What the hell's happening to HN? Why so many negative put downs on pet projects? Someone just posted 10 free images for you to photoshop your startup's screenshot onto. Shut up, take it, and say thank you.<p>Jesus Christ! What? Your poor egos are hurt because you didn't change the world before age 25 and now have to attack everyone's pet project for not being the next flickr?<p>So what did you guys make? Post links please.
It's amazing how much the title submission can influence comments.<p>Original title: "Hated expensive, crappy stock photos so I made this."<p>Current title: "Free hi-resolution photos for your website. 10 new photos every 10 days"<p>A lot of these comments are really negative and might be confusing to people who didn't know the original title. And frankly, when you have a title like that to start, it warrants some of the criticism.<p>If you just take this site for what it is, and what the new title says, then it's awesome and no one should really have a problem with someone spending their time taking great quality photos and releasing them for free.
There are millions (billions?) of stock photos in the world, and your plan is to replace all of them with 10 pictures of a MacBook Air?<p>Even with more pictures it's unlikely you'll beat a Creative Commons search on Flickr:<p><a href="http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=&l=cc&ss=0&ct=0&mt=photos&w=all&adv=1" rel="nofollow">http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=&l=cc&ss=0&ct=0&...</a>
Interesting, but a slight critique. There's some lens chromatic aberration in the bokeh/blur... a better lens that performs with little chroma wide open would solve it, or failing that stopping down just a couple notches down from wide open.<p>Yet another reasons people pay for hi-resolution high-quality photographs, or take their own. Photographs cost money because they provide value, and some random photos taken by a non-professional don't always cut it. Great of you to give it a shot and put it out there though.
I think the developer took MVP to the extreme.<p>For legal reasons it's critical to fully explain the license on the photos available for download, and the terms for anybody submitting the photos. Unfortunately it's really not enough to just say: "Free hi-resolution photos for your website."
Those looking for stock images: google image has a creative commons filter. Trying to find free "stock images" is a road to hell. The key word is "creative commons".
What I surprise; HN crapping all over a show submission. Not even in a constructive form, hate for the sake of hate. Love it. Though to be fair, I'm glad you all seem to see no value in this. I'll use these and won't in turn have to replace them as they take on the ubiquity of Bootstrap
Why do all of the photo's have Apple products in them?<p>I would recommend displaying the license in which these high resolution photos can be used, because "free" isn't a license.
Nice shots, but why not just submit them to Wikimedia Commons/Flickr/etc under Creative Commons license? Much better chance of people actually finding and using them, IMO.
why the hate guys?
he made some good looking pictures and is offering them for free. And the top 3 comments here are people hating.
Creative Commons is difficult in most stock photo use cases - there is often the requirement to display an attribution close to the picture, which would look odd in most designs.
So please calm down and try to appreciate the effort.
Quality + Scarcity = You get what you pay for.<p>If you don't want to pay the big bucks and don't use a lot of media, hire a photographer. In any large city a LF photographer post on craiglists will net you more emails then you know what to do with. If you only need a handful of shots just use one of the many "Fiver" type sites.<p>I don't know why this post is upvoted so high, unless your website sells macbooks, watches, or glasses of water, the premise is ridiculous.
<a href="http://sxc.hu" rel="nofollow">http://sxc.hu</a> has a ton of free stock photos of varying licenses/quality. Also searching on flickr for cc'd images often will net you some good photos.
Oddly, the first thing that I noticed is that the image of him typing at the keyboard has really bad chroma aberration (notice the purple around all the keys).
Maybe you could try turning on your screens, perhaps using a white or light blue fullscreen image so there is some kind of light reflected into the hands and objects surrounding the devices. Otherwise it will look odd when somebody photoshops a screenshot on top of the black screen.<p>Some of the other feedback is spot on, but I, for one, thank you for your intentions. Being thankful and polite is so underrated.
This is cool, good work. My startup is in the photography industry–don't worry about competing with Flickr's CC images or even microstock sites. Just focus on <i>"Splash images for your software/mobile startup."</i> ... if anything, you're competing with the free PSDs you find on Dribbble<p>I have a full studio with Profoto strobes. If you need some more contributors, let me know.<p>Some other thoughts:<p>- I think you'll grow out of Tumblr and Dropbox real quick (I'm already seeing Dropbox errors)<p>- Give people an option to "buy out" an image from the set. For, say, $100 someone can license exclusively an image and it's no longer available.<p>- Include some Photoshop files that place a screen shot on the image and apply the proper perspective/warping. People can then just drop in their screen shots.<p>Good MVP.<p>EDIT: Here's a quick-and-dirty example of a PSD with a "placed" screenshot that is adjusted properly to fit the screen:<p><a href="http://cloud.bigfolio.com/unsplash-1.psd" rel="nofollow">http://cloud.bigfolio.com/unsplash-1.psd</a>
10 CC photos of an Apple laptop at the top of hacker news...<p>This is someone winning a bet that they could get anything to the top of hacker news somehow, right?
Common, this is pure Apple dope... And how cliché! The neat and clean hacker standing straight in front of an espresso and his shiny Macbook lying a sweet wooden table...<p>Hacking is sooooooo cool and clean!
Also, Flickr has lots and lots of good quality CC and other free to use licensed photos.<p><a href="http://www.flickr.com/creativecommons/" rel="nofollow">http://www.flickr.com/creativecommons/</a>
I love stuff like this - super simple solution to a common pain point.<p><a href="http://placeit.breezi.com/" rel="nofollow">http://placeit.breezi.com/</a> is a very similar service with CC images.
Why all the hate? You guys are always telling people to launch early and at the end of the day the OP is sharing something that he created to help out his peers, for free and with the promise of more to come.. I certainly appreciate it!<p>edit: I see a lot of you took issue with the original title:<p>> "Hated expensive, crappy stock photos so I made this"<p>Granted, it wasn't a great title but I kind of get where he's coming from - I used to spend hours trawling through istockphoto and shutterstock for decent photographs and a lot of it matched that description.
This is awesome, I've also felt the same about finding photos. I hope this changes that. Keep it up! I'll contribute when I learn some post processing so you can have more awesome photos.
All of the comments here hating on the "only 10 photos on Apple" seem pretty ridiculous to me. Clearly, the author chose a theme for today and will add more non-Apple photos later.<p>Then again, the OP did release it right at the start, before it'll be useful to anyone, so I'm surprised it's hit the #1 spot.<p>Even if you do keep this pace, you'll have a grand total of 365 pictures after a year, covering something like 36 topics. Not exactly ground-breaking. It would be great if you could crowd-source and curate the best pictures.
Stock photography sites are about being able to search with any keyword and come up with a photo that you can instantly use. The value is in convenience, not the photos themselves
Some really good shots here, they will come in handy at some point in my current projects release span. Thanks for the free images. I don't get why everyone here is being so negative? You are getting free high quality images to use for your startups, be grateful you are getting anything at all. I know for a fact you could get money for these images on a paid stock site.<p>The HN community has really deteriorated in the last year or two.
I think these photos are meant for designers to superimpose their designs on top of the screens? Not sure if the focus is on the objects in the images.
What incentive do photographers have to submit to your site? At least on the 'majors' (istockphoto, dreamstrime, shutterstock et al) they earn something. And if you are the only one doing submissions, you can't possibly cover all categories so if I'm in search of a particular shot I am unlikely to come to your site. Not trying to be negative, just trying to understand what your plan is.
My problem with stock photos is, people in them look like robots. Understandable, since they are usually not actors. Many times when they are talking, they don't look at each other but some crap object. When taking 20 variants of a scene, at least one should involve people talking with each other. That's what people usually do when they pose for a stock photo set for an hour.
Looks great, and it's an awesome idea. I'm not sure what your incentive to continue doing this will be, but please do. Also, I would much prefer quality over quantity. So, if one week you don't have time to create something great, just skip it. (My opinion of course)
Thank you so much for this. The pictures are beautiful, and I've used them to spiffy-up my medium profile. Just published a post with one of them as the header in "IMHO".<p>Again, really great work, and thank you again.
So you took a couple of pictures (that appear to be Apple ads more than anything, as an aside)? I'm sorry if this sounds negative, but I find it completely disingenuous that you denigrate an entire industry and portray a pittance of images as the salvation.<p>When you pay for a stock image, as an aside, a part of the value of paying is economic scarcity: That the images that you choose aren't blanketing every Wordpress site, etc.
As somebody who did pro photography for a few years, these photos are a good example of why you should never shoot JPG, but RAW instead, and process everything in 16 bit per channel until you actually save the end result.<p>Your process resulted in absolutely horrible posterization, can be clearly seen on this one (display of the laptop):<p><a href="https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/18793141/macbook-air-all-faded-and-stuff.jpg" rel="nofollow">https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/18793141/macbook-air-all...</a>