|
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 - ouchie
1
« on: January 30, 2015, 18:57 »
quickly read the release.
almost the same as a universal release. exactly what i expected! shows how ignorant most are on here.
ergo, not enough detail.
where in there does he advise that the type of photos he took might or prob will be used in the adult sex industry?
and before u say "oh what does he have to list every possible use?"
i say no he doesent, BUT he should disclose to the model that these types of photos we are making makes them much more desirable and likely to be used in the porn industry. if for no other reason other then as a courtesy.
all it says is a blanket statement that she cant sue him.
I signed a similar contract when i went sky diving.
Pooie, meaningless, they (skydiving) get sued all the time when someone gets hurt. same thing for pre nups.
you all should just shuttie.
cause you are gona make him loose this case faster with your ignorant self serving defensiveness.
2
« on: January 30, 2015, 18:35 »
i looked at your port and like you pics, even if VERY microstocky.
Thank you Ouchie, but don't you think it makes a lot of sense to sell "microstocky" images through microstock agencies?... I think it does. I sell my images though many different venues and to various publications, and the style of the images I submit depends on where they are intended to go. It works well for me.
Regarding "all of us" here defending the photographer, being "upset" and failing to see the "other side" - didn't I just address it my long post above? You're implying that all of us here are scared because we have model shots in our portfolio, and that's the only reason we take this photographers' side. How about you be nice and read through my reasoning - does it make any sense to you?
talk abt reading and comprehending! get it out of your mind that im a troll. i do the exact same thing you all are, i sell on microstock. the only diff is i will say what is on my mind and will not care abt all the pitchfork wheeling hillbillies coming after me. but it is tiering and i just want read the contract and then post one more time. i already know talking to you all is like talking to a brick wall. well sorry, didn't mean to disrespect the brick wall, at least they serve a purpose.
3
« on: January 30, 2015, 13:47 »
I don't consider it my mission to bring education and information to masses. However, it seems like we have a couple of people here that have trouble understanding what's going on. So I'll give them a benefit of the doubt and assume they are not posting what they do just to try to be disruptive, but are genuinely convinced in what they are saying. So here is my attempt to bring some rational thinking back here:
To Axel Lauer: The issue here has nothing to do with microstock. Images bought from Getty and Corbis in the past with both RF has RM licenses have been similarly misused and corresponding lawsuits have been filed againts photographers, agencies, and the end user. There is absolutely nothing new here and nothing specific to microstock. If you doubt my words, please do your own search, in our wonderful era of the internet the information is at your fingertips.
To anonymous person hiding behind the username of "Ouchie": You seem to be claiming the photographer here has put the model at risk. My comment earlier about you not being familiar with a model release was related to the fact that the model release explicitly states that they images can not be used in the industry that model didn't want to be associated with. The license for the image also explicitly states the same. The photographer made sure he stuck to his end of the deal by submitting the images to the agency(s) with appropriate license limitations. I find it hard to believe that you are seriously stating that the photographer ruined the model's career. When you buy a car, does it say in your sale agreement that the car can be stolen by criminals who can potentially rob the bank? Who gets arrested in that case - the criminals or the car manufacturer? Taking photographer to court for image misused by people who broke the license agreement is as absurd as suing a car manufacturer for the bank robbery. Sure, I can understand how upset the model must be. But you'd also be upset if your car got stolen. Criminals exist, and we have a justice system to deal with them. In this case, people who misused the image are criminals. The photographer didn't break any laws or contractual obligations.
Now, if both of you going to continue posting "microstock sucks" and "you microstockers deserve all this crap" that would be a proof that you're not interested in any constructive discussions. In which case on the "ignore" list you go.
HOW in the heck do you know what model release this photog used? Post a copy if you have his release, and we can go from there. fyi"when i say model release om referring to a generic copy. regarding not giving links and my personal info out....well not everyone is a fame hound and some people like anonymity. plus what is who i am to do with this? my port? what u want to see may crappy port of cabbages? please, I'm not claiming to be anything special in photography. just ppl made innuendos to my skill and i responded in like fashion. they tried to piss me off and i did the same. i looked at your port and like you pics, even if VERY microstocky. but hey that sells! and looking at your port i would also be concerned in the out come of this case, cause you have some pics that could be used in the pron industry, and you'd be in the same boat begging for $$ for help with the legal fees. Dude just needs to settle this case, cut his losses and move on. P.S. i know you (all) are severely biased cause well lets face it, your bread is buttered on one side, and you just don't want to scrap of the butter  . so you fight when someone gives yo the other view point. and i never said "microstock sucks" i am one of you but i can be objective.
4
« on: January 30, 2015, 13:22 »
I could potentially be hit by a car when leaving the house so I started living like a cabbage.
LOOOOOOOOOOL!!!
Hey, i just looked at your portfolio and it made me............. "LOOOOOOOOOOL!!!"
You seem to be anonymous and haven't provided any links to your portfolio. Please don't make comments about someone else's portfolio when you are hiding behind anonymity - that is pathetic.
yea right, i will give you my address, ss#, and tax details. Get real just cause u dum dosent mean i am. plus what u wana see a bunch of cabbages?!
5
« on: January 30, 2015, 03:28 »
I could potentially be hit by a car when leaving the house so I started living like a cabbage.
LOOOOOOOOOOL!!!
Hey, i just looked at your portfolio and it made me............. "LOOOOOOOOOOL!!!"
6
« on: January 30, 2015, 02:43 »
LOL, it seems the only one here using semi vieled insults is Ouchie
I guess the constructive discussion in this thread had to end at some point. Luckily it lasted 6 pages before Lagereek's mini me arrived on the stage.
did you want to say "constructive discussion" or "one sided discussion"? one sided, sounds much more appropriate for this thread. Photog's agreeing with photog's, is not constructive discussion...that's called self serving discussion. you ppl sure do get you panties in a bunch when someone takes on the opposing view! oh yea, and i got your mini me right here 
7
« on: January 30, 2015, 01:48 »
I could potentially be hit by a car when leaving the house so I started living like a cabbage.
and thinking like one.
8
« on: January 29, 2015, 21:12 »
@ouchie: Obviously, you have never seen a model release and have not a slightest idea what it states in pretty noticeable full-size print. So, you posting in this thread why? You know, you can start your own thread discussing problems of shooting cabbages, I can help with that if you don't know how, but please, don't make posts without at least some rudimentary understanding of the subject.
Be real, not just self serving. Why don't you step into someone else shoes for a sec. Not just the shoes the benefit you the most. I know exactly what a model realease is, i have used them a few times, in the beginning. But i realised the potential for problems, because they are not very clear. So I photograph cabbage, or whatever. I understand why you all are getting offended and are using semi vieled insults.....cause it has the potential to hit your wallet. you asked why i posted in this thread. well read between the lines. you all are being self serving and one sided and i decided to take the others side. plain and simple. also if i needed to discuss the problems of photographing cabbage, i would not ask you. you have enough problems with you own pics
9
« on: January 29, 2015, 19:56 »
Poor baby photographer is being sued  .
I'm tired of seeing your winy face (oh woe is me) on your video, asking for money and help, playing the Innocent victim. the only reason you are getting sympathy on here, is cause its every other photographers nightmare to be sued by his model for a situation like this. AND that's why i don't shoot people, i shoot cabbage and such! 
BUT, Lets look at it at least a bit from her side. Unintentionally (?) you have probably ruined here career! I read now she is "the face of porn" or something like that. you and all us photographers know the potential is there to for this to happen, especially if the pics you take are provocative, and I'm sure they are. so you should have at least had it in the fine print of her contract/release stating that there is a possibility that her photos could be purchased and used by the porn industry! but you don't cause you know what, then the models are going to pause and think abt it before consenting to the photos.
i really resent you acting as if you are the victim and have no fault in this and are surprised that you are being sued. We ALL know that this possibility exists to happen. WE need to stop downplaying it or completely ignoring and not mentioning it, thinking it wont happen to me.
My advice to you is suck it up and settle asap.
I resent ignorance and you have plenty of that.
Good responce, that cleared everything up. Why dont you step into someone else shoes for a sec. Not just the shoes the benefit you the most.
10
« on: January 29, 2015, 19:25 »
Poor baby photographer is being sued . I'm tired of seeing your winy face (oh woe is me) on your video, asking for money and help, playing the Innocent victim. the only reason you are getting sympathy on here, is cause its every other photographers nightmare to be sued by his model for a situation like this. AND that's why i don't shoot people, i shoot cabbage and such! BUT, Lets look at it at least a bit from her side. Unintentionally (?) you have probably ruined here career! I read now she is "the face of porn" or something like that. you and all us photographers know the potential is there to for this to happen, especially if the pics you take are provocative, and I'm sure they are. so you should have at least had it in the fine print of her contract/release stating that there is a possibility that her photos could be purchased and used by the porn industry! but you don't cause you know what, then the models are going to pause and think abt it before consenting to the photos. i really resent you acting as if you are the victim and have no fault in this and are surprised that you are being sued. We ALL know that this possibility exists to happen. WE need to stop downplaying it or completely ignoring and not mentioning it, thinking it wont happen to me. My advice to you is suck it up and settle asap.
11
« on: January 16, 2015, 11:41 »
Reading this whole thread, I don't see anything at all for contributors to be excited about. The whole 'exciting news' angle when really it is no benefit to contributors but only more money in SS pockets feels a bit deja vu to me. Do they have Kelly Thompson writing their announcements for contributors now?
If some...how many VP's are there? would address a raise for us that means something to us other than shareholders we would be very Grateful. Not one word in 4 years for gods sake.
Why would they even consider a raise, when the overwhelming opinion expressed here for ages has been how fantastic SS is (at least compared to the others, which isn't saying much). They're sitting pretty, with an apparently 'mostly very happy' contributor base.
ahh, yes. i have been saying this for years. but "ALL THINGS CHANGE".....remember istock?
12
« on: January 15, 2015, 18:48 »
Thank you for your interest about the news we shared this morning. We received a number of questions and hope to answer them here.
What this mean for our contributors:
In the immediate future, nothing will change for our commercial and editorial contributors. Please continue to submit content as you have and well continue to market and license your work. Our Red Carpet program will remain the same. We will continue to work with our editorial contributors to help you gain access to events. These acquisitions provide a wider audience for our commercial and editorial contributors. A broader audience means more views of your work which equals more downloads for you.
Will editorial images from Shutterstock also be available on Rex Features?
For the foreseeable future, Shutterstock editorial and Rex Features will run in parallel. This means that the images you submit to Shutterstock will remain on Shutterstock. Should plans change, we will keep you updated.
Where do the images on Rex Features come from and can I submit content?
Rex receives image submissions from freelancers, staff photographers and agencies around the world and covers red carpet events, celebrity photography, news, sports, and features. Rex also has an archive that stretches back to the early days of photography and shoots 'on set' exclusively for many TV shows.
Rex Features is rights managed? Does that mean that Shutterstock is moving into RM licensing?
Rex currently licenses images for a single use rather than an unlimited number of uses. Shutterstock has no plans to change our current licensing structure.
What is the Rex Features pricing model?
Rex customers can either pay a fixed amount per image, or commit to a customized annual subscription.
Does Rex Features license footage?
Rex began producing and selling video over the last 18 months.
Will Shutterstock contributors have the ability to submit music tracks?
Currently, we are not accepting submissions to our music collection. We will keep you updated on progress.
Thanks,
Paul Brennan
VP, Content Operations
What abt the raise question?
13
« on: December 26, 2014, 17:32 »
I hope the one thing you have learned is that your work is mediocre at best and if you want to make good money then you'd better substantially up your game and produce quantities like your a factory with a bank of employee's working for you. But don't get discouraged it can be done. and i think your the one to do it. Please come back and let us know when you earned your first 11k.
sign,
reality sux
14
« on: December 25, 2014, 21:58 »
ugg, here we go again  go to Mcdonalds like someone already sugested. work for a year and you should be able to almost clear 11k. much easyer. Your Too Late To The Game (YTLTTG)
15
« on: April 30, 2014, 20:39 »
anyway how do i OPT OUT my fololia pics, while i decide if i want to shoot my other foot.
One of my photographer friends who is at Fotolia posted this after I alerted people on Facebook (I hope this helps; I'm not with Fotolia any more so I can't use my experience)
" I found it too - it is in Profile, then Contributor Parameters and as Jo Ann says, it is called the DPC"
thank you! that was it, if anyone wants to not allow them to sell you photos on DPC (opt out) follow the above steps. thaks again.
16
« on: April 30, 2014, 17:40 »
i did not know what is going on, i just saw this.
havent decided to pull my pics yet.
last time i closed my istock port and a lot of good that did....i just shot my self in the foot.
fyi, i never reactivated it, like otheres.
anyway how do i OPT OUT my fololia pics, while i decide if i want to shoot my other foot.
thank you
17
« on: January 13, 2014, 19:26 »
If you aren't following my saga. I was in iStock from the beginning and always had a small portfolio. Took a few years off pursuing other things and now have more free time to shoot and upload. I have uploaded a fair amount of images (for me) in the past few weeks. Zero rejections. Over on SS, I am getting a few rejections where they used to take just about anything. Also, acceptance times are measured in minutes and not the weeks it took a couple of years ago. What is the rationale behind accepting everything? The downside is that none and I mean NONE of the images have even had a single view. Some are going on two months being live. It's like everything that has been uploaded in the past year or so is put on ice and not getting downloads while my images from back in 2005 get constant downloads... argh!
i have not read the entire thread, just you post. I have a theory that they are intentinally accepting anything nowadays in order to pull a fast one on everyone. Ie: free images, extreamly low prices. kinda like that google thing that made me cancel my acct with them. i belive they are going to profit nicely from all the images one final time, with us getting pennies and they making one last bucket load of money before closing down the doors. why else would they accept all your images and not sell any right now? could be jst me being kinda punch happy from the past few scenarios they did. hope im wrong. i was even thinking on reopening my acct and uploading everything to them. thinking why not make some extra $ while i can. but then theyd have my pics and i could be screwed if the do another google deal.
18
« on: January 13, 2014, 19:17 »
fyi: i received my pmt in under 2 weeks, when i canceled my acct!!!
19
« on: April 25, 2013, 16:35 »
whatever it was they are up now. at least fpr me i get the normal page.
20
« on: April 24, 2013, 18:16 »
still the same. No one knows what is going on?
21
« on: March 11, 2013, 21:44 »
Just a what-if question.
How many of us would be tempted and what kind of terms would they have to offer?
They may be missing a golden opportunity right now.
If the earnings ratings are any indication, they could possibly put a few more nails
in the competition's coffins.
OMG~~What will it take for ppl to learn there lesson?! Did you not hear abt the istock drama?
22
« on: March 09, 2013, 10:47 »
this does not interest me but i wanted to say your fb and web site show great work!
but if i were to need your service i would want to see before and after pics.
thats what i was looking for but could not find it on either your website or your face book. did i miss it?
i think that would tremendously help with sales and buyer confidence.
hope this helps
23
« on: February 28, 2013, 18:26 »
YES, i like the artsy stuff. Just why dont they come out and say thats what they are looking for!?
24
« on: February 28, 2013, 18:21 »
if thats the stuff they want why dont they just troll facebook, flicker and maybe 50px for content, like getty does?
i got the invite a while ago but have not sent the 10 cause...i just did not know what they wanted. so i was going to wait (like u guys say) till they open shop so i can look at wht they want.
but all this cloke and dager stuff makes them look kinda snooty, as if they are looking down on us mer microstockers.
makes me (atleast) have a distatest for the way they are going abt it?
not the best way to start a company right off the bat.
25
« on: February 27, 2013, 22:11 »
dont want to know!!! no, no, no! il just put my head in the sand and think~~~if i made 10k thats 10k more the if i did not participate as a contributor. Knowing will be like when i found my first image on the cover of a book~~~ happiness ~ joy ~ pride... then i found out i was paid 38cents for it~~~ sad ~ angry ~ embarased  its just better not to know!
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
