|
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 ... 51
76
« on: February 02, 2010, 13:12 »
I just logged into StockXpert and saw the same notice. How sad. I was hoping that the site wouldn't be killed off, since it was one of the better sites. So did IS just buy them to kill them? Or did IS buy them for the free images site?
77
« on: February 01, 2010, 19:22 »
The point is we are ALL supposed to earn a specified % from each sale and indisputably we are not. In most cases it would seem we are earning quite a lot less than that. Personally I very much doubt that 'it evens out in the end'. Actually I think they say a % of credits.
But even if that is true, a credit should be a credit. You can't say that a credit is worth X for a buyer, and Y for a contributor.
78
« on: January 26, 2010, 18:51 »
The Microstock Poll Results (to the right) lag by one month. In other words, the latest results are for last month (December). December is usually the slowest month out of the year (because of the Christmas holidays). I also agree with the remark that microstock (in general) is doing much better since the recession started, since they are the cheapest option available. IS has stated "The good news is: there's lots of good news. We managed to grow significantly in the worst possible economic times. We now sell three times as many files as we did back in 2006. That's pretty amazing. What's even more amazing is the average number of downloads per contributor has also risen significantly since 2006. Thats a tough feat considering how quickly the collection has grown. Volumes are so high now we can tell in our hourly reports when New York goes for lunch or when theres a sandstorm in Sydney." ( http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=151691&page=1) An email from FT stated "2009 has been an amazing year for all of us - through aggressive marketing and promotion efforts, we were able to more than double photographer payouts!"A statement from Achilles of DT at the beginning of the month stated "Overall, the number of downloads is highest ever. There is no better parameter to track contributors' revenue than downloads." ( http://www.microstockgroup.com/dreamstime-com/dt-in-trouble/50/)
79
« on: January 24, 2010, 14:34 »
I'd very much like to get into strobes, which open the door to portaits and people shots, and maybe that could be done more cheaply than I realized, and that's the future I think.
If you are interested in strobes, then I would suggest that you check these out: LumoPro LP120 Manual Flash ($130): http://www.mpex.com/browse.cfm/4,12311.htmlThe LumoPro flashes were basically designed around requirements from the Strobist website (strobist.blogspot.com). The nice thing about the LumoPros is that they have four (4) different types of inputs: miniphone cord, PC sync cord, hot shoe, and slave. As you are probably aware, the nice thing about strobes is that they are highly portable (since they are small and don't require electricity for power). You can pick up a pair of these strobes, along with light stands, umbrellas, and adapters for about $400. MPex.com also has various kits for the Strobist (@ http://www.mpex.com/page.htm?PG=Strobist%20Kits).
80
« on: January 16, 2010, 17:09 »
This is one of the reasons I use Google Chrome.
81
« on: January 14, 2010, 11:26 »
^^ +1
what's that mean ?? 
+1 is similar to saying "ditto"
82
« on: January 09, 2010, 17:43 »
It's actually been renamed the Khalifa Tower (after Sheikh Khalifa bin Zayed Al Nahayan bailed Dubai out by giving them $10 billion).
83
« on: January 08, 2010, 05:43 »
The iStock credits/image price change has taken place.
Yes, but the more important question is: Did the best match change?
84
« on: January 07, 2010, 07:27 »
Congrats.
Although I still don't think that we should be giving our work away for free.
85
« on: January 05, 2010, 18:28 »
In the US I was asked to submit form w-9. I submitted on the first and it still isn't approved yet.
Does nobody any good to submit forms and then not have them reviewed.
I submitted my W-9 on 01/01 as well and it is still pending approval.
86
« on: January 01, 2010, 12:30 »
I got it too, and I am a US contributor. They already had a w-9 on me, but for some reason I had to fill out a new one. Now I have to wait for it to be examined and approved. Hopefully will not take too long....
Ditto...
87
« on: December 25, 2009, 17:56 »
...it is not something I want to spend much time into.
Please don't take this the wrong way, but if you don't want to spend much time on 3D CGI stuff, then I would like to humbly suggest that you don't bother with it. 3D CGI has an EXTREMELY high learning curve.
88
« on: December 25, 2009, 09:09 »
I guess that it all depends on what you want to do with it.
If you enjoy 3D landscapes and want to start to learn about the genre, then it might be a good (and cheap) way to break into the field. If you continue to enjoy it, then you can purchase more expensive packages later on.
Is Bryce the best package available? I would have to say no (but it isn't that expensive either). In my opinion, e-on Vue is better at producing realistic 3D landscapes, but Vue can also be WAY more expensive. Vue also has a free version (called Pioneer) that has limitations that you can download and try.
I have never used Bryce, but I believe that it is very similar to Vue in that both are only used for creating 3D landscapes. If you want to do other stuff with 3D (like modeling), then you will need to get another package (such as Blender - a FREE app which I highly recommend).
One thing to realize with any 3D CGI package is that they are computer resource hogs. You will need a pretty good computer to run them and create scenes with them.
89
« on: December 25, 2009, 08:53 »
Merry CHRISTmas!
90
« on: December 22, 2009, 07:45 »
To get back to taking pictures that I enjoy and having fun with photography.
91
« on: December 21, 2009, 15:48 »
Just a little side note about considering exclusivity. Istock always pays me on time according to the schedule they lay out.
Unlike Fotolia, where there have been repeated problems getting paid in a timely way. Or StockXpert, which is like pulling teeth to get paid the past couple of months.
The idea of consistent payouts without having to write Support, complain in the forums, compare notes with other contributors, etc. is appealing.
But isn't StockXpert now owned by IS???
92
« on: December 18, 2009, 14:36 »
I'm not understanding what they mean by "best selling".
Some of the other images have more downloads than the top three others!
For example, the fourth best-selling image has 646 downloads and the ninth best-selling image has 708 downloads!
93
« on: December 18, 2009, 07:10 »
I just calculated how much I would have made this year (2009) if I replaced the current royalty rates with the new royalty rates and found that I would have received a 14% pay increase. But this assumes that sales patterns would have remained the same, which is a BIG assumption. For example, subscriptions are currently 65% of all sales for me. When prices go up, then subscription sales will probably rise as well (especially since subscription prices won't be going up), which will decrease earnings substantially. So while there is a possibility of receiving a pay increase next year, the probability of that happening is low.
Also, while I would have received a possible 14% pay increase, FT would have received a 38% pay increase (without taking into account an increase in subscriptions).
As many have stated previously, FT is stating that they need more money to run their business, but the same is true on the contributors side. Many of us would like to purchase some new equipment to increase sales and that will be much harder to do with a smaller cut from sales. I find it very ironic that ALL of the micro sites want better quality (which means better equipment), but they don't want to provide the means for obtaining that better quality.
94
« on: December 17, 2009, 17:50 »
Here is a table of my earnings for the last 5 years and how much % each site contributed to the overall income.
leaf: I was wondering if your figures include referral income?
95
« on: December 17, 2009, 09:32 »
They are owned by Getty.
Is that supposed to be a good thing???
96
« on: December 17, 2009, 07:31 »
I might be wrong, but it sounds like StockXpert might be closing down after the end of the year. They are probably only keeping the doors open until the end of the year for tax purposes.
Is it time to cash out?
97
« on: December 16, 2009, 08:10 »
That's the stuff I send to Flickr. And that stuff wouldn't be accepted for stock. If it did get accepted it probably wouldn't sell.
I find this statement quite ironic! You state that the images that you put on Flickr probably wouldn't sell, yet a real estate agent is using one of those images on their business website to help with their own sales.
98
« on: December 12, 2009, 14:53 »
Currently (accounting for the exclusive bonus) I make 20% more by being independent. With the changes at IS, if I were to go exclusive I would almost certainly make up that 20% and quite possibly make even more.
Are you saying that 80% of your microstock income comes from IS???
99
« on: December 02, 2009, 09:52 »
The only guarantee is the honor system, and we all know how that works.
+1
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 ... 51
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
