In my line of work, I try to digest a lot of news—both to stay up to date on what’s happening in my local and global neighborhoods as well as to be able to offer informed commentary. One of my favorite tools had been Google Reader. It was an excellent way to skim a huge volume of headlines, pick out the few I wanted to read, and then share, star, tweet, or facebook articles as appropriate. I typically used the stars to mark articles that might make good blog fodder later, and shared articles so they’d appear in the news feed on this blog and so I could offer friends the ability to follow the stories I’m reading. It also made a nice archive of articles I’d read in case I needed to hunt one down for a fact-check.

Then Google re-launched Reader with a “cleaner” design and made it to work more exclusively with Google+. I don’t use Google+ and don’t know anyone who does. If I want to share something compelling, I use Facebook selectively for the articles I think are most accessible to a wide audience, then Twitter for articles I care enough to comment on for folks who care enough to follow me, then Google’s erstwhile “share” function to create an RSS fire hose of everything I’m reading. So Google effectively turned off that fire hose by removing the “share” button. Searching for alternatives was frustrating, as they turned up the same few options that didn’t replicate this function. Mostly I was relying on mobile apps like Feedler on our iPad and gReader on my Android. These both work great, and already offered a UI superior to Google Reader. Both piggy-back onto your Google Reader subscriptions and account with no export files needed. Even better, these still (fingers crossed) have the good ol’ “share” function and my RSS feed of shared items still works even after Google removed those buttons from their reader!

But I still wanted to be able to browse and share news on my laptop. It would have been great if either Feedler or gReader had a web-based version. Finally, I came across Feedly, an add-on available for Firefox and Chrome. I’m currently using the Firefox version. The UI isn’t quite as elegant as the apps or the original Google Reader, but it does the job. Click on an article, click on the eyeball icon to “preview this article,” and then you’ll see that “share” button in the upper right menu. I guess I’ll be using Feedly until Google Reader either reinstates the “share” button on their own reader or breaks the back-end function that lets these third-party apps continue to populate the feed. Feedly also has mobile apps, which I haven’t tried yet since I’m very happy with the others.

I’ve been seeing various articles about something called HiveMined being created as a direct response to the Google Reader changes, but it’s still in development. I’ll give it a look once it launches, but for now, Feedly’s doing the job Google Reader doesn’t want.

Out with the old.... (Kind of ruins the moment when my copyright is emblazoned across the face of a Palestinian girl facing Israeli soldiers, no?)

I’ve read a lot of different perspectives on watermarking and could never quite make up my mind. I’m not sure what finally pushed me over the edge, but I’ve decided to switch from a completely intrusive watermark with diagonal lines to a more discreet one in the corner that makes clear this is my copyrighted property but I’m not going to get all up in your grill about it.

I think what it came down to was the fact that if somebody is going to steal my image and crop my copyright and credit, they were never going to buy a license to begin with. So the worst case scenario is that a few of my images are floating around out there unauthorized, hopefully telling the story of Palestinians struggling against the Israeli occupation or immigrants in America struggling for their rights or Norwegians … enjoying  a nice sunset, or whatever.

In the meantime, when folks stumble across this site, or an image I share on Facebook or Twitter, they’ll be able to enjoy it more fully without having to mentally screen out those annoying lines and being reminded that I’m a money-grubbing freelance mercenary who can’t live with the thought of some thieving a-hole using my photos for free without permission. Those things may still be true, but at least now viewers won’t be reminded of it with a big in-your-face watermark. And I’m still blocking right-clicks in the galleries to foil all the thieving a-holes too dumb to do a screenshot.

So it’s going to take me a while to work my way through all the galleries the archive, but say good by to my “crossbones” (as one client put it) and say hello to my elegant little credit in the lower right corner.

....In with the new. (Now the story is front and center, instead of my need to assert intellectual property ownership.)

So I was a little shocked when, within days of posting my “Secrets of Editorial Microstock—Revealed!” post, I was contacted by the PR firm representing BigStock, who wanted to dialogue about my criticisms of their site. I was surprised because my site doesn’t get a ton of traffic, which means that either a) My modest volume yet professional quality is finally getting noticed, or b) BigStock is getting its money’s worth out of their PR firm.

I welcomed their responses to my various complaints, and clarified some of my experience with their batch tool in my follow-up post, but here’s their point-by-point response to my original criticism. I have to say, I’m not that surprised by anything here. I complained that they reject images that sell great on Dreamstime and Shutterstock—they stand by their “high-quality” standards. I complained about slow review time—they say they’re making improvements. …. And so forth. My major complaint continues to be about sales. But now that they’re using TWITTER I’m sure the downloads will be skyrocketing.

Bigstock’s Image Selectivity:

Bigstock’s approval rate for images is on par with other top online stock photography sites.  Our image customers are seeking high-quality images on a large variety of topics and our goal is to service their needs on behalf of our contributors.  If there’s ever a question or concern about a specific image that hasn’t been accepted, or if there is a feeling that an error has been made, contributors can contact support with their concerns and we’ll provide guidance.

Review Time:

We typically approve images in one to three days . This can vary if we see a surge of upload activity within a specific week. We understand that short approval times are critical for editorial content.  We recently added additional reviewers as well as an additional review coordinator to shorten  the amount of time from upload to approval.

Uploading Process:

Bigstock’s new uploading tool retains most of the functionality of the old process while providing better batch tools and more flexible options for selecting images. We also added keyboard shortcuts, such as the ability to use the tab key to cycle through the entire metadata editing process. Our category suggestion tool was moved, but we’re seeking ways to consolidate. We’ve also launched a new “quick view” for upload and earnings data. While many contributors have told us that they are happy with these improvements, we do appreciate and respond to feedback sent to feedback@bigstockphoto.com.   Additional features are coming soon.

Sales:

We’ve made major investments in marketing and infrastructure to expand Bigstock’s global presence  We’re pleased to report that since March, we’ve launched a redesigned website; new online, e-mail and print ad campaigns; a redesigned newsletter; a trade show presence; regular Facebook and Twitter updates; as well as two new blogs, “The Upload” for contributors and “The Download” for image buyers.  We see ourselves as partners with our contributors and many exciting things are underway to support Bigstock’s growth.

Thanks for the opportunity to share our news and enhancements with you. Stay tuned for more updates to come.

I should begin posting running totals of sales like my buddy Laryn Kragt Bakker. His (far more impressive) stats tell the same tale–BigStock is in last place. I’m not trying to beat up on BigStock, but with limited time to process and upload, I’m starting to measure that time according to ROI. And right now, it’s just not worth it.