|
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 - FD
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 ... 82
251
« on: October 14, 2011, 19:37 »
Yaymicro has always been fair. Is that why they team up with Pixmac? 
252
« on: October 14, 2011, 19:33 »
Does it come with a some hints as how to earn it back from 0.25$ subscriptions?
253
« on: October 14, 2011, 11:59 »
provocative or just a bit too close to the truth? for comfort I mean. You are a new (?) member and anonymous. Your rather provocative post came an hour after you signed up. Just go back to your old ID please and post from there. Hi and bye.
255
« on: October 12, 2011, 19:34 »
Halfshag, if I understand the initial poster correctly you are advertising here to get contributors, how do do intend on getting customers? I looked thru his messages and he never advertised the site to be fair. Edit: I was wrong: I missed the advertisement because I have adblock on in FF.
256
« on: October 12, 2011, 12:04 »
For what it's worth: I went to my Canon dealer (not a small one) in Europe 2-3 weeks ago to buy a good HD dedicated videocam. He told me to forget it since Canon stopped delivering all prosumer videocams since the end of August because "something big" was coming for video. The still cams were still easy to get in the shop.
257
« on: October 12, 2011, 11:44 »
I've seen this site before. I think the founder is a member of MSG. Yes, halfshag, a former iStock exclusive illustrator. "Best Match" is not a trademark of iStock, it has (quoted) 74 million hits on Google. Bigstock for instance uses it too. The fonts and color scheme aren't patented : there are not that many fonts for a clear web design and they are rendered by the browser. Many features of iStock aren't there : price slider, disambiguation, categories. http://www.photokore.com/ was a clone from the start of iStock, included the disambiguation and the TOS (they copied literally) and they apparently never got harassed. Maybe because they are in Korea? iStockPhoto is a Canadian company and iRockStock is British. They would have to combat legally on enemy terrain since the EU (or EU states) successfully obtained several convictions of Google about privacy and IP. So I wouldn't be too sure. As to the name, they only have "stock" in common and the front lower case "i" which is an Apple Computer thing. Apple won't object since they "stole" their name from the Beatles' company. My bet is that "halfshag" will be here soon. 
258
« on: October 12, 2011, 10:18 »
No idea if iStock has an easy case there but I think they have a bigger financial punch to keep such fuddy duddies out of their way. The fluid scarce design is very popular now since it's compatible with mobile devices. 123RF has it, FT has it. You start to see it all over the net. Their name seems to be registered and they are a British site. Of course they won't make it (no USP, more of the same) but iStock would have no point.
259
« on: October 10, 2011, 20:45 »
Well I have managed so far to negotiate my percentages with 2 agencies, its no big deal and they will listen.
Details?
NO! secret, and you will understand.
Fair enough. It's still fine to know those things happen and thanks for sharing the info. Apparently, it's all about divide and conquer from the agencies' side. To obtain enough leverage, you must be big. An average contributor will never be big, but nothing prevents him to team up with 9 other average contributors (preferably with non-competing images and covering several niches) like Monkeybusiness did and be big (and have leverage) as a group.
260
« on: October 09, 2011, 03:07 »
.
261
« on: October 08, 2011, 10:28 »
.
262
« on: October 08, 2011, 01:45 »
.
263
« on: October 06, 2011, 21:13 »
I opted out, got the confirmation email and also the invitation to opt back in. I won't do it. If buyers want shots at 0.25 $ct, they can go shoot those themselves or hire a photographer and pay the model(s) and the studio. Fair enough and thanks to have given the choice to opt out.
264
« on: October 06, 2011, 20:17 »
.
265
« on: October 06, 2011, 13:26 »
Sorry, but no other than Steve Jobs REALLY saw the potential (especially for the home users) of the graphic interface. Even Edison did not invent the light bulb, but he made it better. I'm terribly sorry but I had a Xerox and a Sun at my desktop for serious work. Of course I wasn't a home user then, but an academic. When the Macintosh came out around 1984-1985, I actually opposed my school (if it matters, within the top 80 worldwide) to buy a bunch of these new fancy cookie boxes for the students when it was clear that the PC would win the game with its open architecture and its Fortran compiler and its development tools. I even wrote an OS on the poor 6502 since science mattered and not cookie boxes for home users that like to share feelings and drive retro convertibles. The Mac then just was a fancy and trendy toy for rich hippies. No offense intended but we had to do modeling work and the Mac wasn't up to it. In hindsight, it was a great decision since much later, we converted to Linux which has really great programming tools and the possibility to poke in a custom OS for real-time apps. The Mac never allowed "poking". Steve Jobs did not invent mp3 or hard drive or pocket-sized portable devices, but he did put them all together (with his team) and presented us iPod. I had an iPod and I gave it away. I have some cheap 8GB Chinese unbranded crap now that has twice the memory as an iPod at half the price and doesn't need the bulky iTunes to just copy MP3's on it. The genius of Jobs was to create things that combine something familiar and something new, and machines that had a FEEL. Yap, you had to feel it. He was from SFO and the first thing I heard arriving there (or in the valley) was how many Californians it take to screw in a light bulb. The answer was 1 and 4 others to share the feeling. I'm very sorry but the only thing the Mac and all its i-Derivates had in common was an overpriced overhyped feeling, while the real thing was done by workstations ultimately under Windows or Linux when Xerox then Sun and eventually DEC went broke. Even the iPad is a joke with no proper i/o, a price beyond a decent laptop and a screen 1/3 that size. But I'm sure it feels good to show off and share that good old hippie feeling of belonging. "When Reagan was president we had Johnny Cash, Bob Hope and Steve Jobs. In Obama's America, no Cash, no Hope and no Jobs." A witty saying proves nothing. R.I.P. Steve Jobs Of course. He was a commercial and marketing genius and a very witty guy, and so is Gates. He was good with words, just like Obama. May he rest in peace, as Obama will after the next elections.
266
« on: October 06, 2011, 06:49 »
Maybe a caching algorithm would fix all that? That's a sound advice straight from the experts that took the concept " caching" to new heights. 
267
« on: October 06, 2011, 04:37 »
.
268
« on: October 05, 2011, 21:37 »
If the rest of the computer industry didn't have Apple to chase, we'd still be using command line instructions to execute commands. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_graphical_user_interface#Xerox_PARCThe Xerox Alto (and later Xerox Star ) was an early personal computer developed at Xerox PARC in 1973. It was the first computer to use the desktop metaphor and mouse-driven graphical user interface (GUI).
It was not a commercial product, but several thousand units were built and were heavily used at PARC, other Xerox facilities, and at several universities for many years. The Alto greatly influenced the design of personal computers in the following decades, notably the Apple Macintosh and the first Sun workstations. Steve Jobs was 18 in 1973. His main achievement, IMHO, was computer animation with Pixar and his superb innovation marketing skills.
269
« on: October 02, 2011, 17:20 »
Don't believe them. YES you can make a small fortune in microstock... on condition you start with a big one. 
270
« on: October 02, 2011, 12:24 »
you can set it as an option that people can license your photos through Getty if they like one of them Ah thanks Tyler, I didn't know that.
271
« on: October 02, 2011, 12:10 »
I'm just curious but why all your photos on Flickr are mentioned to be licensable via Getty? If those images are on Getty, you shouldn't be interested in microstock.
272
« on: October 01, 2011, 18:25 »
Just my 2 cents... why don't we all contributors do something to favor fair sites like 123RF, canstock, veer, etc.. and put boycott on the greedy screwing ones like fotolia and istock? Perhaps because FT makes me 1 1/2 as much as what 123 makes and 4 times of what CanStockPhoto makes?
273
« on: September 30, 2011, 07:09 »
.
274
« on: February 08, 2011, 10:23 »
Sorry but I virtually left microstock after SS/BigStock banned me for no explanation and even no reply, owing me far over 1000$. So this reply is a bit late.
They must have had an eye for a while on these creative practices to be sure and gather enough evidence. You:So far it seems to me that it was a matter of few days. I guess that if it was being watched for longer period of time we would be notified sooner that we have a bug there.
Me: yes they caught you red-handed, as it seems.
The elephant in the room, the caching, was ignored once again. Can we cut the cr@p about "transparency" and just get that huge Colossal beast out of the room?
There's a blogpost about its extent and technical description above in the discussion.
Just thinking:
The whole microstock business is based on trust. And the trust is really fragile. We did a mistake, we investigated it, we posted a message about what exactly happened as soon as we could. But that is not enough. The problem when being an agency is that there's no way to communicate 'the honesty' or 'the fairness' to the contributor. You can write press releases, you can try to post open reactions on forums, you can meet people from the industry to show yourself and your intentions. But when you make a mistake it turns against you.
Installing a cache system allowing buyers to download an image X times without reporting it to the agent is frankly said theft. Cache systems don't get programmed and deployed just by mere accident: it's deliberate. I still see the elephant in the room but I don't expect it to disappear any more. You've ruined it I have been called a "racist" stating "east of Berlin, there is no copyright". I believe it more than ever now. Please dear God, give us back that beloved iron curtain.
275
« on: January 24, 2011, 13:48 »
All the original hires files were always in the suppliers system only. Yap. Pixmac only gets hires files that have been purchased by a buyer. Yap. To be able to send the file to the buyer. Obviously, unless the temporary download link points to a third server without the DT domain in it. This is the reasonable thing to do. It won't be a server under Pixmac control. Caching system temporarily stores files that were recently purchased only. So, there was a local caching mechanism on servers controlled by Pixmac. Fine. Not all the files available at suppliers server nor all the resolutions without paying for each of them. Yes we know that. You can only cache the copies that the customer bought. Whenever a customer bought a DT hires file, he got a download link to it on a DT controlled server. You intercepted that link and saved a copy of the image for yourself on a Pixmac controlled server and you set a flag in the DB: " we have copy". The next time a customer wants that file, you check your DB and if you copied cached the file, you just sell your cached copy and there is no way DT can know that, nor the contributor. Fine. The problem of course arises when a third auditing party buys a popular file that has probably been "cached" by you. You'll give him the download link on a Pixmac controlled server and not on a DT controlled server. That's how the auditor knows. He then just has to check with DT if the "conveniently" cached file has been reported. Obviously not since DT made a big fuzz about it. They must have had an eye for a while on these creative practices to be sure and gather enough evidence. As for the bold parts in your quote, I can't comment them now. Sorry for that. You'd better not. On the Pixmac blog a technical "mistake" was mentioned as to the under-reporting. The elephant in the room, the caching, was ignored once again. Can we cut the cr@p about "transparency" and just get that huge Colossal beast out of the room?
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 ... 82
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
