pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Google Images Search by Image (was Drag and Drop)  (Read 52290 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #25 on: June 15, 2011, 08:27 »
0
Btw if you're an illustrator and people are using your work as (a sort of) logo for their company, remember to check if they have a photo page on their website. Found one of mine on a big sign that way


« Reply #26 on: June 15, 2011, 08:56 »
0
Since I have the house to myself today, I can already see I will get nothing done playing with this thing!

« Reply #27 on: June 15, 2011, 09:14 »
0
Since I have the house to myself today, I can already see I will get nothing done playing with this thing!

Plus, we'll get many angry posts here today. Should be a fun day  8)

« Reply #28 on: June 15, 2011, 09:14 »
0
They have some interesting ideas of "similar" pics too.  I searched for uses of an emergency first aid image that has sold well and found some, but the similars were mostly color-releated.  My image is heavy in red tones and the similar pics were red belts, red flowers, red table settings and a few women in red boudoir scenes  LOL

« Reply #29 on: June 15, 2011, 09:39 »
0
They have some interesting ideas of "similar" pics too.  I searched for uses of an emergency first aid image that has sold well and found some, but the similars were mostly color-releated.  My image is heavy in red tones and the similar pics were red belts, red flowers, red table settings and a few women in red boudoir scenes  LOL

I think they want to offer different images with the same color scheme, so if image researchers (who use Google Images) are looking for content they might actually be interested in other images with the same color tones. I think it's pretty neat (not if half naked women appear next to your daughter's holiday shot though...).

ShadySue

« Reply #30 on: June 15, 2011, 10:49 »
0
I don't see the camera yet.
I hope the agencies are geared up for dealing with all the 'found but never downloaded' images, or wrongly used images etc.

SNP

  • Canadian Photographer
« Reply #31 on: June 15, 2011, 11:46 »
0
One thing I'm already seeing a pattern with is how effective watermarks are.

I have some images at Flickr and my personal sites with different watermarks. Some have the small faint watermarks at the bottom left or right. Some have a faint bigger watermark in the middle similar to Istock's.

Guess which ones I'm finding being used illegally. Right, small bottom watermark. So whoever says watermarks don't make a difference, wrong.

Time to start registering copyrights on all my images.

really true. on my website, I place watermarks across the middle (or most important portion) of my image. I realize it can make the image less attractive, but so be it...

« Reply #32 on: June 15, 2011, 11:54 »
0
I don't see the camera yet.
I hope the agencies are geared up for dealing with all the 'found but never downloaded' images, or wrongly used images etc.

I am in Germany. No camera for me either.

PaulieWalnuts

  • On the Wrong Side of the Business
« Reply #33 on: June 15, 2011, 11:59 »
0
One thing I'm already seeing a pattern with is how effective watermarks are.

I have some images at Flickr and my personal sites with different watermarks. Some have the small faint watermarks at the bottom left or right. Some have a faint bigger watermark in the middle similar to Istock's.

Guess which ones I'm finding being used illegally. Right, small bottom watermark. So whoever says watermarks don't make a difference, wrong.

Time to start registering copyrights on all my images.

really true. on my website, I place watermarks across the middle (or most important portion) of my image. I realize it can make the image less attractive, but so be it...

Well, after playing with this thing I also found a bunch with the bigger center watermark also. But the smaller one still has more thefts.

Another issue this resurrects is with RF licensing. Without watermarks how do we really know which images were licensed properly or stolen? If a designer buys an image and posts the XXXL size on their website what's to prevent another hundred people from stealing it and using it? How would we know which is legit? RF doesn't track anything. RM tracks customers and usage so it's pretty easy to get a report on who's licensing it and who's in violation.

If for every one image that's purchased it's getting stolen 5/10/25 times, that's a lot of money out of our pockets. We need a hybrid license that offers the buying simplicity of RF with some of the tracking capabilities of RM.

« Reply #34 on: June 15, 2011, 12:06 »
0
If it's so easy to trace all these stolen images now, I wonder if it would be worth the sites getting together and making an example of some of these thieves?  The music industry has gone after people file sharing, why can't the microstock sites do something similar?  They could be losing a lot of money from this.

I also wonder if this could boost our sales?  If potential buyers see something they like, hopefully they will now be able to easily find it on one of the sites and buy a license.

XPTO

« Reply #35 on: June 15, 2011, 12:48 »
0
If it's so easy to trace all these stolen images now, I wonder if it would be worth the sites getting together and making an example of some of these thieves?  The music industry has gone after people file sharing, why can't the microstock sites do something similar?  They could be losing a lot of money from this.

I also wonder if this could boost our sales?  If potential buyers see something they like, hopefully they will now be able to easily find it on one of the sites and buy a license.

Micro agencies don't give a f*ck about going after thieves to increase profits, because if they see their profit margin drop, they simply cut the photographer commission. They get away with it 100% of the time and we end up here complaining but not doing anything about it.

In fact, if it weren't against the law the micro owners would use us as slave labor. I have absolutely no doubt about it. And I'm not joking.

The music industry had to do something about it because they cannot easily replace an artist or band. With us, that's very far from the truth since people even offer images for free just to see them on print.

Today I've already sent half a dozen mails to sites demanding for them to delete the image or pay the license. But that's only on my RM collection. It's impossible to do anything about RF.

XPTO

« Reply #36 on: June 15, 2011, 12:57 »
0
Well, after playing with this thing I also found a bunch with the bigger center watermark also. But the smaller one still has more thefts.

Another issue this resurrects is with RF licensing. Without watermarks how do we really know which images were licensed properly or stolen? If a designer buys an image and posts the XXXL size on their website what's to prevent another hundred people from stealing it and using it? How would we know which is legit? RF doesn't track anything. RM tracks customers and usage so it's pretty easy to get a report on who's licensing it and who's in violation.

If for every one image that's purchased it's getting stolen 5/10/25 times, that's a lot of money out of our pockets. We need a hybrid license that offers the buying simplicity of RF with some of the tracking capabilities of RM.

And also what we need a is a technology that embed in the image, information about the buyer and the end client so we can detect abusive uses. I think that technology already exists for may years but stock agencies don't seem to be interested in using it. They can always cut commissions to increase profit.

Will it kill stock photography? Yes, but the agencies always looked at microstock as a short term thing. Just see how they are happy to sell when a good offer comes up...

« Reply #37 on: June 15, 2011, 13:35 »
0
This thing really works.

PaulieWalnuts, thanks for sharing this.

« Reply #38 on: June 15, 2011, 14:26 »
0
....Micro agencies don't give a f*ck about going after thieves to increase profits, because if they see their profit margin drop, they simply cut the photographer commission. They get away with it 100% of the time and we end up here complaining but not doing anything about it...
I don't think that's quite true.  I'm doing lots about the commission cuts, it's virtually stopped my microstock production and I'm working towards other ways of making money.  I'm not the only one that isn't going to take commission cuts until there's nothing left.  And the sites that have cut commissions the most don't look to be doing that well, istock and FT look like they have a flawed strategy to me.

« Reply #39 on: June 15, 2011, 14:35 »
0
@PaulieWalnuts - I believe that technology will be a big part of how tracking works moving forward. And didn't Getty just buy into one of the companies which has been developing tracking / digital watermarking technology ?

On the subscription side I suspect that sooner or later content will be literally linked to a subscription - such that the content and user agreement expires if the subscription lapses. Subscription based services are potentially easier to control.

« Reply #40 on: June 15, 2011, 14:47 »
0
Doesn't work for me - I don't see any camera neither in Firefox nor Chrome or IE

« Reply #41 on: June 15, 2011, 15:42 »
0
I don't have the camera icon either via Mac Firefox 4.0.1. I can't wait to try it.


traveler1116

« Reply #42 on: June 15, 2011, 15:55 »
0
I don't have the camera icon either via Mac Firefox 4.0.1. I can't wait to try it.

Same here.  I guess we'll just have to wait a bit more.

« Reply #43 on: June 15, 2011, 15:57 »
0
I see the camera, how do I download the plugin?

First try, just got a watermarked image!  Oh well.
http://theenglishstars.blogspot.com/2010/06/airport.html

« Reply #44 on: June 15, 2011, 15:58 »
0
I have no idea why the delay in the roll-out on this feature. That camera icon looks suspiciously like one of mine.

« Reply #45 on: June 15, 2011, 16:06 »
0
So, this first image led to several FT watermarked version spread in many sites, mostly blogs.

A couple of unwatermarked ones are available in the original large size. What can we do about this, contact the user and request that he respects the size limit of the agreement?

« Reply #46 on: June 15, 2011, 16:16 »
0
This is neat, I found one of my stethoscope images in a poster for this clinic.
http://www.centremediclaboral.com/tabid/417/language/ca-ES/Default.aspx

ShadySue

« Reply #47 on: June 15, 2011, 16:35 »
0
On the subscription side I suspect that sooner or later content will be literally linked to a subscription - such that the content and user agreement expires if the subscription lapses. Subscription based services are potentially easier to control.
I think I'm misunderstanding what you mean - could you clarify please?
Thinkstock for one has in their user agreement that images may not be used after a subscription expires (except where it has already been put into use) so you're not supposed to 'stash' images. From the user point of view, the stashing of images must be an attraction of subs.
It has been generally agreed when this point has been made that it would be impossible to police.
But I think you must mean something else.

« Reply #48 on: June 15, 2011, 16:43 »
0
Thanks for posting this. Google just rocks at everything they do!

« Reply #49 on: June 15, 2011, 16:43 »
0
Ok, this is where we can ghet the plugin from:
http://www.google.com/insidesearch/searchbyimage.html


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
11 Replies
7626 Views
Last post June 19, 2008, 02:19
by Perry
3 Replies
2632 Views
Last post June 20, 2008, 23:26
by Peter
7 Replies
3411 Views
Last post October 14, 2011, 04:43
by leaf
0 Replies
1577 Views
Last post August 31, 2012, 13:05
by JanNowak
9 Replies
4150 Views
Last post March 04, 2013, 23:07
by bruce_blake

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results