|
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 - ClaridgeJ
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 ... 23
251
« on: December 04, 2012, 04:34 »
Or not.
I have noticed that when first you begin to use the word "little", it will only take a few posts before you use the word "girl".
I have also said how that sort of communication is labeled.
Wasnt aware of that actually? sorry but I got the impression that your J, stood for Jane? now if your a guy, begging your pardon.
252
« on: December 04, 2012, 04:24 »
No youre very wrong. Its destruction for a purpose, i.e. its done on purpose and for a reason and the IS admin cant do anything about it because they are themselves just minor players in all this. Got nothing to do with it.
So far the strategy has worked out superb. Getty has got them exactly where they want them and frankly it might all be for the better? after all as independants we were not treated much better before, were we?
Personally I am much rather in the hands of Getty then the present wobbling IS admin.
Besides at the moment IS, is selling very well for me. Cant complain at all.
LOL, that's the most self-contradictory post I ever read on these forums, at least since Lagereek had his meltdown and disappeared.
Hang on... You look familiar!
Sigh! the ususal little microstockers neewbie glib. 
253
« on: December 04, 2012, 03:04 »
No youre very wrong. Its destruction for a purpose, i.e. its done on purpose and for a reason and the IS admin cant do anything about it because they are themselves just minor players in all this. Got nothing to do with it.
So far the strategy has worked out superb. Getty has got them exactly where they want them and frankly it might all be for the better? after all as independants we were not treated much better before, were we?
Personally I am much rather in the hands of Getty then the present wobbling IS admin.
Besides at the moment IS, is selling very well for me. Cant complain at all.
254
« on: December 04, 2012, 02:01 »
Here is the rundown of happenings during 2013. Jon at SS, will leave and concentrate on his lifelong passion, softwares and programs. he has the money no doubt to make a hell of a go. SS without Jon? and in the hands of the shares bulls and bears?. Anybodies guess. IS: totally amalgamated into Getty and TS, etc. They will launch a new platform inside Getty, housing the IS ppl. FT: they lost the interest for their contributors even before IS. They dont really care about anything anymore and my guess is we will see a change of admin and strategy pretty soon. DT: well they dont cause too much stir, few changes here and there but basically they chose their battles and I can see more and more of subs coming into this but they are a cautious general. The rest: Gone. Oh by the way! this is not only predictions. I do happen to know a bit, " behind the scenes" so to speak. Say no more. 
255
« on: December 03, 2012, 15:44 »
I see 4-5 Agencies surviving after 4 more years and artists getting increasingly diminished returns even with same or greater output to their portfolios.
Artists have the loosing side here as was evidenced these last years when commissions were cut. The best we can do is produce enough to make the downward slide less abrupt more like a slow down-slope.
Maybe by then we would be in a position to have our content hosted on our own terms with a company just handling the search. Like a Google of microstock, they get 20% we get 80% and there is no curation, we set our prices, we host the content and they just bring the eyes and wallets to it.
No way, youre far too optimistic. At this rate it wont last another 4 years and if it should? left will be the c##p, nothing else. Maybe its all for the better? so we can go back to the stock and photography business the way it used to be. Much, much healthier.
256
« on: December 03, 2012, 13:17 »
Ladies nad gents,
one small step down in Your RCs,
BIG step up in IS total earnings.
Simple ...
More shoots, less talk ...
Enjoy.
Stop smoking weed will ya.
257
« on: December 03, 2012, 08:13 »
Whow! Those reviews are unbelievably bad. Most of all they confirm the impression we have - that the management lacks vision and personal accountability.
Very frustrating to read that istock apparently saved them for a while and now istock is being brought down as well.
Ive read reports from other companies in general and there is a much better spread of comments. In the beginning I thought glassdoor would be a place for people venting, but many companies have excellent reviews.
Very interesting website. And a good example how the internet can help to bring transparency.
"Really enthused to start, but quickly realized the organization can not deliver on projects
Former Employee in Seattle, WA Reviewed Jul 9, 2011
Pros everybody out the door by 5pm
very low pressure - 0 urgency to get anything done on time
great location and comfortable office
people and personalities are generally agreeable and entirely unremarkable
Cons Management spends months talking about product roadmaps but not even the simplest projects get done. The site looks and works exactly the same as it did 4-5 years ago"
"Advice to Senior Management Getty is simply a company in a tailspin that isn't making any material efforts to save themselves. They like to talk roadmaps and handout little books on management de jour, but when it comes time to get accountable, everybody disappears. if it wasn't for the acquisition of istockphoto and allowing that business to run unmolested, Getty would have packed it up awhile ago."
advise to any potential acquirers - PASS or gut that management from Director Level up.
"
Yeah. You would think other Trad-agencies would try and capitalize on the situation, realizing that now could be their big chance but a big fat NOPE!. Yhey are just as set sin concrete as the rest. Getty Does sell though and sell well. I give them that.
258
« on: December 02, 2012, 10:59 »
I'm hopeful but am not expecting much from E+ on Getty. My regular RF on Getty used to get excellent RPI a few years ago but it is now comparable to IS. That's not a bad thing but it's now more of an extra revenue stream than a great opportunity.
Plus I was doing some searches and E+ doesn't seem overly well placed on search results. Just about every other collection including Flickr seems to be ahead of E+. So unless you have images that are really unique or have little competition the E+/Getty thing may not help sales much.
Yes but Paul, in all honesty. I had a wade through all that the other day. Getty nowdays is very, very much conceptual and in every category. Now these E+, no doubt they have come over on automatic transfer, not reviewed a second time that is. It shows! the majority of these E+ files have got that sort of "look" of micro. You know like lets say a dentist with patient, dentist doesnt look at what he is doing but instead gives a giant Colgate smile right into the camera, posing. not exactly overly creative, is it? I even saw a surgeon standing in the theatre, giving the thumbs up , in fact on every other shot its the silly thumbs up. Its outdated.
259
« on: December 01, 2012, 09:32 »
RM. fantastic month, close to a, 5-figured amount. ( probably lots of sales for annuals). plus, 2, all out copy sales 4K a piece.
IS. not BME but way up 50%
DT. BME. up 15%
FT. nope! quitting soon.
SS. down 15% from Oct.
so overall, not BME but thanks to the copy sales and RM, not far from it.
260
« on: November 30, 2012, 13:17 »
Great shame. FT used to be a great earner. Now its just pathetic. I have started to delete files already, deleted some 16, today with over 1500 dls between them. I am not supporting their self-destructive strategy anymore. Its one of the agencies I am dropping for 2013. Havent got the time to sit there uploading, this and that.
Plus the fact it does HELP a lot to have some insight behind the scenes so to speak in the entire stock business.
261
« on: November 30, 2012, 10:54 »
My goals for past years have been money oriented. I think the focus on money has dampened my creativity and enjoyment of photography. This coming year I would like to focus more on shooting what I enjoy and what brings me personal fulfillment.
That said, I would like to at least maintain my stock income.
Best philosophy ever! first then you will produce stuff you wouldnt even dream you were capable of! ( Irving Penn). The danger with micro is. Once you become dependant on only ONE agency for say 50/60 percent of your total revenue, well, youre not much better of then an exclusive being dependant to 100%, are you? because if that agency falls apart, which any of these micros can do at any given time, its all over. Judging an agency becase of its turnover and present balance-sheeth and present success, is probably the biggest mistake one can do in the world of stock-agencies. Been like that ever since 1985.
262
« on: November 30, 2012, 09:39 »
Plenty of commissions already lined up for 2013 but really only suitable for RM and macroRF. So thats where I will put my concentration as I pretty much have done during 2012 anyway.
Quit FT and the middle tier agencies, taking my port with me, I somehow dont believe in spreading them around anymore.
As far as supplying micro? I will be uploading much more to DT, very, very steady agency, good prices and stay clear of all the petty-cash problems other agencies are suffering.
SS? oly God knows.
IS. at the moment selling very, very well for me and I will cary on uploading during 2013.
OTOH. we might all die during 2013?
263
« on: November 30, 2012, 01:03 »
Soon we can expect a payoyt! according to the IS forum. Comes in handy for X-mas I suppose.
264
« on: November 28, 2012, 14:14 »
Not here! great sales in fact.
265
« on: November 28, 2012, 03:51 »
Yes go back to exclusive! Great idea! Also could everyone else join him please?
Ha, ha  . Mark, I didnt mean it like that ( you made me laugh here) but if he doing badly, not even as much as he did as an exclusive, then whats the point? no matter what you think of an agency, you want to be where you get the best revenue dont you. best.
266
« on: November 28, 2012, 01:28 »
Herg! yes I remember you, when you left exclusivity, etc. To rely on SS alone is like putting all eggs in one basket. You cant. Nowdays, SS will also start trembling and wobbling under the shareholders mighty preassure, shouting for more revenues and profits, etc. Dont get fooled. Go back to the IS exclusivity, if you can that is.
best of luck.
267
« on: November 27, 2012, 14:43 »
Dont matter how many. FT has turned bad and sour. The agency changed the search some time back and its just terrible. Im leaving this place and slowly take my port with me.
268
« on: November 27, 2012, 10:54 »
I terminated my exclusivity at the beginning of 2012, but did not start uploading to other agencies until october (life and other work got in the way). Not a good move financially (I hope that will change with time), but it was necessary for my peace of mind. Frankly, the way contributors are treated there nowadays makes me me wonder why I (or anyone) still bother to upload there.
Are they treated better elsewhere? I dont think so. Just that we put up with it simply because they dont enforce exclusivity.
269
« on: November 27, 2012, 04:33 »
Thanks!
I'm still not entirely sure but my earnings here has dropped by half, and I'm getting closer to that decision.
Under present circumbstances, the grass is far from green at almost all other sites. Just read their forums and you get the idea. I would be very careful in terminating any exclusivity, especially if you have a large port. As an independant, IS, is still my 2nd or 3d, best earner and with SS gone a bit weird after the IPO? its a hell of a gamble.
270
« on: November 27, 2012, 02:29 »
@JustinB
This isn't information; it's a pitch to trust you - you've been around the block a few times; you've surveyed users; things are changing, you embrace change, you'll use every means possible...
None of this is in any way a concrete plan - no one's asking for excessive detail. Just something more than blather about why you should be paid $40 a month. I'm hearing general platitudes about the industry and your knowledge of it.
Without buyers, it doesn't matter what you build or how lovely it is. There's a trail of all sorts of lovely development that's gone completely to waste because the businesses couldn't get buyers to use it.
Keep us posted when the site goes live and the skeptics among us can take another look
' EXACTLY! The BUYERS? oh Lord, where are they? and how and where do we get them to use it? Advertising and flaunting! and millions of $$$$$$. well said .
271
« on: November 26, 2012, 10:53 »
The big micro players can cut commissions as much as they like, the overwhelming majority will stay with them anyway simply because they ensure sales.
After the IPOs, etc. They really couldnt care about anything, they got their monies and within a year they will probably run for their life.
Reports has it that even SS, have never been this down? wonder how come?
Curious as to see when somebody really comes up with some new fertile ideas in this business.
272
« on: November 25, 2012, 13:32 »
I contemplated the idea of getting a D800 for stock. After contemplating phase I grabbed a D800E and made a few shootings with it and the following lenses: 14-24, 24-70, 70-200, sigma 50mm, nikon macro 105mm. The conclusion is like this:
- the highly acclaimed dynamic range is almost useless if you expose correctly. It's just not there...
- noise is on par with 5D2
- sharpness seems a bit artificial for me, it's not "clean", like files were applied a sort of unsharp mask after writing to card
- the buffer holds a few burst shots, then it takes ages until you can shoot again in burst-mode
- files are ENORMOUS. You need to upgrade your hardware. This means - at least i7 class cpu for processing, if you do really advanced Lightroom or Capture One processing, and big hdds
- for outdoor shots the jpegs resulted saved at quality 12 will be huge in size, which means that 123RF (for example) will reject for being too big and upload will take more than for a 5D2
- zoom lenses don't do justice to this sensor, 24-70 is awful on edges and in corners, 14-24 less - but still not ok.
There are more things to say, but the bottom line is - do you really think you can justify the excess of MPs by selling many XXXXXXXXXL images? I think not.
Therefore I stayed with Canon and I'm quite confident that I won't buy the 40-something MP rumored, either.
21-22 MP are more than enough.
Well thats just it. Its an overkill at times and especially for micro. The few shots, about 6 or 7, I have shot with the HD4 and uploaded to micro well I dont even think theyve sold once.
273
« on: November 25, 2012, 10:26 »
I'm upset but like most others I'm caught in the trap and just have to accept their decision.
Eventually, this industry may become worthless for contributors, so finding other ways of monetising our work (direct sales, galleries, PoD, whatever) is a good thing to do, but I suppose most of us will ride the roller-coaster pretty much to the end.
The fact that they push us into looking for alternatives does affect them (and the long-term prospects for the industry) as it will mean more competition and fewer images going to the stock sites.
Hi Paul! wise words and thats exactly what will happen.
274
« on: November 25, 2012, 10:24 »
I still do not own the D800. I was planning on buying one but after a careful evaluation I decided against. Reason: image quality. Just check carefully the 100% outputs and compare it to other cams. I was not to satisfied. The D800E can compete anyway, so this would be the Model for me to go for and maybe I will do so soon.
Its wrong step to compare a 36mp pic to a 16-22 mp pic at 100% zoom. If you compare 36 mp against 16-22mp then definitely you would get flaws in 36 mp pix. For an honest comparison you need to downsize d800 pix upto 16-22 mp pix (what ever other dslr you are using for comparison), only then you will see the real difference.
Done it! no differance not in prints either. In the studio I work a lot with the HD4 and first then when you start comparing MF with DSLRs, etc, do you see any differance to speak of. Lots of sales talks and marketing will have us to believe anything but in real life its a differant story. Never the less, its 36MPs. Cant look away from that fact.
275
« on: November 25, 2012, 07:18 »
I still do not own the D800. I was planning on buying one but after a careful evaluation I decided against. Reason: image quality. Just check carefully the 100% outputs and compare it to other cams. I was not to satisfied. The D800E can compete anyway, so this would be the Model for me to go for and maybe I will do so soon.
Agreeing. At 100% on the screen theres no differance from say the MII, etc. This is what die-hard Nikon users are complaining about. Funny thing is. If I compare My D3X with the MII, yes then there is a bit of differance when viewed at 100%, dont make sense?
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 ... 23
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
