|
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 - dingles
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 ... 18
151
« on: January 27, 2014, 13:20 »
I never realized keyword order mattered. Is this true for all agencies? I amy have to go back and do a lot of reordering
Don't bother with iStock - it won't 'stick'.
Thanks, what about SS, DT, DP?
152
« on: January 27, 2014, 13:00 »
I never realized keyword order mattered. Is this true for all agencies? I amy have to go back and do a lot of reordering
153
« on: January 25, 2014, 19:43 »
Still using a D50 and I have lenses from the 80s...all still good.
154
« on: January 25, 2014, 15:57 »
the nikon d 50 cost 1000 dollars back in 2005.
I spend around $800 in 2005, but that isn't cheap for me...but it is all relative. I was thinking of upgrading since I only need the body and would love to add HD video to the mix. I saw some Nikons running around 4 and up. One thing I do not like about some of the new nikons is the lack of the digital display on top...looks like they all expect you to use live view in the LCD now...good for focus, but a pain for checking settings.
Im in Europe. But that was with the kitlens 18-55, and despite what people say it was a good lens.
I hear ya. The 18-55mm lens is great. I use it all the time.
155
« on: January 25, 2014, 14:08 »
The only possible downside of buying the 50 mm AF-D version of the f/1.8 is the issue of its compatibility with cameras which you might own in the future. For example - if your D50 ever fails you might want to replace it with, say, a D3100, D3200 or similar lower end Nikon.
The AF-S NIKKOR
50mm f/1.8G will work with all Nikon DSLRs. It might be worth spending the extra money.
Thanks that is good to keep in mind.
156
« on: January 25, 2014, 14:00 »
I wish they take their money back already so I can move on. Going to be a bummer if we get December PP before they take the money back.
157
« on: January 25, 2014, 13:58 »
the nikon d 50 cost 1000 dollars back in 2005.
I spend around $800 in 2005, but that isn't cheap for me...but it is all relative. I was thinking of upgrading since I only need the body and would love to add HD video to the mix. I saw some Nikons running around 4 and up. One thing I do not like about some of the new nikons is the lack of the digital display on top...looks like they all expect you to use live view in the LCD now...good for focus, but a pain for checking settings.
158
« on: January 25, 2014, 13:55 »
Dingles, I see nothing wrong with wanting to stick with your D50 for now as you start out, it's a fine camera. After 11 years in the photography business, I've just started contributing to Microstock this past year and have been uploading images from my back catalogue from older cameras including a D50 (which I still own) and an even older D100. I'm happy to report that images made with these cameras are being accepted and selling.
As for a fast lens, in 2003 I bought a used 50mm F1.8 lens for about $85 and it was a workhorse for me until I sold it 2013 on ebay for $75. I'd say it's the best 10 bucks I ever spent, but in truth it paid for it self more times than I count. I recommend it for your D50.
Thanks for the advice man, I guess the good thing about lenses is they really don't loss much value. I think I'm going for a AF-D 50mm 1.8 for now. I'll stick with my manual 70-210mm lens for now. An 85mm 1.8 sounds like fun also. I guss in short there really aren't many off-brands for Nikon lenses and I don't want to mess with adapter mounts for AF.
159
« on: January 25, 2014, 13:50 »
BTW. Old DLSRs are not competitive anymore.
Actually I would advice the OP to get a new camera and not a lens.
BS I get great shots from my D50 still. Sure I'd love an upgrade, but not a necessity
I started out in 2007 in stock with a d 50, and it is problematic, because there is not much to crop from with 6,1 mpix.
Also my version was a noise monster. Maybe yours arent, and maybe not in the studio.
I would still recomend the 18-200 because:
CONTRA:
It has vignette
It is very not sharp at 18-22 and 170-200.
It has heavy cromatic abbrevation in some situations
People laugh at you, and you loose street respect among photographers
PRO
It is cheap
It is reasonably sharp in the range from 22-170
It can produce tack sharp pictures
AF is fast, and precise.
It has VR that compensates for ever so much camera shake, but not motion blur.
It can be handheld at 1/60 or even 1/30 at 200 mm and get sharp images.
the close range is good, and it is close to becoming a macro.
It is very versatile, and you can photograph everything with it. Landscapes, portraits, product and wildlife.
of my stock port is done with that lens and a d 200, of which I have also had 3, since i upgraded to a new d 200 every time I dropped the set on the floor and broke it.
http://www.shutterstock.com/gallery-88729p2.html?sort_method=newest&safesearch=1
I have no issue with noise as long as I keep the ISO in check. Never had much vignette issues (although I often add vignette in post...must be the artist in me). Never had issues with Chromatic Abrasion either...at least nothing noticeable. I personally like a bit of imperfection in my photos, except when doing studio shots. Even though it may be cheap now, it was not a cheap camera in 2007  ...
160
« on: January 25, 2014, 12:03 »
BTW. Old DLSRs are not competitive anymore.
Actually I would advice the OP to get a new camera and not a lens.
BS I get great shots from my D50 still. Sure I'd love an upgrade, but not a necessity
161
« on: January 25, 2014, 11:59 »
I forgot to say thanks guys I do appreciate the advice
162
« on: January 25, 2014, 11:55 »
BTW I have a degree in computer graphics (specifically animation) and I am trained in studio Photography. I am a developer in my day job, so I know the equipment and software well. I know what U want in a lens, however, I don't have the funds to spend on the equipment that my employers have. I used to have access to a variety of high- end lenses with my past employer, but now I have to rely on my own equipment.
Stock is a side thing I do to supplement my income along with freelance work. Most of my portfolio is CG and I make the most from animations. I want to bump my returns by using my studio photography experience.
Anyway with that said, I am looking for decent quality at a good price. I do enjoy the manual lenses, but I feel I can become speedier if I had AF
163
« on: January 25, 2014, 11:22 »
I have a Nikon D50. I understand cheap glass isn't as good, but I am sure there are alternatives that don't suffer too much. I haven't decided on any just yet. I am just looking for good AF lenses that allow the most light in. I am a sucker for shallow depth of field with a nice bokeh. My current manual lenses can achieve this with my current lenses, but manual can be hit or miss with focus sometimes. My 18-55mm stock lens just doesn't let enough light in for my liking (f3.x)
164
« on: January 24, 2014, 00:44 »
Best advice is to look on Pond5 and see what similar images ( subject, style, quality) sell for and base your price there. I would price close to competition, if you feel yours stands out I price it a tad higher, but I'd advise never to undersell the competition. If there isn't competition then I would set a price above average. On a side note, I wouldn't expect much from Pond5 with images as most folks seem to buy footage there
165
« on: January 23, 2014, 20:06 »
That article is pure opinion and BS. I can write you up a virus for Apple, especially if you don't have antivirus. Let's stick to facts, fact is that a Mac is less likely to be the target of viruses since it is in the minority. This is not the same as saying they don't get viruses. Truth is they are just as vulnerable. Apple markets the no virus thing based on the small number of Mac viruses in comparison to PC. I'm not being anti-Mac, just realistic here. Mac or PC doesn't matter as much as the software and the users abilities. The system you use just determines how fast you get to your end result spec wise. This is why getting the most Ram, CPU, and GPU you can afford is more important than the Platform. http://drtech.bangordailynews.com/2013/04/14/new-products/busting-the-myth-apple-macs-do-get-viruses/
166
« on: January 23, 2014, 18:14 »
PC=viruses
Mac=no viruses
Macs are just as vulnerable to viruses. Since Macs are the minority it is less of a target, but to say Macs do not get viruses is just untrue. No matter which you get, don't bypass virus protection software
167
« on: January 17, 2014, 16:57 »
Still no email from iStock...and I have been bent over my chair all day just waiting for them. 
168
« on: January 17, 2014, 14:21 »
still no comment from tickstock? my popcorn has gone cold waiting...
Well, his "cover" has pretty much been blown. It's now widely known/believed that he's a Getty employee pushing their agenda in the guise of an objective contributor. When he magically disappeared over the same period that Istock employees were on holiday break, that pretty much sealed it.
Now they have two choices - send him or someone else in under a new screen identity (and maybe be less OBVIOUS this time). Or perhaps they've realized there's nothing they can do to win over our "hearts and minds" while they keep screwing us, and have given up.
First time I'm hearing it...a bit skeptical
169
« on: January 17, 2014, 12:57 »
Never heard of CN...
170
« on: January 17, 2014, 11:46 »
January seems to always be a dead month at IS for me, however SS seems to be going along as normal.
171
« on: January 17, 2014, 11:45 »
I was finally able to upload using Deep Meta yesterday. I upload videos via FTP which seemed to work, however when I went to edit and submit them it took 3 tries each video...meaning I had to redo all the metadata each try. Was a pain.
172
« on: January 17, 2014, 11:43 »
still no comment from tickstock? my popcorn has gone cold waiting...
Tickstock has been assimilated by the collective known as Istock. His biological and technological distinctiveness has been added to their own. Resistance is futile.
We already knew that 
173
« on: January 17, 2014, 09:42 »
still no comment from tickstock? my popcorn has gone cold waiting...
Maybe this is something even he cannot defend
174
« on: January 16, 2014, 15:10 »
Forget the PC and MAC BS...just buy the best computer you can afford. In short get the most processing power and RAM you can afford. A good mid-range video card is pretty cheap these days. And a solid state drive makes a different when open and saving programs and files to your hard drive.
175
« on: January 14, 2014, 10:14 »
Quality in content and subject matter will prevail...those still playing the quantity cards are the ones seeing the huge downfalls.
I am still newish and this has been a great way to supplement my income. I have yet to see if it is sustainable and if it could be my only source of income...in the mean time I am having fun creating and making some extra loot.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 ... 18
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
