|
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 - etienjones
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 17 ... 26
276
« on: December 01, 2011, 07:13 »
I find camera 'add-ons' this or this sorta funny
Why do we need good or fancy cameras on our phones if we are just going to put a 'grunge' filter on top of it to essentially reduce the quality of the picture. I understand editing a certain look afterwards, but altering the original photo seems backwards. Maybe I'm turning old??
Maybe that is so, or at least from a different generation. My teenage son doesn't give a flying fxxx if the photo is of high quality as long as it looks cooooool.
277
« on: November 25, 2011, 13:51 »
Thankx for the info . . . . .
278
« on: November 25, 2011, 13:05 »
Look for a decent 22" CRT on Ebay, preferably LaCie or NEC. They're practically giving them away nowadays but they're still better than any flatscreen monitor I've ever seen. I'll be using them for as long as I can still source them.
Yeah I had a CTX PR-960F for years after everyone had switched to flatscreens. CTX used to do this thing where they'd replace the monitor if it broke down within three years and the time reset after each time you got a reconditioned one. I'd still be using it now if it didn't take up half the office, I swear it was about two feet deep.
Now I am on a Samsung, which is fine for most things and cheap.
Question . . . which Samsung are you using. That question also goes for you, Mr. A.T. Nun. Come on boys, a little information please.
279
« on: November 17, 2011, 11:55 »
Very Nice, enjoyed it greatly. Nice transitions from Urban to Nature. Well done!
280
« on: November 16, 2011, 10:43 »
Thank You, Halfshag. Being slightly aware of the meaning of "shag" in the U.K., does "halfshag" stand for a sortof coitus interruptus?  Just curious.
Oh Behave!
281
« on: November 07, 2011, 15:39 »
Yep, they got it all screwed up . . . . . mine is now -1.50
282
« on: October 30, 2011, 05:14 »
I had the same problem yesterday, files still aren't showing up . . . . . .
283
« on: October 18, 2011, 09:39 »
Well, these are the guidelines for Corbis:
"RGB highlight and shadow values should be balanced and appropriate for the look and feel of the image with maximum values of:
Black point can be down to 5,5,5, White point can be up to 250,250,250"
I was taught, at least for digital printing, the limits should be 8,8,8 and 248,248,248 . . .
284
« on: October 18, 2011, 09:29 »
Sounds great, but don't through away your tripods just yet.
285
« on: September 23, 2011, 12:04 »
286
« on: September 23, 2011, 03:59 »
I still can't see a reality TV show about stock photography being on a big channel. Wont it be on one of the digital channels that don't get many viewers? And it doesn't look definite, it's only potentially going to happen. Perhaps they want to film a bit and then decide? It might be on a channel that none of us can get, so we have to buy the DVD.
It would be of interest to most stock photographers but I'm not sure it would be watched by many of the general public.
Like most athletes, the big money is in having Sponsors. Tiger made more $$ through his sponsors then in the game. Think about it, . . . . Nikon, Canon, Adobe, etc, etc . . . . . and the people who would watch the show are the target clientele.
287
« on: August 30, 2011, 12:06 »
In this new announcemen they didn't even bother with any hype about how the changes would benefit their contributors. It was just "here's what we're doing to you now, take it or leave it". No vision for the future, not even a fake one. If they'd at least pretend, I could too. It is indeed a loveless marriage.
Yes, there is certainly no pretense anymore that they care about contributors. Very sad state of affairs, but completely predictable.
But at least they've managed to keep JodiJacobson happy. ROFL! I'll have some of what she's smoking please
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=333754&messageid=6469394
I love this part: "I make more than enough money here on IS, . . . . . . . " Well, that's just dandy 
288
« on: August 26, 2011, 07:22 »
I like this at the end of the Feast promo:
And we hope to bring you some kick-ass offline events in the future because sometimes it's nice to hang out with people in real life, away from the internets.
There always seems to be enough money for kick-ass events and istockalypses. 
WOW, they have taken up Bush-speak 
289
« on: August 26, 2011, 05:54 »
What concerns me is the fact that I am credited with a file being sold but no corresponding earnings from that API sale (PixMac) . . . . . . . . I guess I will wait a little longer to see if it is credited.
290
« on: July 23, 2011, 03:39 »
All my heartfelt sympathies to those affected by the tragedy in Norway.
291
« on: July 22, 2011, 12:43 »
Uploads are OFF again.
Really . . . . couple of hours ago it worked fine.
292
« on: July 22, 2011, 05:32 »
You can add 123RF to that list of high rejection sites . . . .
293
« on: July 21, 2011, 09:38 »
Blank for me also. It did register as an uploaded image so I suggest others to wait until this problem is fixed.
294
« on: July 21, 2011, 05:48 »
The ICRC's efforts to control their symbol are entirely reasonable, given that the red cross is seen as a guarantee of the highest standards of medical/humanitarian materials and work.
It's a pretty dull, LCV sort of row of chairs. Why worry about it?
And what use can a red cross be put to which is not related to trying to gain credibility from the reputation of the ICRC?
I realize that the image is not that successful but was just curious about the reason for the rejection.
295
« on: July 21, 2011, 05:23 »
That's my point, there is a lot of historical imagery that contains a red cross (with and without a white background) . . . . . for example . . . religious (crusades) . . . . . although in my image there was a conceptual use of the symbol.
296
« on: July 21, 2011, 04:24 »
Just got a very perplexing image rejection:
Your image has been rejected
Reason: Red Cross requested us to delete all images with "red cross" signs
From my Google research:
"The red cross on a background of white is an international symbol of humanity and the use of this emblem is spelled out in international treaty and restricted by U.S. law. In accordance with International and federal law, the use of the name and emblem of the Red Cross in the United States is limited except for certain pre-1905 users - to the medical departments and to the American Red Cross"
As you can see from the attached image, the red crosses were not on a white background so should not have been rejected . . . . . . . unless all red crosses are copyrighted, which is absurd. Or am I wrong . . . . . . . .
297
« on: July 18, 2011, 15:14 »
I find it ironic that after all the discussion here on this forum about how to protect photographer's livelihood against corporate greed, when an action is taken then there are those who oppose that possible protection.
298
« on: July 18, 2011, 10:42 »
I hope it's not the beginning of story "European Commission for regulation of size of pockets for pocket-sized cameras in cooperation with french photographers labour union destroyed microstock business in Europe.".
OR . . . . . . . it is indeed Fraud that all I received for my hard work is 22 cents for my last download.
299
« on: July 11, 2011, 05:53 »
Or the Poetic image from Comte de Lautreamont (1846-1870), which is at the foundation of Dada and Surrealism.
"chance meeting on a dissecting-table of a sewing-machine and an umbrella."
we are slipping off subject into the bizarre . . . . .
300
« on: July 09, 2011, 11:30 »
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 17 ... 26
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
