276
General Stock Discussion / Re: German stock agencies
« on: June 23, 2011, 08:49 »Kimchi that does look good, love things with tomato
And here I was thinking Kimchi was more like sauerkraut mixed with a big does of chilli....
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. 276
General Stock Discussion / Re: German stock agencies« on: June 23, 2011, 08:49 »Kimchi that does look good, love things with tomato And here I was thinking Kimchi was more like sauerkraut mixed with a big does of chilli.... 277
General Stock Discussion / Re: "Fair" Trade Rules« on: June 22, 2011, 17:18 »I think that if a "fair trade commission" is going to be founded to provide honesty and transparency to buyers, contributors and agencies, a simple answer like "political issues" isn't going to fly. Who was responsible for stripping out the copyright? Someone has to know, but no one wants to claim responsibility. What has been done since to remedy that situation? Apparently nothing, because just 2-3 weeks ago, my images were on a partner site with copyright info stripped out. Nobody's talking. Nothing has changed. Very good point - if something serious happened, it would at least help if contributors were told what it was rather than being treated like mushrooms. 278
General Stock Discussion / Re: Google Images Search by Image (was Drag and Drop)« on: June 17, 2011, 11:14 »There seems to be a lot of confusion about the purpose of DCMA takedown notices - the aim is to get third parties such as web hosts to take down your images, not as a remedy against the person who has stolen the images themselves. Its just not what the notice is for. I don't see why I should identify myself and provide all my details to someone who has stolen my work. Its much easier to track down their ISP in any case, and more effective. Sending out the notice to those who have knowingly or unknowingly done the wrong thing perpetuates the idea that a takedown notice is the worst thing that can happen. I don't see what's wrong with asking them at the very least to purchase a legitimate license. Its not like the images on microstock sites are particularly expensive. In many cases violators are using your copyrighted work to generate traffic on their website through google adsense or similar programs. In that case, report them to Google and get them banned from adsense for violating the terms of that program. If their page is indexed in google and your images are showing up in the search, sending the DMCA notice to google will make them remove the page and images from the search and penalise that person's website by cutting off traffic. 279
General Stock Discussion / Re: Google Images Search by Image (was Drag and Drop)« on: June 17, 2011, 07:24 »
There seems to be a lot of confusion about the purpose of DCMA takedown notices - the aim is to get third parties such as web hosts to take down your images, not as a remedy against the person who has stolen the images themselves.
For example - userX posts your image on flickr. You send the DCMA notice to flickr to take down the images. If you know who userX is, you can sue them for stealing your work. If userx has their own website userx.com, you send the DCMA notice to their web host to take down the content. If flickr or the webhost don't do it, they themselves risk becoming liable for the copyright infringement. Getty sending letters of demand when they find a culprit is absolutely the correct way of enforcing copyright. In some cases people have a legitimate way of getting around copyright violations - for example they paid a web developer to build a site for them, the web developer stole the images without the knowledge or consent of the client - but in that case the web developer is still liable for the copyright breach, and can be sued themselves and the website owner still needs to pull down the images. If someone gets caught out without a valid excuse or defence, then paying up is probably the best thing they can do, (or hope that they're too small a fish for someone to worry about frying). Basically you should be sending DCMA notices to Google, Yahoo, Webhosts, etc. Letters of demand for damages for past copyright violation and takedown notices to anyone who is actually stealing your work. If you do this, remember to document violations with screenshots etc & probably include them in any correspondence. To me this tool seems to be a way of making it much easier to track down violations of copyright, and should see an increase of legitimate uses, rather than the opposite. Lets see how it pans out. 280
Off Topic / Re: Trip Planning Started Today« on: June 15, 2011, 10:54 »Passports arrived earlier this week. Got the travel juices flowing. Wife went into intense planning stage this morning. Headed north on IH35. South Dakota is one Destination; Montana (Glacier National Park) is another. Probably cross into Canada. Return down West Coast with Death Valley and Las Vegas (cultural experience) as extended stays. We are excited. :-) When the money runs out: best way to do it! Good luck! 281
Cutcaster / Re: Submitter Stats« on: June 15, 2011, 10:51 »Luis. Not sure where you get your numbers but they are absolutely wrong. See here Sorry but clicking through the Alexa long term stats just shows that you're getting more people finding the site on search and bouncing off - you've gone from a 20% bounce rate to 60% since the start of the year, I'd hardly consider that a roaring success. Put a better-performing site on the chart - say another one of the low earners like bigstock - and cutcaster disappears without a trace. Maybe you could share some actual insights on how you're planning to turn the ship around? Are you advertising for buyers anywhere these days? 282
iStockPhoto.com / Re: More Getty content on iStock« on: June 14, 2011, 03:36 »Thank you MR PaulieWalnuts for expressing my exact thoughts and saving me a lot of time and trouble articulating them. +1 I still come here out of habit, but its getting to the stage that its become a daily dose of depressant. There's always been a bit of a negative sentiment around, but being so consistently negative isn't really healthy for anyone. 283
iStockPhoto.com / Re: More Getty content on iStock« on: June 13, 2011, 06:36 »As far as the content of the edstock portfolio goes, there are more product and location type shots that don't require any special sort of permission than I'd like, but there is also some great content that adds value to the collection and wouldn't really be available through regular contributors. Try this image for example: http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-16844219-king-bhumibol-adulyadej-of-thailand-celebrates-82nd-birthday.php?st=6ec82ef Presumably the photo was sold for its niche value initially, now 2 years later they want to revive its earnings potential that the volumes from iStock may or may not bring. If I had one of the only images like this for sale online at the iStock E+ price-point of $5-30, I don't think I'd be overly upset. I don't think the image has such a low sales potential - assuming they add the keyword "King" I'd be very surprised if it doesn't get lots of sales. 284
iStockPhoto.com / Re: More Getty content on iStock« on: June 13, 2011, 05:11 »To me there is a pretty decent set of political figures and celebrities including some notable examples that aren't in other collections. Nobody is stopping from selling them on SS or DT you if you're not exclusive, or if you are there's always RM options such as Alamy. 285
iStockPhoto.com / Re: More Getty content on iStock« on: June 13, 2011, 04:46 »
I think there is a little bit of an obsession on focusing on the negative things that happen at iStock and the views expressed here are far from balanced at the moment. I don't think the overall trend at iStock is as bad as its being made out to be here. For me the overwhelming positive at iStock is that they're having success at pushing a greater variety of pricepoints - obviously this is more evident as an exclusive. As far as the content of the edstock portfolio goes, there are more product and location type shots that don't require any special sort of permission than I'd like, but there is also some great content that adds value to the collection and wouldn't really be available through regular contributors. Try this image for example: http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-16844219-king-bhumibol-adulyadej-of-thailand-celebrates-82nd-birthday.php?st=6ec82ef Not sure if anyone has tried to get access to the King of Thailand for a photo shoot lately, but its not something that is easy. While I was there, he did a trip in public along the river in a boat. They basically lined the river with police to make sure you A. couldn't get a vantage point on bridges etc at a higher elevation than the king, B. couldn't take photos while he was actually passing. To me there is a pretty decent set of political figures and celebrities including some notable examples that aren't in other collections. 286
Payoneer / Re: Great new payoneer feature - Payout goes directly in your bank account« on: June 11, 2011, 01:07 »
Its the awful exchange rate with Paypal that's my problem at the moment:
US$ to AUD: 0.922894 Whereas the official rate is: 0.94895 So its about 2.6% of every transaction. Does anyone know if the paypal percentage for cash withdrawals is less than this? I know they say they use the Mastercard rate, but they don't ever really show you what this is. 287
iStockPhoto.com / Re: Istockphoto Best Match Tweak 5/27/11« on: June 08, 2011, 16:37 »how are everyone's sales today? my sales are almost non-existent. like a Saturday today. not sure what's up. but they're so bad that I figure something weird happened today. My sales seem to be following the pattern you're talking about. Yesterday was good, today looks pretty bad, but not at weekend levels... 288
iStockPhoto.com / Re: More Getty content on iStock« on: June 08, 2011, 12:25 »Is there any word on how these files will be priced yet...? Very curious about that one... A premium editorial collection was on the cards from day one - I'm pretty sure it was acknowledged as such by IS but put on hold to await some volume in the collection first. My guess is that this move will hasten the introduction of a premium editorial collection. 289
General Stock Discussion / Re: Microstock Earnings - May 2011« on: June 01, 2011, 04:42 »
BME for me on IS in terms of $$$ DL numbers are also the highest they've been for a long time.
Lets see what the summer brings.... 290
General Stock Discussion / Re: European trip« on: May 31, 2011, 02:40 »There are dead tourists almost every day in south america, but maybe you only stick to the safe touristic areas ? Is that an official statistic or something that just popped up in your head? I spent about 12 months in Latin America - including 3 months in Colombia, 2 in Peru and one in Brazil. Obviously there are dangerous parts of each country, but its no different to anywhere else in the world. Colombia in particular has a high homicide rate, but its mainly related to the drug trade, not tourists who have DSLRs. If you want a better picture of how and why people die of non-natural causes there's always the US state department website. For example in Brazil (which receives the most visitors of any South American country) they only list 10 US citizens that have died of homicide between Oct 2002 to December 2010 (58 deaths from other non-natural causes such as vehicle accidents, suicide & drowning). Compared to well over 600,000 US tourists each year to Brazil its not a particularly significant number. http://travel.state.gov/law/family_issues/death/death_600.html Anyhow... sorry for continuing this thread way off topic. 291
General Stock Discussion / Re: European trip« on: May 31, 2011, 00:48 »Yeah best not to travel anywhere. Its expensive and full of killers just waiting for you to turn up with things they can rob. If that's true then it makes your comments about the people who would kill you for your DSLR in Peru, Brazil or Colombia even sadder. 292
General Stock Discussion / Re: European trip« on: May 30, 2011, 04:29 »It's hard to see how can one get a decent return on investment traveling in expensive european cities like London or Stockholm. Yeah best not to travel anywhere. Its expensive and full of killers just waiting for you to turn up with things they can rob. 293
General Stock Discussion / Re: European trip« on: May 29, 2011, 18:02 »I'm planning a European trip next month (3 weeks). Will be in Italy, France, Germany and Switzerland. Is it worth taking city scapes and "travel" style photos for microstock (wondering if I should bring my 5d Mark II along). My North American travel photos don't sell that well so I am considering just bringing a point and shoot for the memories... Traveling for photography & traveling for vacation are very different experiences. The travel style photos which sell usually don't just happen, they're planned around times that usually don't coincide with usual holiday activities such as sleeping in or going out for drinks in the evenings. As others have said, if theft is a worry, just get insurance. 294
Shutterstock.com / Re: If shutterstock offered exclusivity with these benefits...« on: May 19, 2011, 08:46 »Or another option: stay exclusive with IS. +1 I know IS exclusivity is currently unpopular around here, but I think its still the best option at the moment. When I was non-exclusive, SS never earned more than 40% of my microstock income in one month ( usually closer to 30%) even though they had over twice as many images from me as IS. To be exclusive it would have needed to be a 3-4 times increase from there to make exclusivity worthwhile. That's the sort of boost that IS exclusivity gives but I just don't think that works with the SS model. 295
General Stock Discussion / Re: Reproducing and improving old images« on: May 16, 2011, 03:45 »Racephoto - the point of that court ruling appears to be that Bridgeman owns the bit of paper that they copy the image onto, but that doesn't give them any rights over the image itself. If you copy the image off their bit of paper, you aren't taking anything that belongs to them so they have no right to complain. That seems to make a lot of sense and I think it is making an unjustified and irrational leap to claim that the only reason the judge ruled as he did was because one side had a better lawyer than the other. Couldn't it equally well be that the law is clear and the judge ruled correctly? I think you sum it up pretty well. The case is a US authority which technically is binding in New York, but seems to have been followed in other states. Its influential for the UK as well because it comments on UK copyright law without determining the case on that basis. Being a US case it isn't of course binding in the UK. I think one of the reasons a similar case hasn't been brought in the UK is that museums or archives like Bridgeman stand to loose far more than any potential gain if they don't win. For practical purposes, the case doesn't mean you can't sell scans or whatever of public domain material, just that if someone decided to copy those images rather than buying them, theres not much you can do about it. 296
General Stock Discussion / Re: Another Way to Cash In« on: May 16, 2011, 01:25 »In Lee's defense, he's gone out and interviewed and talked to a lot of people in the industry. I think he has a unique perspective that many contributors don't have. I haven't read his report, so I can't really say what is in it or the value of the information. But, I don't really see that as a reason to dismiss it as something that anyone can do though. I wish him success. +1 to that - there's not so many people that have the level of knowledge, contacts or insights that Lee has, let alone a balanced perspective of the industry. 297
General Stock Discussion / Re: Reproducing and improving old images« on: May 15, 2011, 16:51 »If all you're doing is fixing the old images - that is not manipulating them so that the content is different - then you don't have copyright over the changes because you're not creating an original work: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bridgeman_Art_Library_v._Corel_Corp. Whether they accept it or not, Bridgeman lost the case and presumably had to pay the costs of the case. In a practical sense, they still own and have physical possession of the scans and for many purposes are probably the best source of those scans for anyone wanting a high quality image, even if the copyright is in the public domain. 298
General Stock Discussion / Re: Reproducing and improving old images« on: May 13, 2011, 14:34 »Hi All If all you're doing is fixing the old images - that is not manipulating them so that the content is different - then you don't have copyright over the changes because you're not creating an original work: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bridgeman_Art_Library_v._Corel_Corp. The fact of public domain works being for sale in many agencies doesn't mean that the person selling the images has any claim to copyright over those images or any remedy for another person using a copy of those images that end up on a website somewhere. 299
General Stock Discussion / Re: April 2011 Stats« on: May 01, 2011, 04:56 »
Another BME for me in overall $$$ (IS exclusive) despite only adding a handful of images this month.
300
iStockPhoto.com / Re: iStockphoto.com- Editoral Use only: An Update on What's Popular« on: April 11, 2011, 18:08 »They said they will take "ongoing" issues and the events in the Middle East are certainly far from over. They just cannot accept breaking news, for the simple reason that it cannot be processed in time and maybe also to avoid a direct competition with Getty. Unfortunately I think images of conflict in the Middle East will remain topical and relevant for a long time in the future. |
|