Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Another minor enhancement – both Symzio and the Symbiostock Video plugin will have video players that will no longer display black bars when the web-page is resized. The player will hug the video with the correct aspect ratio. This will be released with Symbiostock Video in the next update and is already live on Symzio.
That’s a very interesting idea – Symzio catches everything that is published – theoretically, that should work just fine.
No worries. That’s the cool thing about the whole Symbiostock > Symzio integration – you can fix stuff. With agencies the process is hideous – delete the old clip, re-upload the entire clip, wait and hope it gets passed again, wait for it to get into the search index again, etc etc.
With Symzio, you retain your URL, the details get updated, and the system auto-generates your new preview.
I think you should continue to do videos – they look quite good.
Although we may come up with a solution, one option you have is to just add a link to the Symzio version of your video in the description, with your affiliate code. If someone buys it from there then you get 100% anyways, and this way they can see the preview.
I checked some of your videos on Symzio and they look good, but the FPS is too low – I don’t know how much demand there is for 12fps. Try to keep it at 30 or 24.
Just a note for everyone – after doing some testing, we’ve come to the conclusion that it can sometimes become problematic when trying to access new data – just be aware when using one.
Hey Redneck,
Another thing – if there’s anything we can do to make it work with your theme, let us know. You can even send your theme developer to us so we can see if there’s any way to make the player more robust so as to ‘break free’ of theme related problems.
I think it may have something to do with the extra stuff you have running on your product page (flickety slider). Try disabling that stuff first and see what happens, because I checked the source and the poster image is there and the code looks fine.
You need to have video licenses applied to it just like images – usually these are created by default, but because you started using Symbiostock before the video functions were created, you will have to manually create them.
So just like images, create a license and have it apply to videos, and you should be good to go!
Hey Franky,
So, this is an upgrade a few other people have mentioned that I would love to do but don’t currently have the time. Basically, on that page you provided they clearly say they don’t have the PECL Imagick installed – this is what Symbiostock relies on.
However, Imagick is basically a ‘wrapper’ so that PHP can interact directly with Image Magick. All the functions performed within Imagick can be performed directly from the command line using the bin/convert command. The only problem is, someone has to figure out exactly what those commands are.
So, for example, we resize images using Imagick, we watermark images using Imagick, we set the quality, resolution, all that jazz. To figure out how to do it via the command line is certainly possible, but will take some effort and time. This is something I cannot do.
If, however, you want to research it and test it, and successfully through testing create a command line that watermarks an image, and resizes an image, if it is enough information with which I can work with, I can look into adding it to Symbiostock.
Here is the reference I found:
http://www.imagemagick.org/Usage/
Pretty large, but that’s where the research comes in. We only need a few working examples and then we’re good.
The only other option is to move to a web-host that provides Imagick, or rely on GD.
We’re going to be tweaking the search bar and the navigation with it, but for now you can just send it a blank search and it should display the latest images
Featuring one of our fantastic new #Symzio contributors – #Iguana by Honey Cloverz! https://t.co/ZpoKTIUY6e pic.twitter.com/cB6UAsEnk9
— Symbiostock (@symbiostock) January 4, 2016
From my understanding of the way Shutterstock operates, which is what we are basically striving for since they are currently the market leaders, recognizable vehicle makes and models cannot be used without releases unless it is editorial. I think to remove any and all legal liability, you should always mark it as editorial when in doubt.
My mentality is quite empathetic – if I created that truck, designed it, manufactured it, and I saw a competitor using that image in a commercial capacity on one of their products, it would make me really angry. Accordingly, I, as a photographer, should not do that to avoid any possible worst case scenario.
I think if the truck was not the main object of the image, the case would be different.
However it is a borderline issue, because the truck does seem to be quite generic. I would mark it as editorial if it was my photograph.
It works with Facebook, but facebook uses caches to store the data from URLs. So you can post it and on your facebook page it will show up with the media after a few seconds.
Actually, don’t worry about it. I just realized we’re talking about two different things.
If you put an image up and don’t mark it as editorial, you are telling the customer it is all right to use it in a commercial sense. That is the crux of the original post.
The second point is that despite being used commercially, or editorially, the end user is ultimately responsible for how it is presented and used, and despite being either commercial or editorial, that is their prerogative to determine.
We’ll work towards improving and sharing that information with buyers, but it is a separate issue to editorial tagging.
Images that have recognizable places, people or brands without signed releases must be marked as editorial. Otherwise you are telling the customer it is usable in a commercial sense. This is the central point contributors must be very actively vigilant towards.
We will be writing more detailed guides on this so there is more information and will post it here when it is ready.
Steve: Can you find wording on any agency that asserts what you are stating? I want to see how other agencies address the issue because I never noticed anything like this before. Specifically, allocating responsibility and liability to the customer in regards to the end use.
I don’t want to put anything in our legalese that makes it stand out as compared to other agencies, but if what you are saying is true, then they’ve already figured out how to word it in a smart way.