Author Topic: Stocksy in action... (Read 42264 times)

mattdixon · « **on:** May 23, 2013, 05:51 »

This site has just been found using Stocksy pics, gives a flavour of what a live site looks like. I think one of Tyler's pics is in there on the about page.

http://squarecraft.co/

pro@stockphotos · « **Reply #1 on:** May 23, 2013, 07:10 »

The company could have just gone to the local park with an employee and laptop at sunset with an iphone to capture this image.

Mellimage · « **Reply #2 on:** May 23, 2013, 07:15 »

Quote from: pro@stockphotos on May 23, 2013, 07:10

The company could have just gone to the local park with an employee and laptop at sunset with an iphone to capture this image.

"How many photographers does it take to change a light bulb?
50.
One to change the bulb, and forty-nine to say, "I could have done that!""

- Anonymous

ShadySue · « **Reply #3 on:** May 23, 2013, 07:24 »

Quote from: Mellimage on May 23, 2013, 07:15

Quote from: pro@stockphotos on May 23, 2013, 07:10
The company could have just gone to the local park with an employee and laptop at sunset with an iphone to capture this image.

"How many photographers does it take to change a light bulb?
50.
One to change the bulb, and forty-nine to say, "I could have done that!""

- Anonymous

Hadn't heard that one before.

cathyslife · « **Reply #4 on:** May 23, 2013, 07:49 »

I applaud stocksy for accepting an image (front page pic) that would have gotten rejected at all the micro sites including istock...blown out highlights, poor lighting...

ShadySue · « **Reply #5 on:** May 23, 2013, 08:18 »

Quote from: cclapper on May 23, 2013, 07:49

I applaud stocksy for accepting an image (front page pic) that would have gotten rejected at all the micro sites including istock...blown out highlights, poor lighting...

To be fair, there are some ingested Agency pics that are 'worse' ...

heywoody · « **Reply #6 on:** May 24, 2013, 12:38 »

Quote from: Mellimage on May 23, 2013, 07:15

Quote from: pro@stockphotos on May 23, 2013, 07:10
The company could have just gone to the local park with an employee and laptop at sunset with an iphone to capture this image.

"How many photographers does it take to change a light bulb?
50.
One to change the bulb, and forty-nine to say, "I could have done that!""

- Anonymous

Probably 10,000 or so have actually changed that particular light bulb

SNP · « **Reply #7 on:** May 24, 2013, 20:28 »

there's really little sense to comparing the way an image would be treated in micro; Stocksy isn't trying to be micro.

there are so many great things about that front page photo. her expression is so genuine, it's warm and feel good, the red glasses are in the perfect spot IMO. and that the shot is at eye level as though you're seated right in front of her makes it really easy to connect with. completely different type of imagery, that's kinda totally the point.

it's just bad manners to so dismissively cut down another photographer's work with such trite comments.

heywoody · « **Reply #8 on:** May 25, 2013, 04:46 »

Quote from: SNP on May 24, 2013, 20:28

there's really little sense to comparing the way an image would be treated in micro; Stocksy isn't trying to be micro.

In fairness, Stocksy seems to be taking an approach that requires judgment on the holistic merits of an image rather than the very narrow “is it technically good and forget about the rest” approach that IS uses and monkeys could be trained to do – other than that, hard to see how the offering differs from micro.

Quote from: SNP on May 24, 2013, 20:28

there are so many great things about that front page photo. her expression is so genuine, it's warm and feel good, the red glasses are in the perfect spot IMO. and that the shot is at eye level as though you're seated right in front of her makes it really easy to connect with. completely different type of imagery, that's kinda totally the point.

All true but the concept is just about as hackneyed as you can get – probably better than many “girl with laptop” shots but probably not as good as others – nothing “completely different” here.

Quote from: SNP on May 24, 2013, 20:28

it's just bad manners to so dismissively cut down another photographer's work with such trite comments.

I see nobody cutting down the work I do see folks reacting to the “look at this, isn’t it wonderful” vibe when, at the end of the day, it’s a nice, good stock image but nothing wonderful.

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #9 on:** May 25, 2013, 05:15 »

There's room in stock for all kinds of images and there seems to be a trend at the moment towards the more "instagram" sort of picture.

But while this shot is fine - after all, it fitted the client's requirements so there was a need for it - I really wonder (a) what sort of resale potential it has and (b) now a collection with pictures like this in it thinks it is going to position itself as some sort of must-go-to market leader. Or is it just going to be competing with Cutcaster for its ranking on this board?

pro@stockphotos · « **Reply #10 on:** May 25, 2013, 08:19 »

Quote from: SNP on May 24, 2013, 20:28

there's really little sense to comparing the way an image would be treated in micro; Stocksy isn't trying to be micro.

there are so many great things about that front page photo. her expression is so genuine, it's warm and feel good, the red glasses are in the perfect spot IMO. and that the shot is at eye level as though you're seated right in front of her makes it really easy to connect with. completely different type of imagery, that's kinda totally the point.

it's just bad manners to so dismissively cut down another photographer's work with such trite comments.

You are right, it was bad manners to malign anohters effort. What did you say about Yuri again?

Smithore · « **Reply #11 on:** May 25, 2013, 08:44 »

Look at this Instagram (Nickelback Parody) (The video's owner prevents external embedding)

Poncke v2 · « **Reply #12 on:** May 25, 2013, 08:55 »

mlwinphoto · « **Reply #13 on:** May 25, 2013, 09:51 »

So, while many of you are criticizing the image and the agency that licensed it this particular buyer found that, among the millions of images available to him, this is the one that best suited his needs/wants and he paid to license it as a result. I thought that's why we, as contributors, were 'doing stock' in the first place.

Kudos to the photog and the agency.

gostwyck · « **Reply #14 on:** May 25, 2013, 11:34 »

Quote from: SNP on May 24, 2013, 20:28

there's really little sense to comparing the way an image would be treated in micro; Stocksy isn't trying to be micro.

there are so many great things about that front page photo. her expression is so genuine, it's warm and feel good, the red glasses are in the perfect spot IMO. and that the shot is at eye level as though you're seated right in front of her makes it really easy to connect with. completely different type of imagery, that's kinda totally the point.

it's just bad manners to so dismissively cut down another photographer's work with such trite comments.

I'd agree. I knew it was an excellent image as soon as I saw it ... but I couldn't have defined exactly why as you have done so explicitly.

heywoody · « **Reply #15 on:** May 25, 2013, 11:42 »

Quote from: mlwinphoto on May 25, 2013, 09:51

So, while many of you are criticizing the image and the agency that licensed it this particular buyer found that, among the millions of images available to him, this is the one that best suited his needs/wants and he paid to license it as a result. I thought that's why we, as contributors, were 'doing stock' in the first place.

Kudos to the photog and the agency.

The only thing being criticised is the notion that we are seeing something exceptional - someone used a stock image on a website - wow that's just extraordinary

SNP · « **Reply #16 on:** May 25, 2013, 11:54 »

Quote from: pro@stockphotos on May 25, 2013, 08:19

Quote from: SNP on May 24, 2013, 20:28
there's really little sense to comparing the way an image would be treated in micro; Stocksy isn't trying to be micro.

there are so many great things about that front page photo. her expression is so genuine, it's warm and feel good, the red glasses are in the perfect spot IMO. and that the shot is at eye level as though you're seated right in front of her makes it really easy to connect with. completely different type of imagery, that's kinda totally the point.

it's just bad manners to so dismissively cut down another photographer's work with such trite comments.

You are right, it was bad manners to malign anohters effort. What did you say about Yuri again?

I shouldn't bite, but FWIW I didn't say anything about his work. simply about his choice to use his considerable influence in a less than desirable manner..in my opinion. the Seans and Yuris have pull, it's that simple. what they do influences others in the industry. maybe that isn't a responsibility they choose to take on, but Sean has always given back and shared his experience and knowledge with everyone at all levels in the industry, whereas Yuri ( and I don't know him) seems to be out for Yuri alone. that's fine if that's his choice, I just don't agree with it. I think it's possible to do what you think is right within values we share as an industry group, and still make strong decisions for your own income.

mlwinphoto · « **Reply #17 on:** May 25, 2013, 12:12 »

Quote from: heywoody on May 25, 2013, 11:42

Quote from: mlwinphoto on May 25, 2013, 09:51
So, while many of you are criticizing the image and the agency that licensed it this particular buyer found that, among the millions of images available to him, this is the one that best suited his needs/wants and he paid to license it as a result. I thought that's why we, as contributors, were 'doing stock' in the first place.

Kudos to the photog and the agency.

The only thing being criticised is the notion that we are seeing something exceptional - someone used a stock image on a website - wow that's just extraordinary

Perhaps the buyer thought it was exceptional. What you or I think doesn't matter.

ShadySue · « **Reply #18 on:** May 25, 2013, 12:23 »

Quote from: heywoody on May 25, 2013, 04:46

In fairness, Stocksy seems to be taking an approach that requires judgment on the holistic merits of an image rather than the very narrow “is it technically good and forget about the rest” approach that IS uses and monkeys could be trained to do – other than that, hard to see how the offering differs from micro.

Do you honestly think that most of the results on the search for 'bird' have 'holistic merit'?

cuppacoffee · « **Reply #19 on:** May 25, 2013, 12:48 »

There are some images there that I think are really crisp and clean like the "surfer riding a barreling wave" in the outdoor adventure category. Others will fit the new "look" that seems to be emerging for the younger crowd, or those who want to appeal to a younger (perception "hip"?) customer base. I like those too and enjoy seeing more "artsy" photos whether they are classified as stock or as art. Does stocksy let the buyer know if the image(s) that they are purchasing have been sold before and if so, how many times? The problem with some unique images is that you don't want to pick those that have been used before, those that might be recognizable because of their style. As a buyer, I wouldn't want to have the same cool image as someone else helping to sell my product or services. That seems to defeat the purpose of their prominent statement, "Royalty-Free photos, you can't find anywhere else."

heywoody · « **Reply #20 on:** May 25, 2013, 18:46 »

Quote from: ShadySue on May 25, 2013, 12:23

Quote from: heywoody on May 25, 2013, 04:46
In fairness, Stocksy seems to be taking an approach that requires judgment on the holistic merits of an image rather than the very narrow “is it technically good and forget about the rest” approach that IS uses and monkeys could be trained to do – other than that, hard to see how the offering differs from micro.
Do you honestly think that most of the results on the search for 'bird' have 'holistic merit'?

Just tried to see but search doesn't work on IE8 (work laptop) - will definitely check it out on another one tomorrow. This in itself is not great as the folks I'm contracting for at the moment are a major financial services player who presumably would be a big consumer of stock images

Poncke v2 · « **Reply #21 on:** May 25, 2013, 19:04 »

Quote from: SNP on May 25, 2013, 11:54

Quote from: pro@stockphotos on May 25, 2013, 08:19
Quote from: SNP on May 24, 2013, 20:28
there's really little sense to comparing the way an image would be treated in micro; Stocksy isn't trying to be micro.

there are so many great things about that front page photo. her expression is so genuine, it's warm and feel good, the red glasses are in the perfect spot IMO. and that the shot is at eye level as though you're seated right in front of her makes it really easy to connect with. completely different type of imagery, that's kinda totally the point.

it's just bad manners to so dismissively cut down another photographer's work with such trite comments.

You are right, it was bad manners to malign anohters effort. What did you say about Yuri again?

I shouldn't bite, but FWIW I didn't say anything about his work. simply about his choice to use his considerable influence in a less than desirable manner..in my opinion. the Seans and Yuris have pull, it's that simple. what they do influences others in the industry. maybe that isn't a responsibility they choose to take on, but Sean has always given back and shared his experience and knowledge with everyone at all levels in the industry, whereas Yuri ( and I don't know him) seems to be out for Yuri alone. that's fine if that's his choice, I just don't agree with it. I think it's possible to do what you think is right within values we share as an industry group, and still make strong decisions for your own income.

So you dont know him, but judge him at the same time. Yuri has done his fair share of sharing as well. He helped loads of people as far as I know. So Yuri looks after Yuri, and thats a reason to criticize him? What a load of tosh. Do some reading on Yuri and you'll be surprised.

mattdixon · « **Reply #22 on:** May 25, 2013, 19:19 »

Quote from: ShadySue on May 25, 2013, 12:23

Quote from: heywoody on May 25, 2013, 04:46
In fairness, Stocksy seems to be taking an approach that requires judgment on the holistic merits of an image rather than the very narrow “is it technically good and forget about the rest” approach that IS uses and monkeys could be trained to do – other than that, hard to see how the offering differs from micro.
Do you honestly think that most of the results on the search for 'bird' have 'holistic merit'?

The photos on this site have nothing to do with birds? But if we're going down that road one of yours can cost $240 on iStock, these photos cost the designer $25 for a medium, half the price of the comparable size as E+ on istock and 25% of the cost of a Vetta.

mattdixon · « **Reply #23 on:** May 25, 2013, 19:30 »

Quote from: Poncke v2 on May 25, 2013, 19:04

So you dont know him, but judge him at the same time. Yuri has done his fair share of sharing as well. He helped loads of people as far as I know. So Yuri looks after Yuri, and thats a reason to criticize him? What a load of tosh. Do some reading on Yuri and you'll be surprised.

Indeed he is a man of the people, it was admirable the way he approached Getty over the Google deal. He can also be very humble, like the time he posted his $18000 dollar day, and not afraid to ask for our help in times of trouble with Rayban, hallowed be his name.

Poncke v2 · « **Reply #24 on:** May 25, 2013, 20:00 »

Quote from: mattdixon on May 25, 2013, 19:30

Quote from: Poncke v2 on May 25, 2013, 19:04
So you dont know him, but judge him at the same time. Yuri has done his fair share of sharing as well. He helped loads of people as far as I know. So Yuri looks after Yuri, and thats a reason to criticize him? What a load of tosh. Do some reading on Yuri and you'll be surprised.
Indeed he is a man of the people, it was admirable the way he approached Getty over the Google deal. He can also be very humble, like the time he posted his $18000 dollar day, and not afraid to ask for our help in times of trouble with Rayban, hallowed be his name.

Bitter much?

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Stocksy in action... (Read 42264 times)

mattdixon

pro@stockphotos

Mellimage

ShadySue

cathyslife

ShadySue

heywoody

SNP

heywoody

BaldricksTrousers

pro@stockphotos

Smithore

Poncke v2

mlwinphoto

gostwyck

heywoody

SNP

mlwinphoto

ShadySue

cuppacoffee

heywoody

Poncke v2

mattdixon

mattdixon

Poncke v2

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors