MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Envato Elements

Author Topic: Weird complaint from shutterstock. Someone else is claiming my images.  (Read 11186 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: July 16, 2013, 20:26 »
0
I'm baffled by a complaint I just recieved from shutterstock. Someone it seems currently sent a complaint to shutterstock either claiming that they are the subject in my photo's or that they took the images. I'm not sure which as shutterstock hasn't clarified too much just that they want some sort of proof that the images are of me and taken by me.

The image that was mentioned was this one http://www.shutterstock.com/pic.mhtml?id=107540021&src=id though they also said that the complain was of many other images of the same model.

Here is a listing of all images of me currently on shutterstock.
http://www.shutterstock.com/cat.mhtml?models=12913051&models=13473221&context_photo=107540021

I'm not sure how someone can mistake these images thinking that they might be the subject of these images or confusing their own work thinking that they might be the photographer on these images.

Does anyone have an idea as to what might be going on why someone or for that matter how someone can even claim these images might be of them or by them? I'm at a total loss as to why someone would do this when most anyone would know if they took a picture of themself wearing a santa hat grabbing their nipples or know if they took multiple pictures of a fat guy grabbing their nipples.

Anyone?
« Last Edit: July 17, 2013, 14:08 by txking »


« Reply #1 on: July 16, 2013, 21:03 »
+1
Its a scam.
Someone found the pictures and thought they could put pressure on somebody.
But since it is you who is both the photog and the model, the easiest is to walk up to the shutterstoch office in NY and say you are yourself.
Next best step is to skype video them at shutterstock and show your face.

EmberMike

« Reply #2 on: July 16, 2013, 21:35 »
+15

You know, I mentioned a similar sort of hypothetical scenario to a Shutterstock employee once. I mentioned that I was a bit concerned that it doesn't seem to take much more than an email with an accusation to get someone's portfolio suspended. They didn't seemed too concerned about it, though.

And yet here we are, with something like this happening where someone is wrongly claiming ownership of an image. Fortunately they didn't shut down your port, txking, while they investigate the matter. But it's still concerning that this kind of stuff can so easily happen.

And I think SS still handles these cases backwards. Shouldn't the burden be on the accuser to prove ownership first, and then contact the contributor to see how they respond?

WarrenPrice

« Reply #3 on: July 16, 2013, 21:50 »
+1

You know, I mentioned a similar sort of hypothetical scenario to a Shutterstock employee once. I mentioned that I was a bit concerned that it doesn't seem to take much more than an email with an accusation to get someone's portfolio suspended. They didn't seemed too concerned about it, though.

And yet here we are, with something like this happening where someone is wrongly claiming ownership of an image. Fortunately they didn't shut down your port, txking, while they investigate the matter. But it's still concerning that this kind of stuff can so easily happen.

And I think SS still handles these cases backwards. Shouldn't the burden be on the accuser to prove ownership first, and then contact the contributor to see how they respond?

I for one certainly agree. 

« Reply #4 on: July 16, 2013, 21:59 »
0
So far I admit that I pushed back. I'm asking to see the complaint itself as I believe the complaint is filed in bad faith. Asked to see what proof the person who filed the complaint gave to show that this is his work. We will see what they say.

What is the scam with this though? It doesn't let them use the images right just takes down my version of the images. So what is it they gain by this?


Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2


« Reply #5 on: July 16, 2013, 23:19 »
0
SS took down a property pic I had citing a complaint from a company that as far as I could tell is not the owner of the property or the architect or builder (but an entity that does have similar properties). I asked about that from SS, and as far as they were concerned the complaint was close enough. oh well. It was a good seller too.

I think in cases where there is a real dispute they should put the pics into some sort of escrow and then when it is sorted out the owner gets the sales $. They do seem to swing either too far towards removing ports or just ignoring the problem though.

Good luck getting it sorted out. At least in this case it should be easy for you.


Reef

  • astonmars.com
« Reply #6 on: July 16, 2013, 23:53 »
0
What is the scam with this though? It doesn't let them use the images right just takes down my version of the images. So what is it they gain by this?

Not having to see your imagery on the web?  ;D

« Reply #7 on: July 17, 2013, 00:27 »
+3
What is the scam with this though? It doesn't let them use the images right just takes down my version of the images. So what is it they gain by this?

Not having to see your imagery on the web?  ;D

Hey now I know I really need to work on my lighting and modeling skills. Otherwise these are good pics. They can't be that bad :p



« Reply #8 on: July 17, 2013, 02:07 »
+1
I think the Santa hat-nipples photo caused me to go blind for a few minutes.

Carl

  • Carl Stewart, CS Productions
« Reply #9 on: July 17, 2013, 06:20 »
+1
I think if it were me, I'd send them a scan of my driver's license to prove that I'm who I say I am, and ask them to have the person who filed the complaint to do the same.  I might even run a check on the license number, which anyone can do on my state's web site, and take a screen shot, in case the complainant photoshopped a DL.

ruxpriencdiam

    This user is banned.
  • Location. Third stone from the sun
« Reply #10 on: July 17, 2013, 09:45 »
0
I think if it were me, I'd send them a scan of my driver's license to prove that I'm who I say I am, and ask them to have the person who filed the complaint to do the same.  I might even run a check on the license number, which anyone can do on my state's web site, and take a screen shot, in case the complainant photoshopped a DL.
SS should already have a copy of the Drivers licenses since it is required for proof when you join if you are from the states other then that it would be a passport but either way they can plainly see that you are who you are.

« Reply #11 on: July 17, 2013, 11:24 »
-1
What's a "compaling"?

« Reply #12 on: July 17, 2013, 12:34 »
0
Could this be a vendetta?  Do you know anyone else who knows the workings of Shutterstock who understands that indicating a theft could cause you a whole lot of frustration?

« Reply #13 on: July 17, 2013, 14:08 »
+4
Nope no vendetta that I'm aware of. Most people don't know where I submit my images or the name that I put my images under. Shouldn't be anyone that I'm aware of who would even know where to start to cause my problems.

As far as the images I recieved a call from shutterstock today (big thumbs up for shutterstock being proactive and not shutting me down right then and there and instead trying to get to the bottom of things first) and the person who filed the complaint as I understand it thinks I took their face and transposed it on someone elses body. I ended up finding and sending the RAW over to SS and hopefully this goes away soon enough.

I can sadly say that face and that sexy body is mine. Who really would want to claim both of those :p. As a side note if you do the search for just the word nipple on SS and have it sorted by popular I hold three of the top 6 images.
« Last Edit: July 17, 2013, 14:11 by txking »

« Reply #14 on: July 17, 2013, 15:15 »
0
thanks... now I'm going to  have to stick a hot poker in my eye...

« Reply #15 on: July 17, 2013, 15:24 »
0
Its probably some idiot who thought he could make a buck on suing someone.

But there are also real wierdos out there that dont know what they do.
He might actually have believed it was him. Paranoia, skitzofrenia, anciety, desperation?

I had a guy who  cut all the electrical wires that ran outside my house, because he thought his dead wife talked to him in the television.

Lots of sparks, kind of dangerous, and what cut had I not found?

« Reply #16 on: July 17, 2013, 15:43 »
0
I had a guy who  cut all the electrical wires that ran outside my house, because he thought his dead wife talked to him in the television.

And you doubted him?


« Reply #17 on: July 17, 2013, 15:50 »
+1
I must admit I did, but that was mostly because he had no television and sat and looked at a cardboard box full of cucumbers.
And everybody knows that dead wives do not appear at such places.

« Reply #18 on: July 17, 2013, 16:08 »
+3
Perhaps it's someone who looks like you and whose friends saw the images and laughed at them (him).  He then made a complaint to Shutterstock.  Not saying he is in the right (obviously he isn't) but just trying to think of some logical explanation for a crazy accusation.

ShadySue

« Reply #19 on: July 17, 2013, 16:38 »
+1
Perhaps it's someone who looks like you and whose friends saw the images and laughed at them (him).  He then made a complaint to Shutterstock.  Not saying he is in the right (obviously he isn't) but just trying to think of some logical explanation for a crazy accusation.
Sounds plausible.

Ron

« Reply #20 on: July 17, 2013, 17:17 »
+2
Txing, you are a legend, and I applaud you. And you could be my brother, we look a lot alike. I dont know where you live, but if I ever get there I hope you will let me buy you a pint.

CD123

« Reply #21 on: July 17, 2013, 18:03 »
+2
Unfortunately this is how big business work. They have a name to protect, court cases and lawyers cost a lot and legal pursuits are time consuming. So, although the norm in the legal environment is "who claims has to prove", in this environment it is more like, "this guy might have a legal claim, so take down the possible offending port and get the truth from the party under our control" (cost, perhaps $400 p.m. versus legal actions costing thousands and waste of time and possible blemish on business's name). This is a complete $ perspective and has nothing to do with what is right or just.

gillian vann

  • *Gillian*
« Reply #22 on: July 17, 2013, 19:47 »
0
I know you'll look back and laugh at this (I've found it v amusing so far) thanks for sharing so much of yourself.  :o

Shelma1

« Reply #23 on: July 17, 2013, 21:01 »
0
Are you sure it's from Shutterstock? What sort of "proof" are they looking for? It could be a scammer trying to get your SS# or credit card # or something.

« Reply #24 on: July 18, 2013, 00:00 »
0
It was an email that came directly from shutterstock then mixed with a phone call plus they knew that the person in the picture and the photographer are one in the same. I'm doubting it's a scam at this point.

Ron I'm not quite sure why you think I'm a legend. I'm just some guy who is too broke to hire real models and figured lets see how a quick and easy shot works out.

Leaf thank you for the idea. It's not true but at least it does sound like something that might be in the realm of somewhat realistic.

Ron

« Reply #25 on: July 18, 2013, 00:47 »
0
Legend in Ireland is slang for a cool dude. You are a legend, and I think your images are extremely funny but also have commercial value. I just think what you do is great man. So how about that pint?  :D

« Reply #26 on: July 18, 2013, 11:47 »
0

You know, I mentioned a similar sort of hypothetical scenario to a Shutterstock employee once. I mentioned that I was a bit concerned that it doesn't seem to take much more than an email with an accusation to get someone's portfolio suspended. They didn't seemed too concerned about it, though.

And yet here we are, with something like this happening where someone is wrongly claiming ownership of an image. Fortunately they didn't shut down your port, txking, while they investigate the matter. But it's still concerning that this kind of stuff can so easily happen.

And I think SS still handles these cases backwards. Shouldn't the burden be on the accuser to prove ownership first, and then contact the contributor to see how they respond?

Actually this is thing I don't like about SS - like the queen of hearts Sentence firstverdict afterwards."


« Reply #27 on: July 18, 2013, 13:18 »
0
So far mike there has been no sentence against me. They took the complaint and let me run open and free while they investigate. I'm assuming that the other person has sent a photo of themself or ID, something at least to give some sort of proof. It sounds like SS knowns who the person is and I believe they even said there are some things that look the same between him and myself. With that SS I believe has to at least do due diligence and verify the claim as I'm sure not doing so can open them up to liability.

Ron wouldn't mind that pint but me being in the western US and you I'm assuming being in ireland chances are won't work out too well. Btw I have some new images comming up soon on shutterstock that hopefully I can get some sales on. Figured I can let my nipples rest for a bit before I bring out the clamps and do something else instead.

« Reply #28 on: July 18, 2013, 16:29 »
+6
Well at this point I found out who the person is claiming to be in those images. I've seen his images and his face and while there is something bordering a partial semi kind of in a if you really look at it hard and squint in just the right way I don't think the we look at that much alike other then he has facial hair and so did I when these images were made.

At this point I don't know how much info I can really give other then the person is now making a possible threat of legal action against SS and possibly others for use of his likeness, aka my face, but shutterstock so far is working with this trying to get it resolved. I give them quite a bit of respect on how they are handling this and hopefully once it's all said and done I can say more about what all is going on.

ShadySue

« Reply #29 on: July 18, 2013, 16:36 »
0
Hope it's all resolved soon. It's an interesting story to someone not directly involved!

« Reply #30 on: July 18, 2013, 16:45 »
+1
if this is another contributor - why would he jeopardize his own portfolio on SS by bringing up a false claim? Does he really think that he would be successful in proving beyond a doubt that that is actually him in the photo?
This whole scenario sounds a little bit wacko

Hopefully, you still have the original images (esp raw) as proof ... and hope you get some releif from this strange situation.

What kind of person does this?

Ron

« Reply #31 on: July 18, 2013, 16:55 »
0
This is the weirdest stuff. It would be the same if you would sue me for looking like you. LOL

« Reply #32 on: July 18, 2013, 22:21 »
+3
well hell if you and I look somewhat alike and he thinks him and I look alike maybe you can sue him for looking like you?

Just a thought :p

« Reply #33 on: July 18, 2013, 22:36 »
+2
Maybe you can sue him for bringing a false claim. Perhaps that would send a message that people need to stop and think before doing the most stupid thing possible in any given situation!!

I hope it all works out in your favor.

« Reply #34 on: July 18, 2013, 22:44 »
+2
Sorry had many windows open so noticed I had this typed up but forgot to post it. this is in reply to noodle

This complaint was not brought about by another contributor but rather someone else seperate from the whole thing. It seems he saw this image someplace and said "hey this looks like, maybe it is me." from there from what little I can gather is he made claim against either SS or the company that was using the image at which point he was directed to shutterstock saying that this image is him and as such all images of him need to be removed from SS.

I have the RAW's and multiple of them of me trying to do the same shot and many shots at that same time. I have images of myself that my wife took while I still had my facial fuzz. If it comes to court I don't see any reason as to why this guy would win as the image is me.

Hope it doesn't come to that though and hoping that we can contact the guy get this all resolved and taken care of sooner rather then later, but still if push comes to shove I'm not backing down.


« Reply #35 on: July 18, 2013, 23:11 »
0
At least you don't look like Kim Kardashian...  She would be suing SS because of you.  ;D

Remember this stupid case? http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2016932/Melissa-Molinaro-Kim-Kardashian-sues-Old-Navy-ad-lookalike-Reggie-Bushs-new-girl.html#ixzz2ZSbecMxk

EmberMike

« Reply #36 on: July 19, 2013, 10:34 »
+2
well hell if you and I look somewhat alike and he thinks him and I look alike maybe you can sue him for looking like you?

Just a thought :p

I'm an overweight bearded white guy too. I'm suing you both. Expect to hear from my lawyer.

;)

Edited to add: Good for you for not backing down. I think this is a pretty significant issue, especially if it comes down to a legal battle. Really this almost reads like a major headline. "Photographer sued for use of himself in a photo." Major photo news sites and blogs would be all over this.
« Last Edit: July 19, 2013, 10:39 by EmberMike »


Ron

« Reply #37 on: July 19, 2013, 11:14 »
+1
Hahaha, that would be a legal mess LOL

Here is me, ruining a bottle of JD Tennessee Honey  8)


« Reply #38 on: July 19, 2013, 11:38 »
0
well hell if you and I look somewhat alike and he thinks him and I look alike maybe you can sue him for looking like you?

Just a thought :p

I'm an overweight bearded white guy too. I'm suing you both. Expect to hear from my lawyer.

;)

Edited to add: Good for you for not backing down. I think this is a pretty significant issue, especially if it comes down to a legal battle. Really this almost reads like a major headline. "Photographer sued for use of himself in a photo." Major photo news sites and blogs would be all over this.

Well on an interesting thing with that reading his twitter and facebook he is trying to push this out into the media and to other people. It seems that he is wishing others to spread the word on this. I know that it has spread a little bit as people are sharing the story and I have even found the story on some third party site.


EmberMike

« Reply #39 on: July 19, 2013, 12:06 »
0
Well on an interesting thing with that reading his twitter and facebook he is trying to push this out into the media and to other people. It seems that he is wishing others to spread the word on this. I know that it has spread a little bit as people are sharing the story and I have even found the story on some third party site.

Maybe it's time to spread the word from our side. I'll tweet and fb post about it if you want some help getting the word out.

« Reply #40 on: July 19, 2013, 13:38 »
+1
Hahaha, that would be a legal mess LOL

Here is me, ruining a bottle of JD Tennessee Honey  8)



Just curious on your shirt did they get permission to use your likeness?


EmberMike that might be something to look at later on but for right now my goal as I'm sure you can understand is to make the issue go away first. Once that is done I'm considering options on what to do from there.

dbvirago

« Reply #41 on: July 19, 2013, 13:55 »
+4
So you have several (or more)images of yourself in various outfits doing various things with various expressions. He says you look like him, so it must be him, so give him some money. Has anybody asked if he remembers these particular photographs being taken? Is he saying they were taken without his knowledge? At some point in his life, was he minding his own business, standing in front of a black background with his shirt off, wearing a Santa Claus hat and playing with his nipples, then, without his knowledge, someone took his picture and is now getting rich selling his image to publications around the world? 

Yup, seems pretty likely to me.

Ron

« Reply #42 on: July 19, 2013, 13:56 »
0
That Tshirt is legend, I bought it off Busted Tees. The guys are cheap, good service and extremely funny and clever T shirts. When ever I wear that T shirt I get a lot of positive reactions.

Hahaha, that would be a legal mess LOL

Here is me, ruining a bottle of JD Tennessee Honey  8)



Just curious on your shirt did they get permission to use your likeness?



« Reply #43 on: July 19, 2013, 14:38 »
+1
Personally, I believe this guy was genuinely outraged despite being completely mistaken.  I had an email a year ago from a woman claiming that a picture I took at Disney's Animal Kingdom was stolen from her father, that the people on line for the Everest ride prove it was the same shot.  I told her she was full of carp, that I had plenty of other shots from that same day and that the viewpoint I used was so obvious that thousands if not millions have similar photos.  Never heard from her again, so either she realized she was wrong or decided it wasn't worth fighting about.  People can believe all sorts of insane things, even in the face of both probabilities and evidence to the contrary.

« Reply #44 on: July 19, 2013, 14:42 »
+2
People can believe all sorts of insane things, even in the face of both probabilities and evidence to the contrary.

are you talking about iStock? ;D

« Reply #45 on: July 19, 2013, 14:49 »
0
So you have several (or more)images of yourself in various outfits doing various things with various expressions. He says you look like him, so it must be him, so give him some money. Has anybody asked if he remembers these particular photographs being taken? Is he saying they were taken without his knowledge? At some point in his life, was he minding his own business, standing in front of a black background with his shirt off, wearing a Santa Claus hat and playing with his nipples, then, without his knowledge, someone took his picture and is now getting rich selling his image to publications around the world? 

Yup, seems pretty likely to me.

The picture of the Santa hat isn't him. He has a list of five images that he claim are him and has proof a such that those images are him. The rest of the images on my profile it seems as far as he is concerned are not him. Only this list of five he is requesting to be taken down. What confuses me is even though out of all the images have the same face how he came up with choosing only five of them claiming those are him when the rest of the images have the same face on them.

With the images in question he knows when the photographer took those images and knows for what use those images are for. He has proof that the images he is complaining about are his images and he even has made claims that he has physical proof that this is him. This is going by information he has made public on both his facebook and twitter.

Disorderly he very well could be mistaken and really believe it is him. I'm not sure how as our looks are quite different and from what I have seen comparing his images vs mine only one look even close to the same but really even as such it's about the same as Ron and I look.



I also just want to add that so far my understanding is based upon what little information I have recieved from SS and the rest seems to be based upon what he has posted in public about this.
« Last Edit: July 19, 2013, 15:51 by txking »

« Reply #46 on: July 19, 2013, 14:53 »
+1
is he saying he owns full body or just the face? how about the chest hair? they can't look the same ;D


« Reply #47 on: July 19, 2013, 15:35 »
+2
I'd better add one more sentence to model release:
Hereby model confirms that he / she does not bear a striking resemblance to anybody.

EmberMike

« Reply #48 on: July 19, 2013, 16:24 »
0
So after this joker wastes tons of Shutterstock's time and resources following up on this nonsense and entertaining the insane possibility that this claim has any merit, and possibly after this guy even attempts legal action (which it sounds like he might be motivated enough to do), can SS then sue him for all of the lost time and money spent on this? Or what about txking? The other guy is tweeting and posting about this, I'm assuming linking to your images. This might do harm to your reputation if it spreads far enough.

Just seems crazy to me that someone can simply fire off an email and begin a process that costs everyone involved, and then walk away without penalty after it will undoubtedly be found to be a frivolous claim.

As if photographers don't have enough to worry about these days, now you have to worry about someone suing you for taking pictures of your own face.

ShadySue

« Reply #49 on: July 19, 2013, 16:27 »
+2
Yup, now that I hear this bloke has gone onto social media, I'd hope SS would sue him.

EmberMike

« Reply #50 on: July 19, 2013, 16:34 »
+1
Yup, now that I hear this bloke has gone onto social media, I'd hope SS would sue him.

Was hoping I could find his tweets but no luck so far. :)

« Reply #51 on: July 19, 2013, 16:43 »
+1
Yup, now that I hear this bloke has gone onto social media, I'd hope SS would sue him.

Was hoping I could find his tweets but no luck so far. :)

1pm news tomorrow ;D

EmberMike

« Reply #52 on: July 29, 2013, 14:24 »
+1

Bumping this thread hoping for an update from the OP. Was this ever resolved?


« Reply #53 on: July 29, 2013, 16:03 »
0
So after this joker wastes tons of Shutterstock's time and resources following up on this nonsense and entertaining the insane possibility that this claim has any merit, and possibly after this guy even attempts legal action (which it sounds like he might be motivated enough to do), can SS then sue him for all of the lost time and money spent on this? Or what about txking? The other guy is tweeting and posting about this, I'm assuming linking to your images. This might do harm to your reputation if it spreads far enough.

Just seems crazy to me that someone can simply fire off an email and begin a process that costs everyone involved, and then walk away without penalty after it will undoubtedly be found to be a frivolous claim.

As if photographers don't have enough to worry about these days, now you have to worry about someone suing you for taking pictures of your own face.

This is one of those things I'm afraid of. Somebody suing me for images that they mistakenly think they own. So much fraud and misuse goes on with our images I think it is only a matter of time.

CD123

« Reply #54 on: July 29, 2013, 16:31 »
0
Claiming someone is acting illegally/fraudulently, which claim can be proven to be untrue, can lead in many countries to a criminal charge of Crimen Injuria ("unlawfully, intentionally and seriously impairing the dignity of another.") against the original claimant. This can also lead to a civil claim for dames caused by this person's untrue claims.

« Reply #55 on: July 29, 2013, 23:20 »
0
No word yet. I'm at this point left in the dark as well and hope I can get some sort of information as to what is going on.

I'm hoping the person who is making this claim didn't just silently drop it

EmberMike

« Reply #56 on: July 30, 2013, 16:27 »
0
No word yet. I'm at this point left in the dark as well and hope I can get some sort of information as to what is going on.

I'm hoping the person who is making this claim didn't just silently drop it

If they do drop it, I hope SS will at least let you know that it's a dead issue.


« Reply #57 on: December 22, 2013, 00:34 »
+2
Alright seems the issue is mostly resolved at this point.

For those of you curious this is the guy that is claiming the image are of him

https://scontent-a-sea.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash2/401194_268060556590328_1831697803_n.jpg

I believe that I posted an image of me above. Your opinions on how close we look together?

« Reply #58 on: December 22, 2013, 02:33 »
+1
Glad you got it sorted out.

« Reply #59 on: December 22, 2013, 03:47 »
+2
Alright seems the issue is mostly resolved at this point.

For those of you curious this is the guy that is claiming the image are of him

https://scontent-a-sea.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash2/401194_268060556590328_1831697803_n.jpg

I believe that I posted an image of me above. Your opinions on how close we look together?

There is some resemblance, but clearly you are a much more versatile model.  ;D

ShadySue

« Reply #60 on: December 22, 2013, 08:46 »
0
Glad you got it sorted out, and thanks for getting back to us with your update.

Has your port been offline since your OP in July? (actually, reading back, I'm not sure if you said it was offline even then).

« Reply #61 on: December 22, 2013, 09:24 »
+1
Nope I've been online the whole time and still selling my images :)


« Reply #62 on: December 22, 2013, 10:09 »
0
are you taking self potrait? or other photographer took those photos? it is quite strange the other guy will mistake other faces for his own face.. and if he is not even model for photographers.

anyway, to me it is a story that can make into a movie, so u better go out to sell the story.

do you think the person and you lookalike? i never really see a person look like me at all, and i wonder will two strangers really look alike?

ShadySue

« Reply #63 on: January 10, 2014, 21:16 »
+1
i never really see a person look like me at all, and i wonder will two strangers really look alike?

Just found this:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/10/strangers-who-look-like-twins-im-not-a-lookalike_n_4575750.html

Envato ElementsMicrostock Insider

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
6 Replies
2561 Views
Last post April 23, 2012, 16:01
by CD123
8 Replies
2646 Views
Last post December 03, 2014, 03:59
by EfrenBatt
3 Replies
1784 Views
Last post April 05, 2015, 00:17
by Hobostocker
12 Replies
3181 Views
Last post June 01, 2016, 00:12
by Justanotherphotographer
9 Replies
2246 Views
Last post October 30, 2017, 17:14
by lucagavagna

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

Envato Elements