The photo posted really doen't do anything special for me, but that doesn't mean it's bad or has no use.

This Judge Ross thing is one of the reasons I stayed away from Crestock. Very childish tactic. If they did with more professional methods where contributors could actually learn, that would be one thing, but open mockery of those who help pay their bills is uncalled for. If they slam contributors, who knows what they're saying about their buyers.

Hey Crestock Josh, Are You Listening??

Quote from: cshack on April 26, 2008, 18:58
I would say that with SS you need to make sure your first 10 are VERY STOCK WORTHY images.  No real estate or landscapes snapshot looking images.  The first time I submitted at SS I uploaded all the wrong images.  I got in the second time and now have a 85% approval rate.  On the first 10 I think they are expecting to see the best you have to offer.  If they see a group of 10 just so-so images you get rejected every time even if the images are technically superior.  I guess they figure that if you're not submitting worthy stock for the first 10 then they don't need you.

Bottom line is this.  Take a long hard look at your work.  Then take it to the next level for stock.  What works for portraits and weddings won't work at all for stock.  I've been taking pictures for over 30 years and getting into stock has been a whole new learning experience for me to say the least.   

A total rethink on overall content is what got me in. The images that I submitted were carefully thought out technically of course, but in reality they really were just about on a similar level technically with previous submissions. I also broadened the range - some illustration work, holidays photos that popped, some isolated objects. It got me past the 6 out of 7 malady that many suffer, and now my acceptance rate runs about 90%.

I have the sneaking suspicion that if the reviewer is easily bored by the content, they are more quick to mark things off.

Rethink that content, even f it means shooting specifically for the application process. A well thought out apple in the hand is worth much more plain old birds in the bushes.

Right now my small portfolio of 57 has 160 DLs I think since Mar 29. In the next month I will work on getting the number of images up. Have been a little short on stock shooting time the past few weeks.

Quote from: sjlocke on April 26, 2008, 12:08
Compensating for something?

Maybe he has shortcomings in other areas 

Can I count the old Commodore 64 in the closet?

Does anyone miss a column on the front page that shows how many posts a thread has?

I would kind of like to see this. Kind of  nice for when someone needs help but not many are replying. I don't need at all to see a "number of views" column. That is pretty much useless.

I got my first rejection at StockXpert yesterday. It said

Please improve illustration. Thanks! ;-)

Yes who ever did put a little smiley on there. Such a change of pace,

I have a separate email address set up at my own domain just for paypal and the bank account. In that way, if I ever get one of the spammies I will know the address has been "shared" or compromised in some way. The address is never used for any outgoing email of any kind, nor is it ever used on a board, for a microstock acccount, etc. My brother suggested this as he got caught up in a paypal mess late last year.

I did an experiment when I had AOL a few years back. I opened up an emal address off my AOL account one nite. I just opened the address, never went onto to the internet using that account name, never emailed from that account name, never did ANYTHING under that account name,  It was a very unique address, not a common name with numbers, like John2634 or something like that. It was more like w29z44yt5. Within a week, I was gettting all kinds of porn spam, Kind of tells me it was an inside AOL job. I dumped the whole AOL thing shortly after that.

On since end of March, I have 70 online with 2 rejections. I am impressed with their quick turnaround. I just submitted a small batch around midnite and already they are approved. I find their site a bit wonky though, but not horible.

Even their Java uploader works great for me, and "nothing Java" has ever worked right for me anywhere. Always get some kind of stupid warning box, or it locks up etc. Yes, have all updates installed.

FTP works great too. So far this site has given me the least headaches as far as uploading. If I have just a few, I usually use the Flash uploader. A whole bunch and I dump into the FTP and go get some coffee. When I come back tey're done and waiting for me to click them off to Pending land.

Yaymicro is also a member of Kiva

http://www.kiva.org/lender/yaymicrodotcom

Very interesting about the account hacking.

The other day, I did a Goog search on "Shutterstock secrets" in quotes. What I had in mind was maybe turning up a website or blog with submission tips, you know, just little hints or methods to boost sales. I did not turn up any hints or tips.

What I did turn up though, was a bunch of links to hacker portals, warez sites, torrents to get get shutterstock images (particularly hot vectors). On some further deeper searches (you know I am curious) turned up stuff on hacker sites like "reliable accounts" passwords etc.

With all the virus/trojan stuff out there, I didn't click through to any of the found sites, but it does look like they are out there and Shutterstock is a popular target in the hacker world.

Quote from: mantonino on April 22, 2008, 06:06
always some drama
quite the cast of characters
blame the miz, I do.

Just an update - the offending portfolio and a related one was shut down at DT approx 15:30 Eastern Time.

Posting because there are a few related threads on this.

As noted on one of the related threads here, I just sent a listing of supporting info off to Fotolia regarding the stolen images that now reside on their site. Sent along your Magic Book link, and some others.

I just dd send a note off to Fotolia with a listing of supporting stuff found yesterday, including te Magic Book image you found.

So whose job is it? Well nobody's yet, except that we should watch each others' backs, and somebody has to do it. This is so widespread it would be very hard to notify every individual who got caught up in this Zillman98 mess.

Well this guy Bob should at least get some $$, as this I think was the top selling image in the Zillman98 portfolio.

http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-1078047-stack-of-one-hundred-dollar-bills-u-s.html

I just went to look at number of sales, and the stolen port under Zillman98 is now suspended, along with user Muhamed2525. I think the number of sales was 13 when I last looked.

I find myself that it is best to get the noise out in Raw stage. If you are using Photoshop, go to Detail in the raw stage - turn Sharpen all the way off and Color and Luma noise to 100%. Usually works for me.

If a little sharpening is needed for the detail, I use Filter>Other>High Pass, using a setting that will just begin to show detail (the layer will look all grey), then use either Overlay or Soft Light Blend Mode for that filtered layer. I usually use a layer mask with this High Pass layer, so that no artifacts are re-introduced into the sky and I can just reveal the detail where I need.

Just another option for you.

Quote from: Freedom on April 19, 2008, 23:34
The copyright right or proprietary right owners may not be the photographer. One simple example is where a studio owner hire photographers to shoot the photos, the studio owner is the copyright and proprietary owner, while the photographers are the employee and not the copyright holders, because they took the photos in the course of their employment.

I am not saying that guy was the legitimate owner. However, since DT has not taken down the photos, I wonder if there is a reason behind their inaction.

DT has not taken any action because they are off enjoying a lovely weekend. It says so right in the related post from an infringed user on their forum.

How does work for hire even apply here? The images were ripped from various users that can be verified as legitimate artists across different sites.

My personal opinion is that this might be a referral scheme of his. Zillman98 refers Muhamed2525, M2525 posts more pilferred images and sells, etc, etc etc. More stolen images spread across more users, and making money plus off of all of them. That's my theory anyway. The users with no images just haven't gotten started yet is all. Will take them at least 8 weeks to pump in 1200 mages. Quite a little scheme but I think it just imploded.

Quote from: anonymous on April 19, 2008, 23:33
If any of you find threads on any of these sites pertaining to this subject, would you please be so kind as to post them here? I cannot find any and I'm EXTREMELY curious to see how the individual sites "deal" with the posts. If they close them or punish any of the "posters", this might lend credibility to the "insider" speculations.

THX

Here is the thread that Lumaxart2D started at DT. The last post right now is by one of the Admins saying "awww c'mon, they're off for the weekend. give em a break..."

http://www.dreamstime.com/thread_9737

And I personally admonished them via private email for having a Site Admin that was first to link the offender as a fave photog, so just counting the minutes till my account suspension. They have done it for stranger reasons. For instance the saga of a Polish girl reporting a blog article as "useful" when it was just chatter. The girl just automatically marked it because she knew the photog name or was a friend. Happened fairly recently. Don't know f you can access blog posts from the outside world, but here's the link anyway

http://blog.dreamstime.com/2008/03/25/to-apologize-and-warn_art25856

As far as sites like SS, IS FO etc, well just hoping some of the active people there check in here as well and see what is going on.

Well this has been quite an education for all of us. I wish I had the time and energy to notify all the individual artists, but I don't today as I have some "real" work to do. If any of the infringed are known to you, please notify them. Lumaxrt2d already vocal on the DT board, but there are many still unsuspecting at this point about the ripping of their images.

If you have anymore "finds" good to post them.

I will inform on any replies I get from DT, or on my banishment from the service. I may have hit a big giant nerve there with my Anyar Admin query, since it was quite direct and to the point.

Quote from: jsnover on April 19, 2008, 19:01
But Scott's gold guy with a trophy isn't in the portfolio you pointed to - did they just take down that one image after Chode notified them?

I think it may have come down quickly. The DT people just an weekend vacation is all  

On FO, they seem to work weekends as I recall getting image appvals there on Sat/Sun.

Sorry don't know about copyright laws in Russia. DOn't even know if they have signed on to abide by International Treaties.

Here is a link to the Pavel port on Fotolia. Looks like he is just getting busy there.

http://us.fotolia.com/p/200626358

And since that Oscar statue just stood out, here is another rip link for the original (I think) artist that I found on a quick search

http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-3289745--d-rendered-gold-man.html

Shutterstock definitely has a case here because it is one of ther special rights images.

my goodness, are you guys thinking it's an insider ripoff?
this can open a can of worms... like why certain good photos are rejected from many of you long time members.

this could be exciting... and scary,, too (for a newbie!)

[/quote]

Everyone remember Joma said this and not me! 

Well, I questioned the Anyra link based on what has been discovered. It's just too fishy. Site Admins should be beyond reproach, period. In my opinion, they should not be allowed to market images, nor show favoritism towards ANY photog. A Site Admin should be just that, and nothing else.

No responses from DT at this moment. I think on weekends they just do some server babysitting and that may be all. But I have written at least a half dozen, and have even provided links to what I truly perceive to be the original artists - that is the links from Shutterstock and istock, which point to a variety of user names that have been hit. Others have written as well, so they may be in for quite a surprise on Monday morning.

Quote from: jsnover on April 19, 2008, 04:08
I don't know how reviews are done at DT, but I think it's a fair comment to say that having 1200+ images many/most of which were stolen from other contributors go through the review system in 2 months indicates they need to take a serious look at what they're doing to prevent this type of thing from happening again.

It's not that people will stop trying to pull these con games, or even that the sites fall for it initially, it's that so many images did in such a short time and none of it raised any red flags.

I looked at this user's referrals and noted one new photographer, Photosmillenium, for whom zillman98 is a favorite. I was staggered at what's been approved for him - page after page of simple bursts and sunrays, things that I'd never have thought DT would approve (very low quality work, IMO). I don't recognize any of the stuff though.

Then I noticed that a site admin, Anyra, lists zillman98 as a favorite photographer.  He certainly wasn't flying under the radar...

Photosmillenium - I can't put my finger on it, but I can almost swear I've seen some of these images before. Particularly some of the busines bar graph ones with the silhouettes.

And on the Admin Anyra being the first to list Zillman98 as a faved photographer, well I just emailed DT specifically about that connection, so I definitely do feel my account suspension looming, keeping in line with the cloak and dagger and KGB-like behavior of some of the DT Admins.

It all depends on the Terms of the individual site. In 99.5 % percent of cases, number one, as a contributor you must agree that it is your own original work being submmitted. Then as far as buyers (or subscription holders), there are usually resale and distribution clauses. For instance, you could not buy a group of 50 images, put them on a CD or in a zip file, and resell. Although I do believe this probably happens on EBay.