Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,545   Posts: 1,544,439   Online: 1034
      
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 33
  1. #21
    Steve Smith's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Ryde, Isle of Wight
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    8,597
    Images
    122
    Quote Originally Posted by ic-racer View Post
    did anyone ever figure out if the film we use is "consumer" or "commercial?"
    Yes. It is.


    Steve.
    "People who say things won't work are a dime a dozen. People who figure out how to make things work are worth a fortune" - Dave Rat.

  2. #22
    keyofnight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    86
    Quote Originally Posted by chriscrawfordphoto View Post
    Kodak classifies all of their black and white films as "Professional" films. Its actually been that way for a long time, before digital became popular, since the average consumer only shot color.
    Portra and other films are also considered "professional" products. I laughed and breathed a sigh when I looked around the "Business to Business" section of their site: all of the products I care about are what they're calling B2B products, and they want to become a B2B company. (;

  3. #23
    fotch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    SE WI- USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,128
    To bad Perez wasn't part of the sale. Has to be one of the all time worst CEO's of all time.
    Items for sale or trade at www.Camera35.com

  4. #24

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    local
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    16,305
    Blog Entries
    5
    Images
    50
    Quote Originally Posted by StoneNYC View Post
    Yea and they (Instagram/IG) will lose all of their Instagram customers before January 16th if they don't change their new TOS(terms of service) agreement which gives them stock photo sales rights over any image you post...

    So basically in theory they would become bigger than Getty... But every photographer I know is pulling out of IG if they don't update their TOS... They don't actually pay any of the image makers they just plan to sell the images as stock with no profit to the photographer... Shady... Good thing they didn't buy Kodak or they would probably claim rights to any images SHOT on Kodak products... Lol


    ~Stone

    The Noteworthy Ones - Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1 / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic

    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    hey stone

    FB has claimed rights to everything posted to FB since it started ..
    text images, your likeness+profile picture .. you name it, why would instagram be any different ?

    the purchase it just allows people in the buying consortium to use res-down and ohter kokak technology
    without worry of being sued, or having to do a work around to make it look like
    it isn't the same thing when it is, and having lawyers get rich arguing about it.

  5. #25
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,331
    Images
    225

    Kodak sells $525M patent portfolio to consortiums led by Apple & Google

    Quote Originally Posted by jnanian View Post
    hey stone

    FB has claimed rights to everything posted to FB since it started ..
    text images, your likeness+profile picture .. you name it, why would instagram be any different ?

    the purchase it just allows people in the buying consortium to use res-down and ohter kokak technology
    without worry of being sued, or having to do a work around to make it look like
    it isn't the same thing when it is, and having lawyers get rich arguing about it.
    Because FB isn't REALLY a business platform, it's trying to be but it sucks, Instagram is a very viable business platform for photographers, I have gotten more jobs from IG users who have seen my work on there and have more followers than anywhere else.

    Also in the back system, they may be retaining the original high Rez file, so they could sell that too.

    And the issue is that IG was specifically known to NOT be retaining rights to others photos which is why people liked it... Now that they are changing the policy, it's ruined a great portal for image expression.

    I also specifically don't put many images on FB as I don't think anyone but me should profit from MY images without at least getting a sizable cut of the profits.


    ~Stone

    The Noteworthy Ones - Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1 / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic

    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    ~Stone | "...of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ~Dennis Miller

  6. #26
    Steve Smith's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Ryde, Isle of Wight
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    8,597
    Images
    122
    Perhaps this needs to be posted again:

    http://www.theverge.com/2012/12/18/3...ey-really-mean


    Steve.
    "People who say things won't work are a dime a dozen. People who figure out how to make things work are worth a fortune" - Dave Rat.

  7. #27

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    local
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    16,305
    Blog Entries
    5
    Images
    50
    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Smith View Post
    Perhaps this needs to be posted again:

    http://www.theverge.com/2012/12/18/3...ey-really-mean


    Steve.

    i agree with the article steve,
    and i no reason to trust facebook at all.
    i have never used instagram so i really can't comment on it ...
    when it was revealed that FB flaunt(ed) the fact
    that they publish and distributed personal information
    of their user-base, without their users saying it was OK
    that was enough for me ..

  8. #28

    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Goldendale, WA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    64
    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Smith View Post
    Perhaps this needs to be posted again:

    http://www.theverge.com/2012/12/18/3...ey-really-mean


    Steve.
    Thanks for the link, Steve. I've been hearing a lot about this, but not really what sure what was happening. Isn't this the same as what FB does? And I thought FB owned Instagram?? I find it only marginally comforting that they cannot directly sell the images...they can still paste them all over the internet. This is the problem with the internet that has always existed. Put your images out there and they are for public consumption. The only protected place is your own website where you can control how it is displayed, etc. And, if it ends up somewhere else, it has clearly been stolen.

  9. #29
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,331
    Images
    225

    Kodak sells $525M patent portfolio to consortiums led by Apple & Google

    I read the whole article, I see your point but I also would say that there isn't much difference between putting a logo ON my photo and putting it NEXT TO my photo, it's still doing the same thing and in still not getting paid...

    Lets not even mention the fact if I sell an image to stock and then sell it as an exclusive rights, but FB/IG sells it too, then uses it later am I libel for them using and breaking the exclusivity of it because I posted it on IG to advertise myself? See, it's all shady and no one should like it... This new world sucks..


    ~Stone

    The Noteworthy Ones - Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1 / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic

    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    ~Stone | "...of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ~Dennis Miller

  10. #30
    Diapositivo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Rome, Italy
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,844
    Quote Originally Posted by David A. Goldfarb View Post
    The article says an important thing:

    "Kodak will retain a license to use the digital imaging portfolio patents in its future businesses, and for those businesses that it is selling."

    So Kodak is actually not selling the patents, but licensing them.

    The article also says:

    "In the time since, it has withdrawn from the market for consumer inkjet printers, which were once part of Mr. Perez’s turnaround strategy, and sold its film business, which had made Kodak a household name."

    As far as we know this should be incorrect. Kodak is merely looking for buyers.
    Fabrizio Ruggeri fine art photography site: http://fabrizio-ruggeri.artistwebsites.com
    Stock images at Imagebroker: http://www.imagebroker.com/#/search/ib_fbr

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin