|
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 - gnirtS
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 ... 38
151
« on: December 15, 2024, 06:34 »
Both mine were commercial.
152
« on: December 15, 2024, 06:34 »
Its got a little longer lately for me. Maybe 4-5 days for photo and video. Nothing like 20 though.
153
« on: December 15, 2024, 06:33 »
In the last article above it refers to SS's "billion-plus" asset library. Not sure where that comes from - the web site says over 530 million assets
Likely all the stuff rejected for data licensing. Maybe also assets of people they've bought like Bigstock/P5 etc etc
154
« on: December 14, 2024, 19:12 »
Given the various things Adobe have done to contributors plus the AI deluge its very hard to give a convincing argument that they're somehow the good guys.
people are blocked because problems emerge with their account,but then they are reinstated after verification,unless something serious happened.
Not always. Majority yes but there are plenty of cases where legit contributors have been blocked, some have never been reinstated, most that have took months and months of banging their head against a wall, totally unable to speak to a real person and lost a lot of money in the process. Here it's not a question of seeing who the good guys are,in my opinion the facts speak for themselves.
Indeed. The facts are they're all moving away from contributors. Adobe have been particular bad polluting the library with AI meaning the review times and main library suffered hugely. No option to opt out of AI training (ie training the software to replace you). Inflation into account royalities all decreasing. Free software is OK yes but its a small part.
155
« on: December 14, 2024, 19:09 »
4.7 company bought by a 1.2 company.
We know which way thats heading - its not upwards.
156
« on: December 14, 2024, 06:51 »
Given the various things Adobe have done to contributors plus the AI deluge its very hard to give a convincing argument that they're somehow the good guys.
157
« on: December 13, 2024, 16:53 »
Hello everyone. There's a statistic I'm curious about. What's the most you've earned from selling a single photo or video on Shutterstock?
I've been uploading for two years. The most I've made on a single sale is $60 for photos. $18 for videos.
Now or previously? Had a few $930 video sales last year, have had some $500 images in the past (normal sales not direct negotiation) but they're very very rare.
158
« on: December 13, 2024, 16:51 »
As if they weren't unpopular enough, Shutterstock now have a new rejection policy.
Shutterstock Content Resubmission Guidelines
Guidelines on submitting content that has been previously reviewed or already approved.
Previously Rejected Content
Content can only be submitted once. When submitting content for the first time, please ensure it meets all Shutterstock Content Publishing Standards and Guidelines before submitting it for review. In most cases, our system will not allow you to resubmit content that has already been reviewed and rejected.
If you attempt to resubmit content that has been previously rejected, it will generally be rejected again for Previously Rejected.
https://submit.shutterstock.com/en/dashboard
Except that SS doesn't reject much anymore. Everything now is put into "Eligible for data licensing". To get a rejection, you have to do something pretty extreme. Someone will have to test the theory that a missed check box, for Editorial, for example, makes an image impossible to upload again. How about rejection for improper Editorial caption, is that a death sentence for the image?
Doesn't sound right, but this is Shutterstock. Anything is possible, no matter how unlikely or illogical.
The only rejections i see now are IP related. Ive had a few where genuinely it was touch-and-go with a silhouette binned. The others its mistaken sand patterns for logos and so on (isnt AI great....). I dont THINK there are any technical limitations (exposure, sharpness, WB etc) which could trigger a rejection now. Everything is accepted provided its not a person or logo.
159
« on: December 13, 2024, 16:49 »
This actually feels as if they are penalizing those who want to correct errors and learn and grow.
These companies are flat out not interested in a contributor learning or growing, those days are long gone.
Shutterstock see contributors as a drain on resources, a waste of money and an inconvenience now. They see themselves as a Big Data company for training models not a media company. They've got a library almost big enough that they can afford to ditch new submissions entirely. In a few years time they wont be selling themselves as a stock agency any more, it'll just be a data company selling various portions of a vast, keyworded dataset.
160
« on: December 13, 2024, 16:47 »
As if they weren't unpopular enough, Shutterstock now have a new rejection policy.
Shutterstock Content Resubmission Guidelines
Guidelines on submitting content that has been previously reviewed or already approved.
Previously Rejected Content
Content can only be submitted once. When submitting content for the first time, please ensure it meets all Shutterstock Content Publishing Standards and Guidelines before submitting it for review. In most cases, our system will not allow you to resubmit content that has already been reviewed and rejected.
If you attempt to resubmit content that has been previously rejected, it will generally be rejected again for Previously Rejected.
https://submit.shutterstock.com/en/dashboard
In theory its a good thing. In reality its nonsense. Years ago with actual human reviewers, if content was rejected it was a good reason and you know it was looked at individually. These days its all algorithm, no human in the chain and sometimes the results are absolutely, utterly random (Model release needed for algae anyone?). That said, given their system doesnt even flag identical images that have been stolen from existing images online on submission, the chances of them actually detecting a resubmission have to be near zero anyway.
161
« on: December 12, 2024, 11:43 »
Just browsing their TrustPilot (bloody hell....) https://uk.trustpilot.com/review/www.shutterstock.comOne on the first page stuck out: https://uk.trustpilot.com/reviews/67591a543263f0b2bee5b5cfAI garbage is crowding out real content. What laziness to not QC or fact-check these products. They are cluttering the internet with poor quality images labelled as though they are genuine. One example: search Roman sculpture, and you find numerous images that look like Frankenstein versions of Michelangelo's David. The clothing is wrong, the breaks in the arms are wrong, the anatomy of the neck is cringey (ghoulishly swollen sternocleidomastoid, three...! hyoid bones) and unnaturally cylindrical arms. Let's use real photography and hire real artists.
Date of experience: 10 December 2024So buyers ARE noticing the AI crap too. (inbetween the scam ripoffs of subscription sales etc)
162
« on: December 11, 2024, 16:14 »
Hear me out. I did stock video full time for 10 years. Services like BlackBox and wirestock are starting to make more sense. You can sell on your own and set your own prices on wirestock. I am changing it up a bit here in order to maximize my income. I know but wirestock.. and so on. I have and am selling in my own as well there and it is working. BlackBox now makes more sense then Pond5 Exclusive. Think time and money people. Its a business for me nothing personal.
Blackbox started to make economic sense for me when SS introduced the level system (and made it near impossible for Level 6 for normal, non mass agency submitters). I resisted as P5/AS got me my income without having to pay extra to an agency. Ironically, i signed up to BB this week as a test (not uploaded yet) out of curiosity. This P5 announcement does make it seem more worthwhile when combined with SS and the fact P5 may well cease to exist completely in a while once its fully eaten.
163
« on: December 11, 2024, 16:11 »
The most 'obvious' would be if people 'en masse' either removed their portfolios, or stopped submitting Wont work. Its threatened every time an agency makes cuts. iStock. Alamy, Shitterstock, Getty,123RF. It wont happen. There just simply isnt the interest for enough to do it. Its a calculation the agencies make before announcing cuts and they know full well its a gamble worth taking - for them it'll pay off. (although there is a lot more east indian spam making up for the slack, so not sure that would make a huge difference)..
Indeed - the India/Pakistan/Bangladesh mass spam market will keep feeding it, with some original, lots of lied-about AI and a majority of stolen content. They'll happily do that for pennies. Get banned, simply create a new account, wash and repeat.
164
« on: December 11, 2024, 15:13 »
Wrong yes.
Expected? Yes. Once Shutterstock took over it was inevitable. And more to come.
Cant do anything about it other than stop submitting. P5/SS wont care. Buyers wont care. Nothing will change negatively for them.
165
« on: December 11, 2024, 14:45 »
This year make me Adobe alone more money for video than ,,SSPond5Pond5Exclusive,, together. Why??? Less greedy? Better management?
Easily integrated with the major editing software globally.
166
« on: December 11, 2024, 13:55 »
So in 12 months i expect "Good news" where they'll introduce a resetting levels system of 15% to make it "fairer" and "increase uploading".
167
« on: December 11, 2024, 13:24 »
Ive just had my first ever 0 sale P5 month.
168
« on: December 11, 2024, 13:23 »
Well there we go, whatever Shutterstock touches turns to crap and that is true here.
First they remove the ability to set your prices and adjust your own prices, often downwards. Now they cut the percentage you can earn from those prices.
Everyone knew this would happen after SS bought them. It's the slow process of them being absorbed and cease to exist as a separate entity. I cant wait for 12 cent video sales to start.
That said, its also my first 0 sale month on P5 ever. So it might not matter.
169
« on: December 10, 2024, 06:51 »
If an agency takes ai, their non ai content will be clean.
So having an ai upload process with clear label would be beneficial.
That assumes the contributors are honest enough to label it as such. FB groups alone show that really isnt the case.
170
« on: December 09, 2024, 15:37 »
 And this got approved how exactly?!
171
« on: December 03, 2024, 16:49 »
FWIW it seems submission still works - once approved new content appears in the portfolio as normal. You just cant see any image thumbnails in the reviewed, pending or to-submit lists. If you can submit blind, it works.
172
« on: December 03, 2024, 11:48 »
Indeed - 24hrs on they still havent bothered fixing it. Video thumbnails are fine.
173
« on: December 02, 2024, 14:17 »
Todays bug seems to be no thumbnail being generated or shown for anything at all in the review/pending/reviewed queue.
174
« on: December 02, 2024, 06:30 »
For me this year AS has earned exactly double what SS has supplied. Last year it was about 20% more than SS.
Previous years SS was better.
Its a sign of the long, continuous decline of SS in terms of earnings (NOT download numbers) caused by the levels system and the huge reduction in what they charge customers for the assets.
I still get the odd crazy big 3 figure sales on SS which are never seen on AS but they arent enough to plug the gap any more.
For me now SS is basically a pit of 10-20c Single sales or a few dollars at most per clip video sales.
175
« on: December 02, 2024, 06:24 »
How can you tell the images are Gen AI other than their unlikely perfection? Im genuinely interested.
Theres a cinematic "clean" look and feel. Smooth, saturation is often out for real world. Quite often things merge into background objects. Depth of fields dont look right. The light and shadows dont fit the light sources in the scene. If you know the animals you see flaws in the patterning, ratios etc.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 ... 38
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
