|
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 - topol
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 ... 20
251
« on: March 04, 2014, 03:22 »
...............
nobody is innovating anymore because there's just no space left for innovation, they reached the peak already, as a product it's fully mature and complete now, new models will be just small cosmetic upgrades.
yep, next they'll be closing the patent office because there's nothing new coming in...
and IBM could ignore personal computers because they were a fad...
It all finished 114 years ago, or earlier:
From 1900:
"There is nothing new to be discovered in physics now. All that remains is more and more precise measurement" - Lord Kelvin
From a bit earlier:
"So many centuries after the Creation, it is unlikely that anyone could find hitherto unknown lands of any value." - Spanish Royal Commission, rejecting Christopher Columbus' proposal to sail west.
These and other fine quotes about how science is finished can be found here: http://amasci.com/weird/end.html
The interesting part would be if you could get the plebs the read books like 'The emperors new mind' from Penrose. After reading their tabloid science for rednecks articles about evil monster blackholes growling in space, where even the most sensationalist speculation is stated as a fact... they would be faced with an actual scientist saying that we although we have admirably accurate models, we haven't got the slightest clue about how the world actually works.
252
« on: March 02, 2014, 06:59 »
Yeah, yeah, yeah, I know all about bokeh and lens quality and physics and shutter lag and blah, blah. And yes, currently dslrs and cell phones are two different animals, obviously. I guess what I was trying to say is that it doesnt matter how great a photo is technically speaking or if it was shot in a studio or the best models in the world posed and you can see every hair on their head. If the buyer wants something less its moot. Trends come and go so why not exploit a trend if there is money to be made. Take your special photos and apply a filter, strip the metadata and call it a phone pic if it will make you money.
That's a completely different point. btw, what you are trying to say in many words is that a dslr shot does anything that one from a smartphone can, and no vice versa.
253
« on: March 01, 2014, 16:44 »
Strip the exif data and no one knows what camera or phone was used. The bottom line is the photo, not the camera.
Ever heard of bokeh?
254
« on: March 01, 2014, 13:39 »
They do - if you have no standards for aesthetics... as culture gets eroded away, nowadays most people don't have any. That's the social erosion changing photography (and art in general), not technology as many mistakenly think. Having the technology in the field of photography to spew out crap that most can't tell apart from classy is just a coincidence, that might seem to speed things up due to it's overwhelming volume effect, but the same thing is happening in painting f.e. where there is basically zero tech playing zero effect. It's not the volume, it's not the technology, it's the total lack of taste in people's minds that used to be there.
255
« on: February 27, 2014, 08:45 »
They are issuing their own money and inflating it away along with the liabilities, just like a sovereign.
256
« on: February 27, 2014, 08:43 »
When items in a store are priced differently, you pay the register price, even when its more expensive
Actually, not in some places. They're only supposed to charge you the displayed price. Some states have laws about that:
https://www.google.com/search?q=register+has+wrong+price
It is like this in most of the countries that I know.
I am surprised if it is different in Ireland because I thought that it was the same for the whole European Union.
Charging something different than a displayed price is basically scamming the customer, and should be punishable by law. They used to do this frequently to tourists in some establishments in commie and ex-commie countries, they got instantly blacklisted by embassies and consulates +threats of political sanctions if it keeps happening... it all disappeared very quickly 
Not if its an honest mistake
Well, then you pay for your occasional mistake, or choose to be scammer.
257
« on: February 27, 2014, 07:58 »
When items in a store are priced differently, you pay the register price, even when its more expensive
Actually, not in some places. They're only supposed to charge you the displayed price. Some states have laws about that:
https://www.google.com/search?q=register+has+wrong+price
It is like this in most of the countries that I know.
I am surprised if it is different in Ireland because I thought that it was the same for the whole European Union.
Charging something different than a displayed price is basically scamming the customer, and should be punishable by law. They used to do this frequently to tourists in some establishments in commie and ex-commie countries, they got instantly blacklisted by embassies and consulates +threats of political sanctions if it keeps happening... it all disappeared very quickly
258
« on: February 27, 2014, 07:52 »
Apologies are always appreciated , but this is only the first step.
but the error was made by iStock , this is the risk of doing business.
Istock has made ??mistakes and I do not see why I have to pay for his mistakes .
Istock will assume the burden of this failure . So this will be a GREAT incentive for it to NOT COMMIT more mistakes like that.
My job : to make images that may have market , load them (in their mode cumbersome and slow), I have this job done properly.
THEIR job : to sell my images , to correctly calculate royalties and distribute them in a timely manner . This work Istock has done wrong.
WHY I have to pay for a job that someone else has done wrong ?
They are mistaken his own work and I have to pay for this mistake.
If I 'm wrong in my work, I pay directly the consequences.
But what I did wrong in my work ? NOTHING
This mechanism that istock has put together is deeply wrong
I repeat, do not ever again shortly nullla and retire all of my images.
I do not understand why I have to be treated so badly by a microstock .
Why do you think its normal to keep money that isnt yours? Honest question. In my opinion, it doesnt work like that with any company.
If the taxman makes a mistake, you have to pay it back
When items in a store are priced differently, you pay the register price, even when its more expensive
When utilities make a mistake you have to pay them back.
I once was undercharged for my gas bill due to their error, and still needed to pay the money, I protested but all they did was give me payback scheme to soften the blow.
ETA: Being overpaid by your employer or a mistake from the bank will also be corrected and the money has to be returned.
Hi Ron,
I do not understand the binomial:
you make a mistake -> I will pay for your mistake
This I really do not understand it.
Peace
But you arent paying for their mistake. You just have to pay back what they OVERpaid. If it all is calculated correctly, you only pay back what they paid too much, you shouldnt be out of pocket, so you are not paying for their mistake.
Disclaimer: Assuming IS calculated the overpayment correctly.
They take an extraordinary 85% to keep their house in order, so it should be extraordinarily in order. If even despite all of that things go wrong, it's negligence, so: swallow it. Like a good hoe. It all have been covered well in advance by that 85%.
259
« on: February 27, 2014, 06:19 »
I guess I am in the minority, in that I am glad to be getting an explanation, and some acknowledgment that they are cleaning up their act. I have been posting here asking for those things and so have a lot of others and I am glad to see some response to our concerns.
Let me be clear. I would MUCH rather have the money, but did anyone seriously think that was going to happen?
Their credibility level is a big fat 0. They might as well have said the money fell into our accounts from the 6th dimension, or whatever story they care to make up while thieving, if the peasants are gratefully groveling just from getting an extra email. "2 ez"
260
« on: February 27, 2014, 06:10 »
Excellent idea. The "be the first..." is a great 'added value' line too. Working as an art director I often clicked past pages and pages to avoid stuff that has been overused when designing something a bit more creative. This is a great reminder for those who haven't been smart enough to recognize this issue, and it might help less files to get dropped out of the system just for not getting lucky in time.
261
« on: February 25, 2014, 07:56 »
Definitely stealing your money imho... Istuck is a website operating almost constantly in fraud. Someone in canada should get a court order to grab data from their servers without them knowing in advance, or they will just call a maintenance/technical problem day and order employees to erase stuff.
262
« on: February 24, 2014, 04:40 »
i think it best as contributors that we don't support this type of outlet for selling our work, i only wish the buyers saw it this way too.
It's too late now, I sympathise totally but SS are winning the war in the short term at least.
What the SS fanboys don't realise is that the upward curve many are experiencing is exactly the same IS exclusives experienced a few years ago when they had the lions share of the market. The fanboys will be a lot, lot quieter when that market share plateaus and the flow starts the other way with IS exclusives contributors throwing in the towel and start dumping sizeable ports en masse.
The irony is you can't live without IS as an indy if you want a decent RPI. SS will never get to be a Getty which they so desperately want, their low price non-exclusive business model actively supports uploading to Thinkstock which will always hamper their growth.
You managed to get both points wrong: SS has a lot more files than IS, and IS gives the lowest commissions.
263
« on: February 23, 2014, 12:38 »
Sticking hardware in your face and needling ones body with Tats, is not non-conformist. It's wearing a uniform and being one of the many, trying to be different. But in the end, just being the same? (odd isn't it?)
But nobody would ever sensibly argue that ink and piercings are about trying to be different. Being clearly tribal and therefore absolutely about conforming to a group identity. Like hairstyles or wearing a tie.
Trend spotting is not about following trends - it is about identifying trends which are already emerging - often amongst self identifying groups. It's about trying to see how those trends are likely to evolve and propagate. Stock photography and advertising is all about trends surely. Culture is a neutral term - neither pejorative nor positive.
William Gibson's wonderful novel Pattern Recognition is partly about trend spotting.
But I do see that people buy ultra-mass-produced clothes&accessories and use them as described by mass media, 110% convinced this expresses their 'individual personality' the key to unlocking the massive contradiction: they have none.
264
« on: February 23, 2014, 06:24 »
Depends on which definition of culture someone is using. I mean they culture mold too... But Sue is correct that some people are sheep and follow the advertising and trends, so they can be like whatever is most popular. While I'd say Cultural would be: shared beliefs and values. However as language gets watered down, there we very well are.
Others are individuals and non-conformists, which sometimes can bring some disdain, but it makes for a better self and balance overall.
Sticking hardware in your face and needling ones body with Tats, is not non-conformist. It's wearing a uniform and being one of the many, trying to be different. But in the end, just being the same? (odd isn't it?)
Duck face? Every time I see someone now, doing that, all I can think of is, Daffy did it first and they all look just like him when they do it! That's sexy or what? Lets hope that trend dies off soon.
Lean In? Should I apply?
Culture is about ideals.
Nah, that's advertising - tries to make us feel bad so we might buy the stuff to make us conform to whatever they want to sell us this week.
You are right. When I talk to people like that I'll have to make sure to pinpoint that my use of culture is not about mold or bacteria... thanks!
265
« on: February 22, 2014, 06:05 »
What a stunning drama and opportunity for photographers. I sooo wanted to travel there, but I just couldn't get away  ( I agree a lot with beppe and hobo. I think this is usa's answer to the political humiliation by russia in the syria issue. The ukrainians have real grievances, and probably would have protested very heavily, but I don't think this would have turned into such a militant affair without some covert action by major political forces from outside.
266
« on: February 22, 2014, 05:54 »
Culture is about ideals.
Nah, that's advertising - tries to make us feel bad so we might buy the stuff to make us conform to whatever they want to sell us this week.
Wow, that's uneducated confusion. First of all advertising is a part of culture, even if it's often perverted. Ideals aren't trying to make people feel bad, that's envy when they are too lazy, numb-dumd to strive to achieve them so instead they start frowning upon them.
You think that someone who doesn't 'strive' to achieve someone else's idea of 'ideal' is lazy or numb-dumb?
Sheeesh. I have no words.
Unless you're the bimbo with the inch-thick makeup who grabbed me in a department store and said I should wear makeup every day "so that I'd feel better about myself, and have more self-confidence", when clearly I seem to have the gall and brass neck to go out and about without any.
Wow, how did makeup come in?? Whats next, unflattering swimsuits... Do you realize you act exactly like I described in my post? You have some very personal frustration with some selected narrow issue and just can't keep from rating about it, not bothered by me talking about something totally different. It's ok, everyone is free to rant all they want, but why post them as an answer to my post about culture and ideals.
267
« on: February 22, 2014, 05:30 »
Culture is about ideals.
Nah, that's advertising - tries to make us feel bad so we might buy the stuff to make us conform to whatever they want to sell us this week.
Wow, that's uneducated confusion. First of all advertising is a part of culture, even if it's often perverted. Ideals aren't trying to make people feel bad, that's envy when they are too lazy, numb-dumd to strive to achieve them so instead they start frowning upon them.
Clearly you disagree, but there's no need to be insulting. Unless you are employing Harry Truman's old tactic of "argument weak, yell like hell".
Advertising is all about making people feel bad, or at least envious (is feeling envious "good" now?). The best way to persuade people to spend money is to convince them they are dissatisfied with what they have.
If I am interpreting Liz's comments correctly, her point is that you can't spend your way to happiness. There will always be something newer and better, and at some point you can opt out and choose to be satisfied with what you have and/or what you are. If not, you'll be chasing your tail forever.
Of course in the stock business we rely on people continuing to spend money to advertise things, so that's fine with me if they want to keep using my pictures to do it. 
I was factual. This "nah, thats advertising" kind of reply when someone is talking about ideals and culture... that is an insult. she might just as well have farted out loud, laughed, and said take that with your 'culture, he-he-he' like just some banjo playing redneck.... didn't even make a logical connection, I had to do that part too 'making people feel bad', 'Spending your way to happines'  What??? Can we at least have an attempt at some logical train of thought? By the way, were the greeks and people like Michelangelo in the advertising business and trying to make people feel bad?
268
« on: February 21, 2014, 18:02 »
Marketing hype is always a pathetic read and exploitative no matter what anyone says.
Besides, the whole idea has been nicked from documentary/art photographers....Rineke Dijkstra, Nan Goldin and Alec Soth amongst many others.
Yep. Look at the plus-size models hype. Thousands of hoo-ray comments on places like huffpo, and noone stops to ask where are the male plus size models. Just pure facepalm.
269
« on: February 21, 2014, 17:54 »
Culture is about ideals.
Nah, that's advertising - tries to make us feel bad so we might buy the stuff to make us conform to whatever they want to sell us this week.
Wow, that's uneducated confusion. First of all advertising is a part of culture, even if it's often perverted. Ideals aren't trying to make people feel bad, that's envy when they are too lazy, numb-dumd to strive to achieve them so instead they start frowning upon them.
270
« on: February 21, 2014, 10:53 »
According to that, the pinnacle of 'real' is the duckface in the toilet mirror.
Not really. I was talking in the aggregate, not just one theme, although that does contribute.
You take an aggregate, so can see that this is the most prevalent form of it. By far.
271
« on: February 21, 2014, 10:51 »
... proudly display series of people showing of deformities, obesity, etc...
What's wrong with that?
We've had fake beauty shoved down our throats for so long, we've been indoctrinated to regard anything else as 'unacceptable'.
Everything. Culture is about ideals. Ideals are above average reality not under it. Setting example by repeatedly showing&glamourizing the "under part" is amputating ideals off the culture / people. It's lobotomy. The result is a degenerate jerry springer crowd, which is the real purpose, not the supposed 'acceptance & equality'. The fact that I'm right about the phoney nature of it, shows perfectly in the results. They show around an anorexics as a huge social problem... while obesity is epidemic. The result: even more & more extreme obesity, because people take the fake message and run away with it to the extremes, or just use it as excuse to perform a defiant act of eating themselves to death. So while people are gasping about some anorexic girl or hooraying some plus-size model, doctors have to invent new phrases for people who are so morbidly, unnatrurally obese they just can't x-ray them. Facepalm society.
272
« on: February 21, 2014, 10:04 »
I really get the idea people these days think that authentic means slapping on an Instagram-esque filter. Every time when I am pointed to authentic images, I see staged images with cross processed faded colors and vignetting.
Well, there's an obvious reason. "Real" and "authentic" images are the images we take of the life around us. More and more people are using their convenient phones to capture these "real" moments, and those phones make images with less exposure range and more noise, and the apps commonly used to share them have all the nifty filters. So, "real", now, isn't just content, but also a product of the thing used to capture the image. Of course, we can't walk around family and friends events all the times handing out releases, so sure, things are going to be set up. But the feeling of "real" - the visual style - can be overlaid on that to enforce the sense even when maybe the content doesn't scream "I was taken without the subject's knowledge" or whatever.
According to that, the pinnacle of 'real' is the duckface in the toilet mirror. Btw I'm starting to see filters that are rudimentary implementations of extreme retouching, they usually seem to be derived from noise filtering on super high settings smoothing everything over to a plastic look. How the people of this 'get real' movement gonna digest this demand coming back from exactly the people that are said to be targeted by it? ohh I know... these people have already been victimized, so they need to be re-educated by an onslaught of ugly showed down their throat. Lenin is smiling in his grave. Am I exaggerating? Just look at the how moron-hubs like huffpo proudly display series of people showing of deformities, obesity, etc...
273
« on: February 21, 2014, 09:49 »
There are also a number of posts that mention Shutterstock and Bigstock as well as iStock and Getty commenting on the cookie cutter and unreal aspects of stock photography. Should be good news for Stocksy and the push for more "authentic" images. I put that in quotes, because the authenticity is still a long way from, and much more visually stylish than, reality, IMO.
These look pretty "authentic" for the most part http://www.jengrantham.com/2014/02/13/stock-photography-of-real-women/
I really get the idea people these days think that authentic means slapping on an Instagram-esque filter. Every time when I am pointed to authentic images, I see staged images with cross processed faded colors and vignetting.
Yep. Any ideal becomes a contradictory, dumb dogma by the time it's filtered thru the plebs, it's inevitable.... f.e. the the style stocksy&co are pushing for is about as authentic as a north korean poster about pyongyang city life.
274
« on: February 21, 2014, 09:34 »
Add 1 more to the media entities looking for few more pennies by riding the lowbrow bullscheisse women-this&that movement.
275
« on: February 18, 2014, 03:05 »
no-no-no, this won't douu. where is the excitement? you need more hipsters wearing a bow tie and a swimsuit trunk, riding a vintage tricycle in a winter forest, staring with bland expression.
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 ... 20
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
