|
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 - Yuri_Arcurs
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 ... 11
26
« on: July 25, 2013, 17:13 »
Yuri,
It is a very confident blog, maybe too confident (being diplomatic). I have no axe to grind with you and I am not jealous of your success as stock is a hobby for me. You earned your success.
I don't see mobiles being the future as you do. Quality is not good enough. There is money to be made if you are in the right place at the right time like citizen journalism.
My experience is when a leader in a field leaves that someone fills the gaps. Everyone is replaceable. The world moves on and adapts.
If you can take loyal customers with you and earn more money when the stock industry appears to be racing to the bottom, then good luck to you.
I have some prototypes of Nokia phones that we are testing in the excess of 40+ mpixel. Even if downsized to 46mb uncompressed tif (8bit, or 16mpixel) they produce better quality than any DSLR. Hardly any fringing. Trust me. Now if you combine that info with the huge amount of apps available to further enhance your images, we are looking at a real game changer.
27
« on: July 25, 2013, 17:06 »
What a narcissist! Sneers at us all over how he won't deal with us, only with "professionals", then can't resist cobbling together some stats that might support the contention that he is god's gift to the universe and can't resist coming to amateursnapperstockgroup.com to brag about his importance.
Sorry, Yuri, didn't you get the message when iStock sacked Sean? Nobody is of any real importance to the stock industry, not Sean and not you. But don't let that get in the way of your self-esteem.
Hi. Send me an email on [email protected] and let's discus a bit further. I feel somewhat sad that I can make you explode like this and would like to know why. Are you ok with discussing over email?
I've observed you over the years. My opinion of you went down the drain in an SS thread a long time ago when someone pointed out that one of your people line-ups was ridiculous with the fake reflections not matching the line, so the whole effect was absurd. Instead of admitting you had screwed up and pulling the failed picture, you said it was all the fault of a trainee photoshop worker (who I think you named) and that while the picture was rubbish, that might be the sort of thing customers wanted.
In a couple of replies you showed 1) a complete failure to accept that anything you published could be wrong, even though it clearly was; 2) a desire to blame your staff instead of accepting responsibility when things go wrong, however minor the issue might be, and 3) complete contempt for buyers and a willingness to leave them looking like idiots by buying your mistakes.
I've wasted very little time on your pronouncements since then, though I understand you have provided a lot of useful information to people as a part of your self-promotion drive.
No need to do it in private communication, dude. Your latest "microstock fails because I leave" is just part of the observed pattern.
Unfortunately it was the screwup of a trainee photographer. I told him nicely what kind of trouble this caused me and he was very apologetic. He is still part of our team today and teaches our advanced retouching classes. He was 16 years old at the time of the "reflective surface" mistake and was competing internationally on several photoshop competitions. I simply had to be silent about it. The reflections looked crap. Totally. I agree, but I was not going to smooch it into somebodies online reputation at the age of 16. Then I rather take it on myself. Wish I did and which you are now blaming me for.
Thank you for proving my point. It appears under your name. Everything that appears that is good shows how great you are. Everything that is bad is the fault of someone else. It was FOR SALE on SS. And you blamed a photoshop trainee, not the photographer.
Are you serious? I would not want to the under your wing. Have some heart please. Are you suggesting that I be a more evil boss and less forgiving?
Actually, you would have liked it under my wing because I took responsibility for my staff's mistakes, so if there had been a problem I would have taken the rap, not you. I know that is not the fashion among top business people these days.
If you did protect his reputation, you did it by naming a girl photoshop trainee instead of the photographer.
And the mistake was actually yours, for a failure of quality control.
All you actually needed to do was say "I produce a lot of pictures and once in a while something goes wrong, sorry" and then pull the offending picture. That would have solved everything. Instead you insulted buyers and threw blame at staff whom you never acknowledge when things are going right.
The most astonishing thing is that you seem not to be able to understand what I said in the previous posts. Instead, you are trying to play the "he was only a child, how can you be so nasty to him" card.
Sorry, that's pathetic.
Ok. You got me a bit upset. I posted my phone number just a few post's ago. Please call me and I will get the "photoshop trainee" on the call and we can ask him directly what he thought of my handling of the situation. If you really want to call me, let's do exactly that. Call me!
28
« on: July 25, 2013, 17:01 »
I have a simple question for Yuri:
Do you believe that photographers should go artist exclusive with istock/Getty?
Do you have the impression the company has a successful future and growth ahead of it?
Thanks!
They know the most about the business of selling stock images. The rest are still just catching up. It never really was fair game, but we all signed up to play along.
29
« on: July 25, 2013, 16:47 »
What a narcissist! Sneers at us all over how he won't deal with us, only with "professionals", then can't resist cobbling together some stats that might support the contention that he is god's gift to the universe and can't resist coming to amateursnapperstockgroup.com to brag about his importance.
Sorry, Yuri, didn't you get the message when iStock sacked Sean? Nobody is of any real importance to the stock industry, not Sean and not you. But don't let that get in the way of your self-esteem.
Hi. Send me an email on [email protected] and let's discus a bit further. I feel somewhat sad that I can make you explode like this and would like to know why. Are you ok with discussing over email?
I've observed you over the years. My opinion of you went down the drain in an SS thread a long time ago when someone pointed out that one of your people line-ups was ridiculous with the fake reflections not matching the line, so the whole effect was absurd. Instead of admitting you had screwed up and pulling the failed picture, you said it was all the fault of a trainee photoshop worker (who I think you named) and that while the picture was rubbish, that might be the sort of thing customers wanted.
In a couple of replies you showed 1) a complete failure to accept that anything you published could be wrong, even though it clearly was; 2) a desire to blame your staff instead of accepting responsibility when things go wrong, however minor the issue might be, and 3) complete contempt for buyers and a willingness to leave them looking like idiots by buying your mistakes.
I've wasted very little time on your pronouncements since then, though I understand you have provided a lot of useful information to people as a part of your self-promotion drive.
No need to do it in private communication, dude. Your latest "microstock fails because I leave" is just part of the observed pattern.
Unfortunately it was the screwup of a trainee photographer. I told him nicely what kind of trouble this caused me and he was very apologetic. He is still part of our team today and teaches our advanced retouching classes. He was 16 years old at the time of the "reflective surface" mistake and was competing internationally on several photoshop competitions. I simply had to be silent about it. The reflections looked crap. Totally. I agree, but I was not going to smooch it into somebodies online reputation at the age of 16. Then I rather take it on myself. Wish I did and which you are now blaming me for.
Thank you for proving my point. It appears under your name. Everything that appears that is good shows how great you are. Everything that is bad is the fault of someone else. It was FOR SALE on SS. And you blamed a photoshop trainee, not the photographer.
Are you serious? I would not want to the under your wing. Have some heart please. Are you suggesting that I be a more evil boss and less forgiving?
30
« on: July 25, 2013, 16:43 »
I'm not sure what to think,
There's a guy who made it all the way to the top from scratch, produces the best "Merchandise" in our industry and everybody else is jealous and does not give credit were credit is due. This man became very successful with hard work and great strategies. What are we doing? - Checking his spelling? - very childish of us in my opinion.
I for my part would like to succeed and listen to people who have done it, not judge them.
There is no fairness in business and I don't expect it. I'm not waiting for Yuri to change my diapers.
I'm not hoping that successful people hold back, turn around and offer their hand to me, so I can have a piece of the pie too. That's not how it works.
Great going Yuri, it does suck that you car is nicer than mine, but I know why, and you deserve it. Get it while you can!
You Made my day!
31
« on: July 25, 2013, 16:25 »
Yuri, I used to respect you and what you've been able to accomplish in microstock. But the way you've handled this is really disgusting.
Microstock companies gave you the opportunity to become what you are today. Maybe you've outgrown them, but it's really disrespectful to mock these companies on your way out the door, saying things like "professionals work with professionals" and calling your departure "the first substantial setback in microstock history."
You aren't microstock. We all are, and some of us real professionals in microstock wouldn't act like children on our way out the door if we ever opted to move on.
I completely agree. So why do you think I am saying what I do? Think deeper my friend. 
Well, for a minute I thought you might be trying to get other people to take up the cause, put more pressure on the microstock companies to make changes by getting all of us involved. But I don't think you're ever coming back to microstock so what's the point? Even if you tried, I suspect a lot of companies would tell you to hit the bricks after you publicly mocked them and implied that they aren't professionals.
So what is it? Let's not play a guessing game here. If there is some deeper meaning behind what you've said, just fill us in. Otherwise I'm taking your words at face value. You made a ton of money, moved on, and now openly mock the companies you left behind, the ones that enabled you to grow your business and make millions. What exactly am I missing?
I like your thoughts. I really don't see it the way you do and I don't think you understand the business that we (our images) have created. Do you really think that the optimal price for those images is a 300USD/mth subscription? Am I the only one see this? And yes. It starts by somebody like me saying no thanks.
32
« on: July 25, 2013, 16:12 »
What a narcissist! Sneers at us all over how he won't deal with us, only with "professionals", then can't resist cobbling together some stats that might support the contention that he is god's gift to the universe and can't resist coming to amateursnapperstockgroup.com to brag about his importance.
Sorry, Yuri, didn't you get the message when iStock sacked Sean? Nobody is of any real importance to the stock industry, not Sean and not you. But don't let that get in the way of your self-esteem.
Hi. Send me an email on [email protected] and let's discus a bit further. I feel somewhat sad that I can make you explode like this and would like to know why. Are you ok with discussing over email?
I've observed you over the years. My opinion of you went down the drain in an SS thread a long time ago when someone pointed out that one of your people line-ups was ridiculous with the fake reflections not matching the line, so the whole effect was absurd. Instead of admitting you had screwed up and pulling the failed picture, you said it was all the fault of a trainee photoshop worker (who I think you named) and that while the picture was rubbish, that might be the sort of thing customers wanted.
In a couple of replies you showed 1) a complete failure to accept that anything you published could be wrong, even though it clearly was; 2) a desire to blame your staff instead of accepting responsibility when things go wrong, however minor the issue might be, and 3) complete contempt for buyers and a willingness to leave them looking like idiots by buying your mistakes.
I've wasted very little time on your pronouncements since then, though I understand you have provided a lot of useful information to people as a part of your self-promotion drive.
No need to do it in private communication, dude. Your latest "microstock fails because I leave" is just part of the observed pattern.
Unfortunately it was the screwup of a trainee photographer. I told him nicely what kind of trouble this caused me and he was very apologetic. He is still part of our team today and teaches our advanced retouching classes. He was 16 years old at the time of the "reflective surface" mistake and was competing internationally on several photoshop competitions. I simply had to be silent about it. The reflections looked crap. Totally. I agree, but I was not going to smooch it into somebodies online reputation at the age of 16. Then I rather take it on myself. Wish I did and which you are now blaming me for.
33
« on: July 25, 2013, 16:08 »
I'm here for the next hour or so call me if you really want to discuss this and I will post an update on the call. I will be here for another hour or so.
+27 71 6111 245
34
« on: July 25, 2013, 16:03 »
Yuri, I cannot believe the resistance you are up against here.
Maybe you should not have come here, and not expresssed anything. But you have, and I like that.
It is obvoius that the mobile market, which so much a market but as swamp, can be qualified and moneterized on, simply by selling exif data.
Like this picture was taken at this time at this place and shows a train accident.
That is super competitive, press photos have never been better and it works peer to peer also.
There are 10000 billion of pictures out there, in the chaos, if you can put order into chaos and earn money on it, you have a new step forewards.
Jens. It is ok. You should try to be on the panel with me in some XX country, where XX% hates microstock. This is what to expect. MSG posters are biased yes, but they are brutal and sometimes that is ok.
35
« on: July 25, 2013, 16:01 »
Maybe this is the reason istock has lowered their standards for images....they are preparing for iphone submissions?
You people always fall for nonsense like this. Soros does this: he tells everyone gold is for idiots, and when the price drops, he buys tons of it. I remember when I read someone's list of what not to shoot, because they are so overdone: anything with laptop, businesswoman, girls with apples and similar... than you look at the guys new uploads: stuff with laptop, businesswoman, girls with apples and similar.... But you can bet the guy was very grateful if you were dumb enough to fall for it and gave him more space on those sellers by shooting some niche junk instead... what a bunch of morons
hehe. He is refereing to this post: http://arcurs.com/2008/05/what-should-i-shoot-and-what-sells-well/Not quite true dough. RPI on concepts outside the "sofa, laptop, cell-phone"-sphere are much higher. The problem is that to nail them you need to think and not just duplicate. The advice in the article is true. Actually is.
36
« on: July 25, 2013, 15:56 »
This post might be a blessing- I am sure the folks at SS and others have read this post by now. Just maybe they will change their 'Game Plan' as well. Will camera phones have a place in this industry- heck, yes! But professionals with their high end camera will have a major place as well. Google Images was a game changer as well -probably one of the biggest impacts in many years but the game is still a foot...
T
Mindreader!
37
« on: July 25, 2013, 15:54 »
What a narcissist! Sneers at us all over how he won't deal with us, only with "professionals", then can't resist cobbling together some stats that might support the contention that he is god's gift to the universe and can't resist coming to amateursnapperstockgroup.com to brag about his importance.
Sorry, Yuri, didn't you get the message when iStock sacked Sean? Nobody is of any real importance to the stock industry, not Sean and not you. But don't let that get in the way of your self-esteem.
Hi. Send me an email on [email protected] and let's discus a bit further. I feel somewhat sad that I can make you explode like this and would like to know why. Are you ok with discussing over email?
38
« on: July 25, 2013, 15:50 »
Hi Yuri,
thank you very much for the enlightening article. I understand the frustration of trying to push the agencies towards more price variance and encouraging midstock or even higher prices alongside the micro pricing.
There is a huge market out there that is not being tapped.
I am confused though, that you believe Getty is the right partner for you. I certainly hope it works out the way you expect it too. I would have thought you had a better chance with growing your own site peopleimages and maybe in time expanding it to your own agency. It would have been entirely your own thing, your team, your IT, your ideas. Grow it as big as you want.
I am sure many people in the industry would have supported you, if you wanted them too.
In fact, if Getty hired you as CEO, I would really believe the company could make a turnaround.
But the way things are, it looks from outside like you made a probably lucrative deal with a company that is really not known for innovation and has, as you said yourself, been following the market instead of leading it.
I dont quite follow what is the big difference between shooting with a normal digital camera or a phone camera. Maybe it is fractionally faster to upload directly from your phone and for news reportage the advantage is that people usually carry their phone everyhwere, but fewer people have a camera with them at all times. But for shooting stock - will that really make such a difference?
Crowdsourcing with a phone is still crowd sourcing, which means it offers low entry requirements and so talent can enter the market easily. But it can do so now already and it is only the best talent that will rise to the top of a crowd sourcing platform and produce the commercially interesting content.
After all that is the real success of crowd sourced platforms - they are talent incubators.
99% of the crowd will never shoot the valuable content you are looking for. But an open platform lets you discover the gems you might not have encountered otherwise.
Motivation,intelligence and talent can thus be discovered while ignoring the old boys network.
But will the mobile phone really discover more talent than the DSLR? And could those globals "assignments" not be done on a normal stock platform?
Whatever you do - all the best of success!
See you in Berlin
Competition has it's antennas out there. Pretty much all microsites that have launched since 2005 have been a duplicate of each other. PeopleImages.com is not.
39
« on: July 25, 2013, 15:43 »
Jeg hedder nu Jens.
One thing, Yuri, your business decisions seem very sharp, they have always done.
But you are not the best at telling the story, not as good as you could be, just look here, people ask the wrong questions and doubt your motives.
I suggest you take a week off at some tropical island with a good amount of shade providing palm trees and then do ONE WEEK of serious self education.
Simply by reading Winston Churchills books. First he provides a detailled description of many things you did not know, alone that is interesting. But he really could twist a story so it supported his interests. He was a master of spin. Levels and levels of it.
Fair nok. Jeg er ikke en story-teller nej. Og jeg er helt klart for rlig i mine posts. Jeg er enig. Jeg kunne vre meget bedre til spin. Jeg har et par folketingsmedlemmer i min famile og de siger det samme.
40
« on: July 25, 2013, 15:40 »
Is Nikon and Canon going into the phone cameras with sensors as good as those now in DSLRs?
No. But Nokia and Samsung are
41
« on: July 25, 2013, 15:37 »
However. Read this post in 6mth from now. I have a gameplan, but you wont see it now.
let me guess ..if it's about startups i guess Yuri is already on talks with a few big VCs in the valley, Hardersen-Horowitz, Sequoia, etc etc .. maybe as a small stakeholder or consultant on photo-startups due to his hands-on experience and knowledge in the stock industry.
I know Sequoia very well and was on a call with them as late as yesterday. We are saying no to investments in Scoopshot.com. If you have a good product you don't really have to look for VC's. They come to you.
42
« on: July 25, 2013, 15:35 »
I don't dispute photo crowdsourcing emerging as a new player in the photo market or crowd sourcing market in general. After all several newspapers are asking their readership to send in photos in lieu of staff photogs. However, to suggest that photo crowdsourcing will replace stock photography is kind of bold and rather premature. Photos that require careful planning, skill and a professional approach is and will be in demand for the foreseeable future as we know it. I understand you've made a large investment in a company with a new business model and now must extoll the virtues of your investment in your favour but I for one will continue building my own portfolio of increasingly unique photos.
I don't agree with everything you've mentioned but cannot disagree with an emerging platform as a new tier of photos.
One question. Will your staff be carrying iphones instead of DSLR'S? 
Yes
43
« on: July 25, 2013, 15:30 »
Other than echoing other people's comments that you need to get an editor to look over your work before you post it, I can only suggest that you keep a weather eye on your new business partner. Good luck beating the odds - their past performance speaks volumes.
I think you're way off base on the mobile photography business (and I have no real axe to grind one way or the other) but time will tell. If it is a big new thing, we all own the means to join in (a mobile phone) .
Your enthusiasm reminds me a bit of some of Bruce's posts after Getty acquired iStock. Just about every promise Getty made then has been broken, multiple times.
We'll certainly all be watching your progress with interest.
Tell me why mobile photography is NOT a threat. I would rather hear that.
44
« on: July 25, 2013, 15:28 »
Hi Yuri
How do you see the future of subscription sites like Shutterstock? Will they loose more quality producers?
What direction will the micro agencies go? Will they lower commissions further for short term profits? Or do you think major agencies like Shutterstock is finally going to wake up and realize that they need to pay their top photographers more, if they want them to stick around?
Yes to all
45
« on: July 25, 2013, 15:27 »
Hi Yuri,
Thank you so much for taking 1-2 hours out of your precious schedule for us mere mortals. My question is why would you defecate all over the agencies that feed our children? You seem like a really smart guy, can you not figure out a way to make you millions without pulling down the companies that we rely on for our daily bread?
Thanks again for your time.
Turn that around. What do you think happens at the end of a downward spiral?
46
« on: July 25, 2013, 15:24 »
Yuri, from your experience and knowledge,
1. do you believe there will be any raise of .38 SS subscription royalty bar, maybe at quite high sales level, in the nearest future (let's say 12 months)?
2. do you believe prices for credit sales on major microsites will go any higher than current level in next 12 months or you believe we will see exactly the opposite?
3. now you obviously see a new horizons in raising income for YAP, comparing to horizons you've seen on micros, how big it is? the number you expect to have in 2014 and 2015 financial years now, how does it relate to the numbers for 2014 and 2015 you would expect to have if would stay on micros?
thank you!
1. No. Absolutly no. I would expect the opposite from a company that spends 30% on google addwords and is public. Where will they get the money from? What will happen if they spend 25% next year? Stocks will drop.! 2. Ask me in 6mth. There is a gameplan. 3. I have been very fortunate in business and yes we continue to grow. In 2013 we are forecasting to be awarded as the fastest growing corporation in Denmark!
47
« on: July 25, 2013, 15:19 »
Yuri,
- a lot of photographers expected You to have social responsibility - being a major player in the field You have b seen seen as a "protector" and leader of contributors. Now You have "abandoned" them. Can You please comment on that
- do you think mobile photography is the only future income source for part-time photographers which get their moderate income on microstocks nowadays
- where do You stand in recent "Google case" Getty have had ?
thank You in advance
Now this is interesting. I know I have that status and I know it will look like I'm abandoning my post-keeper position. However. Read this post in 6mth from now. I have a gameplan, but you wont see it now.
48
« on: July 25, 2013, 15:16 »
i dont understand all this negativity and envy towards Yuri.
he's also making clear that after endless talks with the micro agencies owners there's no way at the horizon to see a raise in price or fees, so this should finally settle the question once and for all.
i've the feeling for many here it will mark the "end of a dream" but they can't say they've not been warned since the beginning, it was obvious to see a clear pattern where the top sellers moved out to greener pastures or started their own agencies and where agencies became greedier and greedier leaving nothing to their suppliers.
Yes. Greener fields. Hmm. You are right.
49
« on: July 25, 2013, 15:11 »
Godt get Jakob. Jeg har brug for at lse din artikel et par gange mere, for helt at forst den.
Men jeg tror du har ret i din kurs og dit perspektiv for fremtinden mht mobiler og hvor billederne kommer fra. Et nyt skridt op mht crowdsourcing. Det er nok rigtigt set.
Det er sjovt nok at se at janteloven sandelig ogs glder ude i verden.
Hej Jesper. Ja. Sdan er det. Jeg fr s mange tsk hver gang. Sdan er det. Man bliver hrdhudet. Men ja. vr smart nu. Dem som ikke ser sammenligningen mellem mobile stock og micro tilbage i 2005, er nok desvre en "lost case". Tak for fine ord. God vind i DK!
50
« on: July 25, 2013, 15:09 »
Yuri, you most likely won't answer this the way we want you to, but I will ask anyway:
After the years (!) of iStock giving us proof of not being able to listen to (well established, professional) contributors AND constantly (to this day) having severe problems with their day to day business operations (site up-time, staff replacements, seemingly untested implementation of new features, inability to pay contributors, the list is endless, literally), what in heaven's name did Getty promise you to simply overlook all these previously mentioned facts?
Thanks for reading and even more thanks for a potential answer to that.
Now here is something that is interesting. I could really get in trouble here. I will kindly remind you that a certain CEO left the company about 2 years ago and most of the matters you are addressing dates back to then....
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 ... 11
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
