|
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 - Roadrunner
101
« on: September 03, 2008, 11:31 »
This thread kind of gives me pause. It seem just about every subject has been photographed by someone, and probably duplicated by copycats. I had some experience reviewing images, and I lasted about one hour, and I never looked back. There isn't enough money in it for me - especially at the wages cited here. Most errors I noticed had to do with focus, noise and lacking contrast. Everytime I submit, I wonder how it will work out. For every two hundred shots I take, I may submit 20. I really hesitate submitting tow of the swame subject, and I try to vary my subject matter. I must admit deciding what to shoot can be a challenge for me. I often try to figure ow many photogs already covered the subject I have chosen. I canfault the reviewer too much, because I wouldn't want their job. Dealing with someones art or photography is like dealing with their inflated ego. Have a good day and keep shooting! 
102
« on: August 23, 2008, 09:39 »
epantha - I thought I had to be prepared to upload 25 templates? Did they let you start out with 9? I'm not quite sure I understand the mechanics of the site, but it seems that we can only upload one image at a time, and we have to do some work on it wt the site (on line). Do you find uploading is very time consuming? It does seem interresting - a change from trying out a new MS site!  Radrunner
103
« on: August 23, 2008, 09:30 »
I tend to be aligning my self with Lisafax. I did jump into a few new site - they are not worth any more attention for me taht is! Each photog has to weigh the cost in terms of effort. A tree that bears no fruit is of little use. Though it may provide some shade - providing it at least bears leaves.
So I will be taking down images from about five sites come January 2009 as they have produced no fruit. I will also not upload to sites that obviously do not need or want my images. Not a complaint; some sites don't accept my images. The four sites that accept a reasonable percentages of my images and provide fruit (sales) I will continue to serve. I acknowledge that there are those who just can't use my particular images, but other photogs can do well at those sites. So I don't like to whine or complain over a mere fact of life.
104
« on: August 07, 2008, 14:53 »
Is ist possible the reviewers are flipping a coin or just using a random selection type thing in order to keep their rejection rate up. I have had an image accepted after doing extensive post processing work, and all the others that had any work at all were rejected. Any mor I just upload and wait to see if they accepted anything. Most of my uploading to iS is after I am finished uploading to the three main sites I deal with. At one time I was trying to work with about eight sites which got out of hand. Now I just concentrating on sites that make it easy to upload and that are still accepting images. 
105
« on: August 07, 2008, 10:03 »
Fotolia is at the bottom of the barrel for sales. Considering I can't get any more images accepted by them; I figure things will only get worse for me. I do hope ite can benefit some of you contributors though! The are one of the sites I will not upload for at least a year. I want to give them time to indicate what they want by watching the feedback of you more successful photogs. With a bank of more than 4 million images; they obviously don't need my contributions. It is said that if you throw enough mud against the wall, some will stick. So may be I should submit 1ooo images and get one or two accepted.
106
« on: August 06, 2008, 12:37 »
All you have to do to report income from sites outside the U.S. is to keep track of money received via PAY PAL and include the amounts as part of the Gross Receipts on your Schd. - C Form 1040.
Back-up witholding comes into play if a person refuses to provide the either the Social Security Number or the Employer ID Number.
107
« on: August 06, 2008, 12:26 »
Right on Renee!
108
« on: August 05, 2008, 10:23 »
Good job vphoto! You got 5 images Accepted.  I doubt if I could match that. congratulations!
109
« on: August 05, 2008, 10:14 »
I don't understand why they want a W-9 form. All they actually need is your SS# so that they can issue a Form 1099 reflecting your income for the year. There is no requirement of $600 before a Form 1099 can be issued. Banks will issue Form 1099 reflecting interest of $10. Our responsibility to report all income earned is in accordance with IRC Sec 61A unless there is an allowable deduction. The requirement to file a return is based on Income. People who have part-time employment and earn less than $600 don't have to file, but should file Form 1040 EZ in order to get any taxes witheld returned/refunded. Microstock income for many contributors is in addition to some other form of employment and would be subject to the Fed Income tax Law if they are an American citizen . Citizens of other countries if subject to U.S. Fed tax laws will be able to reduce the subject tax by the amount of Foreign Tax paid as a Foreign Tax Credit. This is of course just a general guideline. Hope you do better than $600!
110
« on: July 29, 2008, 12:26 »
Vonkara - Thanks for the view and information. I'll keep that in mind. I do have a good monitor (Samsung; dynamic range 3000:1), and I calibrate it every two weeks. I now view all isolations at 300% fo look for stray pixels; however it is difficult for me to find thos artifacts some of the reviewers see. As for determining the sharpness after upsizing for Alamy, nothing looks shapr to me at 200 or 300%. At 100 % it looks sharp to me, but nthe reviewers see it quite differently. I already failed twice at Alamy, so I'm gun shy now that they are freezing accounts for those who fail. Perhaps it is three strikes and I'll be killed. So it may not be worth the time to try again. With the other sites I'm doing fairly well. I would never submit an image unless I felt it was acceptable by that sites standards. Once I find the method to meet the standards of a particular site, I do my best to comply. Karimala - you maake a very good point; however I never submit any image that could be embarrassing to anyone. If anyone was obese or dressed strangely, I wouldn't photograph them from the rear or any other way without their consent. Since I don't like trying to get strangers to sign legal documents, I do tend to avoid people. I do thank you for your input! Roadrunner
111
« on: July 28, 2008, 10:29 »
If all Architectural images need property releases there won't be much to shoot without some kind of release.
I just had an image rejected on a site that consisted of a swimming hole in Florida that was a natural spring. All swimmers and the lifeguard had their back to the camera - no visible faces and all were adults. I was told that since the main subject was bathers that I needed a release from each adult? Doesn't seem right to me.
Seem all of a sudden everyon is getting upended over releases. If it gets any tackier, I'm going to stick to shooting events and personal service. It's relly getting to be a pain between releases and overemphesis on quality. I understand the need for quality, but reviewers seem to be able to see things I can't see on a 24" LCD monitor at 100%. Could be some reviewers are checking at 200%. Can't say for sure, but it's amazing how they can see an artifact that I can't see no matter how much time I spend on looking at things.
112
« on: July 27, 2008, 15:14 »
I suppose I just can't get the hang of upsizing. My first batch was shot with the Nikon D-70 6MP image using sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 glass. Rejected due to Soft. My second batch of 4 was shot with a Nikon D300 and Tokina 80-200 f/2.8 Pro ATX lens and the forementioned Sigma lens; 12 MP images upsized and rejected due to Atifacts? There is no way I'm going to upgrade to a Hasy 40 MP camera and Hassy lenses. I did however upgrade my 80-200,, Tokina to a Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8 VR lens. I may try one more time six months down the road, because they will probably freeze me out after my next failed attempt. Then again; may be I should just give up now. Good luck to you othere guys and gals though. Roadrunner
113
« on: July 24, 2008, 10:16 »
I downloaded the trial version of the software recommended above. The message indicated by the scan was "Cannot read - Corrupted ISO Port." I'm not sure if it is only a Norton Fix or no; I will give it a try. I did run Chk Disk, but my computer freezes and I get a message "Program not responding.
I'm still trying. I am able to download one at a time from 123RF; thank God!
114
« on: July 23, 2008, 09:38 »
I find that resubmitting anything to IS is a wastee of time. Resubmissions of mine were rejected for the same reason, "Overfiltered", regardless of what the rejection reason was the first time.
One shot was rejected for lighting. So I took the raw file and used light touch of levels, and the image was rejected for Overfiltered. That's when I decided no mor resubmissions to IS. I only resubmit to SS and BS, and only resubmit if the reviewer advises a fix and advises me to resubmit. Otherwise I figure there is no sense wasting the time of reviewers or my time.
115
« on: July 22, 2008, 14:40 »
Thanks loads gus and gals for the priceless advice! I'm often concerned about the internl HD Dr crashing. All of you have given me great advice which I shall take with great appreciation!
Roadrunner
116
« on: July 22, 2008, 09:37 »
I just had my external drive go toes up due to the USB plug coming disconnected as a file was being written to it! As a result, The drive can no longer be accessed. So I lost all my image files saved between 4-2007 and 1-2008. After some work, I got the computer to recognize the DR, but I cannot access it.
I think either 123RF or YAYMicro enables us to download our own files as a backup in case of such emergencies.
Can someone advise which one it is and how do we do it?
I have a new Exteral DR on the way, so I want to back up everything ASAP. In a couple of months I'll get a second External HD to back that up.
Any help would be appreciated!
Thanks,
Roadrunner
117
« on: July 17, 2008, 13:31 »
Thanks for your input David!
118
« on: July 16, 2008, 13:30 »
Can't you just upload i,ages with keywords and a description? Sounds confusing to me. If I ever get accepted, I'll probably be confused by the system. Being one of the dimest bulbs in the room, I like to keep things simple.
Woul I be better off just forgetting Alamy? I tried twice, but got shot in the head twice.
119
« on: July 11, 2008, 14:56 »
Wow; that seems to be the most stupid policy I ever heard. I can see them playing a game with newbees, but after the individual is accepted, seems the images should be evaluated on their own merit. You are right - it doesn't make sense to submit more than one image at a time after being acepted. If I ever do make it!
120
« on: July 11, 2008, 13:00 »
I just submitted four images that were upsized from 12 MP to the 48MB minimum acceptable size. Images were shot on the D300. THey only stated a reason for one image being rejected due to Artifacts. I upsized using PSE6 - Bicubic Soften.
The first batch was from my D70 (6MP) which I upsized using Imagener. Of the four images, two were rejected due to Soft.
My question is - is it ok to resubmit the images that had no reason for rejection stated other than their being part of the batch? Or is Alamy sort of like SS in that they usually reject images resubmitted until after you were accepted.
On SS, I seem to be getting most all the images accepted that were previously rejected with no reason stated and were part of my acceptance submissions. How is Alamy in that regard?
121
« on: July 11, 2008, 11:03 »
Peter - All you have to do is look at my images on DT - I submit the sme images to both sites, but nothing seems to be good enough for FT anymore. BTW - The last batch I sent to SS had 75% accepted, but FT Rejected 90%? Gues FT has the only professional reviewers.
It really isn't a problem since I'm doing ok on four other sites. Of course I'm not as good as you - so that would account for my having a tougher time.
122
« on: July 11, 2008, 10:35 »
I was just wondering if Fotolia is somehow taking the photographer's ranking into considering how many images to allow to get through (Acceptance/Rejection). In other words - if a photog has a ranking of say 3000 or lower , the photographer will get 80% or more rejected. Someone who has a ranking of 2000 or higher will perhaps get 80% or more accepted. Just wondering?
123
« on: July 09, 2008, 13:45 »
Could be they just don't want any more images. I gave up trying to upload to FT two months agao. May be I'll try small uploads once every three months till they get real reviewers. Who knows.
124
« on: June 27, 2008, 13:12 »
After reading all your comments, I get the message. They should make it clear to dummies like me by stating up front that they want Exclusive Images only. Now I can very easily put them on the back burner; it is a waste of thime considrering they have such an awkward upload system. It is from the pit of Hell! On second thought - I should take them off the burner completely. 
125
« on: June 26, 2008, 17:12 »
THANKS Dullegg! I think it must be zone Alarm based on what you have provided. I'll give it a try; my Router Firewall will be a little protection while I do that. At least no one will be able to hack in.
UPDATE:
Disabling Zone Alarm didn't work, and there was no problem with a pop-up blocker. I still can't get past the first page requiring us to click on the "Check All" box. After all boxes show check marks, it just rolls me back to that page. So far their technical experts haven't gotten back to me. Guess it just isn'tmeant to be.
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
