Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 26, 2012, 04:03

MicrostockGroup

MicrostockGroup » Forum » Microstock Photography Forum - General » General Stock Discussion » Northern Ireland Poster Row

Microstockgroup Sponsors

« previous next »

Pages: [1]

Topic: Northern Ireland Poster Row

(Read 2033 times)

Pixart

« on: April 16, 2010, 14:44 »

#link

Political war using Istock model! Yet another valid reason to hire your own photog and model.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/northern_ireland/8621712.stm

Now they are in trouble with Istock for abusing the depicting personal endorsement rules.


	Ignore \| Logged

gostwyck

« Reply #1 on: April 16, 2010, 16:11 »

#link

Nice bit of free publicity for Istock.

It really was incredibly lazy of the DUP. I'm quite sure the people that designed and paid for the poster would have been well aware of general political advertising rules, irrespective of the terms of the Istock license.


	Ignore \| Logged

ShadySue

Premium Member

« Reply #2 on: April 16, 2010, 16:26 »

#link

And they've used a male model too:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/election_2010/northern_ireland/8624978.stm


	Ignore \| Logged

sjlocke

« Reply #3 on: April 16, 2010, 19:12 »

#link

Or is the right one a purposeful jab at the left one?

"I want this!"

"On second thought, I want this other!"


	Ignore \| Logged

Talanis

« Reply #4 on: April 17, 2010, 07:03 »

#link

They might be in trouble but this is soooo funny. Good jab from the Tories, I guess DUP will lose some points over this.


	Ignore \| Logged

ShadySue

Premium Member

« Reply #5 on: April 17, 2010, 08:49 »

#link

Quote from: sjlocke on April 16, 2010, 19:12

Or is the right one a purposeful jab at the left one?

"I want this!"

"On second thought, I want this other!"

That's what they claim. They claim they were making the point that this was only a model, not a real party supporter.


	Ignore \| Logged

sharpshot

« Reply #6 on: April 17, 2010, 15:39 »

#link

UKIP have the best poster this election, I wouldn't vote for them but this made me laugh.


	Ignore \| Logged

macrosaur

« Reply #7 on: April 17, 2010, 18:47 »

#link

hahaha !

millions of euros spent in the advertising campaign and barely 20$ to buy the photo on istock.

it reminds me of another scandal involving the BNP using istock images of a "typical british family"
that was later found to be the italian parents of the istock photographer...


	Ignore \| Logged

macrosaur

« Reply #8 on: April 17, 2010, 18:51 »

#link

Quote from: gostwyck on April 16, 2010, 16:11

as usual the wording "royalty free" is to blame.
buyers just think they can do whatever they like and never read contracts.

with RM instead they pay based on usage type so they can't make mistakes
like this.


	Ignore \| Logged

sharply_done

« Reply #9 on: April 17, 2010, 22:56 »

#link

That was a brilliant heads-up play by the Concervative & Unionists party - I like how they even kept the same look and feel of the original ad.


	Ignore \| Logged

click_click

« Reply #10 on: April 18, 2010, 10:03 »

#link

I'm curious to see what the "penalty" from iStock will be.

However, I assume that in the worst case they will only get a slap on the hand for not reading the fine print they signed.

They wanted to make a point, did it and moved on. They could have cared less about the fine print as the strategic move was most important.

How does a lawyer justify a $5000 fine for an image that was licensed for $20? Or what else: the accounts the images were purchased from get banned?

Furthermore what compensation does the model or photographer get for such abuse? iStock is acting in its own best interest (their right) but the model and photographer will have to fight that battle with their own pocket money - good luck.


	Ignore \| Logged

macrosaur

« Reply #11 on: April 18, 2010, 20:04 »

#link

Quote from: click_click on April 18, 2010, 10:03

How does a lawyer justify a $5000 fine for an image that was licensed for $20?

exactly my point.

and going further, what if the image was licenced for as low as 5$ or even 0.2$ with subs ?

don't you guys see your images ARE worth nothing, no matter if they sell 1K times ?

even your hero Yuri recently admitted he's now doing 50% RM.
no clear and/or straight reasons about this switch but it must be obvious.


« Last Edit: April 18, 2010, 20:07 by macrosaur »	Ignore \| Logged

macrosaur

« Reply #12 on: April 18, 2010, 20:06 »

#link


	Ignore \| Logged

« Reply #13 on: April 19, 2010, 13:21 »

#link

Quote from: macrosaur on April 18, 2010, 20:04

even your hero Yuri recently admitted he's now doing 50% RM.

In another post you said 80%. What is it now? Could you please call Yuri and ask his exact numbers? Tongue


	Ignore \| Logged

macrosaur

« Reply #14 on: April 19, 2010, 18:29 »

#link

Quote from: FD-amateur on April 19, 2010, 13:21

Quote from: macrosaur on April 18, 2010, 20:04

even your hero Yuri recently admitted he's now doing 50% RM.

In another post you said 80%. What is it now? Could you please call Yuri and ask his exact numbers? Tongue

he wasn't very clear about this.

he said before he was doing 20% RM and now it's almost the opposite.
so is it 50% or 80% ? i don't know.

all i know is he's quickly moving to RM because it obviously pays more.


	Ignore \| Logged

gostwyck

« Reply #15 on: April 19, 2010, 20:34 »

#link

Quote from: macrosaur on April 19, 2010, 18:29

all i know is he's quickly moving to RM because it obviously pays more.

I see. How does that explain all the previous RM shooters that are now moving into microstock though?

Cathy Yeulet trousered $20M by flogging Banana Images to Jupiter in 2006. They paid her a staggering $1300 per image and those 15K images are now languishing on the scrap-heap otherwise known as 'Thinkstock'. Today she's operating as Monkey Business and would appear to be going 100% for the the microstock RF market. Obviously a clever girl who knows where the market is heading __ unlike your good self.

Just think how much you might have made if you'd sold your RM portfolio in 2006. Never mind.


	Ignore \| Logged

Phil

« Reply #16 on: April 19, 2010, 21:18 »

#link

Quote from: gostwyck on April 19, 2010, 20:34

Quote from: macrosaur on April 19, 2010, 18:29

all i know is he's quickly moving to RM because it obviously pays more.

wow!


	Ignore \| Logged

Sign up with Shutterstock

macrosaur

« Reply #17 on: April 20, 2010, 08:38 »

#link

Quote from: gostwyck on April 19, 2010, 20:34

Quote from: macrosaur on April 19, 2010, 18:29

all i know is he's quickly moving to RM because it obviously pays more.

no surprise Jupiter Images got bankrupt and sold at 1/100th of its previous stock value.

p.s.
my RM portfolio would be quite hard to sell as RF, i don't shoot bananas or dogs or ice creams.

recently by opposite i'm investing time in exploring new markets especially selling prints for 100$ a pop.
it was time i got the foot in the door of fine-art and galleries, we'll see how it goes.


	Ignore \| Logged

macrosaur

« Reply #18 on: April 20, 2010, 08:40 »

#link

and if she's so clever what are you guys waiting for ? run to your local Walmart, grab some bananas and get rich quick !


	Ignore \| Logged

« Reply #19 on: April 20, 2010, 12:01 »

#link

Quote from: gostwyck on April 19, 2010, 20:34

Today she's operating as Monkey Business and would appear to be going 100% for the the microstock RF market.

Ah it is a collection, not a group of photogs like Iofoto? I have to say honestly, scouting for images, that I came across some very mediocre images of MB (frontal flash on messy background - looking dated), especially on Cutcaster where they were consistently in front in searches (venting a rant).


« Last Edit: April 20, 2010, 12:03 by FD-amateur »	Ignore \| Logged

michaeldb

« Reply #20 on: April 20, 2010, 20:59 »

#link

Great thread Grin

This is the kind of thing I love to come to MSG for.


	Ignore \| Logged

Pages: [1]

« previous next »

Jump to:

Related Topics
	Subject	Started by	Replies	Views	Last post
	Trip to Ireland General Stock Discussion	sbonk	4	986	February 04, 2007, 22:32 by sbonk
	Trip to Ireland General Stock Discussion	sbonk	11	1524	July 16, 2007, 21:55 by glitterd
	printing poster upsizing or not? Off Topic	MicrostockExp	3	992	December 21, 2008, 16:32 by MicrostockExp
	photos of poster and paintings General Stock Discussion	wins75	2	646	May 02, 2009, 11:28 by batman
	Dublin, Ireland GTG and Shoot - June 7, 2010 « 1 2 3 4 » Microstock GTG / Workshops / Events	leaf	86	9351	June 16, 2010, 08:52 by RT

Microstockgroup Sponsors

MicrostockGroup Email Updates

Microstock Poll Results

Site	Earnings Rating
Top Tier - Big 4
Shutterstock	100
iStock	66.7
Fotolia	34.9
Dreamstime	26.7

Middle Tier
DepositPhotos	21.6
123RF	16.3
Canstockphoto	11.2
Bigstockphoto	9.5
Veer	8.7

Low Earners
PantherMedia	6.7
PhotoDune	5.8
isignstock	4.1
Zoonar	3.5
GLStockImages	2.7
Stockfresh	2.2
YayMicro	1.8
FeaturePics	1.4
MostPhotos	1.3
ScanStockPhoto	1.1
Crestock	0.8
Cutcaster	0.6
AllYouCanStock	0.1
ClipartOf
Pond5
RevoStock
Clipcanvas
DrawShop
ClipDealer
PhotoSpin
VectorStock
GraphicRiver
Pixmac
PhotoCase
The3dStudio
photaki
SuperHug
PhotoKore
iRockStock
Vivozoom
StockPhotoMedia
Regimages
ImageVortex
Imagegate
ViscoImages

More Poll Results Updated: 2012-05-26

Advertise on Microstockgroup.com | Contact: [email protected]