MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: How can the SS database grow so fast?  (Read 7285 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.



« Reply #1 on: June 06, 2018, 03:31 »
+5
They enjoy rejecting similars with video footage.... but what about the photo? Are there no curators for this crap?

« Reply #2 on: June 06, 2018, 05:29 »
+9
I feel they are trying to become the next facebook or instagram or whatever I don't know. Its just a matter of time when they will drop the entire review process and reduce royalties like istock.

« Reply #3 on: June 06, 2018, 13:42 »
+2
Please tell me this is a plan to push customers up to a higher price platform.

« Reply #4 on: June 06, 2018, 13:47 »
+1
I feel they are trying to become the next facebook or instagram or whatever I don't know. Its just a matter of time when they will drop the entire review process and reduce royalties like istock.

They are nothing like facebook or instagram.  They just want to boast having one billion images before the competition does. 

Noedelhap

  • www.colincramm.com

« Reply #5 on: June 06, 2018, 16:03 »
+2
I'd be surprised if he had more than 5 sales a week.

« Reply #6 on: June 06, 2018, 16:08 »
+1
Its absolutely insane... he has 260.000 photos...
I really wonder how much he sells...

« Reply #7 on: June 06, 2018, 16:40 »
+3
Its absolutely insane... he has 260.000 photos...
I really wonder how much he sells...

Photos? He doesn't even know how to use a camera

« Reply #8 on: June 06, 2018, 18:29 »
0
Sometimes I wonder how I keep selling my fairly average efforts in the flood of images...I guess there's the answer....just ludicrous. Now sales are flattening maybe stockholders will start to dig a bit deeper wonder what they will make of this "quality content".

« Reply #9 on: June 07, 2018, 00:50 »
+4
This is one of the stunning portfolios I've ever seen. Not because of how good it is, but how dedicated the contributor is. This is passion in its purest form. I have no choice but to admire it.

« Reply #10 on: June 07, 2018, 00:58 »
+7
This is one of the stunning portfolios I've ever seen. Not because of how good it is, but how dedicated the contributor is. This is passion in its purest form. I have no choice but to admire it.
I haven't checked every single image but I suspect hes missed an opportunity to have each image in a range of colours....bit lazy really.

« Reply #11 on: June 07, 2018, 01:39 »
+2
Lol, quite funny actually!

But what it looks like is it was 100% automated. I *highly* highly doubt he manually submitted those. He probably did spend at least 2-3 hours creating the content. But pushing a button did the rest. For generation, it looks like a 3D model, which he 'slightly' tweaked/moved by 1 degree, just pushed a button, and submitted 26,000+ photos.

I am sure he is dominated the "POS" market. Lol, really quite funny.
https://www.shutterstock.com/g/percom -> 260,000+ images.

It's actually really quite hilarious.

HOWEVER, I don't think you have to worry about it. Shutterstock can play the same game - and they'll look and (eventually) say 'hmm, who has a portfolio of 260,000 photos of almost nearly identical content'? And then all they have to do is push 1 button, "delete", and his entire portfolio is gone.

Most companies have a low tolerance for what they perceive as spam, and it's just a matter of time until shutter stock does something about that. Even though he 'only' spent 2-3 hours (maybe actually 10-20 hours) - he will be quite upset when his account is deleted, and/or most of the images gone somewhere down the road...

« Reply #12 on: June 07, 2018, 01:43 »
+2
PPS, ss says:

"199,570,752 royalty-free stock images / 1,392,424 new stock images added this week"

So his 260,000 "photo" portfolio is 0.13% of shutterstocks entire portfolio! OR... if he uploaded it all this week, 19% of the entire upload. Maybe only '4' people uploaded "photos" this week, and each did 260,000+! :)

« Reply #13 on: June 07, 2018, 02:46 »
+3
Lol, quite funny actually!

But what it looks like is it was 100% automated. I *highly* highly doubt he manually submitted those. He probably did spend at least 2-3 hours creating the content. But pushing a button did the rest. For generation, it looks like a 3D model, which he 'slightly' tweaked/moved by 1 degree, just pushed a button, and submitted 26,000+ photos.

I am sure he is dominated the "POS" market. Lol, really quite funny.
https://www.shutterstock.com/g/percom -> 260,000+ images.

It's actually really quite hilarious.

HOWEVER, I don't think you have to worry about it. Shutterstock can play the same game - and they'll look and (eventually) say 'hmm, who has a portfolio of 260,000 photos of almost nearly identical content'? And then all they have to do is push 1 button, "delete", and his entire portfolio is gone.

Most companies have a low tolerance for what they perceive as spam, and it's just a matter of time until shutter stock does something about that. Even though he 'only' spent 2-3 hours (maybe actually 10-20 hours) - he will be quite upset when his account is deleted, and/or most of the images gone somewhere down the road...
The evidence is no they won't look and delete and supposedly images are inspected makes you wonder if some people have a "back door".

« Reply #14 on: June 07, 2018, 09:52 »
0
https://www.fotolia.com/p/204186849


seems like other agency care of their database...1000 images....219000 rejected:)

once i told ss is the only one doing this, somebody, a genius, answered folia and stock do the same. check the similarities now:)

« Reply #15 on: June 07, 2018, 11:32 »
0
The evidence is no they won't look and delete and supposedly images are inspected makes you wonder if some people have a "back door".
[/quote]

All that will happen is just 1-2 customers will have to complain, and say 'what is this', and then 'poof', portfolio gone...

« Reply #16 on: June 07, 2018, 11:52 »
+1
omg. it's hard to believe this port is hosted on ss.


« Reply #17 on: June 07, 2018, 12:00 »
+4
This is one of the stunning portfolios I've ever seen. Not because of how good it is, but how dedicated the contributor is. This is passion in its purest form. I have no choice but to admire it.
He just sets a 3D model and a camera with an helicoidal movement around it.
Then he starts the rendering and go to sleep.
The following morning he has 2000 frames ready to keyword and upload
:D

« Reply #18 on: June 07, 2018, 12:06 »
0
This is one of the stunning portfolios I've ever seen. Not because of how good it is, but how dedicated the contributor is. This is passion in its purest form. I have no choice but to admire it.
He just sets a 3D model and a camera with an helicoidal movement around it.
Then he starts the rendering and go to sleep.
The following morning he has 2000 frames ready to keyword and upload
:D

Thing is, keywords were probably auto-generated, as well as the uploads. So he just goes to sleep, wakes up, says 'ooh! portfolio of 260,000 images!'

« Reply #19 on: June 07, 2018, 13:24 »
+2
This is one of the stunning portfolios I've ever seen. Not because of how good it is, but how dedicated the contributor is. This is passion in its purest form. I have no choice but to admire it.
I haven't checked every single image but I suspect hes missed an opportunity to have each image in a range of colours....bit lazy really.

True. That would mean he has to use different keywords for each image and that would be too much work.

« Reply #20 on: June 07, 2018, 13:26 »
+1
This is one of the stunning portfolios I've ever seen. Not because of how good it is, but how dedicated the contributor is. This is passion in its purest form. I have no choice but to admire it.
He just sets a 3D model and a camera with an helicoidal movement around it.
Then he starts the rendering and go to sleep.
The following morning he has 2000 frames ready to keyword and upload
:D

Thing is, keywords were probably auto-generated, as well as the uploads. So he just goes to sleep, wakes up, says 'ooh! portfolio of 260,000 images!'

Yeah, he probably exported each frame with the same keyword set in the metadata and did a mass FTP upload. I'm just shocked that SS didn't reject anything.

« Reply #21 on: June 07, 2018, 16:34 »
0
SS advertised on Craigslist as a way to make easy money, then accepted everything that was submitted.  Instant billion.

ShadySue

« Reply #22 on: June 07, 2018, 18:13 »
+3

HOWEVER, I don't think you have to worry about it. Shutterstock can play the same game - and they'll look and (eventually) say 'hmm, who has a portfolio of 260,000 photos of almost nearly identical content'? And then all they have to do is push 1 button, "delete", and his entire portfolio is gone.
Most companies have a low tolerance for what they perceive as spam, and it's just a matter of time until shutter stock does something about that. Even though he 'only' spent 2-3 hours (maybe actually 10-20 hours) - he will be quite upset when his account is deleted, and/or most of the images gone somewhere down the road...

You mistake SS for a company which gives a d*mn. Cannabis Man is still up from at least 2015, and now has 46,684 images on SS, though I see that more recently he's moved into guns and one or two other themes. Wonder if he's drawing the outlines himself? (Of course he is!)

« Reply #23 on: June 08, 2018, 08:08 »
0
ShadySue, I always hear about this cannabis man but have never seen his portfolio. Whats his username?
thanks!

ShadySue

« Reply #24 on: June 08, 2018, 12:37 »
0
ShadySue, I always hear about this cannabis man but have never seen his portfolio. Whats his username?
thanks!

Do what I did.
Search in msg on 'cannabis' in the 'Shutterstock' forum.
You're welcome!

« Reply #25 on: June 08, 2018, 15:30 »
+1
Looks like he does have other colors, 2,599 pages of near duplicate renders. I really should get back into 3D ... lol

« Reply #26 on: June 09, 2018, 18:45 »
+4
I already spent some time sending emails to the SS complaining about these portfolios with almost the same images. Do you know what they answered?

"If you do not like the images use the search filter."

Simple like that.
The SS is behind these portfolios.

This is ridiculous. A joke to be very honest.


« Reply #27 on: June 09, 2018, 23:38 »
+1
I already spent some time sending emails to the SS complaining about these portfolios with almost the same images. Do you know what they answered?

"If you do not like the images use the search filter."

Simple like that.
The SS is behind these portfolios.

This is ridiculous. A joke to be very honest.

Don't worry about it.

It'll come down to money. If/when other people start "copying" this guy, and then shutterstock has portfolios of poeple wioth "1 million" images each, with virtually identical content - and customers complain and threaten to go elsewhere - *then* they will do something about it. Not any time before.

If indeed for the time being they are letting it 'ride' - sounds like they just want bragging rights for being the biggest portfolio site on earth. Once they've gotten that, then they will clean things up.


« Reply #28 on: June 10, 2018, 00:47 »
+6
I have a theory which says Shutterstock themselves are producing these spam images and populating their search. I don't think any sane person will do these kind of stuff.

« Reply #29 on: June 10, 2018, 02:59 »
+4
I already spent some time sending emails to the SS complaining about these portfolios with almost the same images. Do you know what they answered?

"If you do not like the images use the search filter."

Simple like that.
The SS is behind these portfolios.

This is ridiculous. A joke to be very honest.
They won't do anything because they believe their search engine is so intelligent they no longer need QC as it does it for them....meanwhile we all know it doesn't. This is SSs biggest weakness in my view and really could start to drive customers elsewhere.

« Reply #30 on: June 11, 2018, 05:37 »
+2
I have a theory which says Shutterstock themselves are producing these spam images and populating their search. I don't think any sane person will do these kind of stuff.

Microstockers and insanity go hand in hand  :o ;D

« Reply #31 on: June 11, 2018, 06:10 »
0
I have a theory which says Shutterstock themselves are producing these spam images and populating their search. I don't think any sane person will do these kind of stuff.

Microstockers and insanity go hand in hand  :o ;D
Along with conspiracy theories

« Reply #32 on: June 11, 2018, 21:38 »
+3
I feel they are trying to become the next facebook or instagram or whatever I don't know. Its just a matter of time when they will drop the entire review process and reduce royalties like istock.

Matter of time? that has already happened a couple years ago. $1.50 video is the next step. First the photos, then illustrations, now video. Why can't anyone see the repeat cycle. Make money from your work, then too many files, too many people, only enough buyers for much less of your work. This is a dead end full of empty promises. Microstock is so over.

« Reply #33 on: June 12, 2018, 00:42 »
+2
Hahaha! my God!  worst example of a port I have ever seen, worse then the pot-smoking port! and all the weed!...shows you what ambitions SS house nowadays!...actually I find it rather disgusting and insulting.

OM

« Reply #34 on: June 13, 2018, 18:31 »
+1
261 pages = 26,100 images and not 261,000. Still POS is an excellent description.

« Reply #35 on: June 14, 2018, 01:35 »
+3
I have a theory which says Shutterstock themselves are producing these spam images and populating their search. I don't think any sane person will do these kind of stuff.

Microstockers and insanity go hand in hand  :o ;D
Along with conspiracy theories

No point in conspiracy theories anymore its got beyond that. Just a pityfull and embarrassing place nowadays and thats weather you earn good or bad. Just pathetic!

« Reply #36 on: June 14, 2018, 04:08 »
0
261 pages = 26,100 images and not 261,000. Still POS is an excellent description.

It's just a search. His gallery has 2597 pages at the moment


H2O

« Reply #37 on: June 14, 2018, 06:08 »
+8
Unbelievable that anyone can even consider uploading one version of this bookcase let alone 2,599 pages of duplicates.

I cannot understand what is going on, I have had files rejected recently for being similar and they are not anywhere near this crap.

It really makes me wonder if its worth carrying uploading to SS.

« Reply #38 on: June 14, 2018, 09:21 »
+2
Unbelievable that anyone can even consider uploading one version of this bookcase let alone 2,599 pages of duplicates.

I cannot understand what is going on, I have had files rejected recently for being similar and they are not anywhere near this crap.

It really makes me wonder if its worth carrying uploading to SS.

Well, it all depends on your numbers. I am definitely not sure this portfolio makes any profit, due to the low quality.

I often wonder if SS is worth it looking at the low quality of some stuff on it, and then I remember it's my highest microstock source of revenue, and the second RPI, so I continue...

« Reply #39 on: June 15, 2018, 09:16 »
+1
Looks like he does have other colors, 2,599 pages of near duplicate renders. I really should get back into 3D ... lol

I stopped at 20 pages of the book shelf. How, no why does SS accept these? If it's all about numbers, the plan seems terribly flawed. Opening a new curated site sounds like a good answer. Use BS and SS to bring in new customers and then sell them on the better quality for more from the new place. This guy isn't hurting my sales, nothing he has will take away one download, but it just make SS look terrible and trashy.

« Reply #40 on: June 18, 2018, 10:18 »
+3
I got out of SS long ago and couldn't care less what happens to that company.  But these crazy "portfolios" really have me curious - what's actually going on?  Obviously no one is sitting at a computer uploading thousands of nearly identical renderings, and SS isn't paying anyone to inspect them.  They're either produced internally, or by someone with an insider connection, and loaded directly into the system. 

Are there buyers who actually need something like this, to assemble a composite image for an ad?   Maybe they need a black shelf at a specific angle?


U11


« Reply #41 on: June 18, 2018, 15:37 »
+2
As many may know SS is working with IBM about using AI, so those crazy portfolios can be an AI test data, or AI produced "artwork"   

« Reply #42 on: June 18, 2018, 16:21 »
+1
As many may know SS is working with IBM about using AI, so those crazy portfolios can be an AI test data, or AI produced "artwork"

I'm sure companies like SS think they see big money in renderings generated by so-called "AI".  What would a fine microstock company like SS enjoy more than putting photographers and vector artists completely out of business?   Yes, these images could be something like that. 

« Reply #43 on: June 26, 2018, 11:38 »
0
There are apparently also photographers who upload truck loads of duplicates and near duplicates. Look at this portfolio, the duplicates start around page 3:

https://www.shutterstock.com/g/urs%20a%20flueeler

The quality of many of the photos is also shockingly low, with colour cast, tilts etc. It's as if most of the photos are jpegs straight out of the camera. Makes me wonder if there's any quality control at all at SS.

What the photographer achieves here is to fill up the first pages in any search, pushing those of us with one or two shots of each motive back to page one zillion. No wonder my sales are going down. If this is the new policy, I might as well give up, buy a few rolls of Tri-X and enjoy life in the slow lane. I'm not going to compete on this level.

« Reply #44 on: June 26, 2018, 12:12 »
0
As many may know SS is working with IBM about using AI, so those crazy portfolios can be an AI test data, or AI produced "artwork"

I'm sure companies like SS think they see big money in renderings generated by so-called "AI".  What would a fine microstock company like SS enjoy more than putting photographers and vector artists completely out of business?   Yes, these images could be something like that.
AGREE!!!

« Reply #45 on: June 26, 2018, 20:02 »
+1
As many may know SS is working with IBM about using AI, so those crazy portfolios can be an AI test data, or AI produced "artwork"

I'm sure companies like SS think they see big money in renderings generated by so-called "AI".  What would a fine microstock company like SS enjoy more than putting photographers and vector artists completely out of business?   Yes, these images could be something like that.
AGREE!!!

Most of the products shown in the Ikea catalogue are 3D renderings. No photographer needed    :'(

« Reply #46 on: July 01, 2018, 20:11 »
+1
Was looking on SS forum database going Back 3 years and found this Posted By a old friend.
 I would go for this in a heartbeat.
 Quote"I'm beginning to think that a limit on contributor accounts - 1,000 images and 1,000 clips - with each contributor forced to cull their own account if we wanted to upload new images, would be a better approach.  Say you've maxed out at 1,000 images and you have 20 you want to upload.  So find 20 images that have never sold, delete them, and upload new content.  The content would always be fresh, always changing, and it would limit the number of white 3D boxes, bowls of tapioca, thought bubbles, and word clouds (for example) someone could upload.  Or if someone only wanted a thousand similars in their port, they could corner the market on white 3D boxes. 

 

It would certainly level the playing field between individual contributors and image mills.  "


« Reply #47 on: July 02, 2018, 00:43 »
0
Was looking on SS forum database going Back 3 years and found this Posted By a old friend.
 I would go for this in a heartbeat.
 Quote"I'm beginning to think that a limit on contributor accounts - 1,000 images and 1,000 clips - with each contributor forced to cull their own account if we wanted to upload new images, would be a better approach.  Say you've maxed out at 1,000 images and you have 20 you want to upload.  So find 20 images that have never sold, delete them, and upload new content.  The content would always be fresh, always changing, and it would limit the number of white 3D boxes, bowls of tapioca, thought bubbles, and word clouds (for example) someone could upload.  Or if someone only wanted a thousand similars in their port, they could corner the market on white 3D boxes. 

 

It would certainly level the playing field between individual contributors and image mills.  "
I used to think at a certain point the agencies would cull non selling and dated images but it seems to be all about being able to boast amount a huge number of images...which supposedly increases choice....however the effectiveness of "intelligent" search engines is hugely overrated so it just increases more of the same in search returns.

« Reply #48 on: July 02, 2018, 04:22 »
0
Was looking on SS forum database going Back 3 years and found this Posted By a old friend.
 I would go for this in a heartbeat.
 Quote"I'm beginning to think that a limit on contributor accounts - 1,000 images and 1,000 clips - with each contributor forced to cull their own account if we wanted to upload new images, would be a better approach.  Say you've maxed out at 1,000 images and you have 20 you want to upload.  So find 20 images that have never sold, delete them, and upload new content.  The content would always be fresh, always changing, and it would limit the number of white 3D boxes, bowls of tapioca, thought bubbles, and word clouds (for example) someone could upload.  Or if someone only wanted a thousand similars in their port, they could corner the market on white 3D boxes. 


It would certainly level the playing field between individual contributors and image mills.  "

Not a good idea as it would also level the playing field between rubbish content and good content.

A combination of the last two posts would be good. So culling anything that hasn't sold for three to four years (needs to be a few years to give seasonal images a good chance) plus a limit based on sales or even better sale through rate. Sale through rate would be the percentage of your portfolio that actually sells in a given period (say in the last 12 months). Now that would make people clear up their portfolio.

Actually even simpler, your uploads freeze until your STR hits say 50%, then you can keep uploading as long as you stay above that. Easy peasy and solves all the problems in one step.

« Reply #49 on: July 02, 2018, 04:36 »
0
Was looking on SS forum database going Back 3 years and found this Posted By a old friend.
 I would go for this in a heartbeat.
 Quote"I'm beginning to think that a limit on contributor accounts - 1,000 images and 1,000 clips - with each contributor forced to cull their own account if we wanted to upload new images, would be a better approach.  Say you've maxed out at 1,000 images and you have 20 you want to upload.  So find 20 images that have never sold, delete them, and upload new content.  The content would always be fresh, always changing, and it would limit the number of white 3D boxes, bowls of tapioca, thought bubbles, and word clouds (for example) someone could upload.  Or if someone only wanted a thousand similars in their port, they could corner the market on white 3D boxes. 


It would certainly level the playing field between individual contributors and image mills.  "

Not a good idea as it would also level the playing field between rubbish content and good content.

A combination of the last two posts would be good. So culling anything that hasn't sold for three to four years (needs to be a few years to give seasonal images a good chance) plus a limit based on sales or even better sale through rate. Sale through rate would be the percentage of your portfolio that actually sells in a given period (say in the last 12 months). Now that would make people clear up their portfolio.

Actually even simpler, your uploads freeze until your STR hits say 50%, then you can keep uploading as long as you stay above that. Easy peasy and solves all the problems in one step.
I believe some sites do/did have an upload quota based on your success so would give everyone a chance to contribute still but the better your success rate  the more you can submit...not going to happen though ;-).

namussi

« Reply #50 on: July 02, 2018, 06:38 »
+1
As many may know SS is working with IBM about using AI, so those crazy portfolios can be an AI test data, or AI produced "artwork"

I'm sure companies like SS think they see big money in renderings generated by so-called "AI".  What would a fine microstock company like SS enjoy more than putting photographers and vector artists completely out of business?   Yes, these images could be something like that.

I don't think putting them out of business is the aim.

The aim is to make bigger profits for shareholders.

Anyway, microstock photographers were quite nasty when the microstock agencies put traditional stock photographers out of business....

« Reply #51 on: July 20, 2018, 07:32 »
0
and this is another example:
https://www.shutterstock.com/it/g/schompoongam
 >:( ...


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
2 Replies
2514 Views
Last post July 25, 2006, 19:14
by nscotta
31 Replies
9049 Views
Last post October 28, 2009, 19:25
by yuliang11
10 Replies
3532 Views
Last post October 30, 2009, 15:21
by gostwyck
12 Replies
4387 Views
Last post March 17, 2010, 02:53
by hofhoek
0 Replies
115 Views
Last post September 20, 2018, 21:38
by helloitsme

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors