the case is closed, i am terminated, do not use filters ,

I need some time to see how this works, i only want to inform you about my case

I wrote to support couple times, i explained how i created this photo, wrote to every email at shutterstock, ZEPHOS author of this filter http://www.filterforge.com/filters/2190.html  wrote to shutterstock and they won`t accept nothing, for them i am guilty, but all others submiters with same photos are not. This photos are uploaded before and after me. And for them its allowed, and for me its forbidden.

after 3 years and 2800 photos they decided to terminate me

.... The person making the complaint is requesting that Shutterstock take appropriate steps against you. Prior to taking any further steps, we are inviting you to respond to this claim.

How did someone make a complaint about your image before it had been approved?

The really simple way to avoid such issues is to not use elements of other peoples' work within your images. I don't care if it is supposedly 'allowed', public domain or whatever, or indeed whether some folk's images have got through the system. If it's not your work in it's entirety then don't submit it. Dead simple.

QuotePlease respond to this email by December 30, 2010. If you fail to respond by said date with the information we outline above, your Shutterstock.com submitter account may be closed.

You are just posting now that your account is terminated. Did you respond to Shutterstock before the date listed above (from your original post)? Just curious. If you didn't respond before then, maybe they are just getting around to terminating it now? If that's the case, you had a free ride for almost 5 months.

yes i did, i immediate wrote to support

admin edit: employee name removed

i was blocked for 3 or 4 months, they were working on my case

Quote from: cclapper on May 17, 2011, 16:54

QuotePlease respond to this email by December 30, 2010. If you fail to respond by said date with the information we outline above, your Shutterstock.com submitter account may be closed.

You are just posting now that your account is terminated. Did you respond to Shutterstock before the date listed above (from your original post)? Just curious. If you didn't respond before then, maybe they are just getting around to terminating it now? If that's the case, you had a free ride for almost 5 months.

yes i did, i immediate wrote to support

admin edit: employee name removed

they said that they need some time, and that they are working on my case, and i need to be patient

my account is terminated in april

Quote from: gostwyck on May 17, 2011, 16:48
.... The person making the complaint is requesting that Shutterstock take appropriate steps against you. Prior to taking any further steps, we are inviting you to respond to this claim.

How did someone make a complaint about your image before it had been approved?

The really simple way to avoid such issues is to not use elements of other peoples' work within your images. I don't care if it is supposedly 'allowed', public domain or whatever, or indeed whether some folk's images have got through the system. If it's not your work in it's entirety then don't submit it. Dead simple.

I don`t know, my case is suspicious. I make a mistake using filter forge and that filter, but according to filter forge EULA final image render i can use for personal and commercial work, i always wonder how do they create such photos, and i discovered it`s filter forge. There are a lot submiters at shutterstock who are using filter forge without limit.

I used filter forge for bakgrounds and textures, and something which i can create in photoshop, but all other others are using all filters without limit or fear. i just wonder why is for them that allowed and legal but for me it` forbidden.

You still haven't explained how someone could make a complaint before your image was approved. How do you complain about an image that nobody has even seen yet? Doesn't make sense.

Quote from: rimglow on May 17, 2011, 17:12
You still haven't explained how someone could make a complaint before your image was approved. How do you complain about an image that nobody has even seen yet? Doesn't make sense.

I said same thing, i ask shutterstock and *** who make a complaint about my photo, i sent that photo, it was in review mode, and after that i received warning email, and i saw that my account is blocked or disabled, photo was never approved, without shutterstock watermark.

admin edit: employee name removed

Quote from: copyrightdesign on May 17, 2011, 17:17

Quote from: rimglow on May 17, 2011, 17:12
You still haven't explained how someone could make a complaint before your image was approved. How do you complain about an image that nobody has even seen yet? Doesn't make sense.

I said same thing, i ask shutterstock and james who make a complaint about my photo, i sent that photo, it was in review mode, and after that i received warning email, and i saw that my account is blocked or disabled, photo was never approved, without shutterstock watermark.

i don`t know how to explain, photo was in review mode, after that i received warning email, my account is blocked or disabled, photo was never approved, and this is email i received.

Quote from: gostwyck on May 17, 2011, 16:48
The really simple way to avoid such issues is to not use elements of other peoples' work within your images. I don't care if it is supposedly 'allowed', public domain or whatever, or indeed whether some folk's images have got through the system. If it's not your work in it's entirety then don't submit it. Dead simple.

Exactly. It's hard enough sometimes proving ownership of source material for illustrations, brushes, etc., I wouldn't dare risk using anything I didn't create myself in a stock image. Just not worth it.

Besides, even if what you used is legit and allowed by stock agencies, what good is something pre-made that tons of other people use? It's a waste of time to create an image that looks exactly like many others out there. Especially now. Stock agencies are making it harder to get similars approved, and SS is the most aggressive with that new policy. Don't even waste time on these filters. Make your own stuff.

Quote from: helix7 on May 17, 2011, 17:35

Quote from: gostwyck on May 17, 2011, 16:48
The really simple way to avoid such issues is to not use elements of other peoples' work within your images. I don't care if it is supposedly 'allowed', public domain or whatever, or indeed whether some folk's images have got through the system. If it's not your work in it's entirety then don't submit it. Dead simple.

Exactly. It's hard enough sometimes proving ownership of source material for illustrations, brushes, etc., I wouldn't dare risk using anything I didn't create myself in a stock image. Just not worth it.

Besides, even if what you used is legit and allowed by stock agencies, what good is something pre-made that tons of other people use? It's a waste of time to create an image that looks exactly like many others out there. Especially now. Stock agencies are making it harder to get similars approved, and Shutterstock is the most aggressive with that new policy. Don't even waste time on these filters. Make your own stuff.

It`s too late now, because i am terminated, i used filters for something i can create in photoshop, i didn`t  know that this exactly filter is used by someone, so i need to check 12.000.0000 photos in that time, to see is someone uploaded similar photo before me.

Quote from: copyrightdesign on May 17, 2011, 17:44
It`s too late now, because i am terminated, i used filters for something i can create in photoshop, i didn`t  know that this exactly filter is used by someone, so i need to check 12.000.0000 photos in that time, to see is someone uploaded similar photo before me.

You'll get reinstated. If so many other people are using the same filter and you have confirmation from the person who made the filter that it's ok to use in stock, SS will reopen your account. You just have to wait it out.

But once that happens, no more filters!

If you don't use filters, you don't have to worry about looking through all those images to see if someone else created a similar image. It's too late to do anything about it in this particular case, but in the future, just make your own images from scratch. It may take longer, but like everything in this business there are no shortcuts to success.

So why for all others is allowed to use filter forge and that filters without limit, and copy each other without limit, but when i create something with filter forge that is not allowed? I only want to know why? in this case different rules for different submiters.

Quote from: helix7 on May 17, 2011, 17:49

Quote from: copyrightdesign on May 17, 2011, 17:44
It`s too late now, because i am terminated, i used filters for something i can create in photoshop, i didn`t  know that this exactly filter is used by someone, so i need to check 12.000.0000 photos in that time, to see is someone uploaded similar photo before me.

You'll get reinstated. If so many other people are using the same filter and you have confirmation from the person who made the filter that it's ok to use in stock, Shutterstock will reopen your account. You just have to wait it out.

But once that happens, no more filters!

If you don't use filters, you don't have to worry about looking through all those images to see if someone else created a similar image. It's too late to do anything about it in this particular case, but in the future, just make your own images from scratch. It may take longer, but like everything in this business there are no shortcuts to success.

I hope so, i wrote to support and every email i had, i didn`t get any new respond, only ZEPHOS AUTHOR OF THIS FILTER  received email from SHUTTERSTOCK and they said that my case is closed. So i posted my case on this forum, and i hope someone will see, and reinstate my account.

I don`t know what to say anymore.

without those filters in your samples shown, the files would be very simple pieces that most buyers would pass up. I am against blatant profiteering from other peoples hard work. Same goes for supposed photographers who take shots of dead artists work. If you cant create those types of filters yourself, you shouldnt be submitting them as your own.

Just my take... I think filter forge has been seeing their textures used on SS and is trying to protect their business. They probably sent some sort of warning letter to sue to SS. On istock, you have to prove its your own textures you created and i dont know if its like that on SS. Inspectors are probably aware of this issue so they see your submission. flags gets raised and your caught. they will most likely be taking those samples down one by one soon.

Quote from: VB inc on May 17, 2011, 18:08
without those filters in your samples shown, the files would be very simple pieces that most buyers would pass up. I am against blatant profiteering from other peoples hard work. Same goes for supposed photographers who take shots of dead artists work. If you cant create those types of filters yourself, you shouldnt be submitting them as your own.

Just my take... I think filter forge has been seeing their textures used on Shutterstock and is trying to protect their business. They probably sent some sort of warning letter to sue to Shutterstock. On istock, you have to prove its your own textures you created and i dont know if its like that on Shutterstock. Inspectors are probably aware of this issue so they see your submission. flags gets raised and your caught. they will most likely be taking those samples down one by one soon.

This may be a valid moral statement, but as the OP outlined, the license of the software permits the use of Images on shutterstock. Therefore he did legally nothing wrong but nevertheless gets punished and prejudged by shutterstock. And this is IMHO plain wrong.

Quote from: VB inc on May 17, 2011, 18:08
without those filters in your samples shown, the files would be very simple pieces that most buyers would pass up. I am against blatant profiteering from other peoples hard work. Same goes for supposed photographers who take shots of dead artists work. If you cant create those types of filters yourself, you shouldnt be submitting them as your own.

Just my take... I think filter forge has been seeing their textures used on Shutterstock and is trying to protect their business. They probably sent some sort of warning letter to sue to Shutterstock. On istock, you have to prove its your own textures you created and i dont know if its like that on Shutterstock. Inspectors are probably aware of this issue so they see your submission. flags gets raised and your caught. they will most likely be taking those samples down one by one soon.

Well, i am not sure, i wrote to ZEPHOS he is author of this filter http://www.filterforge.com/filters/2190.html , i have a support and permission to use final image render for personal and commercial use. I wrote to FILTER FORGE support and they said same thing, final image render i can use for personal and commercial use. And my photo was never approved, only reviewers could see. I know it`s bad and not moral, but all others are using without limit. I saw that from them. And always wonder is this allowed or not? Now i know it`s allowed for most users, but only for me it`s forbidden.  

Quote from: velocicarpo on May 17, 2011, 18:15
This may be a valid moral statement, but as the OP outlined, the license of the software permits the use of Images on shutterstock. Therefore he did legally nothing wrong but nevertheless gets punished and prejudged by shutterstock. And this is IMHO plain wrong.

Nope, you're wrong. It's Oringer's agency. It's his money, he takes the risks, he writes the rules and he has those rules applied as he sees fit __ all perfectly legally. If you don't like the way he runs his business you are under no obligation to participate in it.