection with a value due to the limited access of that exclusive content, putting similar images, even at an RM site, would devalue your work as an exclusive.
In this case why does IS allow exclusive to sell their images on RM sites?
183
« on: November 04, 2008, 08:55 »
Seems quite clear to me that IS do not require exclusivity for RM images: IS allow you to sell ANY photo on RM site. Whether you can sell same or similar photos at Alamy is a question you should ask to Alamy, not to IS: is it allowed to sell as RM a photo while another photo from the same shoot is sold as RF? RF buyers do not expect to have special rights on a given image and thus don't care to know whether a photo is used a thousand times or not. On the opposite, RM buyers may expect to have more control on the usage of the photo they want to purchase: I thus don't think that IS care much with exclusivity provided you do not compete with them, i.e. RF images. This is a good question however Another interesting question: IS do not require exclusivity if you sell your photo with Getty Images. Does it now include StockXpert which is owned by Jupiter Images which is owned by Getty Images?
184
« on: November 01, 2008, 12:54 »
SS 27% +60%
StockXpert 22% +0%
FT 20% +60%
IS 13% -50%
DRM 12% +15%
BIG 3% +0%
123 3% +50%
October was somehow disappointing especially compared to 2007 which was HUGE, but it is still my best month in 2008. SS has performed extremely well (2nd BME after october 2007, thanks to regular uploads?) and I'm especially surprised by FT which is by far my BME. Same for 123RF, but this one is still a small earner for me. With no surprise, IS sucks this month
185
« on: October 31, 2008, 16:12 »
I don't play in the same category: I'm happy when I upload 30 pictures in a given month 1000-3000 a month you say? WOW... even with 50% acceptance rate you will have the biggest portfolio in the microstock industry in less than a year!
186
« on: October 31, 2008, 06:00 »
how do you match your image in db with the various names MS agencies store it by? you must have multiple names for each image that you enter when items are accepted? This is one of the manual thing i've to do: match each site's ID (not name) together for a given photo. But it has to be done once for newly uploaded photos only which is acceptable.
187
« on: October 30, 2008, 04:45 »
Yes, I do track individual sales. I've developed an almost fully automated PHP script to retrieve all data from all microstock sites I contribute to and then store each and every download in a MySQL database. I'm thus able to produce cool statistics and graphics, which is just... cool and not that useful I would say It's indeed not necessary to track individual sales to know what is important to know and having such detailed info do not give any really useful information. In my case, I do it because I can and liked to do it (I am a software engineer in the "real" life ), but I would not recommand anybody to spend too much time with such detailed statistics.
188
« on: October 23, 2008, 02:13 »
Since this version of the best match supposedly helps exclusives more than previous versions wouldn't that be an incentive to go exclusive and not a disincentive?
If you look at IS forum you will see that MANY exclusive also do see their sales dropping with the new best match algorithm. IS just do it completely wrong here 
189
« on: October 22, 2008, 02:14 »
Well, this is an interesting question. You may be the first one to post a 3D render with a MR... let's see how things happen Keep us informed: I'm quite interested in your challenge.
190
« on: October 21, 2008, 08:49 »
I've read the same Ballistic book, and I understand that you may fine it quite challenging and interesting! But if you are new to modelling, good luck to you: this is a huge challenge as you have to understand that Ballistic's The Face is not the work of a single guy but of a team. Moreover, the final result as seen on the book cover is not photorealistic enough to pass the review IMHO if you try to pretend this is a true person (with a model release), and if you pass the review, it may be considered as a fraud as you are just lying, aren't you? I've submitted myself some photo-realistic renders of a woman, but without the head (a lot simpler ) and without pretending to be a true photo... it does not sell very well 
191
« on: October 18, 2008, 13:32 »
This whole idea comes from somebody who do not understand the stock business I would say: buyers are mostly professional designers who prefer to pay for a high quality service and the insurance that they obtain the proper license.
Going through a microstock site has two obvious advantages: it is a lot safer for the buyer from a legal point of view and there are millions of images to choose from, all of them being inspected by neutral reviewers to ensure a certain level of quality.
I bet that if you give for free your images on your site and ask for a donation, you will get only downloads from non-professional bloggers and nobody would give you any donation unless your portfolio is actually exceptionnal in which case you may earn a few dollars per month.
Freeware softwares are a completely different business I would say: each business has its own rules.
192
« on: October 18, 2008, 09:59 »
The "Download Yesterday" column can be used instead now This is a quite interesting tool and I don't see any problem with such tools as those numbers are public already: this is just a fastest way to get them. We may however argue whether IS and other sites should keep download figures private.
193
« on: October 09, 2008, 05:55 »
Cool 
194
« on: October 03, 2008, 17:13 »
The reflection is not a gradient to invisible: you cannot use transparency thus no "invisible" is allowed.
This is only a gradient from light blue to white which mimic an opacity layer.
195
« on: October 03, 2008, 09:22 »
It is all the difficulty with vectors: you can only use a fraction of the features provided by Illustrator and you must carefully check your EPS for any "forbidden object" (bitmap, open paths etc.) It is somehow frustrating indeed
196
« on: September 29, 2008, 12:59 »
Fully agree with RacePhoto even if I have myself developed a few scripts and a dedicated database to keep track of each and every download: I do it because I can (I'm a software developer and I liked doing it), but I must admit that the nice graphics I get are just nice and not that useful  You should indeed not take too much time on complex calculations IMHO and rough average values are accurate enough.
197
« on: September 25, 2008, 10:11 »
Almost 50% of subs in number of downloads, but from new customers apparently: I still have plenty of credit purchases and quite often XXL which is quite pleasant StockXpert is doing very well for me since the beginning and currently IS and StockXpert are my top 2 earners as SS sales are dropping indeed.
198
« on: September 25, 2008, 04:59 »
It STRONGLY depends on how much money you need. I wish I live in east Europe: I would be pro now. But I'm living in Switzerland and I'm afraid I will never earn enough money to make it a living. But I guess that if you don't event think about that point it is because you are an US citizen In this case the answer is: it depends.
199
« on: September 25, 2008, 04:36 »
"WOW: DT is doing extremely well this month with a 200% increase in downloads. Last month I Had 2 downloads and this month is my BME with 6 downloads!!!!" Just to remember that when doing statistics on small samples, variations from month to month can be huge. The more downloads you have, the more this kind of information becomes relevant. It's the reason why I'm waiting on Yuri answer to this post
200
« on: September 23, 2008, 07:07 »
I'm in microstock business for two and half years now and I've also spent quite a lot of time trying to make nice graphics to analyse my sales. My conclusion now is that there are too many factors which do impact sales and it is quite useless to try to know the impact of a single or a few factors. Put your efforts in making more and better pictures: this is the key to success
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 14
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
