pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: * in shutterstock. How can the agency accept this collaborator?  (Read 1135 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: August 11, 2017, 21:40 »
+2
This guy uploaded millions of times online the same heart with small changes and the agency did not comment anything of being similar images. what
If I were a client I would not see the new vectors because I would hate to see the same thing
 >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:(
newbielink:http://www.shutterstock.com/g/triwawss?page=1&sort=newest&search_source=base_gallery&language=en [nonactive]
« Last Edit: August 12, 2017, 01:35 by angiedragon »


« Reply #1 on: August 11, 2017, 22:00 »
0
First post?

« Reply #2 on: August 12, 2017, 02:41 »
+2
Self advertising?

« Reply #3 on: August 16, 2017, 08:36 »
+2
I don't care. I'm not a stockholder, I don't make monograms with initials, which is all these are. I don't run the agency and what this guy does or what SS accepts of this sort, has no effect on my images or sales? Same with the marijuana guy. Buyers looking for what I shoot will never see either of these two, or any of the other who have one image done 1,000 ways. I must add, just because someone has a collection of this junk, doesn't mean they make any sales from it.  :)

« Reply #4 on: August 17, 2017, 07:00 »
0
I don't care. I'm not a stockholder, I don't make monograms with initials, which is all these are. I don't run the agency and what this guy does or what SS accepts of this sort, has no effect on my images or sales? Same with the marijuana guy. Buyers looking for what I shoot will never see either of these two, or any of the other who have one image done 1,000 ways. I must add, just because someone has a collection of this junk, doesn't mean they make any sales from it.  :)
What does puzzle me though is why? I cant imagine its profitable but then why would they do it?

« Reply #5 on: August 17, 2017, 07:44 »
+1
I don't care. I'm not a stockholder, I don't make monograms with initials, which is all these are. I don't run the agency and what this guy does or what SS accepts of this sort, has no effect on my images or sales? Same with the marijuana guy. Buyers looking for what I shoot will never see either of these two, or any of the other who have one image done 1,000 ways. I must add, just because someone has a collection of this junk, doesn't mean they make any sales from it.  :)
What does puzzle me though is why? I cant imagine its profitable but then why would they do it?

SS or the contributor? If the contributor, they get one sale and imagine great wealth by putting up 1000 of the same thing. Like same eye with a different flag hundreds of them or construction workers same shot over 300 different backgrounds. The monograms are something else, he would have to have, every letter of the alphabet in every combination, so what's that? 676 of two letters? Then find a different shap and start all over again.

Why SS does it? I'm to the point that they are just growing to the biggest and have no cares about the best or quality any longer.

But when you see people still shooting tomatoes isolated on white, don't you wonder the same? I can't imagine it's profitable, why do it?  :D

« Reply #6 on: August 17, 2017, 08:26 »
+2
I don't care. I'm not a stockholder, I don't make monograms with initials, which is all these are. I don't run the agency and what this guy does or what SS accepts of this sort, has no effect on my images or sales? Same with the marijuana guy. Buyers looking for what I shoot will never see either of these two, or any of the other who have one image done 1,000 ways. I must add, just because someone has a collection of this junk, doesn't mean they make any sales from it.  :)
What does puzzle me though is why? I cant imagine its profitable but then why would they do it?

SS or the contributor? If the contributor, they get one sale and imagine great wealth by putting up 1000 of the same thing. Like same eye with a different flag hundreds of them or construction workers same shot over 300 different backgrounds. The monograms are something else, he would have to have, every letter of the alphabet in every combination, so what's that? 676 of two letters? Then find a different shap and start all over again.

Why SS does it? I'm to the point that they are just growing to the biggest and have no cares about the best or quality any longer.

But when you see people still shooting tomatoes isolated on white, don't you wonder the same? I can't imagine it's profitable, why do it?  :D
Certainly agree SS do it because they still boast about the number of images in their reports....like a supermarket boasting they have 99 variations of baked beans .....though supermarkets grew out of this a while back and most mature industries look to minimise their inventory. After doing those 676 and getting no profit you'd think he/she might review the approach rather than do it all over again...

« Reply #7 on: August 17, 2017, 09:28 »
+1
I don't care. I'm not a stockholder, I don't make monograms with initials, which is all these are. I don't run the agency and what this guy does or what SS accepts of this sort, has no effect on my images or sales? Same with the marijuana guy. Buyers looking for what I shoot will never see either of these two, or any of the other who have one image done 1,000 ways. I must add, just because someone has a collection of this junk, doesn't mean they make any sales from it.  :)
What does puzzle me though is why? I cant imagine its profitable but then why would they do it?

SS or the contributor? If the contributor, they get one sale and imagine great wealth by putting up 1000 of the same thing. Like same eye with a different flag hundreds of them or construction workers same shot over 300 different backgrounds. The monograms are something else, he would have to have, every letter of the alphabet in every combination, so what's that? 676 of two letters? Then find a different shap and start all over again.

Why SS does it? I'm to the point that they are just growing to the biggest and have no cares about the best or quality any longer.

But when you see people still shooting tomatoes isolated on white, don't you wonder the same? I can't imagine it's profitable, why do it?  :D
Certainly agree SS do it because they still boast about the number of images in their reports....like a supermarket boasting they have 99 variations of baked beans .....though supermarkets grew out of this a while back and most mature industries look to minimise their inventory. After doing those 676 and getting no profit you'd think he/she might review the approach rather than do it all over again...

No doubt you are right on both counts. This one slid past so fast, I missed it.  151,585,188 royalty-free stock images / 1,171,926 new stock images added this week. Not that 151 million is much different than 150 million. Now adding more images a week than what they had total in the first years?

Contributors are chasing their tails most of the time, or looking for the magic answer. I just sold a shot of dog poo, so I'll go search for 100 more piles to photograph, it must be how to make money.

Others just go look for most popular and copy that. Heck, it's been done, it's covered and new files will usually be buried unless they are exceptional and better than what's being copied. FT doesn't take many of them anymore, rejected as similar. So the guy with the marijuana, has a niche, we don't know if he makes money or not, or just samples the props and makes another 1,000 stock shots.  :)


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
36 Replies
8536 Views
Last post August 05, 2013, 09:16
by gbalex
1 Replies
1094 Views
Last post January 16, 2015, 04:03
by Sean Locke Photography
33 Replies
6055 Views
Last post November 28, 2015, 16:43
by etudiante_rapide
6 Replies
949 Views
Last post December 27, 2016, 00:56
by unnonimus
8 Replies
1383 Views
Last post February 14, 2017, 02:58
by rickwang

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors