I signed up to try, but I feel quite nervous about giving my login data. Whatever, it is mentioned that stats per image over sites are grouped. Does that mean that lookstat has some sort of image recognition software, or do we have to specify ourselves which image is which on the different sites?

I see images offered for sale by some �artists� that larger than you could find on the web, which indicates that they were taken from NASA�s internal servers.

Better get your facts straight before you make an "accusation" of either "artists" or artists. Anyhow, if somebody got supersized images from an internal NASA server and you were, as you claim, responsible for it, then you did a lousy security job. 

1. Copyright/use. source here

# NASA does not permit use of the insignia and other NASA indicia in advertisements. Any use of the NASA identity on spacesuits and on the Shuttle is generally not permitted unless authorized by Headquarters Public Affairs.
# Any references to NASA in an advertisement must be factually accurate.
# Many NASA images and most film and video footage are in the public domain can be used for advertising purposes. However, there are rules regarding the appearance of astronauts or NASA employees or names in commercial activities.

2. Size. source here

For instance take image PIA11419.
Size: 4070 x 8024 x 3 
Byrd Glacier, Antarctica
Full Resolution: TIFF (97.97 MB) JPEG (7.07 MB)

3. Images from JPL. source here

Unless otherwise noted, images and video on JPL public web sites (public sites ending with a jpl.nasa.gov address) may be used for any purpose without prior permission, subject to the special cases noted below. []
... To use a credit line in connection with images. Unless otherwise noted in the caption information for an image, the credit line should be "Courtesy NASA/JPL-Caltech".

Serious makeover required before this guy gets stopped by customs 

Better? Hope someone doesn't get offended 

As for using iStock images, I'm not so sure. But above all that, and I don't really find it a direct criticism of iStock as much as stock, stock, it was pretty funny.

Parody is a form of fair use in all copyright legal systems I know of. The video was funny and not slanderous at all. In fact, to me, it felt like a good alternative commercial for Istock. If I wouldn't know Istock as a designer/customer, I surely would be very curious to visit the site after seeing the video. Because every designer knows photos for marketing are fake, staged, and bigger than life.

The YT video reminded me of the famous ads that John Cleese made for Compaq long ago. He ridiculized the Compaq, comparing it to a goldfish etc... The ad campaign was very successful.

here

,

here

,

here

.

I am having difficulty with the uploading of images to my port at Bigstock.

All I know is that I can't FTP any more since I switched to Filezilla (it only uploads 2) when SmartFTP turned paying, but last week multi-upload worked fine. Maybe it's just a temporary glitch.

bank robbers ? I imagine that trying to get a model release might be hard. It would go something like this.

Do you think that Yuri Arcurs breaks into real business meetings?
Stage it! Fully model released: The Mugging.



As to cities and landscapes, yes they sell on condition you shoot recognizable stereotype landmarks.

Hint : if you pass by my beloved Andalusia, certainly include Granada where you can make great overview and detail shots of the moro (Muslim) Alhambra. Those would be very salable (¹). If you go soon, there will still be snow on the Sierra Nevada (nomen est omen) in the background. There is also the palace of Charles V (Generalife), our Flemish emperor Charles I, great architecture with Arabic-style gardens. Islam-related shots are very en vogue now on stock. Avoid the European Easter school break periods since those landmarks can be very crowded then.

While you're in the area, visit the unique Arab-Spanish old city of Ronda, its magnificent (barely known) canyon/cleft plus bridge, and the oldest vintage bullring of Spain. Close by in the mountains is the vintage Spanish-Arabic mountain village Mijas with restored houses, that you can see on all postcards. And finally, pass by classy coastal Marbella with its yachts and inevitable Moro (Arab) quarters and strongholds. A bit lower is Gibraltar, always good for stock with its English-Spanish architecture mix and breath-taking views along the rock. The apes on the rock are very domesticated and they love to pose.

I got it all on film... as till 1995, I spent all my summers there. Stay in a cheap coastal pension or B&B around Malaga. All these spots are a daytrip away by (rental) car.

Caveat. The area is one of the two major routes of illegal immigration in Europe, especially from nearby (over the Strait) Morocco. Many illegals hang around in the area and will target your camera gear. I lost my analog Nikon and all my lenses there in front of our apartment in 1995 to a Moroccan mugger. Always be at your guard, especially along the coast.

Por favor 
-------------------

(¹) Arab architecture is very secluded for the (hot) sun in summer, so take a tripod. But hide it going in, since the guards like to sell their slides. Of course take a wide-angle lens.

Talks are starting to heat up on some other forums speculating a D700x 24MP full frame will be out in late 2009.

That was Vonkara here, and on the DT forum. He got if from nikonrumors.com. The D3X is really a mishap since it has no sensor cleaning and IS on the sensor, for that price, and compared to the Sony A900. Rumors were that Nikon was going to upgrade the D700 with the 24MP sensor of the D3X, sensor cleaning and IS included, somewhere this summer.

I have a D200 now, and it works fine. I can't afford from my stock income to upgrade to a 24MP cam, considering that that size bears hidden costs as to PC and disk capacity. For News and Commissioned, customers don't ask for 24MP. As to Sony, I have bad experiences with Minolta and Sony (DSC-R1), since the both broke down for environmental issues (I work a lot outdoors in the tropics: moist, corrosion, overheating).

I follow your track. Upgrade in 1-2 years or so for a full frame 24MP Nikon, with IS on chip and sensor cleaning, - and after the price came down after the early adopters were satisfied and the infancy hickups got straightened out. I also count a bit on bargains when the economic collapse will hit the hardst, this fall. I have more patience than Nikon ;-)

I think they're riding out whatever seed money came up front.

As I mentioned in another thread, I suspect that their programmer left some months ago since there is no change at all any more at the (features of the) buyer's side of the site. The much requested view counter still isn't there, since they "concentrate on buyer's features".  Reviews become slower so I figure that Linda keeps the fort alone.

Most of all, I had a thorough look at their "search engine". It apparently works by upload date, not by relevance or view count. Most recent uploaded come first. Since I uploaded the bulk of my port right when they started, all my shots come very very late in the search results. My DT and SS best sellers for instance come somewhere around page 200. No way I could have sales with such a "search engine", and I'm punished for being an early adopter. I had 3 sales when the site was just up (July, August), then nothing any more, probably since I was pushed back in the searches by later uploaders.

There is also no sign whatsoever on Google of any marketing they would be doing, none. As to SEO, these sites are currently best of feeding individual pictures into Google: mostphotos, cutcaster, zymmetrical, fotolia, scandinavianstockphotos, dreamstime, shutterstock. YAY: none.
Plain Google hits: Istk: 15M, DT: 3.5M, SS: 1.6M, MP: 1M, FP: 550K, ZYM: 520K, CC: 90K, YAY: 77K.

I keep uploading since it's dead easy and I can leech the thumbs of my port very easily so I have a complete overview (they take all). 

oups... wrong button.

I thought a Mac had only right buttons? 

Except for the editing and modifying that some people do, which makes them better for stock, any smart buyer should just go to the NASA site and download them for free.

I didn't use the globes "as is" but partly and modified (color, contrast, sharpness) like in the hands of a model or so. Obviously, you can't resell those globes "as is", in all fairness.

Someone on another list also recommended using Gmail as it has unlimited storage. I haven't checked this out yet. Does anyone do this?

As far as I know I mentioned it, and also Yahoo mail. It's free since not the storage is an issue now but just the bandwidth. Dedicated remote storage servers might disappear, like Digital Railroad. Chances that Yahoo or Google fail are less. Using a GDRIVE (and here) or an YDrive (Google on it, also at Tucows.com) is more secure. If it's against their TOS, mail all the images to yourself, that's within the TOS. Of course, no network drive is safe in principle, and it has a bandwidth problem. The only decent solutions to mission-critical backups is redundancy so use your local drives (Iomega USB drives are cheap now) too.

Based on my images I'd say all would fail or get morphed into something else except: IS, SS, DT, StockXpert, FT, in that order.

Add BigStock and 123RF and I'd agree. Especially BigStock.

Do you have a camera?

Darn, that's it! I knew I was missing something!