MicrostockGroup
Microstock Photography Forum - General => Microstock News => Topic started by: gostwyck on January 12, 2011, 17:17
-
Someone in Ireland has had a BIG IDEA that they've named 'ethical crowdsourcing'. Camera clubs will enter competitions to provide stock images to designers' requests. No really. Read all about it here;
http://www.siliconrepublic.com/start-ups/item/19913-irish-start-up-picturk-to/ (http://www.siliconrepublic.com/start-ups/item/19913-irish-start-up-picturk-to/)
-
"they get some money, bragging rights, they get a credit and that’s the value they get"
I'm going to contact him and ask if he'll design me a new website and marketing campaign, in return I'll throw him a couple of dollars but the main appeal will obviously be the credit and bragging rights he'll get.
-
"they get some money, bragging rights, they get a credit and that’s the value they get"
I'm going to contact him and ask if he'll design me a new website and marketing campaign, in return I'll throw him a couple of dollars but the main appeal will obviously be the credit and bragging rights he'll get.
How much is "some money"? Any time bragging rights and credit are mentioned it usually means the money is peanuts.
So from what it sounds like this company is getting amateurs to do a custom photo shoot that would normally cost hundreds or thousands of dollars. I can't wait to see the dollars part to see how "ethical" this model is.
-
'custom stock shoots' sites have failed before. This guy is no different, especially when you're trying to promote 'professional' work and all you have is weekend snappers.
-
What use are "bragging rights" to anyone over the age of 12?
-
"Ireland has produced world-class companies that have exploited the potential of supplying images online before."
Boy, he nailed it there. "Ethical crowdsourcing".
-
He's sat down and thought hard about how to translate the shafting designers get on sites like "99 designs" to photographers.
Now we can all share in the anal discomfort yay!
Problem is people go for it because they think "okay work is short and the fee for winning isn't all that terrible right?"
No wrong! you need to think that actually the commissioning party isn't just getting the one photo or design. They are getting hundreds of hours of spec work from hundreds of people for fractions of a cent an hour.
Never has so much time been given up by so many for so little.
-
Must admit I can't see how this is any different to the "Request New Content" forum on IS, other than it being much more complicated and not being addressed to a stock-shooting fraternity who understand the technical requirements, etc.
On the IS forum there is a magazine that every month gives out 3 recipes and requests vertical and horizontal shots of each. The 'lucky winner' gets to sell ... er, two images for their trouble. Oh, nearly forgot, they also get a 'credit' and a copy of the magazine too. Invariably the recipes are in tiny niche subjects which are unlikely to get many further sales (apart from the fact that the recipes themselves have all been done to death anyway). It always amazes me how many contributors beaver away in response to the request.
Here's one of the posts. Never in the field of stock photography have so many mushrooms been stuffed (with macadamia) by so many for so few potential sales. Makes me wonder who is getting the greater stuffing __ the mushrooms or the participants?
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=260401&page=1 (http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=260401&page=1)
-
It sounds a lot like FocalPop (http://www.focalpop.com) to me.
-
I liked the idea of ethical crowdsourcing, but honestly don't see how this idea could possibly end up being a successful business. At 30K competitions a year, they'd have to sell the photos for a lot - or charge the camera clubs a ton for these competitions in the cloud - to make any money.
Even if you forget the thought that camera clubs will deliver lovely black & whites to hang on a wall vs. the type of stock that gets bought, even if you don't worry about model releases, IP and other legal issues, even if you ignore the issue of not many camera clubs in some of the locations that sell a lot of stock, aren't the club members going to lose interest if one or two of the members always make the sale (the sjlocke of Celbridge Camera Club)?
-
Where was the "ethical" part of it? I must have missed that.
-
Where was the "ethical" part of it? I must have missed that.
I think that's the spin they're giving to the fact that they're not handing out money. Money is dirty and 'unethical' you see. This is confirmed by Kelly Thompson of Istockphoto who recently told us we don't really come to his website for it.
It would appear that the first competition is up & running too;
http://www.picturk.com/?p=1 (http://www.picturk.com/?p=1)
Bizarrely the 'Leader Board' is currently topped by a Mr Joris Vreeke, who has 3 votes, and who also happens to be one of the three judges. Just as well they're so very 'ethical' otherwise we might think something funny was going on.
-
Well hope no one from Ireland is hoping to join the club in anticipation of a revenue stream. From the site:
Prizes will be in the form of Vouchers for Conns Cameras, Dublin
And what if no one wins? Personally for even a corporate gig I see crotchety old cam club members submitting a pool of puppydogs and sunsets. Contests are subject to complex lottery and gaming laws that vary from country to country, and in order to fulfill the legal, terms, conditions, and prohibitions must be posted for the entrants.
I really thought Jerry Kennelly was much smarter than this.
And a judge submitting entries? Really, this is all too funny :D
-
Well hope no one from Ireland is hoping to join the club in anticipation of a revenue stream. From the site:
Prizes will be in the form of Vouchers for Conns Cameras, Dublin
You know, if I wanted to harness the mighty power of the interweb to do some "ethical crowd-sourcing", I probably wouldn't choose a little Irish camera shop as the only place that prize vouchers could be exchanged.
According to the Siliconrepublic report Geraghty "... spent 3 months developing his idea for Picturk". Yeah right.
-
I really thought Jerry Kennelly was much smarter than this.
This isn't his venture, the article merely mentions that he was forthcoming with advice
-
I really thought Jerry Kennelly was much smarter than this.
This isn't his venture, the article merely mentions that he was forthcoming with advice
Probably was "Don't quit your day job...".
-
I really thought Jerry Kennelly was much smarter than this.
This isn't his venture, the article merely mentions that he was forthcoming with advice
Probably was "Don't quit your day job...".
& I'm sure that is what would have been said to a couple of bicycle makers from Dayton Ohio or two a couple of Steves making computers in a garage ....
-
& I'm sure that is what would have been said to a couple of bicycle makers from Dayton Ohio or two a couple of Steves making computers in a garage ....
Huh? You are comparing this obviously hopeless (and way behind the time) enterprise with the invention of flight, etc? Oh I see.
-
& I'm sure that is what would have been said to a couple of bicycle makers from Dayton Ohio or two a couple of Steves making computers in a garage ....
Huh? You are comparing this obviously hopeless (and way behind the time) enterprise with the invention of flight, etc? Oh I see.
No just saying that in generally it is best not to listen to naysayers ...
Particularly those who have to cower in anonymity because they fear reprisal from their agents for speaking their mind ...
-
Particularly those who have to cower in anonymity because they fear reprisal from their agents for speaking their mind ...
I'm curious who is the one "cowering in anonymity" when we all know (and respect!) Sean but you have no website, portfolio links or anything else to identify YOU? Something about a pot and a kettle comes to mind, but in this case the kettle isn't even black!
-
Particularly those who have to cower in anonymity because they fear reprisal from their agents for speaking their mind ...
I'm curious who is the one "cowering in anonymity" when we all know (and respect!) Sean but you have no website, portfolio links or anything else to identify YOU? Something about a pot and a kettle comes to mind, but in this case the kettle isn't even black!
It's not that hard to work out who I am, it wouldn't take a plane scientist much less a rocket scientist
& I wasn't referring to Sean but rather Gostwyck, to whom my most recent reply was directed to ...
Sean's an iStock exclusive and they aren't the agency that has taken reprisals against people speaking out in off-site forums.
One of the other agencies has. They are a pain in the butt, but it's the reality. There are a number of anonymous people here who have been around microstock a while, have portfolios at most of the big agencies and have a lot to lose if they get their account cancelled at this agency that doesn't take criticism well. Don't blame the anonymous posters, blame the agency that plays hardball.
I do know who Gostwyck is, but I have no idea who you are. And I do think that one anonymous poster calling another out for being anonymous is a bit rich.
-
Particularly those who have to cower in anonymity because they fear reprisal from their agents for speaking their mind ...
I'm curious who is the one "cowering in anonymity" when we all know (and respect!) Sean but you have no website, portfolio links or anything else to identify YOU? Something about a pot and a kettle comes to mind, but in this case the kettle isn't even black!
It's not that hard to work out who I am, it wouldn't take a plane scientist much less a rocket scientist
& I wasn't referring to Sean but rather Gostwyck, to whom my most recent reply was directed to ...
Sean's an iStock exclusive and they aren't the agency that has taken reprisals against people speaking out in off-site forums.
One of the other agencies has. They are a pain in the butt, but it's the reality. There are a number of anonymous people here who have been around microstock a while, have portfolios at most of the big agencies and have a lot to lose if they get their account cancelled at this agency that doesn't take criticism well. Don't blame the anonymous posters, blame the agency that plays hardball.
I do know who Gostwyck is, but I have no idea who you are. And I do think that one anonymous poster calling another out for being anonymous is a bit rich.
I know Sean is an iStock exclusive, in fact I would say he is the iStock exclusive.
I also know who Gostwyck is, there is no real anonymity on the web ...
-
I know Sean is an iStock exclusive, in fact I would say he is the iStock exclusive.
I'm _the_ big fat panda...
& I'm sure that is what would have been said to a couple of bicycle makers from Dayton Ohio or two a couple of Steves making computers in a garage ....
I don't think you can compare. This "crowd sourced" requested stock thing has been tried multiple times, with multiple failures. Even on IS where there were real photographers, and real cash payment and not a gift card to some obscure store. There is nothing new here, and it is an even lamer idea than the others.
-
I think that's the spin they're giving to the fact that they're not handing out money. Money is dirty and 'unethical' you see. This is confirmed by Kelly Thompson of Istockphoto who recently told us we don't really come to his website for it.
It would appear that the first competition is up & running too;
[url]http://www.picturk.com/?p=1[/url] ([url]http://www.picturk.com/?p=1[/url])
Bizarrely the 'Leader Board' is currently topped by a Mr Joris Vreeke, who has 3 votes, and who also happens to be one of the three judges. Just as well they're so very 'ethical' otherwise we might think something funny was going on.
Thank you for the link and spotting the bug. Joris name was there in error and has been removed from the leader board.
Picturk
-
You're going to all the trouble to join up, and that's all you're going to post?
Come on, elaborate on the "ethical"-ness of your new "innovative" venture for us.
-
Must admit I can't see how this is any different to the "Request New Content" forum on IS, other than it being much more complicated and not being addressed to a stock-shooting fraternity who understand the technical requirements, etc.
On the IS forum there is a magazine that every month gives out 3 recipes and requests vertical and horizontal shots of each. The 'lucky winner' gets to sell ... er, two images for their trouble. Oh, nearly forgot, they also get a 'credit' and a copy of the magazine too. Invariably the recipes are in tiny niche subjects which are unlikely to get many further sales (apart from the fact that the recipes themselves have all been done to death anyway). It always amazes me how many contributors beaver away in response to the request.
Here's one of the posts. Never in the field of stock photography have so many mushrooms been stuffed (with macadamia) by so many for so few potential sales. Makes me wonder who is getting the greater stuffing __ the mushrooms or the participants?
[url]http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=260401&page=1[/url] ([url]http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=260401&page=1[/url])
thats phenomenal, if it wasn't for actually seeing peoples responses I wouldn't have believed anyone would respond. For at least one recipe what they are paying wouldnt cover the cost of ingredients and electricity for me (let alone my time), but oh I'd get a free magazine. Bragging rights of being taken for a ride.
-
I have removed a number of posts from this thread ... the posts were part of a inter-member 'spat' and had nothing to do with the topic.
... and now back to the topic on hand... (hopefully)
-
Must admit I can't see how this is any different to the "Request New Content" forum on IS, other than it being much more complicated and not being addressed to a stock-shooting fraternity who understand the technical requirements, etc.
On the IS forum there is a magazine that every month gives out 3 recipes and requests vertical and horizontal shots of each. The 'lucky winner' gets to sell ... er, two images for their trouble. Oh, nearly forgot, they also get a 'credit' and a copy of the magazine too. Invariably the recipes are in tiny niche subjects which are unlikely to get many further sales (apart from the fact that the recipes themselves have all been done to death anyway). It always amazes me how many contributors beaver away in response to the request.
Here's one of the posts. Never in the field of stock photography have so many mushrooms been stuffed (with macadamia) by so many for so few potential sales. Makes me wonder who is getting the greater stuffing __ the mushrooms or the participants?
[url]http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=260401&page=1[/url] ([url]http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=260401&page=1[/url])
thats phenomenal, if it wasn't for actually seeing peoples responses I wouldn't have believed anyone would respond. For at least one recipe what they are paying wouldnt cover the cost of ingredients and electricity for me (let alone my time), but oh I'd get a free magazine. Bragging rights of being taken for a ride.
Indeedy: always amazes me too, but there's one born every minute.
But to be fair, some people say they do the challenge because they like the look of the recipe and will enjoy preparing/eating it anyway. I'm way too food faddy, and anyway, "Life's too short to stuff a mushroom".
-
I'm not crazy about the magazine requests, but people like doing food images, they may sell anyways on IS, so it's not that big a deal. It's not like they are some niche images that have 0 chance of ever selling.