rgbstock
Posted something on "the other site "
1. tinneketin26 March 2010, 23:02 GMT +01:00
Posted something on the "other site", wonder how long it will be before they remove my topic !
http://www.sxc.hu/forums/topic/17221
3. Abyla27 March 2010, 0:08 GMT +01:00
I think my account is going to be cancelled, on the other site.
4. crisderaud27 March 2010, 5:12 GMT +01:00
Rsylvan moved it down to the comments section at the bottom of the forum. He gave his typical goodbye and good luck attitude.
5. weirdvis27 March 2010, 6:34 GMT +01:00
Thank the stars for other, more discerning outlets, eh...
:D
6. tinneketin27 March 2010, 7:31 GMT +01:00
Indeed it is moved my topic buth not removed. :o)
Rsylvan gave a typical answer but I replied back that i'am indeed very lucky to have this site ! ;o)
@ Abyla : thanks for your reply there ! ;o)
7. xymonau27 March 2010, 10:08 GMT +01:00
Truly, that person is not worth engaging. If he's angry, he'll stamp his foot and delete. If he isn't, or if he likes you, he'll let it go. I'd love to reply, but I'm banned for playing games.
8. crisderaud27 March 2010, 11:37 GMT +01:00
Subman is now suggesting that fonts may may be causing a copyright issue. That is not the reason for rejection that you gave. Is he saying that you can't use the fonts that ship with your design and image software? Maybe they should just ask the approver who rejected the image.
Oh that's right, the reviewers are not in their department as they have said before. They must formulate an answer because they don't have intercorporate communication.
11. weirdvis27 March 2010, 16:13 GMT +01:00
SXC is at the top because we put it there. At the moment SXC is rolling along on the momentum we built up and sustained. Even though the online images figure is winding backwards I am sure SXC will continue to roll along for quite some time. However, no fresh momentum seems to have been added in real terms because the feed of new images is only a fraction of what it once was and it is not replacing those lost by the bleed of removed or cancelled galleries. Even the submissions queue doesn't appear to rise as fast as it once did. If a system, even one as big as SXC, isn't energized properly it will eventually falter and begin to run down.
They gave the Energizer Bunnies the big heave-ho and replaced them with excuses and empty rhetoric. So now we have RGBunnies. There's one thing bunnies are renown for - proliferation. I trust our database proliferation lives up to expectation? Or maybe we ought to inject a little speed into the process...?
;0)
12. greekgod27 March 2010, 17:22 GMT +01:00
ah... when i found sxc, it was already over 4 year old... the years between 2005 and 2007 in sxc were very exciting for me.
the deluge of great talent to complement the "veterans" (e.g. criswatk, brokenarts, thesaint, and many others who are here now at rgb) at that time was astounding. the list is too long... but guys like xymonau, ugaldew, deziner, wazari, tom denham, crazyhorse, omar franc, naraosga, and many others (yes, even the much-misunderstood seeming misanthrope leonbidon) added some serious muscle to sxc...
i believe, however, that the rgb growth spike in terms of the library will not reach the level of sxc. one of the major reasons is that the early work filling sxc's libraries were not really screened as stringently as rgb does now. and many of those early (and quite unusable) images still make up a huge volume of that.
but what we can probably not quickly make up for in quantity, we will more than compensate for in quality.
i urge the admin to remain very stringent with the image and design quality being put through. so far, so good...
i don't think the stepping on the gas, so to speak, will be necessary, Lynne... let us grow organically... we're in the right direction, we got a lot of the right people... let's let time take its course.
cheers, guys... amen...
13. weirdvis27 March 2010, 18:35 GMT +01:00
We have no intention of sacrificing quality for quantity. Currently the acceptance rate remains high because nearly all of the contributors are SXC seasoned. The acceptance rate will drop as the number of new members from outside of SXC join our merry band of stock pioneers.
This is the reason why a lot of my early images will never be uploaded here. Quality control has moved on and up considerably from the heady days of 2004/5. :0)
14. micromoth27 March 2010, 19:57 GMT +01:00
@13 I fully agree, Lynne. I would be a bit embarrassed now about some of my early images on SXC. But hey, I was learning... and still am. The quality of RGB is really important - I learn as much or more from rejections (fortunately they're not too frequent!) than acceptances.
15. tinneketin28 March 2010, 5:29 GMT +02:00
It is ridiculous their explanations and I have posted it also there.
Everybody thanks for the reactions ! ;o)
16. Gramps29 March 2010, 14:58 GMT +02:00
I was interested in the reply from our freind and left my opinion. Just my TPW, I'm not into the SXC admin bashing bit and normally stay away from it but there was too much of the smell of B***S*** to let this one pass.
18. Abyla29 March 2010, 23:46 GMT +02:00
rsylvan about us :
"As I said before, we are all indeed lucky there are other people willing to provide free resources for all of us to use. It is just a simple statement of fact."
that's a good one !
19. weirdvis29 March 2010, 23:49 GMT +02:00
It seems that the words "Happy" and "Easter" are not considered to be integral to an Easter card design...
Who knew?
:0/
20. crisderaud30 March 2010, 2:50 GMT +02:00
For a man with his credentials, Arsy says some pretty lame stuff.
Rob Sylvan is a photographer, trainer, author, and web developer. Aside from also being a NAPP Help Desk Specialist and the host of Peachpit's Lightroom Resource Center, he is the Site Director for iStockphoto.
Rob writes the Under the Loupe column for Photoshop User Magazine and is the author of Lightroom 2 for Dummies!
21. xymonau30 March 2010, 7:37 GMT +02:00
You don't need personality or people skills to be talented. And there is living proof.
22. Gramps30 March 2010, 9:10 GMT +02:00
Getting back to the point about fonts, which seems to be an area of contention. It must make the acceptance of graphics like these, for example
http://www.sxc.hu/photo/1211065
http://www.istockphoto.com/file_closeup/?id=9667466&refnum=1467580&source=sxchu04&source=sxchu04
http://www.sxc.hu/photo/1192816
http://www.istockphoto.com/file_closeup/?id=2481306&refnum=383958&source=sxchu04&source=sxchu04
http://www.istockphoto.com/file_closeup/?id=5888560&refnum=489391&source=sxchu04&source=sxchu04
http://www.sxc.hu/photo/1100034
very difficult without proof of ownership of the fonts. Or am I missing something here.
23. Zela30 March 2010, 10:35 GMT +02:00
Quick...make a screenprint of the newest files at sxc. The Easter illustration of tinneketin is now accepted without the text bubble but the thumbnail is still showing the original graphic with the text. A cache problem no doubt but very, very funny the least LOL.
24. xymonau30 March 2010, 11:13 GMT +02:00
There certainly is no consistency when they allow those images. But fonts definitely are copyrighted, and you have to be careful of which fonts you use. You must always read the little "read me" text that comes with them, and if it isn't there, search for it on the net. Some people make free fonts with stipulations about their use, but there are a lot of free unlimited fonts. Many state no commercial use unless you buy the font.
