New Social Network for Musicans, Artists, Models, Photographers and Entertainment – Follow us and get it on our beta release! ( 3Echo.com )
http://www.Twitter.com/3Echo
Coming Soon
http://www.3Echo.com

New Social Network for Musicans, Artists, Models, Photographers and Entertainment – Follow us and get it on our beta release! ( 3Echo.com )
http://www.Twitter.com/3Echo
Coming Soon
http://www.3Echo.com
Source: EOS Documentation Project – http://eosdoc.com/
Use your browser’s Find function to locate a specific word (e.g. KISS or REBEL) in the following table.
Click here: http://eosdoc.com/manuals/?q=Bodies to browse and download online documentation.
|
|
http://web.mac.com/kamberm/Leica_M8_…aq/Page_1.html
After reading this, there is no way I’m getting an M8, even though I don’t shoot in war zones. |
Wow.
Leica M8

Canon 5D

Both shot wide open that absolutely blows me away that even without alterations the Leica image could be that much farther behind.
| Blastzone Entertainment Group | |
| Date: | Jul 27, 2008 10:03 PM |
|---|---|
| Subject: | BLASTZONE ENT. GROUP IS GOING TO INVADE ROCK GONE WILD 2009 |
| Body: | Blastzone Entertainment Group has finalized plans to have a huge tent with 2 stages at Rock Gone Wild fest in Des Moines, IA on August 20th. – 23rd. 2009. Both stages will go on all day back to back so there will be no lack of music for the fans of Rock Gone Wild to enjoy. We promise to bring a diverse range of music to the tent as we did at Rocklahoma 2008 on the Tri-Label Stage. As of now the only band we can confirm is playing on the main stage is Saigon Kick with 3 original members. More bands will be announced and tickets will go on sale very soon. Please check here for information on bands playing our tent and other bands playing the main and second stage. We are looking for bands and artist looking to play our tent at Rock Gone Wild 2009. Please contact us here or by email michealw@mrtc.com for more information. Also I am looking for people to come up with a good name for my tent. Please send the idea to my email above, or send message here, or leave it as a comment on this page. If we pick your name and use it as our tent name and for our flyers, t-shirts, and posters we will give you 2 General Admission tickets to Rock Gone Wild 2009. |
Kevin Mazur’s career as a world-class photographer spans twenty-five years of music history. As a staff photographer for Rolling Stone Magazine, Mazur shot many of the world’s greatest performers to become the top music photographer in the world. In 2001, Mazur co-founded WireImage and later launched WireImage’s sister agency, Contour Photos, a premier stock photo agency designed specifically for the high-end celebrity portraiture market. His photos have appeared in numerous publications, including Rolling Stone, People, Entertainment Weekly, Musician, Spin US, Newsweek, and more. Previously, he was the top-producing photographer with London Features photo agency. In its April 2005 issue, American Photo named Kevin Mazur #4 among the 100 most important contemporary people in photography. Kevin Mazur is a WireImage Co-Founder. Steve Granitz Lester Cohen Michael Caulfield Jeff Vespa Larry Busacca Eric Charbonneau Jemal Countess Rick Diamond Dimitrios Kambouris Stephen Lovekin Jamie McCarthy John Shearer Theo Wargo |
So it’s flattering to hear that Getty Images is validating our approach and recognizing our success by reaching into the flickr community. No other competitor in their history has forced Getty to change their model. This is a great sign of encouragement for us. Getty’s CEO Jonathan Klein describes this new endeavor as “the best imagery from a fresh collection of high-quality images chosen by us from Flickr’s diverse and prolific community.” If it sounds familiar, it should be, something very similar is printed on our homepage.
But rather than compare lexicon, let’s clarify some of the key points and differences of this announcement.
Klein stated in a Seattle Times piece that the deal “for us is not significant, but it’s strategically extremely important.” Flickr GM Kakul Srivastava corroborated this by saying, “From our perspective, on the Flickr side, we’re not expecting this will be a huge stream of monetization for our members…The relationship, in the licensing piece, is purely between the photographer – the Flickr member – and Getty Images itself.”
So, if it’s not really about making money, what is it about? Why would the market leader (which is now held by a private equity firm whose sole goal is to make money) strike a deal in such a public fashion if they didn’t intend for it to make money? Why would flickr consent to not taking a transaction fee? What is of such “strategic importance” to Klein?
The answer is in Getty’s historical moves. It’s about locking out competition from the industry to ensure a continued, virtual monopoly. Getty pays flickr for an “exclusive” deal to be their preferred stock content distributor because they are threatened by an open platform like PhotoShelter. Consider that if PhotoShelter succeeds, not only does Getty lose market share, but they invariably will have to give back more of the profits to photographers because they will need to compete for content.
As much as Getty would like to position this move as an open embrace of the community, it’s not. Instead, it’s a way to lock out competition, and allow them to continue with status quo. They’re hopeful that this infusion of content can somehow staunch the flat/declining growth of their traditional licensing revenue, and why not? Their growth has historically been predicated on acquisition of boutique agency content until they bought virtually everyone up, and alienated thousands of photographers and buyers in the process.
On the other hand, PhotoShelter allows virtually any photographer to participate. We give photographers 70% of the sale, and allow them to determine which images they want to submit and set a licensing type and price point that suits their desires. When one of our photographers made an $8000 advertising sale last week, he was pretty thrilled to learn that he would be getting a check for $5600 (i.e. double what he would have received from Getty had they even accepted his image in the first place).
More importantly, we’re trying to create a sustainable environment where contributors are nurtured and cultivated into photographers with intent to sell. Our School of Stock and Shoot! The Day event are proof of our commitment to engage and educate our community to make more money from their photography.
Klein further states, “I think photographers would be much more concerned if 2 billion images from Flickr would find their way into microstock,” and yet they are perfectly happy with the growth of iStockPhoto and taking 80% of the sale from their contributors. There doesn’t seem to be any visible commitment towards photographers in terms of protecting their rights or compensating them fairly.
We live in a free market economy with buyers dictating the dynamics of buying and selling, so I’m sure you’re wondering about the buyer-side equation. One could say that buyers are getting the flickr content that they always wanted, but the reality of this deal is that Getty is simply adding a collection that is sourced from non-professional photographers through a non-scalable model fraught with logistical complexities. They have said themselves that they don’t expect this to be a significant revenue line for them; it’s a perfunctory, competitive move that will be met with both curiosity and skepticism by buyers and that will fail to deliver meaningful diversity to buyers over time.
A monopolistic environment never breeds the diversity that Getty is claiming that is it gaining. And without making efforts to teach photographers about the commercialization of photography, chasing something like a model release after the fact will turn out to be an expensive proposition. Could their standard contributor split soon become a special “flickr” split for even less commission? When this flickr content is bundled into subscription agreements and photographers are literally receiving pennies in commission, we’ll be back to where we are – namely a set of disenfranchised photographers who believe that deflating image prices is an immutable reality of the industry.
Now before you yell that this is a case of sour grapes from an upstart, let me explain why this is more of a David & Goliath story. You see, one of Getty Images’ Executive VPs started contacting us as early as July 2006. Initially it was to use PhotoShelter technology to provide a way for non-Getty photographers to submit images. But once the PhotoShelter Collection was announced, they wanted access to our content because we provided ready-to-license, edited content from thousands of contributors around the world.
They contacted us in July 07, September 07, October 07 and November 07, and we turned them down for one simple reason: It was a terrible deal for photographers (then, as it is now), and did very little to alter the fundamental imbalance in the stock industry.
Getty absolutely knows what PhotoShelter represents in the industry and what we are trying to accomplish. We represent an incoming threat to the old 20th century way of licensing imagery. And let’s make this very clear: we’re in this to beat Getty by standing up for the photographer and giving buyers the diversity that they’ve been seeking. So let the chips fall where they may, but in the meantime, we’re gonna swing for the fences and try to change the image marketplace for good.
No flash, shoot in Manual exposure so that the camera isn’t setting an extra-long shutter speed. ISO 100 or 200, and set aperture for f/8 or f/11. Maybe set focus manually since AF may fail in the darkness. A shutter speed of about 1/60 will give a good freeze of the individual sparks, but longer shutter speeds, even bulb (use a tripod and remote release) are better to get the streaking on the way up and blossoming of the firework.