|
MicrostockGroup Sponsors
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - fljac
26
« on: March 27, 2009, 19:24 »
fljac,
So you have never heard of Alberto Korda?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alberto_Korda
He was Fidel Castro's personal photographer for years, following El Comandante everywhere. There are some very candid shots of Fidel in Moscow, playing with snow.
Anyway, as Cuba has not signed the Berne Convention, which regulates worldwide rights to intellectual property, it seems Korda would not have copyrights over this photo. Later however, he was able to stop Smirnoff to use it in a vodka advertisement, so I understand that the UK law acknowledged him as the copyright owner.
Korda gave the photo to an Italian publisher, Feltrinelli, who then publish it and it became so iconic. Given this situation, I suppose the rights belong to this Italian. Neither of them have been dead for 70 years, but it is obvious that the image has been used over and over possibly without any copyright fees to Korda and Feltrinelli.
Apparently Korda was ok to see the image used to disseminate the Cuban Revolution ideals. However, in respect of him, I would not sell anything using this image.
HI Madelaide, Thank you for the brilliant resume.. I will have to read up on the history related to this subject... I regret that I have only too little knowledge about Cuba and the revolution... Aparently, it seems that this could be a difficult issue about copyright.. And a very interesting one, if such case should ever be procecuted..... Interesting stuff, Thanks /Flemming
27
« on: March 27, 2009, 13:41 »
I'm not sure about the Che picture, becaurse I have no idea about who painted it, and when. The general copyright for a piece of artwork would proporly be summeraized like this: Copyright law covers any work of art for the lifetime of it's creator, and extends 70 years after their death.So based upon this, my assumption would be that El Che's famous portrait is still copyright protected  /Flemming
28
« on: March 27, 2009, 11:55 »
Great idea, ZA sounds great.. Depending on the job / work situation, this could be very interesting. I would love to go to the african continent to shoot nature and wildlife.. And what ever comes along.. - INcluding a few models of course...  Other locations would be equally interesting to me.. It would be great to meet some of all the great people from here, to share a few days of social shooting... To me the cost / benefit calculation is not the main concern...
29
« on: March 27, 2009, 11:49 »
I picked SA because I am also interested in taking some nature, wildlife shots.
Riddle: Is Leaf going to SA because he is getting a fab new lens, or is Leaf getting a fab new lens because he is going to SA?
Leaf is maybe getting a fab new lens because leaf is maybe going to Svalbard
The LEAF must remember to include some very warm clothings in the svalbard budget.. Never been there, but my guess is that it could be quite chilly there at night LOOL
30
« on: March 27, 2009, 11:36 »
When I first switched to digital, I bought in the comsumer class. I was investigating the market and comparing Canon to Nikon. Back then it was the Canon 3xx and Nikon D70.
Back then my conclusion was that the Nikon models in that price range, was far more solid build, than Canon. Canon was giving me the impression of being very fragile and plastic like in the construction.
After that first choice, I'm sticking to Nikon, and I'm currently on the D3 plus all the latest nano coated optics - the first line of camera's where alle the reviewers agree that currently, the camera's are superior to Canons..
But I'm sure that IF I had chosen Canon back then, I would surely be equally satisfied with thair models.. Basically, the differences are very small - as it is NOW. I agree that Canon was superior in all levels up untill Nikon released the D300 / D3 models..
This D3 release seems to have kickstarted a very aggressive approach from Nikon.
/Flemming
31
« on: March 26, 2009, 07:25 »
My latest batch was uploaded at 123 last sunday evening, and it was approved proporly very late wednesday night, US time... I don't remember having anything processed any faster than this...
So then they just don't like me perhaps 
Perhaps you should try to send a polight question about your pending que to 123 administrators...? 
32
« on: March 26, 2009, 06:49 »
My latest batch was uploaded at 123 last sunday evening, and it was approved proporly very late wednesday night, US time... I don't remember having anything processed any faster than this...
33
« on: March 26, 2009, 04:57 »
@satforce:
The RAW file is the so called digital negative. You can not save your modifications to the RAW format.
The many steps of TIFF's, I don't understand... Since I'm using the PS RAW converter, I don't need the TIFF after processing in capture one. I go directly into PS CS 3/4 and alway save the edited version, including all layers in format PSD.
I don't see any reason to save in TIFF unless this is a requirement for a specific purpose...
To the best of my knowledge, you'll have the highest degree of details including history and such when saving in photoshops own file format.
What is the specific benefit in TIFF, compared to PSD?
If needed at some later point, you can always create it from the PSD file.... The PSD file has a perfect level of meta data details as well, including description and keywords...
34
« on: March 25, 2009, 15:50 »
No never. And Ive never had anything rejected, for noise in the dark areas, or sensordust
Sounds great... But none of those examples has anything to do with the normal post processing. These possible issues are fixed in the image editing in photoshop or simular programs.
35
« on: March 25, 2009, 14:32 »
Since I'm always shooting in RAW, the post processing in the RAW conwerter is an essential part of the workflow. In almost all cases, I use the photoshop RAW conwerter for this. It's easy and not time consuming at all.
36
« on: March 24, 2009, 04:28 »
I just uploaded a batch of 14 images... 13 was APPROVED - 1 rejected... The stated rejection reason was inaccurate, but apart from that, I have to agree that it actually was the one image that decerved to be rejected, if any... So both from this batch and from a few previous uploads, I feel that the rejection rate is going down and even the review time is imporving... About half of this batch eas approved within 2hours from upload. The rest about 18 hours after upload.... Have you all stopped uploading or something? /flemming
38
« on: March 20, 2009, 19:11 »
Can't believe this - the technology is mind-boggling ! This is a photo from the 2009 Inauguration, In which you can see IN FOCUS The face of each individual in the crowd !!! You can scan, double click and zoom to any section of the crowd. . . wait a few seconds. . . and the focus adjusts. The picture was taken with a robotic camera at 1,474 megapixel. (295 times the standard 5 megapixel camera) Makes you wonder who's watching us right now !!!!!!!! http://gigapan.org/viewGigapanFullscreen.php?auth=033ef14483ee899496648c2b4b06233c
39
« on: March 19, 2009, 02:46 »
WoW
Amazing how much attention such minor detail can attract LoooL...
I thought that somethiing like this hardly would be noticed.. As long as the ftp is still up and running... If I had anything to say at dreamstime, I would skip the web upload all together, and only offer the ftp..
It's easier, It's faster, it's more reliable... So what's to consider? - Even the software is freeware....
/Flemming
40
« on: March 17, 2009, 11:58 »
Im wondering if things are starting to slow down because so many people have stopped submitting, maybe someone over there should check out this thread.
rest asured that JOSH is checking this thread! - He does that on a regular basis, but he almost NEVER ever engage in any dialogue being remotely critical to CRESTOCK. Nor does he almost NEVER comment on any direct questions. But then again, this is very much in line with the uncountable complaints of not recieving any ansvers when emailing crestock.... (strange business attitude though! ) /Flemming
41
« on: March 16, 2009, 09:02 »
Related to this, I have one little thing that keep on getting into my inbox. I have uploaded around 140 images to crestock, keeping up a steady rejection rate of exactly 100,00 % (not everyone can brag about such numbers  ) THis is a quote from my mailbox: Hi, We haven't seen you around for a while, and we've missed you, so we just wanted to say hi. As you probably know, the Crestock collection is continuously updated with new and exciting images, so why not check out some of our most popular images and contributors at the moment here? Alternatively, you may also be interested in some of the recent articles in our blog. If you have any problems, questions or feedback, please do not hesitate to contact us � we�d love to help you! Thank you, The Crestock Team End quote So even though they keep on rejecting every single image that I have uploaded, and my current portfolio contains ZERO images, they still feel the need to express how much they're missing me... This seems a bit funny, since they're the ones being so persistant, keeping me from participating.... Not that I loose much sleep at night, due to this, of course.... I just wonder, what exiting images are growing thair portfolio, since every body is complaining about close to 100% rejection rate ...?  /Flemming
42
« on: March 15, 2009, 13:04 »
WoW! Payout time..... Amazing.. I'm still waiting for my FIRST download on cutcaster
43
« on: March 15, 2009, 06:13 »
I have to share my experience with a great product from Lastolite... HI-LITE Backgrounds....
http://www.lastolite.com/hilite-backgrounds.php
This is on fact the ideal solution. Thanks for the link.
Available here, around 500$.
Do you actually use it and are you speaking from experience?
Yes I'm actually using it. I have bought the 180 by 215 cm. version. I'm using one Lastolite Lumen 8 F400 flash head for lightning it, and the I have two more of the same flashheads for the rest of the lightning from the front. It takes about 5 minutes to unpack and prepare the hi lite background, and maybe 5-10 minutes to fold it and fit it into the carrying back. This is an example of an image where this background were used.. http://fljac.dk/gallery/index.php?id=40 and another one... http://fljac.dk/gallery/index.php?id=35And the price seems about right.. I have payed about USD 500,- for mine in december. /Flemming
44
« on: March 14, 2009, 13:35 »
The whitest possible in 8 bits (256 possible values). FF is the hexadecimal notation (0..FF). Decimal is 0..255. The deepest black possible is #000000, or decimal 0. In principle, you can isolate on any background color, but since dodging highlights and burning shadow end at 0 and 255, #FFFFFF and #000000 are the easiest backgrounds. You can avoid all this postproduction work by having a white over-exposed (2-3 stops) background in studio and work on manual. [/quote] I have to share my experience with a great product from Lastolite... HI-LITE Backgrounds.... http://www.lastolite.com/hilite-backgrounds.phpIt works exactly like flamish states... overexpose the background. It's actually a giant softbox that can be folded and fittet into a nice carrying bag. It's great for home use as well.. It's really worth every dime... /Flemming
45
« on: March 11, 2009, 16:30 »
and how does it make life easier?
For a start I must say that I have very limited experience with the istock site.... My first uploads were done using the IST homepage interface... And that was a frithtening experinece... The keywording was terrible... Then I downloaded deepmeta.... It was user friendly and above all... The keywording and categorizing works perfectly and seems to be fully compatible with the IST keywording rules... Do invest about one hour in learning this application.. You won't regret it.. IFlemming
46
« on: March 08, 2009, 17:22 »
WoW! This is great! It's professional and very well configured... Given that fact that this is yuour first one, I can't help but wonder just what you might accomplish when you have done this a number of times... D A M N... it's good! Best regards Flemming
47
« on: March 03, 2009, 05:34 »
WoW! It works very very well.. The pages are well composed and the level of detals / text is fine - not too little, not too much.. Nice experience to visit the page... Having said that, I would like to suggest that you make it a little more eyecatching by choosing another mixture of colors. But that's just a minor detail and i'm sure that there are a lot of different opinnions about that. Best regards Flemming
49
« on: February 26, 2009, 16:57 »
I'm using Nikon D3 witch is my only current camera
50
« on: February 21, 2009, 10:00 »
Not only are the prices a little higher... Bear in mind that your images are competing with roughly 15 million other images as well... My guess is that when the buyers download from alamy, they're very sure that they actually really need that particular image... On microstock, quite a lot of download will proporly never get used... But at MS prices, I would imagine that the large buyers proporly don't care much... That's not the case om Alamy...
Alamy contyributors will have less downloads, but when they come, they are worth quite some money...
That's my observation's and opinnion on the subject...
Flemming
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
