Jump to content

Mike@Meonshore

Verified
  • Content Count

    106
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

54 Forum reputation = neutral

About Mike@Meonshore

  • Rank
    Forum regular

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://www.meonshorestudios.co.uk

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Fareham

Alamy

  • Alamy URL
    http://www.alamy.com/contrib-browse.asp?cid={909A78CD-DF58-4C96-9348-128EE03FB265}&name=Mike+French
  • Images
    1581
  • Joined Alamy
    01 Mar 2004
  1. Whilst I'm now a Nikon shooter, I have owned much of this kit on Canon, and have in my time had all of them on Nikon. It really depends on your budget. The 50mm is a cheap option, sharp on the 1.8-1.2 versions and realistically under controlled studio conditions and assuming you are not shooting at wider than f1.8 then you'll see little difference between the £80 version and the £1000 version. Bokeh on the f1.4 and f1.2 is smoother due to an increased number of aperture blades. Contrast straight out of camera is better on the f1.2L but given you are in studio conditions and will post-p
  2. What you actually need is the Intellectual Property Enterprise Court (IPEC) https://www.justice.gov.uk/downloads/courts/patents-court/intellectual-property-enterprise-court-guide.pdf Set up specifically to handle claims of this nature. Small claims court in the UK didn't have specialist IP/copyright experience and is more for pursuing unpaid bills and reparation for poorly executed work etc... There is a small claims track with limited costs. The guide is pretty good, and as Dov stated in his post - no legal representation required.
  3. No problem. I guess it depends what you need from the system. If you need to hold licence details, durations, exclusivity details etc then it isn't ideal but for that I think you'd need a more specific stock photo management solution. The alternative if you are on a Mac is Daylite which I stopped using when I took on Light Blue. You can customise that completely yourself (or pay someone to do it) to absolutely meet your specific needs.
  4. Matt, I use Light Blue. Co-written by a photographer, and with a lot of input form other photographers it is probably more aligned to wedding and portrait shooters although easily services commercial photography, and fine art sales to end consumers. Under continued development and with good support. Hope that helps...
  5. Happy New Year everyone. Here is to a productive, rewarding, and more importantly healthy 2015.
  6. I had this happen a few years back, I went from Cheque to BACS but they had recorded my account details incorrectly and it got paid in a the sweep up tranche in late Jan/Feb, after I checked in with them and corrected it. Might be worth popping an email in, although as we are very close to Christmas it might be worth trying again from 5th Jan. If you successfully claimed then you will get paid. If you didn't hit submit then you'll have to wait until next year now as the money will already have been allocated. You should have an email confirmation from them if your claim was received.
  7. Phillipe, Hopefully by now you'll realise from losdemas' post that this has nothing to do with the number of images you hold in the library. Nor is it explicitly linked to the number of images sold. The categories and bands are critical in determining your payout, and as Regen states the amount per band fluctuates each year depending on the amount of the total pot, expenses of DACS, and most importantly the number of claimants. With each qualifying claimant receiving a minimum of £25 you can easily see that a huge influx of claimants with only 1-2 sales is going to significantly reduce the
  8. Mine was in on the 4th as well, though that is of course old news now ! Down 10% - was in the same bands as last year. Either a smaller pot, or the impact of all the additional claims.
  9. It has to be standardising keyword entry with IPTC fields. Far easier for us to keyword once in Photo-mechanic or Adobe products PRIOR to upload. Pend or truncate those images with keywords greater than maximum field length.
  10. As with a credit/by-line in a magazine instead of a fee for one of your images - a photograph of a plate of food is pretty useless in terms of publicity unless accompanying an article about the restaurant or the chef.... You might have bought the food but what you are paying for is to eat it. Just like if you pay to go an see Michael Macintyre at one of his shows you pay to go and watch not ruin the show for everyone else by chatting at him while he is doing his routine... (recent UK news story) The restaurant is private land, and the staff have a responsibility to preserve the atmosp
  11. To your original post about crowd funding if you have the balls to put it out there then why not - you can't really lose if all you are doing is asking people to pay for your kit with nothing in return. You'd certainly struggle in any football under DataCo restrictions to be able to use those images at all yourself - so a book or prints isn't an option from it. If you can raise the £3500-4500 for a reasonable condition 400mm f2.8L IS then why not. I think you might be waiting a long time. On the subject of sports photography in general and football in particular then I'd caution your
  12. There seems to be a wee underground trade in equipment going between photogs, heard there was a 400 2.8 going for a grand. That's quite a saving. Great wildlife lens too. Keep my ears open when I have the cash earned the right way I think I doubt that is underground trade - you'll probably find that the 400 2.8 in question is a first generation, non-IS version with a fair amount of use. IS is less of an issue in sports as you'll typically be using it on a monopod and aiming for shutter speeds of 1/800th or higher - certainly for football (appreciate motorsport freezing action you migh
  13. From the P1 Superstock series an AquaX jet bike during one of the races. Panned at about 1/80th with a 400mm.
  14. Paul a moot point - and it may of course have been deliberate but your "models" are holding the Union Flag upside down. Used to indicate "distress" - hence why it may have been intended or indadvertedly appropriate ;-) It is also "lese Majeste" (which means: insulting the Crown), and is theoretically still a crime in the UK.
  15. Yes I use cloud storage from Apple and Dropbox (for transfers to clients). But I have no nude selfies stored on them (I have no nude selfies....) I wouldn't put unencrypted personal information on them, but I'm happy to use them to move basic documents around and use Dropbox for image delivery for clients. I'm inclined to believe that the hacker was targeting celebs, and not just randomly hacking cloud storage.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.