|
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 - OM
Pages: 1 ... 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15 16 17 18 ... 36
301
« on: January 01, 2015, 19:12 »
If you're a Nikon shooter, the 85mm AF-S f1.8 is definitely worth the low price compared with the much more expensive and not much better f1.4. I was amazed by how sharp the lens is and the bokeh is also excellent. If you also don't need the VRII version of the 70-200m zoom, there a loads of VRI's used on offer used or you could get the f4 new. In fact the f4 zoom 70-200mm+ 85mm f1.8 AF-S together new, come out at about the same price as the 2.8 VRII 70-200mm new.
302
« on: December 24, 2014, 19:53 »
Good on ya, Ron. A cool Yule and hot 2015 to you! 
303
« on: December 19, 2014, 20:54 »
John Huszar interviewed Adams for his 1981 film, Ansel Adams: Photographer. Adams recalled:
"Well, people have asked me what kind of cameras I used. It's hard to remember all of them. Oh I had a box Brownie #1 in 1915, 16. I had the Pocket Kodak, and a 4 x 5 view, all batted down. I had a Zeiss Milliflex. A great number of different cameras. I want to try to get back to 35 millimeter, which I did a lot of in the 1930s. Using one of the Zeiss compacts. In the 20s and into the 30s, I would carry a 6-1/2 x 8-1/2 glass plate camera -- that was a little heavy. And I had a 4 x 5 camera, then of course we went to film, to film pack, things became a little simpler.
"...I guess we all did the best as we could. If we had very heavy cameras we simply didn't go so far or take so many pictures. Knowing what I know now, any photographer worth his salt could make some beautiful things with pinhole cameras."
I am surprised he went down to 35mm. Most photos of him show him with a large format camera, but there is at least one where he is using a Hasselblad. If you want the absolute best out of black and white film you would still go for large format. As for pinholes, well, they might sometimes look nice but they would fail QC - even on iStock!
Interesting. Thanks. Surprising though in light of his Zone System which rather prefers individual exposure and development for the desired result......plate films easy, medium format less so and 35mm even less.
304
« on: December 19, 2014, 20:39 »
Shocking! Which club is that I'm glad I'm not with? 
305
« on: December 14, 2014, 13:09 »
Think as contributor, I'll stick with Fotolia (opted out of DPC) to see what the deal is that Adobe is offering. If it seems attractive, I'll give it a year but as FT makes me around 10% of Shutterstock income with the same files, it's an indulgence I could easily give up. For image factories and contributors with 5K+ files, I imagine that their decision process would be different. 
306
« on: December 11, 2014, 20:53 »
Gonna have to spend a fortune first on sorting out FT's search. That is seriously rough!
307
« on: November 21, 2014, 21:05 »
Going' gangbusters in Nov. ODD's, SOD's and EL's aplenty. Already beaten October and on target to become a BME, beating the previous BME in July with an RPI of $1+. Oops, sorry, wrong thread.
308
« on: November 21, 2014, 20:49 »
Ask 'em. They will usually give you a honest answer.
309
« on: November 21, 2014, 20:46 »
Trust your all to the cloud And one day you'll be crying aloud.
310
« on: November 12, 2014, 19:52 »
Interesting article. Thanks. Just not sure that giving 'example' of a RPI of $2/month is very realistic. Can be done but almost certainly not the norm.
311
« on: November 06, 2014, 18:28 »
Honestly...Not Interested. I search a lot. what I see is Images that would have been rejected for Lighting On SS in the past and especially Now. I don't get it. And...If there doing that well and folks who are there are doing that well, Then why don't they Look at ports that do very well and invite them? ?
Because the whole point of OFFSET was to be different, separate from run of the mill microstock. If they started promoting the best or better selling microstock portfolios they would lose that flavor. I have to chuckle when I see comments about somebody target shooting for OFFSET. They have clearly stated they were looking for existing, working pros ie: assignment type shooters who had great outtakes. Sound familiar? To anyone involved in stock since the 70's, as I have been, this will ring true. That is the very origin of stock photography. This is how stock agencies in the 70's and early 80's approached photographers. They sought out existing assignment pros who would be willing to market their outtakes. This eventually morphed (mid and later 80's) to the image catalog mentality. Where photographers would actually shoot to get image placements in the stock photo print catalogs of the day.
So no, I would hope that OFFSET continues to be blind of true microstock. If someone thinks they can go out and "shoot for OFFSET" they are already not what OFFSET is looking for in a photographer. All you have to do is look at the photographers they are representing. To a person they are almost all active shooting professionals working for clients and organzations. They are not sitting around thinking of generic microstock concepts.
Nailed it perfectly!
312
« on: November 04, 2014, 20:45 »
I think you need to be invited!
313
« on: November 01, 2014, 18:29 »
Used it this week with Firefox. Fine.
However, the flash uploader for FT appear not to work. There it's a question of reducing down the FT page, going to your directory/ file where the images for upload are stored, Ctrl +A, and then when I restore the FT page to full size, I see that all files are in the uploader! Never used to be like that but now it is. Could be an Adobe update to flash or something. I dunno.
314
« on: October 27, 2014, 20:35 »
Well, I do not expect any payment : there was only 1 of my images in his port, an image of a frog. But as the main keyword "frog" was removed (why did he do that??), I'm sure it was never sold. If he did the same with the other images, his business will not have been very lucrative.
He had one of mine too but his keywords were different. Mostly relevant but including some spammed keywords. perhaps he thought he wouldn't get caught with different keywords?
315
« on: October 25, 2014, 16:33 »
Strewth, Image Sleuth! Didn't know it existed until now!
316
« on: October 25, 2014, 10:16 »
Had a job finding this thread. Might be more noticeable in 'General Stock Photography'.
317
« on: October 24, 2014, 19:54 »
Boy and dog on sandy beach. Dog has found something interesting to canines where sandcastle of boy once stood. (This explains 'ex-sandcastle' in keywords). 
318
« on: October 14, 2014, 18:25 »
There's something seriously wrong with the results when nearly 50% of voters are claiming more than 40c per image/month ... which itself is nearly 50% higher than Shutterstock's declared average.
Even Sean said he's only generating about 60c per image/month (in a previous thread) so we must have some absolute stock geniuses voting in the poll.
Just depends on the ODD's and EL's that month. September was good with 3 EL's and quite a few ODD's. RPI = $0.91 with less than 400 photo's. What is really very interesting is that if I take my total SS income and divide it by the number of months I've been at SS and divide that by, say, an 'estimated average' number of photo's during the time there, I still come out at an average of $0.91 cents.
319
« on: October 13, 2014, 20:43 »
It's a frame of mind........and I fear that my mind is too old to get into that frame. It's a shame, although I get the 'levitation' that the images bring. Thanks Sean for the Jen Grantham link.
320
« on: October 06, 2014, 06:50 »
....When you can immediately pinpoint the Solomon Islands on a world map because you once sold an image there.
321
« on: October 04, 2014, 07:30 »
I would need 18,000 to 20,000 images, but I don't think it would work that way. I think your return per image drops some as you add more. How much of a drop would be really hard to figure out. Not to mention, sales on Shutterstock aren't as consistent as they used to be. I used to be able to know almost exactly how many sales I would get on a weekday. Now it's up and down more.
Also, I'm a zero budget shooter "polluting the library."
Yep! Extrapolating wildly from my <500 images on SS, I would need 12,500 images there to make $10,000/month...but as you say, it probably doesn't work that way! BTW. There is a recent post on SS forum which would indicate (by extrapolation) that one contributor there could derive $10K/month income from around $5K images.
322
« on: September 20, 2014, 18:55 »
This is free and the major factor is 'luck' combined with an HCV image. Your image goes into the Shutterstock 'new' lottery along with 350,000 other images that week. Your image, as with any other of those 350,000, is dependent on a potential buyer looking in 'new' for a particular subject because maybe they don't see what they want in popular. Unless your image at thumbnail size does not immediately look appealing....fuggedaboutit. Within a few days, in the more popular categories, it will be lost forever if not sold multiple times within the first week.
323
« on: September 15, 2014, 19:44 »
DL's steady at 400+/month with less than 400 images. Seem to have more subs the last 1 months and less ODD's. No big SOD's or EL's since July which was a BME (in the 2 years I'm there). Considering the July bounty, I suppose I might have to wait awhile for a month with multiple EL's and SOD's! Conclusion: Ticking over..neither ecstatic nor consumed with doom.
324
« on: September 12, 2014, 19:48 »
Had a similar problem with FT flash upload yesterday. Possibly some Windoze/Adobe Flash update.
No problem on XP which dunt update nomo!
325
« on: September 07, 2014, 19:29 »
If royalties would rise, many more photographers will come, much more images will be uploaded and everyone will earn less. At .25 per download there are 10000 images approved daily. Uploaded probably twice as many. Does anybody consider that?
10K images/day...I wish! Almost 50,000/day approved this week...still at $0.25/download.
Pages: 1 ... 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15 16 17 18 ... 36
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
