When we were used to shot in film we had not all these problems� it was daylight or tungsten. Stop.
And we all lived happy like this�

I used to do a lot of RA-4 color printing in the early 90s. You could pretty much compensate for a caste just the same as today.

I've always meant to try using the white card technique, hold up a piece of pure white card and set the white balance to this, but always been too lazy!

It's on my list of things to do....

Conventional wisdom is that it is better to use an 18% neutral grey rather than white.

But custom profiling is potentially much more interesting since it is about comparison and adjustments based on a range of controlled target colors rather than only grey.

They seem to be asking people to build descriptions using words which would be the keywords if they were not stuck with the legacy CV. In this context the CV seems increasingly convoluted -  being based on thinking from a pre Google era. I strongly suspect (guess) that the CV, whilst not being a flexible or SEO friendly solution, also creates considerable unnecessary loads.

It might be better to look at the possibility of introducing free text keywording for new content and see if they cannot see a way to run that alongside the legacy CV.

I don't quite see how it will really be possible to spin off any of the Getty "assets" to try and save Getty ...  the truth is iStock contributors would lose any sales they are making from Getty if the two site are decoupled ... etc

Nobody serious is suggesting that iStock could or would be "de - coupled" from Getty or sold off on its own. iStock and Getty images compliment each other - it's like running two different shops.

However Jim Pickerell (quoted as a source in the Bloomberg article) has elsewhere suggested that Getty's prestigious editorial "asset" could be sold off.

The market has rated their bonds as junk, it can't be more obvious what is coming next.

Junk : sounds like a terribly pejorative term - but junk bonds can be a great investment -> { what people always say about them is that �the bad news is already priced in� }

Meanwhile I am still very curious about the origins of this story and about the motivations behind the leak. There is always a reason for a leak. That�s the most interesting part of this story IMO. Who leaked it and why ?

Jim Pickerell hinted at this story here on this forum a few days ago (the day before the first Bloomberg piece in which he is also quoted. All of the other articles on the web follow from that.

I wonder whether the writer had spoken to the two anonymous sources or whether the information came via Jim Pickerell. Or maybe he got his lead via the Bloomberg reporter.

Paul Melcher is a reliable voice and the piece which Jeff linked to has a lot of merit IMO. I have the impression however that some people here are letting their feelings color their analysis.

It's quite amusing to go back less than 18 months and see Bunhill and Tickstock telling me that the evidence I cited of falling iStock sales was completely meaningless and I was reaching absurd conclusions:
http://www.microstockgroup.com/istockphoto-com/the-%27new%27-is/msg351483/#msg351483

Where have I said that you were reaching "absurd conclusions" ? If I have said that then I apologise unconditionally - not for being wrong, but for being rude. I am happy to be wrong in a guessing game but I am not here to be rude or impolite to people. The point I think I was making was that the data is incomplete. I still believe that the data was and is incomplete - and without context.

I am very curious about the motivations of the anonymous sources behind all of this reporting. I am struggling to understand why anyone on the inside of those meetings would be motivated to blab. The motivation for the leaking must surely be part of the story. Who benefits ?

As an exclusive, I wish I could share your optimism and enthusiasm.

From a contributor perspective I am not expressing either optimism or enthusiasm. My interest and enthusiasm relates to story itself.

IMHO, they need stability etc

I do not believe that there can be any stability in this market until after this inevitable evolution from primarily selling pictures to primarily selling services.

We need to keep remembering that they have at various stages talked about being prepared to cannibalize their own business. And they have previously been good at knowing where the market is going and focusing on that.

Forget the stuff about selling iStock as an IPO.

The whole of Getty. Not iStock.

I sincerly doubt they could float getty with their history. Wallstreet needs a success story, this isn�t one. And their competitors are showing the world every day how to create growth.

No, another investor is more likely. If that doesn�t work, it will be split and sold in pieces, probably to the competition.

I firmly believe that everything indicates that they are positioning for an IPO exit. Hence the emphasis on subscription even probably at the expense of short term revenue.

Get everything working, cut costs and then slash subscription prices for growth is my bet. And don't forget that they have very significant revenue.

The problem with Getty is a shortage of ready cash (liquidity) so the answer is hang on to the cash for as long as possible.

Let's go back to the water through pipe flow analogy. The same amount is still coming out of the end. So it makes no difference.

But go ahead and vote me down again.

(I'm no fan of the way they have done things - but conspiracy theories don't get us anywhere)

and it's not just Getty but also upper-class agencies like Magnum or VII

Remember that Magnum is also a valuable legacy collection - owned by the members or their heirs. It runs more like a family business. And it is a completely different business anyhow - being primarily about photographs. The big stock companies, by contrast, are essentially finance vehicles. Their primary business is finance.

even some top war photographers have barely a pot to pis-s in and are now doing workshops in order to survive.

Established photographers have always often also been involved in running classes and workshops + lecture circuit. Certainly since the early 70s anyhow.

now repaying the loans is problematic

IPO will pay off the debt. No ?

Well, we told them ... etc

It may not suit many of us but the strategy likely makes sense in the context of Getty likely moving towards an IPO.