MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Show Posts

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

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7
126
Alamy.com / Re: I got accepted - whoo hoo!
« on: June 21, 2008, 15:59 »
Congratulations on your acceptance! 

I can't even get to the page that enables you to upload the images? ::)  Everytime I try, I get kicked back to the first page where you have to check al boxes.  If I check all and click on "Next" to get to the upload page, I get kicked back.  I tried using Firefox and Internet Explorer.  All setting for security are properly set so I guess it just isn't meant to be.  Their experts can't sem to figure it out.  So if any of your guys and gals have any suggestions, I would appreciate the help.  I'm on Windows XP and use Zone Alarm.

Roadrunner

127
123RF / Re: New Reviewers or new Quality requirements?
« on: June 11, 2008, 14:43 »
Only reason I started this thread is because I wanted to know if any other photogs were getting the exact same reason for rejections.  Getting rejected is fine with me. All I ask is that the real reason for rejection be stated![/]  If the reviewers just palin don't like my work that is fine too.  I';; just move on.  Not knowing the real reason prevents a photog from trying to meet their standards.

This was not meant to be whining and complaining, just an attempt to find out If anyone else had the batch problem.

Looks like many of you do.  I am not going to deleted my existing images, because my images are selling well there.  I just don't want to waste time uploading and pushing images through when all I get is a batch rejection with no accurate information.  I notice FOT is doing the same thing now.  When an image is rejected at FOT, I get no feedback at all.  They also are now doing the batch thing.

I'm beginning to think I should just stick to service type photog where I deal with a client up close. 

Any way - good luck to all you guys and dolls!

Roadrunner

128
Dreamstime.com / Re: what works at dreamstime!
« on: June 10, 2008, 18:29 »
I'm catching on to DT and have picked up my Acceptance rating there, but iS is much tougher.  In fact I never bother resubmitting to iS, and ony on occasion do I resubmit to DT.   When I do, DT usually picks it up the second time around.  So far they provide my best sales.  ;D

129
Alamy.com / Re: How do you prepare photos for initial QC?
« on: June 06, 2008, 19:30 »
You can get 50MB file in 16 Bit at 300 PPI by upsizing to 3650 (Long side) X 2427 (Aprx short side).

If you have a 6MP camera and generate a RAW file, make the necessary adjustments and save as a TIFF (16 Bit).  Then bring the Tiff fike up and use Image >Resize in PS Elements.  Male sure PPI is set to 300.  Then change the long side of the image to 3650 (Short side will adjust automaticaly),  you then click on the "Bicubic" button at the bottom of the Resize box; from the dropdown menu, select Bicubic = Smoother.

Resave the image as a tiff 16 Bit.  close the image that is up.  Now use File >Open File and check the file size. Roll you mouse onto the file; the little box opens up and you will see that you have a 50MB file.

Open the file and make adjustments to color saturation (light touch - do not overdo it); then tweak it in Levels/curves.  Now convert to 8 bit (Image>Mode>8 bit.  Also use RGB.  If you want, make only a very slight Unsharp Mask adjustment.  I do not use more than Amount (50); Radius (1.2) and Threshhold (1).

When you save this as a JPG file at 12 (Least amount of compaction), you end up with about a 4.7 MB file.  By saving at 10 or 11, it would be a bit smaller for uploading.

Good luck.

130
123RF / Re: New Reviewers or new Quality requirements?
« on: June 06, 2008, 14:03 »
I wouldn't care if it were three images, but 10 out of 15 is a real slap in the face.  I'm going to give them a rest for a couple of months; then may be test them with a small batch of 10.  If I get the same result, then I figure it's time to just leave what I have on there stay until they stop generating sales.

Can't see cutting off my nose to spite my face.

Roadrunner

131
I'm averaging $.033 per image per month.  I just let things ride till mid November; then I request a payout.  Actually I do that with all sites except 123RF which makes automatic payouts when I hit $50. 

132
123RF / New Reviewers or new Quality requirements?
« on: June 06, 2008, 10:48 »
Did 123RF get new reviewers or are they trying to get tougher than iS and SS?

I just uploaded 15 images that had been accepted by SS and IS.  Of the 15 images, only 5 were accepted.  All ten rejected carried the same reason - "Lighting/Composition".   ??? If 123 is going to start that level of quality level, I'm going to call it a day.  I can't believe that SS and IS reviewers don't know good compposition and lighting when they see it.  No wonder newbees find it difficult to get the understanding of what these sites want.

I had an acceptance rating of 85%, but it appears that I should figure on 35-40% in the future.  Guess the rule of thirds isn't the rule here,  When I shoot, I keep the grid turned on to line up my subject so it falls within the rule of thirds.

Might be time to consider just uploading to RM sites.   Only thing is - sales come very sloooooow on those sites.  ;D 

Anybody else feel as though they are walking through a mine field?  ::)

Roadrunner

133
General Stock Discussion / Re: Life After Microstock
« on: June 06, 2008, 10:18 »
Well put Adelaide!  I hope to make enough to buy the Bride a Big Mac and may be get myself a ne Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 HMS II for Christmas.  Who knows; could be I make enough to get me a Big Mac too.  ;D

Roadrunner

134
Thanks Snurder and Cshack! I sort of thought along those lines.  I'm glad to hear that they are not as bad as iS when it comes to isolations.

With iS, I do not use the term "Isolate" or "Over white", because that seems to be like waiving a red cape in front of an angry bull! ::)  I still haven't gotten one osolation past iS.  May be they just don't want them.


135
Now that I have finally been accepted after two years and many attempts, I have several images that were rejected as part of a batch that failed to generate 7 images acceptable in the batch.  If I want to resubmit the images that have no stated reason for rejection except that they were part of a batch, what should I say in the Reviewer's block?  Also would it be a good idea or should I just forget them?

Thanks,
Roadrunner

136
Peep = I am doing well on 123RF and they also act as a back-up for my images.  Of course they are only backing up those that are accepted.  ???

Anyway - I not only check my ratings to see who gave me the low "4" (or less); I click on their name that show up as a rater to see their images.  Then I give them a large number of fours (or less)!  Get them before he can block you.   ::)

I am thinking about deleting all my images and closing out my acount.  Doesn't seem worth the time.

137
Joined in Mar. 2008; no sales.  Unless they expand their market, there won't be many sales!  I doubt if I'll see any, because I alway do a test market before doing any significant upload.  I usually upload 25 to 40 images for two months.  If I get any sales, then I start uploading more often.  iStock only accepted 4 images the first month from me, but I generated two sales in less than 2 months.  With MP, 40 images uploaded and NO sales.

Plus they utilize a rating system that is annoying and fruitless.

138
Featurepics.com / Re: Repricing trick
« on: May 20, 2008, 15:24 »
Thanks Mantonino for the tip!

I can't find the edit button in order to set the prices lower; can you give me a little help in this area?

ThanK!

139
Shutterstock.com / Re: Shutterstock pricing
« on: May 20, 2008, 10:08 »
I wonder if SS is mising the mark by not having images available to occasional buyers.  They should realize that if they work exclusively on the Subscription package exclusively, they will be loosing ground to sites like 123RF and DT and iS.  IS saw an advantage by opening up Subscription sales to ride side by side with onetime buyers.

SS shoul make images and enhanced licenses available to buyers who may only need one image for some promotion etc. at a higher fee.  That way buyers who are looking for the use of the image on a one time basis won't have to go elsewhere.  Bottom line - SS can't loose, but the contributors will gain a little more commission because of the higher price.  Only thing is, would SS lower the commission percentage paid to the contributor for these one time buys. 

123RF calls the low quantity occasional sale as a Credit Sale (Higher amount for both 123RF and Contributors), and for their registered subscribers a lower price is built into the subscription rate.  I have only been with 123RF four months, but they are tied with my previous best site.  Glad a fellow photog put me on to them.

140
Overfiltered?  Seems only iS uses that ; in fact, 90% of rejections I get there are for "Overfiltered".  No other site rejected any of those images for that reason.  Most of those images were accepted by other sites and are selling quite well.  My best selling image by far on all the sites I'm on was rejected for "A few artifacts" by iS.

I just figure sometimes the reviwer doesn't like something and that gives them a good cop out.  Then I keep on truckin! :P

141
General Stock Discussion / Re: Feasability Study
« on: May 16, 2008, 13:35 »
Something is wrong with me.  I'm lucky I can upload 20 images a month.  At some point, you are going to run out of things to shoot.  Unless of course, you have several models wiling to work for nothing.  ;D

Good luck!

142
That's the problem with these calendar publishers, T-Shirt designers, Coffee Mug printers and Postcard publishers!  They know there is a very slim chance they will be caught by the photographers, so they relish in stealing use of the images by paying only the subscription rate.  To them it is good good business decision.

For every one who has the time to track all thir images and contact the ;egal departments of such offenders, there are hundreds that are not so adept.  Considering the number of vilolators, there are more getting away with it than getting caught.  Add to that, and some sites can't give your work away fast enough.  This might be the biggest factor in persuading photographers to deal with RM over RF stock.  In fact, some may resort to going back to the old way of doing business - contacting editors for their specs,  and supplying images tailored to tthat magazine.

Consider also how expensive equipment is and how much travel expenses are rising! 

Can't help but wonder how much abuse the photographers are willing to take.  I have had two extended licenses in two years.  I highly suspect that I've been cheated more than once. ::)  The question is - Do the majority of photographers really care?  It seems to be a fact that the way for a large percentage of people tody is to cheat all they can, because there are no penalties other than having to give one or two of those being cheated a small check.


143
I have had shots like that rejected due to lack of DOF. and ons site uses "focus or focus point is not where we would expect.".


144
General Stock Discussion / Re: what are we?
« on: May 11, 2008, 12:45 »
We seem to be sub-contractors providing images to a given site.  Since the site can flat out reject us based on our submission, they have a degree of control over us.  That control is actually limited in a sense.  They provide the specs, and we must work within that peramiter.

Since we are responsible to supply our own equipment, work our own hours, select our subject matter and control aany model with whom we work, we seem to meet the sub-contractor/outside vendor criterion.  Therefore a 1099 should be issued by the site for any income we earn via a pay out.  Since we do not report to the company as a salesperson or employee, we should not receive a w-2.  Another factor is that we are not reimbursed for any expenses by the employer. 

Just guessing of course.  ???

145
StockXpert.com / Re: Total Rejection
« on: May 09, 2008, 13:14 »
I got the same message when I applied.  I sent my top selling images. but that is not what they are looking for?  So I deleted their link and won't waste any more time.  At least SS can get you good sales for your efforts; I doubt if StockXpert is in the same league when it comes to sales.

146
iStockPhoto.com / Re: One aproved on initial set of 3...
« on: May 07, 2008, 10:45 »
For acceptance at iS, shrink the size of your submision to 2400 X 1800. Compressing the pixels should kill the Overfilter thing and help get rid of the noise.  Do not over sharpen; if you use the Unsharp mask, use only a light setting for iS (Amount 50, Radius 12 and Threshold 1).  Using Sharpen or Unsharp with higher settings will usually result in Overfiltered rejections.  For iS, I don't punch up color at all!  Sites vary.

Regarding the number of tries at iS:
If you get one accepted the first time, you get to submit two more images within a week (I waited 5 days for the second try); if they accept one of the two, you will have to wait two weeks (10 days).  On the third try you are submitting one image and if it gets rejected, you will have to wait 30 days to try again.  Whether they cut you loose after the fourth attempt, I cannot say.  It took me four tries.  Every time the images were rejected for either "Overfiltering" or "A few Stray Pixels" (Isolations).  ::)  I relied on my best selling images, but iS is the pickiest site there is on Isolations!!!  After being accepted,  I tried several isolations that are doing well on other sites; they were shot down by iS for "A few stray Pixels" which I could not find even at 200%.  Do not use isolations over  white or black for gaining access!  The last image accepted of mine for entry was a straight photograph of a colorful private plane taxiing with no post procesing except slight touch with levels.  That shot was accepted on every site I am on, but no sales on it yet after 4 months.  Go figure.  Glad I made that choice for my fourth attempt.  I was thinking I would have to wait two months (60 days) to try again or I would get the axe.  :'(

I made it though!  ;D  Now I think I will be able to meet their demands.  Funny thing is - when I uploaded the three images that were approved for entrance for my portfolio, The three were rejected for Overfiltered.  I backed off the color a bit (which works for most sites) but they were shot down for "Artifacts".  So I sent four new images, and they got accepted.  I have been with them for a month and have one sale.  Obviously I have to get my inventory up.

147
iStockPhoto.com / Re: Monopoly
« on: May 03, 2008, 11:10 »
I understand where Magnum is coming from.  Like him I realize this is a competitive market, and I am in awe of many of you guys and gals.  Magnum and I do not resent anyones' success; instead I am greatful that some of you experts give a helping hand to us lesser photogs.  I'm not saying Magnum is a lesser photographer than anyone - just sayin ther are some like me who work hard, but just can't get past review.  So working hard is not the only element to achieving sucess.  Some have more raw talent and are better at using it.

To get to Magnum's point - I suppose that in any business 20% will get 80% of the spoils, and 80% of the photogs share 20% of the spoils.  I do feel Magnum will get there to the 20% lightyears ahead of me.  He does have a point.  However as little as I am able to get past reviewers does manage to bring me a few sales here and there.  I am probably in last place in this business, but I earnestly appreciate all the help you guys and gals provide.  May be I'll get to 500 images on BigStock and 123RF some day - but I'll probably see the Grim Reaper before getting that big of a portfolio on iStock.  O course with all your suggestions, I might live to get up to 50.  That's my goal.  As for who gets the lions' share of the matket,  it is beyond my comprehension.

So Magnum - you do have a point, but I think otheres were a little too quick to jump on you.  I know the feeling.  I've been jumped on by some lions a few times in some forums too.  That is why I no longer visit those particular forums.

Good luck to everyone!  Hope you all make a million a month!

148
I thought I broke a record!  I got rejected 8 times, and they even stopped giving me reasons? :o  Do you guys and gals think I'm a marked man?  The only feedback I get via e-mail is "Though some of your images meet our standards, you have not supplied the required 7 acceptable images."   Is anyone else getting that eedback as a reply?

I have been trying to get on that site for two years, guess I need a little practice.  Perhaps I should just be happy with iS and DT. 

Of course I am tempted to try 10 new images shrunk down from 12 MP to 4 MP.  Will that really help?

149
Waldo4- If I stop submitting images with exif data, will that stop rejections for "Overfiltered"?  Sometimes when they (Most sites I use) reject my images for Overfiltered, I can resubmit by reducing color saturation a little.  However iS still rejects them.  Think the rascals are using my exif file against me?

150
iStock seems to see things I can not locate, and you folks have made me feel better.  On any other site, I have 80% of my isolations accepted.  iStock always says - "A few stray pixels", "A few artefacts", "Too much feathering" (Actually I selecte Feather - 1 Pixel for that one), and of course the too smooth or too rough bounces. 

I seem to get the selection done quickly in PS Elements 6 by using the Magicg Selection tool, and finish it off in 200% view using the Selection Brush with a hard edge.  Works for me. But even at 200% on a 24 inch monitor (Calibrated), I cannot see what those reviewers pick up. 

I thought about just sending straight photo images to iStock.  That would save me from getting killed with rejections.  Even when I do that they kill me! :-[ 

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors