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 - GeoPappas
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 ... 51
101
« on: November 23, 2009, 07:04 »
So if I bought the same photo from iStock, DT and StockXpert I could get a print run of 499,999 from iStock, another print run from DT of 499,999 and then yet another from StockXpert for 249,999? Ding, ding, ding! I think we have a winner. There have been many, many times when I have had an obscure photo (that hardly sells at all) all of a sudden sell simultaneously on a few different sites. I could never figure out what the buyers were doing, but I figured that they were trying to get around something. Well, now I finally know what they are doing. They are trying to avoid having to purchase an extended license.
102
« on: November 04, 2009, 05:11 »
Is it possible that the images that have been removed had keywords that were considered trademarks or copyrights?
For example, if you search on the keyword "BMW", there are 5 results. If you search on "Volvo", there are 77 results. Etc.
103
« on: October 31, 2009, 10:12 »
To say that there is "nothing" about a Mac that makes it the best choice, is to disagree with millions of happy Mac users. I base my research, of what kind of computers and camera equipment my favorite photographers use. If your favorite photographers use PCs, then that would be the "best" choice for you. Of course, it's all subjective.
Then we are in agreement. My point is that you can't "quantify" anything about a Mac to say that it is "the best". It is all a personal decision. Personally, for me I can't justify the expense. And the Mac market makes up only a small percentage of the overall PC market. So millions more people feel that the PC is better.
104
« on: October 31, 2009, 09:33 »
"Have I reached the level where I can afford the best, and will it pay for itself many times over?" For me, the answer was yes.
There is nothing about a Mac that makes it "the best". You might like it a lot and that is fine, but trying to quantify something that is a personal feeling is a stretch.
105
« on: October 31, 2009, 09:10 »
IMO, the Macs are highly over-rated and they are WAY TOO EXPENSIVE.
I just upgraded my computer and built a quad-core machine (Intel Q9550 w/ 4 GB RAM) that is super-fast for under $500. If I had to do it from scratch, it would have cost less than $1000.
Mac quad-core computers go for over $3000.
With new technologies coming out every year and computers becoming defunct shortly thereafter, I can't see spending $3000 on a computer every few years.
EDIT: I forgot to add that my first computer was an Apple II back in the late 70s. It had only 4K RAM, no hard drive (none were available), no floppy drive (none were available), and no monitor (it hooked up to a TV similar to a gaming system). If you wanted to save a program/application, you had to hook it up to a tape recorder and hope for the best! When a floppy drive came out the following year, it was $600 for a 5 1/4" double-sided "floppy" drive!
106
« on: October 31, 2009, 07:03 »
The main question is "how would you connect to the computer at your mom's house?"
Does the computer at your mom's house have a static IP address?
108
« on: October 27, 2009, 10:24 »
Can someone please tell me the criteria for the database cleaning?
For example, how old does the image need to be?
What other criteria are there?
And where are you receiving the notification? In your email account, or in your DT account?
109
« on: October 23, 2009, 18:05 »
According to the chart, it looks to me like Shutterstock is lagging behind the others in growth.
110
« on: October 23, 2009, 18:00 »
I could be wrong, but the last part of the following quote makes me think that their company is geared towards macrostock (and not microstock):
"There are two other improvements that the company is working on. The first is the ability for photographers to tell Imagerights to search particular URLs (e.g. past infringers) and the ability to let the system know which images are already licensed so they dont show up in the report."
With microstock, you would most likely have no idea which sites have licensed your images (since the sites don't provide that information).
It is an interesting product nonetheless, and one that artists need more and more of (to protect their assets).
111
« on: October 23, 2009, 13:10 »
I wouldn't want someone else to determine my prices for me. I can charge up to $200 for my Extended License option but I choose to keep it at $75 so that I have more sales. If the maximum sales price were automatically updated then I would have been forced to go through and manually reduce them.
Yes, but it would be nice if FT would provide a button that would allow us to change the EL price across the board (or for a selection of images). Having to change one image at a time is not user-friendly at all and very time consuming (especially for those with 100s or 1000s of image).
112
« on: October 20, 2009, 07:43 »
Did something change with the way DT reports referral earnings (@ http://www.dreamstime.com/referral_earnings.php)? I just went to check my DT referral earnings and noticed that the last one that shows up is from 8 days ago. (I normally see multiple referrals a day so this is way out of the norm). Are they now delaying referral earnings? Or is there a bug in the reporting system?
113
« on: October 14, 2009, 06:44 »
For those of you that are Nikon junkies: http://www.dpreview.com/news/0910/09101402nikonD3s.aspCost: $5199 Some Features:12.1 MP ISO 12800 as standard, expandable to ISO equivalent of 102400 (Hi 3) Movie mode - 720p @ 24 fps Image sensor cleaning 51-point AF 9-fps shooting rate in FX-format, 11 fps in DX crop Approx. 100% frame coverage Twin CF card slots Quiet Shutter-release mode 3-in., approx. 921k-dot color, 170 viewing angle LCD monitor
114
« on: September 23, 2009, 06:58 »
One thing to keep in mind for those of you that are interested in this offering, is that IS is offering a 50% ROYALTY ONLY FOR THE FIRST 6 MONTHS. This rate is a "special offer" rate to entice you to join up and build up their library.
Here is the quote from the IS text:
"iStock will pay a base royalty rate of 50% per logo design for the first 6 months. Well give advanced notice for the rate going forward after that."
My bet, is that the royalty rate will be reduced at some point in the future (once they have built up their library).
115
« on: September 18, 2009, 15:14 »
Blessings to you as well.
117
« on: September 10, 2009, 14:50 »
I find #11 (DONT share or post your techniques) kind of ironic.
118
« on: September 04, 2009, 16:14 »
Of more concern to me is the fact that I am actually selling about the same numbers of images per month on most agencies as I was 3 years ago __ yes really. That's despite having nearly trebled the size of my port.
Are you including SS sales in this analysis. I ask because SS usually has so many more sales than all of the other ones combined. And it might be that your SS sales have slowed down, but your other sales have increased.
119
« on: September 04, 2009, 07:45 »
The cost is only $30 per month for the full featured integrated package...
Plus they will take 10% of any sales you have. So it ends up being $360/year + 10% of sales. There are alternatives to Photoshelter as well, including smugmug.com ($150/year + 15% of sales) and zenfolio.com ($100/year + 8-12% of sales). If you are just looking to store photos for DR (disaster recovery) purposes, then I would recommend Amazon S3 + JungleDisk (jungledisk.com).
120
« on: September 02, 2009, 17:17 »
Since this is custom work that is being done for a single customer, I would charge as such (hourly rate * time required).
Microstock prices are cheap because of the expected payoff from higher volume. This doesn't mean that custom work needs to be priced the same way (since custom work is just that - custom - and has no additional volume).
I would also ask specifics about the project before I quoted them a final price, such as the file format requested (JPG vs TIFF), the DPI requested, the size of the expected print run, the colorspace requested (RBG vs CMYK), and even about the book itself.
As SJLocke stated, I would also create a basic contract that they would need to agree to.
Hope that helps.
121
« on: September 01, 2009, 09:02 »
A quote from dpreview:
The 5D Mark II is a great camera, but I really feel that the 7D (with the exception of sensor size) is what the 5D Mark II should have been. From what I have read so far, most people agree with this sentiment, but what they mean is that the new 7D has a lot of bells and whistles. On the other hand, many people don't like the smaller sensor. With the higher frame rates (8 fps) and the 1.6x sensor, this seems to be geared towards nature / birding / sports. In my opinion, this camera really should have been named a 70D.
122
« on: September 01, 2009, 05:28 »
123
« on: September 01, 2009, 05:07 »
I'm surprised that it's got an APS-C sensor (that 1.6x crop thingy again) despite being 18Mp. I used to hate having to live with that on my old 10D and 20D and can't imagine going back to it.
According to the blurb Canon reckon they've spoken to '5000 photographers worldwide' to give them the camera that they really want. Did they really want an APS-C sensor?
It is very odd that Canon changed the xD lineup from a 36 x 24 mm full-frame sensor to a 22.3 x 14.9 mm 1.6x crop sensor. They normally keep the sensor size consistent in each of their lineups.
124
« on: September 01, 2009, 04:46 »
Features:- 18MP APS-C (1.6x) CMOS sensor
- ISO range (100 6,400) is expandable to 12,800
- 19-point cross-type AF system (all cross-type) including Spot AF
- iFCL (Focus Colour & Luminance) metering system with 63-zone Dual-layer Sensor
- 8 frames per second continuous shooting
- 1080p HD video recording with manual controls (30, 25, and 24 fps)
- 3.0 inch Clear View II LCD screen with 920,000 dots
- 1.0x magnification and 100% coverage viewfinder
- Dual DIGIC 4 processors
- Wireless flash control
- Environmental sealing
Price on Amazon.com is $1,700 for the body and $1,900 with a 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM lens. See here for more info: Press Release:http://www.dpreview.com/news/0909/09090105canoneos7d.aspHands on preview:http://www.dpreview.com/previews/canoneos7d/
125
« on: August 26, 2009, 12:44 »
For those of you that received the email, how close are you to achieving the next rank on your own (i.e., without this offer)?
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 ... 51
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|