The Most Famous Geek in IT

Gushi writes "I want this guy to come work for us. He's famous. He's been everywhere. And he may not even know it. He knows about Windows Mail Servers and all about Open-Source Management Software as well as plenty about the intricacies of SCO server authentication. I want him to come join our team."

News for retards

[Anonymous Coward]

Why would the fact that three companies use the same clip art be of interest to anyone? This ranks right up there with yesterday's "Clouds are big" article.

Of course I've met him before...

[shivianzealot]

...nice guy, his friends call him "Zelig."

Why is Slashdot report on stock photos?

Re:Predictability, thy name is corporate photoart

[ip_vjl]

Stock photo = ~$25

Setting up good camera equipment (no, not your $200 digicam) with real lighting so that you don't end up with hotspots and unwanted shadows and having someone with enough knowledge to use it properly = ~$1000.

Which would you rather pay for a graphic on a site that will probably change in 3 months?

Re:Sadly I have a job

[Anonymous Coward]

No creature perishes more certainly at the point of any weapon than humor when pierced with the blade of explanation. -- Anonymous

Re:What's the big deal???

[poofmeisterp]

That could be explained easily by the "FUNNY" tag to the right of the story on the main page.
It's HUMOR. Funny. You're supposed to laugh.
Why do so many people lack a basic sense of humor?

Re:Predictability, thy name is corporate photoart

[ip_vjl]

I've done both (use stock photo and custom shoot).

For web stuff, 35mm camera shots are good enough, but you really need good lighting. Camera flashes give off very unnatural looking light. I had to do a photo-shoot of our CEO for a magazine interview. I have a photography background, so I was comfortable renting the appropriate lighting rig (and medium format camera, since the photo was going to be printed in the magazine at any size up to about 15x20 inches); but I don't expect that all companies have someone on-staff who would have the first clue about setting up appropriate location lighting.

On our site, the shot of the staff, and of the building are actual (homegrown) shots, but for simple graphic "punctuation" pieces, it's much more convenient to be able to use stock photography. It's not like we are in the photography business, so I don't have a studio set up full time. Additionally, I think you are totally discounting the fact that it takes somebody who knows how to take good photographs for it to look good. "Point and shoot" most likely will not leave you with anything useful.

I would agree, however, that once you are a high profile company, that you avoid stock photography in certain areas (ie. your home page, cover of your brochure, etc.) For that stuff, you should have something custom made. However for many small businesses, this just isn't an option.

Stock photography

[yooHoo202]

while this guy's photo is nearly as popular as that asian kid with the headphones (it seems cutting edge), there are some stock photography rules that ensure such a thing won't happen

this image is royalty free which means once you buy it, you can use it anywhere for anything. The other category is rights-managed. For a rights managed photo you specify a category that the photo is used for, where it will be placed, and for how long it will be used. A quote is generated based on that by Getty/Photodisc, etc.

You can reserve a rights managed photo for exclusive usage in a specific category (e.g. I.T. - Computers) so this type of thing won't happen. It's not that this was an unfortunate coincidence, the companies were just too cheap to find a photo they could reserve and call their own. Any other company in that industry would not be sold usage rights.

Expensive, but it prevents these threads!