pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Yuri Arcurs First Public Statement  (Read 77196 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #100 on: July 25, 2013, 16:11 »
0
Maybe this is the reason istock has lowered their standards for images....they are preparing for iphone submissions?


You people always fall for nonsense like this. Soros does this: he tells everyone gold is for idiots, and when the price drops, he buys tons of it. I remember when I read someone's list of what not to shoot, because they are so overdone: anything with laptop, businesswoman, girls with apples and similar... than you look at the guys new uploads: stuff with laptop, businesswoman, girls with apples and similar.... But you can bet the guy was very grateful if you were dumb enough to fall for it and gave him more space on those sellers by shooting some niche junk instead... what a bunch of morons :)



hehe. He is refereing to this post: http://arcurs.com/2008/05/what-should-i-shoot-and-what-sells-well/
Not quite true dough. RPI on concepts outside the "sofa, laptop, cell-phone"-sphere are much higher. The problem is that to nail them you need to think and not just duplicate. The advice in the article is true. Actually is.



Having to really nail them is trivial when there are 20+ million images in store. But ppl will fall for this because anyone can learn to do an isolation on white, but 99% of the time they have severely inapt, unattractive models, so they get no sales. Then you can just blame it on the concept and they go back to shooting their dogs in the backyard.


« Reply #101 on: July 25, 2013, 16:11 »
0
so yuri, do you think we have a split of pictures.

the kind of pictures provided for the masses, in newspapers and television, that are all editorial and come from cell phone holders at the right place at the right time.

And more commercial pictures, without trademarks and model released that can be used in advertising.

The split has always been there, but what are you trying to do with crowdsourcng editorial on a cellphone platforml?

« Reply #102 on: July 25, 2013, 16:12 »
+2
I've observed  you over the years. My opinion of you went down the drain in an SS thread a long time ago when someone pointed out that one of your people line-ups was ridiculous with the fake reflections not matching the line, so the whole effect was absurd. Instead of admitting you had screwed up and pulling the failed picture, you said it was all the fault of a trainee photoshop worker (who I think you named) and that while the picture was rubbish, that might be the sort of thing customers wanted.
In a couple of replies you showed 1) a complete failure to accept that anything you published could be wrong, even though it clearly was; 2) a desire to blame your staff instead of accepting responsibility when things go wrong, however minor the issue might be, and 3) complete contempt for buyers and a willingness to leave them looking like idiots by buying your mistakes.
I've wasted very little time on your pronouncements since then, though I understand you have provided a lot of useful information to people as a part of your self-promotion drive.
No need to do it in private communication, dude. Your latest "microstock fails because I leave" is just part of the observed pattern.

KAPOW!!!!

Yuri_Arcurs

  • One Crazy PhotoManic MadPerson
« Reply #103 on: July 25, 2013, 16:12 »
-5
What a narcissist! Sneers at us all over how he won't deal with us, only with "professionals", then can't resist cobbling together some stats that might support the contention that he is god's gift to the universe and can't resist coming to amateursnapperstockgroup.com to brag about his importance.
Sorry, Yuri, didn't you get the message when iStock sacked Sean? Nobody is of any real importance to the stock industry, not Sean and not  you. But don't let that get in the way of your self-esteem.

Hi. Send me an email on wackerhausen@gmail.com and let's discus a bit further. I feel somewhat sad that I can make you explode like this and would like to know why. Are you ok with discussing over email?

I've observed  you over the years. My opinion of you went down the drain in an SS thread a long time ago when someone pointed out that one of your people line-ups was ridiculous with the fake reflections not matching the line, so the whole effect was absurd. Instead of admitting you had screwed up and pulling the failed picture, you said it was all the fault of a trainee photoshop worker (who I think you named) and that while the picture was rubbish, that might be the sort of thing customers wanted.
In a couple of replies you showed 1) a complete failure to accept that anything you published could be wrong, even though it clearly was; 2) a desire to blame your staff instead of accepting responsibility when things go wrong, however minor the issue might be, and 3) complete contempt for buyers and a willingness to leave them looking like idiots by buying your mistakes.
I've wasted very little time on your pronouncements since then, though I understand you have provided a lot of useful information to people as a part of your self-promotion drive.
No need to do it in private communication, dude. Your latest "microstock fails because I leave" is just part of the observed pattern.

Unfortunately it was the screwup of a trainee photographer. I told him nicely what kind of trouble this caused me and he was very apologetic. He is still part of our team today and teaches our advanced retouching classes. He was 16 years old at the time of the "reflective surface" mistake and was competing internationally on several photoshop competitions. I simply had to be silent about it. The reflections looked crap. Totally. I agree, but I was not going to smooch it into somebodies online reputation at the age of 16. Then I rather take it on myself. Wish I did and which you are now blaming me for.
« Last Edit: July 25, 2013, 16:16 by Yuri_Arcurs »

« Reply #104 on: July 25, 2013, 16:12 »
0
I'm not stock [exceptionally not talking micro] expert at all - so what's the reason on SS stock drop mentioned in article? Looking at Getty Images, they closed on 33,98 yesterday but 52 weeks figures are 21.80 - 51.00. Why is 12% drop that tragic?

« Reply #105 on: July 25, 2013, 16:13 »
-1
MSG posters are biased yes, but they are brutal and sometimes that is ok. :)

is it me or some of them are literally foaming from their mouth in anger ? :)

it's getting more and more funny to read this forum recently, one by one all their dreams and their rock solid statements about the microstock industry are crashing and burning and the only talk left is about Symbiostock of PoD sites.



Ron

« Reply #106 on: July 25, 2013, 16:13 »
+8
I dont think mobile is going to take off. If it would be the next big thing, it would have taken off already. Smartphones have 8mp cameras and bigger. What are they waiting for 12mp? 18mp? It wont take off because its only the occasional shot thats good enough. Low light shots is still a problem, moving subjects is still a problem, releases are still a problem.

Sure they equip journalists with smartphones but its not going to make it ever. Not in front line journalism, not in Nat Geo, etc etc.

Candid shots of someone's toes with nail polish? Sure, someone will buy one for 5 dollar and have a laugh. Next thing they post a request for someone in a shower kissing a fish, just for laughs. Its a craze and will lose interest soon. Just as planking lost all interest, just as the hula hoop, just as roller skates, etc etc.

Why does it take so long for mobile photography to take off? The fact that instagram is popular for personal mobile images, doesnt mean mobile stock is commercially going to be a success.

So you got 33k images in 10 hours. And are you going to do what with them?

Your blog sounds delusional. The drop of SS stock because of you. Investing 1.2m to get photos of toenails. Thats 1,2 million down the hole. You would have been better off burning them in the fireplace to get some use of it. I think you're off your trolley, mate.

I am sure IS slashing the prices in half fits right in with your 'stock agencies wouldnt raise their prices' argument?

You did great doing what You did, but why that blog? Its just bitter. Makes you sound like a git.


EmberMike

« Reply #107 on: July 25, 2013, 16:13 »
+6
Yuri, I used to respect you and what you've been able to accomplish in microstock. But the way you've handled this is really disgusting.

Microstock companies gave you the opportunity to become what you are today. Maybe you've outgrown them, but it's really disrespectful to mock these companies on your way out the door, saying things like "professionals work with professionals" and calling your departure "the first substantial setback in microstock history."

You aren't microstock. We all are, and some of us real professionals in microstock wouldn't act like children on our way out the door if we ever opted to move on.

I completely agree. So why do you think I am saying what I do? Think deeper my friend. :)

Well, for a minute I thought you might be trying to get other people to take up the cause, put more pressure on the microstock companies to make changes by getting all of us involved. But I don't think you're ever coming back to microstock so what's the point? Even if you tried, I suspect a lot of companies would tell you to hit the bricks after you publicly mocked them and implied that they aren't professionals.

So what is it? Let's not play a guessing game here. If there is some deeper meaning behind what you've said, just fill us in. Otherwise I'm taking your words at face value. You made a ton of money, moved on, and now openly mock the companies you left behind, the ones that enabled you to grow your business and make millions. What exactly am I missing?
 

« Reply #108 on: July 25, 2013, 16:13 »
-1
What a narcissist! Sneers at us all over how he won't deal with us, only with "professionals", then can't resist cobbling together some stats that might support the contention that he is god's gift to the universe and can't resist coming to amateursnapperstockgroup.com to brag about his importance.
Sorry, Yuri, didn't you get the message when iStock sacked Sean? Nobody is of any real importance to the stock industry, not Sean and not  you. But don't let that get in the way of your self-esteem.

Hi. Send me an email on wackerhausen@gmail.com and let's discus a bit further. I feel somewhat sad that I can make you explode like this and would like to know why. Are you ok with discussing over email?

I've observed  you over the years. My opinion of you went down the drain in an SS thread a long time ago when someone pointed out that one of your people line-ups was ridiculous with the fake reflections not matching the line, so the whole effect was absurd. Instead of admitting you had screwed up and pulling the failed picture, you said it was all the fault of a trainee photoshop worker (who I think you named) and that while the picture was rubbish, that might be the sort of thing customers wanted.
In a couple of replies you showed 1) a complete failure to accept that anything you published could be wrong, even though it clearly was; 2) a desire to blame your staff instead of accepting responsibility when things go wrong, however minor the issue might be, and 3) complete contempt for buyers and a willingness to leave them looking like idiots by buying your mistakes.
I've wasted very little time on your pronouncements since then, though I understand you have provided a lot of useful information to people as a part of your self-promotion drive.
No need to do it in private communication, dude. Your latest "microstock fails because I leave" is just part of the observed pattern.

You mentioning the obscure reflection on some obscure group shot is almost as bad as him inserting the SS graph. 8)

« Reply #109 on: July 25, 2013, 16:18 »
-2
Det her er en fed trd.
Den bliver reference for spekulationer i mange r.

Der bliver mske endda brug for at stte den p vers, s man nemmere kan referere.

LOL



« Reply #110 on: July 25, 2013, 16:19 »
-1
Having to really nail them is trivial when there are 20+ million images in store.

Due to Pareto's Law only 20% of those 20 million images are selling well and compensating for the remaining 80% of low sellers.

That means 2 millions of top sellers and of those 2 millions 100,000 are Yuri's, that means his portfolio alone impacts an agency like SS for around 5% of their sales but as far as we know it could be even 10-15% !

Of course random buyers will quickly grab the clones but some buyers could go back to istock if they're fans of Yuri and his team.


« Reply #111 on: July 25, 2013, 16:21 »
+7
What a narcissist! Sneers at us all over how he won't deal with us, only with "professionals", then can't resist cobbling together some stats that might support the contention that he is god's gift to the universe and can't resist coming to amateursnapperstockgroup.com to brag about his importance.
Sorry, Yuri, didn't you get the message when iStock sacked Sean? Nobody is of any real importance to the stock industry, not Sean and not  you. But don't let that get in the way of your self-esteem.

Hi. Send me an email on wackerhausen@gmail.com and let's discus a bit further. I feel somewhat sad that I can make you explode like this and would like to know why. Are you ok with discussing over email?

I've observed  you over the years. My opinion of you went down the drain in an SS thread a long time ago when someone pointed out that one of your people line-ups was ridiculous with the fake reflections not matching the line, so the whole effect was absurd. Instead of admitting you had screwed up and pulling the failed picture, you said it was all the fault of a trainee photoshop worker (who I think you named) and that while the picture was rubbish, that might be the sort of thing customers wanted.
In a couple of replies you showed 1) a complete failure to accept that anything you published could be wrong, even though it clearly was; 2) a desire to blame your staff instead of accepting responsibility when things go wrong, however minor the issue might be, and 3) complete contempt for buyers and a willingness to leave them looking like idiots by buying your mistakes.
I've wasted very little time on your pronouncements since then, though I understand you have provided a lot of useful information to people as a part of your self-promotion drive.
No need to do it in private communication, dude. Your latest "microstock fails because I leave" is just part of the observed pattern.

Unfortunately it was the screwup of a trainee photographer. I told him nicely what kind of trouble this caused me and he was very apologetic. He is still part of our team today and teaches our advanced retouching classes. He was 16 years old at the time of the "reflective surface" mistake and was competing internationally on several photoshop competitions. I simply had to be silent about it. The reflections looked crap. Totally. I agree, but I was not going to smooch it into somebodies online reputation at the age of 16. Then I rather take it on myself. Wish I did and which you are now blaming me for.

Thank you for proving my point. It appears under your name. Everything that appears that is good shows how great you are. Everything that is bad is the fault of someone else. It was FOR SALE on SS. And you blamed a photoshop trainee, not the photographer.

tab62

« Reply #112 on: July 25, 2013, 16:22 »
0
"I dont think mobile is going to take off. If it would be the next big thing, it would have taken off already. "

Tell this to the professional photographers at the Chicago Tribune  :-[



« Reply #113 on: July 25, 2013, 16:23 »
+8
... almost as bad as him inserting the SS graph. 8)


Notice how Yuri was carefully selective in the dates used on the graph posted. The truth is that SS stock is actually 10% UP since he removed his images and announced his 'exclusivity' deal on 17th May!

http://www.nasdaq.com/symbol/sstk/interactive-chart?timeframe=6m&charttype=line

Recent stock drops will almost certainly be profit-taking from those who bought low. No stock ever goes up in a straight line.

« Reply #114 on: July 25, 2013, 16:24 »
0
I know Sequoia very well and was on a call with them as late as yesterday. We are saying no to investments in Scoopshot.com. If you have a good product  you don't really have to look for VC's. They come to you.

well to each his own, VCs are also a way to share risks and getting big investors on board.
considering they launched and still own a part of google they could have an ace in their sleeve regarding the integration of media companies into their portfolio.



« Reply #115 on: July 25, 2013, 16:25 »
+17
Believe it or not - few of us don't speak Danish. To be honest I find using Danish in this thread impolite.

Yuri_Arcurs

  • One Crazy PhotoManic MadPerson
« Reply #116 on: July 25, 2013, 16:25 »
+6
Yuri, I used to respect you and what you've been able to accomplish in microstock. But the way you've handled this is really disgusting.

Microstock companies gave you the opportunity to become what you are today. Maybe you've outgrown them, but it's really disrespectful to mock these companies on your way out the door, saying things like "professionals work with professionals" and calling your departure "the first substantial setback in microstock history."

You aren't microstock. We all are, and some of us real professionals in microstock wouldn't act like children on our way out the door if we ever opted to move on.

I completely agree. So why do you think I am saying what I do? Think deeper my friend. :)

Well, for a minute I thought you might be trying to get other people to take up the cause, put more pressure on the microstock companies to make changes by getting all of us involved. But I don't think you're ever coming back to microstock so what's the point? Even if you tried, I suspect a lot of companies would tell you to hit the bricks after you publicly mocked them and implied that they aren't professionals.

So what is it? Let's not play a guessing game here. If there is some deeper meaning behind what you've said, just fill us in. Otherwise I'm taking your words at face value. You made a ton of money, moved on, and now openly mock the companies you left behind, the ones that enabled you to grow your business and make millions. What exactly am I missing?

I like your thoughts. I really don't see it the way you do and I don't think you understand the business that we (our images) have created. Do you really think that the optimal price for those images is a 300USD/mth subscription? Am I the only one see this? And yes. It starts by somebody like me saying no thanks.


Ron

« Reply #117 on: July 25, 2013, 16:26 »
+2
Hi Yuri,

Thank you so much for taking 1-2 hours out of your precious schedule for us mere mortals. My question is why would you defecate all over the agencies that feed our children? You seem like a really smart guy, can you not figure out a way to make you millions without pulling down the companies that we rely on for our daily bread?

Thanks again for your time.

Turn that around. What do you think happens at the end of a downward spiral?
You fall into a hole. If your move was to help the micros then you have bigger ego than I hold humanly possible and if your gameplan is to increase pricing across the board, then it sure is a weird approach  :D

« Reply #118 on: July 25, 2013, 16:26 »
+5
Why take potshots at Yuri.  This certainly has the attention of many and cannot be edited by the current agencies.  Maybe we can take the time while everyone's watching and reading to make some headway with projects on the move like Symbiostock.

If photo crowd sourcing can work, what about Symbiostock crowd sourcing.  Perhaps we can crowdsource buyers to Symbiostock.   I'm considering joining the Symbiostock group.

Is everyone aware of Symbiostock and are you considering entry?

« Reply #119 on: July 25, 2013, 16:26 »
+17
I'm not sure what to think,
There's a guy who made it all the way to the top from scratch, produces the best "Merchandise" in our industry and everybody else is jealous and does not give credit were credit is due. This man became very successful with hard work and great strategies. What are we doing? - Checking his spelling? - very childish of us in my opinion.


I for my part would like to succeed and listen to people who have done it, not judge them.


There is no fairness in business and I don't expect it. I'm not waiting for Yuri to change my diapers.
I'm not hoping that successful people hold back, turn around and offer their hand to me, so I can have a piece of the pie too. That's not how it works.


Great going Yuri, it does suck that you car is nicer than mine, but I know why, and you deserve it. Get it while you can!
« Last Edit: July 25, 2013, 16:43 by Gunter Nezhoda »

« Reply #120 on: July 25, 2013, 16:27 »
+1
If Microstock goes down there are two things that will happen. Lower quality images will be replaced by cell phone photography. But the better and more creative photographers can go back to mid stock or macro stock. There will always be a market for high end photography. Nowadays micro mid and macro stock are overlapping to much. So in the long run it can be a good thing for the creative ones among us!

« Reply #121 on: July 25, 2013, 16:29 »
+5
You mentioning the obscure reflection on some obscure group shot is almost as bad as him inserting the SS graph. 8)

It wasn't his picture that bothered me. It was the way he handled the issue when someone pointed it out.  For me, that was symptomatic of the way he handled his business and - enormously successful though he may be - it is not an approach I can admire. But then, I'm not "professional", which probably explains it.

(P.S. - Gunter one thing I would not blame a Dane for is his English spelling... my Danish is err ...)
« Last Edit: July 25, 2013, 16:32 by BaldricksTrousers »

« Reply #122 on: July 25, 2013, 16:29 »
+9
Yuri, I used to respect you and what you've been able to accomplish in microstock. But the way you've handled this is really disgusting.

Microstock companies gave you the opportunity to become what you are today. Maybe you've outgrown them, but it's really disrespectful to mock these companies on your way out the door, saying things like "professionals work with professionals" and calling your departure "the first substantial setback in microstock history."

You aren't microstock. We all are, and some of us real professionals in microstock wouldn't act like children on our way out the door if we ever opted to move on.

I completely agree. So why do you think I am saying what I do? Think deeper my friend. :)

Well, for a minute I thought you might be trying to get other people to take up the cause, put more pressure on the microstock companies to make changes by getting all of us involved. But I don't think you're ever coming back to microstock so what's the point? Even if you tried, I suspect a lot of companies would tell you to hit the bricks after you publicly mocked them and implied that they aren't professionals.

So what is it? Let's not play a guessing game here. If there is some deeper meaning behind what you've said, just fill us in. Otherwise I'm taking your words at face value. You made a ton of money, moved on, and now openly mock the companies you left behind, the ones that enabled you to grow your business and make millions. What exactly am I missing?

I like your thoughts. I really don't see it the way you do and I don't think you understand the business that we (our images) have created. Do you really think that the optimal price for those images is a 300USD/mth subscription? Am I the only one see this? And yes. It starts by somebody like me saying no thanks.
You're late to the party on that one.  Many of us have been speaking out about how cheap subscription sites are bad for everyone and create a race to the bottom.  One of the big arguments for them was that the most successful microstocker is on all the sites so they must be great.  Maybe this will start to shift some of that attitude.

« Reply #123 on: July 25, 2013, 16:31 »
+2
"I dont think mobile is going to take off. If it would be the next big thing, it would have taken off already. "

Tell this to the professional photographers at the Chicago Tribune  :-[

well even the NYT fired a lot of staffers and photographers, and i know of some Reuters and AFP reporters paid a pittance to risk their neck in dangerous areas.

it will be a bad day for humanity when all this will be replaced by mobile phones or Sony NEX and thrown online for free or for a few bucks to the crowd of angry readers who expect everything for free.

recently i've even heard friends claiming the images shot with the iphone by their guests in his wedding were "as good" as the ones shot by the paid photographer ... this is so sad !

online services like Instagram or Scoopshot are yet another sign of the times, and the worst is yet to come.

« Reply #124 on: July 25, 2013, 16:35 »
+5
"It starts by somebody like me saying no thanks."

... With a straight face you said that?

Btw, as we've previously discussed, citizen journalism crowd sites don't work.  Past failures include Getty's own Scoopt.
« Last Edit: July 25, 2013, 16:38 by Sean Locke Photography »


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
36 Replies
16734 Views
Last post December 12, 2008, 12:09
by download
1 Replies
3750 Views
Last post May 25, 2011, 07:16
by RT
0 Replies
1997 Views
Last post April 13, 2012, 10:41
by williamju
136 Replies
25244 Views
Last post March 23, 2016, 20:43
by goober
8 Replies
1754 Views
Last post December 20, 2018, 13:06
by Pauws99

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results