• Please use real names.

    Greetings to all who have registered to OPF and those guests taking a look around. Please use real names. Registrations with fictitious names will not be processed. REAL NAMES ONLY will be processed

    Firstname Lastname

    Register

    We are a courteous and supportive community. No need to hide behind an alia. If you have a genuine need for privacy/secrecy then let me know!
  • Welcome to the new site. Here's a thread about the update where you can post your feedback, ask questions or spot those nasty bugs!

XP wallpaper finally tracked down

Jeff O'Neil

New member
Interesting article coming up in Vanity Fair.

A journalist took it upon himself to figure out where one of the windows desktop XP photographs was taken. It's the one called Autumn.

After an exhaustive search he found the photo was taken in Milton Ontario Canada.

Ok, so what's wrong with this? Microsoft bought the photo from Corbis for $300 USD. The photographer got 45.00 USD. It's been shipped on millions of operating systems worldwide.

I'm wondering how on earth could a company like Corbis sell a photo for 300 bucks to Microsoft without some sort of usage requirements? Surely someone went hmmm? Microsoft? Lets see what thhey want it for?

I just find it stupefying that this man only got $45.00 for a photo that has been shipped all over the world.

It's no surprise that people are so insecure about the distribution of their work. I had dinner tonight with my wife's cousin and his fiance. They were talking about the upcoming wedding and how the photographer they had hired was so great they loved his style etc.

They went on to say how the pictures from the wedding would be theirs. They would own them and then they would post them on this pre wedding site for people to download if they want. My spidey senses went off the map at that point!

I told them to check with the photographer as it his work and reselling may not be permitted and allowing others to download and print on home computers would degrade his work. Raised a few eyebrows over that!

I also told them to check with this pre wedding registry website to see if the photo's had to be printed by their company or could actually be downloaded. They hadn't checked on that.

I've never shot a wedding professionally. But I have assisted on a few. Even as a guest. Trying to keep people from interfering with the hired pro while they are working...tough sometimes when 300 pound Aunt Jean wants a PHOTO NOW!

So here's the real info...looking forward to others thoughts on this.

Jeff

Here's the link to the Toronto Star article, not sure how long it will be up:

http://www.thestar.com/News/article/184493

Here's the story copy from the Toronto Star:

Michele Henry
Staff Reporter
Serenity is in Burlington.

It's true. A Vanity Fair journalist discovered it there.

After an exhaustive search that almost brought New York-based Nick Tosches to his knees, sifting through sources from Lake Como in Italy to Colborne, Ont., in Southern Ontario, he finally found what he was looking for.

Turns out the leaf-littered lane that stole his heart one afternoon when he first glimpsed it on his computer – it's the default desktop wallpaper in Microsoft's XP operating system – is just west of Toronto in the Burlington suburb of Kilbride.

"It was insane," Tosches says. "Something that would appear very simple at first probably turned out to be one of the most difficult searches of my life."

It took Tosches just over a year to pinpoint the exact location of calm – actually a photograph called Autumn that popped up on his computer screen after a tech-nerd configured his new machine.

An experienced investigator, who once conned the Vatican into giving him a doctorate so he could gain access to hidden archives, Tosches, 58, was confident he'd find the object of his desire.

He documented his search in a recent article published in Vanity Fair online.

"I was so absorbed by that picture," he says. "Autumn is my favourite time of year. I got lost in it. I figured I'd just ask Microsoft where it is."



He made hundreds of queries to Microsoft, public relations agents, inn owners, horse farmers, realtors, small-town librarians and tourism departments of various countries.

Tosches wrote emails, made countless phone calls and followed up on "feelings" he had that placed the scene in horse-friendly states, such as Vermont.

"Fifteen years ago, we had telephone, postal system, the library. ... It seemed easy to get information," he says, musing about the time he spent searching.

"Now we have huge, intertwined, monolithic conglomerations with all their wires tangled. I did have the feeling of congestion. It really doesn't make things easier."

Stymied at every turn, Tosches painstakingly sifted through 5,000 photographs in a database labelled Autumn, praying to find a match.

He did. But unlike the other pictures in the Corbis database, a library with more than 70 million images for sale, it didn't contain pertinent, locating info.

Then he got an email from Microsoft placing the scene in Campbellville, Ont. But, it was a false lead.

Fortunately, and probably by "magic," a Vanity Fair researcher was able to track down the name of Autumn's photographer. Peter Burian shot the picture along with hundreds of frames in October 1999 while he was testing lenses for a photography trade magazine. He sent it to Corbis, where Microsoft probably purchased it for $300. Burian's cut was $45.

The Milton man says it was a treat to get Tosches's call.

"I was more shocked to find out that one of my photographs is available to hundreds of millions of people," he says. "I didn't think anything of it when I took it."

The lane in the picture leads to an unspectacular farmhouse once owned by the Harris family, one of the first settlers in the area, Burian says.

Tosches says he's going to see it with his own eyes. He's hoping to make the trip sometime this year. "I know where it is now and it's not going anywhere."

 

Ray West

New member
Hi Jeff,

The original artical says
He sent it to Corbis, where microsoft probably purchased it for $300. Burian's cut was $45.
You are implying that $300.00 was the actual amount paid by microsoft. I expect that microsoft have thousands of employees, who could/would/maybe have already supplied equivalent images for free, but I guess stock photos are easier.

I know nothing about Corbis, I suspect there is some legal agreement between them and the photographer, which may or may have not been broken. Microsoft did not get where they are by being completely honest or generous in the eyes of the rest of the world - no large company ever does, afaik.

Best wishes,

Ray
 

Jeff O'Neil

New member
Hi Jeff,

The original artical says You are implying that $300.00 was the actual amount paid by microsoft. I expect that microsoft have thousands of employees, who could/would/maybe have already supplied equivalent images for free, but I guess stock photos are easier.

I know nothing about Corbis, I suspect there is some legal agreement between them and the photographer, which may or may have not been broken. Microsoft did not get where they are by being completely honest or generous in the eyes of the rest of the world - no large company ever does, afaik.

Best wishes,

Ray

Ray,

I think I was shocked that Corbis would sell a photo to Microsoft without some sort of intended use clause. While they may indeed purchase many images for use in their product line up, one that is meant as a desktop display certainly would and should demand a higher payment.

A fee of only 45.00 to the photographer just seems highly unfair. But you're right MS didn't become the huge company they are by being overly generous.

Jeff
 

Jeff O'Neil

New member
Isn't Corbis owned by Bill Gates?

Look here
And here


You're quite right Nicolas. Corbis is a Gates company.

From the links you supplied it was disturbing to see how many images Corbis owns.

In competition with Mark Getty, Gates has been buying image libraries over the past decade. Purchase of the libraries gave Corbis ownership of photographic prints and sometimes also gave it ownership of copyright in those works.

So I guess it should come as no surprise that the photographer only got 45.00 for his work.

Jeff
 

Ray West

New member
Hi Nicolas,
Thanks for the Links, the second in particular is very informative. Also, that links to Caslon, which has some interesting 'publishing to web' information. and Caslon home page linked to this gem - if you are a dog owner- it is the truth http://www.j-bradford-delong.net/OpEd/virtual/dog_haiku.html

I wonder if the Corbis photos will form the back bone of M$ virtual 3d photo thing we discussed many months ago - it seemed apparent to me that they intended paying no respect to copyright ownership. Maybe I can find the thread.

Best wishes,
Ray
 

nicolas claris

OPF Co-founder/Administrator
Thanks Ray
Woudl be interesting to check!

BTW, for the lazy ones, just a short reminder picked-up from : http://www.ketupa.net/corbis.htm

This chronology is indicative only.

1973 Sygma news photo agency founded
1989 Corbis founded by Bill Gates of Microsoft
1995 Corbis buys Bettmann Archive
1999 Corbis buys Sygma
2000 Corbis buys Stock Market photo collection
2000 Corbis buys TempSpot sports image collection
2002 Corbis buys Sekani moving image collection
2005 buys Zefa for US$96m
2005 buys The Roger Richman Agency ("iconic personalities")

And, now how can we escape from this system if we want to sale our images a little more far away than our "local" clients?
Who will be stong enough to have our confidence and be able to compete that trust?

I'm an old dreamer and desesperate by the behavior of such companies.
Ultra liberalism is not freedom. The story above is a too true proof…

and now, to relax a bit, try to say fast, many times:
too true proof too true proof too true proof too true proof too true proof too true proof …

LOL!
 

Erik DeBill

New member
Sorry, I don't agree, it is not unfair.

It is theft, unsane, disgusting. Please note that I keep being polite.

Maybe, but I could imagine a lot of people being thrilled to see their picture on all those computers, regardless of how much they got paid. It all comes down to what the original seller wanted. By selling it to a stock agency the photographer gave up most of their control of it anyway.

It's not like the wallpapers are fine art or carefully photographed to order - they're pretty snapshots, probably selected by an intern.
 

MArk Le

New member
$45 do sound more like a joke. I believe that the photographer can pursue a legal action (that doesn't mean that the price is not appropriate, maybe it is, maybe it's not: let a Judge decide it). The Agency may also become part of this discussion (with the Judge) because you don't give the rights easily. Their job is to sell the images, and the diffusion is part of the task: it's not like the Agency (even mine, which is great) can possibly say "we didn't know that it was Microsoft, or we didn't know the destination": nope, they can't say that, no way.

Maybe the Judge will agree that the price was fair.. or maybe not.

Jeff, do you remember (for example) the case of the model against nestle?

Erik: well, the image on the package of nescafe was fine art? It is not.. still you (nestle) need to pay a fair amount of money in order to use it on your products: that's how it is, and it is also calculated depending on the circulation, size, diffusion..lots of things.


This world is motivated by the money, not because we (photographers) are motivated by that, but because everybody else is .. so we need to comply.

I understand that some posters here would like to see a free circulation of the images but that will have to apply also to their personal salary for the job they do: let's make everything free.. starting from their job. That way, for one who needs to endorse a free system, starting out with a wonderful gesture like giving back the salary will be the right way to pursue the battle.

But I want to see it, first. May I? See it?

/sarcasm OFF
 
Top