ISP rejects my model releases created with EasyModelRelease on the iPad, which are perfectly fine and perfectly legal. Reason: "you MUST compile a real one bla bla yadda yadda".

Welcome to the digital age, the model release I have is as real as one compiled on paper, just more convenient, perfectly legal, perfectly acceptable, more ecological and so on so forth. Now, is there a good reason why they behave this way? Beside trying to make my life more difficult on purpose? This, coupled with the again completely unlawful killing of my best seller of a castle taken on public grounds, is pissing . out of me, who I usually am pretty calm and cuddly

Now, since I'm dealing with people who are unreasonable, I will print the model release, scan it, and send the scanned version. I have the legal release anyway just in case. I will not give up the ease and coolness of signing model releases on the iPad for a bunch of <insert your favorite word here>.

Thanks for listening to my rant.

There's a nice bunch of images of the aforementioned castle on Shutterstock. Upload your images there, they don't appear to have a problem with it.

http://www.shutterstock.com/cat.mhtml?lang=en&search_source=search_form&version=llv1&anyorall=all&safesearch=1&searchterm=german+castle&search_group=&orient=&search_cat=&searchtermx=&photographer_name=&people_gender=&people_age=&people_ethnicity=&people_number=&commercial_ok=&color=&show_color_wheel=1#id=86809111&src=a4ea09f1f29abe9fe07c7a7b32f8ef82-2-88

Yes, thanks, that's my best seller on SS.

Was it from France?

Neuschweinstein in Bavaria, Germany.

Just buy your own castle - problem solved 

Why did I think about that?

http://www.dreamstime.com/thread_23022

Justice for your photos!

Part of the thumbnail's goals is to present the customer with an attractive and suggestive summary of how your file looks at original size. It's one of the agency's duties within a proper marketing of the image. We need to keep up with technological evolution and provide our customers with the best experience. The result is the new image details page, which goes live today.

In addition to the new thumbnails, now bigger and better (and lower in size!), we have done a complete redesign of the image page. The Extended and Royalty Free licenses can be purchased or compared on the same screen. The graphics also changed and prefigure our site's future look. We started with the floatable panel for lightboxes and will continue throughout the rest of the site to give you a better and more contemporary experience. The end result will ultimately be a complete redesign of the website. Considering its magnitude, this is a long process so we preferred to launch elements separately rather than wait for everything to be ready. By doing this we expect better sales, better customer experience and less technical glitches or disruptions.

The new page is available for all existing customers, while the new thumbnails are still being generated. Over 70% of the database already has the new thumbnail.

Dream on, dream until your dreams come true!

PS: the release is done gradually, some users will continue to see the previous page design, especially the ones with older credits.

Opinions? I don't love it, but the new thumbnail is pretty big.

But it appears that they are no more savvy about microstock content and no more able to deliver sales than ever.  Glad I didn't bother.  Fool me once.....

With a small portfolio, I had an EL for 40$ (!!!!) and few sales this month on Veer, totally unexpected. About 70% AR.

Congratulations Jonathan

Okish, but nothing to sing home about. I have about 150 editorial images on SS of various stuff I do around here in Frankfurt for fun.

Congrats!

I think IS should really make a better system for us to see PP sales in real time, and to easily see which images are sold. Also, I think if Yaymicro could manage to pay me the same moment I click "payment" button, that other agencies should do the same. Why we have to wait more than 2 weeks sometimes to get our many?

Because it means two weeks more of money in the bank generating interests.

The more memory, the better in the future ;-)

Regarding BIG pictures, you'll need quite fast processing speed too.

Regarding graphic card:
No matter that you will have multiple cores, I advise that you take nVIDIA graphic card (quadro preferable).
It is just because it has CUDA and it can render extra for you ;-)

Cheers!

Avoid QUADRO, go for a normal GPU, NVIDIA or AMD doesn't really matter. CUDA drivers are available for any NVIDIA GPU, AMD has support for OpenCL which is going to be standard for general purpose computing on GPUs. You don't need 1GB on the Graphics Card, 512mb is ok.

Ram: lots, as much as you can, if you save on the GPU go for more ram (12mb or 16mb). The biggest bottleneck for a PC is the available ram.

Quote from: RacePhoto on March 12, 2010, 00:59

IS photos sold on ThinkStock will appear on the IS account, not on StockXpert.

You would appear to be correct.  iS shows $5.25 for 21 partner program downloads.  Oddly, they show it with my January earnings; if these are ThinkStock, I'd have thought these would be on the bar for February.  Either way, I won't be putting any down payments on any new gear.

If I understand it correctly, IS haven't updated partner site sales for february yet. It's still due. I only have PS from January as well.

Unsurprisingly, he's making the appearance to promote his new service to make money off of photographers:
"We are on the verge of launching a new online information service � PhotoLicensingOptions � that will expand beyond stock photography and deal with the business side of photography and every possible way that photographers can earn money from the pictures they produce."
"Readers pay a small fee to read stories of interest. "

"The next stage of communicating with images may be moving more toward video and away from stills. My advice to photographers coming out of school is to throw away the still camera and focus on video. "
Oh come on, not another "Get A Red" thread.

Sean, this is a well known fallacy:
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/circumstantial-ad-hominem.html

A Circumstantial ad Hominem is a fallacy in which one attempts to attack a claim by asserting that the person making the claim is making it simply out of self interest. In some cases, this fallacy involves substituting an attack on a person's circumstances (such as the person's religion, political affiliation, ethnic background, etc.). The fallacy has the following forms:

Person A makes claim X.
Person B asserts that A makes claim X because it is in A's interest to claim X.
Therefore claim X is false.

I strongly believe that claims have to be countered based on arguments and not fallacies. Said that, I don't have the knowledge to counter or agree on any claim regarding stock.

P.S. Theory and reality are two completely different things!

In this case even theory is wrong: asserting that competition is the best model is pure non-sense. In fact, there is no big company in the world which willingly runs its production in a competitive manner, by, for example, having two departments producing the same goods and then choosing the best one. Because it's horribly unproductive.