|
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 - Graffoto
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14 ... 34
201
« on: December 11, 2010, 23:34 »
^^^^
Not me.
202
« on: December 11, 2010, 23:31 »
The USA are the de-Facto 'world police'.
Huge amounts of our taxes go to the military industrial complex.
More huge amounts go international aid programs.
No one throws more money at other countries in need than the US.
And for the most part all we get is grief in return.
Canada has a socialist system. Socialized medical, heavily subsided transportation systems, etc, etc.
Its an apples vs oranges argument.
Aside from speaking English, our two countries are really nothing alike.
(PS - I was married to a Canadian for 24 years and went to visit many times - so I know a bit about it).
203
« on: December 08, 2010, 15:30 »
What seems to happen is as soon as a technology is nearing the point of perfection, or at least being really good, it gets superseded. Or perhaps when a new technology is just a lot easier to use and is cheap, it drives a nail into its competition.
And sometimes the inferior product wins out. Remember Betamax vs VHS? My iPhone is my snapshot camera simply because I don't own any other point n shoot. Who wants to lug a full frame SLR around every day? It also is my mobile web. I'm writing this on the iPhone. Very handy this convergence thing... but it's a trade off of convenience over quality.
204
« on: December 07, 2010, 12:34 »
^ "Testing the waters about lowering them".
What is there to test? We know they sold well at a lower price point & we know they are not moving nearly as well at the higher price. IS should just admit the error and return them to the previous
price and while they are at it, put back the original commission %....
Oh that's right I forgot, TPTB (Getty) don't want us have fair cut on the sale of our own work.
205
« on: December 06, 2010, 19:16 »
Um, Woo------- yay? 
206
« on: December 01, 2010, 15:33 »
I tend to not have a camera with me unless I'm doing stock work. All the cute little snaps and videos I have of my six year old son are from my iPhone 
207
« on: December 01, 2010, 00:21 »
So, let's hope Extraterrestrials can be good guys too. 
Not a chance if they run big stock agencies.
Best thing I've read all day. Thanks for the laugh, Zeus! 
208
« on: November 30, 2010, 21:47 »
@SNP
Why not?
Well, (takes deep breath) because while periodicals are not wiling to pay much of anything for editorial imagery (the stuff they use to illustrate the stories on the inside), the cover is a different story altogether. The cover is what moves magazines off the shelf at the newsstands and that is worth more than a measly cut of an anemic extended license.
I'm glad you are happy that you got twenty free issues of the magazine and have a tear sheet for your portfolio.
Sorry to say that the mention on the inside cover is practically next to worthless except for bragging rights.
It's highly doubtful that you will get further jobs from that.
Your attitude tells me that you don't yet make a living with your imagery and are probably very young.
I expect that your tune will change ten years or so down the road.
209
« on: November 30, 2010, 19:14 »
Not exactly RM. At least as I understand it RM specifies exactly how long an image may be used.
Also as I understand it RM often requires an image not be made available for anyone else to license during that use period.
Please feel free to correct me if I am mistaken about this.
210
« on: November 30, 2010, 17:14 »
SJLOCKE:
So, trying to raise prices to a mid level is bad... Micro pricing is bad... What's the answer?
I think the answer is fair pricing for better images (Vetta), fair commission for the contributors AND a better licensing model.
A national magazine (Time) should not be able to get away with running a cover image and only paying a few pennies + extended license. Neither should a national or multi- national be able to put a model's image on a multi- million dollar product (Shampoo for instance) and only have to pay a few dollars + extended license. That is just highway robbery.
A cheap image for a blog is fine. A cheap image for a website that will be changed out in a few weeks, also fine.
We need to have a better license set up for the use of our imagery.
211
« on: November 30, 2010, 02:29 »
^^^
My Grandfather was a diamond wholesaler back in the post depression era.
He said that if he could make 33% margin over his cost he was REALLY happy.
80% is TOTALLY sustainable. Anyone that says otherwise is lying.
212
« on: November 27, 2010, 23:16 »
A brilliant achievement and shows how well polished and many faceted her portfolio is. Truly a cut above. Scintillating in all respects. OK, sorry I could not help myself  In my other life I'm a gemologist. All kidding aside, it must feel great to reach that level. Congrats JoAnn!
213
« on: November 23, 2010, 01:02 »
Yuri is a smart guy but his model is flawed. DNY59 at iS has it right.
Therefore SJ Locke's model is flawed, as is that of Lise Gagne and any number of highly successful contributors? I understand its cheaper to shoot objects. However its much harder to differentiate yourself from the masses of others that have access to these same objects. Models are each one unique. Therefore no one else can make an exact copy of your shot.
214
« on: November 22, 2010, 16:51 »
Maybe he has come to the conclusion that teaching other photographers how to compete with him is not a wise long term strategy? 
For a bright guy, it sure took him long enough to come to that conclusion. ETA: stupid iPhone formatting.
215
« on: November 16, 2010, 15:18 »
Motivation? What's that?
216
« on: November 13, 2010, 13:37 »
ALL modern video cameras and camcorders that shoot in h.264 or mpeg2, come with a license agreement that says that you can only use that camera to shoot video for "personal use and non-commercial" purposes (go on, read your manuals)."
Well, shouldn't this agreement then be signed at the moment of purchasing the camera?
They advertize that the cam has video capability, can I not assume that I am allowed to sell those videos just like I'm allowed to sell the photos that the camera produces?
Indeed. What sort of BS clause is that? Unenforceable I would guess.
217
« on: November 09, 2010, 17:52 »
Incentives were promised to exclusives and have now been reneged on.
In essence these were contractual obligations.
A good litigator out to be able to prove that harm was done to this class.
218
« on: November 08, 2010, 13:32 »
My top three non Vetta sellers average 30:1 Less popular files have a much higher view/sales ratio. ETA: I have one Vetta file that has a 1351:0 ratio
219
« on: November 04, 2010, 18:13 »
^ This
220
« on: October 20, 2010, 08:45 »
This has been done before, but I'm too lazy to look up the old thread.
Anyway the proper answer is: old enough to know better.
221
« on: October 15, 2010, 11:49 »
You may be correct. I have come to pretty much the same conclusion.
However I feel that it would be a grave error for Getty and iStock to lose their separate identities.
222
« on: October 14, 2010, 08:43 »
223
« on: October 13, 2010, 20:17 »
^^^
This gives me a headache.
224
« on: October 13, 2010, 17:19 »
Very nice image. Congrats on being featured.
225
« on: October 12, 2010, 15:47 »
I have had this happen on several occasions.
It's annoying because there is really no way to prove that they have destroyed the file
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14 ... 34
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
