|
List Info
Thread: Re: Critical remarks about onexposure.net
|
|
| Re: Critical remarks about
onexposure.net |
  United Kingdom |
2007-06-07 07:19:15 |
|
Very true, we all run the risk of having our photo's nicked by someone dodgy, which makes it even worse when a so-called 'legitimate' site does it... Vernon Trent <vernon.trent googlemail.com> wrote: "I know, its really crap to loose control of your work and to have your creativity exploited."
this happens with every pic you post in internet. just a small remark, if my opinion is allowed ))
2007/6/7, Francoise Beguime YAHOO.CO.UK>: > I know, its really crap to loose control of your work and to have your > creativity exploited. > > I have been invited to join onexposure by Ralph a number of times, but I > read the small print and thought it maybe dodgy. Another thing that bothered > me was the way
they put themselves about as a 'quality' photo site, but many > of the photos aren't that great... > > So I was just curious, given the lack of quality in places on onexposure and > the general high standard of your images (there's not a bad photo on your > site, unlike onexposure!!), if there wasn't something personal in the > decision to reject your photo... > > Letting us see the photo would enable us to decide for ourselves in this > very public argument.... > > > > > > Jens LOOK-S.DE>wrote: > > Francoise...the photo is really not of importance here....;) > > On 6 Jun., 16:08, Francoise Beguime > wrote: > > I don't know about anyone else, but I'm just dying to see the offending > photo from Jens... > > > > I mean how bad could it be? The photos on his website don't look that > bad... > > >
> Does anyone have a link? > > > > Sorry for being a nosey parker!! > > > > --------------------------------- > > Yahoo! Mail is the world's favourite email. Don't settle for less, sign up > for your freeaccount today. > > > ________________________________ > To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo! > Security Centre. > > >
Yahoo! Photos - NEW, now offering a quality print service from just 8p a photo.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Photoblogs" group. To post to this group, send email to photoblogs googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to photoblogs-unsubscribe googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/photoblogs?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
|
| Re: Critical remarks about
onexposure.net |

|
2007-06-07 07:27:04 |
francoise,
what do you mean with "legitimate" site? )
2007/6/7, Francoise Beguime <francoisebeguime yahoo.co.uk>:
> Very true, we all run the risk of having our photo's
nicked by someone
> dodgy, which makes it even worse when a so-called
'legitimate' site does
> it...
>
>
>
> Vernon Trent <vernon.trent googlemail.com> wrote:
>
> "I know, its really crap to loose control of your
work and to have
> your creativity exploited."
>
> this happens with every pic you post in internet. just
a small remark,
> if my opinion is allowed ))
>
>
>
>
> 2007/6/7, Francoise Beguime :
> > I know, its really crap to loose control of your
work and to have your
> > creativity exploited.
> >
> > I have been invited to join onexposure by Ralph a
number of times, but I
> > read the small print and thought it maybe dodgy.
Another thing that
> bothered
> > me was the way they put themselves about as a
'quality' photo site, but
> many
> > of the photos aren't that great...
> >
> > So I was just curious, given the lack of quality
in places on onexposure
> and
> > the general high standard of your images (there's
not a bad photo on your
> > site, unlike onexposure!!), if there wasn't
something personal in the
> > decision to reject your photo...
> >
> > Letting us see the photo would enable us to decide
for ourselves in this
> > very public argument....
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Jens wrote:
> >
> > Francoise...the photo is really not of importance
here....;)
> >
> > On 6 Jun., 16:08, Francoise Beguime
> > wrote:
> > > I don't know about anyone else, but I'm just
dying to see the offending
> > photo from Jens...
> > >
> > > I mean how bad could it be? The photos on his
website don't look that
> > bad...
> > >
> > > Does anyone have a link?
> > >
> > > Sorry for being a nosey parker!!
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------
> > > Yahoo! Mail is the world's favourite email.
Don't settle for less, sign
> up
> > for your freeaccount today.
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > To help you stay safe and secure online, we've
developed the all new
> Yahoo!
> > Security Centre.
> > >
> >
>
> ________________________________
> Yahoo! Photos - NEW, now offering a quality print
service from just 8p a
> photo.
> >
>
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the
Google Groups "Photoblogs" group.
To post to this group, send email to photoblogs googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
photoblogs-unsubscribe googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http:
//groups.google.com/group/photoblogs?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
|
|
| Re: Critical remarks about
onexposure.net |
  United States |
2007-06-07 07:31:51 |
Hi Francoise,
> So I was just curious, given the lack of quality in
places on onexposure and the general high standard of your
images (there's not a bad photo on your site, unlike
onexposure!!), if there wasn't something personal in the
decision to reject your photo...
I suggest you to drop this track and try another one. At
this time,
Jens was one of our most valuable members and no sign of
this quarrel
had been seen Rejecting his photo was not a fun thing to
do,
especially since he has stated in the forums that he only
uploads his
best work and all his previous uploads were really amazing.
We
questioned our decision several times before taking it. And
the
members came to the same conclusion without knowing who the
photographer of the photo was. I have a hard time to see how
this
could have been personal in any way.
> Very true, we all run the risk of having our photo's
nicked by someone dodgy, which makes it even worse when a
so-called 'legitimate' site does it...
Do you seriously think this is a valid and fair
comparison...? You
don't need to reply here, but do me a favor and think about
it again.
/ Jacob
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the
Google Groups "Photoblogs" group.
To post to this group, send email to photoblogs googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
photoblogs-unsubscribe googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http:
//groups.google.com/group/photoblogs?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
|
|
[1-3]
|
|