|
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 - pr2is
26
« on: October 02, 2007, 00:13 »
True, my initial perception proved to be mistaken as things evened out with nice sales across the portfolio.
Just out of curiosity though, I am trying to understand how this change came about. New images are still appearing as before in Newest first search, and it's not like buyers' behavior somehow changed suddenly over a course of couple weeks. I heard version that bringing Search within portfolio feature played role here but to me it doesn't sound right, for several reasons. Pure academic interest though
27
« on: September 28, 2007, 22:48 »
Back to upload limits: yesteday I exhausted my limit for the week so I had those freshly uploaded and older ones from 9/19 in the queue. An hour ago e-mail arrives: files ID from this to that "could not be properly processed. We ask you to please re-upload the files for reprocessing". Ummm... OK, fine, thinking for myself, considering such a hiccup probably my upload limit is back for the according number of files? Yeah right. Zero. 
28
« on: September 26, 2007, 22:25 »
Since I started the topic, it would be only fair to post the latest observations. Pattern is still different in a sense that there is no pronounced spikes when new batches kick in - however, sales of older ones became noticeably more stable. So far so good... Now, can we have the best of both models?? 
29
« on: September 26, 2007, 14:15 »
Just uploaded batch, went through fine
30
« on: September 24, 2007, 13:34 »
I don't see better way out of your predicament than Oly 510. In-body IS, lighweight, very reasonably priced...
I know you said you wouldn't want to switch from Pentax but if Pentax doesn't make a camera matching your requirements, what else can you do? I don't really look into P&S side of things, sorry... IMO solution isn't there
31
« on: September 21, 2007, 08:16 »
Pixart, you missed the point I am afraid... I said: "When CAD was at 1.60 vs USD, did Canada go to war, or had unbalanced budget?". We werne't anywhere near Afgan when CAD was that low, that was my point. yingyang, sorry, I meant STOCK market reaction, not currency, should have elaborate. As for the rest, sorry, it becomes way too involved. I could cite a lot of analysis, but as you can appreciate we are restrained by a framework of forum devoted to completely different topics... What you see as hyperbole is simply an analogy to show that your reasoning doesn't work in another place with similiar situation, in attempt to keep the discussion of highly complicated topics on a essily understood for non pros level. Also, every time it comes to Bush, US vs whoever, emotions run so high that it's kind of hard to maintain coldblooded discussion. So I'll bow out on this, with just one advice from somone who makes a living trading various markets: if you think popularity of a current president is a serious factor in currency valuiation, do not try to trade Forex
32
« on: September 21, 2007, 07:44 »
I don't have duplicates and in fact wondered whether it's a good idea, many seem to do a whole lot of them - girl moved her hand left, right, higher, lower, you know As for quality of photos, it's not for me to judge, I'd guess somewhere in the middle of the pack. Maybe there is a big demand on people right now, and I don't shoot people (no, I am not a pacifist). I hope it's just some fluke, it was a very nice "feature" of SS. on a lighter note, little funny situation of day or two ago. At some point earlier I uploaded this fire shot  which did considerably well. So I decided to add couple more to provide some flaming variety, with different copyspace and flame configuration. I submitted two more,  and  as you can see fairly different. Second of them was rejected for not being in focus (hmm, but OK, whatever), and first - for too many similar submissions! I just shrugged and first time in my SS life resubmitted it immediately without notice to reviewer, so out there it was. It got accepted a few hours later. So I wonder, how do people manage to get gazilion shots of hedgehog over white accepted in a single batch?? (btw, whoever shot that hedgehog did a great job, I can't make my son's cat sit quietly for me more then 3 seconds).
33
« on: September 20, 2007, 22:31 »
I am not talking about particular study. It's a rate cut or hike that takes about 18 month to work its way through the system, yes - which makes monthly Feds decisions very questionable approach as I said earlier - so, when we are talking about currency trend over last 4-5 years, when should the influencing factors start? And war and its impact on economy... umm, at the risk to offend people of good will I will still have to suggest anyone interested to have a look at market's reactions on war announcement... spring of 2003 is the latest example. Anyway, you can't ignore example of Canada in this comparison. Closest neighbour, very similar economy trends, strong interconnection. My example of what happened with CAD over last 10 years is relevant to show that a lot of factors you attribute USD downtrend to simply didn't exist north of border, yet currency depreciated very significantly. Even without any further analysis that alone would be enough to question the validity of those factors, don't you think?
34
« on: September 20, 2007, 21:21 »
I guess my portfol,io is too small yet to be an indicator of anything... and all tweaks in search algorithms etc always benefit some while killing others. But since I am not alone in noticing it, something did change. My experience is exactly as dbvirago's. It just never happened before that new images had no sales whatsoever when they hit their according categories sorted by Newest. Including several Christmas themed, too
35
« on: September 20, 2007, 21:12 »
Sorry, will have to respectfully disagree here... Evaluate the cost of war on macroeconomic scale and you'll see that it, well, leaves a dent but not much more than that. Also, and majorly, things like annual budget are very fleeting when we are talking about such macro-trends. When CAD was at 1.60 vs USD, did Canada go to war, or had unbalanced budget? In fact, Canada has balanced budgets for what, 25-30 years now? And fights mostly mosquitos in prairie provinces not spending on military anything above amounts bordering with indecent. Yet CAD went to historic lows - with strong economy, decent employment numbers... It wasn't until oil prices exploded and CAD became seen as resource-pegged currency that it went up. If you are talking about trading deficit (which is far from straightforward thing), housing credit crunch (and all related credit issues), questionable Feds rate regualtion policy (matter of separate and very involved discussion), China USD reserves, possible unpegging of oil from USD by oil-producing countries in Middle East, and couple dosens things of this scale - then yes, I'll agree that they are singificant factors. Current President is merely blip on radar of these things, I'll venture to suggest that whoever hypotetically won last election or two - situation with USD would have been exactly the same as today. Just as Clinton didn't have much, if anything, to do with stock market surge in 1998-2000, Dubya had nothing to do with its crash in 2001. Consider also huge inertia of these things, they take quite a while to wortk their way through the system - in other words, economic mistakes of last c year won't reflect in events and reaction of this or next, and when we are talking about these long term trends, count in decades and use geopolitic terms I understand common desire to put all the blame on widely disliked President... but this one is misplaced, IMO. Not because he did something right about that, but simply because it takes much longer and greater "social engineering" or mistaken economic policies to influence such huge economy as USA's. I could site some concrete examples to illustrate the thesis but heck, it has nothing to do with photography, and I think I wrote way too much about it already to bore you all to death
36
« on: September 20, 2007, 19:32 »
I don't see either how this addded option could stop those spikes deasd in their tracks. BTW, it was introduced in July, and this phenomenon appeared just over last week - ten days.
37
« on: September 20, 2007, 19:28 »
I don't believe there is palpable connection between choice in the next (or last for that matter) election and current USD devlaluation. Forces that are in play here are way beyond the scope and timeframe of efforts of any given government. Think of it in terms of housing situation which plays significant role here; of Feds polcies in inflation control; stock market fluctuations, etc etc. It would be way too flatering for any President or Senate or else to consider them one of factors of such scale.
38
« on: September 20, 2007, 15:00 »
Same here dbvirago. I saw your thread but since there was no real discussion I decided to ask people here.
39
« on: September 20, 2007, 14:55 »
Change I see is in exactly that - uploading new photos doesn't cause spike in buying anymore. Sales spread out more even now but became noticeably lower.
I really liked that effect of buying surge as new batch kicked in...
40
« on: September 20, 2007, 14:45 »
So if if someone in the UK earned $1,000 in 2006, it would make about 570 but now it is only 500.
If someone in Canada earned $500 at the height of USD/CAD, it would make $800CAD. Now it's only 500. How about that?
41
« on: September 20, 2007, 14:32 »
Anyone noticed sudden change in SS sales pattern over last week or so? Can't say i like it...
42
« on: September 18, 2007, 07:40 »
Congratulations, I am sure you'll be glad you persevered!
43
« on: September 15, 2007, 15:20 »
Barings Bank strictly forbade using number 8 in any documents since then. (OK, I made that up 
44
« on: September 14, 2007, 18:24 »
I personally hate the bug (eleven). Wierd DOF, feels like rather artificial selective blurring. Liking the broken egg (twelve), maybe framing to include entire yolk would make it even better? Check 13 for blown highlights, hard to tell but seems like there are some on white stuff on top of it (butter?) As for the rest, one question... why don't you close apperture a bit to get entire subject in focus? After you are in, experiemnt... for first 10 go safely, this "your focus is not located where we think it should" is fairly subjective thing, why give them reviewer too much freedom of choice?
45
« on: September 14, 2007, 14:28 »
Additionally to what was said above: - thrid image has paper structure visible in the shadow which can easily be taken as a noise. IMO, eliminate the shadown completely to be on a safe side (dodge it out). You may want to replace this one at all, it's questionable by other parameters too (focus, commercial value) - on fourth one I would clone out a few black hairs on the finger... sorry, just looks unappetizing - fifth may require a bit different framing, it's shot so close that it takes a little to understasnd what it is... maybe just me being slow - sausages on bbq, background is too dark IMO, high chance of "uneven lighting" rejection - shadow under the cellphone - same comment as for the third shot regarding the paper structure
46
« on: September 14, 2007, 11:14 »
wow... at least third one would require a minute of work... first two are simply unprotected at all
47
« on: September 13, 2007, 18:36 »
I wonder, did he send the debris as a proof of file being "destroyed"?
48
« on: September 11, 2007, 10:02 »
It feels contributors are likely to "grow intio" exclusivity with certain site rather than go for it form the start. If that's true then such move would all but choke off the supply of new artists, and natural churning would not only slow down the growth but actually create a danger of shrinking. I can't see any site doing that unless they want to fade out of business.
50
« on: September 09, 2007, 01:09 »
Lincoln,
providing it was not a glitch and your photos were rejected for a reason that somehow didn't get conveyed, I wanted to comment on the rest of your reaction.
SS didn't flip you a bird, they didn't blow you off and there is nothing to be pissed off about. There was nothing personal tyoward you in their rejection. They simply work as a well-oiled machine. You submit images, they review them and reject or acept them according to their standards (and, to certain degree, to particular reviewer take on some borderline photos - but that is true for all agencies). Noone looks at them and says "hey, this is that Lincoln guy, lets whack him on a head". 2 hours response is normal for them, too.
It's the best moneymaker for most submitters. Taking it personally and refusing to deal with them anymore is detrimental to you only, not in the least to them. They also do not consider themselves being in a business of educating photographers - there are enough resouirses for that including their forums where your images will be analyzed and mistakes explained should you post them asking for help.
Rejection, and multiple rejection before getting in is rather norm for SS. many went through that, me included. Eventual acceptance was totally worth the effort in two aspects. First, I learned a lot while trying to improve my photos to match their standards. Second, in two month they made me more moneythan any of other agencies in five.
You are allowing your ego to govern your reaction in a situation that doesn't warrant ego intrusion. So, it's up to you now to go ahead and improve what you do or remain pissed off and with skills that are not up to par.
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
