76
iStockPhoto.com / Re: Weren't we supposed to get paid the 25th?
« on: May 01, 2015, 01:49 »
still nothing here
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. 76
iStockPhoto.com / Re: Weren't we supposed to get paid the 25th?« on: May 01, 2015, 01:49 »
still nothing here
77
123RF / Re: Just removed all photos from 123rf« on: April 27, 2015, 02:41 »
their upload- and submitting system is one of the easiest around. They even decide whether an image will be editorial or not.
And sales are increasing here 78
Adobe Stock / Re: Fotolia views climbing rapidly« on: April 23, 2015, 02:08 »
also here, since a month ago views increased with 50%.
but I,ve seen more of such fluctuations about one year ago. From out of nothing views increased with 100%. Then collapsed after a few weeks. btw, it didn't affect my sales 79
General Stock Discussion / Re: Microstock - is it consider a hobby or business in the eyes of the IRS?« on: April 06, 2015, 10:20 »
what would be more profitable for you (OP): carrying on microstock as a hobby or making it a business?
Just a question out of curiousity 80
Alamy.com / Re: Alamy ftp« on: April 03, 2015, 23:38 »
it works perfect for me. especially since I have problems uploading to alamy with my browser for a long time now.
81
Shutterstock.com / Re: Extended Licence (EL) on average compared to DLs« on: March 31, 2015, 12:26 »
1 per 610 all time
1 per 420 this year 82
Dreamstime.com / Re: SR-EL License sale?« on: March 21, 2015, 11:30 »
got one a year ago, also sold hardly.
After I got the request, I set the price at $900,-. Surprisingly the customer bought it for that price....my share $450,- Shortly after that I got 2 more requests, but both with any success. The problem is that you can't negotiate with the potential buyer. I am sure that then you would come to an agreement about the price. So be carefull with setting your price. deleting the file is a bit work, but doable 83
General Photography Discussion / Re: 95% Eclipse 2015 today« on: March 20, 2015, 02:51 »
not much better here
84
Adobe Stock / Re: Payout delays« on: March 17, 2015, 11:25 »Paid! The time I got a payment in 2 days is a distant memory...... got it also in 2 days but usually I have to wait 10 days 85
Mostphotos.com / Re: Mostphotos goes Rip-Off« on: March 12, 2015, 04:48 »
nothing news under the sun.
I have had 0,14 and 0,17 sales (medium- and highres) 86
Adobe Stock / Re: Credits price change« on: March 12, 2015, 04:14 »
didn't see a raise here. I,m silver level.
I also get 6 for an M, but as far as I know it has always been that. Maybe my raise will come soon 87
General Photography Discussion / Re: mail from customer« on: March 12, 2015, 03:15 »
thank you for your explanation Jo Ann. I think I know what to do now.
She has indeed showed some respect for the photographer by asking permission. 88
General Photography Discussion / Re: mail from customer« on: March 11, 2015, 18:14 »Doesn't a regular download allow that kind of use? good one thanks for the link 89
General Photography Discussion / Re: mail from customer« on: March 11, 2015, 18:12 »Ask for $28 would be an option. But I do not really understand well what she means. Will the image be the main subject, the quilt or the quilt with the image printed on it? My english is not good enough 90
General Photography Discussion / Re: mail from customer« on: March 11, 2015, 18:04 »Doesn't a regular download allow that kind of use? I really don't know. Never bought an image 91
General Photography Discussion / mail from customer« on: March 11, 2015, 17:45 »
Today I got an email by FAA from a customer who bought an image of me on SS.
From: xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx@xxxxxxx Subject: Use of Your Photograph Message: Good day, Hans. I recently purchased your "xxxxxxxxx" photograph from Shutterstock. May I have your permission to use that photograph as the design basis for a small quilted wall hanging? The wall hanging will be made of fabric, thread and batting (also called wadding). It will not be sold, but it may be exhibited at several quilt shows in the United States. I will gladly credit you and your photograph as the basis of my design. Respectfully, xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxx What to do? Should I answer her with a simple "no", or try to make a deal with her? Never had a request like this NB: I think it was an $2.85 OD sale 92
General Photography Discussion / Re: Looking for the ultimate answer on White Balance« on: March 11, 2015, 17:33 »
Ron, no one can give you the right receipt for a correct WB. Only the "right out of the book" solutions. It's not that easy as people (books) say.
I also never had WB rejections, untill about past 2 years. Tried to fix them with the eye dropper tool but with no succes. Sometimes I got them through by changing the WB into daylight, but often they got rejected again. I surely see WB problems in your images, but maybe thats subjective. I would try to move the blue saturation slider in LR to the left, about halfway. 93
General Photography Discussion / Re: Looking for the ultimate answer on White Balance« on: March 09, 2015, 17:58 »When we were used to shot in film we had not all these problems it was daylight or tungsten. Stop. I see, but you said "just the same as today". How do you compensate a color cast today, digitally? 94
General Photography Discussion / Re: Looking for the ultimate answer on White Balance« on: March 09, 2015, 17:33 »Just use the white dropper in Photoshop - click on what is meant to be the brightest and cleanest white, and hey presto. I wish it was that easy 95
General Photography Discussion / Re: Looking for the ultimate answer on White Balance« on: March 09, 2015, 17:14 »When we were used to shot in film we had not all these problems it was daylight or tungsten. Stop. How? With the use of a color temp. meter? I tried some times in LR but not very satisfying. What is the best way to remove a color cast? 96
General Photography Discussion / Re: Looking for the ultimate answer on White Balance« on: March 09, 2015, 04:33 »
I always shoot on auto WB, but now and then I have WB issues.
Yesterday shot some pics at the beach under a pretty cloudless sky. The WB values were all around 4600K, so pretty cool. I changed them manually to 4800-4900K, a little warmer and they looked good imo. But if I change the WB to daylight (5500K), they look too warm. On the other hand, I also experienced on some particular days with a light overcast, that my images are too warm. (around 6500K). But when I change them to daylight, they become too cool. So, is it the moment of the day, is it my camera or is it me? I really don't know. For those issues I made an extra check before I upload them. Especially when I processed them in daylight, I check them later in the evening again to be sure to have the WB (and exposure) correct. It becomes more difficult when they have a color cast. It's almost impossible to get rid of that. On those images, if they are worth it, I often apply a special filter or transfer them into BW. And the reviewers..........I think they more like the images to be on the warm side than on the cool side. 97
Adobe Stock / Re: New to Fotolia« on: March 08, 2015, 02:23 »
decide for yourself.
Maybe you shoot the type of images FT buyers like, maybe not. For me they are my 2nd best earner and still going strong 98
Dreamstime.com / Re: Strange surge in $2.00 royalty subscriptions« on: February 21, 2015, 05:36 »
31, all low sellers
99
Shutterstock.com / Re: Private Homes« on: February 10, 2015, 06:07 »
they have got pretty strict on that lately. If you submit an image of a single home you surely need a property release.
A row of identical homes with no special architectural features can get through. But make sure you clone out house numbers and street names. btw: Istock has become more easier to submit that kind of images. In the past they were extreme strict with that kind of stuff, but nowadays they accept a lot more .... 100
iStockPhoto.com / Re: partner sales are late« on: February 09, 2015, 17:06 »
that makes sense and that's what i meant |
|