Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for 'zooms sales ratio'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Alamy Forum guidelines and announcements
    • Forum guidelines
    • Announcements
  • Alamy discussion and community support
    • Introductions
    • Portfolio critique
    • Community support: ask the forum
    • Stock photography discussion and contributor experience
    • Alamy Quality Control and technical talk
    • Let's talk about pics
  • Suggestions and ideas
    • Alamy
    • The Forum

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


AIM


MSN


Website URL


ICQ


Yahoo


Jabber


Skype


Location


Interests


Alamy URL


Images


Joined Alamy

  1. Interesting. My zooms last month (May) were the highest ever in 10 years, until this month when they were even higher. Sale numbers this month are average ( 36 ), but gross income is below average at $1460 Compared to the first 6 months of 2013, I have 18% more images for sale I have had 36% more views 14% more zooms 8% less sales 6% less gross income If that trend continues to the end of the year it will be the first time in 10 years sales and income numbers have not continued to rise Kumar
  2. My Dashboard says 15 sales for $840 My Summary says 17 items for $650.98 Either way it's not looking good. wim (looking up that quote about damn statistics)
  3. Sales = catastrophic Zooms = a seven-year record high Feeling = frustrated and confused
  4. It's a single monthly figure not a rolling average. So, until today's zooms are reported (I assume tomorrow) your July figure will be zero. It's going to be a regular 1st of the month thing.
  5. 10 Sales for $313 gross. Above this years average for numbers, and below it for price. This year to date revenue now exceeds total for 2010. Milestone of 300 sales passed this month. I am happy - thanks Alamy!
  6. where are all these $6.59sales going to? I sold a lot of these last month..discounts discounts .. dis
  7. Two sales in June. One dropped in last night for a net of $45. Can't remember the other one but it was around $20. Just done a complete rehaul of my stuff and hoping that the pruning will sort things out going forward.
  8. June took me past 2013's income and equalled number of sales. Mind you it is still nothing to write home about At least it is heading in the right direction after nearly a year in reverse, or stationary.
  9. After five very average months to start the year, June was much better. 26 sales for $823 my best month of the year, double my average month. Thank you Alamy.
  10. Strange old world, just when I post that the canon premium zooms don't seem to suffer from the decentering problem a reviewer finds it in the new 24-70 f4 os.
  11. It really is a factor that needs to be addressed by the manufacturers; I really don't understand why people like Zeiss would produce lenses with this problem. I have been looking at the Canon 70-200 zooms recently and the OS does not seem to produce the same problems.
  12. Who knows? I believe that David Kilpatrick, who hasn't been heard from lately, has mentioned this possibility as well. Before switching to the NEX system, I used Sony DSLRs, which have in-camera "sensor shift" stabilization. I found that it worked better, especially with long lenses, than the lens-based OS system. I also don't remember any noticeable problems with decentering, even with kit zooms.
  13. You can change the ratio and zoom the flash out.I use it for all my red carpet events. At 1/4 power say 6-10 feet or so away,the recycle is fast. I've been working w/flash for more than 30 years so after awhile it just becomes intuitive. Shoot raw! L
  14. One review did link decentering with os in general. Not sure if that was only in zooms, hope so as am about to buy the Canon 100mm f2.8 os macro.
  15. I find that decentering problems with the Sony zooms that I'm using are inconsistent, so I'm wondering if this issue doesn't have something to do with lens-based stabilization systems in general. After all, the lens elements do move around, I believe. This could be the reason that Sigma has yet to come out with some e-mount zooms. There certainly seems to be a healthy market for them. Anyway, thanks for all the useful feedback. I've pretty much decided to get the Sigma 30mm. It sounds like a real bargain.
  16. I tend to put everything as 'requires PR / haven't got one' for anything man-made and identifiable. In other words, if there's the slightest possibility that someone could see it and say 'that's mine' or 'I made that'. I make an exception for ancient Roman coins that I own, but that's about it. Erring on the side of caution, I know, and I hope I'm not losing hundreds of sales as a result.
  17. The Sigma seems to give quality results at a bargain basement price, my only reservation is whether it has barrel markings to indicate depth of field. I was about to go for the alpha 6000 with a Zeiss 16-70, as the two standard zooms from Sony get poor reviews, but the Zeiss seems to suffer from decentering. My alternative choice would be the three Sigma primes which all get good reviews and charts, and have the advantage of all having the same filter thread diameter. As the Alpha would be used as a carry anywhere camera, not a replacement for my slr, a zoom would be a better choice but a
  18. I had been making a great effort to upload regularly, because I was told that moves one up in the searches. So being in the sin bin hurts that endeavor. I've got lots to upload, so no problem there. I think it has helped, because my zooms have doubled after uploading something, even 5 images, every week. John, hurry up. You can still get a piece of pie if you make a tiny error.
  19. Still can. It is not phased out. You can still choose it. But does that mean that NU sales are still being made? Hate to see it, but some regular sales now look like NU, price-wise anyway. Update: Was happy to see a sale for $150 pop up today. Now that's a bit more like it.
  20. I try to stay away from any dish that includes white floor, but I would make an exception for a large slice of fresh apple pie, my favorite of the many great pies. I'll be in my cell well into July. I can still shoot and do Post, of course, and sales are slow anyway. I'm not going to fret much about being tuned out for a time. I'm just getting disappointed with myself at being no longer "perfect."
  21. Mine is 108.33. You guys just need to have a sales record as stellar as mine. oh, NOT!
  22. The existence of such a lens would almost certainly push me off the fence in the direction of ditching my Canon. But even the promised 16-55 is not quite good enough. I do at least 95% of my work with the Canon 24-105 and I would have too much to lose at the moment by sacrificing those precious mm at either end. Alan Me too, but how much do you actually do at 24-28 and 80-105mm? I found that it was quite a modest proportion of that 95%. We could do with a prime at around 90-100mm (the old 135mm equivalent) - I might then be tempted to experiment with Don McCullin's approach of
  23. This one hasn't even been reported yet.... http://janehobson.photoshelter.com/gallery-image/Tearsheets/G0000bXwWccO5fnA/I0000RpgqbzOAkTQ and I'm still waiting to be paid for two reported sales from 2012. Who knows how many have been used but not reported......
  24. Your images are terrific. I'm not surprised you are doing well already. Unfortunately it can take a very long time for sales to actually clear. Paulette
  25. How long is a piece of string. If it is paid within 90 days consider yourself lucky. If it is unpaid after 6 months contact MS. Good luck - 3 sales with only 100 images is a really great start - congratulations. dov
×
×
  • 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.