|
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 - cypher
26
« on: February 05, 2013, 17:27 »
Here's an interesting thought.... if someone actually intends to license an image, why on earth would they go to google images instead of just going directly to an agency. I think a lot of people here are getting all cheesed off over a non-existent problem.
While I agree with you for the most part, the majority of my walk-in traffic and new buyers are from Google. I would suspect most agencies would probably say the same. So, it definitely has the potential to be damaging. Whether it is or not is hard to say right now.
I can understand coming from a google web search... but how many actually come from google image searches?
I have several websites that are not photography related. Even so, a fair number of my visitors find some of the sites through Google images. I would expect that websites specifically for images would get even more of their traffic from image searches. It would make sense that some buyers would use the Google image search as a way of searching multiple agencies at the same time. In my opinion, Google actually has a much better search algorithm than some of the microstock sites and provides much more relevant results.
27
« on: February 05, 2013, 16:52 »
This story has been submitted to Slashdot, which has a very large readership that is generally quite interested in stories related to changes in the technology world. However, the story is not yet published; that is up to the votes of Slashdot users. If you would like to see this story get coverage there, vote it (and any other interesting stories) up higher on this page.
As more stories are added, it's getting harder to find this one. It's listed for today (Feb 5) at 12:00 CST (that's 9:00 PM GMT - convert as needed to your timezone).
28
« on: February 05, 2013, 16:43 »
You can check how any page on any site renders in all the different browsers by entering the url here - http://browsershots.org/ It has come in handy for me when coding web pages.
Very useful. Thanks.
29
« on: February 05, 2013, 13:01 »
This story has been submitted to Slashdot, which has a very large readership that is generally quite interested in stories related to changes in the technology world. However, the story is not yet published; that is up to the votes of Slashdot users. If you would like to see this story get coverage there, vote it (and any other interesting stories) up higher on this page.
30
« on: February 05, 2013, 12:25 »
Any idea why Serban's blog is not showing up in the list on the DT blog forum? It's listed on the blog page.
31
« on: February 05, 2013, 00:17 »
Interesting idea.
33
« on: February 02, 2013, 20:01 »
I did a search for my xmas ball on the beach which shows up still in Google images as an iS image, just deactivated. likewise all my deactivated xmas files are still there.
I'm sure that once IS "sells" and image to Google, there's no way the photographer can pull it back through IS. You'd have to take action against Google. And good luck with that.
Apparently the files usually come down from Google faster than they went up.
Sorry, can't find the link just now, I'm sure it was in the exclusive forum.
Really? I thought that for all practical purposes they'd been "sold" to Google. But I suppose I'm not the only one who's confused about the actual terms of this deal, or how they might be interpreted.
I certainly assumed the images were now on Google's servers. And that IS wouldn't respond to a contributor's request to remove an image by asking Google (or any other customer) to do the same.
The initial comment was about Google Images, not Google Drive. Google Images is just part of Google's web search. Those will eventually disappear once the images are removed from the web. But, it will probably take a few days or more for Google's crawler to update and not show the links to Istock anymore. However, the images that Google bought for Google Drive are an entirely different matter. Those have been licensed and likely will remain available no matter what action a contributor takes.
34
« on: February 02, 2013, 13:04 »
9lives has it right; that is what I was asking. My hope is that someone here with experience in this area could help answer the questions the designers are asking.
MichaelJayFoto, what you say makes sense. One wrinkle that I found interesting in the questions being asked is the idea of an image being renewed once after it has been deactivated. I didn't know this was possible (but again, I do not do any RM work). That just seems like it would have some very interesting implications.
35
« on: January 30, 2013, 15:26 »
I don't do any work with RM -- buying or selling. I just saw the open question over there and thought someone from this forum might know the answer and be willing to help direct them to a knowledgeable answer.
36
« on: January 30, 2013, 15:05 »
The Graphic Design Forum has had a little bit of discussion about the Getty / Google deal. That discussion has since turned into questions about what happens to usage rights for RM files if they get deactivated. It looks like there are some open questions that someone knowledgeable in this area might be able to address. Here's the thread (posts #10 & #12 have the questions): http://www.graphicdesignforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=82573
37
« on: January 30, 2013, 00:11 »
Interesting quote from the Istock forums:
-----------------------------
Posted By PaulCowan:
I think I will delete at least one useless old file on the 2nd, just in case anybody is watching the numbers to see how many contributors are annoyed enough to make some minor gesture of protest.
(Edited on 2013-01-29 04:25:50 by PaulCowan)
Posted By Lobo:
Paul, we are watching everything.
38
« on: January 28, 2013, 19:54 »
Does anyone know how many images are currently available in Google Drive? I was watching the numbers continue to go up on the kga.me site until it was shut down. The last figure I saw was slightly over 12,000 images. Does anyone have current numbers?
39
« on: January 24, 2013, 15:35 »
The http://kga.me/ site has gotten a DMCA takedown notice.
Corporate Counsel at iStockphoto, Ronald Lo, issued a DMCA takedown notice (Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 6:17 AM PST). I respectfully obliged (Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 10:11 AM PST).
Here are a couple of other places you can use to find out if your images were involved in the Google Drive stock image deal: 1. Text list 2. Text + Image list
More information regarding Google Drive's stock images:
http://kga.me/dmca-20120124.html
I don't know the full reason this site was asked to come down, but my guess is that part of the reason might have been that each thumbnail had a link to the full sized image. Those links may have been problematic. It sure would be nice if at the bare minimum if the site could continue showing some of the stats (like how many images are currently available in Google Drive).
40
« on: January 23, 2013, 00:00 »
Looks like there are some buyer concerns about D-Day popping up in forums. Could someone who works with RM files address the question at the Graphic Design Forum: http://www.graphicdesignforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=82573
The question is still sitting there on their forum, unanswered. Anyone want to give them a knowledgeable answer? Thanks.
Okay, an answer was given. Thanks!
42
« on: January 22, 2013, 16:36 »
Looks like there are some buyer concerns about D-Day popping up in forums. Could someone who works with RM files address the question at the Graphic Design Forum: http://www.graphicdesignforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=82573
The question is still sitting there on their forum, unanswered. Anyone want to give them a knowledgeable answer? Thanks.
43
« on: January 22, 2013, 16:33 »
There are no extended licenses at Getty. Published, anyways. This is just a list of the cost of the regular RF images.
Okay, thanks for clarifying that.
44
« on: January 22, 2013, 16:31 »
I submitted a blurb to slashdot yesterday, but it didn't get enough traction to be accepted. Perhaps someone else who has a better way with words could give it a try?
45
« on: January 22, 2013, 16:19 »
New page added that lists the amount of money distributed to the agency and the artist/agency commissions.
http://kga.me/gds/details/getty-images
Where are the totals coming from? Did Getty or Google reveal the actual amount exchanged in the deal? I see where the price of the images are coming from (cost of licensing the file at the given resolution), but where did the other data come from? Also, would none of these images need a special extended license for the type of redistribution that Google is allowing? If so, what would the cost of that license be for these images? The page is currently a bit sparse on sources, but it is still very, very interesting.
47
« on: January 21, 2013, 17:50 »
Has anyone thought of starting up Facebook invitation about this date? It would be hard to get it out there, as non photographers will not join and pass it on but If it gets momentum it might help.
Interesting idea. If someone gets this up and going, be sure to share the link here. Anyone have a nice stock image of a groundhog deactivating files to use as the timeline cover? :-)
48
« on: January 21, 2013, 12:13 »
What is the current tally for removed images?
49
« on: January 21, 2013, 12:12 »
What is the current tally for Feb 2?
50
« 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?
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
