|
MicrostockGroup Sponsors
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - WendyT
1
I wonder if a legal person could have a bit of fun with that ... As copyright holders we own the assets. Having them held hostage is a violation of that right ... having to opt in to something that is not wanted is a violation of the copyright holders rights and as has been pointed out leaves the assets vulnerable to "illegal" use. The other thing is how do contributors know that the assets are not being used without their knowledge and without compensation ...
2
« on: May 24, 2025, 20:10 »
Thank you for sharing that screen shot of the "limit reached", it still concerns me that it is very vague and lacking in detail. If they can use AI to address you personally in an email message then I am sure they can get AI to let you know the exact reason, or let you know ahead of time what your limits are. Use AI for something useful that actually helps the contributors.
3
« on: May 20, 2025, 16:30 »
What concerns me is this "Your submission limit is based on a variety of factors related to your account, performance and approval rates. " Especially the last one when we have all been on the rejection roulette wheel.
Telling us there is going to be a submission limit that is based on an individual "calculation" does not help us plan our workflow without given us our individual information. What exactly do they mean by "performance" as well???
What has my "account" got to do with my uploading ability? We all have "accounts" some upload, some download, some upload and download, some only have software. It is our registration with Adobe .... does that information have bearing on our ability to upload? In other words priority will be given to those who have the newest version of the software and both buy and sell? Clarity is needed or it is just more obfuscating!
4
« on: May 17, 2025, 17:46 »
[snip]
@wendy
again, thank you. the whole upload process is on istock is very painful compared to other places. but with the coming merger they should be able to increase sales, so habing content there should help my monthly income.
@cobalt I do not like the ESP process, I find that using DeepMeta certainly streamlines the process. Having content should definitely help.
5
« on: May 16, 2025, 18:00 »
[snip]
I understand the use of a batch if I want to upload a complete series from a shooting. But there should be a simple way to upload mixed files daily.
Maybe I should open more batches by genre instead of monthly - food, travel, easter, xmas, people...
using the batches in that way is probably a good way to do it. I personally just add to a batch in a day and upload, then start a new batch ... I have some batches that only had a couple of images in them. I preferred it when they just did FIFO reviews. If you do have batches by genre just make sure you dont add to them before the ones already uploaded have been reviewed.
6
« on: May 15, 2025, 17:31 »
Btw my reviews on IS are really lagging; over a month now, and some new files reviewed sooner than older. This could be related with my upload method: I don't upload much (5-8 files / week on average) and I don't open new batch every time I upload - simply keep filling same batch until artificial 100 limit is reached.
Yes, it is related to your upload method - if you add anything to a batch that is waiting for review, you send the whole batch to the end of the review queue 
Oh...that explains it. I use "monthly" batches and just keep adding content.
As has been said if you add to a batch it goes back to the end of the queue. Only add to a batch after the current uploaded assets have been reviewed. It does not matter how many batches you have open. The other thing you can do is add assets to a batch and then when you have enough then finish the upload. The main use of batches is that a "series" is uploaded together and then they will show up in the carousel for "more images from this series" (or whatever they say) ...
7
« on: May 05, 2025, 16:07 »
I think we have all been hit with the "similar" rejections lately. For many of us it is obvious that it has not been compared to images in our own portfolios, so it must be comparing to the larger collection. If this is the way things are going then anything new will always be rejected for similar as there are so many images of just about every topic on Adobe. I dont see how this will keep the collection "fresh".
8
« on: April 11, 2025, 18:05 »
I had 2 removed in the "audit" process, tells me that they are against the guidelines and a link to read. I did read and I have no idea how "dead trees in a drought affected lake" go against the guidelines. The other one was a "hemp plant ready for harvesting" again I dont see how it goes against guidelines.
To me these removals are clear as mud.
Actually the email said I had 2 removed, I look at my numbers and I have had 19 removed so far. All of them say "This content has been removed for violating Adobe Stock’s content submission guidelines. We have determined that this content is incompatible with the Stock Contributor Terms on the basis of an internal audit. "
So apart from the previous 2, there are mushrooms, a small frog, some ducks and I have no idea what else because there is no point in looking ...
9
« on: February 06, 2025, 17:54 »
I have not uploaded to Alamy but things like this make me wary. The amount of the so called "fines" vary for the same "offence" as though it is a random amount from some person who may or may not be having a good day. Coupled with the number of people who find sales for which they have not been credited .... it does sound like their accounting department needs a good shake up!
10
« on: January 22, 2025, 16:30 »
@Shady Sue I agree that it makes the files look dodgy. You would think that a company as big as Getty would want to keep the buyers within the umbrella of themselves. However showing them an image then not showing them "how" to buy it is ludicrous. The buyer wont head over to IS and "hope" they can find it. They are more likely to look elsewhere.
All independent files are put into the "Essentials" category. "Unreleased creative" (illustrative editorials or editorials on other agencies) are mirrored to Getty and get us the 20% if you get a sale there. Though 20% of "not much" is "not much". "Unreleased creative" as a term can be very confusing to buyers even if it makes TPTB feel more comfortable with it.
11
« on: January 21, 2025, 19:29 »
As far as I understand IS exclusive files are not more expensive, the contributor just gets a bigger percentage. Exclusives do however get the chance to have files designated S+ and they are mirrored to Getty, the indie files do not have that advantage.
I dont know if it still happens, but a google search of my files pointed me at Getty and then it said it was "not available to purchase" and did not point you to IS (that was really annoying)
12
« on: January 19, 2025, 17:48 »
I'm new to using DeepMeta for iStock/Getty. What are "connect" downloads, and why does iStock seperate them in the TXT reports?
From what I can work out Connect are not "real" downloads, they are pay per view. EG the slide show on your windows machines that shows up when you boot up. They show up one day and then a different one the next. As such they are separated out in the report. I also had a set of images downloaded twice, casssowaries in my case. I saw someone mention before that it was possibly "Sony" .... but it does smell rather like AI training  December was one of my best for the year for downloads but worst for RPD.
13
« on: January 07, 2025, 21:31 »
"If" you only used "Topaz AI Denoise" and or "Topaz AI sharpen" then IS has said that this is acceptable. "If" you think your images were rejected incorrectly then put in a ticket. I have not heard of anyone being rejected for those tools as they dont use a "data set" they use information from within the file. But "if" you use Photoshop CC, and use tools like "content aware" corrections, a lot of them now have AI enabled and you need to turn it off. User beware in other words! Even though they say the minimal use is acceptable it usually scores a rejection. Topaz AI Gigapixel is not allowed at all, but resizing up is frowned upon anyway. Metadata removal will also get you a rejection. As Uncle Pete said the information is embedded within the file not in the metadata anyway. Current rules: https://contributors.gettyimages.com/article/9608and this https://contributors.gettyimages.com/article/10847
14
« on: January 05, 2025, 18:26 »
I've been using Topaz AI for noise reduction / sharpening for more than a year now and super pleased. However, I've noticed that iStockphoto have rejected whole batches of commercial and editorials. See screenshot below.
I went to find out why and from November 2024 they changed their policy. See link here:
https://contributors.gettyimages.com/article/10847
In summary:
If you want to make significant changes to your content, either separately or in addition to work you’ve done under the Retouching Requirements, follow these rules (“Modification”):
Do not apply Modification to your content with generative AI tools (only use traditional, non-generative AI tools).
Do not add location keywords, titles or descriptions more specific than Region/State/County if you modify recognizable, named, or famous locations.
Do not alter a model’s body shape to make them look thinner or larger than they are in real life. Find out more.
NOTE: Under these Modification Requirements, without using generative AI tools, you can:
Retouch more than 10% of the image’s total pixels.
Add new elements you own the copyright for, including creating composites.
Retouch your models more extensively.
Had no issues at any other agency. Frustrating, might just stop uploading to iStock anyway for what they pay and now further hurdles of creating two separate batches.
As far as I am aware Topaz AI Denoise and Sharpen are supposed to be acceptable on IS, but if you are using some of Photoshop's tools, just check that AI has not been activated on them ... the latest version of CC turns them on automatically again.
15
« on: October 01, 2024, 20:06 »
You have again ascertained that the sound can only be interpreted by another mechanism. So if there is no mechanism then the sound is just waves in the ether. It is only "sound" because our body takes the vibration from the waves, these then react on the auditory bones that then send a signal to the brain that interprets it as "sound". Another mechanical device will mimic this. A deaf person does not hear "sound", they feel "vibration". So sound is just a concept created in a hearing persons brain.
16
« on: September 29, 2024, 19:16 »
"If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?" is a philosophical thought experiment that raises questions regarding observation and perception.
________
I don't know what different philosophers have come up with, but when I was recently walking through the forest and a huge birch tree was falling on me, I clearly heard the loud sound of it falling. It was thanks to this sound that I was able to accidentally escape from the area where the tree was falling. After which, behind me, I heard a loud dull sound of a fallen tree hitting the ground.
If I hadn't heard the sound of a falling tree, this tree would have fallen on me and I wouldn't be writing this post here.
Sound is just a concept, without a mechanical means to interpret the vibration then no sound would be "heard", by extrapolating that, if no sound can be "heard" then no sound is "made". There may be vibration in the earth and air, but if no mechanical device is able to receive that vibration and then translate it to something the brain perceives as sound then it is not sound.
17
« on: September 26, 2024, 17:51 »
most recent inspection 2 and a half months, all rejected for "quality issues".
18
« on: September 15, 2024, 16:50 »
I had one removed a while back for that reason, but they didnt tell me which one fell foul of the "new" restrictions so I have no idea which one it is or what was wrong with it.
19
« on: September 08, 2024, 17:29 »
It seems that some people are getting images reviewed and others seem to get buried never to be seen again, I am wondering if it is worth deleting images and resubmitting them to get them back up the top of the Q?
It has worked for me on a handful of occasions in the past to resubmit the stuck files and they have been reviewed more quickly. But there is no need to delete the older ones first, you can delete them if the newer ones get reviewed. Otherwise I would leave the older ones there in case they get reviewed first, and then I would delete the newer ones.
Deletion of uploaded files is treated same as file rejection and effects on your stats and sales.
Do you know that as a fact?
20
« on: September 07, 2024, 18:19 »
It seems that some people are getting images reviewed and others seem to get buried never to be seen again, I am wondering if it is worth deleting images and resubmitting them to get them back up the top of the Q?
21
« on: September 06, 2024, 17:36 »
Small jubilee - 50 days of not reviewing. 
I am sitting at 40. Could I please ask you to report here once it goes over 56 days (8 weeks) if it still hasn't been reviewed?
over 2 months here now .. so that is longer than their "8 weeks"
22
« on: August 30, 2024, 17:59 »
I look on connect as bonus money as they are not "real" downloads. IS still outperforms AS, which is not helped by slow inspections on AS.
23
« on: August 30, 2024, 17:45 »
I have a batch of 400 files uploaded 18 days ago, 30 files approved within 3 days, another 290 approved yesterday, im left with 80 files in the queue for approval, all non AI pictures.
wow you must be special. were they special topics?
24
« on: August 28, 2024, 18:38 »
I personally found them not worth the effort. When I was uploading I ticked other agnecies, just made sure the ones I already upload to was not included. (you can deselect them). They charge you a fee now and I am not sure if they still charge 15% for selling. If they do that is double dipping in my opinion. The last time I uploaded they sent everything to their own marketplace instead of accepting at sending it to agencies. Some of the sales I have had are also "dataset" even though I specifically said I didnt want that. I have a small number of files with them and will not upload any more.
25
« on: August 25, 2024, 20:31 »
It would be good if Mat could explain to use why the reviews are taking so long.
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
