Hey,

I'm a bit confused on the minimal megapixels needed for Alamy. I have seen some people claim it is 16MP, while others claim 17.5 or so. Doing the math, I get this:

// 48 MB is not the same as 48 000 000 bytes, so we have to convert to the same units
1 MB = 1 048 576 bytes
48 MB = 48 MB * 1 048 576 bytes = 50 331 648 bytes
// So, minimum uncompressed size has to be 50 331 648 bytes.

//1 pixel = 3 bytes (Red, Green, Blue)
Uncompressed Size = Bytes per pixel * Total number of pixels
50 331 648 bytes = 3 bytes * y MP <=> y = 50 331 648 bytes / 3 bytes = 16.8 MP

Minimal megapixels for Alamy is 16.8 MP.

Am I correct? It is easier for me to upsize to match a given MP value, than it is to match an uncompressed size (I use Gimp).

Another quick question: do I have to re-upload the four initial test images or are they kept online from the moment I'm accepted?

As I said, I'm curious why some people can put a link and it isn't blocked. It seems like Flickr specifically allows them to do it and that doesn't seem very fair. Either block it for all or allow it for everyone, no?

Yeah, that would probably work, elvinstar. Thank you for your kind offer, but as I have my own website I guess I can do it myself . I'm thinking on configuring subdomains to redirect to my portfolio at each site, so that, for example, dreamstime.lbras.net would redirect to www.dreamstime.com/Luder_info.

I just got an answer from Flickr senior representative. Perry was spot on, it has to do with the "don't use Flickr for commercial purposes":

QuoteHello luder.pt,

Thank you for contacting Flickr Member Support.

In general, you can put links to your personal site on your
profile page, but not on photos or any other place.  Also,
again, please avoid posting any sales verbiage, or putting
any product, commercial logos or banners, etc, in your
account.

Don't use Flickr for commercial purposes.  Please do not
sell products, services, or yourself through your
photostream, or we will terminate your account.  Any other
commercial use of Flickr, Flickr technologies (including
APIs, FlickrMail, etc), or Flickr accounts must be approved
by Flickr.

The best place to refer for clarification on what is and is
not allowed are the Community Guidelines and Terms of Use. 

   http://www.flickr.com/guidelines.gne

These URLs that you are trying to use have been blocked due
to spamming users in the past.

Thank you again for contacting us. If you have any other
questions, please feel free to reply to this email.

Regards,
Jake

I replied with this:

QuoteHello Jake,

Thank you for your answer.

I accept Flickr reasons, but then I don't understand why some members are allowed to place links to stock agencies websites on their photo descriptions. Here are a few cases:

http://www.flickr.com/people/lumaxart/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/lumaxart/3296928881/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tiger_empress/sets/72157605193525066/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tiger_empress/2755858633/in/set-72157605193525066/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/pirate59/sets/72157605220285023/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/pirate59/2404666419/in/set-72157605220285023/
http://www.flickr.com/people/nekiy/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/nekiy/3179802684/
http://www.flickr.com/people/sookie/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sookie/388527150/in/set-72157602473137517/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ari-face/1106081123/in/set-72157600576729994/

As you can see, most of these member blatantly advertise their services directly on the photo descriptions, with links to their products and, sometimes, even a referral code. I assume they got approved by Flickr, somehow, so I would like to know what do I have to do to get approval, too.

Thanks you, once again.

Best Regards,
Luis Bras

Ok, I don't want that bad to put my links on my profile, but now I'm curious why some people manage to do it, while others don't.

Quote from: elvinstar on August 27, 2009, 00:21
I believe that I read somewhere that they have gone with bit.ly exclusively.

Nope, just tried it and it is blocked too. The same goes for tr.im.

Quote from: elvinstar on August 26, 2009, 18:18
Why not use a URL-shortening service like twitter does? Then you won't have the keywords that they're flagging in the URL...

Yeah, that was my first thought, but it turns out they're blocking tinyurl.com, too. Didn't try other, though...

Quote from: gostwyck on August 26, 2009, 13:02
Do you reckon you generate additional sales for your stuff by having it on Flickr?

I doubt it. Not much of what I have in there is available at stock sites, I use it more for the kind of shots that are not acceptable as RF or for photos that I processed so much they no longer leave margin for someone to work on. It's really just for the fun. Oh, and obviously resized to the 500xSomething px.

However, I occasionally get messages from people who want to use some photo, so I thought I might save the hassle and point them to the places where they can get them for cheap.

Hi,

I've been updating my Flickr profile with links to the sites where I sell my photos, but it seems Flickr is filtering most of the URL. I can only link to the following sites: iStockPhoto, Feature Pics, Stockphotomedia and Gimmestock. Dreamstime, Fotolia, BigStockPhoto, CanStockPhoto, ScanStockPhoto and 123 Royalty Free seem to be removed after I save my profile...

I tried to see what would happen if I insert the URL in the description of a photo, so I put a link to Dreamstime. This is what I got:

"Hey! That URL you tried to post has been used for abuse on Flickr before. If that's you, stop it! If that's not you, sorry, but you can't post links to it."

How silly is this?! I can just put the non-html URL, without the "http://www". I wonder if this is because of Flickr being in bed with Getty Images.

I sent a question to Flickr support and it was escalated to a senior representative. Let's see what they come up with.

It's been almost a year since my last upload to fotolia. I recently upgraded from my modest HP945C to a Canon 40D, with the nifty fity, and, so far, all of the photos I submitted (3) have been rejected: "Your photograph did not reach our desired level of aesthetic quality"... They used to accept almost everything! Once, I even submitted a deliberate bad image to test their criteria and, shockingly, they accepted it. What a change.

Dear Ironarrow, I totally love your idea and I truly believe it will work!

In fact, I am so excited to take part on this venture that I will even give you free money to startup your website and company, so you can fulfill your, our, everyone's dreams! Yes, that is correct, sir: free money! I assure you, I am very serious in my proposal and I am completely confident it will not fail. For each $0.05k you spend on my portfolio I will give you the incredible amount of 5 (FIVE) US dollars. As a bonus, you will even get free licenses to use all the beautiful pictures you can get from me.

This, sir, is completely honest and I guarantee you that there is no catch: by accepting my proposal, you will be helping with the promotion of my work. As they say in my country, friends have to help each other, but I'm sure you already know that, or else you would not have come here in the search for help.

Let me show you once again the benefits of my unique proposal. For each $0.05k you spend ordering from my portfolio, you get:
- $5. That's 5 (FIVE) dollars, completely free, without hidden terms or conditions. You always win!
- Free licenses to use amazing photos as you see fit. Thanks to this incredible, one time offer, your website will come out almost free, as you already have the images to use in the design of your choice.
- My strong moral support for your cause. You can count on me, my friend!
- The promise of me becoming a future contributor, as soon as the website is up and functional. I will help you get rich selling my photos for me!

How can you say no to what I have to offer? Think about it, you can get more than US$1.000.000 (ONE MILLION US DOLLARS!!!) in just a couple of days. It only depends on you, my dear friend!

What are you waiting for? Head quickly to http://www.dreamstime.com/luder_portfolio_pg1 and start winning now!

Do not forget to send me a private message with your paypal information, so I can quickly transfer the bonuses to you.



disclaimer: this offer is only valid for citizens from Mars. Proof of citizenship is required.

Got this email a few minutes ago. More than expected, imho.

---------------

Hi
It is with great regret that i shall have to close Geckostock.
All images will be deleted from disk this week.
Any payments due will be paid over the next few weeks.

The site went down yesterday and i decided not to try and get things running due to low sales.
I can't see any future in the site.

I would like to thank you all for your past support and for allowing Geckostock the right to show your images.
Those of you that worry about your images please don't the disk will have a full reformat and your images will never be used or saved in any way.

I would like to ask newcomers to Geckostock and the world of stock in general please don't be put off by your experience at Geckostock and to upload to other stock sites as you maybe more succesfull. Please try new sites as they maybe more successful than Geckostock.

I think a whole new way of selling stock is needed for the success of a new site. This may come soon!

I have enjoyed the time spent with all the contributors and learnt so much.

Thank you and good luck with sales.

Richard_C

Same here:

Service Temporarily Unavailable

The server is temporarily unable to service your request due to maintenance downtime or capacity problems. Please try again later.
Apache/2.2.3 (Debian) DAV/2 proxy_html/2.5 mod_ssl/2.2.3 OpenSSL/0.9.8c Server at www.luckyoliver.com Port 80

Not good 

Edit: it is online, again!

I use XnView and it doesn't work either, not a single field. Gimmestock isn't picking up descriptions and Fotolia puts descriptions in the title...

I have to agree with the comments about LO, it still amazes me that they give a personalized and insightful message for each review. It is by far my favorite place to upload! Let's just hope one day their sales can match the big guys.

Well, I did have permission and was even encouraged to take the photo(s), but I see your point and have to agree so I'm not uploading to anywhere.

when I clicked and found her face missing very offensive for some reason.  Almost like stumbling across kiddie porn on the web.  If you don't have her permission for such a an intimate image, how could feel good about exploiting it?

Just to clear this, the photo was taken in a public event, seen (and photographed) by hundreds of people, so I didn't feel it was that intimate. Of course that is only because I know the context, and now I understand how it may look to someone who don't.

If you don't have her permission for such a an intimate image, how could feel good about exploiting it?

The same way I see other people uploading photos of sports people taken in public events. If I recall correctly, one of the big 6 even encouraged this with something like "there's plenty of ways to photograph a football player without showing his face".

I was going to upload this photo [warning: half-naked woman] to Dreamstime and to other sites, but then I got warned that I needed a model release and ID photo for nudes, even if the model's face is not visible.

I understand this is only to avoid photos of minors, but now I'm not sure if I should upload it to other sites that don't have such restrictions... The girl in the photo is a professional acrobatic dancer and she has quite some fame (so I'm told)...

Maybe it is better to let this one go, right?

I just received this news in the last iStockphoto newsletter:

"Citizen journalism innovators Scoopt are now part of Getty Images.The emerging source for user-generated editorial content has carved out a reputation for having the latest images in citizen amateur journalism. Scoopt members who have an accidental front row seat to headline-making moments contribute their images and video of breaking news from around the world to Scoopt, which are then sold to the international press. And yes, Exclusive photographers will be able to submit images to Scoopt."

I knew about Scoopt before, but it never interested me much. They seem to be looking for unique photos that weren't captured by the press, so I guess one has to be really lucky to make it there...

What's your thoughts on it?

It looks good on Firefox now, but they're still working on it:

"We're changing. Some functionalities might not be available yet. "

I guess they will send an email when the site is completely functional. So far, I like the simple design, let's see how it works out.