Fatality: She wasn't rude, she was angry that some scumbag stole her work and used it for commercial purposes, to make money out of her work!
Photography can be very expensive -shooting location, models, hairstylist, makeup artist, light assistants, props, dresses etc etc... and when some scumbag offers you 40$-160$ for your work when he gets caught, is just pure insult!
What's even worse, is having your work associated with incredibly cheesy or tacky product/service.. Imagine a McDonalds clown wearing a Gucci dress or Ducati brand on some junk bicycle from China.. Such use lowers the value of the artist and their work. The way they used her photo, it looks as if it comes from a "Joe's DVD Clipart Collection".
"This amount is in line with the price of stock images. It was a reasonable starting point..."
You have to be a real fool to assume that every illustration/photo is worth $40 just because that's what the stock agencies charge.. pfff...It's the artist that decides the value of his work and not the thieves or the stock image agencies.
Not everyone creates "generic" stock image junk.
What they offered her (40$ - $100), is the equivalent of spitting in her face.
As for the professionalism, an "adult professional" is expected to PAY in a "civil and courteous manner" for someone's work. Theft isn't exactly a professional business conduct, is it?
So according to you theft is considered "professional behavior", and the use of the word "scumbag" is not.. You need to check your priorities..
JohnyP: I think the laws should be amended: any content posted online by copyright holder should lose copyright protection and should be open to reproduction, modification and derivative works.
If you don't want others to be exposed to your work - open a gallery or travel and display your works on tour.
time to clear our courts of these nonsensical cases.
What you don't get Roland, that there is a HUGE difference between personal use (desktop background photo on your PC) and commercial use (photo selling a product/service).
Think about it and let it sink in.
Reading posts on here I find it creepy how many people lack intelligence and common sense..
She wasn't rude, she was angry that some scumbag stole her work and used it for commercial purposes, to make money out of her work!
Are you mental? You're seriously out of touch with reality..
I presume you never paid for a shooting location, a model, never invested any money in the gear, and most importantly -never took the time to develop skill in your art..
For those who are interested, Sigma DP Merrill samples:
gl2k: 75mm (equiv.) @f2.8 !!!! That's a good one. That "thing" is nearly unusable for anything else than portraits. What a crap. One really has to be a die hard Sigma fan to spend $1k for such a toy. Epic fail, sorry.
Obviously you don't know much about this "thing", or about photography in general.
The images this "thing" produces are spectacular, Canon and Nikon is not even close to producing per pixel detail this "toy" does.. The only manufacturer that got closer recently is Fuji, but it still has a long way to go.
It's a large format camera in a compact body at a very inexpensive price. $1000 for a lens and body is nothing in comparison to Nikon, Canon, Leica, where body and lenses sell for thousands.
I have a bunch of Canon gear, but I will definitely be getting one of these cameras, because in the end it's the image quality that matters, and that "thing" delivers.
DPreview instead of doing another review of a 2 megapixel upgrade from Nikon and Canon, how about doing a review of DP1 or DP2? These cameras have been around for a long time offering a totally different sensor technology, but there is not a single beep out of this so called "Photography Review" website. I had to go on different sites to see how these cameras brutally crush the competition in per pixel detail.
Roland_Lislevane: The feature most sorely missed today is called "competition".
Few years ago I switched to GIMP and Blender from Photoshop and Maya, and I'm very happy with my new work-flow.. Excellent efficient tools created by artists and developers, not by corporate trolls that need to spit out a new version of software every year or two to milk the cash from the sheep.. :)
Fatality: By the way, to all the people who are planning on buying a new monitor.. Instead of buying one 30" monitor, I recommend getting two monitors in dual-head configuration -one 24" IPS and a second smaller cheap TFT monitor. Keep all of your tools on the TFT monitor (except the color palette) and do all of your processing and color work on the IPS monitor. It's less expensive this way and it's also better on the eyes since you can always turn off the second monitor if you don't need the extra screen real estate, plus you can conveniently adjust the position/angle of the second monitor. I'm using this setup since 2000 for 3D, digital imaging and illustration work, it's working really well for me..
(some advice to novice users) :)
I have a wacom tablet too, 6x11, an indispensable tool.. :) It's setup with a 1080p as the primary and the second one is 1280/1024. For the tablet size I have, this works very well for me (horizontally 1280+1920) -this is equivalent to a 3200x1024/1080 single monitor, now that's a lot of screen real estate. Personally I do small strokes, so I don't have to move my arm around on the tablet a lot, if I need to add some specific detail -I zoom on the image anyway. However, if I had two 1080p side by side horizontally (1920+1920), maybe my tablet would be too small, unless I would spin the second monitor 90 degrees vertically (horizontally 1080+1920) or lower the resolution on the second monitor..
So I guess gl2k, you can try spinning the other monitor, lower the resolution of the second monitor, or just get a bigger wacom tablet.. :)
Well, the "drawing estate" depends on a lot of things..
1. The size of your wacom tablet, of course..
2. The resolution or the orientation (vertical/horizontal) of your second monitor..
3. Your style.. What I mean by that, is how an individual draws, for example if they make large or small strokes.
By the way, to all the people who are planning on buying a new monitor.. Instead of buying one 30" monitor, I recommend getting two monitors in dual-head configuration -one 24" IPS and a second smaller cheap TFT monitor. Keep all of your tools on the TFT monitor (except the color palette) and do all of your processing and color work on the IPS monitor. It's less expensive this way and it's also better on the eyes since you can always turn off the second monitor if you don't need the extra screen real estate, plus you can conveniently adjust the position/angle of the second monitor. I'm using this setup since 2000 for 3D, digital imaging and illustration work, it's working really well for me..
SirSeth: So buying a 2410 looks to be a good deal for those on a budget? I'd be curious to know what other older monitors are good for photography. My "problem" is that 12 years ago I bought a really high quality graphics CRT and it's still a great monitor. So it's a bit large for the screen real estate by today's standards, but it's just really accurate and nice to look at so I haven't upgraded. When I do, I'll probably be looking at something like the 2410 at less than $400.
Sir, first thing you should do tomorrow morning is to take your CRT and toss it in the dumpster (better yet, dispose of it properly) and then go to a store and buy an IPS monitor. You will not regret it! The image on the new monitor will have better tonal range, it will be more crisp, vibrant, and without any distortions. I know this will be hard to do, because I done it myself, I had a perfectly working professional flat CRT monitor that I threw out.. I was really sad when I was throwing it out, I even put a big note on top of it "working", hoping someone would pick it up and use it.. lol but I have no regrets now, because the IPS image quality is superb, I could never go back to CRT. If you want a very good IPS monitor at a good price, get Viewsonic, they're excellent. I have one, and I'm very very pleased with it.
Adrian Van: I spotted these monitors in their ads last week and will likely buy the 24 inch monitor, which at $599 is a good choice considering the apple monitors stand alone unit are $999. Maybe apples monitors are a bit better spec wise, but this is a good price for almost similar colour performance I think. Great controls, and lumens can be set from 350 high end to 50 minimum. This monitor has multiple inputs, HDMI and DVI and miniport for multiple uses for video or photo editing.
If you're shopping for monitors, I recommend you checkout Viewsonic, they make excellent professional IPS monitors at very good prices. I have been using one for the past 3 years (bought my 23" for $330 back then, now they cost about $270), and I find the color accuracy, viewing angle and brightness is excellent (plus they have 0 dead pixels guarantee). I highly recommend them..
As for apple monitors, they are used by designer/artist noobs and fashion victims. The surface of their screen is reflective, you can see the reflection of yourself and the background while working on them. Totally unacceptable..
Fatality: I wouldn't upgrade to 6D not even for $500. To me, the 6D is worth about $1000 MAX.. My 60D is more superior than this camera (which currently sells for $780), not only that it takes EF and EF-S lenses, but it even has a shutter speed of 8000.. pfff This is a major failure from Canon.
Euhh.. a lot of noobies on here..
Regarding high 8000 shutter speed:
1. It is useful in the very bright sun with high aperture setting.
2. You'll have a sharper image of your subject that is in motion -motorcycle racing, subjects swayed in strong wind, insects etc..
I'm not saying 6D is a horrible camera, it's just ridiculously overpriced for what it is.
Anyway, FF is not the future, nanotechnology is. Olympus is on the right track.. and Nokia 808 is a fine example of the future..
Personally, I find it annoying to haul a bag with two DSLRs, a tripod, and a bunch of EF and EF-S lenses, it gets really heavy after a while.
I wouldn't upgrade to 6D not even for $500. To me, the 6D is worth about $1000 MAX.. My 60D is more superior than this camera (which currently sells for $780), not only that it takes EF and EF-S lenses, but it even has a shutter speed of 8000.. pfff This is a major failure from Canon.
"Phenomenon" - First thing that comes to my mind is a horror film by Dario Argento called "Phenomena", about a girl that is able to communicate telepathically with bugs.. lol
Fatality: Dear Canon,
Where is my fricken mirrorless?
I don't understand.. Just because I bought into Canon system I'm automatically called "Canon fanboy". It's just a tool of choice.. It works well for me, the same way as Nikon works well for others.. I'm might complain and whine at times, but that's only because I want the most out of my investment (Canon system). I'm an artist and a "fan of photography", not a fan of products.. Calling someone automatically a "fanboy" just because they have an investment in a specific product is lame.
I want more innovation from Canon.. A mirrorless would be nice! The problem with large corporations is that they don't take risks.
and.. I'm not a Canon fanboy at all, I focus on the practicality of tools. The only reason I want Canon to have a mirrorless camera is because I would have more uses from my Canon lenses, but since they are slacking, I'm not going to wait, Olympus is churning out lovely mirrorless cameras.. I will get Olympus OM-D E-M5 soon, it will be a great travel/walk around camera. :)