|
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 - JPSDK
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 ... 74
26
« on: December 11, 2015, 12:48 »
Are you surprised?
27
« on: December 06, 2015, 15:44 »
Shutterstock gets all the new pictures. First and at once when they are done.
Then sometimes, a month or 2 later on a lazy evening I upload some of them to fotolia.
Then eventually to Dreamstime, though I often forget to send them the whole way through the system.
That reminds me, maybe I should take a look to see if i have something hanging on dreamstime.
ne, I wont bother tonight.
other agencies, no.
Im done with low earnes and image spreaders and middlemens middlemen.
I actively delete my port from underperforming agencies, or if they annoy me. But I still might have images around on obscure agencies, that I have forgot about. Thats not so good.
Because you should not underestimate the impact of competing with yourself.
28
« on: December 06, 2015, 15:36 »
Its good that you got them accepted. I wouldnt have bet on it. I see smears and overprosessing in all of them. Like someone said before.
I dont know if it comes from the camera (lack of resolution) or if it is an photoshop induced artefact.
Look for the smears in the out of focus areas, such as on leaves, stones or trunks.
Comments on the snow picture:
light of the lamps burn out, so the time of the day is wrong on the photo, you need to time it so you can expose ambient light at the same step as the street lights. In this case you shot too late, if its an evening photo.
There is a terrible lack of resolution on the green end of the bench, smears.
The snow is not resolved enough, there are no details or shadows where there should be. That comes both from quality of light, lack of contrast and camera resolution. It could maybe have helped if you had falshed the snow from the side or painted with light in a long exposure, so you got some contrasts into the snow.
29
« on: December 04, 2015, 15:52 »
Hello George,
Crete is a wonderfull place. I have been there once and I wished I could soon come back. The nature, the history and the culture.
And since you are there, and are an experienced photographer, you could make all those classic historical images, and tourist attraction images, just much better than the 7 week tourists do. Because you can choose the light.
And there really is a wealth of images to be taken on Crete.
The airports, the naval base, licenceplates of CD cars, its endless. Military things for editorial, flowers and stones for stock.
Not to mention oranges, rays and swordfish.
may we see your port?
30
« on: November 22, 2015, 07:57 »
how did you get my name so fast?
31
« on: November 22, 2015, 07:32 »
For me fotolia has always come in cycles: 20 downloads in 2 days and then nothing for a couple of days, or weeks.
Which of course makes me think about their search engine.
And I hate it when the agencies search engines are being manipulated. Which they are.
All of them.
its not decent-Like if you are a farmer and sell corn cubs in your local store, you can walk in and see where they are placed in the shop.
For us photographers there is no such walk into the shop, to see how our goods are being placed, because all the agencies keep it ever so secret.
I dont like that.
32
« on: November 22, 2015, 07:24 »
now i have about 10 downloads on DT every month.
and many are 35 cents.
it used to be much better
like downloads worth 8 dollars every day.
so i dont bother upload to them unless im drunk and have nothing to do.
I think there are 4 months of uploads that I have not sent in the DT direction.
33
« on: November 22, 2015, 07:06 »
I do not upload so many that I cant do it manually, but I keyword and title all my pictures in microsoft pro photo tools, which is not the best program I have had.
So when first they are saved in the sales directory, they are ready to go anywhere.
I upload to shutter at once when the images are finished, the other agencies get them when I have a lazy day and remember to do some uploading.
34
« on: November 22, 2015, 06:43 »
No.
Canstock and deposit spread your pictures to second hand dealers.
also they dont sell much. Like 1/100 of shutter
I was there for a while with my best sellers, I managed to get a payout, and got tired of the whining in the forum and the begging for free pictures so I took my port down.
A couple of years ago I used to test agencies with my best sellers to see if they could produce business. Then I knew something about the agencys performance in general and I could compare to SS, iS and fot.
Canstock never performed.
35
« on: November 22, 2015, 06:40 »
good, congratulations. Your port is nice and will yield sales.
Go on.
I wonder why it took you so long, maybe you have some inbuilt flaws in your workflow?
36
« on: November 18, 2015, 13:57 »
Talking of ...The fallen of the WW2 -
18 min should get your full attention!
Brings perspective, doesnt it?
38
« on: November 04, 2015, 16:45 »
the People fighting against corruption.
That is a good thing.
Brave also.
Historically, It was usually the kings, who fought corruption. Meaning the fight came from above, and not from below as in this case.
im unsure if there is any precedence for the people to have success in that.
39
« on: November 04, 2015, 16:30 »
In photoshop, make a new levels layer and use the white droptool (pipette) on the background to set wb.
Then zoom in.
40
« on: November 03, 2015, 12:13 »
Has anyone tried that? To sell their portfolio?
Like, did you have a port on fx shutterstock that you let somebody buy?
and how did you do it?
It looks like that shutterstock portfolios keep selling without being maintained so we do have a question.
41
« on: October 17, 2015, 16:59 »
not here.
42
« on: October 17, 2015, 16:50 »
There was a time when I spread my port out to any agency with a bit of sales potential. 3-4 years ago that was.
also canstock got my pictures and I even got a payout from them.
It was a nice little community where the owner himself asked us to donate free pictures.
Else most of the time people were appraising everyting and eachother. Whooray I have a sale and such.
Thats not good enough for me, I expect an agency to perform better than that, and produce a lot more sales.
So now I have withdrawn my port from all the low performing agencies, and I only sell at 3-4 places.
Have my income gone down? No.
But the hassle has.
Im the sort of guy that activily reacts and pull my port, even if it takes many hours, if I get the wrong feeling.
43
« on: October 17, 2015, 16:30 »
Rose tinted.
Please realize that you have ventured the area of global crowdsourcing. There is no decency, there are no rules other than the rules of the people in power. You are being exploited, and noone cares if you live and die, they might even hope the latter, so that there is less competition.
Its globalisation and the payment is a bowl of rice per day. You put your head in and looked and it was ugly. Yes.
Get used to it, or do something.
... and we would be happy if you could, many have failed before you.
44
« on: October 17, 2015, 13:57 »
My point being: Since noone shows their pictures, noone knows if you or the other 3800 people have a good case or not. So we dont know if the reviewers are correct or how much randomness there is in it. Or if you are right and misjudged. You could be, but we dont know.
45
« on: October 17, 2015, 08:30 »
As has been noted before, enough people have resubmitted rejected files without alteration which then get accepted to show that either the rejecter/s or the accepter/s has the wrong take on the requisite standards.
I have not seen them. But then again I do not follow things closely.
46
« on: October 17, 2015, 08:28 »
I suggest you upload a 100% cut out from the image at least 500 pix wide, best wider. And then a small version of the total image.
Then we can all see and possibly judge if the reviews are wrong or not, and even give advice.
It would be a learning experience for us all, instead of just a talking experience.
47
« on: October 17, 2015, 07:19 »
It is characteristic, that both here and in the other 38 mile long whining thread, we never see any pictures.
So people can just whine and claim innocent and being abused or whatever they claim, without providing any proof.
So its just words and hurt emotions. Which is also the case here.
And now we hear that the OP uploaded some of his second hand images.
In my ears its a clean example of the greenhouse effect and a swollen head.
Can we see som pictures or will you stop whining, Please.
48
« on: October 17, 2015, 07:02 »
BTW. I have all kinds of fancy old lenses: 50 mm a 1,2. 85 mm 1,8, both famous primes, and some fancy teles also: like 500 mm and 400 mm.
They are all useless for stock. I never use them.
For stock I use my trusty macros or wide angles (sigma 150 and 14mm) and the newest nikor 20-85.
49
« on: October 17, 2015, 06:51 »
Thanks everyone - I really appreciate hearing your thoughts on the subject. Are there any Nikon-made lenses you would recommend that would deliver what I'm looking for? I recently purchased a Nikkor 18-200mm and a Nikkor 50mm/1.8, probably not going to accomplish what I'm after.
For a long time I used a nikon d 200 and an 18 - 200 mm nikor to produce stock. The lens was a bit soft, but that could be manipulated, and the cameras range was not great, so I used HDR. BUT... I could handhold, with VR, a person or ar butterfly in low light conditions, such as 1/30 on 200 mm, and get it (reasonably) sharp. A splendid combination, that d 200 and that 18-200. Perfect for stock. But now its outdated.
50
« on: October 17, 2015, 06:35 »
I do photograph human models in the studio, but I also photograph macros of natural things such as flowers and caterpillars.
And yes I use a tripod, so I can be sure to place dof where it is relevant. My hands wobble to much to get fx a hair from an eyelash or a mosquito wing placed correctly in focus.
Then Ill qoute myself: sharpness is an illusion based on focus and the quality of light.
Because when first you have the basics right, like shutterspeed and you have timed the strobes glimse, its all about putting contrasts into your picture, so you have something to draw sharpness out of.
I do that by basically creating a soft light environment 45 degrees to 45 degrees, Rembrant light and THEN add a strong light from the side that can produce shadows.
That means that fx the eyelashes of a blueeyed blonde has a dark shadow on the back of each on them, and such they can be processed into extreme sharpness, or into something else if you want to. The point is, I have created pixels, by adding graduated shadows, so I have something to work with in photoshop in any way I choose, sharpness is one of them.
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 ... 74
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
