Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin
Pexels – Free stock photos (pexels.com)
136 points by tilt on July 6, 2016 | hide | past | favorite | 39 comments


The more variety, the better! Apparently a lot of people love Unsplash, but how many...

(1) mountainscapes

(2) cityscapes

(3) fields

(4) pretty girls standing in fields, and

(5) coffeshop patrons typing away on powered-off MacBooks

... does the world really need?

Especially when they all come with washed-out Instagram filters pre-applied.


It's interesting to watch how what was considered good taste a short time ago is gradually becoming tired, cliché, phoney -- and in 10 years will look as outdated as 2003's web designs look now.

The software industry and startup scene is enormously fashion-driven. A lot of people like to pretend it's the opposite though: a group of ideal meritocracies building highly needed products based on rational data-driven decisions...


Staying fashionable for a given context is a fantastic means of signaling that you're well connected. Even more so if you kick off a new trend.

Fashion based signals then inevitable degrade as they become more mainstream and are replaced by whatever hot new thing that's different enough to avoid confusion with other trends.

Even an ideal meritocracy requires abstractions for efficient communication.


It is as though people were just responding, unthinkingly, to some stimulus.


My quick-n-dirty benchmark for measuring the exhaustiveness of a stock photo website is how many photos I can find of man laughing alone with fruit salad. One of the staples of corporate promotional photography.

In this case, 0. Without looking too hard, Getty has 39. Of course, the quality of the search engine and tag database also plays into these results.


As an hobbyist artist I can never get enough free references for drawing.


> an hobbyist

I know this is grammatically correct (and I often try to use it), but something in my brain always struggles with 'an' preceding 'h' words.


Don't pronounce the h in cases like these. An obbyist.


As an historian of English grammar, I feel your pain.


Given how often the same images gets reused, given that I regularly recognise many of the popular Unsplash images all over the place these days, clearly we need a lot more variety.


I started a curated-link daily news roundup a couple months ago and the plethora of #5 was perfect for what I'd named "breakfast reading". :)


Seriously. It has almost become a cliche now.


Nice project! I used to find free stock photos browsing Flickr filtering by license: https://www.flickr.com/search/?text=&license=4%2C5%2C9%2C10


I got sick of seeing 100 different websites with stock photos so I built a web crawler to crawl all of them and put the links into a database

Thats how http://librestock.com was born. enjoy :)


How does their business model work? Are they a not-for-profit or non-profit? Do they really get enough money from shutterstock click-throughs and donations to fund the site and image curation process?


They also have ads and an app and/or PS plugin they're selling for $19.


Looks good!

Another public domain collection I use: https://pixabay.com/


I just got a $2 donation on Pixabay for one of my photos :-)


This site looks great. But think, Unsplash is unbeatable.


Is it just me, or do quite a few of the photos look like they are from Unsplash?


Yup

> Photo Sources

> Only Creative Commons images from our community of photographers and sources like Unsplash, Gratisography, Little Visuals and many more are added to our photo database. We constantly try to deliver as many high quality free stock photos as possible to the creatives who use our website.


So, can I use the ones with faces of people in them if they don't have a Model Release Form... ?


"The only restriction is that identifiable people may not appear in a bad light or in a way that they may find offensive, unless they give their consent."


> in a way that they may find offensive

IANAL but isn't that too vague?


ShutterStock is similarly vague, although they give some examples of offensive use.

From the ShutterStock license:

[YOU MAY NOT] Portray any person depicted in Visual Content (a "Model") in a way that a reasonable person would find offensive, including but not limited to depicting a Model: a) in connection with pornography, "adult videos", adult entertainment venues, escort services, dating services, or the like; b) in connection with the advertisement or promotion of tobacco products; c) in a political context, such as the promotion, advertisement or endorsement of any party, candidate, or elected official, or in connection with any political policy or viewpoint; d) as suffering from, or medicating for, a physical or mental ailment; or e) engaging in immoral or criminal activities.


this is one area you'd want it to be vague (from the image curator/host's perspective)


...so if the model happens to be Muslim and someone uses it in a website which sells pork meat, there is a potential case here? (I chose the example because I'm coming from a country in which this kind of stuff usually happened to be a problem - nothing meant against any religion or group).


Nope. Not in the USA. One of the best reasons to use a reputable commercial provider. Pixabay told me via email that their models do sign releases.


The website I used was - http://librestock.com/

Which is a large search engine for public domain images. Too bad the search sucks compared to this.


Hey! I'm the creator of librestock, could you please clarify as to what sucks and how I can improve it? I'm very much a beginner.


I think he means Pexels search sucks, not yours. Although he/she is not clear.

Your site does not look like it was made by a beginner. Seriously, is this what beginners can do?

I just did a side by side comparison searching for "ashtray", and your Librestock search actually finds ashtray photos from Pexels that not even Pexels search returns. So I'm quite confident that Pexels search sucks and yours does not suck.


Oh man thats a relief!

The reason I can find stuff from pexels that they cant find is actually because I have duplicate image detection that sources the tags from multiple sources. So a different source must have tagged it as ashtray!

I've been building websites for a year. I still consider myself very much a beginner. (I worked in design before that). thanks for the compliment!


Can be useful. Thanks for sharing!

I usually used sxc.hu so far, which became FreeImages.com some time ago.


Can these stock photos be used commercially? Can they be resold?


Yes, CC0 License.[0]

[0] - https://www.pexels.com/photo-license/


I personally prefer the UI design on pexels over unsplash


free? Does nobody ever learn?


Your comment lacks all the things needed for discussion to go anywhere. Was that your intention?

You take issue with "free" and in addition there's some valuable lesson we should be remembering, but that's where you've stumped me.


It's no Unsplash... sorry.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: