I really wonder how this “slightly” inappropriate product made it into shops without no-one raising an eyebrow. At least it has gender-neutral colours.
I think this is a very good image to explain how many companies add content to their websites. Layer upon layer, without the possibility to go up or down the information tree. Static pages with stale information and repitition, the user can’t dig deeper into or understand the relationsship with other parts of the site.
A poster has clear constraints and it is within these the designer works. A website doesn’t have these constraints, and I believe that more companies should focus on letter the consumer consume content they way they want to.
This has to be the weirdest peice of code I’ve ever come across. I can’t remember if I wrote it or someone else. Oh well, I never did like The Footerbar anyway…
Sorry, the books are no longer for sale.
Erik Petersens Besættelse – Fotografier 1940 – 45
Josef Koudelka – Exiles
Keld Helmer-Petersen – Frameworks
Kent Klich – El Nino (Signeret)
Lennart Gottlieb – Skandaler
Linda Hansen – Linda Hansen
Luc Sante – No Smoking
Mary Willumsen – verdens første kvindelige erotiske fotograf
National Geographic – Photographs then and now
P.S. Krøyers fotografier
Pirelli Calendar Classics – 100 Photographs from the first 30 years
Rolling stone – The Photographs
Sebastiao Salgado – Terra
The Best of LIFE – fra 73
The Playboy book
Time – Eye Witness – Collectors Edition
Tove Kurtzweil – Moment
Viggo Rivad – Vennerne i Aswan
World Press Photo
Yann Arthus-Bertrand – The Earth From The Air, 365 Days
JEG SÆLGER IKKE LÆNGERE MINE TEGNESERIER!!! – MEN TAK TIL DE MANGE SOM KØBTE.
Jeg sælger ud af mine gamle tegneserier. De fleste er i brugt men pæn stand og mange er eksemplariske/som nye. Hvis du ønsker at købe nogle af dem, så kontakt mig her med navne på ønskede titler og prisforslag.
Du kan se hele tegneserie listen her. Der er billeder på alle tegneserierne, så siden kan godt tage lidt tid at loade.
Og ja, du må gerne sige det videre, hvis du kender nogen, der kender nogen, der samler på eller køber gamle brugte tegneserier.
Følgende titler er til salg:
DE SMÅ GRØNNE MÆND
DE 4 ESSER
FANDENS VEJR AT DØ I
FEDTMULE OG KLASSIKERNE
FRED OG BOBS FATALITETER
HENRIK OG HAGBART JAGTEN PÅ TIDSFUGLEN
JULES VERNE KANINDRÆBEREN KAJ
LILLE SPLINT ET LONDONMYSTERIUM
MIGUEL ANGEL PRADO
NÅR VINDEN BLÆSER
PORTRÆT AF ET OPRØR
SPLINT OG CO.
STEEN OG STOFFER
Samt en hel del Anders And blade fra 1959 – 1974
Du kan se hele tegneserie listen her.
If you’re in to watching TV commercials or ads you are probably already watching them online at adland.tv or maybe even using the embed function to post them into your blog’s posts. Adland also has a good section for print and radio. News about acency’s campaigns, gossip & adnews, awards, social marketing & virals are dealt with in the subsections of the Adland news section.
But this time of year you are probably hooked up to adland because of the worlds largest super bowl commercial archive.
Maybe you are tired of using Google, Bing or the other major search engines and directories and believe you aren’t getting all the infomation you want. So you search for alternative search engines and get the usual suspects like Altavista and Yahoo.
Forget top ten, top hundrede or top thousand list of which search engine to use. At searchengineindex.com you will find all the other cool searchengines of the world wide web. Many obscure and unknown internet searchengines I never even heard of.
Are they better than google? Depends on what kind of search you do but for the more topic specific local searches of a niche you will be better of useing one of the search engines listed at searchengineindex.com
Interesting search engines focus on a narrow niche and deliver in-depth targeted results on very specific topics. It’s like going into a specialist’s shop instead of going to the google mall. You feel at home and everythis is quant and there are smells and dust. For instance I checked out the Haiti search engines and found them very 1997-ish but they had the infomation I needed.
Snemænde stopper op i deres vandring og kigger på det fine kirsebærtræ.
Just noticed this cartoon by Pelle Forshed and Stefan Thungren in Svenska Dagbladet and was reminded of this photo from Bognor Regis International Birdman Competition birdman.org.uk of an old guy in old style swimming suit. Wish they would come back in style
It took a while but it’s nice to finally get the new website up and running. Now only remains straightening out the few last bugs. And what better to do it on a live site.
In the process I’ve become pretty good at hacking my way through wordpress, css, MySQLdatabases and what not. Need a website. Call me.
From the AOP – it says post or forward this email, so I hope this is OK (?). You might also want to read The Illustrators Partnership’s suggested amendments
FROM THE ILLUSTRATORS’ PARTNERSHIP
We’ve had word that the House Judiciary Committee may mark-up the Orphan Works Bill this week. This is the session where Committee Members will propose, accept and reject amendments to H.R. 5889. After markup, the bill could be reported out of the House Committee and go to the floor for a vote. We’ve submitted several critical amendments for consideration: These would limit the scope of the bill to affect only true orphaned work. Unless such amendments are adopted, we believe the bill should not be reported out until its impact on small businesses can be determined. Here’s our summary of the issues at stake in the House version of this bill:
Q What is the Orphan Works Act?
A: A proposed amendment to copyright law that would impose a radically new business model on the licensing of copyrighted work.
Q: How would it do that?
A: It would force all creators to digitize their life’s work and hand it over to privately-owned commercial databases or see it exposed to widespread infringement by anyone, for any purpose, however commercial or distasteful.
Q: How would it hurt me if I didn’t register my work?
A: The bill would let infringers rely on for-profit registries to search for your work. If your work is not in the databases, it’s a potential “orphan.”
Q: What about my unpublished work?
A: The bill would apply to any work, from professional paintings to family snapshots, home videos, etc., including published and unpublished work and any work ever placed on the internet.
Q: How would these databases work?
A: No one has yet unveiled a business plan, but we suspect they’d operate like stock houses, promoting themselves as one-stop shopping centers for licensing art. If you’ve registered your work with them, they’ll probably charge you maintenance fees and commissions for clearing your work. If you’re a publisher or art director, they’ll probably charge you search fees. If you’re an infringer, they’ll probably charge you a search fee and issue orphan certificates for any unregistered work you’d like to infringe. We assume different registries may have different terms, and any start-up terms will of course be subject to change.
Q: How will the bill affect the market for commissioned work?
A: It will be a gold mine for opportunists, favoring giant image banks over working artists. Some companies will probably sell access to orphans as royalty-free work — or they’ll harvest orphans and bundle them for sale as clip art. Other companies can harvest orphans, alter them slightly to make “derivative works” and register the derivatives as their own copyrighted product. Freelancers would then be forced to compete against their own lost art – and that of their colleagues – for the new commissions they need to make a living.
Q: But the bill’s sponsors say the bill is just a small adjustment to copyright law.
A: No, it’s actually a reversal of copyright law. It presumes that the public is entitled to use your work as a primary right and that it’s your legal obligation to make your work available.
Q: But isn’t the House bill an improvement over the Senate version?
A: Only for those who intend to operate commercial databases. These registries will exist to make money. To make money, they’ll have to do a lively business in clearing work for infringements. That means making their databases infringer-friendly.
Q: But isn’t the House bill better because it requires an infringer to file a Notice of Use, documenting their intent to infringe?
A: The House bill creates a very low threshold for infringers to meet. They’d only have to file a text description (not the image itself) of the work they want to infringe, plus information about their search and any ownership information they’ve found.
Q: But won’t that let artists consult the archive to see if their work has been infringed?
A: No, as currently written, the Notice of Use is a dark archive, which means you won’t have access to it. If someone infringes your work and has filed a Notice of Use, you wouldn’t know about it.
Q: Then how would I know if my work is in the Dark Archive?
A: You wouldn’t, unless a.) you discover you’ve been infringed; b.) you sue the infringer in federal court; c.) the infringer asserts an Orphan Works defense. Then you can file a request to see if the infringer has filed a Notice of Use to infringe your work.
Q: Then what good does it do me for the infringer to file a Notice of Use?
A: It’s of no probative value to you at all unless you go to court. And if you do, you’d better be sure of winning because otherwise, without the possibility of statutory damages and attorneys’ fees, it will be too expensive for you to sue. If the Notice of Use helps anyone, it actually helps the infringer: it lets him prove in court that he followed the prescribed protocol to “legally” infringe your work.
Q: Then shouldn’t we ask Congress to change the Dark Archive to an open one?
A: This would still place an impossible burden on you. Can you imagine routinely slogging through a “lost and found” containing millions of text descriptions of works to see if something sounds like one of the hundreds or thousands of illustrations you may have done?
Q: So should the infringement archive be changed to display images rather than text descriptions?
A: If so, you’d have a come-and-get-it archive for new infringers to exploit works that have already been identified as orphans by previous infringers.
Q: The bill’s sponsors say the House version includes specific instructions on the requirements for diligent searches.
A: No, read the bill. It’s full of ambiguous terms like “reasonable” and “diligent” that can only be decided by courts on a case-by-case basis. That could take a decade of expensive lawsuits and appeals. How many millions of copyrights will be orphaned before we learn how the courts ultimately define these vague terms?
Q: Then what can we do to improve this bill?
A: We don’t believe the bill can be patched up to mitigate its harm to creators. The Orphan Works matter should be solved with carefully defined expansions of fair use to permit reproduction by libraries and archives, or for family photo restoration and duplication. Narrow exceptions like these would also meet the needs of other orphan works usage without violating artists’ rights as defined by the 1976 Copyright Act, The Berne Convention and Article 13 of the TRIPs Agreement. These copyright-related international trade treaties are not just a matter of law. They codify longstanding business practices that have passed the test of time.
Q: What can we do now to oppose this legislation?
A: If you’re opposed to the House bill in its current form, contact members of the full House Judiciary Committee. Ask them to adopt our amendments limiting the scope of the bill to affect only true orphaned work.
Tomorrow, we’ll email you a short basic letter which you may use as a template. –Brad Holland and Cynthia Turner, for the Board of the Illustrators’ Partnership
Over 60 organizations are united in opposing this bill in its current form. Illustrators, photographers, fine artists, songwriters, musicians, and countless licensing firms all believe this bill will harm their small businesses. Don’t Let Congress Orphan Your Work.
To use the Orphan Works Opposition Website just go to this link: http://capwiz.com/illustratorspartnership/home/ Put in your zip code and follow the instructions. Your letters will be addressed and sent automatically. It takes less than 2 minutes to fight for your copyright.
If you received our mail as a forwarded message, and wish to be added to our mailing list, email us at: illustratorspartnership *at* cnymail *dot* com Place “Add Name” in the subject line, and provide your name and the email address you want used in the message area. Please post or forward this message in its entirety to any interested party.
Flickr is announcing a collaboration with Getty Images. The idea is so obvious and simple and it’s great news for both parties and their respective users. Flickr has an insane amount of images and Getty gets to pick and choose. Picturebuyers get a larger selection and the flickrphotographers get some cash. Everyone wins. Unless your business is rightsmanaged or even royalty free stockphotography. Then you might think, “Oh no, not yet another blow at my business. Will it never end”. That – at least – was what I thought when I got the news.
I don’t shoot for stock and I’ve only just started uploading my large backcatalog of photography to Digital Railroad, so I’m not threatened by the new competition as many others would be, but still I had to take a closer look at what this could mean to my business.
I compared the image request I get from Digital Railroad about once a day and tried to find some of the images on flickr
One image request reads:
Detailed Image Description: for a jewelry client
close up of a diamond stud earing on a woman ages 20 to 40 years old.
No brides or fancy make-up or hair. Want this to look like an everyday shot not special event
do not want to see the woman’s face but can crop in if image fits. Really prefers close-up
can be a couple hugging tight crop.
Feel of Campaign is very artistic- photojournalistic
Will be running as Black & White
Maybe I searched the wrong words so I tried “female diamond earring” which turned up even fewer photos and none usable. I thought the one with a diamond earring would be easy, so I picked a new image request. This time with a lot more luck.
Detailed Image Description: Looking for images of pomegranates in the Greek islands (Naxos and Crete are preferred, but any are ok).
Search: “Pomegranetes Greece” and bingo. 115 hits and many usable.
OK. So the score so far is Flickr/Getty 1 point and the rest of us 1 point. Lets test some more. Hmm, here is a good one:
Detailed Image Description: I’m looking for an engaging image of a mother and child or children, something that reads quickly and is not too heavy. I’m not necessarily looking for anything too saccharin, either. This is a photo book, not many words, and is marketed to be a Mother’s Day gift book.
IMPORTANT: anyone recognizable has to be model released but silhouettes and the like are okay without a release.
A search for “mother child” gives 72,849 results, so lets see if we can refine it. “mother child love” brings us down to 10,305 results results. I don’t see any superduper shots but some are usable if stressed (I only went about 10 pages deep).
Ok. Let’s try another one. Something easier to search.
Detailed Image Description: Who has recent images of the Appalachian Crafts along the Kentucky Artisan Heritage Trail and at the Kentucky Artisan Center in Berea? Could also use Boone Tavern, Snug Hollow Farm B&B.
I know this is not the most scientific approach but my guess is that if Flickr and Getty are to have any success they better hire truckloads of photoeditors – and some good ones at that – to wade through the trillions of private photo-of-friends-friend-with-other-friends-friend imagery. And maybe more importantly it reminds us to always do our best. You never know what the next move is.
In the current arms race between advertisers and adblock software-developers the domain adland.tv (also known as Adland) has been blocked by Norton for years and now many more adblockers – like FiltersetG for
example – do the same. As a result webusers are prone to email the siteowner Dabitch and tell her that the site doesn’t work – when it is in fact their adblocking software is what “deletes” the links and images. The most interesting thing about this is that major advertisers have payed themselves onto the whitelist – whereas commercial-archive can’t/won’t/doesn’t know how to. And they don’t even carry ads once you’re logged in! Ironic no?
Even more interesting is that this story hasn’t even caused a ripple among bloggers. You’d think that whole “buy your way onto the whitelist” thing would get people pissed off.
Anyway – read more about it here at commercial-archive