Interludes In reply to artmagic99 [2006-02-21 23:46:33 +0000 UTC]

Thank you very much for your kind comment.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Interludes In reply to splucy [2006-02-06 23:31:39 +0000 UTC]

As stated in our Limited journal and FAQ, we do not at all base our decisions on popularity.

"but at the end of the day.. I can not be bothered seeking permission" Not quite sure I understand what you mean there, but it's not at all complicated to request. All you have to do is send us note saying which stock you want and how you're going to use (like photomanip, drawing, etc.)

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Interludes In reply to Liek [2005-12-17 01:19:43 +0000 UTC]

Beautiful work

There are alot of pros and cons to our program, we see that and hear about it alot too -. But we appreciate the mature comment you have made regarding it. It's not perfect but hopefully beneficial to some.

Working hours on a piece only to see the same stocks used in another piece... totally sucks.

Thanks again!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Liek In reply to Interludes [2005-12-17 07:54:01 +0000 UTC]

Sorry for the terrible English I'm from the Netherlands
But I'm glad I could make my point of view on this subject.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

OleWormius In reply to s15jesusfreak [2005-12-08 23:51:44 +0000 UTC]

"By only giving it to artists who are really good it means that the rest of us aren't able to use it to get really good." Many people have pointed this out to us in their arguments, but what we always say is that that's what every other stock account on DA is for. We're the only stock account that we've seen that has a program like this, so that means that all of the other thousands of stock accounts on DA are for those beginning artists.

You mentioned artists who are still working on their skill quite a few times, so I just have to point out that we don't give out stock based on skill alone. If an artist has really creative work but doesn't have the best skill, we would probably still give it to them because of their creativity.

I have to say that I think that most of the people who have complaints about our program, don't really see things from these accomplished artists' point of view. I guess this would usually only apply to the well-known ones, but I know that so many of them are just fed up with finding a great piece of stock and using it in their art, and then after they submit it, a hundred other people go off and use the same stock in the same way. It causes the originality of their art to be lost amongst the hundreds of other artists that copied off of them, whether consciously or unconsciously. We wanted to create a program that would allow an artist's originality to be preserved because it would be impossible for anyone to come and use the same stock in the same way. So I hope that you can see this from their view as well.

"Please hear me out not as someone who just wants to argue, but as someone who's frustrated with the amount of useless stock and when I finally find stock i could use, I may not be good enough to use it!" I do see your point here, and I do understand how hard it can be to find the right stock and what a blessing it is to finally find it. So I do see how that can be very disheartening to finally find the right stock and not be able to use it. That's something that no one has ever really brought up, so we will definitely have to discuss this and see if we can come up with a way to handle these cases. But I'll tell you that I can recall one case where we had an artist request who we would have declined if it hadn't been for what they said in their note. Their skill was decent, but we just didn't see a whole lot of creativity in their work. But it was because of what they said in their note that made us change our minds and give them the stock.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

s15jesusfreak In reply to OleWormius [2005-12-09 15:06:26 +0000 UTC]

First I'd just like to say thank you for being very open-minded and listening to the points that I was trying to make. It was this that helped me to see your point of view as well.

To be honest I really haven't seen where someone uses a piece of stock in their art and then has other people use it in the same way. I have seen many other artists use the same stock, but it's usually in some pretty unique ways that are different from anything else. This is just what I've seen though, so i guess there's more i don't know about

I can see your point as far as keeping the artist's originality. I'd hate it if someone stole my idea for something It's a very good idea and very helpful for the artists.

I do think you are making a difference for a lot of artists and I'm sorry that I midjudged you because i couldn't see this before. Believe me, I know what it's like to be different.

I have some questions regarding your rules though. It's really just curiosity since at this point there's nothing that i'm working on that i could use your stock for anyway. I can't explain it, but I see things in a new light and your kind attitude was a big factor in that I do hope that i'm not totally on your ban list now for complaining about your club because your stock might be useful to me in the future.

Ok so, for the questions:
When you give an artist 3 stock photos to use (such as a package) can they just use one pic from the package and leave the rest to be used by another artist? I'd hate to see the other two go to waste since they aren't exactly the same as the one the artist chose to choose.

Ok I know i had more questions but I can't remember them now...so anywayz thanks again for explaining everything I bet if you put some of this in your journal thoroughly explaining what you just told me, you wouldn't have so many people coming in with complaints.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

OleWormius In reply to s15jesusfreak [2005-12-10 00:45:42 +0000 UTC]

Thank you for being so open-minded as well! And I also forgot to thank you for the manner of your argument. It's rare to receive such intelligent and well-thought-out criticism, so we really appreciate that! I'm glad we could come to an understanding.

And reguarding your thoughts on the packages, I can see where you're coming from. The reason we made the packages was because we would end up having stocks that were very similar, but thought that several of them could be useful. But we thought that some of them were just so similar that it would be too much like giving out one stock to more than 3 people. But I can see your point here; it would kind of be a waste of the other photos in the package unless the artist decided to use another one from it later. Maybe we should make a poll about this and see how everyone feels.

Again, thank you very much for your input! We'll discuss these issues you've brought up and add all of this to our FAQ.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

s15jesusfreak In reply to OleWormius [2005-12-10 01:08:19 +0000 UTC]

Thank you

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Interludes In reply to JenaDellaGrottaglia [2005-11-11 19:29:51 +0000 UTC]

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

OleWormius In reply to despair [2005-11-06 18:02:26 +0000 UTC]

Well we think there are quite a few talented and accomplished artists who have used our stock so far. So no, we don't have to pay artists to use our stock. And if you have any more comments to make, you might want to check out our FAQ and Frequently Said Comments journal first: [link]

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

despair In reply to OleWormius [2005-11-07 10:00:07 +0000 UTC]

Just the normal run of the mill regulars, btw it seems you totally missed the satire in my comment.
No need to check the FAQ, let me end my interaction with you people by saying this, any true manipulator knows how to use *over-used* stock in such a way as to make it completely foreign to what it was before.
This is an accomplished artist's method.
We don't accept poor quality teeny bopper stock and put wings on her and say "voila" my masterpiece.

its like i said, you and the rest of the crew here should consider yourselves lucky that anyone wants to use it thereby stimulating your obvious egomania not to mention validating your online existence.
Good luck, it's my opinion that you are only breeding contempt among fledgeling artists.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

OleWormius In reply to despair [2005-11-07 23:03:41 +0000 UTC]

Oh I did get your sarcasm. You didn't catch mine.

Yes, there are great manipulators out there that are capable of vastly changing stock, but there's only so much you can do and it's usually still somewhat recognizable. But making stock completely unrecognizable is not what manipulators use stock for. They don't choose a stock image so that they can make as many changes to it as possible; they choose stock images that closely resemble what they had invisioned for their piece.

And we're certainly not creating any contempt here. We've recieved comments from many artists who say that they hope to improve their skills and creativity so they can use our stock in the future. So if anything, we're inspiring quite a few artists to push their own boundaries to improve their art.

But you're right, the only reason we take the time, thought, and effort to make these stock images...is to validate our online existence.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Interludes In reply to momentofclarity [2005-10-25 22:29:02 +0000 UTC]

Thank you very much! We hope to hear from you in the future.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0