Jump to content

giphotostock

Verified
  • Content Count

    194
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by giphotostock

  1. 1. business 2. concepts 3. real-looking people doing real-looking things (model released) .. 10. travel 11. what you see is what you shoot
  2. Not a secret. Specialize. Shoot for the market. Research. An example given 10-15 years ago on the old AlamyPro forum by Geoff Kidd (if I remember correctly): "If you are shooting in a garden, do not shoot flowers, shoot garden pests." Something like that. GI
  3. I feel sympathy for everybody, exclusive and non-exclusive.. Unfortunately, it does not matter to this contributor. 50% or 40% of a very small (and declining in time) amount does not make much difference. Last image shot specifically for Alamy was in 2010-2011.. Last outtake available for upload to Alamy was in 2014... There are much greener pastures out there... GI
  4. Had been using Manfrotto 410 for 10+ years in the studio, still works well. GI
  5. Wrong. If you shoot secodary-editorial material, you will not likely to see pricing difference between RM and RM on Alamy, IMHO. There are plenty of RM licenses where rights granted are largely equivalent to RF. GI
  6. Depending on how big your subject matter is in your "indoor photography", lighting solutions will differ significantly... Generally, electronic flashes will allow for much more flexibility.. Alien Bees are vary capable and inexpensive. Plus light modifiers.. GI
  7. Go for it. After I discovered the S button press in the Develop module, it saved me enormous amounts of time when trying to avoid clipping of those pesky saturated colors. GI
  8. We do not do well-defined "shoots"... Overall, among a total of about 7500 images, 1700 different images have sold (23%). YMMV. GI
  9. Ian, I certainly understand the desire to evaluate the validity of a message by looking at who the messenger is. I could point you to an image that sells 4 times a month for two years now (not microstock). No models, locations or make-up artists. I hope you'd understand why I won't. As to the message. I myself struggled initially with the concept of what is a high-production-value image. Even now I could not explain it in few sentences. Maybe I try some other time. The key is that the image should *look* expensive to produce (light, style, subject matter, access, e
  10. It is certainly not my intention to attract attention to my humble images. I suggest a better way to appreciate what I am saying is to look up G's Creative Guides / Visual Trends. John Lund's blog is a fun read. GI
  11. The OP asked for a critique and advise. Not sure why you are asking? There's always google, if you must... Are you challenging the idea that commercial high-production-value images would hands down outsell secondary-editorial images? GI
  12. Your images show a very good technical capability. You seem to mostly document what's around you. How about producing shots? Start with an idea/concept, think about how to make that idea come across in a photograph, go shoot. Check out John Lund's blog. Yes, taking mages "in", not "of". GI
  13. Self-edit to the rescue. Plus research. Plus shooting for the market. My acceptance rate is >95% for all of the above. Your mileage may vary. GI
  14. Alamy: way less than $1pipy Niche editorial agency: $6pipy Commercial aggregator: $4pipy (slipped from about $10pipy due to Getty mostly selling at microstock prices) An experiment with a single microstock agency with a handful of images: on-target for $4pipy Note1: all numbers are NET Note2: very few common images between the four above. All images are now shot with a particular agency in mind.
  15. Specialist agencies who sell specialist images to a defined market? I know of a couple... GI
  16. 1. Study the market that you want to supply to : market size, type of shots that that market uses, suppliers (ie competition), gaps, best sellers. 1a. Better yet, pick up a market NICHE and specialize. That allows for a more focused market study so that you can actually reach grounded conclusion (ie the opposite of "everything sales" strategy) that will drive the next step: 2. Produce images for that market. 3. Analyze your own sales statistics and adjust what and how you shoot. GI
  17. I hate to bring it up: 1. business 2. lifestyle 3. concepts with contemporary styling and high production values. Any indicators that shots selling well in 2018 are going to be different from the kinds that has been selling well for many years now? GI
  18. There's plenty of commercially-relevant, in-demand images that can be done with a macro lens (technology, science, business, medical). Its use is certainly not limited to bugs and flowers... And the clients always want more. It forces you to start thinking and seeing differently. Very differently compared to visiting more locations that you have not covered yet. :)) Look at what has been used, see if you can spot a macro-lens shot. YMMV. Happy New Year. GI
  19. If one were to find shots, they'd be lost among other images of the same subject matter? If one were to produce shots, resulting in high-production-value images, they would stand out among other images of the same subject matter? It may be a difference between editorial and commercial. The latter still pays better. GI
  20. Updated to Lightroom Classic CC. iMac Late 2013, macOS Sierra 10.12.6. Have not noticed any speed improvements. Have not had a need to use the new range mask. Business as usual. GI
  21. You used your own data to project your earnings. And the result is just not realistic. The implicit assumption in your projection is that you keep shooting the same kinds of images. To break out of that unrealistic scenario, you need shoot different images. Images for which the demand/supply dynamics is way different than that for pretty pictures one can shoot by going places. It has been an open secret for many years now: business, concepts, people (model-released)... something like that. GI
  22. macOS. Life is too short to be dealing with Windows.
  23. Anybody with a first hand experience with NEX6 and RX100 M3? Specifically, differences / similarities in the layout of buttons and menu structure? Access to manual functions like flash and exposure compensation, focusing point selection? I have a NEX6 and could never get used to it. Every time I need to change a setting that is not frequently changed, it's a struggle to find where it is and what button press sequence to use. Just not intuitive. Never had that problem with Olympus or Canon. Is it just me not being a Sony person? Feedback appreciated.
×
×
  • 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.