pancakes

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 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 ... 57
26
Photo Critique / Re: Do you think these photos should sell?
« on: November 29, 2016, 03:56 »
And your keywording is poor.

Agreed. Keywords are crap. For example this photo with a pair of legs and a dog, https://www.shutterstock.com/pic-428307724/stock-photo-cozy.html
there are many keywords that aren't in the picture, like: marshmallow, stars, night, bonfire, tent, portrait, chow, running, food, fire, roast, white, red, roasting, park, trainer etc.

And then there is no obvious ones like: feet, legs, car, inside, lake, rest etc.

Good accurate keywords are crucial in generating sales!

27
Wait... so if the talented newbies are much better than us old farts - then why is it our OLD images that keep selling?

28
That email has the nasty smell of IStockphoto.

29
My advice:

"Don't"

30
You must mean "Dreamstime has sunken below Pond5" ?

31
Canon / Re: Anyone else not happy with the 5D MIII?
« on: November 02, 2015, 13:24 »
I have been shooting 5ds for years.

I had to read this a few times, you know Canon 5DS is a camera model? :D

32
Categories are useless but agencies insist that customers use them to browse for images.

I don't buy often, but I almost always search by category.

Can you give me an example of an image you have found by browsing categories (instead of searching with words). i just cannot understand the process...

I still can't believe that browsing categories with - let's say 100,000 images would get you anywhere...

33
This is a move to the right direction. Of course no categories at all would be the best (I can't imagine any serious buyers using them!)

And please, PLEASE, add "objects" category!

34
Adobe Stock / Re: Message to fotolia
« on: August 24, 2015, 14:51 »
Perhaps the post is about their policy of allowing images to be part of the free section.   The default changes to YES option on its own but not 100% of the time so  it is easy to assume.  It is important to check each image before confirming upload.

That setting really seems to bounce back and forth by its own. The conspiracy theorist in me suggests it's not a complete accident :(

Is there a way to check if any of my images has accidentally been put to the free section?

35
Adobe Stock / Re: Message to fotolia
« on: August 24, 2015, 13:04 »
I read the OP's text twice, but can't quite understand what this is about?

36
How about

"Greed - The Rise and Fall of iStockphoto"

37
I'm not entirely sure shooting "great"  images is what microstock, or indeed many aspects of professional photography is about - its more about knowing what sells and how to achieve it - Imho the best way to do that is putting stuff up for sale and learning from the experience.

Maybe I chose my words badly by using "great", but my point was that you need to have good skills and a fast workflow to succeed in microstock. If you can make "great" images, doing microstock is a breeze (at least technically). I'm not sure you can become a good microstock photographer without experimenting with other kinds of photography first, just to learn "Knowing how to achieve it", as you wrote.

Photography is such a funny business. I have never heard about anybody buying their first hammer and saying they will start a construction company.

38
By the way i want be one of the contributor in microstock industry in later future.

First: Learn how to shoot great images before aiming any higher. It's just common sense to be good at something before trying to make money doing it. It will also surprise you how much work it will be making images, and it's not just shooting: planning and preparing, image selecting, photoshopping, keywording, uploading will be very time consuming.

But DO get yourself a camera and learn the ropes. I'd consider a second hand Canon Eos 5D mk II and a couple of second hand prime lenses, that should be enough to create images that sell (it has worked for me :P )

39
I am wondering, if I'm shooting with a camera that has 28 mp, and in 3 years new cameras are probably going to have 40mp, are my photos today will be obsolete in 3 years?

The difference between 28mp and 40mp isn't really that big. Nowdays most of the image uses are online and in low resolution, I don't see the megapixel count as a problem. I have some old files downsized to 4mp, and they still sell.

A much bigger problem is the subject getting outdated. Old photographic style, old looking props, old looking fashion, makeup etc. will make the images look old, not the megapixel count.

40
General Stock Discussion / Stock Photos in Real Life
« on: June 19, 2015, 16:47 »
I thought this video was a bit funny. "Peter and Mike find out what happens when our office becomes a bunch of stock photos in real life." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OKslVql78BU

41
The site just can't handle our enormous sales and massive royalties :P

42
Then many photographers figured out because of it's sharpness it's also a great portrait lens. That's why Canon decided to add the IS feature. Not to improve sharpness but versatility in use.

They are not the same lens, the L-version is slightly sharper and has better color.
I have both, and I haven't had a single urge to use the non-L version for anything, because I don't get the same results. (I have it only as a backup)

43
Featurepics.com / Redesign?
« on: May 21, 2015, 05:25 »
Am I wrong or have they redesigned the site lately?

Also to my surprise I have had a few sales this month!

44
Shutterstock.com / Re: Royalty Declines At Shutterstock
« on: May 15, 2015, 04:38 »
Someone should take a look at Shutterstock's profits, and look how their

1) profit per image
2) profit per contributor (do we know the total number of contributors?)

have developed... If those numbers are going up and our earnings down, they are screwing us.

45
Shutterstock.com / Re: Royalty Declines At Shutterstock
« on: May 15, 2015, 04:34 »
One reason for the increase in rejections might be the cost of additional servers to store all the data

Nah, storage space is cheap. Let's say they have 50 million images, 10 megabytes each. It's just 500 Terabytes. Of course the handling of these files need computing power, but let's not forget they are mostly dealing with tiny preview images.

46
Cameras / Lenses / Re: New Canon full frame DSLR 50MP!
« on: May 11, 2015, 12:31 »
You who are buying this camera, are you going for the DS or DSR version?

I'm being tempted by the greater sharpness of the DSR version, but at the same time I'm afraid of excessive moire. I haven't seen anywhere any comparison between the versions (same scene with both models)

Which version are you going to buy?

47
That lens is propably my favorite lens, I shoot about 50% of my pictures with that lens: Portraits, people, products, food.
For short depth-of-field I stop down to 3.5 or 4 (2.8 is only borderline acceptable and makes focus tricky).

48
Shutterstock.com / Re: Oringer gets $28 million grant
« on: May 08, 2015, 05:01 »
I have always liked SS, sometimes more, sometimes less. But now they seem to be on the wrong track in many ways.

49
Mostphotos.com / Re: Mostphotos goes Rip-Off
« on: May 06, 2015, 17:09 »
I got a sale for 0,00 !!!

Amazing... Going to send them an angry mail tomorrow, If they don't answer with a reasonable explanation.... bye bye Mostphotos!

50
General Stock Discussion / Re: What is fair?
« on: May 06, 2015, 15:58 »
It would be fair to split the sale 50/50 between the agency and the photographer, but with one condition: the agency need to spend the same amount of time and investments as the photographer promoting and selling the images.

The correct pricing would then be the one that is profitable both for the agency and the photographer.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 ... 57

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle