|
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 ... 51 52 53 54 55 [56] 57
1376
« on: August 25, 2008, 10:00 »
There is one possibility for successful midstock. And that's localisation ie. images that represent a lifestyle and culture of a smaller country/nation. I have some images at a local midstock agency and they do sell a bit, not great tho. Those images would never really sell at microstock, because they don't look "american" enough.
I have also been a on the buyer side, sometimes I just can't find anything at the micros that would look like it was shot in my homeland. People somehow look a bit different even if they have the same skin color. And then there's the small details that seem "wrong", it may be just some electrical poles in the background, a house door etc.
I believe there's some point in midstock agencies that approve only images shot in a certain country, the higher price (than micros) comes from the fact that the market is smaller. The advertising budgets for a local market are also smaller.
1377
« on: August 25, 2008, 09:15 »
me too. It is hard to tell when you have a background at 253, 253, 253 but it gets pretty obvious on the net in a thumbnail for some reason... but making crazy contrast in the whites makes these areas pretty obvious.
That's an easy one. Just make a curves adjustment layer and make a very steep curve, that will show if you have anything else there than 255,255,255.
1378
« on: August 25, 2008, 09:10 »
Some people even upload their microstockimages to macrosites. I can foresee a slow death to Alamy by this behaviour.
Yes, I'm also worried about that. Photoshelter says in their contract that the same images cannot be sold for under $50, at any size - I think that's a good thing to be clear about that. I really hope that Photoshelter will succeed, they seem like professionals and nice people, but the times are hard... 
1379
« on: August 25, 2008, 08:37 »
I sell my images macrostock and microstock (different images of course). I have tried various midstock sites as well, but the results have been very disappointing. I really like the idea behind midstock: In theory you can put more work in each image to produce better images than the microstock ones. You still don't need anything "special" in images as in the macrostock world. The images would still be very affordable for smaller businesses. Something like $50 is a very, very cheap image in advertising. But why doesn't customers buy midstock images, only cheap and expensive images? One thing is propably that customers are also divided to big corporations and "mom & pop" stores. (yes I know, big corporations also use some microstock for some minor projects) One thing is also that most of the midstock sites are flooded with microstock images and that is not a good thing. Why would anyone pay $50 for an image that can be bought for $5 at a micro. In my dream midstock site there would be a restriction to sell the same images on the other sites too cheaply, let's say a web sized image shouldn't be sold anywhere under $10. Also a per-image exclusive site could be a good idea, but only if they have decent marketing budgets. Also a place with only exclusive images you can't buy anywhere else. The exclusive images only site should also be a bit more picky about the images and accept only good images. Ok now I have this out of my system... 
1380
« on: August 15, 2008, 05:07 »
So my solution is, you need to have exclusive and niche images on cutcaster.
The problem is that niche and micro/midstock or RF doesn't quite fit together. When an image is a niche image, that means the photographer has often gone trough much work to produce the image, and still it will sell only a couple of times (if at all). I think niche images should be sold at "macrostock" agencies as RM. It's the only way to get compensated for the efforts you need producing niche images.
1381
« on: August 13, 2008, 06:49 »
That's good.. What about keywording? Just wondering if they do them as well..
They are in the iptc of the files. Snapvillage reviewers also add/remove keywords.
1382
« on: August 13, 2008, 06:16 »
As I said in the beginning: If Snapvillage can't make it, no others can! Even for them, I am waiting!
I always try to consider the time and effort spend on the uploading. There are sites that have such easy uploading procedura that there's really no reason NOT to upload. Snapvillage dvd submission, 123rf and stockxpert are the easiest one (what else are easy: no categories, no clicking on individual images etc.)?
1383
« on: August 13, 2008, 04:09 »
There has been one newcomer that is worth the bother, and that's Snapvillage. And I don't mean uploading but sending images on dvd. You don't need to categorize or anything, just images on dvd. I spent 30 minutes burning my images on dvd and sending it by mail, and I have already gotten $60 with my about 1000 images, that's $120 per hour
1384
« on: August 12, 2008, 02:48 »
No, you are not alone. This is my graph (about 1000 images non-exclusive portfolio), and it makes me very sad:  At this rate, it's going to be a struggle to get even on the june level. And yes, I have been uploading at a steady pace. BTW yesterday was propably my worst monday ever in three years.
1385
« on: August 11, 2008, 02:02 »
Where do I get a printable version of the payments that Alamy has paid to my bank account? (I need it for my accounting)
I just can't find anything suitable at "My Alamy" ?
It's quite poor not to get any sort of payment raport anywhere at an agency of this caliber (or am I just too blind to find it)
1386
« on: August 10, 2008, 13:26 »
I'll point out (too late) that this question is in the Snapvillage part of the forum... I should have written that in first place
1387
« on: August 10, 2008, 12:31 »
Has anyone ever sold any image for $50 at Snapvillage?
1388
« on: August 01, 2008, 05:24 »
I just got my first subscription sales: Large 2.60 Medium 0.57 Large 1.90 Much better than the dime crap on the other sites
1389
« on: July 28, 2008, 15:00 »
Depending on your camera and quality of your images the upsizing shouldn't be too much of an issue, just some extra hassle. BTW it's quicker to upsize for Alamy than go trough Photoshelter's cumbersome keyword/release/pricing system.
1390
« on: July 28, 2008, 12:50 »
Just start with Alamy... nice agency with good sales, and it's British too.
1391
« on: July 25, 2008, 13:56 »
Well, it still would be easiest to get a .CR2 file to try it out...
And yes, my Power Mac with 4GB and twin processors were super amazing in 2005
Too bad my calendar tells me that was 3 years ago
Yes, but it still crunches 5D files with good speed, and 1Ds mark III files aren't even double size.
1392
« on: July 25, 2008, 08:58 »
Well, it still would be easiest to get a .CR2 file to try it out... And yes, my Power Mac with 4GB and twin processors were super amazing in 2005
1393
« on: July 25, 2008, 02:45 »
BTW, is there any RAW-files (.CR2) from this camera available anywhere? I need to test how fast they open on my old computer.
Upgrading both camera and computer would be very, very expensive...
1394
« on: July 25, 2008, 01:52 »
My sales at IS have been down by almost 50% in june and july, I made as much money last summer and I have uploaded lots after that.
This month DT has performed almost as bad too, last time DT was this low was in january 2007.
This doesn't look good...
1395
« on: July 22, 2008, 08:07 »
Do you want to make money by selling your photos? I'm not going to say that its easy, but once you make it, each picture will make you on average $12 a year. Hell, I'm only making $4 per image per year from shutterstock... where is the missing $8 ? 
1396
« on: July 22, 2008, 05:45 »
I just wish they had a regular "request payment" button or that you could set the payment treshold yourself. A tiny payment like $12 would be very annoying and costly in accounting, it would cause more work than benefit for me.
1397
« on: July 19, 2008, 08:02 »
How about a person with a laptop in as awkward position as possible? The screen should preferably be at least 3ft away from the eyes. It's also important that the person is using the laptop with just one hand. Also some bright sunlight would make it more interesting, since the person couldn't see anything in the screen.
1398
« on: July 08, 2008, 14:53 »
Please, do remember to calculate the photographer's share too.
I also think that an EL is mostly a curiosity, it's the regular licences that should be the thing to compare.
1399
« on: July 08, 2008, 14:05 »
I don't know if it makes any difference. I heard somewhere that upsizing in 10% steps gives a better result, but that may just be a superstition. That's just an old (pre-CS) Photoshop trick. With CS versions you have "bicubic smoother" that does the same job in just one step. Anyone tried Alien Skin Blowup for Alamy? http://www.alienskin.com/blowup/I wish the next 5D would have megapixels enough (about 16,8 mpix) for Alamy just to stop this upsizing nonsense!
1400
« on: July 08, 2008, 13:58 »
I usually upsize my 5D files with Canon DPP RAW software. In the batch window I set the longer side of the image 5020 pixels, and export that to 16 bit tiff (which is in the last stage converted to 8bit jpg in Photoshop).
Pages: 1 ... 51 52 53 54 55 [56] 57
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
