Jump to content

Alexandre Fagundes

Verified
  • Content Count

    261
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Alexandre Fagundes

  1. 22 minutes ago, Betty LaRue said:

    Don't I know you? Your face looks very familiar. Perhaps from Darrel Young's defunct agency?

    Betty

    Hi Betty

    I dont know, I used to be extremely active in the forums here a while ago, than I got bored...

    I used to be very active in social media, google+ and later on Facebook 

    Lately I am just worried about taking pictures and uploading 

    After reaching 6000 images here I started uploading in another agency, no, not Darrel's.

    And my firstan RF  agency where I have 12000 images, constantly selling, but much lower prices of course,

    Thanks for being so kind

  2. 6 hours ago, Arletta said:

     

    First thing - I tried to go to your portfolio by using the number under your avatar but it's broken, can't get in, can't see your work. The same with other users.

    Second - you have almost 6200 files and no sales? :o Something must be very wrong with the images or even more with keywords, as you should see at least few sales monthly.

    Third thing - 1 or 2 sales more is nothing, it tells nothing about any changes. Other thing would be with at least 10 + sales more with your number of images. That would make a significant sign of changes.

    I see Arletta, as I said, I am having one or two sales per month, certainly better than no sales last year.

    My CTR didnt change much since the begining, I have some zooms and views (54 zooms for the last 12 months to be precise). None of my sales have been zoomed.

    The one thing did changed was that I have now some images with high discoverability, I suspect this changed my ranking, this could be an explanation

    The other, as John Mitchel suggested is that the sales changed my ranking,

    Well, than it took a long time, even after my first sale last year.

    Anyway, I am content (not excited, but content) on having one or two sales monthly, because the prices have been  better than I expected.

  3. This will definitely sound weird, but...

    I uploaded a lot of images and had only one sale.

    Than Alamy changed its interface and I realized all my images had poor discoverability.

    I was trying to use very relevant, but few keywords to increase my CTR.

    Well, I decided to add a lot of keywords to some images so get the status fully discoverable

    I didn't spam, they are keywords related to the images, but some a bit generic like picturesque, horizontal, traditional, etc.

    And the sales came, is not crazy number, but one or two per month.

    Now the crazy part, so far none of the sales are of the images with "enhanced" keywords...

    Dont know what to say, but I am seriously thinking about "enhancing" all my images keywords

    Have you guys had similar experiences?

    Thank you

    Alex

     

  4.  

    I like shadows. Let shadows be shadows. 

    Oh, yeah i remember the tobacco grad filter. I still have it somewhere. I'll let it stay there. 

     

     

    The human eye has a lot more dynamic range than your camera's sensor. When your eye can see details in both highlights and shadows, I want my shots to also show those details rather than details in the mid-tones along with complete white and complete black. HDR brings those texture details out in both cases on the same resulting image, when the difference in exposure between dark and light goes beyond the scope of a standard RAW file. That's when HDR is needed and is effective, so your image represents what the eye actually saw at the time. That doesn't mean you can't have shadows and highlights - It just means those areas have more texture and better colours, as those details are captured in the original shots and not lost.

     

    Geoff.

     

     

    I remember that I read it somewhere that the human eye has a parabolic curve dynamic range, therefore, we can see more detail in the shadows than in the highlights, not sure if that is scientific, though.

    The other thing that happens is that we usually scan the image looking at different places and combine the image in our brain, so, you dont even realize, but you look at the shadows, take a "mind" picture, look at the subject, take another "shot", than look at the, say, sky, and combine the three images in your mind in a "super realistic" HDR.

    So I think it makes sense using HDR techniques to try to have an image that looks like what you saw in your mind.

    • Upvote 1
  5. I've noticed that none of the younger Brazilians posting have mention "Macumba," one of the African-based religions (magic? witchcraft? like voodoo?). Figas are a part of Macumba. I'm wondering if Macumba has disappeared from the culture? I'm not comfortable being a spokesman for things Brazilian; it's a complex, multi-leveled subject, and for all I know the figa was something dreamed up to sell to tourists.

     

    :unsure:

    Candomblé is a religion of the afroamerican culture in Brazil, "figa" is part of its traditions as "macumba".

  6.  

    Alamy are trying to save the photographer from a billion $ lawsuite.

     

    All of these restrictions strike at the heart of the stock photography business, except for hard news.

     

    I don’t know what can be done about it. With stock photography prices trending towards zero $, I don’t particularly care.

    Bill I do understand the reasons of Alamy and I am not complaining of them.

    I just dont agree with image copyrights restricting historical buildings.

    In my opinion after a few years they should be public domain.

    • Upvote 1
  7. I have had the same. To be honest, I was not surprised, German agencies removed them a few years ago after a ruling by the Federal Court of Justice of Germany which applies to all images taken from the grounds of palaces, ie Sanssouci

     

    Interesting that I can find Sanssouci images in almost all stock agencies. If you go to google maps there are hundreds of images of it.

    As I said, I dont understand what are they trying to protect here.

    Those images can only enhance tourism to the place.

  8. Alamy just sent me an email saying they heard about legal issues regarding copyrights of Sanssouci Schloss images in Potsdam and have removed my images of the palace.

    This is the second time it happened, first was with the british historical buildings some months ago.

    I am not questioning Alamy, just want to know your opinion about this.

    I don´t agree with that, public places, hundred years old.

    What exactly are we protecting here?

    It´s not an artist copyright (that, BTW, become public after 50 years, I think), but they can keep the copyrights, forever!

    Those palaces were built to show off, not to be hidden under copyright laws in my opinion.

    Eventually we won´t be able to take pictures of anything!

×
×
  • 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.