Quote from: Microbius on November 25, 2011, 10:35
I bet if anyone here searches the site using their name it will come up with their images.

Dam it. This site is full of images from many agencies, and so on... Host in UOL ( Brazil ). Need to be shutdown.

Quote from: Microstock Posts on November 24, 2011, 19:11
There's a free online storage site called mostphotos.

Not only mostphotos. And where i store RAW files?

One disk to work, other with a recent backup ( only RAW files )

Storagecraft Backup Software to external RDX drive. When necessary do a incremental backup.  Anytime I can full restore OS ( HIR ), or easily mount a backup and search a specific file.  

Quote from: traveler1116 on November 22, 2011, 17:15
I'm not surprised you find watermarked images, at small sizes most people wouldn't even notice them.  You should report, it can't hurt.

Me neither... but is becoming annoying to be always of the same agency. Probably they should change watermark or do something about it.

I've contacted them ( at least I've learn how to write from right to left ) and will complain with hosting server. Does not matter report to the agency. because I already know what they will answer.

This forum have the following image with Yaymicro watermark:

http://up.c61.ir/images/y5klveafe0u26v9dyg97.jpg


Mine: http://yaymicro.com/portfolio.action?search.offset=307&search.id=2172399&search.limit=50&search.numResults=467&search.filterExplicit=false&search.sort=date&search.advanced=true&preview=

Isn't "image sleuth"?

Almost every week I find one image stolen with Yaymicro watermark. With ONE SALE so far, and dozen stolen, is probably a new WR on Micro Stock

...wait for NATO do something about?

http://rudekhorushan.blogfa.com/post-8.aspx

Hosted on Iran.

I'm almost get a new record at Yaymicro...

Quote from: Cogent Marketing on November 21, 2011, 23:32
Hmmm. All of mine seem to be Greek sites - so there's a busted flush right off. It's probably turn out to be their defense - they've got no dosh as the whole country is about to default by the end of November anyway, so cannot afford to buy images for their blogs and websites.

The first time I had an image stolen (again it was off RF123) I reported it and sent the relevant link etc. I also reported it to Google and the image was removed, as a result of my actions it has to be said. On this occasion it's five separate offenses on five different sites within two weeks of each other (naturally as the Euro crisis is a topical event at the moment - the precise reason I set the shot up in the first place). I am just disappointed they appear not to be bothered, after all it is their responsibility - it's their logo on the stolen images!

Maybe they'll react now the issue is in the public domain (here). I send another site mail to them telling them tonight I had posted the issue on MSG.

With "agencies watermark" I had a bunch of them stolen, several weeks ago ( from 5 different agencies ).  DT was the most effective and faster dealing with them. CS was the best exploring other options to deal with non-Us domains. 123RF was fast with one image stolen, but I was even faster removing same image from another 3 sites...

Anyway, any agency, without any exception, should do ALL to fight these situations. After all, our work is being stolen, with their watermark.

Quote from: louoates on November 21, 2011, 22:31
I see one of my best sellers there. Not sure what I can do about it. I don't even speak the same language as used on the site.

See if hot-linked. Talk with agency I try remove and re-submit it.

I had one image with 123RF watermark ( on a Russian site ) , that I reported on 21 September and get a reply asking for direct link, and they remove it after some days.

Others ( from 123RF ) I managed to get they removed after an DMCA over host ( USA ) or blog host it self. Try DMCA "blogspot.com". They will say something like: "We can't control content.. but we will remove it" 

Had some funny guy creating blog after blog with a stolen image.

Sometimes it's good to be on lower level ( 15% with or without RC issue ).

Quote from: RacePhoto on November 21, 2011, 16:53
You have mind of confused me, so I was leaving this alone.

What does the EXIF have to do with the size or the license? If you are asking, do the agencies always remove the EXIF, NO they don't. AT least one used to and not says they will leave it. I never searched for my images to see if they include or have that data removed, in licensed use.

It's also possible that on the agency sites, it doesn't show, but when someone pays for a download, they get it. The buyer could be removing the data... So it's pretty complicated.

I forgot to check my English twice, after write it.

I was just asking if they always remove exif.

Against that site i've done DMCA to web host ( Brazilian ) and think that was against this site that i inform google: nothing happens.

Quote from: jsnover on November 21, 2011, 15:25
I think lots of agencies strip the exif, but there's no requirement that they do it. If there's information in there you don't want the world to see, you would need to remove it prior to uploading rather than hoping every agency does it for you.

Ah, isn't about my "photographer secrets"    ( I even share it with photo community )

Just because I find two sites using a web size, and strange or not, they have full original exif. These images were some time ago, at 800px ( almost without watermark ), in a photo forum. If could be a rule in all agencies ( exif removal ), i would be certain that 2 images are being used without fees... And Yes they were removed from that forum much time ago.

I sleep few hours last night and could be the main reason to ask:

Is "original" exif removed from our images after they get into agencies database? If not, it is possible an client buy any size and publish it with original exif?

Quote from: Sadstock on November 21, 2011, 12:21
Is there a particular partner or micro you are having problems with?

One specific partner with 2 specific micro agencies. I'm keeping it private because partner  "demand it" for a fast resolution in backstage, without unnecessary discussion over it ( i think ).

And probably there more contributors, like me, that could get a bit more if PP issues could be solved fast.

Start getting tired of "PP syncro issues":

- Partner says that is main agency problem.
- Main agency says that are a Partner issue.
- Both want and will solve the problem.

The true is that no one sales month after month.

I had one image "hot-linked" there ( to CS ). After contact them, host, etc ( DMCA ), as last resort, image was removed from agency ( after a talk with Duncan,  thanks for the fast and good support so far ).

I even open a topic about it, and have not seen much worries about...

In my opinion, it's better reporting them, to allow us know whenever our work isn't licensed.

After a long period without any sale, made 2 this month , and the fact is: the images sold so far have 1, 4, 13 views max. Images with many views still at 0. Images sold are almost "old files".

Some days ago I think about it. Could be keywords? Or just images it self ? db update?

Anyways, still putting faith on it.

Bump. More agencies would do the same.

For Contributors: With much or few sales, even 5$, 10$ makes the difference.

Quote from: rinderart on November 17, 2011, 17:26
Also...And let me add. A nice well exposed pretty shot of a mountain in arizona does not need a property release. Thats off the chart silly.

It appears to be an "common error" and I would send it back for revision.

That happen with all agencies, and,  without mention agencies names, some of the funniest reasons of refused photos:

- Lunge - X-Ray -> Trademark/logo ( dam..  x-ray machine see any trademark on patient LOL )
-  "half" Medium voltage pole against sky -> no property release ( with more than 20 poles already online.. why this one have owner? Or I shoot God's cloud? )

Despite predictions / opinions about the IS, I was quite happy to see "my" f-16 being used in a Designer Spotlight Entry:

http://www.istockphoto.com/design_spotlight_details.php?ID=33081

Each day i believe that worth it to be almost deaf after shooting this takeoff 

Quote from: alex123rf on November 17, 2011, 06:00
Hi All,

1. I find it alarming that emails that are sent to us were not addressed at all. Can you please forward me your email so that I can look into it?
2. We do not track views, we also not not have a RPI metric as well. Just number of downloads and image ID sort order and previously faved images. What else can we do to make your experience better?

Alex.

Don't know if it could help:

- When i send an email directly to [email protected] I get a response.

- If i send on site, never get a reply.

Since 2010: 2/3 days. Just one time that take a week. Editorial files no longer than 1/2 days.

Less than a day just once with editorial captions rejections that I was almost at "live" with reviewer  (one batch take less 10 minutes LOL )

Quote from: dr_skn08 on November 16, 2011, 13:13
@CoisaX.
You are in SS and IS :-) that is sufficient to tell that your photography would be really well and stock oriented. But please tell me that did you get selected in these 2 sites with birds and macro shots ?or what type of photographs did you submit Der approval ?
I think (may be wrong) that 3 sample photos as still better and easy (for IS) than to get selected with 10 (ok 7) photos in SS.
What do you think guys ?

Sure, that apply with 3 photos is easier than with 7. Moreover both agencies want variety and get it on 10 photos is a bit harder. ( BTW, i only enter SS second time )

Take a look to ( no referral )  http://www.shutterstock.com/public_lightbox.mhtml?lightbox_id=10289314&code=cf5b45b4acbfb0ed881cd31d9f9238a8

From right to left, are 7 photos that were accepted in second batch. Other four were between 6 with "green light" on first batch ( yeah I failed by 1 LOL  ) . From that lightbox just 2 photos ( buddha pattern and screws over "what should be a black background" haven't sales. 

If i applied just with macros ( mostly dragonfly's ) and small birds, probably i would be out of SS.

Forgetting the first submission approval process, is important keep in mind that in the begin could be a bit harder until find the best ration between "What we shoot" and "What will Sell". Approval is another "war". 

After get some sales over , for example, tree pattern, I start shooting every tree, thinking that could be rich less in a year... but then realize that someone ( 100 photographers or more.. ) had same idea, probably 5 years ago, and agencies have more and better photos than mine. Moreover isn't a "top seller" subject. 

Now if i send one tree pattern today, I bet that easily i get it accepted.. but then came the old question: Why loose time if i still sell few and the same? Same for birds and macros and birds!

Get the point?

I see a blue cast too.