Thread for Deletion

Goldmund

New Member

« on: September 30, 2011, 02:36 »

#link

I tried something, it didn't work. Mods, please delete this thread. Thanks.


« Last Edit: September 30, 2011, 19:55 by Goldmund »	Ignore \| Logged

markrhiggins

« Reply #1 on: September 30, 2011, 03:08 »

#link

needs a vignette to be Vetta?


	Ignore \| Logged

markrhiggins

« Reply #2 on: September 30, 2011, 03:09 »

#link

It is serious however as the brand is being diluted. best match is lots of similar, mostly exclusive and often poor quality.


	Ignore \| Logged

ShadySue

Premium Member

« Reply #3 on: September 30, 2011, 03:32 »

#link

"...we are on a mission to simplify the ingestion process as well as the inspection process"

ETA: that photo has 3 x 5* reviews. Cheesy


« Last Edit: September 30, 2011, 05:06 by ShadySue »	Ignore \| Logged

sjlocke

« Reply #4 on: September 30, 2011, 05:21 »

#link

Link: http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-17763924-close-up-of-water-pouring-from-a-copper-fountain.php


	Ignore \| Logged

fotografer

Premium Member

« Reply #5 on: September 30, 2011, 05:30 »

#link

Quote from: sjlocke on September 30, 2011, 05:21

Link: http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-17763924-close-up-of-water-pouring-from-a-copper-fountain.php

55 credits for small size!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


	Ignore \| Logged

rubyroo

« Reply #6 on: September 30, 2011, 05:41 »

#link

OMG


	Ignore \| Logged

Maui

« Reply #7 on: September 30, 2011, 05:42 »

#link

Ranked with 5 stars by 3 users? Hmmmm....


	Ignore \| Logged

cclapper

Premium Member

« Reply #8 on: September 30, 2011, 05:52 »

#link

While millions of people have either lost their jobs completely or have had to take a serious cut in pay, there are still companies that can afford to pay 55 credits for a small size image? Somebody's still rolling in the dough. Angry


	Ignore \| Logged

Difydave

« Reply #9 on: September 30, 2011, 05:58 »

#link

Quote from: cclapper on September 30, 2011, 05:52

Doesn't look like anyone has felt the need to download it yet.


	Ignore \| Logged

PaulieWalnuts

« Reply #10 on: September 30, 2011, 06:02 »

#link

If IS, or any stock site, can sell images like this at Agency level prices we should all be happy and take note of how undervalued our work is.

Micro has set our value perception, and also buyers perception, so low that now everything is expected to be cheap.


	Ignore \| Logged

BaldricksTrousers

« Reply #11 on: September 30, 2011, 06:05 »

#link

Here's another example, this time with outrageous lens flare/veiling flare.

http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-15436834-carefree-woman-with-outstretched-arms-holding-a-flowing-scarf.php?st=c338afc

Would these be old slide scans, by any chance? I quite like some of them but they clearly violate iStock quality standards.

I also noticed one edstock cityscape taken this year with the horizon about 2 degrees out of level (and I haven't bothered looking at more than a dozen of the edstock images). It seems the edstock types don't waste time correcting anything about the stuff they churn out. I won't be surprised if they have sensor dust, too.


	Ignore \| Logged

ShadySue

Premium Member

« Reply #12 on: September 30, 2011, 06:07 »

#link

The real insult is that while that file, by a 'fake' exclusive, is sold at agency prices, all independent files, and maybe soon some/all plebby exclusive files are being compulsorily sold at TS prices. :-(


« Last Edit: September 30, 2011, 06:12 by ShadySue »	Ignore \| Logged

rubyroo

« Reply #13 on: September 30, 2011, 06:27 »

#link

Wow. My retinas are burned out!


	Ignore \| Logged

Goldmund

New Member

« Reply #14 on: September 30, 2011, 06:43 »

#link

...


« Last Edit: September 30, 2011, 19:55 by Goldmund »	Ignore \| Logged

ShadySue

Premium Member

« Reply #15 on: September 30, 2011, 06:49 »

#link

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on September 30, 2011, 06:05

I also noticed one edstock cityscape taken this year with the horizon about 2 degrees out of level (and I haven't bothered looking at more than a dozen of the edstock images). It seems the edstock types don't waste time correcting anything about the stuff they churn out. I won't be surprised if they have sensor dust, too.

It could be that they don't do any post work at all: they maybe just upload their images directly from location.


	Ignore \| Logged

ShadySue

Premium Member

« Reply #16 on: September 30, 2011, 07:09 »

#link

Agency:

... which IMHO is worse than some images I've had rejected altogether for 'poor light'.
(But I don't know how to link to a rejected image)


« Last Edit: September 30, 2011, 08:08 by ShadySue »	Ignore \| Logged

Goldmund

New Member

« Reply #17 on: September 30, 2011, 07:19 »

#link

...


« Last Edit: September 30, 2011, 19:56 by Goldmund »	Ignore \| Logged

Nadya

New Member

« Reply #18 on: September 30, 2011, 07:31 »

#link


« Last Edit: September 30, 2011, 07:54 by Nadya »	Ignore \| Logged

cclapper

Premium Member

« Reply #19 on: September 30, 2011, 07:35 »

#link

pimping thread Roll Eyes


	Ignore \| Logged

Goldmund

New Member

« Reply #20 on: September 30, 2011, 07:40 »

#link

...


« Last Edit: September 30, 2011, 19:56 by Goldmund »	Ignore \| Logged

Nadya

New Member

« Reply #21 on: September 30, 2011, 08:01 »

#link

Agency:

Rejected:


« Last Edit: September 30, 2011, 08:11 by Nadya »	Ignore \| Logged

michealo

« Reply #22 on: September 30, 2011, 08:20 »

#link

Goldmund, do you think that your decision to resign as an inspector and your vocal criticism are leading to you being punished?


	Ignore \| Logged

Goldmund

New Member

« Reply #23 on: September 30, 2011, 08:39 »

#link

My decision to resign is not the subject of this topic so let's not go into that. I am raising here a valid concern and any half decent person to just look at these and many other examples will see no reason to punish me for criticizing the obvious double standard policy. Istock's success is in my best interest and I am doing what is in my power to point to flaws of the system that have potential to affect this success. And we are not in middle ages, there are written agreements that define obligations of contracted parties. I have not nor do I intend to breach any of my obligations so I don't see what "punishment" could possibly await me.


	Ignore \| Logged

michealo

« Reply #24 on: September 30, 2011, 08:52 »

#link

Quote from: Goldmund on September 30, 2011, 08:39

My decision to resign is not the subject of this topic so let's not go into that.

No problem with that.

Quote from: Goldmund

I am raising here a valid concern

I agree with you.

Quote from: Goldmund

and any half decent person to just look at these and many other examples will see no reason to punish me for criticizing the obvious double standard policy.

I'm afraid you have greater faith in Getty/IS than I do.

Quote from: Goldmund

Istock's success is in my best interest

And theirs too.

Quote from: Goldmund

and I am doing what is in my power to point to flaws of the system that have potential to affect this success.

If they didn't want to hear it on their forum what makes you think they would be more receptive here?
I know Chris pops in here to keep a check on what IS contributors say here.

Quote from: Goldmund

And we are not in middle ages, there are written agreements that define obligations of contracted parties. I have not nor do I intend to breach any of my obligations so I don't see what "punishment" could possibly await me.

Well increased rejections, fewer acceptances to premium collections, no lypse assignments, and any number of things


	Ignore \| Logged

Pages: [1] 2

« previous next »

MicrostockGroup

Microstockgroup Sponsors

Topic: Thread for Deletion

Microstockgroup Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results