Quote from: derek on November 02, 2018, 20:45

Quote from: DallasP on November 02, 2018, 01:41
I changed it anyway ... because it was an old password but, bruteforce targeting of user accounts isn't a "hack" so there very well could be some attempts ... but, it'd take years for them to even make a dent.

They could over a long period of time take a bit here and there!  nobody would notice or be alarmed and it could go on for years!........when you write to support to check your account all you get back is the same waffle " we're constanly improving our Tech department and so on"

Again, how can someone take a bit of the contributor income to be unnoticed on SS if they do not pay on request, but monthly, automatically, with all the value that is payable and to all contributors?

Any hack would take all or nothing and surely be noticed. Especially by those having a payment every month, which I'm sure are going to SS daily and would note immediately any problem with a password hack.

Quote from: Gio on November 02, 2018, 20:27
I can confirm. I've been hacked and my PayPal account got changed. Earnings have gone. I am waiting an answer from the support, i hope to have my earnings back.

How are earnings gone if Shutterstock haven't started to rollout payments just yet? SS just does not pay on request, they process everyone every month.

You can be hacked by a number of reasons, one of them you alone having a virus or malware on your computer. That is very different from a problem affecting all contributors, or at least a large number of them.

I'm not seeing any problem and I'm not aware from any communication from SS until this point.

Someone comes here and announces a possible hack, without any evidence or references and no indication from SS that this is happening, and people start changing the passwords?

Imagine if the hack is real but it's not targeting the current password because they cannot do it, and instead are targeting the new password when people change it because they have found a way to do it?

Or trying to cause some panic to overload SS systems and take advantage of some weakness created then?

So, if I make any type of alarmist announcement will you follow it just because Leaf confirmed my contact, but not my information? This is all very strange.

Quote from: Zero Talent on October 25, 2018, 16:58

There are many religious impositions, besides the veil or burka accepted as normal even in a free and laic society. Besides, many traditions and society norms originate from religious impositions.

Why would this piece of clothing be any different?

You don't get that I am against laws mandating burkas as much as I am against laws forbidding it!
France is no different than Saudi Arabia from this point of view. Both countries have oppressive laws forcing women to wear what the government considers OK.

This is my message for you: Let people wear what the want, let them be free to exercise their religion, tradition or fashion taste and stop imposing your beliefs on others.

I asked about babies because it was you who has extrapolated the notion of free will to minors. If you give me bad examples with minors, why stopping there and not extrapolating even further to babies? Get my point?

Simply because the burka is anti-human. It dehumanizes the women that use them since it makes them invisible as people. Plus, it denies their individuality by hiding their personal characteristics. They are no longer "Aliyha", "Amina" but just another female standing there.

It's simple to prove this by imagining if you could identify one woman wearing a burka that you've seen previously, after she changed to a different burka, side by side with others with similar stature and composition. I'm certain that you could not and that's because she has her individuality denied to everybody except the close family.

But the offense doesn't stop there. They wear those complete covers because the people who impose them consider women as a source of sin and temptation. So, to prevent them to "provoke" men they cover women.

Summing up, they consider men as animals incapable to control violent sexual impulses! So, we must be protected from the sight of women! ABSURD! Did you think men would get away?

The most shocking consequence of this way of thinking is when a woman of those cultures is raped by a man (or a whole battalion), she's the one considered guilty. After all, they are the ones who provoked and men are incapable of control. And as it's frequent in the news they may even be sentenced to the death penalty because they had sex outside marriage!!!

I call that a giant BS!!!

I understand your point about freedom. Believe me I understand. But freedom isn't an absolute value.

If freedom was an absolute value what would stop religions that advocate human sacrifice, cannibalism or sex with children to be practiced in any western world?

Am I right to think that you would not accept those practices in your country, am I right? So where do we draw the line? From what point do we consider something unacceptable? Do we stop at human sacrifice, or is treating women as things also unacceptable to us, despite being part of a culture or religion?

Quote from: Zero Talent on October 25, 2018, 15:04
May I remind you that we are talking about an innocent piece of clothing.

This is the basic reason why you fail to understand all that follows.

That "innocent piece of clothing" is a strong religious symbol dictated by the religious norms, not the latest fashion trend adopted by some women for a season or two. So much that in many countries women failing to use it (in any of its different forms) are punished by law. So much for an innocent piece of clothing, right?

Plus, in many of the countries where the use is not enforced by law there's a strong criticism and pressure from society against those women that do not use it. How much of that criticism do you think becomes harassment or discrimination?

I remember in my own country when women started to use mini-skirts, trousers, going to pastry shops (cafes and pubs were unthinkable to women) what they were called. "Whore" was one of the nicest things...

There was a huge pressure for women not to dress like that. But since the everyday clothing did not have any religious imposition it was possible for the brave ones, with the support or tolerance of their fathers, boyfriends or husbands, to go through and path the way to other women initially more shy. Today, no one cares about it.

But society and peer pressure plays a huge role limiting that free will. When religions gets in the way then things get ugly.

In my country many women still use the scarf, especially in the interior. As far as I know they are not imposing it or criticizing those who not wear them anymore.

Quote from: Zero Talent on October 25, 2018, 15:04
I am also talking about free will and you give me examples of mutilation and child abuse, having nothing to do with it. Do you actually think that the concept of free will can be extrapolated to babies, when you give such examples?

I'm not talking about babies. The examples I have given refer to adolescents. They understand what is happening and consent it (the way an adolescent is able to, anyway), but were brought to believe that that's the correct way to do things. Many times led to believe that the people not doing it are wrong and they are better.

Plus, you're being shortsighted because you are ignoring that it's the education they receive as children that will form their adult personalities. And the continuing of unacceptable traditions.

Quote from: Zero Talent on October 25, 2018, 15:04
So you might be subject of many Stockholm syndromes yourself, when you side with such oppressive lawmakers, who made you believe that oppressive laws are good for you. Have ever thought about it?

I have full conscience that I'm a product of my society and education. Having that conscience I regularly question many things since and don't accept blindly what people want to stick down my throat. I also used unacceptable haircuts and clothing (punk with mohawk) and know very well . I went through the public condemnation the peer pressure process. So I know what I'm talking about. Now I see kids with mohawks imitating footballers.

Yet, I know I continue to be a product of my society. Maybe a bit misfit, but still...

Quote from: Zero Talent on October 25, 2018, 15:04
I told you the origins of the veil and burka. In many places, like Eastern Europe, this tradition evolved into the scarf. Even today, in some of these places, women consider impolite to show their hair in public and wear the scarf, all the time. Are all these women also affected by the Stockholm syndrome?
Far from that, I would say. It is a tradition and you must respect that. Nobody is forcing them to do it, not their husbands and not any law. It is their choice, their free will. The same thing is valid for many middle eastern women who chose to wear the veil, because it is their tradition and they like it.

There's a difference between a tradition and religious imposition, many time punished by law as I mentioned. The Burka and it's less invasive variation belong to the latest kind.

Quote from: Zero Talent on October 25, 2018, 15:04
How hard is to understand that?

That is a question you should ask yourself.

Quote from: Pauws99 on October 25, 2018, 14:16
To be honest I thought the comment about a women's only section was somewhat tongue in cheek  . I think its interesting though that a post pointing out what probably 95% of members consider ill judged at best has created such a vitriolic argument.

In this day and age, regarding this issue nothing is to be taken as tongue in cheek. In my country there are women claiming to have transports just for them. A measure that several countries have already taken.

In the past men only clubs have been forbidden, for now women only businesses and places to start creeping around.

At this very moment universities in my country, instead of being beacons of educated free thinking and progress, are battlefields where censorship of ideas and even thoughts gain alarming ground. Even common words are micromanaged and potentially reason for public shaming. Debates, instead of welcoming different ideas end up with attempts to stop the participation of some intellectuals just bacause they don't fit the PC norm.

The use of traditional expressions tend to create a lynching mob instead of an education action.

This politically correct movement, where every opinion is extremist, all black and white, no shades of grey, no tolerance, of lynching mobs and inquisition is starting to fracture society.

The result is the alarming growing popularity of conservative and authoritarian politicians, like Trump, Orban, Le Pen, Salvini, Bolsonaro, just to name a few recent ones.

You may think I'm overreacting, but watch the world, the timeline of this politically correct movement and connect the dots. So, sorry for not taking some things lightly.

Quote from: cathyslife on October 25, 2018, 12:05

I guarantee there is more than one man on this site that makes those types of comments, or has that mentality regarding women. Yes, most here are respectful, men and women alike...some are not.

Unless you're telling me that the vast majority of men on this forum disrespect women continuously, and that attitude is tolerated by the owner and moderators, I will not accept that some women in this forum classify all men as abusers or imply that there is a women intolerant environment to the point that a women specific section is needed!

Just grow up, thicken your skin and fight those who disrespect you. That's how conquests have been made in the past. In fact, that's how you even got the right to be in this forum and express your voice freely, instead of being locked up in a house tending to your man needs. Not by creating women only clubs and forums.

And I'm absolutely sure that you will not be surprised that many men will take your side, which is also one of the major reasons women conquered more freedom in the past 100 years than in the thousands of years before. Because many men sided with women and agreed with their reasons.

Quote from: Zero Talent on October 25, 2018, 13:22

Quote from: MicroVet on October 25, 2018, 10:30

Quote from: wordplanet on October 25, 2018, 00:42
"Me too."
Maybe we need a women's only section of this forum. Guys seriously this is insulting to all of us.

I shiver every time I read a comment like this. Step by step women get closer to using Burkhas, and worse of all, willingly.

Nothing wrong with that. Women and men should be able to wear whatever they like, as long as it is willingly.

For your information, the veil and the burkas originate from the assyrian culture. Back then, a thousand of years BC (maybe more), the veil was worn willingly by "respectful" women.

Only, slaves and prostitutes were forbiden by law to use it.

Yeah... That's called Stockholm syndrome based on culture and education.

If you raise a child believing in the most f*cked up things and make him/her believe that by doing them they're making not only the right thing but even making them better than others, they'll do it "willingly".

Ancient Egyptians married fathers and daughters and performed all type of f*cked up genetic inbreeding. I'm pretty sure that everybody would answer they were doing it willingly, especially when not doing it would turn them into pariahs.

Even children that are groomed by their parents say they performed sex with they by their own will.

I've got a community in my country that perform child marriages against all laws. They'll tell you they do it willingly. Girls from that ethnic group abandon school at 10 or 11 years old because that's what traditions orders and they "want" to be like their mothers and take care of the house.

Immigrants coming  from Africa mutilate the genitals of their daughters, and I bet most if not all of those girls are anxiously waiting for the day their parents perform that abomination on them, because that will make them right, better, become women, etc.

So, don't pull that argument on me.

Forums just for women, just like buses, trains, gyms, etc, are a setback to the western society. The moment women start to isolate themselves I guarantee you their future generations will regret bitterly because then some men will have an excuse to start excluding them, like they did in the past.

The most stupid thing is that women fought and died for over a century to be in the public life. And now many start to claim the right to be excluded from it! Mind boggling!

Quote from: wordplanet on October 25, 2018, 00:42
"Me too."
Maybe we need a women's only section of this forum. Guys seriously this is insulting to all of us.

I shiver every time I read a comment like this. Step by step women get closer to using Burkhas, and worse of all, willingly. You should fight to be a recognized and valuable participant of the society, to be present in all areas, and not to be removed from it and much less by voluntary action.

Plus, your comment accused and condemned ALL the men in this forum as offenders because ONE made a comment that it's disrespectful to women.

The fact that most men understand, or at least start to understand that some things are disrespectful to women and should not be said, breaking thousands of years of culture and tradition to acknowledge women as equals, doesn't seem to hold any value to you.

I don't know what it's worse, the crude comment from one man, or your crude stereotyping of men and apartheid mentality. Maybe we should start having water fountains and park benches for women only.

Here's a thought, just push men to the back of the bus and reserve the front to women. That way you won't have man staring at you as you pass and it's safe since ALL men are abusers.

Unbelievable!

Quote from: MircoV on October 24, 2018, 13:33

Quote from: MicroVet on October 24, 2018, 08:02

Quote from: alexandersr on October 23, 2018, 22:39
What kinds of images could be sell on Alamy?

Really?! Why don't you find out for yourself? In this day and age where everybody complains about falling sales, "slices of pie" shrinking to everyone due to competition, etc, do you really think people will tell you their secrets so they get even less sales?

Honestly, why don't you put your bank account number here so we can all start sending you money. Would save a lot of time for everybody.

Slow down. He didnt asked which images are selling in your port of anyones. He just asks what kind. Answer would be for example travel photos... editorial photos. Dont look always for a reason to blast around. This forum is becoming worse and worse.

What's the difference between asking what photos we sell and the types of photos that sell?

Lets say I answer "Space Travel" after years of testing different types of images and understanding what sells or not. Next thing you know, thousands of photographers that just arrived and barely invested time, effort and money start buying tickets to visit Mars and Jupiter and even worse, Earth, submitting those images to alamy and diluting my work.

It's not blasting around. This is a business and like all businesses there are trade secrets. And in stock photography the most important one is, what type of images sell.

Try to make similar questions to Coca-Cola, Microsoft, Apple or the successful restaurant in your area for the recipe of the specialty that make people travel miles to eat it and you'll get a real feel of what is to be blast around.

Quote from: derek on October 24, 2018, 08:17
The Alamy QC is as crazy as the SS accepting everything and anything!

It has always been like that from the beginning. The only criteria is technical quality. On the plus side, there are sales on images that would never have been accepted on micro or any curated agency on the first place. From exposures that would be considered wrong, to strange subjects.

Quote from: alexandersr on October 23, 2018, 22:39
What kinds of images could be sell on Alamy?

Really?! Why don't you find out for yourself? In this day and age where everybody complains about falling sales, "slices of pie" shrinking to everyone due to competition, etc, do you really think people will tell you their secrets so they get even less sales?

Honestly, why don't you put your bank account number here so we can all start sending you money. Would save a lot of time for everybody.

Alamy does not have a record of being contributor unfriendly. Much by the contrary. In fact, it's the only agency that more than once has changed decisions based on contributors feedback. They're not perfect, but are among the best despite some criticism they occasionally get. So, I find it strange that they targeted you for a polite (as you describe it) conversation.

I sell an average of several hundreds of dollars every month for the past 11 eleven years on alamy. Yet, this year I had a month with no sales, especially when I was expecting a good number of sales. The first time since 2007! And I did nothing. Not even a polite conversation with them before that.

But I sold in the following months until today, after questioning about what happened in that month. By your logic I should have been punished, right?

I doubt the QC rank influences your sales and exposure on the site, but I do have 3 stars. Yet, to get them I have near 20.000 images on hundreds of batches and close to 10 years without rejections.

Install TOR browser which allows you to surf anonymoulsy and compare the results of the searches against the results on your browser. You'll see if your images are being damaged in their exposure when compared with what you see when logged in.

That short term marketing stunt may cost a lot in the long term.

As soon as buyers start perceiving the SS collection as little more than dross, and the time and effort to find anything suitable becomes too much to be practical they'll change to another more curated agency.

Even if SS then starts tightening the approval criteria the damage will be done. Millions of great images will already be buried in all that garbage and the photographers will not re-shoot and submit the same things. I know I will not.

Submitting to ten.

If I exclude the latest joined, because of video that now also accept photos, I'm just submitting to the same ones I had in 2007 or so except for one joined in 2014.

Never were the type to run after every new agency, especially when it was obvious that the project had no ability to compete with the top ones even back then, when things were still at the beginning.

A lot of people thought otherwise and we ended up with endless price wars between agencies, dragging prices and commissions down. The new ones tried to gain market share through low prices and the larger ones tried to keep customers by matching those prices.

All this was very discussed back then, with some people warning about the consequences of spreading the work through all the amateurish agencies, but most could not care as long as they could get $1 total out of those tenth of agencies per month.

12 years past and none of those new agencies are even close to the middle tier and most are dead doing who knows what with the images they got, but the damage is now done and it's irreversible.

Expecting a 40% drop from last years' September.

Quote from: Francisco on July 16, 2018, 04:32

Quote from: namussi on July 10, 2018, 04:43
I'm not seeing a lot of love for Shutterstock right now.

Their customer service is a  " "  For example, I've tried to ask for my own stats but they answer like robots. I hate that!

Contributor support is among the worse of all agencies. Slow and unhelpful most of the times. But to be honest it has always been like that since the beginning. A few years back it would have been the only thing I could point as a negative about SS.

Just had a perfect example of what I said earlier about SS and their absurd reviews.

Had a number of images rejected for similar, where each one was a variation of another image. I mean, different images where each one had a variation. Each variation not only has a different meaning it is also hard to make from the approved image by a designer.

So, I only got one approved of each and the variation rejected. At the same time I see tenths of images being approved that look like they are the exact same frame!

I really do not understand this.

I think that Alamy and Fotolia/Adobe are the ones that I "like" the most. But, as it has been said before they all have disappointed the contributors.

Depositphotos, for example, is downright dishonest.

After the scandal of images being sold by distributors for $30 as a single sale but paid to contributors like a subscription, I've taken knowledge of a contributor that demanded to be taken out of the distribution scheme which DP confirmed. But a few years later that contributor realized that DP blatantly lied to him and never took his portfolio out of the Distribution deal.

Quote from: Minsc on July 10, 2018, 16:57
I don't see any reason to hate SS since they haven't been reducing contributor royalties.

Well, considering that they haven't raise the contributor commissions for about 10 years, while raising the price of subscriptions, you may say that they have somewhat reduced the royalties.

In the past, when SS raised the price of the subscription plans, they usually raised the amount paid per download.

Plus, they seriously dropped the price of the Extended Licenses. A couple years back we would get $28 and now it's rare for them to get to the $20 mark.

I'm pretty sure that they also changed the requirements from which a buyer had to buy an EL, like the number of prints. Many sales that would have required an EL and for which you would receive $28, now you receive $0.38 or less depending on your rank because of the more permissive license.

So yes, they have been reducing the royalties.

Quote from: sharpshot on July 10, 2018, 08:03
Some people were probably complaining here while they were uploading.  Many of us stopped uploading, deleted images and eventually closed our accounts.  That was the only way to hurt istock and at least make the other sites give us a bit more respect.

I understand what you are saying, but even in small companies people can't get a few dozen workers, who know and see each other every single day, united on a common goal.

How would you expect a mass organized action based on MSG alone where only a small fraction of photographers come, on a global scale, between people that have never met, have absolutely different goals (professional/amateurs), different income expectations where some need 3000€ to live and others are kings with 500€, different points of view on the subject, etc.

The only way to change an agency politics on this type of business is to threaten their income through competition. Or have the means to launch a persistent major campaign worldwide. And have the money to fight the agency lawyers who will try to sue you for defamation.

SS is making some some pretty awful decisions, that are damaging the income of a lot of photographers at the moment and making us predict that things may go bad for SS too in the future.

For example, the review process has become a complete joke:

- It has become almost random in their approvals and rejections. Images that are rejected for stupid reasons are almost guaranteed to be approved on a second submission. It makes everybody lose time.

- The quality level demand has dropped to zero. There are thousands of images approved daily that are appalling. Amateur to the worst level. You name every error anyone can make on a photo and they are approved.

- Similar images do not seem to be an issue anymore. In the past days there was a portfolio with hundreds of thousands of images where each object was submitted with a 1 degree difference in point of view. And that for every angle possible.

So, any photographer who tries to produce varied, high quality imagery (even if just an apple on white), and pics just the good images from a sessions to submit gets buried under all that.

It's not biting the hand that feeds us has it's said earlier. It's stating the obvious errors SS is making, which are making it to be an agency going from a high quality imagery shop to becoming the garbage landfill of stock agencies.

This May I've earned 45% of what I've earned in 2017. In fact it was the worst May since 2007. Well, to be honest almost every month of 2018 has been the worst since 2007.

When I look at the graphs and see that on IS in past years I've earned in a single month more than I have this whole year, is just mind blowing.

Sending them images, that sell on others agencies do not seem to make a difference. That's why IS dropped from being my second agency to 5th.

Quote from: Josephine on April 23, 2018, 17:31
old are those, who are in the Microstock business for more than 7 years. They ran out of new ideas. And they remember the golden days.

That is not true. I still have ideas, I just keep forgetting them on my way to the studio. And sometimes I also forget why I was going there or where I am.

Dr. Josephine, is this a symptom of being in the stock business for 12 years?

Maybe you could prescribe a dose of instagram and free sharing social networks. The young people there seem to have a lot of ideas. Still confused why they live in their parents house at age 35, though...

I'm a Flickr member for many years now, and even had a Pro account in the past, but despite I keep my account open there I do not use it for a long time now. Even then I never uploaded nothing larger than 500px and with a small watermark. Their constant safety failures never assured me.

As a photographic community I also ended up detesting it. Everybody kissing each others ass, no real criticism made and accepted and small groups voting each other awful photos in the group contests, so they could get idiotic badges. I played this game successfully without having to be a member of a clique, but I detest these type of things that promote corruption over talent so after a while I stopped.

As for Smugmug I also had a paid account. Anyway, they decided to triple or quadruple (or more, can't remember) the annual fee so I left.

I can't predict what will happen by joining both of them but from my experience with both I'm not exactly thrilled.