|
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 - kuriouskat
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 ... 28
152
« on: June 16, 2023, 07:42 »
As I've said a number of times, it is the agencies' responsibility to review content, for the protection of their customers (even if they don't give a toss about us as contributors). This is especially true with new portfolios - lots of the ones you posted had less than 100 in their portfolios.
I understand the agencies are trying to automate and cut the costs of the inspection process, but they're not doing a good job of that. They're fouling their own nests with this sort of short sighted cost cutting.
This struck me as funny (in a gallows humor sort of way). One of the people who stole your mushroom shot had apparently stolen other work and decided to add text to it (genius disguise, that...). Small problem in that he's too lazy to even add the greeting correctly.
Haha, that's funny, (as you say, in a gallows humour kind of way). However, it does raise a question as to who is reviewing these images? Is it just a lazy reviewing letting this slip in, or is it all being done by a bot who can't spell?
153
« on: June 16, 2023, 03:44 »
Sorry, I couldn't get the screenshot to attach above.
154
« on: June 16, 2023, 03:43 »
I was browsing this morning, and came across several portfolios with the same images. After clicking around a bit, I realised it was a total minefield, with one copied image leading to another, and the issue just getting bigger and bigger. I have quite a large portfolio, and with competition form both AI being passed off as 'real', and stolen content at every turn, I'm feeling the pinch. Fair competition is fine and healthy but this is really getting to be a bit much. If I can find this from the similars displayed on the same page, then why can't the sites involved? If I submit two images that are vaguely close, then one gets rejected for being too similar! You may want to check if any of these portfolios contain your work, as they all contain an image of these lovely musrooms: https://www.istockphoto.com/portfolio/MohamedMehalla?mediatype=photographyhttps://www.shutterstock.com/g/rezzzahttps://www.shutterstock.com/g/Dykamahadyhttps://www.shutterstock.com/g/Faiza+Anwar+8To be honest, I'm not sure if any one of these is the original photographer but, from clicking around a bit, it just leads to more and more suspicious content. This image from the second link above, https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/sweet-fresh-delicious-orange-fruit-1874601004, leads to: https://www.shutterstock.com/g/shaggysarthttps://www.shutterstock.com/g/fatimomihttps://www.shutterstock.com/g/Take_photo_byhabibhttps://www.shutterstock.com/g/mrbabaraslam1https://www.shutterstock.com/g/Umamfalshttps://www.shutterstock.com/g/vilculesemi02The same oranges image is free to download from Pexels and Freepik, so I guess this has all become a free for all at our expense?
155
« on: June 15, 2023, 03:01 »
I posted this in response on FB, not aimed at Matt but AS in general.
The various FB groups along with other forums are full of people doing this. Actually asking for help in how many AIs they can submit before account gets flagged, what happens if they don't tick the boxes and so on.
There are verifiably, a large number of people, bulk submitting AI to the main collection without labelling. And its getting accepted.
There's no detection and no sanction for this.
(Yes SS and others have the same problem).
Agree - the problem is widespread, and for those who are trying to play by the rules, it's a kick in the teeth and further crashing our earnings. At first, I thought 'how can the reviewers not see that this is AI?', but now it's getting harder and harder to tell. By allowing it, the flood gates have opened to a lot of people who are willing to cheat the system for short term gain. Put a REPORT button on your pages, so that anything suspicious can be flagged and checked, before the problem gets totally out of hand. Maybe also do a search in the database for Generative AI, then exclude 'Generative AI' from the results? There are over 140k images that mostly shouldn't be there, which can't be good for your customers and is certainly not good for the rest of us who are trying to play by the rules. And that's just people who forgot to tick a box. The genie is out of the bottle, and we can't put it back, but we do have a responsibility to figure out how to control it.
156
« on: June 09, 2023, 15:26 »
I like you so I will play your game (but it's small pictures to tell from):
1- AI
2- AI
3- AI
4- AI
5- AI
6- AI
7- Reality
8- Reality
9- AI
10- Reality
11- AI
12- Reality
13- AI
14- Reality
15- Reality
16- Reality
17- AI
18- AI
19- Reality
20- AI
21- Reality
And don't tell me they are all AI because then I will not like you anymore 
I have a nasty feeling they are all AI.
157
« on: June 09, 2023, 07:50 »
they've been enforcing the all-caps requirement - maybe haphazardly. but don't think circa x was ever acceptable. they also reject vintage slide scans from the 70-80s as too old! non-editorial from those shots easily accepted, even if date was in the description
Circa has always been accepted (i have plenty using it).
Their blog on writing a caption also says its ok:- https://www.shutterstock.com/blog/creating-the-perfect-editorial-caption
But that article is from 2010, so plenty could have changed since then. My understanding is that Circa is acceptable if the date is unknown, such as with vintage editorial but, if you know the date, but can't be bothered to check it and include it, you will get a rejection.
158
« on: May 12, 2023, 02:29 »
Don't know about Bigstock. But whenever I get this 406 error at Shutterstock, it means it doesn't like my IP address. Cookies clearing or resetting browser would not cut it. Only resetting my router to get new IP fixes it for me.
Agree - that's what I've had to do in the past. Also, if you switch off wifi on your phone, and connect via 4G, that seems to work.
159
« on: April 27, 2023, 08:47 »
Did you add property releases?
Adobe requires a property release for real looking people that are not based on real people photographs.
Thanks for that and, no, I didn't submit a property release - first AI generated people, and other site accepted them with 'fictitious person' in the description, so I forgot about the rule. I would have remembered if they were rejected for needing a property release, but the model release rejection threw me. I'll resubmit later and attach the correct release.
160
« on: April 27, 2023, 07:42 »
It's an interesting questions as to whether the AI images of people look real or not. There are a few clues if you look closely, but a large amount are certainly passable.
Mine clearly fool the reviewers because, despite being clearly marked and checked as Generative AI on the submissions page, I'm still being asked to supply model releases.
161
« on: April 21, 2023, 08:14 »
Sorry no time to answer, I'm busy making a pink letter X, within a circle with some floral accents.
The other pink letters have gone, so you can corner this lucrative market 
162
« on: April 19, 2023, 05:22 »
I wonder why buyers suddenly go for a pink X? Because it's a bestseller? I can't imagine that.
If the bestsellers are arranged here the way they are in my own portfolio, then that doesn't correspond to reality. But it's certainly strange. 
Well this is currently the most popular in the photo search, and has been for a while:
https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/yellow-color-banana-sri-lanka-2093921068
High Usage and customers 'love this asset'.
What is going on at Shutterstock these days?
Ok, but I can understand that.
I worked in Sri Lanka some time and can only remember ripe bananas.
Otherwise, there's really not much to see in this country.
I can understand the subject matter being popular, but the execution should also be up to scratch to be the most popular photo on Shutterstock. It's held that position for several weeks or more.
EDIT: I see it has gone from the top spot today, and isn't visible in the first few pages. I assume Shutterstock are reading and acting upon information shared here?
My posting was meant rather ironically.
But I have to realize again and again that this sometimes goes wrong in English.
I did wonder, as you said there wasn't much to see in Sri Lanka! I've been, and it's a beautiful place to visit, with some amazing sites to photograph. As you say, humour and irony doesn't always translate well in forums posts.
163
« on: April 19, 2023, 04:14 »
I wonder why buyers suddenly go for a pink X? Because it's a bestseller? I can't imagine that.
If the bestsellers are arranged here the way they are in my own portfolio, then that doesn't correspond to reality. But it's certainly strange.
Well this is currently the most popular in the photo search, and has been for a while:
https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/yellow-color-banana-sri-lanka-2093921068
High Usage and customers 'love this asset'.
What is going on at Shutterstock these days?
Ok, but I can understand that.
I worked in Sri Lanka some time and can only remember ripe bananas.
Otherwise, there's really not much to see in this country.
I can understand the subject matter being popular, but the execution should also be up to scratch to be the most popular photo on Shutterstock. It's held that position for several weeks or more. EDIT: I see it has gone from the top spot today, and isn't visible in the first few pages. I assume Shutterstock are reading and acting upon information shared here?
164
« on: April 18, 2023, 15:10 »
I wonder why buyers suddenly go for a pink X? Because it's a bestseller? I can't imagine that.
If the bestsellers are arranged here the way they are in my own portfolio, then that doesn't correspond to reality. But it's certainly strange.
Well this is currently the most popular in the photo search, and has been for a while: https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/yellow-color-banana-sri-lanka-2093921068High Usage and customers 'love this asset'. What is going on at Shutterstock these days?
165
« on: April 18, 2023, 14:52 »
Watch your videos on SS. SS has completely changed the sorting of videos by popularity (top). Now in the top one nonsense.
Notice the top images right now? Also nonsense.
Pink letters come from this portfolio: https://www.shutterstock.com/g/SanMirzaThey are the same pink letters that were being discussed in this thread: https://www.microstockgroup.com/shutterstock-com/portfolios-of-100-almost-identical-vectors-from-bangladesh/msg585928/?topicseen#newAnd they are also in in a different portfolio: https://www.shutterstock.com/de/g/ZainKhalid09I see a lot of the portfolio that were listed have now been closed down, but how are these identical images getting through review and, once approved, how on earth are they reaching the top of the popular search, beating nearly 185million into lower places? How are they getting Superstar status?? This is currently in the images 3rd spot: https://www.shutterstock.com/image-vector/extra-22-off-all-sale-styles-205539893322% off is rather random to generate lots of sales, but how does this guy have 999 images that are simple colour changes, which should be rejected under Shutterstock's policy regarding similar content. If I submit 2 images of the same subject in the same batch, one gets rejected. This is all very fishy, and totally disheartening. Shutterstock is but a shadow of its former self.
166
« on: April 17, 2023, 03:35 »
Date of shoot should be 2019 but date of signing should be 2023.
167
« on: March 24, 2023, 04:55 »
To clarify, Kirsten is referencing the question from people who may not have received the actual email yesterday. As she stated, you must be opted in to receive marketing emails via adobe.com to receive this sort of information in real time.
You can be assured that any major announcements like the news about Firefly will be called out here in Microstock Group Forum too.
Thank you,
Mat Hayward
Getty images had their images pilfered to train an AI and they are in the process of mounting a significant legal action against the company that did so.
Shutterstock compensate it's contributers for images that have been used in the data sets to train their A.I. you are also not able to opt out.
Adobe is compensating their contributers how. I think that ignoring this question which has already been asked doesn't make for a good look. So what's the deal. This isn't light and fluffy ... awwww cummon guys ... this is business. You don't get free use. It is a requirement to be transparent regarding payment for use. what Matt.
There is an opt-out in the Shutterstock Account Settings>Licensing Options, although it does feel as if this is closing a door after the horse has bolted.
168
« on: March 11, 2023, 18:14 »
For February my "applies" are up 24% and "exports" are up 18%. We shall see if that translates to any increase in earnings when they report that later this month.
At least in my case it did not. The three bigger spikes are in February. Applied +51 and exports +17 when compared to the previous month. In January I made $ 874 and in February $ 887. So that's almost the same despite the increase in applies and exports.
For now the dashboard seems pretty useless when it comes to predicting income.
May I ask where to view this statistic? I can only find earnings for royalties and individual sales, but nothing that gives me an indication as to how many times an images has been applied or exported.
go to
https://www.canva.com/creators/element
and then select "dashboard" somewhere in the middle upper section of the page, and then you can select one of their selected time periods on the right side where it says "filter page by"
Thanks a lot - found it!
169
« on: March 11, 2023, 08:16 »
For February my "applies" are up 24% and "exports" are up 18%. We shall see if that translates to any increase in earnings when they report that later this month.
At least in my case it did not. The three bigger spikes are in February. Applied +51 and exports +17 when compared to the previous month. In January I made $ 874 and in February $ 887. So that's almost the same despite the increase in applies and exports.
For now the dashboard seems pretty useless when it comes to predicting income.
May I ask where to view this statistic? I can only find earnings for royalties and individual sales, but nothing that gives me an indication as to how many times an images has been applied or exported.
170
« on: February 21, 2023, 02:51 »
How do you know this? There isn't a way to calculate the RPD of the contributor pool, is there, as we aren't told how many of our images have been used each month, or am I missing something?
171
« on: February 19, 2023, 07:19 »
Well it's not working for me. I uploaded 10 images this morning and only 6 submitted. One wouldn't let me add missing categories, so I deleted it and tried again - same problem. The remaining 3 are in a loop of saying they've been submitted, but then turning up again as unsubmitted, and I've tried 3 times over. I've even deleted them and uploaded them again - same problem.
172
« on: February 08, 2023, 16:56 »
I'm so glad for the good news but, once again, the change in criteria counts me out, as I fall short of the required 6k downloads for all apps. (Same happened when the criteria changed from 500 uploads).
I think I'm maybe going to let the full program go, and just take the free option for Photoshop/Lightroom, as I'm otherwise unable to benefit. My question is whether last years' code is still valid, and can I add this before receiving this years' code. If so, where can I find it?
Alternatively, can there be some kind of discount for those of us that want the full program but just miss out on the qualification? It feels like there is a group of us simply not benefiting in any way and just paying our monthly subscription regardless of the generous offer that Adobe is making.
173
« on: January 18, 2023, 03:28 »
I had a look at the Mini 3 and Air 2S to replace my aging Mavic Pro 2 but decided on keeping the older tech but bigger sensor. Even the Mavic Pro 2 raw files have a fair amount of noise in the shadows - I find processing the raw files using DXO 6 and its noise reduction Deep Prime XD does an excellent job to make files look great free of noise (takes around 15mins to process per file on a 2020 macbook pro).
Have you tried noise stacking on your Mavic 2 Pro (taking a burst of photos and then averaging them in PS)? It did wonders on my Mavic 2 Pro files - the noise went away almost completely
No, I haven't, but thanks for the tip. So far I've not experienced that much noise, and the little there has been has been easily dealt with by Topaz. I usually shoot in decent light conditions though, and haven't had to deal with low light issues in post yet.
174
« on: January 17, 2023, 12:23 »
I had a look at the Mini 3 and Air 2S to replace my aging Mavic Pro 2 but decided on keeping the older tech but bigger sensor. Even the Mavic Pro 2 raw files have a fair amount of noise in the shadows - I find processing the raw files using DXO 6 and its noise reduction Deep Prime XD does an excellent job to make files look great free of noise (takes around 15mins to process per file on a 2020 macbook pro).
Thanks, Richard. I have to say I'm also pretty happy with the image quality out of the Mavic Pro 2, when the camera size is taken into account. A bit in post and some Topaz Denoise, and everything I've submitted so far has been approved. That said, I haven't done much video, mainly stills.
175
« on: January 17, 2023, 05:35 »
Every country has different rules in regards to drones. Rarely does the actual weight of the drone make a difference and at times it does.
Quoted from FAA. "You will need to get a Remote Pilot Certificate ( RPC ) issued by FAA to fly your drone as the pilot in command ( PIC ) . The FAA does not currently recognize any foreign RPC or equivalent."
I am registered and certified in my country (Canada) but can't fly in America. I am currently travelling and got certified where I am, but the next country I am travelling to is a root canal to get a permit. I have noticed some countries make it more difficult for foreigners to fly.
In my view it's not worth the additional expense cause it's an either you can fly or you can't fly scenario.
Thanks - with the help of everyone here, I've come to the same conclusion. I will just fly in my home country, or in countries that make it easy for me to register online.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 ... 28
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
