|
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 - Perry
Pages: 1 ... 36 37 38 39 40 [41] 42 43 44 45 46 ... 57
1001
« on: July 07, 2010, 07:12 »
The best thing would be to upload fall/autumn themed images from last year...
1002
« on: June 18, 2010, 04:51 »
I tend to send niche images to macro agencies, ie. images that won't be sold in volumes at micros.
1 or 5 micro sales isn't enought for one image, but 1 or 5 macro sales could be...
1003
« on: June 11, 2010, 19:30 »
Removal of the automatic end-of-year payout for royalty balances that havent yet hit the $100 minimum payout threshold.
So this should be just "Removal of the automatic end-of-year payout" ?
1004
« on: June 10, 2010, 16:34 »
In well lit areas there was no noticeable noise. But the shadows had noise and at 400 it was bad noise. Shadows aren't more noisy, it's your post processing (fiddling with levels/curves etc.) that causes it. If the image is correctly lit and exposed there is no need to bump up the lightness in the shadows.
1005
« on: June 10, 2010, 07:17 »
(However the nighttime lights are copyrighted and an image of eiffel tower by night cannot be used commercially without permission) It's only the nighttime light show that is not allowed.
Thanks for correcting, that's what I thought also but wrote otherwise 
1006
« on: June 10, 2010, 07:04 »
In the time you used to write your forum post you would have keyworded at least two images!
Just make yourself a big cup of strong coffee, put some nice music on the background and start keywordin'.
1007
« on: June 09, 2010, 08:09 »
Swiss Army Knife is a very old design, dating back to 1897. The term "Swiss Army knife" is a registered trademark owned by Wenger S.A. and Victorinox A.G., longtime suppliers of knives to the Swiss Armed Forces. Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_Army_knife
1008
« on: June 09, 2010, 08:07 »
I thought Swiss Knife is like Eiffel Tower, etc. Very recognizable Intellectual Property.
Just to get the facts straight: Eiffel tower is not copyrighted, the microstock sites are full of pictures of the Eiffel tower. (However the nighttime lights are copyrighted and an image of eiffel tower by night cannot be used commercially without permission)
1009
« on: June 07, 2010, 07:53 »
I'll give this one a chance if they will get my images up without me clicking categories etc. I just want to send my images on DVDs and without any extra work...
1010
« on: June 04, 2010, 09:16 »
The power of a studio strobe is NOT watts, it's Wattseconds (Ws)
1011
« on: June 02, 2010, 04:14 »
-- Double post --
1012
« on: June 02, 2010, 04:12 »
May 2010:
IS On the weak side, but nothing unusual (I have already estimated the bump I will get from Thinkstock later on)
SS A Solid month, not good, not bad.
DT Very weak, Last time I got thiss little was July 2008 with a portfolio of only half of what I have now
FT A Bit on the weak side, but nothing unusual.
Conclusion: I got only about 10% more than in May 2009, so I'm a bit dissappointed. (I have much larger portfolio now and I have been uploading lately a lot)
It's very easy to see that RPI's are still falling all the time...
1013
« on: May 31, 2010, 17:32 »
To me this is more on the moral side. It's ok that we can use things that are now public domain, but is it correct to sell them?
Then again: would it be a good thing to let the old fabulous stuff just collect dust on the shelves? IMHO there is nothing wrong in selling public domain works, you are not selling the creativity, you are selling the work of scanning / cleaning up / uploading etc. I have some old book scans (pre-1884) for sale on the micros and they are selling some. Not great, but it was worth the work. And I always write the source in the description and tell the image is in public domain.
1014
« on: May 31, 2010, 03:22 »
I think iStock's policy is to accept photos/illustrations that are in public domain and made before 1884 (I have read it somewhere in their forums).
The problem here is: how do you know exactly when the photos were taken?
1015
« on: May 26, 2010, 08:17 »
The rate you use will be the rate that the party wishes to earn on the investment they are making by buying your portfolio. I wouldn't discount that by more than 15% personally, given a good portfolio can really produce stable returns for a decent period of time
I personally would never invest in such a hazardous business as stock photography just to get 15% in profits after many years, I would be much better off investing in something else.
1016
« on: May 26, 2010, 07:19 »
Due to changes in personal circumstances, my partner (business) and I are thinking of selling our stock portfolio of almost 10,000 images.
I would go to the bank and try to get a loan instead. The amount of loan could be two or three times your yearly microstock earnings and you should be able to pay it back in five years or so. The problem with selling your portfolio is that the buyer needs to make a profit, that's money YOU LOSE. Of course even banks need to get a profit, but it's much less than what a risk investor needs to get.
1017
« on: May 26, 2010, 07:15 »
Hi Phil,
That is really tricky, great portfolio by the way. This has been asked before and the answer I gave then was that you would probably achieve a price equal to 5 years worth of income assuming a drop in value of 50% per year. So if the portfolio brings in $50,000 per year you can probably get 50000+25000+12500+6250+3125= $96 875.
Not to say that it is only worth that much, ideally you should be able to get a lot more-- but I think with the uncertainty that is what the market will give you.
I hope I am wrong!
Don't forget that the buyer also needs to make a profit... If the estimated earnings in five years is $96 875, the buyer could pay perhaps only $65 000 to make it worth to take the risk. Personally I think the portfolio is much more worth than $96 875. There is not an easy answer to the original question, at least the buyer needs to see statistics on how the portfolio is performing money-wise.
1018
« on: May 25, 2010, 02:57 »
Too much noise and the images aren't sharp (I can't tell if it's because the shots are handheld or because of the lens)
Especially the second image doesn't have a straight horizon, it should be rotated.
Sunset photos are difficult to get accepted (or sold), and these are not spectacular, too much distracting elements.
1019
« on: May 23, 2010, 07:25 »
(I shoot only with primes)
I shoot propably around 80% of my microstock photos with Canon 100/2.8L Macro.
1020
« on: May 20, 2010, 07:12 »
The same happened to me... I requested a payment in november, and a second one in february... today I got them both! (I was almost sure I was not going to se that money ever 
1022
« on: May 04, 2010, 09:01 »
They just rejected some images of a red heat-shaped thing because I had includeded word 'Love' in the keywords. Arrrrrrrrrrrrrrrgh!
1023
« on: April 27, 2010, 08:43 »
1024
« on: April 26, 2010, 11:55 »
There is a question on the Istock forum addressing this issue and the response was 'sometime during this week'.
Last week is over but no earnings yet... I'm curious why they wait so long to give us the partner site earnings? Is it because they get interest on the money (a large chunk of money waiting for three weeks will make them some more money) or are their systems somehow poorly programmed?
1025
« on: April 24, 2010, 08:35 »
How do i request payment on Veer? Do they send payment automatically?
They send payment automatically each month if you have over 100 dollars of balance. I think they also send a payment after each year even if you have under 100 dollars.
Pages: 1 ... 36 37 38 39 40 [41] 42 43 44 45 46 ... 57
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
