MaxPreps

Sports Corner Rules
Sports Corner Resource

FM Forums \| Sports Corner \| Join Upload & Sell	Search Used
1 2 3 end

Archive 2009 · MaxPreps

Steve Ickes
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #1 · MaxPreps

gman1339: We get it. You don't like Maxpreps. Great. So why bother to continue to respond in this thread?

I think the point being made is that Maxpreps is far from a fly-by-night high school preps photo web site. They are a well established company which has steadily grown their market presence in the 3 years I've shot for them. They not only provide those stats on the Maxpreps web site but often help supply stats for media outlets in local markets. Obviously you fail to see how those partnerships and increased market presence benefit photographers. Fortunately for me and a few other here we don't. All the content unrelated to their photos is what really drives the traffic to the web site.

Aug 27, 2009 at 02:33 AM

Tom D
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #2 · MaxPreps

Zamboni Dan wrote:
There is a misconception, especially amongst folks here, who think MaxPreps is just a photo-selling website. It's not. It's the high school arm of CBS Sports. They cover games, playoffs, all-star events, compile rankings -- it is primarily editorial and stat-driven. I've written for the site for several years -- it's largely news stories, columns and video features on high school athletes. People seem to think they just sell photos.

In terms of photos, I think it's an excellent opportunity for both those looking to shoot and gain experience as well as for vets who want to make some extra cash.

And as I said before, regarding flash, it's a matter of consistency and quality in terms of noise, that's it. What you consider to look OK at ISO 3200 or 6400 may not be what they or parents want.

-d

Dan's on the money here-- and actually, the photo aspect of Maxpreps really doesn't register with most parents around here (So Calif). For them (and that includes me), the site is most important as a giant repository of stats of all the area prep athletes. In an instant, and providing a team is current with reporting their players' numbers, you can see just how everyone is stacking up. The leaderboards is actually a killer little tool. And it's common knowledge that college coaches (D1's included) visit the site to stay current with their prospects' performances. All in all, a pretty cool service at no charge...

Aug 27, 2009 at 01:08 PM

gman1339
Online
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #3 · MaxPreps

Aug 27, 2009 at 02:09 PM

WmPat
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #4 · MaxPreps

I shoot in a region where MaxPreps has minimal presence. You never see anyone shooting on a sideline wearing their shirt, they don't have stats for any team within the 3 states I work in, and no editorial content about anything here. I see one or two galleries per season of area teams, mostly when we play in another part of the country. Apparently we are the exact opposite of the southern California area.

I have been watching the growth of MaxPreps for several years with the idea that perhaps I could use them as another (profitable) outlet. I think that many photographers in my area would like to work with MaxPreps but my attempts to open relations with them so far have met with little more than automatic replys to my e-mails.

I have seen several threads, both here and at other sports photography websites, regarding shooting for MaxPreps. There are always some voices that say MP is a pretty good deal. There is, however, very little info available about how much a photog can expect to earn from shooting what MaxPreps wants and posting galleries on their website. And when you do find a nugget about your potential earnings it always seems to be less than generous. I was disappointed that they didn't expand more rapidly when they made the deal with CBS Sports. Most of the photogs I talk to about MP seem to think that their forays into editorial content are more for the purpose of making a credible claim to access than for serious journalism.

I don't think that the requirements to shoot with flash & strobes are unreasonable, but they do mean an additional investment of time in learning the techniques involved, and in equipment.

I will continue to watch the progress of MaxPreps, I'm sure they will eventually get to my part of the country. But my fear is that when they do, and when I have satisfied all their requirements to post galleries, I will feel the the return does not justify the investment. I hope I'm wrong but with the current economic situation, and with the trends in professional sports photography, it may be that I am trying to swim upstream.

Aug 27, 2009 at 02:20 PM

Fish On
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #5 · MaxPreps

WmPat wrote:

"There is, however, very little info available about how much a photog can expect to earn from shooting what MaxPreps wants and posting galleries on their website. And when you do find a nugget about your potential earnings it always seems to be less than generous."

Here is a brief info from the Maxpreps website. More info can be found by clicking on the "Maxpreps Photographers Agreement" found at the bottom of the page.

You get to keep 80% of profits from all prints sold. IMO, the 20% they keep for having a server for the galleries, billing, printing, shipping, and customer service is worth the hassle.

http://www.maxpreps.com/FanPages/photo_join.mxp

Aug 28, 2009 at 04:32 AM

timgangloff
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #6 · MaxPreps

I've never sold anything for maxpreps, but am curious about how they set prices and what net really means to the photographer. I gleaned this from their website. And for the record, I am not anti-MP.

"Standard Royalty Compensation. Upon the sale and delivery of photographic prints and/or digital files to consumers, Member shall earn a royalty of eighty (80) percent of the net proceeds.

Net proceeds are defined as the total sale price (not including shipping and handling charges or sales tax, if applicable) of a product sold, minus the cost of production, order processing and marketing. Generally, the production, processing and marketing expense represent approximately ten (10) percent of the sale price."

Aug 28, 2009 at 01:17 PM

indyjones
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #7 · MaxPreps

Most of the photogs I talk to about MP seem to think that their forays into editorial content are more for the purpose of making a credible claim to access than for serious journalism.

Huh?

Aug 28, 2009 at 01:53 PM

clarence3
Online
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #8 · MaxPreps

timgangloff wrote:
curious about how they set prices and what net really means to the photographer. I gleaned this from their website.

"Standard Royalty Compensation. Upon the sale and delivery of photographic prints and/or digital files to consumers, Member shall earn a royalty of eighty (80) percent of the net proceeds.

Net proceeds are defined as the total sale price (not including shipping and handling charges or sales tax, if applicable) of a product sold, minus the cost of production, order processing and marketing. Generally, the production, processing and marketing expense represent approximately ten (10) percent of the sale price."

Tim, I read the same info. My interpretation... MP sells a 4x6 for $7.99... subtract 10% for production/processing/marketing...

$7.99 - 10% = $7.19

Then subtract 20% for their share of the net.

$7.19 - 20% = $5.75

So the photographer ends up with $5.75 for each photo that is sold.

Aug 28, 2009 at 02:01 PM

Steve Ickes
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #9 · MaxPreps

indyjones wrote:
Most of the photogs I talk to about MP seem to think that their forays into editorial content are more for the purpose of making a credible claim to access than for serious journalism.

Huh?

I second that "Huh?"

Are you saying that MP hides behind the veil of editorial content so that they might gain access for their photographers? Have you actually looked at the web site? It is full of insightful and detailed editorial content. The sale of images is definitely secondary. In many cases MP will post images clearly marked "Not for Resale" because that particular event may already have an agreement with an official photographer that prohibits the sale of images for anything other than editorial use. So while the MP photographer does have access to said event, MP does not usurp the other photographer's agreement to sell images. I know that's hard to believe especially since undermining existing agreements by other photographers seems to happen all the time these days.

Aug 28, 2009 at 02:33 PM

WmPat
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #10 · MaxPreps

Fish On wrote:
Here is a brief info from the Maxpreps website. More info can be found by clicking on the "Maxpreps Photographers Agreement" found at the bottom of the page.

You get to keep 80% of profits from all prints sold. IMO, the 20% they keep for having a server for the galleries, billing, printing, shipping, and customer service is worth the hassle.

http://www.maxpreps.com/FanPages/photo_join.mxp

Thanks for the reply Fish On. I have read just about everything on their website regarding the terms, most of it more than once. That info doesn't give me any clue as to how much I could earn by posting galleries or for shooting assignments for them.

Aug 29, 2009 at 03:44 AM

WmPat
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #11 · MaxPreps

Steve Ickes wrote:

Are you saying that MP hides behind the veil of editorial content so that they might gain access for their photographers? Have you actually looked at the web site? It is full of insightful and detailed editorial content. The sale of images is definitely secondary. In many cases MP will post images clearly marked "Not for Resale" because that particular event may already have an agreement with an official photographer that prohibits the sale of images for anything other than editorial use. So while the MP photographer does have access to said event, MP does not usurp the other photographer's agreement to sell images. I know that's hard to believe especially since undermining existing agreements by other photographers seems to happen all the time these days.

Yes I have looked at the MaxPreps website, in some depth over several years. My impression is that MP started as a photo sales site on the west coast and is trying to grow into a national one. They have branched out into what they call editorial content and therefore can stake a claim to access anywhere. What I see on their website reminds me more of promotion than it does journalism. However, I have not dug into what they do for southern California, am not familiar with the stats they post or the leaderboards for that region. In my area MP has not bothered to correct misspellings in school names even after repeated e-mails from some photogs and parents of players. Last year they listed an area team high in their national rankings that wasn't even ranked in it's home state. That became a sort of standing joke on the sidelines every friday night.

I am not trying to disagree with what you say about MP. But I would also ask that you pay equal respect to the honest impressions I am telling you about from people in another part of the country which is not as well served by MP.

Aug 29, 2009 at 04:04 AM

Steve Ickes
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #12 · MaxPreps

I will agree that there are many typos and inconsistencies with some of the information. For instance, I never rely on MP for the game schedules, I usually just go directly to each school's web site. However, as I understand it the majority of information is submitted by the coaches, staff, or someone who volunteers to upload information. Therefore, I would assume mistakes should be corrected by those individuals. That's merely speculation on my part as I really have no working knowledge of that part of the process.

While I certainly respect your difference of opinion as I do anyone's I also think that many people have the wrong impression of MP in general. I still stand by my statement that of all the prep sports web sites they seem to be the most comprehensive and well run. There is a group here that tried to launch the same type of concept but they wanted to grow from the bottom up. Meaning, start with one local region and then slowly expand out. In their case, they had absolutely no standards with respect to photos. As a result it appears that everything is uploaded including OOF shots. So essentially parents have to wade through 500 photos in some cases just to find one or two of their son/daughter. And many times the photographers would submit a 10-15 shot sequence of one run or play which is just ridiculous in my viewpoint.

I appreciate the standards that MP has sent and have no problems adhering to those in the name of consistency and clarity.

Aug 29, 2009 at 04:44 AM

Patrick Lanius
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #13 · MaxPreps

I am a MP shooter although I was accepted in December and didn’t submit too much material through the spring season earlier this year. I plan to be more active this year.

My impression is that MP is driven mostly by a desire for content. Their content includes high quality photography and excellent editorial and reportage content. I believe they want the content mostly to drive traffic for ads - not photo sales.

To keep the quality of the content high, they screen shooters then review and accept only acceptable shots. Once a shooter gets a bit of experience in their system, they relax their supervision a bit and rely more on the shooter. Here in Denver, they use the former prep sports editor for the Rocky Mountain News for much of their reportage and editorial content - high quality stuff there too.

Overall, I think they are a good outfit. All of us photogs are just freelance contractors who provide content. It’s a symbiotic relationship that works well for both parties IMO. They pass 80% of the revenue from photo sales to their photographers. And the photog keeps the photo copyright. I think it’s quite reasonable for MP to keep the other 20% for their part in this. And you can post a link to your personal photography site in your online MP profile.

As a photog, you can push your MP work as hard as you want - or not at all. It’s up to you. The more content you post, the more likely you are to get some sales and perhaps other opportunities.

MP may have started out as a photo sales site in CA, but after they were purchased by CBS Sports, they morphed into the bonifide prep sports news outlet they are now. If MP seems a bit unprofessional in a certain area, I’ll bet it’s because they have not yet made significant inroads there and don’t yet have quality people in that area. In such an area, there might actually be an opportunity for you.

Aug 29, 2009 at 04:58 AM

jaybean
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #14 · MaxPreps

I shot for them for a while but the return wasn't worth the time investment. They require everything you upload be print ready or else they reject it. They require that you use flash or they reject it. If there's even a glimmer of flash reflection in the player's eyes, they reject it. If the white balance it even a tad off, they reject it. If there's a hint of blur, they reject it. If there's any noise at all, they reject it. If it's above ISO 800 they reject it. etc. etc. After getting through all of the above, I found I was lucky if I sold more than one or two photos from each game I shot. The return wasn't worth the amount of time that had to be invested compared to other outlets.

I doubt anyone shooting for them is even earning minimum wage, based on the time spent shooting and preparing every single photo to be acceptable and print ready. If they would accept proofs then it would be a completely different story, but they don't

Nov 05, 2009 at 07:59 PM

Carl Auer
Offline
Dedicated FM
Moderator
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #15 · MaxPreps

I have been shooting for MaxPreps for, jeeze, 4 years now. The recruited me, mainly because I am in Alaska and a SportsShooter member. I can answer some of the questions brought up here.

First of all, MaxPreps started out as a independent company in California and grew from there. They were slowly infiltrating other states and had some pretty strict rules on photos. One of the rules now gone was, you can post images for sale on your own website, but only 14 days after they are posted on MaxPreps. That has changed. You can now post your images for sale on your personal site at the same time. If you shoot anything ambient for them, it is fine up to ISO 400. If you have to shoot at a higher ISO, then they require you to use strobes or flashes to keep the ISO at 400 or lower. They do this because they hold themselves at a higher standard. Yes, I have shot at ISO 1600 on an original 1D and printed at 16x20 and it looked just fine with a little noise reduction, but if there is any noise at all, they usually reject the images. They want to product the highest possible quality images for various reasons. One is that they sell prints to parents (not for all events) and while it might look great on screen, it may not look as good in print, so the lower the ISO the better. Another reason is they are a media outlet. They have had ties with USA Today in the past, and currently have an agreement with Sports Illustrated. So, if SI or another media entity asks for a image of a specific player, they want to send them the best possible image because you never know how big it will be, or what the use will be. So better to be safe than sorry. Since CBS acquired MaxPreps, it has not really changed much, except that I do see them offering more media use of images. At least for Alaska, my images are on the state pages with schedules, rankings and stats. I have had recruiters call me asking for me to cover games through MaxPreps so college coaches could take a look, and I know that a couple kids from the high school got calls from colleges about them because of MaxPreps.

MaxPreps could really be looked at as a Photo sales site, a photo media outlet, a college recruiter site, and a high school sports news site. The states that have had their high school sports association sign contracts with MaxPreps is a great thing. I feel it is better for the kids to have sports photographers taking the action shots for them rather than Lifetouch. (Lifetouch has the contract up here for high school sports, so when it comes to state championships, I shoot for MaxPreps, but for editorial only, whether it be on MaxPreps, SI.com or CBSSports websites).

Can you make a living shooting for Maxpreps? Not unless you are a employee. But when I shoot for the school I cover, and also take shots of the opponent, the bulk of my sales and how I make my living comes from my personal site, but for each game I shoot, I may get some sales through MaxPreps from the opposing teams and to me it is just extra money.

Nov 05, 2009 at 09:06 PM

jaybean
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #16 · MaxPreps

Ah, you brought up the other thing I didn't like about them. When you upload images to them you are for all practical purposes also giving them an unrestricted use license. As you noted, whereas they "offer more media use of images" yet the photographers only get paid for print sales made to parents.

Nov 05, 2009 at 09:28 PM

clarence3
Online
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #17 · MaxPreps

jaybean wrote:
Ah, you brought up the other thing I didn't like about them. When you upload images to them you are for all practical purposes also giving them an unrestricted use license. As you noted, whereas they "offer more media use of images" yet the photographers only get paid for print sales made to parents.

Maybe the terms have changed since I've been shooting for them, but that's not the way I read the Agreement...

http://www.maxpreps.com/FanPages/photos.mxp
http://www.maxpreps.com/FanPages/photosScheduleA.mxp

Standard Print and Digital Photographic Usages
Standard Royalty Compensation. Upon the sale and delivery of photographic prints and/or digital files to consumers, Member shall earn a royalty of eighty (80) percent of the net proceeds.

Commercial Photographic Usages
Commercial Image Royalty Compensation. Upon the sale and delivery of digital images to commercial consumers, Member shall earn a royalty of fifty (50) percent of the net proceeds. Net proceeds are defined as the total sale price of the license, minus the cost of delivery, order processing and marketing.

Of course, if they decide to let another media source use the image for $0, then 50% of 0 is also 0.

Nov 05, 2009 at 10:10 PM

Carl Auer
Offline
Dedicated FM
Moderator
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #18 · MaxPreps

That is incorrect. Any time they sell an image, whether it be to a parent or a newspaper or a website, you get money. Some items, like SI pictures, you need to invoice them, but that is no big deal.

Nov 05, 2009 at 10:20 PM

Carl Auer
Offline
Dedicated FM
Moderator
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #19 · MaxPreps

Let me say this too...Any image I have sent to them that they have used on pages other than the team page or galleries, I have been paid for (that means front page, feature in site, or state page). If the photo goes to parent site CBS Sports, I get paid, SI.com, USAToday, ESPN, wherever they send it, I get paid.

Nov 05, 2009 at 10:23 PM

jaybean
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #20 · MaxPreps

Here's the clause which let's them get around royalties, including allowing them to provide photos to the state high school publications (which may also be some of our direct customers) without any royalty:
Use of Photos for Promotions, Web Site Display.
Member grants MaxPreps a perpetual, non-exclusive and worldwide license for use of images in promotions and display for MaxPreps. This licensed use of images is granted by Member to MaxPreps to inform the public about high school sports, to assist with advertising and promotion in order to publicize MaxPreps to the public, and to enhance the appearance of MaxPreps� Web site and its publications, advertising and promotional materials. MaxPreps is also authorized by Member to provide a sub-license for the display of photographs by official high school sports governing bodies in connection with their publications.

Nov 05, 2009 at 11:11 PM

Mark Peters
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #21 · MaxPreps

Carl Auer wrote:
So, if SI or another media entity asks for a image of a specific player, they want to send them the best possible image because you never know how big it will be, or what the use will be. So better to be safe than sorry.

I have no dog in this fight - it's their playground, they get to set the rules.

I did want to respond to the snippet above however -

David Bergman had an ambient ISO 3200 shot grace the front cover of SI, and it was a vertical crop from a horizontal frame. http://www.davidbergman.net/blog/2008/09/03/no-sports-illustrated-cover-jinx-for-me/

Rather than say it's better to be safe than sorry - I would say it's better to have an image (even if it's high ISO) than no image.

That said, I'm curious about the notation on their membership agreement page that says the image must be shot jpeg large-fine. Do they actually require the image to be captured that way, or to be processed and saved at that resolution. If the former, I would be curious why they would care if it was captured as a Jpeg or as a RAW and processed to a jpeg.

Nov 05, 2009 at 11:40 PM

P Alesse
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #22 · MaxPreps

In the days of the 1D, I would agree that anything above ISO 400 started to degrade, but in this day and age with the D3 producing such amazing stuff at 3200, you'd think they'd aquiesce and change their requirements for flash above 400

Nov 06, 2009 at 12:02 AM

Carl Auer
Offline
Dedicated FM
Moderator
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #23 · MaxPreps

Hah, It is funny you mention David Bergman shooting at 3200 on his D3. I may have misspoke/mistyped. They require the strobes/flashes for the sales to parents side. They want little to no noise in these images. While todays cameras, the D300, D3 D3X and 1DMk III, IV, and 7D have great high ISO handling, not all of their shooters use the brand new gear. Plus in your example, I would love to shoot a high school game at 3200 ISO in a NCAA stadium. Every football field I have gone to has horrible lighting and even at 3200 ISO, it is just not enough. With good stadium lighting (NCAA may have a tv contract and will light the field much more even than a typical high school stadium), correct exposure, and a fantastic camera like the D3, yes, those images may slip past the quality control of MaxPreps. But all stadiums are not lit the same.

I actually traded my 20D to David Bergman for his 1D (Was going to give his brother in law the 1D to learn how to take pictures on, then decided a 20D would be easier for him to use at the same time I was looking to trade). Still have it in my camera bag as a back up. Anyway, when I shot the Alaska State Football Championship game, it started in sun and went to dark. I would normally have shot at ISO 400 until my shutterspeed hit to slow a point to freeze action, then pull out the vivitars and go to work with those, but, because I was not shooting for sales, but contracted by MaxPreps for editorial coverage of the game, I was able to just bump up the ISO. I think I ended up shooting the last quarter at ISO 1600. If I was shooting to put into a gallery, absolutely no way I would have not shot without a flash. But since we were not selling the photos to parents, I was free to do whatever I wanted. But I also let them know that the shots would not be flashed. I have had basketball shots used in ESPN the magazine that had close to 75% of the original image cropped out, and the remaining image blown up quite a bit. These shots have been from a NCAA preseason televised tournament, shot at ISO 800 unstrobed, If it would have been a typical high school gym, ambient would have been ISO 3200 and blowing up a image cropped like that would be unacceptable. So, because even MaxPreps does not know what the use may be, by offering lower ISO images, allowing clients to crop and enlarge and still have a great image, they have a better chance of getting these images out to places like SI. On the Bergman cover, he was shooting for SI, and I know a few SI shooters that always go into the game with check lists. They typically have images they are asked to get, specific players, or a play, or a overall shot. Once they get the required shots out of the way, every single one of them is shooting in hopes of a cover or a leading off photo. When a photo editor goes to Icon, Getty, Corbis, Wireimage, Maxpreps, they are looking for an image that will work for what they want. So if there are two images that they find, one shot at ISO 3200 on a MKII of exactly what they are looking for, or a ISO 200 strobed shot from a classic 1D of almost the same shot, but not quite as good (missed the peak moment), you can bet that if they are planning on cropping or blowing it up, the strobed shot will win out.

Another thing to remember is that the MaxPreps quality/strobe guidelines will probably change in the future. These were written in the 1D classic/MkII and D2H/D2X era when high ISO was not the best. Once more and more of their shooters start shooting less with the older cameras, the strobing issue will more than likely change.

Nov 06, 2009 at 12:55 AM

jrowphoto
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #24 · MaxPreps

Seems to me that a few people are making assumptions and especially the people that haven't shot for them. A lot of misinformation as well, imho... I just started shooting for them this year, and was recruited by one of their photo managers out of Texas (I'm in the Chicago/Milwaukee area). He came across my site, and liked my photos and asked if I'd be interested, so I started shooting for them. They hardly have any photography presence in IL, other than downstate, so I'm the only one posting galleries from the Chicago metro area of 10 million people. They aren't as well known here but a lot of people I talk with DO know them from looking at stats, rankings, articles... They are growing nationally from CA, and have a large presence in TX, and are now the official photographers in CA, NY, and NC for state championships. Besides now being part of CBS Sports, they have signed an agreement to provide HS content for SI (and specifically the "faces in the crowd" column). They just sent a notice that this last month was the most traffic ever on the site and have now had 3.9 million unique visitors... To me, that sounds like a pretty decent audience to market to.

They aren't some "conspiracy", but I think some people just like to look for things like that.

All shooting is on spec, and you aren't assigned to shoot anything. If they do ask you to cover a particular event, they pay you for that, but 99% of it is shoot what you want. It's simply another outlet to sell photos (and a better outlet than my own site apparently, because I've sold more via MP this fall than my own site, without doing ANY marketing for MP). I received my first check in October (for all sales in September), and they pay on time, and accurately. I generally don't market myself much or hand out business cards and the like too often, so I've made sales via MP that would have never heard of me or come across my photos otherwise.

Regarding quality, what's wrong with having strict or more demanding standards?? Isn't that a good thing?? There's enough crappy photos floating around already from the 10 soccer moms with a Canon Rebel providing the "official" photos on the school/team websites, and giving those away free.

Also, there is no "you can't shoot above ISO 800" rule. What they want are well-exposed, low noise, non-blurry shots with good color that will make nice prints. They want consistency in the photos on their website from photographer to photographer, and for the most part they do achieve that. It's hard to shoot night with flash, and due to recycle times, you can't just blast away at 9 FPS and hope for the 1 or 2 good shots. You have to wait, anticipate, etc. (which usually means the ref's white butt will cross right in front of me as I press the shutter! hehe). I've shot about 5 night games this way, and I don't get many great action shots (a lot of the pre and post play stuff generally), so I've shot a local Saturday day game each week as well to get some more/better action.

I shot a night playoff game in Wisconsin just last week at a school that had relatively good lighting for HS, so other than a handful of shots, I shot ambient light. With my Nikon D700, I shot at ISO 2500, f2.8, and 1/500th, and that gallery was accepted by MaxPreps. I had two submitted photos out of ~120 removed by the editor (with his crtique/notes available for me to read), for being too dark, which was fine, and they were... near the endzone, with no lights hitting the front of the player. I've never had more than 1 or 2 photos rejected per gallery submission (~70-100 shots for a night game, and 200-275 for day games). Personally, I like having an editor look at my pictures and give me feedback, because it makes me better, and the only person that does that otherwise is my wife or my family (and that's not really a critique is it... everything is "great"!

)

As far as "being a pain" with their cropping guidelines, it really isn't. I already crop when I post to my own website, so rather than trying to decide 4x6 or 5x7 for this shot or that shot, I started using their cropping guidelines for all of my photos. I shoot RAW, process in lightroom, crop, and then upload the photos to my personal website galleries (the sales part of my website is through smugmug). After I've uploaded all of my photos to my personal site, I simply re-export them to a folder at 1600 on the short side. Copy the folder to MaxPreps, and I'm done. No additional hassle really.

This isn't my full-time job, and I'm not making a living at this, and neither would anyone else I suspect... But that doesn't make them "evil", or out to "rip us off"... Simply another outlet for our work, and maybe it generates some revenue that wouldn't normally come your way. Nothing wrong with that. I suppose it's dependent on how well you market yourself, and even then it's sometimes hit and miss. I've sold $100s of dollars from shooting events I didn't have expectations from (i.e. children's choir holiday concert), and sold little from things I thought would sell (weekend hockey tournament)...

MaxPreps has been a really good partner for me so far, and I don't have anything bad to say about any of their practices, communication, etc. They've been very professional and timely at every step of the way.

Nov 06, 2009 at 07:42 AM

Jeff Napier
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #25 · MaxPreps

jrowphoto,
I would have to +1 to everything thing mentioned in the above post. Our workflow/experince with MP is very similar other than I have not been loading them to my personal site, just havent done it yet is the only reason.

Jeff

Nov 06, 2009 at 02:53 PM


FM Forums \| Sports Corner \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 3 end