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 - Perry

Pages: 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14 ... 57
201
123RF / Re: close to 100 pics
« on: April 09, 2013, 05:13 »
I think in Microstock you do have to set production goals.

I did have some strict production goals earlier, but nowdays I don't. Strict production goals don't allow to make images with high production value and quality. To make 100 images and get $10 per image (=$1000) isn't as rewarding as to make 10 images and get $100 per image (=$1000), I have noticed. Working without strict production goals allows me to work on some more complex images that doesn't have as much competition. Of course I also do run-of-the-mill shoots, but they are only a part of my production.

Don't get me wrong, I have some monthly production goals, just to make sure I produce at least something :)

202
Veer / Re: Very nice, Veer
« on: March 29, 2013, 04:56 »
Very nice, Veer, they seem to take care of their customers by offering refunds for files their client doesn't need or want anymore. That way they will get the customer return to them in their next project.

If someone wants to steal/pirate images, there are many easier ways than buying extended license images and asking for a refund.

Of course from a photographer's standpoint this sucks.

203
"If approved, these files will compete against each other for downloads thus diluting your sales"

They should include checkboxes:
Do you care if your files compete against eachother? 
(  ) Yes
(  ) No

204
iStockPhoto.com / Re: I'm going for the golden choker.
« on: February 26, 2013, 01:24 »
I currently submit to four sites, and my royalties on iStock is twice the amount collected on the three other sites.

What are the sites you are submitting to?

205
General Photography Discussion / Re: Great Letter
« on: February 16, 2013, 08:53 »
There are as many talented amateur photographers with proper equipment and amazing images, as there are professional photographers that cant produce more then the average snapshot and have no clue about what they are doing. Pro and amateur says nothing these days.

I have to disagree. If a pro photographer has managed to make a living for years, his/her images must have some qualities his/her customers want and need. Of course being a pro photographer 50% is photography and 50% business. But without the "business" there isn't photography.
I personally don't know any full-time professional photographer that have been in the business for years and delivers only (bad) snapshots. Do you, really?

There are plenty of good amateurs too, but they are free to shoot anything they want and only show the good images. A pro must always deliver, even if the subjects and conditions are far from ideal.

I'm a pro. In my opinion 50% of my work sucks, 5% are good images and 45% are "OK". If I was an amateur I would have the freedom to show only the best 5%. Still, even my worst 50% have been "usable" images.

206
Stocksy / Re: Bruce, Our Knight in Shining Armor? Stocksy Co-op
« on: February 09, 2013, 06:31 »
-- double post, sorry --

207
Stocksy / Re: Bruce, Our Knight in Shining Armor? Stocksy Co-op
« on: February 09, 2013, 06:28 »
If only it was that easy! I have been at iStock for 8 years, I have a portfolio of 4000+ images and a weekly income of 4 figures. My income is rising too, not reaching what it was 2 years ago or so, but rising. I know from others experience that giving up exclusivity would mean an immediate large drop in income of up to 75%.

Yes, I can definitely understand your side of the story too. Your main problem is that you should have quit exclusivity a long time ago, before you had become too dependent on microstock income (I quit exclusivity back in 2006). Of course thinking about the past doesn't help here...

208
Stocksy / Re: Bruce, Our Knight in Shining Armor? Stocksy Co-op
« on: February 09, 2013, 05:54 »
Many people rely on their IS income to pay their rent and mortgage and feed their family. If my income from there was cut off with 30 days notice it would be a disaster

Then why do you insist to have your "all eggs in one basket" ? Why not want to secure your income and spread the risks if you are depending on microstock income?

209
General Stock Discussion / Re: The single most annoying thing?
« on: February 05, 2013, 18:47 »
The single most annoying thing is the poor sales. If I sold 10X more images (measured in $$$) I wouldn't care a bit about the small annoyances.

210
Suomenkielinen keskustelu / Re: Ketn suomesta?
« on: February 03, 2013, 15:15 »
Min oon tehnyt tt ainoastaan "individualina", mutta tosiaan toiminimi kytss, voi olla eri asia kuin ky. Kirjanpitjn mukaan ei ole mitn ongelmaa niin kauan kun kaikki tulee firman tilille ja maksan verot :)

Ehk kirjanpitjsi osaa auttaa tss asiassa?

211
Can you please post an example of a rejected image?

212
15) We are introducing a new tiered royalty system based on your sales...
16) We are introducing new products...
17) We are introducing new distribution partners...

213
Lighting / Re: Lighting Michael Phelps
« on: January 14, 2013, 07:47 »
What?  You mean just shoot it in a pool?  What sort of fun is that?  ;)

I would have shot it in studio, but I would have known how to light it in a similar fashion without testing (I'm not very impressed by the results). I would have also shot it in medium format digital with a tilt lens, no need for 8x10" here.

Renting a real pool would also have been an option, I have no clue why they would have wanted to shoot the image using a particular pool.

214
Lighting / Re: Lighting Michael Phelps
« on: January 14, 2013, 07:32 »
I think I could have made this shot in 10% of the time and 3% of money they used here.

215
General Stock Discussion / Re: Dusting Off Some Old Accounts
« on: January 07, 2013, 16:14 »
I would upload to Veer

216
don't think they are more fancy than Sandisk

I just meant the "Elite Pro"-name, sounds kind of expensive, but aren't :)

217
I always format my card (using my camera). I haven't got any clue why this would be harmful to the card(?)

218
General Stock Discussion / Re: To Quit or Not to Quit
« on: January 04, 2013, 07:36 »
I have thought about quitting many times. Here is what has helped me:

- Have a break, don't do anything stock related in a month or so. Don't even plan any future shoots or check stats.

- Ramp up your photo quality, concepts/subjects and production speed. That way your sales will eventually get higher. More images with more demand and better quality will equal in more dollars. Of course the total amount of produced images is not necessary the key, but the faster you are to shoot and edit, the better hourly wage you get. Be your hardest critic, just to get the quality up. To get the quality up do what is necessary: study more, test shoot, buy equipment etc.

- The sites have already millions of images. I have found out that nowdays I get best sales from images that are somewhat hard to produce, may require special props, location, shooting skills and/or editing. Generic shots seem to get buried (there are of course some lucky exceptions).

219
In eight years I have had only one complete card failure (Sandisk). Nowdays I use Kingston Elite Pro cards - they have a fancy name, but are quite affordable and reliable, I have ten 16GB cards of various ages and speeds and zero failure.

Maybe it's me being old and been used to expensive film, but I think people are saving in wrong places. Many have a camera bag with $3000 worth of equipment, but they still think spending $300 for a set of memory cards is steep. In the good old days that would have been less than what a hobbyist would have spent in films and processing in just a year...

220
Cards are cheap nowdays... On a trip, I usually use one 16GB card for each day of the trip. In the evening I will change the cards (even if the card had much room left) and put the ready one in the hotel room's safe. Even if my camera bag was stolen, I still would have my images. And if one card fails, I lose only one day's photos.

I also try to delete as little images as possible, deleting images may cause fragmentation and make the card less salvable if something went wrong.

221
General Stock Discussion / Re: Increasing Photo Session Speed
« on: December 31, 2012, 10:05 »
What happens in the middle of a paid shoot if the expensive lights fail? What does the customer think?

The real pro has at least one extra light. I have had a couple of Elinchroms (not expensive, I'd say they are mid-range) that have failed during shoot. When they have failed, I have just changed it to a working one and the shooting has continued. The customers think I am professional because I have been prepared to some minor failures. I also carry around an extra camera house, and when the shoot is very important and I already know what focal lens I will use I sometimes have even a spare lens in the same range.

It's not professional to have all the latest new and shiny gizmos. It's about getting the job done and making some usable images.
You can have an cheap extra light as well. This was not about being pro, but about cheap against expensive gear.

Well, it became about being pro after the word "customer" was brought to the conversation :)

222
General Stock Discussion / Re: Increasing Photo Session Speed
« on: December 31, 2012, 07:49 »
The real expense of lighting equipment isn't the purchase price. It's more like: Expense = Purchase price - reparations - selling price.

If you buy crappy gear from a suspicious brand for $500, you can sell them for $100 or $0 (if they break)
If you buy better gear for $1000, you might sell them for $600 (if they break, they might be worth repairing, there are spare parts available etc.)
If you buy used better gear for $600, you might get $400 when you sell them

When you buy studio gear (especially strobes), you should think of it as buying a system. If you need light modifiers to some obscure system you might not find any. Or you don't find the thing you need. You would'n buy an obscure brand DSLR either if it had some strange bayonet and a lacking range of accessories?

I think buying used (good quality-) gear is a good option. If it's professional equipment with really light use, they will last very long. Hobbyists doesn't really know how much use good flashes can endure (I'm guessing some of my older Swiss made Elinchroms from 2005 have popped at least 100 000 times, with only one failure, and that was a minor one, replaced power switch). Just remember not to buy really old stuff, anything 2000-> should be good.

223
General Stock Discussion / Re: Increasing Photo Session Speed
« on: December 31, 2012, 07:38 »
What happens in the middle of a paid shoot if the expensive lights fail? What does the customer think?

The real pro has at least one extra light. I have had a couple of Elinchroms (not expensive, I'd say they are mid-range) that have failed during shoot. When they have failed, I have just changed it to a working one and the shooting has continued. The customers think I am professional because I have been prepared to some minor failures. I also carry around an extra camera house, and when the shoot is very important and I already know what focal lens I will use I sometimes have even a spare lens in the same range.

It's not professional to have all the latest new and shiny gizmos. It's about getting the job done and making some usable images.

224
here is the rules on copyright here int he United States.

http://copyright.cornell.edu/resources/publicdomain.cfm

Who ever said 1884 does not know they were talking about, the year was 1923


Yes, it's 1923 in the USA. But because the images are made and used also in other places 1884 is a much safer bet. You americans are always lagging behind... you don't even have metric system :)
Here is some story about european copyright legistlation (the Berne Convention 1886) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berne_Convention_for_the_Protection_of_Literary_and_Artistic_Works

225
Cameras / Lenses / Re: dust inside the lens
« on: December 29, 2012, 04:23 »
Those "cloudy spots" sounds more like dust on sensor. Do you only see spots with this lens and do they really disappear when you use another lens? Can you send us some example images?

Pages: 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14 ... 57

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle