MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: IS illustrator master Russel Tate gone  (Read 15494 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: March 30, 2011, 19:09 »
0
If it's not a new bug or a temporary glitch, seems that Russel Tate go away from Istock. I love to know if was because royalties cut.


« Reply #1 on: March 30, 2011, 19:17 »
0
Whoa. I just saw a couple of his files come through the recent uploads.

« Reply #2 on: March 30, 2011, 19:59 »
0
Maybe something to do with this?
http://youthoughtwewouldntnotice.com/blog3/?p=8304

I hope not.

« Reply #3 on: March 30, 2011, 20:07 »
0
My "Vector Text" lightbox will soon have 20% fewer files. I don't know how he was able to get away with stuff like that so often.

"We're sorry but iStock does not accept illustrations containing text as a primary focal point within a composition"

http://www.istockphoto.com/search/lightbox/3815234#108d6921

« Reply #4 on: March 30, 2011, 20:10 »
0
'cause it was aaawwwwesome!

« Reply #5 on: March 30, 2011, 20:10 »
0
Well, a tut published over internet is supposedly to be used, but i think some IS rule must be broked, because images are almost the same. It's strange, because Russel have a very original work and don't need to do this kind of thing.
« Last Edit: March 30, 2011, 20:12 by Chico »

« Reply #6 on: March 30, 2011, 20:32 »
0
If I search by contributor, I can see his whole portfolio, but if you click on any image you get a 404 error and if you click on his user name you go back to the iStock home page. I can't quite believe that such a long association could just be over like that - if it was the tutorial issue that triggered it.

Does he have a blog or any other web presence?

ShadySue

« Reply #7 on: March 31, 2011, 04:49 »
0
Maybe something to do with this?
http://youthoughtwewouldntnotice.com/blog3/?p=8304
I hope not.

I wouldn't have thought you couldn't use methods taught in a tutorial. Not that I do, and if I did, I wouldn't make them so much 'the same'; but still, it's surely not illegal or unethical if you create them yourself using the tut?

Microbius

« Reply #8 on: March 31, 2011, 05:14 »
0
The images are not copies just similar so I don't see the problem.
He's used the tutorials as intended, to make similar work.

« Reply #9 on: March 31, 2011, 05:33 »
0
It's frightening how much power the microstock agencies have in this regard.  It is great that portfolio's are pulled very quickly when a thief is found - but when the photographer / illustrator is innocent and there is just a misunderstanding or some other problem is creates a scary situation.

Microbius

« Reply #10 on: March 31, 2011, 06:03 »
0
I think Russell is also admin, so you would have hoped they would have given him the benefit of the doubt.
Anyway we are speculating right now, maybe he quit?

« Reply #11 on: March 31, 2011, 06:05 »
0
I think Russell is also admin, so you would have hoped they would have given him the benefit of the doubt.
Anyway we are speculating right now, maybe he quit?


Sean said he didn't leave
Quote
I heard from Russell. He didn't leave the site. He is working on fixing the situation.

http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=319712&messageid=6204822&source=rssforums

Microbius

« Reply #12 on: March 31, 2011, 06:12 »
0
Sorry missed that!

« Reply #13 on: March 31, 2011, 06:20 »
0
If I hear more from him, I'll post.

« Reply #14 on: March 31, 2011, 07:27 »
0
I don't think speculation about the reasons that Russell's PF is unavailable at this time is likely to help things much, so this is getting locked.

Took longer to be locked than i thought...

SNP

  • Canadian Photographer
« Reply #15 on: March 31, 2011, 09:13 »
0
another contributor whose profile went offline is back...Maravic. Though when I click through to his port, it doesn't populate. I can view his images again though. A thread was started about him too in the iStock forums. I guess they take your port offline until they investigate. scary though that you lose your income indefinitely.

« Reply #16 on: March 31, 2011, 10:12 »
0
It's definitely surprising to see. Hopefully, it's not "abusive inspiration" like claimed in the article.

I've always admired IS's "abusive inspiration" policy though. People may have gotten unfairly burned by it, but it's good to have a policy that states that something doesn't have to be a direct copy to be a copy. Especially for those that dip into the "inspiration" well too many times.

helix7

« Reply #17 on: March 31, 2011, 10:26 »
0
Tutorials are sort of a gray area as I understand them. And I always thought it was sort of an unwritten law that you learn from tutorials but don't actually use the resulting images in stock. Use the methods to create something totally unique.

The tutorial crowd is especially vicious when it comes to people using images created from tutorials for profit. I was accused of ripping off a tutorial image a while back, but in my case the tutorial was written long after my image was created. Might have been a case of the tutorial writer being a little too inspired by my image instead of the other way around. The trouble I had was that on the site where the accusation was brought up, public comments are visible on the image page. So I had to contact the site and have the accusatory comments removed so as not to damage my sales of that image.

What I took away from that experience is that the tutorial community are vicious with tracking down copy-cats, and my policy of not using tutorial-derived images as stock seems to be a good way to go. It's surprising that a guy like Russell would dare put his portfolio and income at risk by using tutorial-based images like that.

« Reply #18 on: March 31, 2011, 11:03 »
0
If I search by contributor, I can see his whole portfolio, but if you click on any image you get a 404 error and if you click on his user name you go back to the iStock home page. I can't quite believe that such a long association could just be over like that - if it was the tutorial issue that triggered it.

Does he have a blog or any other web presence?


his website sucks, IMHO, but he does have one.  though no blog that I can see

http://www.russelltate.com

« Reply #19 on: March 31, 2011, 11:26 »
0
How can someone prove that you used the tutorial to create your files? It is somehow scary, there must be tons of images in tutorials over the internet that are similar to stock images and it is impossible for an artist to know every single tutorial out there.

Or this is a case of a tutorial were you had to signup and there is no doubt that at least you had notice of the tutorial and that your file was made after you had access to it. Even then, are ideas protected? Where is the line? What if you refine the technique learnt, get better results and use them?

« Reply #20 on: March 31, 2011, 11:36 »
0
How can someone prove that you used the tutorial to create your files?
I doubt the tutorial thing was the reason for the deactivation/banning/whatever it is.

Just noticed that the thread in the Illustration forum has not only been locked, but it has been disappeared

« Reply #21 on: March 31, 2011, 11:37 »
0
I never heard from Istock: "Well, we don't accept images created from internet tutorials"

« Reply #22 on: March 31, 2011, 15:58 »
0
Maybe something to do with this?
http://youthoughtwewouldntnotice.com/blog3/?p=8304

I hope not.

Given  Russell's ability to do draw 3D objects in Illustrator, that the lighting reflections and perspective on the two bows are different, (and they look like differennt rendering techniques) I think the chances that he needed to use a tutorial to do an illustration of a bow are very small. I presume it's just a case of choosing a similar bow as a model. I have a box of identical bows somewhere for use in Christmas decorations.

« Reply #23 on: March 31, 2011, 23:27 »
0
Wow, i was just looking for the thread in the illus forums and its disappeared. Hope russell manages to clear his name.

Microbius

« Reply #24 on: April 01, 2011, 01:24 »
0
Maybe something to do with this?
http://youthoughtwewouldntnotice.com/blog3/?p=8304

I hope not.

Given  Russell's ability to do draw 3D objects in Illustrator, that the lighting reflections and perspective on the two bows are different, (and they look like differennt rendering techniques) I think the chances that he needed to use a tutorial to do an illustration of a bow are very small. I presume it's just a case of choosing a similar bow as a model. I have a box of identical bows somewhere for use in Christmas decorations.


If you look at the fact that he also creates tutorials for the site and that he has two illustrations that very strongly resemble ones created in other tutorials there I think it's a bit of a stretch that it's a coincidence.
In any case this could be cleared up by looking at the files closely- there are many ways to create similar images and if he has done it differently to the tut then that will clear it up with no need for further digging.
However, even if he has used the tutorials to create his files, which seems likely, the resulting files aren't identical to the ones in the tutorials and surely that's what the tutorials are for? creating similar images.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
0 Replies
1145 Views
Last post April 02, 2007, 16:30
by Istock News
Photography At The Tate

Started by Istock News Microstock News

0 Replies
1377 Views
Last post May 25, 2007, 13:28
by Istock News
7 Replies
14586 Views
Last post February 27, 2010, 05:11
by photoshow
186 Replies
21157 Views
Last post March 26, 2014, 15:30
by lisafx
74 Replies
12458 Views
Last post December 20, 2014, 02:26
by Hobostocker

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results