Author Topic: Apparently they can just block you without further notice... (Read 13802 times)

Rasika · « **on:** July 08, 2019, 10:16 »

Hi.
I am sharing my experience for others to be aware. I am almost 5 years doing stock full time, with a portfolio of 15k videos and 5k photos.
3 days ago I found out my Adobe stock account is blocked. No further notice, nothing, just a message says it was blocked and email to contact.
If you ask me, treating this way someone who is working with you, someone who trusted you his work, someone who you share your income with is... Well, you fill the gap.
In my 5 years experience with all the different stock websites, there have never been anything like this.
So after I contacted them they let me know, the reason for blocking is "spamming with duplicated files". Duplicated files by their understanding is when you have the same file with different color grading, for example (that is the exact explanation they sent me).
So, I don't sure, who was checking my portfolio and how qualified he is... But my portfolio consists from dlog raw files + color graded version. This is how I work for a long time already (because both the dlog and the color graded selling to different auditory, not pond5, not SS, not all the other stocks I am working with, never had any problem with me uploading this way...) So... OK, I wrote them a request for someone who is qualified to check this out on their side, and of course, if this is their policy, and this isn't some reviewers mistake who don't know the difference between spamming dupes and uploading source+graded version... Ok, no problem, I'll accept this... 3 days, no answers, account blocked, my income (nearly 800$) blocked. What should I think about those people, who treat their contributors, who invest tons of time, like dogs, or even worse? I hope you read this, Adobe stock people, and ask yourself the same question I am asking: "Are we ok? How can we do better next time?"
Because there is a place for improvement.

cathyslife · « **Reply #1 on:** July 08, 2019, 11:01 »

It is their site and their rules. Even if you have gotten away with it before, looks like your number is up. What you describe sounds like spamming to me. Without seeing exactly what you mean by “color grading” and how many images/videos we are talking about, it’s difficult to say for sure. But in the end, it doesn’t matter what we think, it’s Adobe’s call. You apparently violated their terms, and they have every right to terminate your account. Frankly, I am glad to hear they are cracking down on this nonsense. Uploading tons of the same image with slight color variations is an attempt to cheat and game the system. If that’s NOT what you did, and you have a reasonable explanation, you should contact Adobe and try to sort it out.

Jimbo · « **Reply #2 on:** July 08, 2019, 12:09 »

I am so sorry for this Rasika! I heard about this practice of Adobe before. Closed accounts without warning for "similar" file uploads. We all know that in stock you have to produce a number of similar files in orders to stay profitable. This is many times a thin line and actually it would help if the agencies gave more feedback regarding this instead of destroying the economic life of someone without warning.

Unfortunately, the lack of contributors to support each other and form a lobbying entity increases the randomly applied power of the agencies. Too many naysayers. While it might be legal or their "right" it is still a very destructive business practise eventually for both parties. Most of us professional contributors build incomes, production pipelines and lifes around stock and do not want to harm the agencies.

I think in the case I heard about it could be fixed, just contact them and explain. Maybe Matt Hayward here can help as well?

From my point of view it does not sound like spam, but giving the client the choice of either colour grade themselves (pro clients which need raw material) or use the pre-graded version (end users which need just a beautiful clip) sounds absolutely reasonable. Understandable to offer this choice to the client IMHO.

Good luck!

Brightontl · « **Reply #3 on:** July 08, 2019, 12:54 »

Hi Rasika,
very sorry to hear what happened to you.
I think you should contact Matt. He posts quite often here, is a nice guy and very helpful

Stockmaan · « **Reply #4 on:** July 08, 2019, 13:23 »

Very sorry to hear that.

When you uploaded all this duplicated files?

As I know reviewers reject this kind of uploads with this reason:similar content

Or this are very old uploads?

Hope you resolve this quickly and start uploading again by the rules.

Good luck!

YadaYadaYada · « **Reply #5 on:** July 08, 2019, 14:32 »

Apparently they can and warned us photo requirements

Be careful not to spam

Select only the best images from a shoot and ensure that each submission offers something different. Don’t submit multiple images with minimal changes in angle or depth, or copies of the same image with different postproduction effects applied. Customers apply their own creative effects to suit their project. Submitting multiple copies of similar or identical content can be perceived as spam by our moderation team. Spamming is strictly prohibited and may prompt us to block your account or close it permanently.

cathyslife · « **Reply #6 on:** July 08, 2019, 15:41 »

Quote from: YadaYadaYada on July 08, 2019, 14:32

Apparently they can and warned us photo requirements

Be careful not to spam

Select only the best images from a shoot and ensure that each submission offers something different. Don’t submit multiple images with minimal changes in angle or depth, or copies of the same image with different postproduction effects applied. Customers apply their own creative effects to suit their project. Submitting multiple copies of similar or identical content can be perceived as spam by our moderation team. Spamming is strictly prohibited and may prompt us to block your account or close it permanently.

Exactly. It’s in the agreement (that some don’t read, apparently).

cathyslife · « **Reply #7 on:** July 08, 2019, 15:47 »

Quote from: john_vlahidis on July 08, 2019, 13:41

after fotolia adobe stock migration had many rejection reason is: "Similar file already submitted" and one ban for 1 month!
today read this post and
this:

https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/similar-vs-spamming.html

I decided to erase
many online files
from adobe portfolio over 200+ "similar image"
will check carefully before upload after all that

And this from the above link:

“A few versions of a motif best facilitate the commercial success of the respective files in question.”

I take that to mean about 5 from the same shoot, with noticeable changes in angle, proximity, etc. Sometimes I would do a vertical version, and a horizontal version, too. Edit: oops, I see a couple of posts down the op is only talking about video. Which is why I wasn’t sure what color grading meant, as I don’t do video. But apparently the same rules apply for both video and images.

Rasika · « **Reply #8 on:** July 08, 2019, 15:49 »

I am not submitting images for 2 years, so we are talking about footage. And I have about 10,000 videos in my Adobe stock portfolio, so there is no way I can know which of the files they found to be problematic.
Now, don't get me wrong, I am not insisting I am right. The problem is they can at least let you know, something is not fit for them, or any other issue.
If you don't want it, you can just reject it and say "sorry, this is similar" etc. I wrote them 3 days ago asking to work this out/show me where is the problem/have any communication, but no replay so far.

cathyslife · « **Reply #9 on:** July 08, 2019, 15:54 »

Quote from: Jimbo on July 08, 2019, 12:09

I am so sorry for this Rasika! I heard about this practice of Adobe before. Closed accounts without warning for "similar" file uploads. We all know that in stock you have to produce a number of similar files in orders to stay profitable. This is many times a thin line and actually it would help if the agencies gave more feedback regarding this instead of destroying the economic life of someone without warning.

Unfortunately, the lack of contributors to support each other and form a lobbying entity increases the randomly applied power of the agencies. Too many naysayers. While it might be legal or their "right" it is still a very destructive business practise eventually for both parties. Most of us professional contributors build incomes, production pipelines and lifes around stock and do not want to harm the agencies.

I think in the case I heard about it could be fixed, just contact them and explain. Maybe Matt Hayward here can help as well?

From my point of view it does not sound like spam, but giving the client the choice of either colour grade themselves (pro clients which need raw material) or use the pre-graded version (end users which need just a beautiful clip) sounds absolutely reasonable. Understandable to offer this choice to the client IMHO.

Good luck!

I don’t support any contributor who spams a site in an attempt to cheat. And the rules are there in the agreement for everyone to read. How is it Adobes fault if a contributor doesn’t? And it’s certainly not a destructive business practice for Adobe to punish those who try to cheat. I’d say they are doing those contributors who follow the agreement a favor.

DavidK · « **Reply #10 on:** July 08, 2019, 15:56 »

Dlog is DJI's flat log profile for thier drones etc. I agree with Jimbo and have often wondered myself why submitting both flat profile AND graded versions of videos is not actively encouraged by all the agencies. I think they are leaving money on the table by not offering this option for pro level studios who can easily drop it into their timeline and grade match to the rest of their footage. Next to impossible with pre-graded clips.

cathyslife · « **Reply #11 on:** July 08, 2019, 15:58 »

Quote from: Rasika on July 08, 2019, 15:49

I am not submitting images for 2 years, so we are talking about footage. And I have about 10,000 videos in my Adobe stock portfolio, so there is no way I can know which of the files they found to be problematic.
Now, don't get me wrong, I am not insisting I am right. The problem is they can at least let you know, something is not fit for them, or any other issue.
If you don't want it, you can just reject it and say "sorry, this is similar" etc. I wrote them 3 days ago asking to work this out/show me where is the problem/have any communication, but no replay so far.

You don’t know which files you just made color changes to, or you just don’t want to be bothered sorting them out? And they did let you know, before you even started uploading! You are learning the hard way, unfortunately.

Rasika · « **Reply #12 on:** July 08, 2019, 16:02 »

Quote from: cathyslife on July 08, 2019, 15:58

Quote from: Rasika on July 08, 2019, 15:49
I am not submitting images for 2 years, so we are talking about footage. And I have about 10,000 videos in my Adobe stock portfolio, so there is no way I can know which of the files they found to be problematic.
Now, don't get me wrong, I am not insisting I am right. The problem is they can at least let you know, something is not fit for them, or any other issue.
If you don't want it, you can just reject it and say "sorry, this is similar" etc. I wrote them 3 days ago asking to work this out/show me where is the problem/have any communication, but no replay so far.

You don’t know which files you just made color changes to, or you just don’t want to be bothered sorting them out? And they did let you know, before you even starting uploading! You are learning the hard way, unfortunately.

Do you know the difference between graded footage and raw footage?

cathyslife · « **Reply #13 on:** July 08, 2019, 16:07 »

Quote from: Rasika on July 08, 2019, 16:02

Quote from: cathyslife on July 08, 2019, 15:58
Quote from: Rasika on July 08, 2019, 15:49
I am not submitting images for 2 years, so we are talking about footage. And I have about 10,000 videos in my Adobe stock portfolio, so there is no way I can know which of the files they found to be problematic.
Now, don't get me wrong, I am not insisting I am right. The problem is they can at least let you know, something is not fit for them, or any other issue.
If you don't want it, you can just reject it and say "sorry, this is similar" etc. I wrote them 3 days ago asking to work this out/show me where is the problem/have any communication, but no replay so far.

You don’t know which files you just made color changes to, or you just don’t want to be bothered sorting them out? And they did let you know, before you even starting uploading! You are learning the hard way, unfortunately.

Do you know the difference between graded footage and raw footage?

I do now, but no, I don’t do video. You still violated their terms, so what I know or don’t know is irrelevant. I am sure Adobe does, so why don’t you ask them that same question? I bet you won’t.

Rasika · « **Reply #14 on:** July 08, 2019, 16:11 »

Quote from: DavidK on July 08, 2019, 15:56

Dlog is DJI's flat log profile for thier drones etc. I agree with Jimbo and have often wondered myself why submitting both flat profile AND graded versions of videos is not actively encouraged by all the agencies. I think they are leaving money on the table by not offering this option for pro level studios who can easily drop it into their timeline and grade match to the rest of their footage. Next to impossible with pre-graded clips.

My ungraded portfolio sells almost as good as the graded one. It gets less downloads, but most of them are 4k. It is about 2/5 of my revenue.

Rasika · « **Reply #15 on:** July 08, 2019, 16:16 »

Quote from: cathyslife on July 08, 2019, 16:07

Quote from: Rasika on July 08, 2019, 16:02
Quote from: cathyslife on July 08, 2019, 15:58
Quote from: Rasika on July 08, 2019, 15:49
I am not submitting images for 2 years, so we are talking about footage. And I have about 10,000 videos in my Adobe stock portfolio, so there is no way I can know which of the files they found to be problematic.
Now, don't get me wrong, I am not insisting I am right. The problem is they can at least let you know, something is not fit for them, or any other issue.
If you don't want it, you can just reject it and say "sorry, this is similar" etc. I wrote them 3 days ago asking to work this out/show me where is the problem/have any communication, but no replay so far.

You don’t know which files you just made color changes to, or you just don’t want to be bothered sorting them out? And they did let you know, before you even starting uploading! You are learning the hard way, unfortunately.

Do you know the difference between graded footage and raw footage?

I do now, but no, I don’t do video. You still violated their terms, so what I know or don’t know is irrelevant. I am sure Adobe does, so why don’t you ask them that same question? I bet you won’t.

I don't know who are you so angry with, but I wish you happiness

Sorry, I am unusual to being blamed and pushed by unknown to me people. Please keep your judgment to yourself. Everything is going to be allright

DavidK · « **Reply #16 on:** July 08, 2019, 16:20 »

Quote from: Rasika on July 08, 2019, 16:11

Quote from: DavidK on July 08, 2019, 15:56
Dlog is DJI's flat log profile for thier drones etc. I agree with Jimbo and have often wondered myself why submitting both flat profile AND graded versions of videos is not actively encouraged by all the agencies. I think they are leaving money on the table by not offering this option for pro level studios who can easily drop it into their timeline and grade match to the rest of their footage. Next to impossible with pre-graded clips.
My ungraded portfolio sells almost as good as the graded one. It gets less downloads, but most of them are 4k. It is about 2/5 of my revenue.

I can understand why too. Like I said, it has never made sense to me leaving the well heeled buyers without the choice. It would be such an easy option to implement and it could even be charged at a premium. I suspect we would all see an increase in 4K sales, after all, right now who really needs 4K other than the pros?

cathyslife · « **Reply #17 on:** July 08, 2019, 16:55 »

Quote from: Rasika on July 08, 2019, 16:16

Quote from: cathyslife on July 08, 2019, 16:07
Quote from: Rasika on July 08, 2019, 16:02
Quote from: cathyslife on July 08, 2019, 15:58
Quote from: Rasika on July 08, 2019, 15:49
I am not submitting images for 2 years, so we are talking about footage. And I have about 10,000 videos in my Adobe stock portfolio, so there is no way I can know which of the files they found to be problematic.
Now, don't get me wrong, I am not insisting I am right. The problem is they can at least let you know, something is not fit for them, or any other issue.
If you don't want it, you can just reject it and say "sorry, this is similar" etc. I wrote them 3 days ago asking to work this out/show me where is the problem/have any communication, but no replay so far.

You don’t know which files you just made color changes to, or you just don’t want to be bothered sorting them out? And they did let you know, before you even starting uploading! You are learning the hard way, unfortunately.

Do you know the difference between graded footage and raw footage?

I do now, but no, I don’t do video. You still violated their terms, so what I know or don’t know is irrelevant. I am sure Adobe does, so why don’t you ask them that same question? I bet you won’t.

I don't know who are you so angry with, but I wish you happiness Sorry, I am unusual to being blamed and pushed by unknown to me people. Please keep your judgment to yourself. Everything is going to be allright

You posted on an open forum. I am entitled to my opinion, even if it doesn’t agree with what you want to hear. And I will continue to post my opinion, as I have done since 2004. About every month a contributor comes here whining that their account got blocked “for no apparent reason,” It turns out, there always is a reason. 😄

Rasika · « **Reply #18 on:** July 08, 2019, 17:09 »

Ok, lets say reviewers are always right and never make mistakes. Being here from 2004 you must know this is truth

cathyslife · « **Reply #19 on:** July 08, 2019, 17:35 »

Quote from: Rasika on July 08, 2019, 17:09

Ok, lets say reviewers are always right and never make mistakes. Being here from 2004 you must know this is truth

I never said that. You yourself admitted wrong. This isn’t Adobe’s mistake. And I am no more angrier, and no less angrier, than any other contributors. Between spammers and thieves, and poor sales, it’s tough for even the top contributors to make a buck anymore. That said, I do pretty well with Adobe. 😃

Noedelhap · « **Reply #20 on:** July 08, 2019, 17:40 »

How many similars are we talking about, Rasika? Pages and pages of the same video, or max. 5-10 variations? I've seen some spammy portfolios being posted here, that were never taken down by Adobe, so I don't know how 'spammy' your portfolio was.

Either way, Adobe should contact the contributor and demand removal within a reasonable timeframe... or they shouldn't accept similars to begin with, use a better automated system to check for spammy similars and nip it in the bud. Agencies shouldn't just blindly accept all kinds of similars, let the contributor think it's okay and then punish the contributor for spamming afterwards (certainly not without notice).

Allsa · « **Reply #22 on:** July 08, 2019, 19:39 »

Quote from: MatHayward on July 08, 2019, 17:44

This past week, Adobe in the US was closed for the Fourth of July holiday. We had team members working and answering contributor questions but there may have been some delays in response time. We strive for 2 hours max to get back to you when you write via the contact us page during regular business hours.

-Mat Hayward

That hasn't been my experience. I sent a help message yesterday and haven't received any acknowledgement that they received it. I thought maybe they had the wrong email address, so I sent another message asking them to change my email for me (there does not appear to be a way to do it myself) and I still haven't heard back. I don't know if they received my help request or not. I have heard nothing at all from Adobe.

Allsa · « **Reply #23 on:** July 08, 2019, 20:07 »

Quote from: Allsa on July 08, 2019, 19:39

Quote from: MatHayward on July 08, 2019, 17:44

This past week, Adobe in the US was closed for the Fourth of July holiday. We had team members working and answering contributor questions but there may have been some delays in response time. We strive for 2 hours max to get back to you when you write via the contact us page during regular business hours.

-Mat Hayward

That hasn't been my experience. I sent a help message yesterday and haven't received any acknowledgement that they received it. I thought maybe they had the wrong email address, so I sent another message asking them to change my email for me (there does not appear to be a way to do it myself) and I still haven't heard back. I don't know if they received my help request or not. I have heard nothing at all from Adobe.

Sorry for this! They did get back to me, the 'from' didn't say Adobe and I missed it. Sorry, my bad.

Dennis Radeke · « **Reply #24 on:** July 09, 2019, 05:51 »

Hi there Rasika,

I think a support case came through that is probably yours. I have responded to Adobe support and they will no doubt get back in touch with you but let me try to provide some guidelines for the future here as well.

in general, we want to provide you the contributor as much opportunity and creative expression as possible and provide the creative customer with a large and high quality library where they can easily find the perfect clip to add to their project.

As the content lead for motion, I have provided our moderation team guidelines for accepting similar clips. In general, I have loosened those guidelines because a different take, magnification/zoom/focal length or other factors can result in a clip that a customer wants. It's tricky though - there are always going to be grey areas and opinions on what constitutes a unique clip or not.

However, it doesn't make sense for us to have both an ungraded file and a graded file of the same clip. Especially if the files are 8bit color where the idea of "raw" isn't really applicable. Once you get to 10bit color or greater with cameras such as a RED, ARRI and some others, then the idea of a RAW version may be very appealing to some. As Adobe Stock develops, we may be able to offer a customer a choice of a raw clip versus a graded one. The team here certainly have discussed many ideas and we hope to bring them to our users in the future!

Today, I like to suggest to contributors is to submit a lightly graded version of your clip. This means that it isn't flat like a clip shot in log might be and it brings out the luma range (black to white) and lightly touch the color (based on your preference). The end goal is that the novice buyer will see a beautiful clip and the experienced editor/buyer will see a clip that fits and provides enough latitude for them to push the color to whatever the need is.

I hope that this provides some guidance and if you (or others) have any questions please feel free to hit me up with them here. Please note that I'm technically on holiday so my response to answer may be a bit slower than normal.

Thanks and happy shooting!
Dennis

leremy · « **Reply #25 on:** July 09, 2019, 06:05 »

As a full time contributor myself, I do hope agencies don't block us without warning or talking to us first. This kind of "immediate block" has always been the biggest nightmare to any contributor. I do hope agencies will review case by case. For those who are confirmed violators (thief) should be banned immediately, but for case like this one, they should be given a chance to redeem themselves first at least. Just my 2 cent.

derby · « **Reply #26 on:** July 09, 2019, 07:02 »

After reading billions of posts here with contributors telling that agency did not make their work refusing or ban users that send thousand of similar subject... Now Adobe is working on this, and many of you have to say that is not right???

Well I'm happy that agency is doing good job on content.

jonbull · « **Reply #27 on:** July 09, 2019, 07:09 »

Quote from: Rasika on July 08, 2019, 16:02

Quote from: cathyslife on July 08, 2019, 15:58
Quote from: Rasika on July 08, 2019, 15:49
I am not submitting images for 2 years, so we are talking about footage. And I have about 10,000 videos in my Adobe stock portfolio, so there is no way I can know which of the files they found to be problematic.
Now, don't get me wrong, I am not insisting I am right. The problem is they can at least let you know, something is not fit for them, or any other issue.
If you don't want it, you can just reject it and say "sorry, this is similar" etc. I wrote them 3 days ago asking to work this out/show me where is the problem/have any communication, but no replay so far.

You don’t know which files you just made color changes to, or you just don’t want to be bothered sorting them out? And they did let you know, before you even starting uploading! You are learning the hard way, unfortunately.

Do you know the difference between graded footage and raw footage?

Im with you. People talk without not knowing nothing. Offering a graded and a non graded is a smart move and not spamming at all. Tjose who want a graded version and not want to work on ungraded are served and those who knlw hkw to grade buy the ungraded. Tjis is not spamming at all i simply the fact that most agency and reviewers, followed bh many amatuer contriboutor with basic portfolio, don’t have a clue what they talk abiut.

jonbull · « **Reply #28 on:** July 09, 2019, 07:15 »

Quote from: Dennis Radeke on July 09, 2019, 05:51

Hi there Rasika,

I think a support case came through that is probably yours. I have responded to Adobe support and they will no doubt get back in touch with you but let me try to provide some guidelines for the future here as well.

in general, we want to provide you the contributor as much opportunity and creative expression as possible and provide the creative customer with a large and high quality library where they can easily find the perfect clip to add to their project.

As the content lead for motion, I have provided our moderation team guidelines for accepting similar clips. In general, I have loosened those guidelines because a different take, magnification/zoom/focal length or other factors can result in a clip that a customer wants. It's tricky though - there are always going to be grey areas and opinions on what constitutes a unique clip or not.

However, it doesn't make sense for us to have both an ungraded file and a graded file of the same clip. Especially if the files are 8bit color where the idea of "raw" isn't really applicable. Once you get to 10bit color or greater with cameras such as a RED, ARRI and some others, then the idea of a RAW version may be very appealing to some. As Adobe Stock develops, we may be able to offer a customer a choice of a raw clip versus a graded one. The team here certainly have discussed many ideas and we hope to bring them to our users in the future!

Today, I like to suggest to contributors is to submit a lightly graded version of your clip. This means that it isn't flat like a clip shot in log might be and it brings out the luma range (black to white) and lightly touch the color (based on your preference). The end goal is that the novice buyer will see a beautiful clip and the experienced editor/buyer will see a clip that fits and provides enough latitude for them to push the color to whatever the need is.

I hope that this provides some guidance and if you (or others) have any questions please feel free to hit me up with them here. Please note that I'm technically on holiday so my response to answer may be a bit slower than normal.

Thanks and happy shooting!
Dennis

Even 8bit file non graded are much easier to color matches inside a timeline compared to
Graded files.

Jimbo · « **Reply #29 on:** July 09, 2019, 07:23 »

Thanks Dennis and Mat for jumping in here! That clarifies a lot!

I think it would be really reasonable if in cases which are not clear Adobe first could just send a warning or shoot a mail before closing a entire account. I mean, everybody will agree that true and obvious spammers and/or thieves should be blocked immediately, but just as Dennis points out himself, it is not always clear:

Quote from: Dennis Radeke on July 09, 2019, 05:51

It's tricky though - there are always going to be grey areas and opinions on what constitutes a unique clip or not.

I mean, it is not a nice feeling if you sit in front of the screen contemplating if you should offer the customer a alternate version, upload a additional shot which is different but maybe not different enough or if this will get your account blocked and your income destroyed.

DavidK · « **Reply #30 on:** July 09, 2019, 07:35 »

Quote from: jonbull on July 09, 2019, 07:15

Quote from: Dennis Radeke on July 09, 2019, 05:51
Hi there Rasika,

I think a support case came through that is probably yours. I have responded to Adobe support and they will no doubt get back in touch with you but let me try to provide some guidelines for the future here as well.

in general, we want to provide you the contributor as much opportunity and creative expression as possible and provide the creative customer with a large and high quality library where they can easily find the perfect clip to add to their project.

As the content lead for motion, I have provided our moderation team guidelines for accepting similar clips. In general, I have loosened those guidelines because a different take, magnification/zoom/focal length or other factors can result in a clip that a customer wants. It's tricky though - there are always going to be grey areas and opinions on what constitutes a unique clip or not.

However, it doesn't make sense for us to have both an ungraded file and a graded file of the same clip. Especially if the files are 8bit color where the idea of "raw" isn't really applicable. Once you get to 10bit color or greater with cameras such as a RED, ARRI and some others, then the idea of a RAW version may be very appealing to some. As Adobe Stock develops, we may be able to offer a customer a choice of a raw clip versus a graded one. The team here certainly have discussed many ideas and we hope to bring them to our users in the future!

Today, I like to suggest to contributors is to submit a lightly graded version of your clip. This means that it isn't flat like a clip shot in log might be and it brings out the luma range (black to white) and lightly touch the color (based on your preference). The end goal is that the novice buyer will see a beautiful clip and the experienced editor/buyer will see a clip that fits and provides enough latitude for them to push the color to whatever the need is.

I hope that this provides some guidance and if you (or others) have any questions please feel free to hit me up with them here. Please note that I'm technically on holiday so my response to answer may be a bit slower than normal.

Thanks and happy shooting!
Dennis

Even 8bit file non graded are much easier to color matches inside a timeline compared to
Graded files.

Very true. I'd almost say that a log version might even be more important for 8 bit vs 10 or 12. Even light grading with 8 bit in the wrong hands can quickly destroy any hope of recovery. Also, I don't think Dennis's compromise of grading lightly would work out too well in terms of sales. I could be wrong, but it seems to me the vast majority of buyers in that category are attracted to the finished product. Period. If there are two similar clips side by side and one is bright, vibrant and pops while mine might be technically better but is comparatively flat and muddy looking I am pretty sure I know where the sale is going.

cathyslife · « **Reply #31 on:** July 09, 2019, 09:08 »

Quote from: jonbull on July 09, 2019, 07:09

Quote from: Rasika on July 08, 2019, 16:02
Quote from: cathyslife on July 08, 2019, 15:58
Quote from: Rasika on July 08, 2019, 15:49
I am not submitting images for 2 years, so we are talking about footage. And I have about 10,000 videos in my Adobe stock portfolio, so there is no way I can know which of the files they found to be problematic.
Now, don't get me wrong, I am not insisting I am right. The problem is they can at least let you know, something is not fit for them, or any other issue.
If you don't want it, you can just reject it and say "sorry, this is similar" etc. I wrote them 3 days ago asking to work this out/show me where is the problem/have any communication, but no replay so far.

You don’t know which files you just made color changes to, or you just don’t want to be bothered sorting them out? And they did let you know, before you even starting uploading! You are learning the hard way, unfortunately.

Do you know the difference between graded footage and raw footage?

Im with you. People talk without not knowing nothing. Offering a graded and a non graded is a smart move and not spamming at all. Tjose who want a graded version and not want to work on ungraded are served and those who knlw hkw to grade buy the ungraded. Tjis is not spamming at all i simply the fact that most agency and reviewers, followed bh many amatuer contriboutor with basic portfolio, don’t have a clue what they talk abiut.

Actually, it wasn’t a smart move, because it went against Adobe’s policies. It has nothing to do with whether you think I am stupid or not. The whole problem could have been avoided if only the contributor would have read the agreement in the first place. 😃

But great that Mat and Dennis came here and got it sorted.

Rasika · « **Reply #32 on:** July 09, 2019, 09:48 »

Quote from: Dennis Radeke on July 09, 2019, 05:51

Hi there Rasika,

I think a support case came through that is probably yours. I have responded to Adobe support and they will no doubt get back in touch with you but let me try to provide some guidelines for the future here as well.

in general, we want to provide you the contributor as much opportunity and creative expression as possible and provide the creative customer with a large and high quality library where they can easily find the perfect clip to add to their project.

As the content lead for motion, I have provided our moderation team guidelines for accepting similar clips. In general, I have loosened those guidelines because a different take, magnification/zoom/focal length or other factors can result in a clip that a customer wants. It's tricky though - there are always going to be grey areas and opinions on what constitutes a unique clip or not.

However, it doesn't make sense for us to have both an ungraded file and a graded file of the same clip. Especially if the files are 8bit color where the idea of "raw" isn't really applicable. Once you get to 10bit color or greater with cameras such as a RED, ARRI and some others, then the idea of a RAW version may be very appealing to some. As Adobe Stock develops, we may be able to offer a customer a choice of a raw clip versus a graded one. The team here certainly have discussed many ideas and we hope to bring them to our users in the future!

Today, I like to suggest to contributors is to submit a lightly graded version of your clip. This means that it isn't flat like a clip shot in log might be and it brings out the luma range (black to white) and lightly touch the color (based on your preference). The end goal is that the novice buyer will see a beautiful clip and the experienced editor/buyer will see a clip that fits and provides enough latitude for them to push the color to whatever the need is.

I hope that this provides some guidance and if you (or others) have any questions please feel free to hit me up with them here. Please note that I'm technically on holiday so my response to answer may be a bit slower than normal.

Thanks and happy shooting!
Dennis

Thank you for your comment.
My uploads are 10bit h265 raw from mavic2 pro hasselblad camera + 8bit h264 graded for stock.
My adobe stock sales are only 5% of my general sales from all stock websites, so I can't afford myself doing another version of grading for few thousands of clips. You do whatever you consider is best for you, but please, give your contributors clear guidelines. And again, please, you have all our mails, we are people, you can talk to us in case if anything isn't ok. That will be human and nice.

Rasika · « **Reply #33 on:** July 09, 2019, 10:00 »

Regarding Ungraded vs graded - I have about 3-5 inboxes every month from buyers on pond5 (the only place that allows inboxes, if SS and VB had them, I believe it was much more), requesting a raw version of a file. Luckily I have them all uploaded to pond5, so I can simply point where to d/l.

ForrestBrown · « **Reply #34 on:** July 09, 2019, 10:10 »

It's a bit worrying that Adobe would deactivate someone's account without giving some kind of warning first. Especially when considering that Adobe hasn't seemed to be that strict about similar images/videos in the past. https://www.microstockgroup.com/fotolia-com/adobe-similar-content/

spike · « **Reply #35 on:** July 09, 2019, 10:20 »

Quote from: Dennis Radeke on July 09, 2019, 05:51

Hi there Rasika,

I think a support case came through that is probably yours. I have responded to Adobe support and they will no doubt get back in touch with you but let me try to provide some guidelines for the future here as well.

in general, we want to provide you the contributor as much opportunity and creative expression as possible and provide the creative customer with a large and high quality library where they can easily find the perfect clip to add to their project.

As the content lead for motion, I have provided our moderation team guidelines for accepting similar clips. In general, I have loosened those guidelines because a different take, magnification/zoom/focal length or other factors can result in a clip that a customer wants. It's tricky though - there are always going to be grey areas and opinions on what constitutes a unique clip or not.

However, it doesn't make sense for us to have both an ungraded file and a graded file of the same clip. Especially if the files are 8bit color where the idea of "raw" isn't really applicable. Once you get to 10bit color or greater with cameras such as a RED, ARRI and some others, then the idea of a RAW version may be very appealing to some. As Adobe Stock develops, we may be able to offer a customer a choice of a raw clip versus a graded one. The team here certainly have discussed many ideas and we hope to bring them to our users in the future!

Today, I like to suggest to contributors is to submit a lightly graded version of your clip. This means that it isn't flat like a clip shot in log might be and it brings out the luma range (black to white) and lightly touch the color (based on your preference). The end goal is that the novice buyer will see a beautiful clip and the experienced editor/buyer will see a clip that fits and provides enough latitude for them to push the color to whatever the need is.

I hope that this provides some guidance and if you (or others) have any questions please feel free to hit me up with them here. Please note that I'm technically on holiday so my response to answer may be a bit slower than normal.

Thanks and happy shooting!
Dennis

While this might be good advice in an ideal world, we the contributors also need to earn money, and if you lightly grade your clip, it will probably not stand out in a sea of vibrant clips, won't get picked up, and will end up in the 0 downloads abyss.

Extremes, on microstock, always perform better than something closer to "normal". And I can say that just based on my portfolio (around 50k assets).

So if the contributor submits "normal" clips (lightly graded), they won't be picked up, and the people who decided to go all-out on their grading (think of orange-teal, crushed blacks, heavy vignetting, cheesy stuff like that) will reap the rewards. Then you'll get a feedback loop of contributors trying to out-compete each other in terms of grading, and the actually good and usable footage for further post will be buried on page 27... if anyone even decides to submit usable footage, given their lower "sales potential". Just my take on it.

I used to upload my drone footage in dlog and heavily graded versions, and the graded versions outsold the "raw" by a factor of more than 10. And I bet the "raw" would outsell the "lightly graded" version because the "raw" is only gonna get downloaded by someone looking for footage shot in log, but the lightly graded version will not be downloaded by anyone... because it won't be seen by anyone.

I understand what you're trying to do, but what's good for the platform isn't necessarily good for the contributors. In other words, if you apply game theory principles on this issue, submitting lightly graded versions doesn't confer an advantage and is not an evolutionary stable strategy, as a "parasite" (heavily graded clips) can abuse the propensity of customers to notice bright vibrant assets first.

Rasika · « **Reply #36 on:** July 09, 2019, 10:26 »

Quote from: ForrestBrown on July 09, 2019, 10:10

It's a bit worrying that Adobe would deactivate someone's account without giving some kind of warning first. Especially when considering that Adobe hasn't seemed to be that strict about similar images/videos in the past. https://www.microstockgroup.com/fotolia-com/adobe-similar-content/

I am even more confused now.

Trippy · « **Reply #37 on:** July 09, 2019, 10:29 »

I think submitting graded and non graded should be ok. It's not spamming in my opinion.

cathyslife · « **Reply #38 on:** July 09, 2019, 11:19 »

Quote from: leremy on July 09, 2019, 06:05

As a full time contributor myself, I do hope agencies don't block us without warning or talking to us first. This kind of "immediate block" has always been the biggest nightmare to any contributor. I do hope agencies will review case by case. For those who are confirmed violators (thief) should be banned immediately, but for case like this one, they should be given a chance to redeem themselves first at least. Just my 2 cent.

It’s simple, don’t upload many versions of the same file, videos or images, and you have nothing to worry about. If you have a question, ask first.

Noedelhap · « **Reply #39 on:** July 09, 2019, 11:24 »

Quote from: derby on July 09, 2019, 07:02

After reading billions of posts here with contributors telling that agency did not make their work refusing or ban users that send thousand of similar subject... Now Adobe is working on this, and many of you have to say that is not right???

Well I'm happy that agency is doing good job on content.

I'm all for banning thieves and confirmed spammers, but false positives can also happen. If it takes a big fishing net to catch thieves and spammers, I wouldn't want to accidentally get caught in it as well. So, there should be an opportunity for contributors to appeal their case and not get cut off from earning money when they did nothing wrong.
We don't know enough details to judge this case but it could be this ban may have been a misjudgment.

SpaceStockFootage · « **Reply #40 on:** July 09, 2019, 11:59 »

Quote from: ForrestBrown on July 09, 2019, 10:10

It's a bit worrying that Adobe would deactivate someone's account without giving some kind of warning first. Especially when considering that Adobe hasn't seemed to be that strict about similar images/videos in the past. https://www.microstockgroup.com/fotolia-com/adobe-similar-content/

Well the 'warning' is in the terms and conditions to be fair. I agree that it should be possible to sell flat versions and graded/colour corrected versions... but until Adobe change the rules, we're not allowed to.

Quote from: jonbull on July 09, 2019, 07:09

Offering a graded and a non graded is a smart move and not spamming at all.

It's a smart move and not spamming if you're selling them on a site that allows duplicates... if you're selling them on a site that doesn't allow duplicates (like Adobe) then it's most definitely not a smart move. You can't seriously be saying that doing something which is likely to result in, and in this case has resulted in, your account getting blocked... is a smart move?

Quote from: jonbull on July 09, 2019, 07:09

People talk without not knowing nothing.

Indeed. I think.

jonbull · « **Reply #41 on:** July 09, 2019, 12:25 »

Quote from: derby on July 09, 2019, 07:02

After reading billions of posts here with contributors telling that agency did not make their work refusing or ban users that send thousand of similar subject... Now Adobe is working on this, and many of you have to say that is not right???

Well I'm happy that agency is doing good job on content.

selling two version of a video is not at all spamming and can have a market.....the point is they have lot of works to do especially hopefully stop accepting every crap uploaded in these days before occupying of people uploading two versions of the same files.

Trippy · « **Reply #42 on:** July 09, 2019, 13:05 »

Quote from: cathyslife on July 09, 2019, 11:19

Quote from: leremy on July 09, 2019, 06:05
As a full time contributor myself, I do hope agencies don't block us without warning or talking to us first. This kind of "immediate block" has always been the biggest nightmare to any contributor. I do hope agencies will review case by case. For those who are confirmed violators (thief) should be banned immediately, but for case like this one, they should be given a chance to redeem themselves first at least. Just my 2 cent.

It’s simple, don’t upload many versions of the same file, videos or images, and you have nothing to worry about. If you have a question, ask first.

Two clips is not: 'many versions'.

charged · « **Reply #43 on:** July 09, 2019, 13:33 »

A) Why not update Adobe Stock so contributors can upload both graded and ungraded at the same time and have those two files linked together as one, so the buyer can see both versions when they click into the landing page for that video. This would reduce search clutter and increase options, win/win.

B) Obviously a warning should have been sent out first by Adobe Stock. Just because someone is breaking a policy doesn't mean they understood they were blocking a policy. Adobe spends a lot of time building out and maintaining a stock marketplace, and contributors spend a lot of time creating sellable content. Each party benefits from the other. Many years ago, I too was breaking a (different) policy of a stock website, I didn't know any better at the time, I was sent an email warning, my account was suspended for a week. I wrote back and apologized for my ignorance and I haven't had a problem since. In addition, it isn't as if policies at stock websites don't evolve over time, they do. Anyway blocking without sending a warning is too heavy handed, it gives Adobe Stock a bad reputation. iStockphoto developed a bad reputation a long time ago, and many contributors actively worked to drive sales to other stock websites.

Dennis Radeke · « **Reply #44 on:** July 09, 2019, 13:43 »

Quote

Even 8bit file non graded are much easier to color matches inside a timeline compared to
Graded files.

Yes, of course this is true in some cases, but we can easily go down the rabbit hole on. Ultimately, we leave it up to the contributor to do what they feel is best for them and potential customers who would license the content. That's why I generally recommend a "light" touch on grading anything. Again, it helps novice buyers feel good about their purchase yet still allows more seasoned video customers the confidence to do more with it.

Thanks,
Dennis

georgep7 · « **Reply #46 on:** July 10, 2019, 04:38 »

Nobody is perfect, nobody will ever be!
But there is always the competition and comparisons.

Dennis it is kind of hard to assume that one contributor have to become an MSG member and post to grab Adobe's attention. Perhaps I misunderstood your saying. If i can make a rough but friendly comment the communication channels must be first direct with the company and secondary in related forums or whatever. Even if your previous post had to be in a monthly Adobe newsletter to all contributors.
I have menntioned e.g. an Adobe rejection on intellectual property violation on a cherry blossom close up and still laugh on it, searching the Adobe forum to just read similar stories never answered (ok, frustration passed). In contrast, i have uploaded clips of money bills, got rejected, email asked and got my answers and guidance all those in the same working day in other agency.

EDIT correction, not same working day but within 20-24 hours.

Communication perhaps must be direct, personal and fast.

HalfFull · « **Reply #48 on:** July 10, 2019, 11:48 »

Quote from: Dennis Radeke on July 10, 2019, 08:41

Quote from: georgep7 on July 10, 2019, 04:38
Nobody is perfect, nobody will ever be!
But there is always the competition and comparisons.

Dennis it is kind of hard to assume that one contributor have to become an MSG member and post to grab Adobe's attention. Perhaps I misunderstood your saying. If i can make a rough but friendly comment the communication channels must be first direct with the company and secondary in related forums or whatever. Even if your previous post had to be in a monthly Adobe newsletter to all contributors.
I have menntioned e.g. an Adobe rejection on intellectual property violation on a cherry blossom close up and still laugh on it, searching the Adobe forum to just read similar stories never answered (ok, frustration passed). In contrast, i have uploaded clips of money bills, got rejected, email asked and got my answers and guidance all those in the same working day in other agency.

EDIT correction, not same working day but within 20-24 hours.

Communication perhaps must be direct, personal and fast.

Yup, we're not perfect that's for sure!

To answer briefly, we are communicating on a variety of methods and will continue to build and expand upon those.

As for your past or current issues - please feel free to message Mat or I directly with your account information and we're happy to try and address concerns.

For money, we've recently loosened restrictions but essentially there is a IP problem on currency that is 100% readable. You can find the specifics under the general section of our known image restrictions page: https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/known-image-restrictions.html If your image/clip wasn't that, then again contact me directly.

At the end of the day, Adobe is likely to be the most conservative with regards to intellectual property and I'm 100% okay with that as it protects customer, contributor and Adobe alike.

Best,
Dennis

Being able to contact the likes of yourself and Mat is great... whenever I've been in contact with Mat it has always been quick and easy process.

I do think Adobe are missing out on a proper forum. I can understand the desire to have everyone post in one place in their own language but, for me anyway, it just feels a bit of a mess. The translation of the posts is not very good and in the end, you end up copying and pasting into google for a slightly more accurate result. Just makes it a drawn out process when often you just want to quickly read through what's been happening, post or whatever and get back to work. In the end I just stopped visiting... I might use it once every 6 months or so... if that.

"Adobe is likely to be the most conservative with regards to intellectual property"

I've always found Adobe to have the right balance and, more importantly, they're consistent with in their approach. Makes it easy to know what to send.

I agree with the warning email before banning/blocking... with all the small print for each agency being different (and plenty of it) it can be very easy to miss something or, fail to spot a change to policy. Most of us are here to make a living and wouldn't intentionally jeopardise it.

Anyway, good to hear from you about this... especially on holiday! with a beer by the pool 😉

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Apparently they can just block you without further notice... (Read 13802 times)

georgep7

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors