Jump to content

Kukkudrill

Verified
  • Content Count

    101
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Kukkudrill

  1. On 07/07/2018 at 04:46, wiskerke said:

    The graves of Bertolt Brecht and his wife Helene Weigel smeared with anti semitic graffiti. Dorotheenstadt cemetery Stock Photo

    Again one where drag and drop still works.

    Flat Rate. Bulk discount. Territory: Germany

    The graves of Berthold Brecht and his wife Helene Weigel after the opening up of the Berlin Wall.

    Bertolt Brecht was not Jewish . Helene Weigel was from a -secular- Jewish family.

     

    wim

     

    Well done on this photo. It really grabs you. Echoes of dreadful history, and a reminder that history is not a closed chapter. 

    • Upvote 1
  2. I recall a forum thread a while back in which (besides carrying on the eternal debate about the pros and cons of RM and RF), it was said that Alamy prefers RF because this is increasingly what clients want. This has stayed at the back of my mind, and I thought it should be possible to test how true this is by counting the number of searches in Alamy Measures that specify RM and RF. AM appears not to provide any information other than the search terms on all-of-Alamy searches, so I went to my own most important pseudonym and looked up searches from 1st January to 30th June this year. I stopped counting after 100 pages of search results. Here are the results:

     

    Searches that specify RM or RF

    RM: 25 searches

    RF: 14 searches

     

    Distribution of RM and RF in pseudonym

    RM: 95%

    RF: 5%.

     

    The results should be treated with a lot of caution. First of all, number of searches that specify RM or RF is very small and more data might change the picture. Secondly, most of the images under this pseudonym are RM and this probably skews the results. I used only one pseudonym because my pseudonyms aren't subject-exclusive so a lot of searches show up in more than one. Thirdly, results are also likely to vary by subject matter.

     

    But if more forum members were willing to chip in with their own figures, we might build up a more general picture.

     

     

  3. On 20/05/2018 at 15:06, Robert Quinlan said:

    I've been an Alamy contributor for over 10 years, but I'm getting tired of carrying around my big Canon SLR and an assortment of lenses. I recently purchased a small, versatile Sony digital camera (DSCHX90V/B) to use when I take occasional trips abroad. 

     

    You could have written this bit about me :) 

     

    But the HX90V comes nowhere near a DSLR in image quality. To see the difference, compare images at full size and look at how well each camera renders fine detail.

  4. On 17/01/2018 at 21:20, British Gent said:

    Set out to get the cathedral on the other side of the road, but the light wouldn't play nice so I pointed the camera down Llandaff Fields to ward off the despondency. Maybe one day it will be just what some client is after. No. 1 favourite this month so far is my faithful hound and Alamy subject Ruby.

     

    llandaff-fields-in-mist-cardiff-KXP21X.j

     

    I really like this one. It's ethereal.

     

  5. On 07/01/2018 at 11:35, DDoug said:

    Was it purchased new in the EU? I thought there was a mandatory 24-month warranty.

     

    https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/consumers/shopping/guarantees-returns/index_en.htm

     

    You have to read the small print, unfortunately. The key bit is this:

     

    The legal guarantee covers any defects presumed to have existed at the time of delivery and which become apparent within a period of two years. However, the crucial time period here is the six months following purchase:

    • Any fault that appears within six months will be presumed to have existed at the time of delivery. The seller must then repair or replace your phone free of charge - or reimburse you if repairs or replacement are impossible.
    • After six months, you can still hold the seller responsible for any defects during the full two-year guarantee period. However, if the seller contests this, you must be able to prove that the defect existed at the time of delivery. This is often difficult, and you will probably have to involve a technical expert.

    (https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/consumers/shopping/guarantees-returns/faq/index_en.htm)

     

    In short, the 24-month warranty is really a 6-month warranty. This is an excellent example of how something can be talked up to make it seem more than it is. 

    • Upvote 1
  6. On 12/12/2017 at 10:36, IanDavidson said:

    I was told it was wrong to photograph one of our own in difficultly (we are quite a tight knit group in Downing Street).  I did respond by point out that the “man down” was not identifiable in the photo.  Also the tog posted photos of his injury later so he was clearly not too bothered....

     

    If a politician had fallen on his face outside Downing Street they'd have been all over him in a flash ... what's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander, or so I'd have thought  :)

  7. 1 hour ago, wiskerke said:

     

    Of course it's a trademark infringement. A deliberate one. But not by the photographer.

    It's an image that shows an identifiable object and it's its main subject. The leeway in the US is not in whether or not this is an infringement but in allowing antagonistic campaigns.

     

    Seems to me, if antagonistic campaigns are allowed, then they cannot considered trademark infringements, otherwise the party that is being portrayed negatively in a campaign could sue the advertiser and stop the campaign. 

     

    1 hour ago, wiskerke said:

     

    Boeing even has it's own licensing channel aka stock agency. At least since 2006. Where you can order a fully released image for use in your own campaign. That would be a neat trick: to use an image licensed from Boeing Stock to use in a mean ad against the company.

     

    It would, but I don't think it's possible. The fine print sets out licensing terms equivalent to what we would call unreleased RM. It also gives Boeing the right to approve the end use work in which images are used, including photo layout, text, web page etc. Of course I don't know how long these conditions have been in place - for all I know they might have been introduced in response to that 2012 Airbus advert. 

     

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.