|
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 - Mantis
5101
« on: October 21, 2011, 16:36 »
I'm preparing some images for submission to Alamy for the four "test" images. The following submission guideline is not clear, are they asking for files larger than 24MB. of course they want jpegs which are not uncompressed and most of my jpegs after processing are on average about 10MB.
"Uncompressed file sizes of more than 24MB. This means you should make your JPEG file from an 8 bit TIFF file that is at least 24MB. If you have a camera that is capable of producing an uncompressed 8 bit file of over 24MB then leave it that size."
thanks for additional clarity...
It means this. Open a file in Photoshop CS series (I am not sure about Elements or any other software). Click the menu "image" then "image size". At the top of the dialog box it says "Pixel Dimensions". That is the number they are talking about. If that number for you is over 24 then you are good to go. If not, you have to upsize your image (they do accept uprezzed images). If you upsize, click on the bottom drop down menu and select bicubic smoother (best for enlargement). Then switch your pixel dimensions to percent and play with a percent greater than 100 until that number reaches just at or over 24. With a 10 meg JPG you have plenty of gusto and shouldn't have to upsize. Hope that helps.
5102
« on: October 20, 2011, 18:28 »
Only IS, is badly down, really terrible. All the others. SS, is way up, followed by DT and FT, even some in the middle-tier, are up.
I agree^^ For me IS is way way down. Usually 12-15 a day, last two weeks has been 3-7 per day. Did they shake their best match again? Geeze.
5103
« on: October 19, 2011, 17:54 »
for brush resizing, just hit the bracket keys. The left one shrinks and the right one expands.
5104
« on: October 16, 2011, 09:10 »
Yep, sales are pretty much dead. One million images in your database means nothing if you can't turn it into some decent sales.
Agree. I make about $3 to $5 a month there with 2000 or so images. I am still going to keep uploading but that will happen on the back end of my workflow.
5105
« on: October 16, 2011, 08:28 »
As newbie I've started submitting to canstockphoto and 123rf about the same time. On Canstock I've 59 pictures in portfolio on 123rf 48. Sales on CS just around 0  . Sales on 123rf 9  . Does any newbie had some sales on CS
To make money in microstock you have to meet several criteria: 1. Usable concepts 2. Quality 3. Quantity 4. Upload to multiple sites (unless you want to go exclusive somewhere) I think you would need 500-1000 images to start seeing any repeatable monthly income. One of the most frequent mistakes new contributors to microstock make is the expectation of rolling in the income with only a handful of images. Plus you've chosen to upload to middle tier sites. Why not try to upload to Istock or Shutterstock? Keep shooting, keep uploading. If your stuff cuts the muster you'll start to see the counter move in the right direction.
5106
« on: October 15, 2011, 18:17 »
There's plenty of hope for stock. It's a great business model. Keep over 70% of every sale on average, on a product you don't have to manufacture and only requires server space to warehouse. Site traffic may be dipping, but so what. Prices are up, they're keeping a bigger chunk of the pie, and the company revenues probably aren't suffering. If things were really going badly at HQ, we'd be hearing about job cuts, benefits cuts for employees, etc. Last I heard, that on-staff masseuse was still around, so it sounds like things are humming along normally up there.
The only problem with the stock business model is that we're on the wrong side of it, the side that has to suffer to maintain the status quo for the employees, management, ownership, and investors.
But from the perspective of the company, things are going perfectly.
^^Exactly. Great post.
5108
« on: October 14, 2011, 18:34 »
^ self-policing would be ideal if it worked. but as many have pointed out, it seems that there are serious consequences for having an opinion in our industry. that sucks. I've been verbally pushed around and wrist-slapped many times on iStock, sometimes I deserved it, sometimes it was pre-eptive and sometimes it was uncalled for and I was pi55ed off. but I also believe that companie's have the right to limit damage to their reputation, especially when it is libelous and inaccurate.
so again, the compromise seems anonymity is allowed, but qualified by an admin on MSG. no one here could honestly believe that their anonymity would be compromised by Tyler. it's fairly standard to require user registration on forums.
I really don't disagree with you. There is always a gray area. I'd go along with Tyler if that was the case. However, if he required our identity to be public then Tyler has to allow us to disengage our real identity from the current anonymous one. Probably easy to do but we'd lose all of our rankings and such.
5109
« on: October 14, 2011, 17:50 »
^ you probably won't see my post since it seems you're lucky #32...but your post makes a point. instead of stating why you disagree, or welcoming discussion, you've posted an inflammatory, dead end response. aren't we beyond the popularity games of high school at this point?
I am anonymous but I don't have a single person on ignore even though there are times I want to. The reason? I enjoy reading comments from people for which I disagree because sometimes I change my mind. Now, for me, I have a few reasons for remaining anonymous and one of them was already pointed out. Someone started flagging unnecessary keywords on my images at DT because I disagreed with them in a forum discussion (not on MSG, of course). The other reason is that for simple posts in Istock, I have received three threatening site mails. On another forum I am banned already for calling the BS card with a "the next one we will close your account". None of these posts used foul language but DID make someone else look like a fool. If that can happen on their own forums I am a little nervous about what can happen here when certain threads are followed such as sensitive FT and IS threads. Not all of us anonymous posters are trolls or hide behind a cloak. I make it a personal policy to never bash someones port because I think that is unfair since mine isn't available for someone to criticize. However, like SNP, I call them like I see them just as I would if I weren't anonymous. Some people call that cowardly...you are anonymous so you say anything. In my case, that isn't the issue. Self policing is my personal policy.
5110
« on: October 09, 2011, 19:43 »
Rinder you know Boots Randolf?
5111
« on: October 09, 2011, 07:51 »
They have lots of IS images. I'm guessing that they are indexing the site without paying for using the images, and then buying a license to do individual prints when someone buys them. I'll ask ce about it.
Thanks, Sean. Much appreciated.
5112
« on: October 07, 2011, 19:32 »
Jazz or stuff I wrote and produced, Theres hundreds of my songs on You tube and a lot of video tutorials. just use Laurin Rinder or rindersmithphotography
Time Traveler, Laurin Rinder
Holy cow. I'm an old school guy, but this was definitely not my cup of tea. But, hey, to each his own. I am listening to some Gerald Wilson Orchestra.
5113
« on: October 07, 2011, 16:06 »
300,000 yen is about $4k US.
5114
« on: October 07, 2011, 15:39 »
A bunch of mine are in there, too.
5115
« on: October 07, 2011, 07:44 »
worst week in a long time. 2-3 subs a day is it.
5116
« on: October 02, 2011, 18:47 »
^ If you depend on it for a living, yes.
The beauty of it though is you don't have to do it that way. You can take the pictures you enjoy, and just regard it as a hobby that pays for itself. A week ago, I bought a 5D Mk II. Paid for with my last three months income.
Congrats on the 5D Mk II.
5117
« on: October 02, 2011, 18:02 »
Stock photography is all about preplanned, carefully composed images in a subject you chose delibaretly. You spend a lot of time doing research on what is already available in the collections, what is missing, then you decide on location, models, props, type of lighting, organize helpers, do the shoot, then spend a lot of time post processing.
You dont walk around with a camera and shoot what catches your eye. Stock is commercial photography with a clear intention.
Of course you can learn how to do this, but you have to work very hard for it.
And no, the images that I see dont seem to be shot with the customer in mind. What concept are they supposed to sell with that image? Can they be printed on a pizza flyer or added to the email newsletter of an insurance?
if you want to learn about stock, just look at the images that are used in advertising and product packaging all around you.
The question is: will you even enjoy shooting stock? Or would you maybe prefer to shoot editorial images? Or take portraits of families and get paid for that?
Excellent advice. This post should be stored for instant retrieval for when the next wave of Flickr-ites ask the "Should I do stock?" question.
Microstock is simply put.....hack photography. You might enjoy doing it but for the most part what you shoot isn't what you'd hang on your wall in your home. No matter how you slice it, the isolated bananas, the plastic model loving her job is nothing more than hack photography. MS is (as it should be) all about money. It is not about enjoyment, it is about volume, which equates to money...even though you may enjoy it. Take away the money part and the rest is moot.
5118
« on: October 02, 2011, 16:53 »
1- Putting 123RF in the Top Tier just doesn't reflect reality as I know it.
2- Are the majority of people here REALLY earning more on 123 than on FT?
1- No, It does! For me 123rf does much better than fotolia
2- Yes, otherwise why would we vote them into top tier just for the fun of it 
For me 123 has jumped about $20 a month after the last Istock debacle. But it is still 1/2 of Fotolia's monthly income. I look at stuff in terms of repeatability, so I don't get a boner when I have a good month. Rather I wait to see if the next 6-12 months repeat before I would claim a rise (no pun intended) in status to top tier.
5119
« on: October 02, 2011, 16:46 »
5120
« on: October 02, 2011, 16:37 »
You still need to keyword your images on these sites which you didn't seem to want to do on another thread. You really aren't going to make anything if you aren't willing to put in the work. I'm beginning to wonder if you are just trolling!!
I don't mind some level of keywording. But I'm opposed to the more intense keywording which appears to be required by the more stringent sites. Example:
If I have a photo of a car on fire, I just want to keyword it "car on fire". I don't want to have to research what kind of car it was or who owns it or why it was on fire.
And no I'm not trolling. I'm just really confused.
"car on fire" iStock: 595
Alamy: 1607
What relevant keywords could you add to your keywords to help a potential buyer?
Actually, 'car on fire' isn't a great example, as these are relatively small searches.
But say you had a 'flower', and didn't want to have to research it.
Flower: iStock: 404634 (and that's if you filter down to 'photos only)
Alamy: 914,776
What chance to you think you'll have of having your flower seen, i.e. considered for purchase, in among all the others?
Can I reiterate what others have already told you: micro is NOT a get rich quick scheme. If you are 'opposed' to putting decent keywords onto your images, you'll have a fit when you see the technical stringency required.
Thank you^. Ya know there are still sites out there promoting micro as an easy way to make extra income. Maybe years ago, not today.
5121
« on: October 02, 2011, 09:01 »
put them up for critique at shutterstock and you will get the low down .
Really?^ In my humble opinion that is the epitome of a "good ol boy" network with just a few arrogant profiles running the show. I buzz through their critique forums and simply find very few useful critiques, and not many of them from a volume standpoint, either. But that's just my opinion. Your experience may be different. Istock used to have a good critique forum but since people like Sean and Joanne have quit critiquing, I don't seem their forums as useful as they used to.
5122
« on: October 01, 2011, 17:52 »
Know me 
We speak as dissapear thing are.
Worry no you as come good things.
Patrick H.
Was this necessary?^^
5123
« on: October 01, 2011, 17:44 »
C'mon! a lot of you have been complaining about recent inconsistent SS reviews, weird and nosense rejections... and now you claim that "resubmitting is bad" and that the OP deserved to be kicked off??? so, what do you do when you get that inconsistent reviews? just resign??
I've sneaked the odd one back through at times as have many of us here but there is no way that I would do it again after a warning and it is sheer stupidity to continue after 2 warnings.
My guess after warning #1 is that your submissions are now getting "special attention". After a second warning I can guarantee that your submissions are red-flagged. There is no way that your submissions were "casually identified" as resubmits two times. So to fotografer's comments, you should have walked a careful path after your first warning.
5124
« on: October 01, 2011, 16:05 »
On a personal level, I'm positive that JJRD is an ethically-minded individual. But you must bear in mind he is also a deconstructionist piss artist of the most superior order, someone who perceives the making of money from the labours of others as an art form. Marrying his persona with his job, he is consistent in warning us before the bombshell. This is now his third or fourth warning about the new inspections coming up. All he's really saying is "Tie up your loose ends, upload now as much as you can. Later you may not be so pleased with how your files are accepted." It's not as if he has any power in this. He's merely doing the best he can.
This is exactly what I am afraid is happening. Prelude to a kiss, so to speak.
5125
« on: October 01, 2011, 15:46 »
Out of a recent batch of 26, DT refused all of them and SS accepted all of them. It's my first 100% rejection at DT, and the first time ever I've had the same batch rejected 100% on one site and accepted 100% on another. Figure that one out! 
WOW!^ What was the rejection reason on DT?
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
