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 ... 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 17 ... 57
Photo Critique / Re: Confused about font use
« on: October 06, 2012, 16:54 »
And I'm still a bit confused. Let's say I buy some font. If I sell an image with that font in it, will the buyer have to pay for the font as well?

If the font is a part of a design and the font is converted to outlines/paths it should be OK.

I would still stay away from fonts made by P22, they seem to be a bunch of greedy a*holes

Off Topic / Re: Photographer on holiday dilema
« on: October 06, 2012, 03:47 »
I take a 17-40 for landscapes and architecture, 24-105mm for general and a 70-200 f4 IS for lots of stuff .. because I like it.

Why the 24-105? It only covers 40-70....

Off Topic / Re: Photographer on holiday dilema
« on: October 05, 2012, 11:40 »
Do you want holiday snaps or sellable images?
"Everybody" lugs around a 35 or 50, so I would choose tie fisheye and 135mm to get some images that stand out from the crowd. In real life, I don't have the courage to do so, I just snap with my 35mm and 100mm and my images look just like someone else's... :(

I have sometimes thought that combination 28mm and (about) 100mm would be a perfect allround combination.

Photo Critique / Re: Confused about font use
« on: October 05, 2012, 09:13 »
1. Can pictures like these get accepted? It's not a vector, it's just a modified picture with text on it.

If there is no specific graphics (only the sign and perhaps a generic border) and the idea and execution are good enough, why not?

2. I shouldn't be able to sell it if the font is not mine and can't find any way to buy it right? What do people who use fonts in their works usually do?

You should own a commercial license for the font. Fonts can be bought for example at and paid with a credit card.
There are a lot of free fonts too, but it's very difficult to find out the licences and/or if the material is really pirated (also 95% of free fonts are crap)

What font did you use for this project?

I can't see the point in this comparison. Why don't they compare SAME image made with different cameras.
And if they combined better image with Hasselblad quality, that would be the winner.

And the prints are very small because it's a combination of small images.

edit: now when I took a look at the beginning of the video I understand this is just humor :)

Illustration - General / Re: Scans from old books/illustrations
« on: October 04, 2012, 15:03 »
Santa Clause wasn't invented by Coca-Cola, they just popularized and colored him red. I have seen many 19th century illustrations of Santa, the chubby fellow with a beard, hat and even belt.

282 / Re: The chart that says "unsustainable"
« on: October 04, 2012, 04:54 »
Its such a shame that we couldn't all get together and leave.

IS was either very clever or lucky to when they combined painful uploading and pay cuts.
Many of us had invested so many hours in slow and painful uploading process that they (me included) weren't able to leave. If they had an extremely easy upload I would have left. Ironic?

General Midstock / Re: ZOMG I just had 3 sales through Zoonar
« on: October 04, 2012, 01:56 »
hi perry, would u mind to share usually your sales come from which partner?

I don't have the exact stats, but they seem to come from DDPIMAGES, GETTY_IMAGES (some of my old stuff are there), APISNETWORK, AGE, FOTOFINDER, PHOTOLIBRARY. Only very few are directly from Zoonar.

Illustration - General / Re: Scans from old books/illustrations
« on: October 03, 2012, 16:51 »
Doesn't the copyright of the 'new' image belong with the photographer?

Not really, if the work isn't derivative. Scanning and cleaning the image doesn't really create a new copyright in most cases. It's a very grey area...

I have some old engravings in my portfolio, some sell, some don't. I'm a bit sad that SS started to reject all old images, I had some good stuff coming...

Illustration - General / Re: Scans from old books/illustrations
« on: October 03, 2012, 13:17 »
You can't (because laws are so different in different countries). Anything pre 1800 should be fair game though unless it is owned by a museum.

Anything pre 1885 should be OK. (Can you give me a scenario of a 1884 image that is still copyrighted?)

One problem is the copyright of the "new" image: If someone downloads an old illustration as RF image, he/she could legally upload it in full size for example on flickr.

General Midstock / Re: ZOMG I just had 3 sales through Zoonar
« on: October 03, 2012, 06:47 »
I have there 1268 pictures online seamse 18 months (I do not remember exactly) and 0 sales, no one no two, not for one cent just ZERO!!!

Just curious, do you know how the site works and on which partner sites do you have your images on? The whole idea behind Zoonar is the partner sales, I suspect you have your images only on Zoonar...(?)
I have accepted all partners except Alamy and Getty. 3000 images and I get about 100 euros monthly (it varies quite much month-to-month, but I'd say 100 is the average)

Selling Stock Direct / Re: I Hit My Goal for the Year
« on: September 30, 2012, 06:22 »
I am jealous... I'm about 150 photos behind my goal... :(

But on a brighter note, earnings-wise I'm doing OK compared to my goals, I might reach my 2012 goal already in November.

288 / Re: oh my 1%, lol
« on: September 27, 2012, 07:20 »
I'm steadilya t 17%. I don't find the RCs motivating me at all, I would need a lot more sales to get to 18%, So I better not even try because it won't be happening.

General Stock Discussion / When did you have your BMEs?
« on: September 27, 2012, 05:57 »
I'm interested in when you did have your last BME (Best Month Ever) on different sites? I think this will tell a lot about the trends. I started to think about this when DT seems to be resurrected from the dead again :)

My stats:
IS: March 2011
SS: July 2012
DT: May 2009 (September 2012 might be a new BME, just a few dollars short)
FT: September 2010 (nowdays about 70% less earnings than back then)
Veer: April 2012
Bigstockphoto: April 2012
123rf: February 2012

290 / Re: Balance carried forward vs. Cleared balance
« on: September 26, 2012, 06:37 »
Why oh why does Alamy use this strange system

It's not a "strange system", it's common business practise. It's the "credits" and "subscriptions" that are strange.
Does Getty or Corbis do that ?

I meant a broader perspective, almost every other business-to-business works with billing.

General Stock Discussion / Re: Wow. Have you guys seen this.
« on: September 26, 2012, 05:58 »

We all browse through the libraries looking for things to copy, i mean inspire us.

Umm.  Actually, no, we don't all do that.

I usually take a look at the existing images AFTER I have come up with an idea, just to see how many similar images are already on sale, and I also want to find out how to make my images better than the existing ones.

292 / Re: Balance carried forward vs. Cleared balance
« on: September 26, 2012, 05:51 »
Why oh why does Alamy use this strange system

It's not a "strange system", it's common business practise. It's the "credits" and "subscriptions" that are strange.

293 / Re: So Slow It's Unusable
« on: September 21, 2012, 15:16 »
I just submitted 2 batches (3 images each) to SS (via browser upload) while waiting IS upload page to load... It's almost ridiculous how terrible their site has become.

and yet here we're saying that exclusives have the best chance to make this kind of money from one site?

Of course. I make more than $2500 from all sites combined. If I was exclusive to IS, the site where I might - just might - earn $2500 would be iStock.

Photo Critique / Re: Outdoor Lighting- Photo Sample of Rejected Pic
« on: September 21, 2012, 09:55 »
Lighting aside, I don't understand the pose (+ the grip of the bucket) and the concept of this shot at all (I would reject this for low commercial value too)

Better light, lose the sunglasses, change the plastic bucket to a wicker basket full of harvested stuff etc.

+1 to everything click_click said above.

Its not about that video being annoying, its about the idea of educating people about copyright.

"Would something like this help against image piracy?" and the answer is NO, because it's annoying!

What I would like to have is to have a lesson in school about intellectual property and copyrights (preferably a few lessons, for different age kids).

Those ads on DVDs are really, really annoying. It's almost like it would be better to get a pirate version without those annoyances.

General Stock Discussion / Re: Offensive Photos
« on: September 16, 2012, 11:19 »
One more thing: If that stock photo is like the worst thing a 10 year old could stumble upon while browsing internet, you must be very naive. The net is full of very, very bad and nasty stuff, much worse than some stock photo.

General Stock Discussion / Re: Offensive Photos
« on: September 15, 2012, 03:01 »
It would never cross my mind (as well as mind of absolute majority of Europeans - I hope) that studio photograph of someone pretending suicide could be considered by anybody as offensive.

I haven't seen the photo (Is it worse than these ), but if it is a clearly staged studio photo I cannot understand why someone would consider this offensive... It might be an example of bad taste or low commercial value, but not "offensive". And yes, I'm from Europe :)

And you cannot protect your 10 year old daughter forever, I'm sure she'll soon start to understand that people do take their own lives in this cruel world.

but that happened to be what the publishers of the dying Princess Diana pictures also said.

How can you even compare a staged studio shot to a real persone dying?

Switch to Mac. I just search the keywords and add "jpg" to find just images. The results are practically instant.

Pages: 1 ... 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 17 ... 57


Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results


3100 Posing Cards Bundle