|
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 - PeterChigmaroff
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 ... 72
126
« on: December 01, 2015, 13:55 »
It's very different. PJPEG is intra-frame and H.264 is inter-frame. intra-frame codecs are editable, inter-frame's should only be used for delivery, projection.
Do you honestly have a problem with editing in h.264?
127
« on: December 01, 2015, 11:00 »
"However, I will stress once again, that PJPEG compressed at full resolution will be indistinguishable to the original with the untrained eye. If it isnt, youre doing something wrong."
The size of those files is too large for the benefit.
128
« on: December 01, 2015, 09:58 »
"Is H264 really still treated as a red-headed step child..."wearing a soiled dress.
This is one of those debates that goes on and on. In the end I just decided to trust what I saw and that is that h-264 is visibly better and renders to a smaller file than conventional "preferred" codecs. Sure there are better ones but the bandwidth of those is just too cumbersome to use them. If there is someone out there using a NLE that can't import and drop an h.264 onto any timeline they are long overdue for an upgrade and shouldn't be pampered to.
129
« on: November 29, 2015, 14:35 »
I've long since quit iStock and had my meager portfolio removed but am wondering how much having to purchase something called a "credit", which everyone knows can be valued at a hundred different conversion rates, has contributed to the demise of same said credit sales.
130
« on: November 26, 2015, 18:26 »
This month, even if it is not finished, is my best month ever
Not sure that sales collapse for everybody.
Marriage is like that...for a while.
131
« on: November 25, 2015, 18:26 »
I havent used ESPAWS since May. Once Istock decided to pay $6-$8 a clip, including 4k i ceased my uploading. To me this is among the worst things they could inflict on video contributors. It SCREAMS WE NO LONGER CARE IF YOU SUBMIT OR NOT. I choose NOT.
This is of course the real issue. Getty can send someone by my office everyday to do all the keyboarding and processing and take the material and upload it for me and it still wouldn't be much use given the end sales results.
132
« on: November 25, 2015, 10:34 »
With the latest update to its Penguin algorithm, Google has sunk the entire stock market.
(...)
Most agencies are trying a new look more friendly for their "daddy" google , others have already operated a sum of changes and
(...)
What do you think?
Google has not sunk just the stock image market but these b*stards sink everything they get their bloody hands on. And while they're at it, they kind-of dictate how websites ought to look: "responsive" being the latest craze now. Arrrrrgh. As if people started to, all of a sudden, ditch their comfortable desktops and workplace PCs and workstations just in order to jerk it on a "smartphone" or equally "smart" tablet or the like.
You are spot on @Suliman Razvan, this sssucks beyond belief, and being the user-unfriendly greedy corporation they are, Google are in bed with the US govt at the same time feeding "Big Brother" in a way George Orwell would never have thought possible (particularly the NSA and DHS, just read the horror stories of SWAT teams barging through your door after "googling" this or that)...
At the same time, Google are doing a very mediocre job at their supposed*) core business (search), if you look at it more closely -- or is anyone here satisfied with the "results" they serve when you search for some "image of xyz"?!
It seems about time the market demands a replacement for this exploitative corporation and their "services". Yes, there are Alexa (with their own problems) or Duck-Duck-Go and Yandex, but a nicer layout and certain novel features are what's also needed. What do you guys think?
---
*) because they are actually an Advertising agency, I know, but...
I agree with a lot of what you say. I do I search now and half the time end up with useless listings from yellow pages or smoother 2nd or 3rd tier site. How is this useful? The "new look" that's out there has gotten old really quickly. Every thing looks the same. How can so much brain power produce such banal crap?
133
« on: November 24, 2015, 21:31 »
how do you convert dollars to dollars??
There are several countries that use the dollar as a unit of currency. It isn't the same dollar.
134
« on: November 24, 2015, 18:23 »
Get ready for royalty cuts at 500px!
In case you've forgotten or just didn't know Mr. Thompson's words:
"Since roughly 2005 we've been aware of a basic problem with how our business works. As the company grows, the overall percentage we pay out to contributing artists increases. In the most basic terms that means that iStock becomes less profitable with increased success. As a business model, its simply unsustainable: businesses should get more profitable as they grow. This is a long-term problem that needs to be addressed." Kelly Thompson. September 8th, 2010
So he's the yokel who tried to convince everyone that percentages were absolute?
135
« on: November 24, 2015, 16:24 »
All I can say is what I see when I walk into Costco or Target and see the demo sets. Looks like slightly clearer HD. Not the miracle difference between HD and standard.
I agree there is a big difference between DVD and HD, but we're visual artists, we see it. My point was that even though HD(Blu Ray) is readily available, and I would think that if you are going to rent a movie you would rent the HD version and enjoy the much nicer picture, this doesn't seem to be the case. Most people just rent the DVD. I expected DVDs to experience the same rate of decline from Blu Ray as VHS did with DVD. I hasn't. So I am going to believe there is a coming 4k revolution. No
136
« on: November 23, 2015, 15:40 »
To be fair the $6 is a promotion of some kind not all 4k or HD is that low. That being said 18 out of my 28 Dl's in Oct. were below $20.00. I have a few at really good prices but those 1 and 6 dollar sales kill me.
It's called Premium Access. It's where large companies pay getty $$$ upfront every year to be able to license a large quantity of images or footage at highly reduced rates. G keeps all the money upfront and pays the contributor their contractual royalty percentage on very small dollar amount sales. They've been doing this for years and it blows. It's just a way to payout less to contributors.
PA is a heartless corporate move to dig ever deeper into our nearly empty pockets.
137
« on: November 23, 2015, 15:10 »
It's a small sample size, but I was selling more at Dissolve at $80 than $49. Looks to me like they pissed off contributors AND are making less $.
Not like I want anyone to lose an income stream but they would have been better off just cancelling contracts than reducing prices for some.
138
« on: November 23, 2015, 15:06 »
We have in our neighbourhood a video store. One of those good old fashioned ones that has all the new releases for you to rent. I like the place and support it when I can. The thing is, it's greatest amount of shelf space is still dedicated to DVDs, not Blu Ray. Maybe it's the cliental or something else. But the far majority don't even bother to rent on BluRay.
The difference between DVD and Blu Ray wasn't enough for most people but 4k takes it to another level. Blu Ray will lose out, people will probably go from watching DVD's to streaming 4k, if the internet can cope.
I actually hope you're right but have my doubts. Program viewing is a pacifier to most people. Good 3D starts to fade as anything unique by mid movie. I make a point of seeing the regular version over 3d now. I remember thinking with Avatar how cool the 3D effect was but honestly couldn't see it anymore after a while. I guess I see 4k similarly. Yes everyone goes "wow this is so cool" but it's always about the content first.
139
« on: November 23, 2015, 12:54 »
I'm not uploading anything new either but my clips are still at $79. I would say they are down some from the early days. They may just have many more clips to offer without much increase in customer base.
What I'd like to know is if they think that their strategic move of lowering similarly priced clips to $49 is working out well for them.
140
« on: November 22, 2015, 20:57 »
We have in our neighbourhood a video store. One of those good old fashioned ones that has all the new releases for you to rent. I like the place and support it when I can. The thing is, it's greatest amount of shelf space is still dedicated to DVDs, not Blu Ray. Maybe it's the cliental or something else. But the far majority don't even bother to rent on BluRay.
141
« on: November 22, 2015, 13:25 »
The last half of this year is very slow I did have one month in the summer that was decent. I am down around 12k on the year and frustrated. If I have a good month I post that as well. I only hope things turn around. I have been exclusive in video at iStock since 2006. I know this business and you can call me out anytime! Several changes at iStock has me worried and I do not want to be in a race to the bottom. I think curated sites like Stocksy are the future for serious full-time producers. This is not a hobby or side job for me so when I have several low months in a row durning high buying season it is a concern.
Thanks for sharing the info. Yes I agree, curated sites with a long term interest in both the vendor and and contributor is likely the way of the future if you want to survive the stock dystopia we live in now.
142
« on: November 22, 2015, 12:57 »
Very glad I jumped on 4K early on since I'm starting to win business from clients who are producing 4K TV documentary series. I just licensed 68 4K clips to a production - the market is certainly growing.
That's awesome. Congrats.
An anonymous account with 3 posts, I'm going to take that with a grain of salt...
Agreed, just giving benefit of doubt is all.
And I doubt the benefit 
143
« on: November 22, 2015, 12:56 »
I have to post my frustration here. Just about at the end of the rope here for good! I have 7,038 video files on Getty. In Oct. I sold 28 of those 28 18 were sold for 20bucks or less! I think the future is curation with higher prices coming from hard to get unique content. I am formulating Plan B.
Greetings, I may be getting people mixed up, so I apologize up front either way, but didn't you report within the last month or so how pleased you were with how many sales you were getting and the amounts you received for each sale? Not trying to call you out or anything, like everyone, I'm just trying to move through this minefield we find ourselves in as safely as possible. And yes I fully understand your frustration.
144
« on: November 21, 2015, 21:01 »
My sales with 4K at $199 are few and far between.
4k seems to be a bit of Field of Dreams scenario at the moment. I don't have a lot of it myself but I just don't hear of many sales of 4k at an any price.
Yes someone will jump in next post and tell me they have their BME because of 4k sales but I'm still sceptical.
I feel the same way but I am starting to see a lot of well priced 4K on the P5 artists resources page so maybe it will take. It would be nice to offer the content to customers in both HD and 4K but it's a lot of money to upgrade camera and storage so I am trying to look the other way right now:)
I'm guessing it's content specific as well.
145
« on: November 21, 2015, 14:12 »
My sales with 4K at $199 are few and far between.
4k seems to be a bit of Field of Dreams scenario at the moment. I don't have a lot of it myself but I just don't hear of many sales of 4k at an any price.
Yes someone will jump in next post and tell me they have their BME because of 4k sales but I'm still sceptical.
Lol i had my BME from selling mostly hd at 4K prices.
Which at least for me proves how relevant 4K is for today's needs, and also how much i care for all those scenarios where 4K will be the next hd bla bla bla.
Prices dont need 4K as an excuse to go down.There are better and more effective ways and we are experiencing them as we speak.
Someone decided years ago that photos should be sold like potatoes, but instead of by the pound, it was by the pixel, with little regard to the value that image (or clip) produced for the end user. The reality is, even at several hundred dollars per clip, if the end user doesn't have to shoot it himself and it fills his need, then the price is cheap.
146
« on: November 21, 2015, 13:08 »
My sales with 4K at $199 are few and far between.
4k seems to be a bit of Field of Dreams scenario at the moment. I don't have a lot of it myself but I just don't hear of many sales of 4k at an any price. Yes someone will jump in next post and tell me they have their BME because of 4k sales but I'm still sceptical.
147
« on: November 18, 2015, 16:51 »
Most anti-Video Blocks people aren't responding to my original post. I don't care if you sell at VB or not. That's not the point I raised on my original post.
Your original post is non-sensical and narrow. There is nothing to respond to in the fashion you're looking for.
Then, say nothing. You are wasting time of your own. Just start your own thread instead of being a perpetual wino.
"You should make a buyer want to buy at $49 on VideoBlocks rather than paying more on Pond5 or any other sites"
You start your OP with this and expect everyone to agree?
You just don't get my point. $79 sale on SS will give a contributor only $24 or so. $79 sale on P5 will give contributor only $40 or so. $49 sale on VB will give contributor $47 which is more than those $79 sale on other sites. More money in our pocket is good, for me at least, maybe not for you. 
I get your point, I got your point, I just don't agree.
148
« on: November 18, 2015, 15:22 »
Most anti-Video Blocks people aren't responding to my original post. I don't care if you sell at VB or not. That's not the point I raised on my original post.
Your original post is non-sensical and narrow. There is nothing to respond to in the fashion you're looking for.
Then, say nothing. You are wasting time of your own. Just start your own thread instead of being a perpetual wino.
"You should make a buyer want to buy at $49 on VideoBlocks rather than paying more on Pond5 or any other sites" You start your OP with this and expect everyone to agree?
149
« on: November 18, 2015, 13:11 »
Most anti-Video Blocks people aren't responding to my original post. I don't care if you sell at VB or not. That's not the point I raised on my original post.
Your original post is non-sensical and narrow. There is nothing to respond to in the fashion you're looking for.
150
« on: November 18, 2015, 01:05 »
Exactly why I don't sell at VB. Encouraging buyers to think $49 is an appropriate price is a mistake.
For me, only thing that matter is how much I get per clip sale. So, VB is all good because I don't sell directly at $70-80.
You have a very short term outlook for your business. I find your philosophy on what to price your clips at on P5 laughable.
Selling a clip at $79 doesn't mean anything if you only get $23 versus selling at $49 and get double the $23. Good luck.
I understand percentages. I also understand that they aren't locked in place and that the usual trend for them is downward. I also understand that the buyer doesn't care what percentage you get.
Ask yourself why a company has chosen to host and sell your clips and not retain any of that earning. As if it all just happens for free.
Ask yourself if you are better off making $47 from a single HD sale or $23 regardless of how much the clip was sold for. You are free to leave and delete your clips at VideoBlocks. Keep speculating while others make much more per clip. I'm seeing the money and am happy. So, I'm laughing.
Good for you then.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 ... 72
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
