MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Stocksy in action...  (Read 13129 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #25 on: May 25, 2013, 21:48 »
+3
So you dont know him, but judge him at the same time. Yuri has done his fair share of sharing as well. He helped loads of people as far as I know. So Yuri looks after Yuri, and thats a reason to criticize him? What a load of tosh. Do some reading on Yuri and you'll be surprised.
Indeed he is a man of the people, it was admirable the way he approached Getty over the Google deal. He can also be very humble, like the time he posted his $18000 dollar day, and not afraid to ask for our help in times of trouble with Rayban, hallowed be his name.

I agree, Yuri never was a community guy and never will, believe we should follow his example more often...


Poncke v2

« Reply #26 on: May 26, 2013, 01:52 »
-1
So you dont know him, but judge him at the same time. Yuri has done his fair share of sharing as well. He helped loads of people as far as I know. So Yuri looks after Yuri, and thats a reason to criticize him? What a load of tosh. Do some reading on Yuri and you'll be surprised.
Indeed he is a man of the people, it was admirable the way he approached Getty over the Google deal. He can also be very humble, like the time he posted his $18000 dollar day, and not afraid to ask for our help in times of trouble with Rayban, hallowed be his name.

I agree, Yuri never was a community guy and never will, believe we should follow his example more often...
Where is it written that Yuri went to talk with Getty over the Google deal? Is that confirmed or is that gossip?

Poncke v2

« Reply #27 on: May 26, 2013, 02:01 »
+4
Wait I dont get this, so its not ok to be critical of an average image but it is ok to slag off a person en mass and then be big about because you didnt criticize his work?

« Reply #28 on: May 26, 2013, 02:04 »
+1
So you dont know him, but judge him at the same time. Yuri has done his fair share of sharing as well. He helped loads of people as far as I know. So Yuri looks after Yuri, and thats a reason to criticize him? What a load of tosh. Do some reading on Yuri and you'll be surprised.
Indeed he is a man of the people, it was admirable the way he approached Getty over the Google deal. He can also be very humble, like the time he posted his $18000 dollar day, and not afraid to ask for our help in times of trouble with Rayban, hallowed be his name.

I agree, Yuri never was a community guy and never will, believe we should follow his example more often...
Where is it written that Yuri went to talk with Getty over the Google deal? Is that confirmed or is that gossip?

Any deal that Getty is getting money in their pocket for, made possible by my (and your images), but that we do not collect a royalty on, is a scandal and deserves attention.
My legal team and I do not quite know what to do here. Is the current situation as follows: The photographers will not get any royalty from the Google deal, images are licensed for free? Are there any news out there that we have not heard off? Is this license not basically a very liberal "extended" license for which we should receive normal pay? How is it possible for Getty to avoid this?
I am meeting with Getty Executives Monday the 28 in London to discus this among other things. Are there updates on the matter of significant character.

Poncke v2

« Reply #29 on: May 26, 2013, 02:26 »
-1
Ok thanks, I think I remember now. But it has little to do with Yuri not helping other people. He runs a charity program, however, I am sure someone will find something to knock that as well.

Anyway, the thread has gone off topic.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #30 on: May 26, 2013, 05:34 »
+6
In fairness, Stocksy seems to be taking an approach that requires judgment on the holistic merits of an image rather than the very narrow is it technically good and forget about the rest approach that IS uses and monkeys could be trained to do other than that, hard to see how the offering differs from micro.

Do you honestly think that most of the results on the search for 'bird' have 'holistic merit'?

The photos on this site have nothing to do with birds? But if we're going down that road one of yours can cost $240 on iStock, these photos cost the designer $25 for a medium, half the price of the comparable size as E+ on istock and 25% of the cost of a Vetta.

I don't understand the first question at all. Although it is true that an embarrassing proportion of images showing up on the Bird search on stocksy either don't have birds or you'd need a microscope to find them (just because a wide, sweeping landscape 'probably' has birds in it somewhere shouldn't automatically trigger the 'bird' keyword), there are still some Stocksy photos with actual birds in them. I was only questioning the idea that these images, taken as a whole, have 'holistic merit' that makes them in any sense superior to what's already available in the established micros.

However, most of my bird pics are in the ordinary collection so nothing like that dear, and some are in the Value collection (a lot more than the 2 which are Vetta, one of which is only available at M).
My discussion was not about prices, but about me being genuinely confused about the major hype that Stocksy was going to be different to the other micros and in a good way, but the quality standards seem to be vary variable, for a curated collection, in the area I have most interest.

Another question: once someone is 'in' do they just upload all their pics without further curation?

And finally, what is intrinsically or holistically better or even 'different' about the four pictures of the undercroft of Bute Hall on Stocksy
http://www.stocksy.com/search?text=Glasgow
 compared to those on iStock
http://www.istockphoto.com/search/text/Glasgow%20cloisters/filetype/photos/source/basic#1f1a95bb
or Shutterstock:
http://www.shutterstock.com/cat.mhtml?lang=en&search_source=search_form&search_tracking_id=OIcITxXBehmFCsgaw9pHHg&version=llv1&anyorall=all&safesearch=1&searchterm=Glasgow+cloisters&search_group=&orient=&search_cat=&searchtermx=&photographer_name=&people_gender=&people_age=&people_ethnicity=&people_number=&commercial_ok=&color=&show_color_wheel=1
etc?
NB, I am in no way knocking the Stocksy undercroft images, and I'll save anyone looking by saying upfront I have no pics of this location. It's just that they consist 4/5 of Stocksy's Glasgow offering.

I realise it sounds as though I just want to bash Stocksy. I don't. At the beginning I was very excited about it even though I somehow thought it would only be accepting fantastic lifestyle images. Notice I make no comment about the lifestyle images, as it's not my modus operandi. I also have not commented on the profit share, as that's clearly much more in the artists' favour. It's just that the vaunted promises of 'difference' and 'quality' don't seem to being 'holistically' implemented.
« Last Edit: May 26, 2013, 07:23 by ShadySue »

« Reply #31 on: May 26, 2013, 07:09 »
+2
Good points liz..
I also heard that stocksy has been quite strict on curating images of even very good photogs (in my opinion) but even after being so choosy i dont find any extra ordinary images or different (yeah some are definitely impressive) than some available in other stock sites. Probably stock photography is selling those types of images. Though i know stocksy and their people have good intention, at least for we photographers.
« Last Edit: May 26, 2013, 07:20 by gemmy12 »

« Reply #32 on: May 26, 2013, 09:03 »
+3
In general, their travel images are very good (if not very numerous). I noticed one photographer who is also on a leading micro and I see they have accepted only his most striking work - though the fact they've taken his HDR and left his ordinary shots does seem at odds with the policy on gritty realism.

aspp

« Reply #33 on: May 26, 2013, 10:51 »
0
the policy on gritty realism.

Policy of gritty realism ?

« Reply #34 on: May 26, 2013, 11:10 »
0
the policy on gritty realism.

Policy of gritty realism ?

From the Bruce Livingstone interview: " Bruce Livingstone has set out to produce a collection of authentic stock images unlike anything customers will be able to find anywhere else. When he uses the work authentic he means a photograph that doesnt look staged, pretend, forced or unrealistic."

« Reply #35 on: May 26, 2013, 11:10 »
0
Not sure I've seen Stocksy and 'gritty realism' in the same sentence before!?

falstafff

    This user is banned.
« Reply #36 on: May 26, 2013, 11:22 »
+2
the policy on gritty realism.

Policy of gritty realism ?

From the Bruce Livingstone interview: " Bruce Livingstone has set out to produce a collection of authentic stock images unlike anything customers will be able to find anywhere else. When he uses the work authentic he means a photograph that doesnt look staged, pretend, forced or unrealistic."

really!  well he better go for editorial work then. dirty workers with filthy hands and real female models with pot bellies and double chins. :D

aspp

« Reply #37 on: May 26, 2013, 12:10 »
0
From the Bruce Livingstone interview: " Bruce Livingstone has set out to produce a collection of authentic stock images


Trends people have a nebulous sense of what they mean when they talk about authenticity.

New Statesman: Give Me The Real Thing

Getty Images Curve

Getty Again

Authenticity: New York Times

Design Week: 'Authenticity' in branding - How real can you fake it?


ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #38 on: May 26, 2013, 17:51 »
+2
From the Bruce Livingstone interview: " Bruce Livingstone has set out to produce a collection of authentic stock images unlike anything customers will be able to find anywhere else. When he uses the work authentic he means a photograph that doesnt look staged, pretend, forced or unrealistic."
That would be the vulture in the party hat.

« Reply #39 on: May 26, 2013, 18:17 »
0
From the Bruce Livingstone interview: " Bruce Livingstone has set out to produce a collection of authentic stock images


Trends people have a nebulous sense of what they mean when they talk about authenticity.

New Statesman: Give Me The Real Thing

Getty Images Curve

Getty Again

Authenticity: New York Times

Design Week: 'Authenticity' in branding - How real can you fake it?

Those are very interesting links and very interesting reading.

gillian

  • *Gillian*

« Reply #40 on: May 26, 2013, 22:45 »
+4
there are tutes on keywording on the Stocksy site and it appears that some are being a little enthusiastic, despite the tutorial giving a very good "how to". There are quite a lot of non-stock photographers on Stocksy so they may need to settle down a little. I believe keywords will be limited soon, which is also a good thing IMHO.

Honestly I don't see how you can single out any site for keywording perfection. There seems to be spammers everywhere, and while the general mentality of Stocksy contributors is more unified and happy clappy, I guess there's always going to be a few (out of the 300+ photographers they now have) who have to tweak the rules for themselves.

if you do a search for "christmas" at iS on the first page you get: a dove, starry skies, a crystal ball, a VIP rope, a car with a bow, red velvet curtains, page 2 also has another 5 that shouldn't be there. SS is far better, nothing jumps out at me as being wrong until page 4.



ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #41 on: May 27, 2013, 04:51 »
+2
Honestly I don't see how you can single out any site for keywording perfection. There seems to be spammers everywhere, and while the general mentality of Stocksy contributors is more unified and happy clappy, I guess there's always going to be a few (out of the 300+ photographers they now have) who have to tweak the rules for themselves.
I've seen some spamming/misidentification in wildlife on Stocksy, just like everywhere else, mainly from people who generally do other things but sometimes shoot the occasional animal. Also some incompatible multiple destinations, like everywhere else.

But Stocksy is not supposed to be 'like everywhere else'. That's the rub.

If I were starting a new agency (which I have no intention of doing), I'd have keywording/search as top priority equal with image quality. I have no time for spammers, and professionals should do their research properly and should very seldom make identification mistakes.
Buyers would be so grateful for a clean search.
It's something a new agency could/should embed right from the start.
« Last Edit: May 27, 2013, 04:58 by ShadySue »

« Reply #42 on: May 27, 2013, 07:39 »
+9
Maybe I'm one of the "happy clappy ones", but I love Stocksys Design and approach. The sense of "unity" is something that's gone for too long at IS. And this has got power IMO which was never valued at IS lately. For all those criticicing everything about the new site right now, please remind theyre online since just 2 months...
I hope it will succeed - and if it does it may also have hopefully influence on other agencies who have increasingly maximised their own profit on the back of the suppliers - not only in microstock. We as Photographers do not have a Lobby or Unity to protect our work and give us a fairer share - but we should have. Now someone comes along with a good and fair concept like Bruce did, I personally think this deserves at least some respect if you prefer not to belong to the happy clappies... I do not mean to be offending, just my 2 cents :)

Poncke v2

« Reply #43 on: May 27, 2013, 07:58 »
0
^^ No one is denying that aspect of Stocksy, its other points that are being made here.

« Reply #44 on: May 27, 2013, 08:47 »
+2
All true but the concept is just about as hackneyed as you can get probably better than many girl with laptop shots but probably not as good as others nothing completely different here.

Maybe you read something different into the "completely different" than I do - it is about the collection as a whole to be completely different than what other agencies are showing. At many other places, buyers have to wade through hundreds of mediocre images to find a few good ones. It doesn't mean you can't find any good images anywhere else.

« Reply #45 on: May 27, 2013, 12:53 »
+2
I'm a literal type of individual so I take "completely different" to mean "completely different".   :)  It ain't, collection is a slight variation on a theme, a nice approach but nothing startling or ground breaking..


« Reply #46 on: May 27, 2013, 14:22 »
+2
I doubt we can ever define "completely different" for long. Because, if being completely different is proven to be successful, there will be lots of copycats, including Stocksy shooters themselves. They would follow their own path to success and repeat the formula with images of similar style to "normal" agencies before long. Unless Sstocksy is hugely successful from the start, you cannot blame its contributors' need to generate "normal" income.

gillian

  • *Gillian*

« Reply #47 on: May 28, 2013, 03:46 »
+1
Now someone comes along with a good and fair concept like Bruce did, I personally think this deserves at least some respect if you prefer not to belong to the happy clappies... I do not mean to be offending, just my 2 cents :)
I wasn't being disparaging. The ethos over there is very different and quite wonderful. Everyone wants to pitch in to make the site work and there's nil snarkiness in the forums. Sure we can see flaws but those are brought up and then suggestions are made on how to improve and both admins and contributors chat freely. There's a postitivity that things can (and will) improve that's exciting to be a part of.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #48 on: May 28, 2013, 03:53 »
+1
Now someone comes along with a good and fair concept like Bruce did, I personally think this deserves at least some respect if you prefer not to belong to the happy clappies... I do not mean to be offending, just my 2 cents :)
I wasn't being disparaging. The ethos over there is very different and quite wonderful. Everyone wants to pitch in to make the site work and there's nil snarkiness in the forums. Sure we can see flaws but those are brought up and then suggestions are made on how to improve and both admins and contributors chat freely. There's a postitivity that things can (and will) improve that's exciting to be a part of.
Sounds like iStock was back in the Glory Days; though I joined just after Peebert disappeared, so never experienced his forum contributions.

« Reply #49 on: May 28, 2013, 04:29 »
+2
the policy on gritty realism.

Policy of gritty realism ?

From the Bruce Livingstone interview: " Bruce Livingstone has set out to produce a collection of authentic stock images unlike anything customers will be able to find anywhere else. When he uses the work authentic he means a photograph that doesnt look staged, pretend, forced or unrealistic."

really!  well he better go for editorial work then. dirty workers with filthy hands and real female models with pot bellies and double chins. :D

Notice they never say real, just 'authentic' stock : ) It's tired old phoneyness. A real shot of shoppers on a street would be: dirty sidewalk with overspilling trashcans, all kinds of cars everywhere, and tired looking people in mismatching clothes holding on to wrinkled, disgusting ugly plastic bags. NOBODY wants that... and if it isn't that, it is a shined up stock shot. If you choose to process it with some film emulation filter, etc, it will be so new and so different to handful an virtual infants, but to an adult who has seen things it's just another, even older and more worn cliche than the micro-style. There's nothing wrong with selling stuff like that and they can even be really nice photos, just don't try pretend it's new and real and revolutionary... pls... it's just sooo exhausting... it's the home shopping network style.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
405 Replies
57774 Views
Last post March 03, 2013, 17:16
by lisafx
192 Replies
33793 Views
Last post April 22, 2013, 17:30
by leaf
Stocksy is Alive

Started by Artist « 1 2 ... 5 6 » Stocksy

141 Replies
25455 Views
Last post December 30, 2013, 04:38
by topol
0 Replies
1277 Views
Last post April 03, 2013, 00:03
by goober
13 Replies
3878 Views
Last post July 19, 2013, 17:50
by gillian

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors