|
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 - Lcjtripod
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14
226
« on: February 07, 2009, 18:32 »
I think they are crazy. Reject reasons are ridiculous. Give them to a different site and forget about them.
-Larry
227
« on: February 07, 2009, 17:56 »
BigStock has been slow refreshing the site the last few days. Usually when that happens with BigStock, new changes (site wide) are going to take place.
Lets hope they get rid of the "Quality Ratings" they said they would, but that was over a week ago. We'll see.
-Larry
228
« on: February 04, 2009, 10:54 »
My sales on BigStock took a big jump yesterday. Wonder if this is why? Perhaps the vast majority of my images which are okay got some exposure?
Just a lucky break for you! The image quality ratings have not been deleted or changed yet. How long does it take to change the programming? I have zero experience in programming so this is a mystery to me. UPDATE:Just checked it again and the "Quality Ratings" are gone with the wind. Thanks BigStock!!!!
-Larry
229
« on: February 03, 2009, 12:56 »
I prefer this idea . It's like instead of the bouncer throwing the guy out you put him in a sound proof booth with a mirror so he can scream at his reflection without bothering the other patrons Grin
He can still call the waitress for more pints of Guinness , of course.
a win win solution. Bravo Cool
Are you speaking from experience?  -Larry
230
« on: February 03, 2009, 10:12 »
I noticed that Leaf did not give himself an ignore button. Hmmmmmm Perhaps he will hit the ignore button on my post here. We'll see.  -Larry
231
« on: February 03, 2009, 10:06 »
I got Canon FS4000US which is a 4000DPI film scanner right on my desk, but I never tried to sell anything scanned to stock. Thought the scans will be rejected for grain / noise for sure. So the scanner remains disconnected since I moved to a newer computer.
Lary, Jack,
When you guys say you scale the scans down - can you be more specific? A 4000DPI scan of 24x36 film in color is about 100MB TIFF with a lot of pixels. What the right workflow to adjust the grain / noise and convert it to reasonable JPG?
Do you use VueScan or any other scanning utility or just a TWAIN driver with PS/Lightroom?
FS4000US came with Canon FARE software, not with Digital ICE - not sure how FARE is good in noise reduction, if any
All my scanning is in Photoshop using the Epson Twain Driver. The photo of the little girl in my above post was scanned with enough pixels to make a 12 X 12 print at 300 DPI I did all my retouching and adjustments in .tiff format then when I was happy with the results I reduced the image file size to 1024X1289 and saved it to .jpg You cannot tell it was from film. (I also cropped it some to make a vertical.) Note: I do everything with the file in .tiff and save to .jpg as the last save. Only then will I sharpen it if necessary and most of the time sharpening is not needed. Digital Ice makes for a great time saver on color images as it will eliminate 99% of all dust specks. -Larry
232
« on: February 03, 2009, 09:53 »
An example of not enough room for description copy:  here is the Title and description copy: Caribou Shedding caribou shedding the winter fur and growing new antlers that are still in velvet. it is spring and the tundra is lush. caribou have a protruding antler over their forehead and wide hooves for support on the soft snow and tundra of the north slope. both ma le and female Caribou have antlers.The text in red was cut off of the description. Hope this helps you. -Larry
233
« on: February 03, 2009, 09:44 »
With over 2,000 images on my BigStock port I have never had a hard time finding seven words to describe the item. In fact many times I go over the alloted amount and get part of my description cut off.
One large red apple photographed on a nearly white background.
An apple a day keeps the doctor away. On White background.
One bright red apple with water droplets. Lots of copy space.
I could do this a hundred more times. Your description, title and key words are ALL part of the search. Use it or loose it. Your sales and views depend on your action at this point.
-Larry
234
« on: February 01, 2009, 12:30 »
That makes the XSi an oddball in the Canon lineup.
You are correct! But it is a good camera! I still prefer CF cards and I am about to sell my XSi and XTi and all my EF-S lenses and break down and go for the New Canon 5D mk II Full frame. -Larry
235
« on: February 01, 2009, 11:39 »
yes you need to sign as photographer and as model; and you still need a witness as usual.
Not me! I photographed myself while looking into a mirror so I actually got to see the photograph being taken by me, so I could sign as a witness, cuz I was! If you all bought that I have a bridge for sale. You could set up a tool booth and get richer than shooting dirt! -Larry
236
« on: February 01, 2009, 11:35 »
what about Panasonic Pro High Speed SDHC (class 6 ) 16 gb. ?
...
Maybe that will work on Canon too.
Nope. Canon dSLRs use CF (=Compact Flash) cards.
Yours is an SD (=Secure Digital) card. Totally different thing.
Edit: wait a minute, a Canon 1 series can use both a CF and an SD. I doubt the 5 series can.
Your HDHC cards will work perfect in a Canon DSLR (Just the Canon XSi however) And I suggest Sandisk. I only format in the Camera Never the Computer. -Larry
237
« on: February 01, 2009, 09:08 »
Thanks to all for the help and valuable information on DT. I'm getting close to signing up with them and I have one more question. All people require a model release even if their back is to the camera. That I understand .... but how about if they are a long ways from the camera? (Like this sample I found on DT.) There must be some point where a release is not required on long distance shots. Yes? http://www.dreamstime.com/golf-image2870379To the Photographer, I posted a link to your port here without permission. Hope it is OK. ( ..and I like your shot!) -Larry
238
« on: February 01, 2009, 08:27 »
My best seller is about 90% Sepia. I used a full color image and selected areas of the image to convert to sepia. I don't think i could duplicate the results again as I have tried to improve the effect and have not been able to do so.  -Larry
239
« on: January 31, 2009, 10:15 »
I pulled my port off a couple of days ago.
What a waste of time Yay was.
-Larry
240
« on: January 29, 2009, 19:47 »
If you think your sales are dropped because of few more photographers, than you should maybe follow stock market everyday, and see the connection between global economic crisis and your sales. You will see that every day stock market goes down, your sales go down as well, and vice versa.
And, as someone already said, if you are afraid of new photographers, maybe it's time to try to find your self in some other business. Creative people will find a way to stand against the crowd. They are not afraid
"Creative people will find a way to stand against the crowd. They are not afraid." Well said, Whitechild! The NON Creative ones will fail. I have been in photography since the early 50's and had lots of competition, yet I was able to put my kids through college on my earnings from photography. I had competition every year and in everyting I tried. Some times I won sometimes I lost. Yet I will offer help to anyone who asks for it. I have helped many and many have helped me including Whitechild. Anyone afraid of competition should take up gambling. It's you and the machine or dealer. No competition! -Larry
241
« on: January 29, 2009, 08:30 »
I am on the verge of dumping them, because of their search engine. Tens of similars in a row, no ranking as to relevance, just as to upload date. A buyer wouldn't even find my shots.
Since nothing happened to the buyer's end of the site (I have a different buyer's account and I'm looking to the source once in a while) I figure their main programmer left long ago.
No marketing effort whatsoever visible on Google. No life in the forum. Crap images. Anybody has any reason to stay there? I'm through.
When are you pulling your port off of Yay? I'm about ready to do the same thing. I have over 1800 images there over 6 or 7 months and zero sales. What a waste of time! I expect to see it go belly up very soon.
They will soon be sinning the LO song. "Oh so bad is me!"
-Larry
I just requested Yay to delete my port. I'm done with them. -Larry
242
« on: January 29, 2009, 08:01 »
I am on the verge of dumping them, because of their search engine. Tens of similars in a row, no ranking as to relevance, just as to upload date. A buyer wouldn't even find my shots.
Since nothing happened to the buyer's end of the site (I have a different buyer's account and I'm looking to the source once in a while) I figure their main programmer left long ago.
No marketing effort whatsoever visible on Google. No life in the forum. Crap images. Anybody has any reason to stay there? I'm through.
When are you pulling your port off of Yay? I'm about ready to do the same thing. I have over 1800 images there over 6 or 7 months and zero sales. What a waste of time! I expect to see it go belly up very soon. They will soon be sinning the LO song. "Oh so bad is me!" -Larry
243
« on: January 29, 2009, 06:13 »
I understood this as "of the 2121 images I have today, about 600 had sales". Not sales in one day.
If I am wrong, Larry must be the king of BigStock!
Nooooo! Not sold in ONE day! That was the total up to that day. -Larry
244
« on: January 28, 2009, 19:39 »
I sell a large variety of images on BigStock. About 600 different images sold out of 2121 images today. Most are in the $1.00 to $15.00 per dl.
Search is in the process of being changed very soon. (See other posts about BigStock.)
BigStock does not have subs and that is great. I hate subs! I think subs at .25 or .30 each saturate the buyers with too much cheap shots and they would pay more if subs were not available.
I'm happy at BigStock and I will stick with them.
Just my thoughts!
-Larry
245
« on: January 28, 2009, 18:10 »
What scanner do you use? I guess the Nikon 5000 is the best, but a bit pricey. Are there any cheaper options?
I think any of the top brands with high res options and equipped with Digital ice will do the job. Do not use interpolated resolutions! I am now using Epson Perfection V500 and love it. It is a high res flatbed. Most of my negs are 2 1/4 and 4X5 so the 35mm scanners are no good for me. The Epson V700 is even better than mine but a lot more dollars. Photo below is from 2 1/4 B&W neg.  -Larry
246
« on: January 28, 2009, 16:40 »
At least 100 of my images are scans from color negatives. I scan at high res and resize down from there and I go heavy with noise removal. I even remove most of the real grain in the images. It works!
-Larry
247
« on: January 28, 2009, 15:06 »
I agree with Lisa!
Thanks Tim for the update.
-Larry
248
« on: January 28, 2009, 15:01 »
Thanks Tim,
I will check for some shots and contact Liz.
-Larry
249
« on: January 28, 2009, 13:29 »
2 days later ... still no information on the site or forum for uploading Premium Images or who or what decides they are in fact Premium.
It sure would be nice if we could all have the opportunity to sell at our prices instead of fixed prices only.
Not one of the blessed,
-Larry
250
« on: January 28, 2009, 13:23 »
Still no answers on the BigStock Site or forum.
Oh well .... someday we will know.
-Larry
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
