Powered by Blogger.
RSS

Re: Selling Stock Photography Re: Microstock: up, down or the same?

 

I think the present style stock photography will always be there, it is the cheap mass market and crudely we photographers have a choice of calling it by its real name and sell next to nothing or kneel down, tough the floor with out forehead and KTFA [self censored expression] so we still make little money.

The solution I believe is to create a competition, photo on order where skills and experience make the difference, and a boutique stock photography where each photographer has a theme. We have not done that very well yet.

I am thinking of how the Chinese warehouses work. You go into a building, inside are maybe ten to fifteen floors, and many thousands of small shops, each with a different owner and each with a different theme of products. Each warehouse has also a theme, one may sell electronics, another may sell decoration, a third one clothing.

This could be replicated on the web, one website with a theme, and photographers "shops" inside, each again with different themes, it is just that nobody has done it yet, in photography least. Throwing virtual rotten tomatoes on the competition will not help, but creating something better will.

With skilled photographer supplying quality work to the present microstock system, it only cements the present untenable situation for us.

On 01-Sep-2010 2:04 AM, Peter Forsberg wrote:

 



--- In selling_stock_photography@yahoogroups.com, "Fred" <freddyv@...> wrote:
>

>I prefer to keep licensing images at prices that keep our photographers happy as long as we can.

I think that's a good plan. Keeps the photographers' work morale high and chances of getting better photographs from them are higher than from demoralized, disillusioned photographers

>Of course I also won't invest much in the stock photography licensing end of my business because it just doesn't look very bright.

That's also a pretty reasonable way to go. I haven't invested a red cent really in stock photography, it all comes as a side kick but despite that it's the most important part of my work. Had I not been involved in the kind of stuff (travel guide commissions etc) I do, I wouldn't have had a chance. That's why I am pessimistic for most people who try to get into or make it in stock photography.

Peter Forsberg


__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
.

__,_._,___

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

[MyOlympus] Re: IR Photography - Why?

 

Thanks for all your views. I very much appreciate that most people like to experiment with colour as do I and, that IR and HDR photography can be very successful if it is done well as I can see from some of the examples that you have shown me. The Model Mayhem work is simply stunning and King Arthur's HDRs are excellent examples of how to do it right (not so sure about the Cropped Brick Street one though). Personally I don't mind the occasional IR or HDR but I find that the novelty soon wears off. I don't really want to look at pages of them. I suppose that it all comes down to that undefinable thing - personal preference.

John

__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
MARKETPLACE

Hobbies & Activities Zone: Find others who share your passions! Explore new interests.


Get great advice about dogs and cats. Visit the Dog & Cat Answers Center.


Stay on top of your group activity without leaving the page you're on - Get the Yahoo! Toolbar now.

.

__,_._,___

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

[artshow_photo] Re: "wasted" money - better print bin

 

__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
Donate to support the ArtShowPhoto Forum at
http://artshowphoto.com/support.htm

PLEASE READ....PLEASE TRIM POSTS!!! Keep quoted material short.
Repeat or create accurate subject lines.

Resource web site at
http://ArtShowPhoto.com 
MARKETPLACE

Stay on top of your group activity without leaving the page you're on - Get the Yahoo! Toolbar now.


Get great advice about dogs and cats. Visit the Dog & Cat Answers Center.


Hobbies & Activities Zone: Find others who share your passions! Explore new interests.

.

__,_._,___

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

Selling Stock Photography Re: Microstock: up, down or the same?

 

Brian,

It was noted on a forum as a sign of micro malaise that arcurs had not updated his microdiaries or whatever since march. This fact led me to some investigations. I also figured that most supplying istock in a professional manner have seen their sales go way down. I just wanted to see what anyone had to say here. I guess nothing. We'll see how the future shapes.

I have seen so many people disappear and all but stop supplying many free for all portals that it's amazing. Of course, there are new people coming in but I still think it really takes a lot of time and effort to make any sales that could be considered worth the trouble. We must remember that in the western world, most adults make several thousand euros a month just working somewhere. In the country I am now, the average wage is 3000 euros a month. People here have no desire whatsoever try get into any scheme that could net them something here and there. Of course, there are people in poorer regions who would like to make more, but their English is often inadequate for keywording and so on. I could bet that at least in the western world the biggest fad times of stock photography are over. They are going to move on to the next racket. That's how it's always been and that's how it will always be. The next big thing could be video stock and making films, but that's a lot harder than shooting a photo here, another there. Of course, anyone trying to get people to pay for stock workshops and teach them would like to disagree. But they have a vested interest in doing so.

There are ways to make it in stock and there are always people who go further than others. Most people are lazy, they play the lottery, they get nowhere. They are full of plans, good thoughts, but then they sit in front of the tv and forget it all. This applies to those who would like to be active at a gym, or shoot and edit photographs for portals, agencies, pennyplaces.

Anyways, this discussion didn't reveal much but it's not important, either. Have to get busy now, as the train to Russia is already being polished and prepared for the trip towards the unknown lands. And as to travel, I wouldn't go there or anywhere unless I hadn't already secured a satisfactory amount through commissions.

Peter Forsberg

--- In selling_stock_photography@yahoogroups.com, "Brian Yarvin" <brian@...> wrote:
>
> > You are of course right. But until now the "micromen" have come out with stats
> > etc. to show that it's business as usual. Now even that arcurs fella is keeping
> > quiet.
>
> Peter:
>
> I had no idea that Arcurs was saying anything in public and I feel that read too many boards
> already. Because so many people boast about some sale or another I never take any numbers
> I see on ,boards seriously. And face it; their silence can be for an infinite number of reasons.
>
> > I know the history (I think I learnt it from you). I know you fear the
> > floodgates opening up from the micros and them heading our way.
>
> This has been a longstanding concern of mine but I would no longer call it "fear." I'm way
> beyond fear now in the same way that explorers get beyond their fears and face the unknown.
> Yes, the fears are there and even vivid, but we explorers are beyond them.
>
> > But I think many hobbyists are giving up macro too for lack of sales. It's a full
> > time job, any way you look at it.
>
> How did you find this out? I see no dimunition at all. Certainly, if the number of people signing
> up for workshops is any indication, the number is growing. As far as I can tell (by the means
> available to me) the number of people trying to sell images through agencies is as high as
> ever.
>
> I also believe that the percentage of people entering the field who are satisfied with what they're
> getting is also far higher than it used to be. Paths of entry like Alamy and microstock make it
> much easier to see modest results than the methods we knew a decade or two ago.
>
> > Any half-hearted attempt, any "I will do it on the side too make extra cash"
> > approach is doomed to failure. Anyway, it's good to hear your thoughts, as ever.
>
> This isn't as true as it once was. A person with access to marketable subjects can get their
> images in front of buyers far more easily than they could have back in the day. Indeed, the
> whole industry looks far better to me than it did even a couple of years ago. Of course, those
> who choose foolish specialties like "travel" and "nature" face the same reality they always
> have, but who wants to beat that dead horse?
>
>
> > What about Age? Their phone call sales would be even higher than Alamy's?
> > Any thoughts on editorial vs. commercial on age phone vs. search through
> > internet?
>
> I doubt it. AGE is mostly a commercial agency and their core business is marketing lifestyle
> images with a European/Latin flavor. While they seem to be happy (these days I veiw them
> only from the outside) to put up other subjects on their site, I doubt that they get many
> requests for them. I mean...when was the last time you saw a promotion for AGE with editorial
> images?
>
> Brian Yarvin
> Author, Educator, Photographer
> http://www.brianyarvin.com
>

__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
.

__,_._,___

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

Re: [MyOlympus] Re: HDR using E510 + 1442mm lens

 

On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 11:36 AM, Brian <bmiller025@msn.com> wrote:

>
>
> I just keep asking myself, why did he want to use HDR here?
>
> HDR is often used on cars to bring out reflections of the world around them
(clouds, sun, grass, ground, etc). These are elements that are outside of
the normal dynamic range of the camera (they are usually a few stops below
or above the properly metered image). I believe that's what he was wanting,
but as you said, it looks overdone in many respects; this is partially due
to not enough exposures, and it's partially due to generic settings in
Photomatix.

I think he was looking at this effect:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/kingarthur10/4861798218/

Now, that's a handheld 3 bracket exposure which took some extra processing
beyond photomatix, and it's still not what I would have liked should I have
had my tripod at the ready.

Arthur

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
.

__,_._,___

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

[photography_beginners] Fwd: Photos by Dave Stewart

 


__,_._,___

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

[MyOlympus] Artistic and impressive to boot (nt)

 



--- In MyOlympus@yahoogroups.com, Justin Bonaparte <jfinite@...> wrote:
>
> My friend Sherry makes incredible infrared portraits:
> http://www.modelmayhem.com/portfolio/890740/0
> ______________
> Justin Bonaparte
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
.

__,_._,___

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

[MyOlympus] Re: HDR using E510 + 1442mm lens

 

The basic purpose, at least in my mind, of using HDR is to increase the dynamic range of a photo beyond what the technology can enable you to do in a single exposure. At its extremes, you can get some pretty interesting/bizarre effects with the technique, but that seems to me to be what most people complain about with HDR photos.

I am assuming that you want to increase the dynamic range of your image, and not create an impressionistic look. What about your photo made you want to "increase" that dynamic range? Your photo shows a red car in the woods, on a sunny day. You could use HDR to enable us to see what is going on inside the car, or if the sky were a prominent feature in the composition, you could give us highly detailed clouds up above. All the effect seemed to do to your image was distort colors and blur details. If that is what you were attempting to do, I have no complaint. Would I have preferred a single, properly exposed image to this highly doctored one? Quite likely, but I don't know for sure.

I just keep asking myself, why did he want to use HDR here?

--- In MyOlympus@yahoogroups.com, "Gales, Edwin" <edwin_gales@...> wrote:

...

> Result can be seen at www.flickr.com/pedroiho/photos<http://www.flickr.com/pedroiho/photos> under HDR set.
>
> Comments and Critics are welcome. Will try to explore more of HDR mostly on my landscape shots.
>

__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
MARKETPLACE

Hobbies & Activities Zone: Find others who share your passions! Explore new interests.


Get great advice about dogs and cats. Visit the Dog & Cat Answers Center.


Stay on top of your group activity without leaving the page you're on - Get the Yahoo! Toolbar now.

.

__,_._,___

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

[MyOlympus] Re: IR Photography - Why?

 



"Now I am quite prepared to be told that that my artistic taste sucks..."

I'm going to hold you to that John.

I'm actually not a fan of infrared photography - per say - but if something is pretty, to me - then its pretty (to me).

John, I can't really judge your artistic taste; as the say, art is in the eye of the beholder.

I think these images would look nice in an art gallery:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/sk1968/4941627048/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/infraredatelier/4759620196/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/infraredatelier/4758986027/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/infraredatelier/4757472461/

I think the main thing that keeps me from going "IR" is that you have to hack the sensor on your camera (if you want to truly get into this "art". I'm not much into half measures (lens filters instead of actually opening up and hacking your camera's guts). If I get into something its generally all the way or not at all.

I might say that IR photography, to me, is kind of like country music - a little goes a long way (translation: I can only handle just so much). But beautiful is beautiful - even if it's white trees with a green sky (we don't always have to color between the lines).

Will

--- In MyOlympus@yahoogroups.com, John <zitjopa@...> wrote:
>
> Please do not take this the wrong way as it is not my intention to criticise anyone or their work but, can someone please explain to me the attraction for IR photography. I may be the only person on the planet who just doesn't get it as it does nothing for me. What are people seeing in it that I don't? Now I am quite prepared to be told that that my artistic taste sucks but all I see when I look at an IR photo is an image with unrealistic colours and I think to myself that it would look much better as a normal photograph. I feel the same way about a lot of HDR photography as well unless the effect has been used very carefully and subtly. Is it just me?
>
> John
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
.

__,_._,___

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

Re: [photography_beginners] iphone ? again.. sorry

 

I have the iphone 3gs and I am going to hold off a little longer before I switch over the iphone my nephew has and he had a few problems and he had to take his first back.

--- On Tue, 8/31/10, Lori North <lorinorth@rogers.com> wrote:

From: Lori North <lorinorth@rogers.com>
Subject: [photography_beginners] iphone ? again.. sorry
To: photography_beginners@yahoogroups.com
Date: Tuesday, August 31, 2010, 7:01 AM

 
Off all of my yahoo groups, I think you guys are the only ones who answered my phone questions.
 
Do any of you have the new iphone 4?  I am wondering if I should hold off and see if they have a new build that doesn't have antennae issues.
 
Also, how is email recieved and organized?
 
 

__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
Questions about group rules or contest rules?  They can both be found here:
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/photography_beginners/files/

If you use Flickr join our Flickr group!:  http://www.flickr.com/groups/photography_beginners/

Wanna chat?  http://www.muddyboots.org/erica%27sphotographychat

----
.

__,_._,___

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

Re: [MyOlympus] IR Photography - Why?

 

My point is that IR and UV photography are "otherworldly" but still
"Real" while Ps manipulations can cross that very fuzzy line.

-alan

--
  -  Alan Hoyle  -  alan@alanhoyle.com  -  http://www.alanhoyle.com/  -

2010/8/31 Bjørn K Nilssen <bk@bknilssen.no>:
> On 31 Aug 2010 at 10:41, Alan Hoyle wrote:
>
>> There are limits as to what Ps can do.  Non-visible light photography
>> literally sees things that the human eye can't see.  They give some
>> images an other-worldly quality.  With IR, bright skies are dark and
>> plants are bright.  If you Google for "UV flowers" you can get some
>> interesting images there too.
>
> Sure, but most IR images doesn't show anything that the eye can't see anyway, and there
> are a lot more possibilities for making other-wordly images in PS than in-camera (with or
> without IR-sensors).
> OTOH, about 15 years ago I developed an application that grabbed stills from live video
> cameras. It was amazing how much more "penetrating" the cameras were when they switched
> to IR cameras (B/W). With strong, but invisible, IR lighting with synchronized pulsing IR-
> LEDs it could penetrate rain and snow quite easily :)
> So with a IR digital combined with an IR "flash" you should be able to shoot in any
> weather and at any time of day/night?
>
>> If that's not any particular person's cup of tea, so be it.  I have
>> only toyed with it a tiny bit, and it's interesting, but I don't spend
>> a lot of time on it.
>>
>> -alan
>>
>> --
>>   -  Alan Hoyle  -  alan@alanhoyle.com  -  http://www.alanhoyle.com/  -
>>
>>
>>
>> 2010/8/31 Bjørn K Nilssen <bk@bknilssen.no>:
>> > On 31 Aug 2010 at 5:34, Patrick A. Timlin wrote:
>> >
>> >> --- On Tue, 8/31/10, John <zitjopa@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>> >> > Please do not take this the wrong way
>> >> > as it is not my intention to criticise anyone or their work
>> >> > but, can someone please explain to me the attraction for IR
>> >> > photography.
>> >>
>> >> I don't know. How do you explain likes, dislikes, taste (or no taste if that is you
>> >> opinion)? You either like it or you don't I guess.
>> >
>> > I used to shoot IR back in the 60s/70s using IR color slide film.
>> > The attraction back then was all those weird colors you could get using various
>> colored
>> > filters etc.
>> > Just like you can easily do nowadays in PS...
>
> --
> Bjørn K Nilssen - http://bknilssen.no - panoramas and 3D
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Group's site: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
.

__,_._,___

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS

[artshow_photo] Re: blogs comment LOL

 

"I thought CNN might be more accurate than random blogs, but I stand
corrected..."

That made me laugh! Being a blog writer that just went over 500,000 hits I have to disagree a little on the CNN thing as they are constantly getting facts wrong (as with ALL news agencies) - but I do understand the sentiments LOL

Rod
www.melottephotoimagery.com

__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
Donate to support the ArtShowPhoto Forum at
http://artshowphoto.com/support.htm

PLEASE READ....PLEASE TRIM POSTS!!! Keep quoted material short.
Repeat or create accurate subject lines.

Resource web site at
http://ArtShowPhoto.com 
MARKETPLACE

Get great advice about dogs and cats. Visit the Dog & Cat Answers Center.


Hobbies & Activities Zone: Find others who share your passions! Explore new interests.


Stay on top of your group activity without leaving the page you're on - Get the Yahoo! Toolbar now.

.

__,_._,___

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS