|
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 - lthn
Pages: 1 ... 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15
326
« on: May 08, 2011, 06:26 »
...First of all most images 'stolen' (so to speak) aren't used in any commercial mean that would generate a sale otherwise.
I wasn't aware of that. Has there any research been done about this that I haven't heard of?
If someone wants one of my images to use a nice little print on their bedroom wall or as a screen saver/desktop background they better pay me. Otherwise I'd upload my stuff to flickr under the Creative Commons license with free personal use, which I don't.
I perfectly understand that, but imho there's a difference between stealing your images, or you and others wanting to squeeze more money out the market... actually I phrased that wrong... it's more like you want to squeeze 'more market out the people' if you know what I mean.
327
« on: May 08, 2011, 06:21 »
lol, a percentage of your stock income, # pics in your portfolio or at the stock site, that was hijacked, lol : ))
Well that's useless as I've only been in it for just over a year and don't have a huge port. I mentioned above that tineye has only started indexing my images so I haven't been able to find many of my own yet. I find heaps of other images that have been "hijacked" though. When I say heaps, I mean I was finding from 10 to 20 a week when I was looking. I wasn't looking through the database for images intentionally as I'm sure I would have found a lot more. I'm just talking about images I'd come across on my zazzle thread. For example, I may have been promoting yoga products and I would start a thread in Zazzle asking if anyone wants me to consider featuring their products. I'd get a few pages of people giving me links to their products. Each time I did this, I would find products using images that have been stolen and I'd report them and notify the original owner.
tineye hardly shows anything... very unreliable.
328
« on: May 08, 2011, 05:37 »
As soon as a photo is sold RF and appears on someone's website it is out there able to be stolen. Nobody is worried about that. I don't see the point of worrying about thefts from flickr.
Exactly, this is the wonder of RF, not flickr or blikcr or anything. With pics sold several hundreds or thousands of times, each time for almost limitless usage, they can pop up anywhere and everywhere, you hardly have any way of even guessing whether they are legal or not. Add micro prices to that and they also become generally considered a thing with value of next to nothing... so ppl started spreading their shots as wide and far as possible with RF, and now they whine about them popping up anywhere being suspicious of theft everytime they see them... picking on flickr ppl... thats a bit...khmmm... inconsistent : )
329
« on: May 08, 2011, 05:25 »
Could you give me a percentage? I bet you it would be less than 1%. What we are talking about is whether those ppl would buy the pics if there absolutely wasn't any other way to get them, and they wouldn't. Most times its just some wallpaper site to gain popularity for an URL and get some ads. Those ppl wouldn't buy anything anyway. What contributors should worry about (besides getting shafted constantly by the agencies) is that many buyers don't give flying f**k about getting extended licences for usages where they should. That's a real loss there.
lol a percentage of what, the Zazzle database which is over 40 billion? Yes that's right, 40 BILLION products. I hope it's not anywhere near 1% of 40 billion! No I can't give you a percentage but I can tell you that whenever I open a thread in Zazzle asking for products to promote, I usually find at least one person with stolen images... they don't even bother hiding it, it's so common. You can do a search on this forum and you'll find some threads with many many images stolen. I've never reported them here myself. There are just too many to bother. There are so many that I got to the point one time where I was spending more time reporting items than creating them. I've had to turn a blind eye to it all because it was putting me off creating products... now I only worry about my own images being stolen.
It's irrelevant saying these people won't buy the images if they could... we all know they won't. The issue is whether we want to just hand them over a nice large unwatermarked copy or whether we protect our images as best we can. I'm sure there are those that can remove watermarks but with the smorgasbord of images on the net, they're more likely to pick a large unwatermarked one to spare them a few minutes adjusting it.
By the way, 1% of my own images being stolen is 1% too many and I'll do whatever I possibly can to try and keep theft down. Saying "oh well images get stolen, it's a normal part of life" doesn't mean we should make it as easy as possible for the thieves, does it? Just accepting that it happens isn't good enough for me and probably for many others.
lol, a percentage of your stock income, # pics in your portfolio or at the stock site, that was hijacked, lol : ))
330
« on: May 08, 2011, 05:20 »
the jump from nothing to something is always nice : ))
331
« on: May 07, 2011, 06:24 »
It took them a decade to discover PNG : ))) ridiculous... will it cost more btw?
332
« on: May 07, 2011, 06:21 »
700px wide - Honestly I don't see a reason why anyone who uses flickr would need higher resolutions - unless they want to give their pics away for free.
That size should be big enough to decide whether the shot is worth buying or getting a different one. Always a learning curve.
Thanks for that. Yes 700px wide is more than big enough.
I upload with a small logo+url in the corner. All this pararnoia about image theft thru flickr, et.c is useless, stupid, and very net / computer illiterate. First of all most images 'stolen' (so to speak) aren't used in any commercial mean that would generate a sale otherwise.
Really? Do you know how many images I find stolen on sold on Zazzle alone? Others in this forum find them too.
Could you give me a percentage? I bet you it would be less than 1%. What we are talking about is whether those ppl would buy the pics if there absolutely wasn't any other way to get them, and they wouldn't. Most times its just some wallpaper site to gain popularity for an URL and get some ads. Those ppl wouldn't buy anything anyway. What contributors should worry about (besides getting shafted constantly by the agencies) is that many buyers don't give flying f**k about getting extended licences for usages where they should. That's a real loss there.
333
« on: May 07, 2011, 05:31 »
I looked at those links as well and there are some good pictures but not as spectacular as what one could find on flickr.
Considering that some of my mediocre images are being stolen constantly I wonder why those extremely awesome shots on flickr cannot be found by Tineye.
It just blows my mind.
Who of you on this forum is uploading without watermarks? I'd love to know.
I upload with a small logo+url in the corner. All this pararnoia about image theft thru flickr, et.c is useless, stupid, and very net / computer illiterate. First of all most images 'stolen' (so to speak) aren't used in any commercial mean that would generate a sale otherwise. Secondly real hackers can lift pictures off your own machine if they really want to, beleive me... or the stock sites storage servers... That's why the recent microstock site fraud-sales are very-very suspicious to me. Spending the stolen virtual money to get some penny-sale pictures, that might or might not get them a few more pennies is utterly-totally useless for a hacker, who get instant money or usable items thru chargebacks, buying online, etc... Many of the guys buy the card and account data on the black market. Why on earth would they waste their money and time going thru this process of dl-ing $5 dollar pictures one-by-one, when they usually just get instant money, or rip complete sites with all buttons included?  Those guys ripped archicad and that had a hardwer keys.... just total nonsense.
334
« on: May 06, 2011, 20:15 »
Then dont go looking here
http://morguefile.com/
or here
http://www.freerangestock.com/
I have seen some spectacular shots over there. I guess they just are not in the same frame of mind as us. I dunno.
they are promotional sites for microstock sites, like stckchnge was for stockxprt. I wouldn't call those shots spectacular...
335
« on: May 03, 2011, 14:31 »
Flickr links don't work as ranking backlinks, just so you know... no seo advantage except for the # of visitors to your site
336
« on: May 03, 2011, 11:22 »
I strongly suggest canon simply because of the lens choice you'll have. Especially recomended if you are (like most ppl) on a budget. Two reasons:
1. the world's best price / value modern lens for portraits, the 50/1.8 II
2. shorter flange to focal plane than most other brands... this is a big thing because you'll have a plethora of lenses to use, including some super cheap but L quality old M42 ones (and even nikon lens).... lens are far more important than the camera body.
337
« on: May 03, 2011, 03:11 »
I think the key to getting noticed on Flickr starts with the following.
....
hotties : )
338
« on: May 03, 2011, 02:36 »
An overwhelmingly superior force (what else??) of SF fought for 40 minutes with a frail old man and a few bodyguards? Who ever beleives that, jesus ppl are stupid... Bin Laden never even had a proper organization of armed man who could defend him, any well trained armed force could have just snatched him in 2 minutes. Being an 'inspiration' to radical muslims doesn't turn anyone into ironman : )
Now Mrs. Hillary sais this won't stop Al Qaeda... that's for sure since Al Qaeda never existed, except as a curtroom invetion to service the organized crime law, and a buzzword for the public. As long as US fights it, there will an inivisible fearsome magical Al Qaeda, when they stop fighting it, it will magically dissapear : )))
339
« on: May 02, 2011, 12:58 »
I think youre president Bush was better then this clown Obama? he seams a complete joke to us here in Europe. We wouldnt even consider him as a porter to open the front-doors to parliament, here in Europe.
ohh, we sure do have much better 'leaders' and representatives, speakers all around here in Europe  Maffia man berlusconi, good old pedofile cohn-bendit... the whole nice hydrocephalic eu parlaiment with insanely stupid regulations obviuolsy aimed at wrecking certain ecomonies at request... etc etc
340
« on: May 02, 2011, 10:53 »
Another interesting fact they've just revealed on CNN is that they found a bunch of computers with their harddrives ripped out. Yet they had no internet.
So everyone who has a computer *has* to have internet?
Perhaps you missed the rest of the joke?
In any case though, I find it odd that the huge mansion had no internet and no phone yet all deliveries arrived by courier. I can't imagine a terrorist running his operation that way ... maybe he sent for supplies via courier pigeon lol
what operation? Btw that's how a wanted man lives, since the internet is pretty much monitored realtime, all the time, since the installment of splitters and so are phones.
341
« on: May 02, 2011, 09:22 »
OMG, people! It only just happened and it was a covert op. Give it time and more details will come out.
yaeh, all kinds of details that will make this a total mess. It's useless, we'll never know who the corpse is / what happened. NO way.
342
« on: May 02, 2011, 06:58 »
343
« on: May 02, 2011, 06:24 »
there are 'bout 150 million ppl in the world who would look like that in that condition...
Yes, but it is still clearly just a photoshop job.
I see that, that's not my point. Probably the whole thing is fake, and we will never-ever know.
344
« on: May 02, 2011, 06:20 »
IMHO, a site like flickr -just like your own site- supposed to be for promoting yourself as photographer to get commissions, jobs. Setting up your own site for selling shots escpecially of the microstock kind is pretty much useless, you'll never be able to compete with the agencies... and sales thru flickr are good value usually, but rare. I just use it to promote my own showcase site, get somewhat better ranking thru the clicks, and to have even more stuff up there for anyone who wants to see what I do, and for my models to see what . I'v done to them recently : )
346
« on: May 02, 2011, 04:46 »
They had to throw his body into the sea The USA is just so desperate to produce something that gets the peons cheering. It was probably the 'northern alliance' once again that produced the body of someone with a big beard that looks like an arab, beause they needed some cash. They have been doing this since the start of the war on 'al quade', which of course doesn't exist.... so whenever they needed some money from the americans, they just captured anyone who looks like the "bright amarican soldier's" stereotype for an islamist, usually just dirt poor rural people who never had any papers.
347
« on: May 01, 2011, 17:16 »
Hi to all,
I have a problem about floating pixels when saved as JPEG on isolated photos.
I process with adobe camera raw, photoshop and finally convert it to JPEG. But even if i detaily clean all the edges, when saved as jpeg there becomes floating pixels around the edges. (when i push levels all the way right)
How can i avoid this?
Don't push the levels al the way... then you can forget the whole thing, it doesn't matter : )
348
« on: May 01, 2011, 04:29 »
I was approached 7 times for usage of my pictures in flickr, 6 of those worked out. Contrary to most of what I read (and that's why I don't beleive it at all, i think its just ppl trying to bash flickr, for some weirdo reason) nobody ever asked to use my pics for free, every time they offered basically the same amount, about 100$, or 80 euro, etc... it was for a sinlge time usage.... so /usage they were helluva better deal than micros.
349
« on: April 29, 2011, 15:24 »
Leave your money on Moneybookers or on Paypal if US dollar is your account currency and wait for a better time...
Probably next will be better...
One potential problem with that is that Paypal can refuse you access to your own account at any time. They can do this if there is a problem with your account, even if it is not your fault. You might keep this in mind if there is a chance that you will need the Paypal money in a hurry.
I used to keep a lot of money in Paypal back when they paid some real interest, but I stopped when I learned that they can refuse people access to their accounts. Paypal is not a bank.
Bank can refuse acces to your money anytime, its just something so far out and unbeleivable to most americans or europeans... but ask someone from argentina...
If the dollar collapses, millions of peple will be refused their money by the banks all over the world.
I think that happened in 1929.
But, if you believe everything you hear (or read), none of this will matter after December 2012.  
Things like that happened several times all over the world since that... but not of the magnitude we are facing now. What I'm afraid is that it will matter after 2012, for years and we'll have to live with it : )
350
« on: April 29, 2011, 13:55 »
Leave your money on Moneybookers or on Paypal if US dollar is your account currency and wait for a better time...
Probably next will be better...
One potential problem with that is that Paypal can refuse you access to your own account at any time. They can do this if there is a problem with your account, even if it is not your fault. You might keep this in mind if there is a chance that you will need the Paypal money in a hurry.
I used to keep a lot of money in Paypal back when they paid some real interest, but I stopped when I learned that they can refuse people access to their accounts. Paypal is not a bank.
Bank can refuse acces to your money anytime, its just something so far out and unbeleivable to most americans or europeans... but ask someone from argentina... If the dollar collapses, millions of peple will be refused their money by the banks all over the world.
Pages: 1 ... 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
