I see that Shutterstock has a new logo - that will solve everything lol

I'm hoping I'm safe from this as I haven't had an email from SS inviting me to Unlimited, and in my account settings I am opted into 4 things: Image Licensing, Video Licensing, Image Data Licensing, Video Data Licensing, and there are no other options.

Regarding TrustPilot reviews, this is not unique to SS. All stock agencies with free trials get a huge amount of negative reviews from people who never checked the terms and didn't cancel before the trial ran out.

Mat Hayward was great. I don�t think anything of the recent drama would have happened under his watch.

eta

According to linkedin he still works for Adobe

My thoughts have always been that Mat was moved on to his current role at Adobe, not that he chose to move on. (Disclaimer: I have no insider knowledge though.) But nevertheless the current drama could just as easily have taken place while he was still in his previous role. Contributor Relations have never had any say over moderation.

Didn't beat the previous month's BME but it was still a good month, approximately the same as Adobe.

Since January, I've had very few sales from the US in SS. Usually, I get a considerable proportion of my sales from the US.

Maybe the decrease in US buyers could explain everyone's experience across most agencies.

Did the US video buyers switch to iStock/Getty? I had a very good month for video in March on iStock/Getty and around two-thirds of my videos DL's were from the US.

I upload both photos and videos camera content and have maintained a 99% acceptance rate until today. My uploads are typically reviewed within a few weeks, or at most, within one month. I submit one picture per topic or subject each day, consistently uploading every day. I usually have 5 to 7 topics submitted at the same time, resulting in 5 to 7 photos or videos uploaded daily. So far this year, I have had only one image rejected for being similar to another.

No AI.

Congrats on the high acceptance rate! I'm wondering of the majority of your content is model-released? (And therefore has to be reviewed by a human, not a bot.)

I can't access iStock's ESP portal today due to a 502 Bad Gateway error - anyone else getting this?

Congrats!

Quote from: Raul.Ceron on April 15, 2025, 02:27

As part of our ongoing commitment to enhance the content discovery experience for both customers and contributors, we have identified and are removing duplicate files on Adobe Stock. You should have received an email regarding this update on February 27, 2025. All assets have been carefully evaluated to ensure minimal impact on your portfolio.

Thats what the email says but many of us are getting things removed that arent duplicates.

Exactly what criteria is used here - is it identical image, similar images, similar metadata?  Is it fully automated or human audited?

Also, please can we have a filter on the rejected page to see which have gone rather than have to manually trawl through page after page of normal rejections over the last decade?

Your lobster, clownfish and the 2 drone videos are still showing up in your portfolio, do you now agree that the ones that were removed were duplicates?

If the images are actually duplicates say image #x was deleted because it is identical to image #y.

I totally agree the vague guidelines reason is very unhelpful. I followed the guidelines link and went down a little bit of a rabbit hole...

Yes, a clear rejection reason of "duplicate content in portfolio" would have avoided a lot of the unnecessary anger at Adobe for appearing to randomly remove images and videos. People were already mistrustful of Adobe because of the recent increase in rejections and this didn't help.

Just woke up to another email of a further 11 removed so 56 in total.
They DO appear in the rejected items but in the location in time of where they would have been rejected so you need to trawl through.

The SEEM to be starting at the older and working up because so far all the stuff is  on the last few pages.  Most of it from Fotolia days!

Its the same bland, generic removal reason that offers no useful information and might be garbage.

Can see with the attachments, as a selection i have a sea fan, clownfish, coral crab, flooded bridge, rice terrace and old drone shot of a river all "incompatible with terms".  It doesnt tell me why or any details at all.

Most of these are from 6-8 years ago, some are Fotolia so pre-adobe stock days.  So apparently my images have managed to violate Adobe Stock terms and conditions despite being uploaded and accepted literally before Adobe Stock even existed.

Do i need to persuade a clownfish to sign a model release now?  Or check for an owner of a blade of grass?

FWIW quite of a few of these images sell quite well even to this day.


It looks to make like they're started at image number 1 and applying their unspecified criteria from there upwards which suggest a lot of people could lose hundreds or potentially thousands of images by the time this completes.

The really frustrating thing here is the complete contempt they seem to be treating contributors.  They've gone down the Shutterstock route.

There is no clear criteria listed anywhere, there's no timeline, there's no explanation of HOW the process is conducted (i suspect entirely automated.. but based on what?).  No discussion of whether this is a one off or will continue scanning or pruning indefinitely.
Theres not even a simple filter to show WHAT has been deleted - the email link just uselessly goes to the "rejected images" most recent page.

AS *used* to be different to the others, direct 2 way engagement and communication with contributors, things were explained (even if not agreed with) but you knew where you stood.  Those days have gone.

It appears that all these files are still online, so the reason why they were removed may be because they are duplicates. Please can you check if the file numbers of the removed files and the file numbers of the ones still in your port are different?

Hello Adobe,

why don't you openly say that you're not interested in us contributors anymore?
What's with this pathetic, pointless communication?

I am very disappointed.

As a tech company, you should be ashamed of yourselves. Incidentally, I am also (was) a customer of Adobe products.

It appears that this was removed because it is a duplicate of a file in your portfolio with a different file number. Please can you check?

I thought ahead and I took a screenshot of my Not Accepted page back when they sent me an email about duplicate removals. I don't see any new rejected files so far.