Subscribe and save with our all-new image subscriptions.

Learn more
Close

Google Drive Update + Jan 23

Displaying 261 to 280 of 748 matches.
jjneff
Member is a Bronze contributor and has 250 - 2,499 Photo downloadsMember is a Gold contributor and has 5,000 - 12,499 Video downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 125 Audio downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto VideographerExclusive iStockphoto Audio ArtistMember has had a File Of The Week
Posted Sun Jan 20, 2013 7:42AM
"Hello, Welcome to Walmart" just practicing for when I get 2cents per click. This business model only works on huge scales not for the single artist!!! Hence my work will not be a part of that because I can't afford it! Lets talk about smart coroporate change like "Netflix, Instagram, The New Coke, GettyImages.....you get the idea

(Edited on 2013-01-20 07:44:14 by jjneff)
HeliRy
Member is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Sun Jan 20, 2013 8:33AM
Posted By rimglow:

Posted By Imgorthand:

So far we always do



You must not be aware of the plans for Feb. 2.

(Edited on 2013-01-20 07:08:23 by rimglow)


Be interesting to see if it turns out to be a lot of sabre rattling or not. I'm seriously thinking of pulling the plug and moving to SS even though none of my images were used in this Google Bamboozle. Just fed of with all the bull, empty promises and utter failures that now seem to be coming on a monthly basis.

I don't mind being forced to eat a s**t sandwich from time to time.... just put a little mayo on it.
amesy
Member is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Sun Jan 20, 2013 9:17AM
Just as a kind of side bar, I was poking around with PicScout and discovered something that I thought was interesting: ALL of the stock images that I checked on Google Drive have been 'fingerprinted'. I wondered then if all images on Getty Images were already fingerprinted, so I checked my portfolio on GI and found that only two of my files have been fingerprinted so far. This suggests the 'Drive' files were expressly fingerprinted before being released to Google. It follows therefore that if any of those files eventually find their way to Spark Rebel or any other sites that have integrated the PicScout imageIRC (say, sometime in the future: Pinterest, Facebook et al), then Getty will know about it, having been notified by the imageIRC. Getty bought PicScout and is testing 'innovative licensing arrangements' which will no doubt include usage tracking through PicScout/imageIRC. In order to get the ball rolling, and test the whole technical and administrative infrastructure, there needs to be a body of engaging, fingerprinted photos out there in the wild that could find their way onto social media sites - photos much like the ones chosen for the Drive program.
Imgorthand
Member is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Sun Jan 20, 2013 9:31AM
Posted By rimglow:

Posted By Imgorthand:

So far we always do



You must not be aware of the plans for Feb. 2.

(Edited on 2013-01-20 07:08:23 by rimglow)

I'm aware and I'm in. 
sjlocke
Member is a Black Diamond contributor and has more than 200,000 Photo downloadsMember is a Gold contributor and has 5,000 - 12,499 Video downloadsMember is a Bronze contributor and has 125 - 1,249 Audio downloadsMember is a Bronze contributor and has 250 - 2,499 Flash downloadsMember is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Illustration downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto IllustratorExclusive iStockphoto Flash ArtistExclusive iStockphoto VideographerMember has had a File Of The Week
Posted Sun Jan 20, 2013 10:21AM

Posted By amesy:
Just as a kind of side bar, I was poking around with PicScout and discovered something that I thought was interesting: ALL of the stock images that I checked on Google Drive have been 'fingerprinted'. I wondered then if all images on Getty Images were already fingerprinted, so I checked my portfolio on GI and found that only two of my files have been fingerprinted so far. This suggests the 'Drive' files were expressly fingerprinted before being released to Google. It follows therefore that if any of those files eventually find their way to Spark Rebel or any other sites that have integrated the PicScout imageIRC (say, sometime in the future: Pinterest, Facebook et al), then Getty will know about it, having been notified by the imageIRC. Getty bought PicScout and is testing 'innovative licensing arrangements' which will no doubt include usage tracking through PicScout/imageIRC. In order to get the ball rolling, and test the whole technical and administrative infrastructure, there needs to be a body of engaging, fingerprinted photos out there in the wild that could find their way onto social media sites - photos much like the ones chosen for the Drive program.


'Fingerprinting' is not proactive ( inserting hidden code in the pixels ) but reactive ( having a searchable database of images ). Images stolen from Google are no different from properly licensed images, so you're not going to be able to track them or anything.

"ImageIRC combines an index of fingerprint information that uniquely identifies each image, a registry of metadata about each image, and an API connection that provides access to the ImageIRC for various products and services."

(Edited on 2013-01-20 10:23:14 by sjlocke)
AudioGate
Member is a contributor and has less than 250 Photo downloadsMember is a Gold contributor and has 5,000 - 12,499 Audio downloadsExclusive iStockphoto Audio Artist
Posted Sun Jan 20, 2013 10:48AM
I know it's not much as I'm an audio contributor(with a one time hand at trying photography) but in support of you guys I will be deactivating my only 3 photos on the 2nd of February. I will also deactivate several of my audio files, particularly the ones I use in my theatre company, as this type of deal would seriously compromise the work I do and I'm absolutely certain that if this attempt to negotiate, with iStock, fails then other mediums will be included over time.

Good luck to you all.
jjneff
Member is a Bronze contributor and has 250 - 2,499 Photo downloadsMember is a Gold contributor and has 5,000 - 12,499 Video downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 125 Audio downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto VideographerExclusive iStockphoto Audio ArtistMember has had a File Of The Week
Posted Sun Jan 20, 2013 10:57AM
Keep in mind this Picscout/GoogleDrive deal was done behind your back and no one knows the real truth behind the deal. You as an artist will make very little if any from the technology Getty is using. They are treating your work as they owned the IP not you!
amesy
Member is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Sun Jan 20, 2013 10:59AM
Sean, I'm not sure if I'm catching your drift but from my tests it is apparent that the fingerprint is indeed something embedded in the file (as opposed to a 'google image search' kind of mechanism that recognises images by their visual attributes.)
cobalt
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Flash downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Illustration downloads
Posted Sun Jan 20, 2013 11:36AM
amesy, if I understand you correctly, you think it is possible these fingerprinted files have been released "on purpose" into the wild, in the hope they will get spread around the internet to test the new technology?

 That would be even worse sad.

They could have easily used getty wholly owned content for something like that  or spoken with select contributors who are also admins and under an nda who could have offered up files for testing.


I really hope this is not true. This would really make me believe they are capable of pushing over many more of our files, in the vain hope they can make money on it later through yet untested technology. And it would also mean that we become fully dependent on getty, because once these files are out and circling, it will be hard to get them accepted somewhere else, especially it becomes impossible to offer them as exclusive files, if they have been released to 30% of the internet population under free re-distribution licenses.


I need to go and get a tea. All of this is just mind blowing.

(Edited on 2013-01-20 11:37:30 by cobalt)
sjlocke
Member is a Black Diamond contributor and has more than 200,000 Photo downloadsMember is a Gold contributor and has 5,000 - 12,499 Video downloadsMember is a Bronze contributor and has 125 - 1,249 Audio downloadsMember is a Bronze contributor and has 250 - 2,499 Flash downloadsMember is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Illustration downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto IllustratorExclusive iStockphoto Flash ArtistExclusive iStockphoto VideographerMember has had a File Of The Week
Posted Sun Jan 20, 2013 11:52AM

Posted By amesy:
Sean, I'm not sure if I'm catching your drift but from my tests it is apparent that the fingerprint is indeed something embedded in the file (as opposed to a 'google image search' kind of mechanism that recognises images by their visual attributes.)


Sorry, I've seen nothing that says that. The above quote from their site says it is just a database of image information. So, I don't think this is any test of that.

By the way, there now appear to be more than 8000 images there. That's an addition of 1000+ in the last week.

Eta: you may be thinking of DigiMarc.

(Edited on 2013-01-20 11:57:31 by sjlocke)
matthewleesdixon
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Flash downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Illustration downloads
Posted Sun Jan 20, 2013 12:07PM
Posted By sjlocke:


Posted By amesy:
Just as a kind of side bar, I was poking around with PicScout and discovered something that I thought was interesting: ALL of the stock images that I checked on Google Drive have been 'fingerprinted'. I wondered then if all images on Getty Images were already fingerprinted, so I checked my portfolio on GI and found that only two of my files have been fingerprinted so far. This suggests the 'Drive' files were expressly fingerprinted before being released to Google. It follows therefore that if any of those files eventually find their way to Spark Rebel or any other sites that have integrated the PicScout imageIRC (say, sometime in the future: Pinterest, Facebook et al), then Getty will know about it, having been notified by the imageIRC. Getty bought PicScout and is testing 'innovative licensing arrangements' which will no doubt include usage tracking through PicScout/imageIRC. In order to get the ball rolling, and test the whole technical and administrative infrastructure, there needs to be a body of engaging, fingerprinted photos out there in the wild that could find their way onto social media sites - photos much like the ones chosen for the Drive program.



'Fingerprinting' is not proactive ( inserting hidden code in the pixels ) but reactive ( having a searchable database of images ). Images stolen from Google are no different from properly licensed images, so you're not going to be able to track them or anything.

"ImageIRC combines an index of fingerprint information that uniquely identifies each image, a registry of metadata about each image, and an API connection that provides access to the ImageIRC for various products and services."

(Edited on 2013-01-20 10:23:14 by sjlocke)

It looks very much like they are trying a pay per click advertising service with Google, this was mentioned by the Getty spokesman at the Luminance talk by Photoshelter. It has been nagging me all weekend that this new licence with google is a way of bypassing the advertsing click royalties payments to the image holders with a backhander to Getty at a later time. I'm very suspicious that Vetta and Agency images have been sold for $60 for perpetual rights, it doesn't make financial sense unless you can earn pay per click income afterwards at which point it becomes potentially lucrative. Question is are they trying to cut out the contributors royalties in a very sketchy licence deal?
amesy
Member is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Sun Jan 20, 2013 12:10PM
Sean, try this: Install ImageExchange in your browser and load a page containing some of your images (say, Getty images site) - it will find them in its database and show you where you can buy them. Now copy one of your files from your hard drive to your website and load it in your browser - ImageExchange will not find it. At least, this was my experience. Furthermore, if you take a fingerprinted file (say one from Drive) and drastically modify it in PS, uploaded it to your site and load in your browser, ImageExchange will still find it - even if you completely blanked out the image in PS.
amesy
Member is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Sun Jan 20, 2013 12:15PM
Posted By cobalt:
amesy, if I understand you correctly, you think it is possible these fingerprinted files have been released "on purpose" into the wild, in the hope they will get spread around the internet to test the new technology?

 That would be even worse sad.

They could have easily used getty wholly owned content for something like that  or spoken with select contributors who are also admins and under an nda who could have offered up files for testing.


I really hope this is not true. This would really make me believe they are capable of pushing over many more of our files, in the vain hope they can make money on it later through yet untested technology. And it would also mean that we become fully dependent on getty, because once these files are out and circling, it will be hard to get them accepted somewhere else, especially it becomes impossible to offer them as exclusive files, if they have been released to 30% of the internet population under free re-distribution licenses.


I need to go and get a tea. All of this is just mind blowing.

(Edited on 2013-01-20 11:37:30 by cobalt)

Of course I couldn't say that, Jasmin, but it would be a useful by-product in terms of testing the system. All we can do so far is speculate, isn't it?
aristotoo
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsMember is a Bronze contributor and has 250 - 2,499 Illustration downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto Illustrator
Posted Sun Jan 20, 2013 12:17PM

Posted By SDbT:
I think the strategy and marketing model that Peters describes works in providing small incremental income to artists whose main source of revenue comes from other avenues. I don't believe that this model will support the income for a full time photographer / artist as a sole means of revenue. This is an early warning to artists that they better find new sources of income and not to bet the farm on Microstock.


Unfortunately, I get the same impression. Unless the remuneration is adequate, and the business is massive. But I also don't think stock imagery should be used to flood the Internet this way. Maybe it applies more to editorial, as in the example he gives.

The presentation is worth watching: http://www.photoshelter.com/luminance/videos/peters

(Edited on 2013-01-20 12:21:46 by aristotoo)
cobalt
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Flash downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Illustration downloads
Posted Sun Jan 20, 2013 12:17PM

yes, real information would stop all speculation. but if they continue to send files over, maybe that is a form of communication as well.


I just don´t understand the whole thing. It is just strange.
cobalt
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Flash downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Illustration downloads
Posted Sun Jan 20, 2013 12:19PM

actually for editorial I see very valid use for this technology. the files have a shelf life of a few days, sometimes just hours, they need to flood the internet as fast as possible.


but creative works can give you an income for many years to come - unless they have have seeded to whole globe already.
aristotoo
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsMember is a Bronze contributor and has 250 - 2,499 Illustration downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto Illustrator
Posted Sun Jan 20, 2013 12:23PM
^ Yes, Jasmin, and I think it serves a different clientèle which is there, and willing to license creative works.

It's a little as if they want to serve the guy on the bench without budget!

(Edited on 2013-01-20 12:25:00 by aristotoo)
straubini
Member is a contributor and has less than 250 Photo downloads
Posted Sun Jan 20, 2013 12:28PM
Sorry if this has been answred, but I cant find the answer anywhere. I am not an exclusive contributor. If I deactivate files can I immediately relist them to another agency or is there a waiting period?

(Edited on 2013-01-20 12:29:03 by straubini)
hambagahle
Member is a contributor and has less than 250 Photo downloads
Posted Sun Jan 20, 2013 12:28PM

@Amesy: were you able to tell if Getty would get a slice of the action for images licensed as a result of discovery through ImageIRC?  Especially for an image not available from Getty or one of its subsidiaries or partners?


Regards
hambagahle
Member is a contributor and has less than 250 Photo downloads
Posted Sun Jan 20, 2013 12:30PM

@Straubni: not exclusive ==> you can place your images with any agency that will accept them.  The iStock Exclusive ASA does not allow Exclusives to do that.


edit for clarity

(Edited on 2013-01-20 12:30:46 by hambagahle)
This thread has been locked.
Displaying 261 to 280 of 748 matches.
Not a member?Join
Cart (0)