Rudy Umans
-
Content Count
604 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Calendar
Articles
Posts posted by Rudy Umans
-
-
1 hour ago, clivewa said:
Thank you for your kind remarks Rudy, although I'm not sure I deserve them. I don't much care for dealing with galleries, and so (being of a grumpy disposition, I'm told) I choose not to bother them. Also there are severe practical difficulties in selling art. The worst is that galleries tend to like framed pictures, and as I already have a storage space problem with unframed paintings on board or paper, I don't dare to start framing them because that would make the storage problem much worse. On the plus side, I enjoy painting and microstock does mean I can indulge myself in buying photo gear that I would otherwise consider too expensive. Also I'm not much of an entrepreneur, and being well-retired by now I'm not inclined to take on tasks that I don't feel like doing.
What you suggest does indirectly come about via the microstock market because if I do an image search on one of my better painting efforts I usually find that it is available through various "wall art" outlets as a framed copy.
So again, thanks for your enouraging comments.
Well, I respect your point of view and I will not be trying to talk you into something you don't want to do or already know.
and from one grumpy old man to another, I just love your paintings.
-
On 12/16/2020 at 3:53 PM, clivewa said:
The camera is a Sony A7 which has been converted, and is currently fitted with a 720nm filter. The biggest problem I have found is finding a lens which is good at infrared. Most lenses are not. The images were taken with an old Minolta 17-35mm lens, which is the only zoom I've so found so far that is good at IR over its whole zoom range.
I have uploaded IR shots to several microstock sites but they don't sell well for me. I think the images are quite atmospheric, so perhaps I'll try arcangel with my next IR attempts.
Love your paintings and photography @clivewa. I Really do!
Hope you have other outlets besides microstock because just microstock would be a total waste of your talent. (besides the enjoyment creating the pieces, which is never a waste)
Your work needs to be seen by the art world and that will probably never happen by just submitting them to microstock.
-
I like to think I can afford $0.05 over a period of 6 months for donations on my own. (I was kidding. I make $0.07)
Nevertheless I applaud the initiative. I might upload a little bit more now just because they care
-
2 hours ago, Darla Hallmark said:
When microstock began, many professional photographers got on board because they already had hundreds, or even thousands,
of images ready to go. That was how I got into it.
That "make money from your hard drive" mantra didn't last very long in real life
-
2 hours ago, HodagMedia said:
To add a little to your observations, that's why I never went full time or serious about Microstock. Some people did very well and worked hard, very smart, styles, trends and uploads. How much does anyone want to invest in time and equipment, just to name two factors, to get paid 10 cents? Hobby, getting paid for doing what I love.
Even when I started and it was 25c there was no motivation to make a serious effort. That was my view. Everyone else is welcome to their own.
Every agency has cut our portion of the earnings from what we got paid in 2012, by various means.
We are at the same page here
-
3 hours ago, HodagMedia said:
Answer is: in Lightroom it's Grid View, Photoshop View>Show>Grid
in CC 21 the grid is just that, a grid. No golden rule or spirals or triangles. Those are in the crop toolbox
In Picasso's famous words "You have to learn the rules before you can break them" . This logical statement alone celebrates the rules and does not mean that rules devaluate the learning process of photography, or flat art in general, by calling them guidelines. (Reading what I just wrote, I sound like a politician lol)
-
10 minutes ago, Steve Bower said:
Rudy, Where exactly is the Golden Spiral Overlay found in Photoshop? That might be of interest to the new contributors (and me). I read it can be found in Lightroom (which I never use) but I didn't find it when I looked. I am using Photoshop CS4 and the applicable version of Lightroom so that could be the problem.
Thanks again for your "insight".
I don't know about CS 4, but in the latest, you click on the crop tool and then in the toolbar on top you click on the icon that looks like a tic tac toe board.
-
38 minutes ago, Steve Bower said:
Rudy, I can always count on you to fill in the blanks. I've known of the golden spiral for quite some time but I hadn't (up until a few days ago) looked it up to find out what I needed to do differently (photographically) in order to use the Golden Spiral as my compositional guide rather than the rule of thirds.
Maybe I didn't research it sufficiently but the best I could tell, the primary difference (photographically) between it and the Rule of Thirds is that the elements of your image should be "arranged" on the spiral which will cause your eye to be led around the spiral to the terminus where your subject is to be placed. The placement of the additional elements on the spiral seem to be the key to it's aesthetics, setting it apart from the Rule of Thirds which just places your subject at one of the intersections points.
I wanted to add some of what you included in your post but I tend to be pretty verbose and figured I better just stick to the photographic elements and benefits. Thanks for the philosophical and spiritual implications.
LOL. I just thought I throw it in there and although I think it is very interesting and these tidbits of knowledge could help with one's photography, in the greater scheme of things, none of what I wrote really matters much.
The rule of thirds has been around since the 18th century and was originally used a little different than how we use it today. I might be mistaken, but the rule of thirds as we know it, was made popular in the golden age of advertising in the fifties. They placed the most important element of an advertisement (logo, name, product) on one of the intersections because somebody with time on his/her hands discovered that's where viewers look first. And they are right
Even though the Golden Spiral is much more interesting, in my opinion for commercial microstock purposes, the rule of thirds might be more applicable. It is "safer" and somehat the lazy way out.
Either way, I still tell people to study advertisements, they will help to get a greater understanding of composition.
Having said that, I really loved your post and I think that anybody who is in the slightest interested in learning about composition should learn about the Golden Spiral and the Golden Ratio. It would be a tremendous help.
btw, I think that most software programs have overlays in the crop tool with the rule of thirds, golden spiral, triangles and some other things. I know that Photoshop, Corel's PSP, and Affinity have it.
-
Full time contributors saw this coming a long time ago and it should not have been a surprise.
The professional stock photography industry was doomed the moment the subscription model was introduced about 16 years ago. Most realized that and always had a back-up plan (ay least the ones I know)
-
On 12/12/2020 at 2:22 PM, Steve Bower said:
One more time (resurrecting this thread)! Most of us have heard of the Rule of Thirds as it pertains to photography (we discussed it earlier in this thread) and I'm sure you've found it useful in composing your images. However, there is a another compositional guide which has been around for many centuries and has been used in the design of the Egyptian pyramids and composition of some of the great painting master pieces like the Mona Lisa and the Last Supper.
It goes by many names but it is most commonly known as the Golden Spiral or Golden Ratio. It's actually a mathematical concept which is "simply" explained as "the ratio that results from dividing a line into two parts so that the longer part divided by the smaller part is equal to the whole length of the line divided by the longer part". That was the simple explanation??? (first image, Golden Spiral diagram or graph)
Bottom line: It is a mathematical concept or equation that emulates many of the of the shapes we see in nature (i.e nautilus shell, many flowers etc.). While the image results may not look that much different from those created by the Rule of Thirds, it provides a curved line on which you can place the various elements of your image which helps to draws your eye around the Golden Spiral to the tight spiral at the end where you've place the picture's subject.
While It may be hard to visualize this spiral in all of it's orientations (as you frame up your image), you may find that some of your favorite photos (you may not have known why they were your favorites) actually use or reflect the Golden Spiral as the elements of your photo draws your eyes around the spiral pointing them to the subject of your image. How or if you use the Golden Spiral is dependent on the scene before you but knowing this compositional technique could improve your image composition when appropriate.
While I suppose I could be forcing the issue to make my point, I believe the following images illustrate the Golden Spiral when used as a compositional tool and serve as acceptable examples of this technique. Sorry, I was not able to overlay the spiral on these images. This would have been a big help, I'm sure.
Great post Steve,
The Golden Spiral is actually more important or influential on the human psyche if you like, than the Rule of Thirds. It is very similar to the Golden Spiral (not the same though), which in turn, is based on the Golden Ratio Phi 1.618. You find this ratio throughout nature. Even the human body. (Fingers are 1.618 of the hand, the hand is 1.618 of the arm etc. etc.)
The Golden Ratio is related to the Fibonaccy Sequence of frequencies. One of those frequencies is 369Hz "The sound of the Universe" or OHM/AUM, what Buddhists monks chant during their meditation. The Yin/Yang symbol is also based on that. Nikola Tesla (yes, that one! lol) said, "understand 369 and you understand the universe"
Everything is related. Even a Dragon fly to the Universe and Composition in photography to a Buddhist monetary.
Never knew that your picture of a Dragonfly could have such a deep meaning did you?
So, consciously or not, it is something we instantly relate to and recognize.
-
16 hours ago, PomInPerth said:
HI Rudy, great images. Do you have the same photos on MS or are the FAA photos your best and not sold elsewhere?
Thanks POMinPerth (I have friends in Perth)
For the most part, I don't have any overlap anymore with MS and POD.
Some of my images are also on other POD sites and I have an Amazon store . My main attention is however on FAA. Simple they sell the most. (for me and in general). I had "stores" on Saatchi and some others, but it wasn't worth it for me.
-
On 12/3/2020 at 11:42 AM, Milleflore Images said:
Some people have said to me that they only want to upload their fine art work to FAA, and others like me, are using their Pixels.com side to capitalise on the wider more commercial side of things. It depends on the individual. However, whatever you upload to FAA automatically flow through to Pixels, if you pay the $30 annual fee.
We already had this discussion on a previous thread started by Steven earlier this year. I am trying to find it for you.
Here it is: Fine Art America - Anyone rate it? - Page 2 - Contributor Experience - Shutterstock - Forum
FAA is my main sales outlet and I sold there this year alone more in money than the last 5 years on MS combined.
I am very active on FAA. I like it there. This is me: Rudy Umans - Official Website (pixels.com)
The other site I do fairly well on for jigsaw puzzles, calendars etc. is Zazzle.
I know people who do very well on RedBubble (Australian site)
-
On 12/7/2020 at 9:26 AM, HodagMedia said:
Is that a way around it? I'm not sure if reselling as art is allowed from a standard license and I'd say it shouldn't be.
My quote was from the EL paragraph. It is not allowed with a standard license as far as I know
As far as the OP's question goes, there are 3 things to consider. From a legal point of view this doesn't seem to be a case of stealing, but rather a case of being a derivative work or a new work and we all know that is one big grey can of worms. From Shutterstock's point of view, their terms say that it is allowed "Provided such merchandise incorporates creative or functional elements apart from the image(s)" If the added elements are either creative or functional is a question I leave up to the judge so to speak
The 3rd thing to consider is what prevails. Common law or Shutterstock's terms? Both are ambiguous and poorly written
-
AN ENHANCED IMAGE LICENSE grants you the right to use Images (which rights are in addition to 1-5 above and exclusive to Enhanced Image Licenses):
-
In any manner permitted under a Standard Image License, without any limitation on the number of reproductions, impressions, or budget;
-
Incorporated into merchandise intended for sale or promotional distribution (collectively "Merchandise"), including, without limitation, textiles, artwork, magnets, wall-art, calendars, toys, stationery, greeting cards, and any other physical reproduction for resale or distribution, provided that such Merchandise incorporates material creative or functional elements apart from the Image(s).
-
In wall art (and without requiring further creative or functional elements) for decorative purposes in a commercial space owned by you or your client, and not for sale.
-
Incorporated as elements of digital templates for sale or distribution.
-
-
34 minutes ago, kar said:
"...to me it seems that the designers you linked to did the same thing."
Are you seeing the same designs I am seeing? The 99designs contests holders post their requirements in a brief , and is normal that the designs have common elements . If a logo is about cannabis ,is normal that have cannabis leaves .Or if is for veterinary is also common that have animals. All plus the requirement of the contest holder. I dont know where you see by example the links for Pure Vermont Cannabis Co designs can be considered the same.Or any of the other ones ,beeing a designer or not.
How do you explain the coincidence of the company names?Obviously you are a very passionate person about graphic design, but regardless how tempting it might be I am not going to debate what I see and how I see it. What designers do is their concern, not mine. Besides there would be no winners.
My second point was more important. You need more proof. Once you have that solid proof, tell SS.
-
10 hours ago, kar said:
"How do you know who is the thief, the Shutterstock contributor or the 99design contributor?"
Did you take some time for see the links to the contests? The SS contributor is taking designs from several designers in each contest,in some cases also winners,with exactly the same company name .Admittingly I am not a Graphic Designer, but to me it seems that the designers you linked to did the same thing, to me (again) it looks like they took design elements from each other
I am not saying you are wrong, but to make a case that sticks, you will have to come with better proof. Not for me, but for the people at SS
-
I didn't see any discussion forum or anything on 99 Design in which they discussed this "many times"
So, how do you know who is the thief, the Shutterstock contributor or the 99design contributor?
Frankly, in the 12 years I am here I know that more often than not, they (not 99design in particular) steal from Shutterstock Contributors instead of the other way around.
Your reference to the License Agreement makes no sense. You quoted about content use, but you are complaining about content acceptance
-
On 11/3/2020 at 8:31 AM, leonjackson said:
Is anyone here a fan of film cameras? Which lens do you usually go with?
Assuming you mean analog (not digital), do you mean for motion pictures or still photography?
-
5 hours ago, Thijs de Graaf said:
Not a good idea if Shutterstock goes out of business in the meantime. 😁
They won't
-
7 hours ago, Marcel Rommens said:
(i prefer a yearly payout).
That is not a bad idea
-
Instead of cloning them out, I would blur them and see how that goes. That way, you can still see what is there while the privacy of the owners is protected
-
To be registered with SS as a business, you need to be registered in your country as a business as well and have a local business registration number. Once you have that, you need to complete IRS form W-8BEN-E (which is a pain) for foreign business entities. A W-8BEN (without the "E") is for foreign individuals, including Sole proprietors.
It's not worth it
-
Just finished my semi educational book about the Everglades with about 35 or so B/W images
So, it's either that or a calendar or a jigsaw puzzle (with my pictures obviously) or a bag with trail mix
Other than that I am making a family picture book for my wife's birtday in December
-
Y'all enjoy it while it last. January is around the corner.
I just got an email from SS congratulating me for making it to level 4.
Was I jumping of joy? Did I care? There was a time I would have I suppose, but now it felt more like another spam email.
December sales - take two
in Contributor Experience
Posted
For me, your work is the standard for your kind of work and if you do bad, they all do bad I would think
MS is doing a lot worse for me too (no surprise), while my art sales are way up this year. Best year of the last five actually. Funny how that goes.