|
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 ... 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 ... 51
176
« on: May 28, 2009, 13:13 »
Elena:
Thanks for your quick reply.
I am very happy that you will be allowing an opt-out for subs. I'm sure that there are many, many others that feel the same way.
177
« on: May 28, 2009, 12:39 »
Does anyone know when subs will go live?
178
« on: May 28, 2009, 10:33 »
Surely there are a million monkeys with a million cameras out there.
Wow. So now we are monkeys? 
179
« on: May 28, 2009, 07:16 »
I don't believe so.
The advanced search option does not have an option for photographer/user name.
EDIT: But I believe that you might be able to use Google to do this.
For example, the following Google search will find images created by me:
site:fotolia.com geopappas
You could just replace my username with the ones that you are trying to find.
180
« on: May 28, 2009, 05:46 »
On the positive side, this might eliminate many of the fake subscribers that contribute stolen materials.
181
« on: May 25, 2009, 08:17 »
The best product you can compare this to in my opinion is telephone services.
And look what happened to the telecom industry over the past decade or so!
182
« on: May 19, 2009, 18:15 »
I would suggest taking into account some of the following:
- How much you have earned from the image and how long it has been online? From that you can figure out an approximate annual rate that you have earned (or might earn) on the image. Obviously, if the image is relatively new (only a few months), then that will make it harder.
- Are there similar images to this one also available from your collection? If so, then you the buyer might want you to remove all of the similars as well, and you should calculate the rate of return on these images also.
- Pick a period of time that you feel the image might sell over. It seems to be the experience of many here, that the sales on an image reduce over time (since they get lost in the haystack and there are boatloads more loaded every week). For example, you might choose 5 or 10 years. Then multiply this time frame by the annual rate of return that you previously calculated. This should give you a ballpark figure.
- Factor in your time. As they say: "Time is money".
- Add in a fudge factor, since they might want to "bargain" with you. For example, if you ask for $500, they might offer back $250. Take this into account.
- Where are they located? If you give them a quote in $USD, and they are located in another country, there will be a conversion rate that they might need to apply. This might make the image seem more expensive or inexpensive to them, depending on the country.
- What are their plans for the image? How big is the company that you are dealing with? Do they plan on using it as a logo?
Of course, after having said all of that, you need to feel comfortable selling the rights on an image. Many people have an attraction to the images that they have created and have a problem parting with them.
Hope that helps...
183
« on: May 19, 2009, 16:19 »
I think that it is pretty obvious that your isolation on white went very bad! 
184
« on: May 19, 2009, 10:08 »
Seems to me a pretty usual residential / office area...
http://www.findvej.dk/Mejlgade71,8000
I am probably wrong, but the building looks like it was a greenhouse that was converted to a studio. It must have great ventilation to keep it cool.
Most residences don't have transparent ceilings.
185
« on: May 19, 2009, 06:47 »
...and that's not including state income taxes...
Or the myriad other hidden taxes and fees that we are charged on a daily basis (such as sales taxes, property taxes, gasoline taxes, phone taxes, cable taxes, toll roads, ad infinitum). Like they say, there are only two things guaranteed in life: death and taxes. The irony is that there is actually a death tax as well
186
« on: May 19, 2009, 06:20 »
I am probably wrong, but the building looks like it was a greenhouse that was converted to a studio. It must have great ventilation to keep it cool.
187
« on: May 18, 2009, 18:35 »
I knew this about Texas, not about Florida. I wonder if any other state has higher state income tax than CA. And on top of that our sales tax just went up by 1% ....
According to Wikipedia ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_income_tax), there are seven (7) U.S. states with no income tax: Alaska Florida Nevada South Dakota Texas Washington Wyoming Although they don't have income tax, they have a higher sales tax rate (and probably many other taxes that are higher). California does have the highest rate for a state, but there are some cities that have a tax rate which (when combined with the state income tax) makes them higher than California. For example, NYC has a state income tax rate of up to 8.14% and a city tax rate of 4%.
188
« on: May 16, 2009, 07:00 »
The other thing that is coming into play is that we're open source and "free internet" kind of people. We try to not operate out of fear of things being stolen.
Is your source code available somewhere? Or are you only "open source" when it comes to other people's intellectual property?
189
« on: May 07, 2009, 18:52 »
I thought "Up your nose with a rubber hose" would be more appropriate!
Was that a quote from Vinnie Barbarino?
190
« on: May 07, 2009, 17:07 »
Don't bone me bro'!
As they drag him away never to be heard from again...
191
« on: May 07, 2009, 10:38 »
Hopefully you won't have your account closed because they think you are gaming the system.
192
« on: May 07, 2009, 09:46 »
Tape seems the way to go. I had to take a couple video classes when I was in animation school and got used to it so it doesnt bother me. Tape is great because its cheap too.
Is there any difference in video quality going from tape vs a hard drive?
good question. you're going from analogue to digital (10101010).
That is not correct. Most of the video cameras that use tape nowadays are using DVC (digital video cassette, also known as miniDV). This means that the tapes are digital and NOT analog. The quality on the video cameras that use tape are usually higher quality than the video cameras that use a hard disk or memory. But that mostly has to do with the compression that the video is saved with. Video cameras that use tape mostly save in AVI format. AVI format is not compressed as much and has larger file sizes. Video cameras that use hard disk or memory usually save in a much more compressed format (such as MP3, MOV or WMV) and have smaller file sizes.
193
« on: May 06, 2009, 07:57 »
In some ways I really feel for the iStock admins. I don't believe for a second they are on board with Getty's plan. They are doing their jobs, doing their best to defend the indefensible. I don't envy their position.
That is NOT what IS admins have stated on their forums. Here is what was stated in one of the threads by JJRD (see http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=87786&page=11):
"Let me be clear, very clear: we at HQ firmly believe that offering multiple collections & multiple offerings to our contributors is the very best thing to do for the future of the exclusivity program; we at HQ strongly believe that it can only lead to empowering our contributors in choosing what they feel is best for them."
He does not explicitly state that they believe THIS collection is the "very best thing," and as they are offering multiple collections within iStock, and launching the new "iStock exclusive" collection over at Getty, they can certainly believe those are good without saying that the new plan sucks arse.
An IS admin stated this in a thread about the new subscription offering which was titled "Subscription Shuffle" and which had the following statement a page or two prior to his: "I have a sneaky feeling that iStock HQ had no say in this. I believe that if it were up to them nothing like this would have happened."It is obvious to me that he was reacting to this statement (along with another one about why they released this information on a Friday afternoon). But of course, you are free to believe whatever you like... 
194
« on: May 06, 2009, 05:59 »
In some ways I really feel for the iStock admins. I don't believe for a second they are on board with Getty's plan. They are doing their jobs, doing their best to defend the indefensible. I don't envy their position.
That is NOT what IS admins have stated on their forums. Here is what was stated in one of the threads by JJRD (see http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=87786&page=11): "Let me be clear, very clear: we at HQ firmly believe that offering multiple collections & multiple offerings to our contributors is the very best thing to do for the future of the exclusivity program; we at HQ strongly believe that it can only lead to empowering our contributors in choosing what they feel is best for them."
195
« on: May 06, 2009, 05:30 »
When you hover over thumbnails with mouse you can see a larger preview without a watermark. only if you click on an image, another page opens, and there images are watermarked.
The watermark is only there for people that don't login. If you join the site, you will see that nothing is watermarked.
196
« on: May 05, 2009, 20:27 »
I just browsed Photos.com and viewed a few images on the site.
I noticed that there isn't much information attached to the photos. For example, the contributor's name doesn't seem to be there, so there is no way to look at other images from the same contributor. Not only that, but there are no watermarks on the large image previews (which are blog size). Doesn't anyone else have a problem with this?
197
« on: May 05, 2009, 16:43 »
- no subscriptions
If you have no plans to add subscriptions, then why does your Sellers Legal Agreement (@ http://www.zymmetrical.com/help/legal/) mention subscriptions in quite a few places? Here are a few quotes from the text: 1h. Subscription Service means a service for which a user pays a flat license fee for access to the content included in the subscription service during the subscription period. 6b. Licensor shall remit to Artist $0.60 per Unique Download of its Submitted Content from the licensing of the Submitted Content in a Subscription Service. If Submitted Content is licensed through a Sub-distributor in a Subscription Service, Licensor shall remit to Artist no less than $0.50 per Unique Download from the Sub-distributor from the licensing of the Submitted Content. Sub-distributors may determine their own pricing. Such payments shall be Artists sole compensation for the licensing or use of any Submitted Content. 6b ii. Any user with a paid subscription to the Subscription Service may
download as much content as the user wishes, subject to the conditions of the subscription program. Artist will be paid one time for each Unique Download of the Submitted Content by a paid subscriber. If
Artist, an immediate or extended family member, any individual under Artists direction, or any individual acting with the intent of increasing downloads of Artists Submitted Content for the benefit of Artist (the Parties) purchases a subscription to the Subscription Service, Artist agrees to notify Licensor via email with the related account details, and further agrees that the Parties will not download Artists Submitted Content.
198
« on: May 05, 2009, 15:19 »
The current iStock subscription program is, at least for now, completely different than the newest scheme they are proposing. The guarantee is .96 PER CREDIT, not per sale, and it is far better than the no guarantee/good possibility of 3 cents PER SALE at photos.com and JUI.
IS royalties on subs are much lower than 0.96 per credit. I have received a royalty on a sub for 0.34 and I'm sure it goes lower than that.
199
« on: May 05, 2009, 11:52 »
I want more people to tell me I can't do something because it makes me even more determined to do it!!
You can't do it!
200
« on: May 05, 2009, 05:41 »
... but why not reduce the price in the first place with out havin to send in the receipt to Canon to get it 
Because they hope you will forget, are lazy, or don't follow the exact rules (and thus don't qualify).
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 ... 51
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
