pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: The Flickr Collection on Getty Images  (Read 13754 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

tan510jomast

« Reply #25 on: July 10, 2008, 10:42 »
0
"Getty also runs a site called iStockPhoto, where amateurs contribute photos that the company markets at lower rates. The photos on Flickr are of sufficent quality to demand higher prices, Mr. Klein said."

This statement devalues the iStock brand.

I love the damage control on the iStock boards over this quote.  Clearly it is being stated that many free images on Flickr are worth far more than the "amateur" images at iStock.  I'm not surprised though. 



yes, I was one to notice that " iStockPhoto, where amateurs contribute photos that the company markets at lower rates"

I was quite apprehensive to read that he would make such a sweeping statement, as it includes exclusive IS contributors too. :o


vonkara

« Reply #26 on: July 10, 2008, 11:00 »
0

 What was he trying to say? As some people have already pointed out in iStock forum, when the inspection process focuses so much on the technical perfection,  Getty is more interested in contents. While some of us can isolate a Christmas gift box with prefect pen tool and revel on it, the big ad drive had rather used (or stolen) a giggling little girl's image from a point-and-shoot. Why? Because it told the story of the moment - authenticity.

Then why they reject the stock photographer noisy but well composed outdoor pics and then choose the noisy outdoor Flickr users pictures?

tan510jomast

« Reply #27 on: July 10, 2008, 13:47 »
0
I'm not even sure whether this is an indication that Getty is getting into recruiting Flickr users, more than perharps keeping them with Flickr, as
we know many have left Flickr for microstock.
Now, with this promise of glory in Getty, Flickr "professionals" will buy into
their premium class , or whatever you call it, so they qualify to have images selected by Flickr for free and uncompensated uses in yahoo promotions
and whatnot. I see Flickr photos in yahoo weather sites, and I am sure
many other places that I don't know about.

To the amateurs, sorry I mean professionals with Flickr, just seeing their images published would be enough of a celebration.
Imagine if many Flickr users become affliated with micro
and decide to leave, what would happen then?
that site would be a flicker (bad pun ) of what it is today.

So I think it's more of a promo to keep Flickr "pros" happy. 8)

« Reply #28 on: July 10, 2008, 13:52 »
0
Then why they reject the stock photographer noisy but well composed outdoor pics and then choose the noisy outdoor Flickr users pictures?

Because they have Inspectors that Inspect the images, now they are looking at quality and content and ticking the boxes, one bad mark means a rejection, this takes away any subjective and artistic licence and you end up with a lot of the same, look at the critique forums and read the "you have a bit of fringing or noise in the top left hand corner about 10 pixels down", and not comments like "well there is a tiny bit of noise but it is a fantastic image, I would use it", we have all likely had perfect usable images subjectivly rejected.

Alamy on the other hand do not look at content but quality only, and we see comments like 70% dross, Photoshelter look at quality and subjectivly at the content and claim to be in touch with the buyers needs, time will tell on that one.

What is needed are inspectors that can look at an image tick the boxes, if some boxes are not ticked then be able to make a call on if the image should be allowed.

PhotoShelter had a poll of buyers that said stock was dated and dull and sites did not have what they really wanted, now with Getty they are looking for fresh conceptual images and photographers, but if the images hit the same inspectors will they get through, what is required is a new set of checkboxes for the inspectors and a good mix of conceptal and standard stock as they both have a place, one conceptual for grabbing attention and making you think for new markets, the other standard stock for the comfort of established businesses and markets.

For all the "Conceptual Hype" the only thing that counts is servicing the buyers requirements, they alone will drive the market in the direction they want it to move and not Getty or Istock, and they will talk with thier feet if they do not get what they want.

David    
« Last Edit: July 10, 2008, 14:02 by Adeptris »

tan510jomast

« Reply #29 on: July 10, 2008, 14:03 »
0
Then why they reject the stock photographer noisy but well composed outdoor pics and then choose the noisy outdoor Flickr users pictures?

(extract)
What is needed are inspectors that can look at an image tick the boxes, if some boxes are not ticked then be able to make a call on if the image should be allowed.

PhotoShelter had a poll of buyers that said stock was dated and dull and sites did not have what they really wanted, now with Getty they are looking for fresh conceptual images and photographers, but if the images hit the same inspectors ...

Good point David,
then maybe it's time to replace the inspectors who have been cruising on basing judgement solely on technical data, and get new ones who use their eyes to peruse the composition as well. perharps?
« Last Edit: July 10, 2008, 14:06 by tan510jomast »


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
2 Replies
2566 Views
Last post November 06, 2009, 13:39
by melastmohican
36 Replies
14658 Views
Last post May 27, 2010, 06:33
by mtkang
2 Replies
5199 Views
Last post October 04, 2011, 10:54
by jeffclow
25 Replies
9471 Views
Last post December 14, 2011, 12:21
by davetee
9 Replies
3679 Views
Last post November 21, 2012, 18:09
by madelaide

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results