pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Stocksy's call to artist  (Read 42112 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #25 on: May 07, 2014, 09:32 »
-2
So it doesn't looks like you are a source for free content to take?

But I think that potential customers and casual viewers demand more respect than that. Even Magnum have dropped using watermarks. Legitimate commercial users simply do not steal content.

And if we love pictures - well why should that experience be spoiled by having to take measures which are not going to prevent piracy anyhow. It's self-defeating. It makes the pictures look bad.

And if we are talking about RF stock - there are already mostly going to be masses of places to find a non watermarked version of the same image at the same size as the comp or larger - just by finding somewhere it has already been used. So if someone wants to steal it then they already can.


« Reply #26 on: May 07, 2014, 09:37 »
+8
But I think that potential customers and casual viewers demand more respect than that. Even Magnum have dropped using watermarks. Legitimate commercial users simply do not steal content.

Well, of course they don't.  That's why they are called "legitimate users".  Watermarks are not to deter "legitimate users" from anything.

Quote
And if we love pictures - well why should that experience be spoiled by having to take measures which are not going to prevent piracy anyhow. It's self-defeating. It makes the pictures look bad.

Are you talking about selling stock, or just putting up some showcase work?  I'm not in love with an image of a hamburger (or whatever).  I just want it to retain its value as a piece of content someone can utilize.

Quote
And if we are talking about RF stock - there are already mostly going to be masses of places to find a non watermarked version of the same image at the same size as the comp or larger - just by finding somewhere it has already been used. So if someone wants to steal it then they already can.

Why make it easy?

« Reply #27 on: May 07, 2014, 09:38 »
+4
As far as I'm concerned if I have to completely change the way I shoot and process to satisfy a particular agency's 'look' or 'style' then that agency isn't for me, and I'm not for that agency.

Stay true to yourself, so to speak.

I go where the money is :) .

EmberMike

« Reply #28 on: May 07, 2014, 09:39 »
+10
You know who really hates watermarks? Thieves. Just do a search on twitter and you can find tons of people posting stuff about being annoyed by watermarks because it prevents them from using images for free.

Real buyers aren't bothered by watermarks because they know they get the un-marked image when they pay for it.

« Reply #29 on: May 07, 2014, 09:54 »
-1
Are you talking about selling stock, or just putting up some showcase work?

Sue was talking about VSCO grid.

However - I do also think that the best stock sites  will go watermark free sooner or later. It's the job of the agencies to track sales.

  I'm not in love with an image of a hamburger (or whatever).

I can be. Food photography is often brilliant.

In the end the record companies realised that copy protection was not the way to go. This is the same. The best way to sell images is by having a strong brand and by developing good relationships with the clients.  Search results and therefore a site looks ugly when you see the same watermark over and over.


« Reply #30 on: May 07, 2014, 09:57 »
0
Uh..hope this thread will not become watermark vs no-watermark debate.
I personally dislike watermarks, but as a stock photographer I have to use it. No offense, watermark is the main concern for most microstockers, but it's no big deal for assignment photographers.

Steve McCurry does'n watermark his works. Anyways, I don't think I can get away easily stealing his photos.

« Reply #31 on: May 07, 2014, 10:06 »
+4
It's the job of the agencies to track sales.

I'm not sure what you mean by "track sales", but we all know micros aren't out there looking for infractions.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #32 on: May 07, 2014, 10:08 »
+16
I've said this before and it bears repeating.
A friend's brother is an assignment photographer, specialising in aerial photography.
He watermarks the photo on his website, pretty lightly.
Someone (not a client) phoned him to complain that he couldn't use the images from his website because of the watermark. When he checked up, the complainer was a commercial company.

« Reply #33 on: May 07, 2014, 10:21 »
+2
Uh..hope this thread will not become watermark vs no-watermark debate.

Sorry to divert your thread.

Anyhow - good luck with Stocksy. Nobody could sensibly deny that they are building a really nice collection.

« Reply #34 on: May 07, 2014, 10:34 »
+3
I've said this before and it bears repeating.
A friend's brother is an assignment photographer, specialising in aerial photography.
He watermarks the photo on his website, pretty lightly.
Someone (not a client) phoned him to complain that he couldn't use the images from his website because of the watermark. When he checked up, the complainer was a commercial company.

I'm always amazed how many people out there who totally have no slight idea about intelligent property. No doubt, watermark will be a good tool for these people. Just look at those people in a website related Getty extortion. I'm no fan of Getty, but the people there make me sick.
Anyway, what I'm trying to say is every usage or download for each stock photo counts, so stock photographer is more aggressive in protecting their image. As for assignment photographer, their photos are sold or can be considered as paid even before the images are created, so there is not much need to protect the photos. Just my 2 cents.

« Reply #35 on: May 07, 2014, 10:36 »
+3
Uh..hope this thread will not become watermark vs no-watermark debate.

Sorry to divert your thread.

Anyhow - good luck with Stocksy. Nobody could sensibly deny that they are building a really nice collection.

No worries. It's just one of the debate topic that will never go anywhere, just like for Nikon vs Canon. :)

jen

« Reply #36 on: May 07, 2014, 11:21 »
+1
I've said this before and it bears repeating.
A friend's brother is an assignment photographer, specialising in aerial photography.
He watermarks the photo on his website, pretty lightly.
Someone (not a client) phoned him to complain that he couldn't use the images from his website because of the watermark. When he checked up, the complainer was a commercial company.

That's pretty ballsy.  I'm laughing a lot at this (and crying a little inside). 

« Reply #37 on: May 07, 2014, 11:45 »
+1
I've said this before and it bears repeating.
A friend's brother is an assignment photographer, specialising in aerial photography.
He watermarks the photo on his website, pretty lightly.
Someone (not a client) phoned him to complain that he couldn't use the images from his website because of the watermark. When he checked up, the complainer was a commercial company.

Wow. Simply amazing.

jen

« Reply #38 on: May 07, 2014, 12:35 »
0
Being ... a fan of contemporary lifestyle magazines

Which magazines do you like?  I've been looking for some besides Kinfolk.

« Reply #39 on: May 07, 2014, 12:39 »
0
Which magazines do you like?  I've been looking for some besides Kinfolk.


Feast Journal is an Irish magazine with a similar outlook to Kinfolk. We came to it via the always lovely farmette blog btw.

mlwinphoto

« Reply #40 on: May 07, 2014, 13:49 »
+3
As far as I'm concerned if I have to completely change the way I shoot and process to satisfy a particular agency's 'look' or 'style' then that agency isn't for me, and I'm not for that agency.

Stay true to yourself, so to speak.

I go where the money is :) .

I haven't gotten there yet.   :o

shudderstok

« Reply #41 on: May 07, 2014, 19:14 »
+6
^^
Such linking is heavily discouraged here.
However, some of the rejected applicants have posted on msg, so you can ferret around.

BTW, IMO, some Stocky images are anything but awesome or stunning, but I'm not posting links to them either. And just in case you wondered, I'm not a bitter rejectee - I haven't applied.

stocksy has some brilliant work, and so does SS,IS,GI....

stocksy does not really bring anything new to the stock world at all, but they did cut out the crap that made microstock what it is today. stocksy is just trying to be an agency that edits work like all trad agencies do. what is the big deal about this?

to say stocksy is not stocky is rubbish. there is a lot of stocky type photos on stocksy.

i have not applied there either, but i have been in touch with them by invite and also of my own choosing. the replies or lack thereof (in the beginning) made it clear it is not the agency for me. and that is ok.

i think if stocksy dropped the ego, the self importance, the mystery then perhaps i and a few other photographers would take them a bit more seriously.

« Reply #42 on: May 07, 2014, 19:19 »
0
Being ... a fan of contemporary lifestyle magazines

Which magazines do you like?  I've been looking for some besides Kinfolk.

I'm following Kinfolk too, but not buying every issue. Kinfolk is probably a true representation of imagery Stocksy's wants, but the fact is many Kinfolk's photographers have been snapped up by Offset.

Fool Magazine has the best content but their strong, unusual photographs are not stocksy-ish or anything hipster. Cereal Magazine is so beautiful and I love their minimalist style. If my memory serves me right, one of their regular photographers just won Pink Lady Food Photography award.

I haven't checked out Chick Pea and Gather, but they are both look really beautiful. I'm going to order them soon.

« Reply #43 on: May 07, 2014, 19:36 »
0
Which magazines do you like?  I've been looking for some besides Kinfolk.


Feast Journal is an Irish magazine with a similar outlook to Kinfolk. We came to it via the always lovely farmette blog btw.


I'm going to check them out. I have a thing for indie magazines.

« Reply #44 on: May 07, 2014, 20:36 »
0
Since I have a little spare time, so I want to respond to Sue's question about watermark. I'm not quite sure about VSCO grid, but I still believe the people in there share the same ambition as instragrammers, which is to gain popularity. Watermark and protecting their photos is their least concern. They are using the tool for branding, creating beautiful picture to get noticed by big brands for big commercial gigs. I know many of them have great success. As for the brands, hiring these guys are a great marketing strategy itself. Just get the photographer to mention in their instragram feed that they shooting for xxx brand, they gonna get thousands likes/followers almost immediately. I learnt about this first hand, when one of my rare instagram photos got a "like" from  one particular popular instagrammer; in a few minutes I've got more "likes" and followers in my entire lifetime.
« Last Edit: May 07, 2014, 20:38 by onepointfour »

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #45 on: May 07, 2014, 20:38 »
+1
Thanks for the info.
I've never seen instagram, as it seems you have to log in to be able to see anything, unless I'm missing something. No matter. I don't have enough time to keep up with the sites I do check out!

« Reply #46 on: May 07, 2014, 20:58 »
+1
Thanks for the info.
I've never seen instagram, as it seems you have to log in to be able to see anything, unless I'm missing something. No matter. I don't have enough time to keep up with the sites I do check out!

I hardly post anything on my instagram too Sue. I hate all the popularity and social media stuff. I'm following them because I have a weird obsession in visual trending and have fun trying to predict the upcoming trend.

As I mentioned a few of contemporary magazines in my posts, you can see that they are mostly food magazines which have much love for local produce, organic and healthy lifestyle. What I noticed, these magazines start to appear after Noma restaurant won best restaurant for 3 consecutive years. The head chef Renee Redzepi is using only locally sourced, seasonal produce and foraging for wild ingredients and he has been named one on the most influential people by Time. He clearly has started a new trend and food culture. His first book is shot by the talented Ditte Isager, and you can see Ditte's inspired style in all these magazines. Now, I even noticed very distinct Ditte Isager's inspired food photography in Stocksy.
« Last Edit: May 08, 2014, 04:19 by onepointfour »

Ron

« Reply #47 on: May 08, 2014, 04:09 »
+7
As far as I'm concerned if I have to completely change the way I shoot and process to satisfy a particular agency's 'look' or 'style' then that agency isn't for me, and I'm not for that agency.

Stay true to yourself, so to speak.

I think it's terrific that Stocksy is taking the approach that it is, we need something 'different'....wish them all the best.

I would love to apply for Stocksy but I agree that I would completely need to change the way I shoot and process my images, and the problem is, I lack experience and an understanding of the typical lighting seen on Stocksy.

I also wonder how long this trend/look will last and if Stocksy is not shooting themselves in the foot by only accepting a certain look. If people get tired of the look, the agency is set for collapse.

« Reply #48 on: May 08, 2014, 04:13 »
+4
As far as I'm concerned if I have to completely change the way I shoot and process to satisfy a particular agency's 'look' or 'style' then that agency isn't for me, and I'm not for that agency.

Stay true to yourself, so to speak.

I think it's terrific that Stocksy is taking the approach that it is, we need something 'different'....wish them all the best.



I would love to apply for Stocksy but I agree that I would completely need to change the way I shoot and process my images, and the problem is, I lack experience and an understanding of the typical lighting seen on Stocksy.

I also wonder how long this trend/look will last and if Stocksy is not shooting themselves in the foot by only accepting a certain look. If people get tired of the look, the agency is set for collapse.

I'm wondering about that too Ron. I don't think the trend is timeless and will last.

« Reply #49 on: May 08, 2014, 04:54 »
+14
Same for me - I don't think what I shoot and how I shoot it will ever be a match for what Stocksy currently wants.

And maybe (certainly?) their focus on a specific style and their rather restrictive policy of accepting new contributors/content is a big part of their success.

But what I would love to see is the same model (co-op, fair commissions, no price dumping) being applied to a broader spectrum of content / contributors. Even if that would not allow exact same pricing (accepting - and successfully selling - more and less focused content may only work with a lower price level than Stocksy), it would be a great alternative to all the other agencies.
Could be a different collection, or a different site with different branding, but with the same principles.
That would be great and would allow many of those who can't make it into Stocksy right now to benefit from those ideas...


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
18 Replies
8582 Views
Last post May 12, 2008, 07:26
by Gregor909
2 Replies
2935 Views
Last post March 09, 2011, 12:52
by ErickN
3 Replies
2178 Views
Last post April 01, 2011, 16:02
by tab62
57 Replies
5096 Views
Last post March 06, 2017, 07:54
by JimP
24 Replies
2539 Views
Last post December 22, 2016, 13:31
by pixel8

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors