MicrostockGroup

honestly I don´t find that similar but I guess you know what you are doing

lol so you guys think it's just a coincidence that the external diamater of both the internal and externl parts of the lenses line up EXACTLY?  Considering I didn't use a photograph or trace anything and just drew it from scratch like I do with all my work (whereas CTE openly admits to tracing photographs),  and made the internal part of the lens bigger than a normal lens to accentuate the eyeball, it would be a huge coincidence for the diameters to line up EXACTLY.  Also it's too much of a coincidence that the shutter / diaphram lines line up EXACTLY with mine as you can see from the third image.  Also the colouring of the eyeball is similar with the yellow / orange shading surrounding the pupil.  That's my eyeball there and I've exagerated the yellow to make it more distinct.  His image is also nothing like anything he has ever submitted before.  Considering we both submit to the same microstock agencies and that I've interacted with him and he's aware of my portfolio with only a few images in it, I'd say it's far too much of a coincidence and I'm absolutely positive an IP lawyer would agree.  If the image is not removed from every agent he has it on, or if I find it displayed somewhere at a later date, I will be seeing an IP lawyer and taking the matter further.

If you can't see the resemblance... and that some parts of it an exact match, then I'm glad you're not running a microstock agency because it would end up a database full of ripoffs.  Everyone I've asked so far... and I've asked hundreds from various places, can see the resemblance and have no doubt it's a copy, as do I.

Anyway, this thread really isn't to ask your opinion whether it was copied because it clearly was copied.  This thread is to acknowledge the agents and the way they have handled the matter so far.

i have seen a ton of images like yours over the every sites!!

No worries luis.

Thanks for your support Danicek.  I've actually done that with the two layers on the third pic and they're still arguing.  I think some in here just want to argue for the sake of arguing without even looking at the evidence.  I'm just as disgusted as you are.  It actually really peed me off that I put a fair bit of thought into creating this lens.  I spent a long time doing extensive searches to make sure there is nothing similar to my image before creating it, and then some guy comes along and copies it. 

And I come in here to thank the agents and to assure people that when this happens to them, the agents take this sort of thing seriously and will probably look after them but all I got was a lot of flack, lol

It really doesn't matter what you type in here, you can count on a bunch of bullies will just crap on it regardless...  They've become used to doing that and honestly, I don't pay attention to a lot of the people that post in here anymore... they seem juvenile to me and incapable of actually having a discussion on something and I just find them comical.  However, this is a serious matter to me so I'm going to ignore the ones who are just looking to argue for no reason.  There's still some decent ones here though and I read what they write and consider their opinions, even if I don't comment.

I'll leave it there because I've no interest in turning this into a shitstorm. My image was copied, the agents so far responded accordingly and that's all I wanted to share.

I too agree this is not just the copy of a concept, but of thee image itself. Glad to know agencies are respinding accordingly.

I like his copy. Is it still for sale?

Thank you for your comments, everyone.

hmmm... interesting... i always suspected something wasnt right with the speed at which his portfolio was growing at istock around a year and half ago. I thought to myself he wasnt alone in creating his works.

So glad for you that the agencies are handling it.  Yes, he added background, etc, but d*mn, that is just all kinds of wrong to copy someones stuff.  Good for you for catching it.  People like that need to be banned.  Good luck with the rest of the sites.

Thanks Lisa and Blufish.



I once called him a machine and was in awe at the speed he was producing but then I became a little suss when he said he traces a lot of his own photos.  I just couldn't see how he would have the time to go out and shoot and then trace, then pretty up the image and finally load it to so many microstocks.  I couldn't see how one person could do all that and produce 10-20 images a day.  It just didn't make sense to me when I was putting so much time into my own images and only producing one every few days. 



Interestingly enough, that's what I thought and had a quick browse through his profile after finding my image was copied.  I found this:

http://www.iclipart.com/search.php?keys=20436&id=198

And I'm guessing that's what he used to create his chiropractic image.  I sent the two links to DT but they came back to me saying they don't see a striking resemblance.  After that, I didn't bother looking further.  I don't think it has to be a perfect match to be copied.  It's obvious that the concept was copied but it's also obvious (to me anyway) that the image was copied too.  Sure he improved it but it would be pretty difficult for him to prove that he came up with that image without copying the other.

I really don't know how people like that can respect themselves.  I used to think he was amazing.  Now I think he's amazingly pathetic.

Well I've just had word from Crestock who informed me that cteconsulting requested to have the photo removed from their database, right before I emailed them, so that's a good thing.

Goodnight all and thanks for the support