MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Yuri Arcurs selling same photos RF and licensed.  (Read 16858 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: November 09, 2008, 17:11 »
0
Just read in the alamy forum that Yuri is now selling the same photos he has on the micros as licensed on alamy.  I didn't believe it, so I looked and it is true.  If alamy allow this, what is the point of licensed images?  I thought that the buyers might like to know how the photo was previously used and that would be impossible if it was sold on the RF micros sites.

I am starting to wonder if it is worth building up a portfolio with alamy when they are letting people do this.  Wont the buyers just go to the microstock sites?

I have nothing against Yuri and if he is allowed to do this, then there is no reason why he shouldn't.  I just don't understand why alamy allow it.


« Reply #1 on: November 09, 2008, 17:13 »
0
Yep it is true and Yuri explained himself on Microstockdiaries here
http://www.microstockdiaries.com/is-microstock-becoming-more-accepted-in-the-stock-photo-industry.html

vonkara

« Reply #2 on: November 09, 2008, 17:18 »
0
-Interesting video from the Idambies link-
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gZYr7JINMoc[/youtube]
« Last Edit: November 09, 2008, 17:24 by Vonkara »

« Reply #3 on: November 09, 2008, 17:31 »
0
Just read in the alamy forum that Yuri is now selling the same photos he has on the micros as licensed on alamy.  I didn't believe it, so I looked and it is true.  If alamy allow this, what is the point of licensed images?  I thought that the buyers might like to know how the photo was previously used and that would be impossible if it was sold on the RF micros sites.

I am starting to wonder if it is worth building up a portfolio with alamy when they are letting people do this.  Wont the buyers just go to the microstock sites?

I have nothing against Yuri and if he is allowed to do this, then there is no reason why he shouldn't.  I just don't understand why alamy allow it.


no alamy does NOT allow this.  This was a mistake and Yuri has acknowledged that in that link to microstock diaries and is fixing the problem.  It was a apparently a third party distributor who put the images on Alamy. 

Alamy states on their submitter page

Quote
Tips and legal considerations

To ensure customer confidence in your images and avoid potential legal problems:

    * you cannot change the licence type for an image once it is set.
    * you must not submit the same or similar images as different licence type

alamy source

so NO... you CANNOT license an image as both RM and RF at the same time.  And once an image is licensed as RF it can never be licensed as RM, even if it is taken off the RF sites.

« Reply #4 on: November 09, 2008, 17:39 »
0
Wish I had read microstock diaries before the alamy forum.  Here's what Yuri said over there, for those that don't have the time to find it.

"One of my third party distributors has put all my images in Alamy under RM. We are currently investigating this and I will require the images removed immediately. We are in the black as to why this agency has done so, especially when considering that just one single search on my name on Alamy would reveal that all the images are already online. I will be contacting Alamy about this also.
Yuri"

AVAVA

« Reply #5 on: November 09, 2008, 17:49 »
0
 Hi Sharpshoot,

Thanks for pointing that out.  I saw the same thing as soon as I looked at the posts. Yuri is not to blame. However I was thinking about making dart boards with Yuri's face on them. ;D Who wants to put in an early order, if I hurry I can add it to my Sarah Palin punching bag orders.

 Hey folks, the guy is just making a living and he probably follows the legal concerns of this industry a lot closer than most of us. He has far more to lose if he screws up. Yuri gives a lot to this community and I tip my hat to him for building a better mouse trap. ( american term for figuring out how to make something better that already exists ).

Peace,
AVAVA

« Reply #6 on: November 09, 2008, 18:16 »
0
And once an image is licensed as RF it can never be licensed as RM, even if it is taken off the RF sites.


Pssst.... sure you can.  You just can't sell exclusivity or history data with the image.
http://seanlockedigitalimagery.wordpress.com/2008/09/12/rm-vs-rf/

To the OP, guess it pays to keep a tighter reign on what you're putting out there.
« Last Edit: November 09, 2008, 18:20 by sjlocke »

grp_photo

« Reply #7 on: November 09, 2008, 18:26 »
0
And once an image is licensed as RF it can never be licensed as RM, even if it is taken off the RF sites.


Pssst.... sure you can.  You just can't sell exclusivity or history data with the image.
http://seanlockedigitalimagery.wordpress.com/2008/09/12/rm-vs-rf/

To the OP, guess it pays to keep a tighter reign on what you're putting out there.

You may right in general but Alamy doesn't allow it, they have always been absolutely clear about this policy.

« Reply #8 on: November 09, 2008, 18:34 »
0
It must be so clear as to be transparent on their "How to choose a license type" page:
http://www.alamy.com/licensing.asp

:)

AVAVA

« Reply #9 on: November 09, 2008, 18:40 »
0
Hi Sean,

 I don't think Getty will take it. I don't think Corbis will take it. Now that Veer is Corbis I don't know another serious RM company in the marketplace ( Alamy, but you know... ). If anyone here knows an agency that will allow this practice please share their names. I would love to get more information on this topic. Thanks for pointing this out SJ, I was not aware there are agencies offering this option. That kind of info is super helpful. By the way Sean's blog on Stock business models RM vs. RF and their differences is spot on and easy to understand.

Best,
AVAVA

grp_photo

« Reply #10 on: November 09, 2008, 18:42 »
0
if you feel unsure or don't believe me you can contact member service. But Alamy doesn't allow it i'm 100% sure about this.

« Reply #11 on: November 09, 2008, 19:56 »
0
Yeah, I'm not specifically saying Getty has to allow it or anything, but you could certainly sell them on your own site if you wanted.

« Reply #12 on: November 09, 2008, 19:58 »
0
"i don't like Yuri's"

BUT

the images are sold i i saw under the nane "Shoosh"

as RF

THE RULE IS

WE DON'T SELL SAME IMAGES RF AND RM

AVAVA

« Reply #13 on: November 09, 2008, 20:48 »
0
Hi Lobby,

 I am sure we have a translation issue from us probably speaking different languages. Please be patient with me. Do you mean that " You don't like Yuri type Photographers" or Yuri himself or just his style of work.

Thank you,
AVAVA

« Reply #14 on: November 09, 2008, 21:21 »
0
I think he is pointing out that Arcurs is trying to keep the Alamy images unassociated with his name by putting them all under the psuedonym "Shoosh":
http://www.alamy.com/stock-photography-search-results.asp?qt=shoosh&ns=1&nu=0&lic=6&lic=1&archive=1&size=0xFF

Possibly so people wouldn't be able to search for them at a lower price elsewhere under his name?  Maybe that's what lobby is trying to say?

AVAVA

« Reply #15 on: November 09, 2008, 21:50 »
0
Thanks SJ,

 That made way more sense for me. He has an interesting point there. I know RM shooters that use different names for their RF Macro. I don't do that in my Macro but I made a separate name for my Micro than I did my Macro collections. It has a great deal to do with back end control for two completely different markets when we are dealing with a lot of imagery ( so no images end up accidentally in both markets ). I am always willing to share my Macro identity if anyone ever wants it.( I wouldn't waste your time though ).
  I think it really just depends on the person and the way they want to represent themselves and operate their company more than some secret squirrel approach to some devious tactic, that in the long run could hurt your reputation even more. I think the most important part is making it as easy as possible for your clients or buyers to be able to find you in your markets. Branding is important for any company no matter how small.

Thanks,
AVAVA

RacePhoto

« Reply #16 on: November 10, 2008, 00:04 »
0
I think he is pointing out that Arcurs is trying to keep the Alamy images unassociated with his name by putting them all under the psuedonym "Shoosh":
http://www.alamy.com/stock-photography-search-results.asp?qt=shoosh&ns=1&nu=0&lic=6&lic=1&archive=1&size=0xFF

Possibly so people wouldn't be able to search for them at a lower price elsewhere under his name?  Maybe that's what lobby is trying to say?


Sorry but I think you missed something. He didn't put up the RF images, someone else did. He does use his name on Alamy. Maybe this link will make it easier to see. By the way, look at which photo jumped out as a dupe, licensed both ways. The rock concert shoot that was written up, blogged and promoted as the most expensive Micro shoot.  ;D

http://alamy.com/stock-photography-search-results.asp?qt=APJFXK+or+B0A1HD&ns=1&nu=0&lic=6&lic=1&archive=1&size=0xFF

I expect you will see the RF image files disappear from Shoosh, uploaded by Formcourt agency, a reseller. The RM images are there from Yuri. I bet the phone lines are smoking!

(READ THE CORRECTION BELOW: Shoosh is Yuri's photos RF, possibly an agency, maybe himself under an Alamy Pseudonym. "Yuri" photos RM is not Yuri, it is the agency)
« Last Edit: November 10, 2008, 15:41 by RacePhoto »

« Reply #17 on: November 10, 2008, 01:03 »
0
So, you're saying his intent was to upload the micro concert series as "L", under his name, and the RF version is what is not supposed to be there, under Shoosh?  That makes even less sense having it listed RM there and RF micro.

That can't be correct at all.

« Reply #18 on: November 10, 2008, 01:57 »
0
I am sure he has been uploading RF images there as "Shoosh" for a long time and the distributor has now uploaded his portfolio under his own name without him knowing, with some of them licensed. 

There have been a few threads before about the pros and cons of uploading the same images to the micros and alamy with the RF license.  Alamy currently allow this.  I keep mine separate but I can understand why others do it and I might end up joining them one day.
« Last Edit: November 10, 2008, 02:01 by sharpshot »

« Reply #19 on: November 10, 2008, 02:32 »
0
I think he is pointing out that Arcurs is trying to keep the Alamy images unassociated with his name by putting them all under the psuedonym "Shoosh":
http://www.alamy.com/stock-photography-search-results.asp?qt=shoosh&ns=1&nu=0&lic=6&lic=1&archive=1&size=0xFF

Possibly so people wouldn't be able to search for them at a lower price elsewhere under his name?  Maybe that's what lobby is trying to say?


Sorry but I think you missed something. He didn't put up the RF images, someone else did. He does use his name on Alamy. Maybe this link will make it easier to see. By the way, look at which photo jumped out as a dupe, licensed both ways. The rock concert shoot that was written up, blogged and promoted as the most expensive Micro shoot.  ;D

http://alamy.com/stock-photography-search-results.asp?qt=APJFXK+or+B0A1HD&ns=1&nu=0&lic=6&lic=1&archive=1&size=0xFF

I expect you will see the RF image files disappear from Shoosh, uploaded by Formcourt agency, a reseller. The RM images are there from Yuri. I bet the phone lines are smoking!



no no no... sjlocke is right.. 
once again, this is what Yuri commented on microstock diaries

Quote
One of my third party distributors has put all my images in Alamy under RM. We are currently investigating this and I will require the images removed immediately. We are in the black as to why this agency has done so, especially when considering that just one single search on my name on Alamy would reveal that all the images are already online. I will be contacting Alamy about this also.
Yuri


The mistake was putting them on as RM.  You can also see that the agency that uploaded the photos has some 85,000 images on Alamy.

lagereek

« Reply #20 on: November 10, 2008, 02:46 »
0
Yes in dealing with RM youve got to be careful. This happend to me last year. A third party put up ONE shot only as RM and RF.
Fortunately I found it.

RacePhoto

« Reply #21 on: November 10, 2008, 13:23 »
0
So, you're saying his intent was to upload the micro concert series as "L", under his name, and the RF version is what is not supposed to be there, under Shoosh?  That makes even less sense having it listed RM there and RF micro.

That can't be correct at all.

I think you are correct and I looked at the RF as the agency and the L as him, when it was Shoosh as the RF (the real Yuri) and the RM was from the agency under his name. My mistake and I'll leave it that way so the thread makes some sense. Otherwise it will say the same as you and someone will see my mistake being pointed out, which will be even more confusing.  ;D

I was wrong! The RF collection with the name Shoosh is Yuri, the RM collection under Yuri is the agency using his name. Yuri is selling everything RF.

However, I'm still myself... both of me agreed on this in a conversation this morning.  ;)
« Last Edit: November 10, 2008, 13:32 by RacePhoto »

RT


« Reply #22 on: November 10, 2008, 15:10 »
0
As far as I can tell Formcourt have just under 10,000 images on Alamy out of which 57 are not Yuri's.

I'm wondering if it is an agency?

In the past a mix up over image licensing has happened many times, and if requested Alamy member services have dealt with the matter within hours, so if Yuri really wants those images removed it shouldn't be too much trouble.

I'm sure it was a genuine mistake.



« Reply #23 on: November 10, 2008, 15:12 »
0
I think you are correct and I looked at the RF as the agency and the L as him, when it was Shoosh as the RF (the real Yuri) and the RM was from the agency under his name.

So, just to clarify, the RF that is to stay up, which is the same stuff on micro, is not listed under his name, but "Shoosh".

« Reply #24 on: November 10, 2008, 16:24 »
0
Yes, I wonder if he was thinking "shoosh, don't tell anyone these are available much cheaper on the micros" :)


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
12 Replies
9911 Views
Last post September 21, 2008, 19:07
by Pheby
11 Replies
5556 Views
Last post October 01, 2008, 04:18
by nata_rass
0 Replies
2486 Views
Last post October 17, 2008, 10:00
by News Feed
36 Replies
24217 Views
Last post December 12, 2008, 12:09
by download
1 Replies
3740 Views
Last post December 16, 2008, 07:57
by grp_photo

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle