Author Topic: Google giving photos away free for commercial use and iStock agrees (Read 259903 times)

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #875 on:** January 20, 2013, 15:07 »

Quote from: Poncke on January 20, 2013, 13:39

Is image exchange owned by Getty? I am interested after seeing what they do, and its free, but I dont want to end up in the claws of Getty at some point

Yes. Getty purchased PicScout. I'm not doing anything with it, but wondered why, as a Getty company, it wasn't being pitched to photographers at Getty agencies.

Mantis · « **Reply #876 on:** January 20, 2013, 15:14 »

How does on see what NEW images have been added to Google Drive? I am having some funky sales on PP and fear the worst.

Poncke · « **Reply #877 on:** January 20, 2013, 15:47 »

Quote from: jsnover on January 20, 2013, 15:07

Quote from: Poncke on January 20, 2013, 13:39
Is image exchange owned by Getty? I am interested after seeing what they do, and its free, but I dont want to end up in the claws of Getty at some point

Yes. Getty purchased PicScout. I'm not doing anything with it, but wondered why, as a Getty company, it wasn't being pitched to photographers at Getty agencies.

THanks, sounds like a great service, but I dont want to get involved with getty in any way

cobalt · « **Reply #878 on:** January 20, 2013, 16:40 »

Their website says they also work with photo shelter. probably they will work with other agencies in the future. If they really want it to become an industry standard it cannot be limited to getty.

Pixart · « **Reply #879 on:** January 20, 2013, 17:49 »

Now I'm paranoid. I was walking by a table of USB drives and it said "100 free photos". Momentary panic - until I read the package and it was actually 100 free prints. Worried for a minute there that this might have been another bright initiative!

Pinocchio · « **Reply #880 on:** January 20, 2013, 19:36 »

Quote from: cobalt on January 20, 2013, 16:40

Their website says they also work with photo shelter. probably they will work with other agencies in the future. If they really want it to become an industry standard it cannot be limited to getty.

You will find similar information on Photoshelter's web site, but when I asked them about it last week (we use Photoshelter) they replied that the relationship is on hold since the time Getty bought PicScout. The original arrangement was that PicScout would fingerprint all priced images in publicly viewable galleries; unpriced images, and those in private galleries were not fingerprinted. No explanation for the absence of any statement to this effect on the Photoshelter web site...

Since I'm in a betting mood (very rare): I think Getty may be trying to position themselves to get a penny (or two or three) every time an image is licensed, from every agency. Imagine JK's smile...

This is likely off-topic for this forum, but I re-discovered a very interesting publicly accessible article dating back to September 2010. Titled "Why Full-Time Stock Photographers Are an Endangered Species", it's at http://rising.blackstar.com/is-it-time-to-give-up-shooting-stock.html. Uncomfortable, but probably essential reading for all of us.

Regards

lisafx · « **Reply #881 on:** January 20, 2013, 23:21 »

Quote from: Pinocchio on January 20, 2013, 19:36

This is likely off-topic for this forum, but I re-discovered a very interesting publicly accessible article dating back to September 2010. Titled "Why Full-Time Stock Photographers Are an Endangered Species", it's at http://rising.blackstar.com/is-it-time-to-give-up-shooting-stock.html. Uncomfortable, but probably essential reading for all of us.

Regards

The link didn't work for me.

klsbear · « **Reply #882 on:** January 20, 2013, 23:22 »

Quote from: polar on January 20, 2013, 13:07

Quote from: rubyroo on January 20, 2013, 12:54
So it's up to 8,696 images now.

Worse than I thought.

Thanks for the link. I didn't see any way to tally up the total number of images included in the list. Does anyone know if this is up to date?

It's over 11,000 now

Kenny · « **Reply #883 on:** January 20, 2013, 23:34 »

The latest export from Google Drive to kga.me/gds resulted in 3,085 new images. Current total is now 11,781! Here's a text list of the images that were added http://kga.me/google-drive-stock/new-jan-20-2013.txt

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #884 on:** January 20, 2013, 23:43 »

Holy Sh*t - they're busy!. Lots of Hemera, Jupiter Images. Was sorry not to see Blend Images' name in there after the snotty response that their CEO had to Sean trying to get them involved in fighting Getty on this

cybernesco · « **Reply #885 on:** January 20, 2013, 23:44 »

I have this banner posted on IS.

http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=350613&messageid=6825247

update: got deleted sometime this morning

Kenny · « **Reply #886 on:** January 20, 2013, 23:55 »

Quote from: jsnover on January 20, 2013, 23:43

Holy Sh*t - they're busy!. Lots of Hemera, Jupiter Images. Was sorry not to see Blend Images' name in there after the snotty response that their CEO had to Sean trying to get them involved in fighting Getty on this

1 image by "Blend Images/Marc Romanelli" was added today:
http://kga.me/gds/4729/blend-images-marc-romanelli
image number=151333861
title=Librarian helping student in library

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #887 on:** January 21, 2013, 00:02 »

Quote from: Kenny on January 20, 2013, 23:55

Quote from: jsnover on January 20, 2013, 23:43
Holy Sh*t - they're busy!. Lots of Hemera, Jupiter Images. Was sorry not to see Blend Images' name in there after the snotty response that their CEO had to Sean trying to get them involved in fighting Getty on this

1 image by "Blend Images/Marc Romanelli" was added today:
http://kga.me/gds/4729/blend-images-marc-romanelli
image number=151333861
title=Librarian helping student in library

HughStoneIan · « **Reply #888 on:** January 21, 2013, 00:03 »

Quote from: jsnover on January 20, 2013, 23:43

Was sorry not to see Blend Images' name in there after the snotty response that their CEO had to Sean trying to get them involved in fighting Getty on this

What snotty response? Is it posted somewhere? It's utterly amazing to think any stock agency (besides GI) would see this as a good thing.

dcdp · « **Reply #889 on:** January 21, 2013, 00:03 »

Unbelievable. Getty obviously doesn't believe there is going to be an issue with continuing.

cypher · « **Reply #890 on:** January 21, 2013, 00:17 »

Wow, someone's putting a lot of time into the http://kga.me/gds site. Who's maintaining this? Does anyone know how often it checks for updates?

donding · « **Reply #891 on:** January 21, 2013, 00:22 »

Sounds to me like Getty/Google is trying to get as many on there as they can, as quickly as they can. That's moving pretty fast. What next?

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #892 on:** January 21, 2013, 00:28 »

Quote from: HughStoneIan on January 21, 2013, 00:03

Quote from: jsnover on January 20, 2013, 23:43
Was sorry not to see Blend Images' name in there after the snotty response that their CEO had to Sean trying to get them involved in fighting Getty on this

What snotty response? Is it posted somewhere? It's utterly amazing to think any stock agency (besides GI) would see this as a good thing.

I'll ask if it's OK and then I'll post here if it is - it wasn't an open forum.

Kenny · « **Reply #893 on:** January 21, 2013, 00:31 »

Quote from: jsnover on January 21, 2013, 00:28

Quote from: HughStoneIan on January 21, 2013, 00:03
Quote from: jsnover on January 20, 2013, 23:43
Was sorry not to see Blend Images' name in there after the snotty response that their CEO had to Sean trying to get them involved in fighting Getty on this

What snotty response? Is it posted somewhere? It's utterly amazing to think any stock agency (besides GI) would see this as a good thing.

I'll ask if it's OK and then I'll post here if it is - it wasn't an open forum.

I'd like to know more about that response to Sean as well.

By the way, Blend Images currently has 35+ high resolution images available through Google Drive:

kga.me/gds/contributor-search/blend

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #894 on:** January 21, 2013, 00:41 »

Quote from: cypher on January 21, 2013, 00:17

Wow, someone's putting a lot of time into the http://kga.me/gds site. Who's maintaining this? Does anyone know how often it checks for updates?

I think it's a search engine that just lists what's there. I suppose it is some sort of search by date that lists the new files.

jm · « **Reply #895 on:** January 21, 2013, 01:26 »

Images that I deactivated eight hours ago already disappeared from ThinkStock. So this works surprisingly quickly.
Unfortunately not that quickly as adding of images to Google Drive :-(

Poncke · « **Reply #896 on:** January 21, 2013, 03:14 »

Quote from: rinder99

After reading everything out there on this and talking to old friends that were exclusive for years. I think it's a non Issue.Like I've said for years. 10,000 submitters could leave tomorrow.and ya know what? 10,000 new ones will replace them and Us in 3/6 months with the same Images give or take. The sites know this guys. Wondering why some of you don't.Thats why they call this crowd sourcing.

http://submit.shutterstock.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=127819&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=90

Microbius · « **Reply #897 on:** January 21, 2013, 03:32 »

Okay, I am not sure if this has been explicitly stated said yet because all these threads are getting a bit hard to keep up with!

After watching this video, finding out the Google images are stamped, given the purchase of Picscout and so on I would stake money on this being the situation.

Getty want to test out their new business model, discussed in the video, of getting their images out to the maximum number of people then perusing payment via image tracking. Hence picking images that are specifically wanted by the maximum number of Google users.

They are gambling that they will be able to get the main payment from users posting stuff to Facebook and the like.

Rather than doing the decent thing and using their solely owned content to test the viability of their new model, they have acted a if they are the copyright owners of our content and gone against what could be reasonably assumed in their terms.

It all seems to add up, and suddenly makes a lot more sense in this context.


Craig Peters Speaks at Luminance 2012

ETA or even worse case scenario, they aren't hoping for more money from these images, but think it is worth the sacrifice just to test the tracking technology

sharpshot · « **Reply #898 on:** January 21, 2013, 03:41 »

Quote from: Poncke on January 21, 2013, 03:14

Quote from: rinder99
After reading everything out there on this and talking to old friends that were exclusive for years. I think it's a non Issue.Like I've said for years. 10,000 submitters could leave tomorrow.and ya know what? 10,000 new ones will replace them and Us in 3/6 months with the same Images give or take. The sites know this guys. Wondering why some of you don't.Thats why they call this crowd sourcing.

http://submit.shutterstock.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=127819&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=90

I don't like that way of looking at it. Instead of the greedy stock sites replacing us, I think we should replace them. Hopefully even if it does only take 3/6 months to replace our images, the buyers will of already checked out other sites and found out that some of them have a better for all of us.

sharpshot · « **Reply #899 on:** January 21, 2013, 03:50 »

Quote from: Microbius on January 21, 2013, 03:32

Okay, I am not sure if this has been explicitly stated said yet because all these threads are getting a bit hard to keep up with!

After watching this video, finding out the Google images are stamped, given the purchase of Picscout and so on I would stake money on this being the situation.

Getty want to test out their new business model, discussed in the video, of getting their images out to the maximum number of people then perusing payment via image tracking. Hence picking images that are specifically wanted by the maximum number of Google users.

They are gambling that they will be able to get the main payment from users posting stuff to Facebook and the like.

Rather than doing the decent thing and using their solely owned content to test the viability of their new model, they have acted a if they are the copyright owners of our content and gone against what could be reasonably assumed in their terms.

It all seems to add up, and suddenly makes a lot more sense in this context.

Craig Peters Speaks at Luminance 2012

ETA or even worse case scenario, they aren't hoping for more money from these images, but think it is worth the sacrifice just to test the tracking technology

I just don't understand why they wouldn't do this with the images they own? If they did have to use contributors images, why wouldn't they ask them first? And why wouldn't they tell us about it last week, as it might stop some people removing their images. It's already being talked about, so it's not a secret. So I think this is unlikely.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Google giving photos away free for commercial use and iStock agrees (Read 259903 times)

Jo Ann Snover

Mantis

Poncke

cobalt

Pixart

Pinocchio

lisafx

klsbear

Kenny

Jo Ann Snover

cybernesco

Kenny

Jo Ann Snover

HughStoneIan

dcdp

cypher

donding

Jo Ann Snover

Kenny

BaldricksTrousers

jm

Poncke

Microbius

sharpshot

sharpshot

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors