Re: Rendering the Print
Re: Rendering the Print
- Subject: Re: Rendering the Print
- From: Rick McCleary <email@hidden>
- Date: Sat, 07 Jul 2007 18:23:43 -0400
Martin,
I have no interest in protecting abhorrent corporate behavior (like
Adobe's attempt to promote RF images to the detriment of a good chunk
of their own customers, and the gouging of non-US customers.) However,
it seems misguided (in the literal sense) to blast Adobe in a thread
that addresses something else altogether on a forum where you're
largely preaching to the choir. Why not hit them straight on in a
thread dedicated to the subject? Why bury your message under the title
"Rendering the Print"? My question about this being a professional
forum was directed at your posting comments that were off-topic from
the thread, not whether it is unprofessional to criticize Adobe.
Additiionally, it's quite a challenge to affect corporate behavior when
the company you're targeting has a virtual monopoly on the market.
What's their incentive to change? In that situation, it's completely
ineffective to lob bombs from the back bench, hence my suggestion of
"the third way".
BTW, your perception of why I stopped contributing to Pro Imaging is in
your head only. I got busy with work, and the forum simply didn't
address my needs at the time. I'll check it out again. (I'm an active
member of ASMP over here -- ASMP addresses most of the same issues -
copyright, orphan works, RF.)
I applaud your passion. The trick, as always, is knowing how to turn
passion into effective change.
Rick
RICK MCCLEARY PHOTOGRAPHY
201 Orchard Drive
Purcellville, VA 20132
v 540-338-4895
c 540-454-7180
www.rickmccleary.com
On Jul 7, 2007, at 3:03 PM, email@hidden
wrote:
Message: 6
Date: Sat, 7 Jul 2007 09:52:22 +0100
From: Martin Orpen <email@hidden>
Subject: Re: Rendering the Print
To: email@hidden
Message-ID: <email@hidden>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed
On 6 Jul 2007, at 20:13, Rick McCleary wrote:
Not sure why Mr. Orpen chose to reply to this particular post with
his gripes about Adobe's business practice. The points he makes
have nothing whatsoever to do with the subject of the original post.
This is a professional forum, is it not?
Oh Rick, have you forgotten me so soon?
Surely you can remember when you were a member of Pro Imaging?
ISTR that you drifted off when we took Adobe to task for selling
Royalty Free images back in 2005.
You claimed that you were looking for a "third way" if I'm not
mistaken - which seemed to really mean not challenging Adobe on any
matter whatsoever.
A "third way" which now also appears to include calling others who
criticise Adobe "unprofessional" and not worthy of being part of
colorsync-users...
Years later Adobe are still flogging RF and their plans to do the
*right thing* and look for ways to compensate photographers with a
reasonable fee for their labours have all turned to dust.
Or, more accurately, turned to a bunch of lame links on their site to
photo libraries that sell Rights Managed work.
--
Martin Orpen
<http://www.pro-imaging.org/> Intermational support for professional
image makers
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Colorsync-users mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden