|
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 - ravens
Pages: 1 ... 10 11 12 13 14 [15] 16 17
351
« on: November 02, 2015, 10:33 »
V2 offers slightly better protection, but not good enough. The gigantic preview and save feature are still there. Why can't they make a watermark which has a large central SS logo on it?
Don't understand why this is taking so long. They introduced the crap watermark overnight but fixing the issue takes forever.
Won't upload until they can offer protection for my images.
352
« on: October 31, 2015, 02:45 »
Please sign, Let's reach 500 today!
If we speak our mind AND stop uploading and they get no new images they will have to change their attitude towards us contributors and develop a protective enough watermark. Sure everyone is used to contributing to SS and making money. That used to be comfortable. However that was BEFORE they put all our images out there for everyone to download and use for free. People love free stuff and think that everything they Google is free. So goodbye nice money in the future.
Don't forget that what SS did to us diminishes our sales in other agencies as well.
Every trade demands more pay but stock photographers are expected to donate their work away, free. You are giving your work free you continue to upload to SS. Free work day in day out. Just think. Who wants to do THAT?
The petition now has 486 signatures. Surely we can get to 500!
Come on, folks:
https://secure.avaaz.org/en/petition/Shutterstockcom_team_Infringes_copyrights_of_contributors_by_Shutterstock
491!
We can do this today!
Say NO to stealing!
Just few names missing. Come on!
353
« on: October 30, 2015, 11:26 »
Please sign, Let's reach 500 today! If we speak our mind AND stop uploading and they get no new images they will have to change their attitude towards us contributors and develop a protective enough watermark. Sure everyone is used to contributing to SS and making money. That used to be comfortable. However that was BEFORE they put all our images out there for everyone to download and use for free. People love free stuff and think that everything they Google is free. So goodbye nice money in the future. Don't forget that what SS did to us diminishes our sales in other agencies as well. Every trade demands more pay but stock photographers are expected to donate their work away, free. You are giving your work free you continue to upload to SS. Free work day in day out. Just think. Who wants to do THAT? The petition now has 486 signatures. Surely we can get to 500!
Come on, folks:
https://secure.avaaz.org/en/petition/Shutterstockcom_team_Infringes_copyrights_of_contributors_by_Shutterstock
491!
We can do this today!
Say NO to stealing!
354
« on: October 30, 2015, 04:31 »
Nothing major ever changed
Doing something may achieve nothing, doing nothing will definitely achieve nothing or, in the oft-quoted words of Edmund Burke, 'The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing'.
Exactly! When we do what we can, there is hope for the better. We know nothing for sure but only action can make a difference. Group action is what is most effective. I only need to look at my Gigantic free images all under the v1 watermark and I know Exactly what to do. And what not to.
356
« on: October 29, 2015, 13:46 »
Forgive me if I misunderstand what you're saying, but this is not the time for negativity or sarcasm. They don't help. They make money out of OUR work, they can't ignore us forever, if we stop uploading and will not upload until this problem is fixed. We have to think long term and not just this day and week. Let's be consistent.
475 out of 60,000 contributors (wikipedia 2014), nice!
yes, and 9 pages on this forum. i can see where this is going to get ss management off their moforearends to acknowledge there is an issue to be implemented urgently.
consider there were a lot more pages re the other contributors relations matter on ss forum which were also ignored by management.
time to face up to the truth, ppl 
357
« on: October 29, 2015, 11:35 »
358
« on: October 29, 2015, 11:33 »
There really is not much difference between the old watermark and the new (black footer) watermark.
Both are too weak and you can save too large images on your computer. Both watermarks are easy to remove, if you ever need to, and if the background is light or textured it doesn't show.
Shutterstock has to fix this. What can wake them up is NO NEW UPLOADS coming in. Write them, contact the support. Write on the SS forum. Even if they send out robotic emails they will get a lot of mail and they'll see we are furious.
I too got a robot reply to recent email.
"This new watermark and larger image preview is designed to drive more download opportunities for your creative work ..."
Yep, that's what it does.
What other trade is expected to work for free??
Please sign the petition if you haven't already (I have signed) ... let's reach 500!!
359
« on: October 28, 2015, 16:07 »
Wait wait wait... Are you telling me that there's the chance SS won't fix this issue?? ...can't believe it! If so, subscribers first, and then all the rest of the world will pick and choose everything they want to... Just right click and save... I can't believe SS can actually think this is ok... Ok for us , or at least , for them.
They are also quite demanding on almost everything and.... How possible they don't see the stupidity with this?
If so, keeping uploading to SS does not make more sense anymore... What do you guys think?
I checked many of my pics and the watermark is visible only on darker areas..... I think it's a week now they have this new preview ... How long will this take to be fixed?
They are reluctant to change anything, which is why this is taking so long and our work goes unprotected. BUT we can email Shutterstock support, write on the SS forum, sign the petition, stop uploading our work. Maybe use social media! How they have exposed our work is not acceptable - Let's make sure they know that! Let's tell them what we think! This is not the time to wait and to be silent! When SS practically offers our work for free, that means less sales in other agencies as well. It's easy enough to click and save, so why would anybody actually purchase images when you get them free? (Especially if you need a small Image for web.) Don't let this happen to your new most recent work, don't upload it on SS.
360
« on: October 28, 2015, 11:06 »
361
« on: October 27, 2015, 07:20 »
I disagree. Group action can make a difference. This is why it is important that people sign the petition _and_ do not upload. We have to be consistent to protect our content the best we can. We need to think long term, not just this week's sales. I signed the petition yesterday and will not upload until the watermark is safe enough. Like you all, I work hard for my images and do not want somebody stealing them. Currently anybody can save 1500*1100 image with nearly invisible watermark. They do not even have to be logged in users. It would be just as effective if every contributor (how many...tens of thousands?) stopped uploading, rather than worry about a petition with 400 names. I realize that signing a petition is at least doing something, and I can appreciate that, but these things have never been effective, because some people say they are going to do something, but never really follow through, and some people never do it in the first place. Shutterstock pretends to appear like they are listening, but in the end, they will do whatever makes them the most money. If clients don't want big watermarks, they aren't going to put big watermarks, no matter how much contributors scream. It's all about the $$.
I will give them until after the next payout to come up with a better solution for that watermark. If they don't, I will just close my account. I am sick and tired of these people making billions of dollars, with my help, and them not even having the least bit of respect for me and my property. I only have my images at 2 places now, and I am winding down my participation anyway. I make pennies as it is. When my stuff starts being given away, I'm out. 
362
« on: October 27, 2015, 01:47 »
Link to the petition. Shutterstock.com team: Protecting of copyright on Shutterstock.
link to the petition ---
https://secure.avaaz.org/en/petition/Shutterstockcom_team_Infringes_copyrights_of_contributors_by_Shutterstock
Dear Shutterstock.com team,
At the moment, the watermark used in the preview function recently implemented on shutterstock site actually has failed in its main purpose: it is hardly visible, if at all, and it can be easily removed, even without complex manipulations just by downsizing the preview image.
As a result, we feel that our works are now unprotected, exposed to public access and available for download to anyone.
We have specified the list of proposals that we would like to see implemented as soon as possible:
1. Make watermarks larger and more noticeable:
Reduce the pitch of the watermark grid to 100 pixels for more reliable protection of icon sets.
Increase the width of the grid lines to 5 pixels.
The lines of the watermark should be contrast to the background. The pixels of the lines should have at least 15 levels of brightness in contrast to the surrounding pixels.
2. Inform contributors about any changes on the web site relating to copyright before such changes actually made.
Contributors who have signed this petition suspend uploading of the new images until the elimination of the negative consequences produced by Shutterstock.com.
Looking forward to your cooperation
363
« on: October 26, 2015, 11:59 »
Under "Announcements" there's "Updated Shutterstock Watermark". What do they say? I can't have access to that, the page reloads like forever. They're tricking us ... the preview now is smaller yes, but when you'll just right click the image and "view" you get a huge preview with almost invisible watermark. Easy to save it in 1500*1100, a free image
364
« on: October 25, 2015, 10:48 »
Actually, I think that bigger preview might help to increase the sales, although there may by more people stealing images. As an independent web and graphic designer I don't like to use the small preview images from stock agencies to show how the final product will look like to the customers. Customers wants to see the quality preview and are deterred by the lowres watermarked pictures, so I rather look for some free source of quality pictures, or stock agencies with the higher quality previews as I can't afford to waste money and buy something which I will not use in the final design. There is an increasing number of photographers who offer their pictures with Creative Commons or Public Domain license. And you can find their pictures on portals with such self-explanatory names like deathtothestockphoto or gratisography. So blaming the agencies that they are trying to give your pictures for free doesn't make any sense. They want to earn something in the constantly changing world same as the photographers do. You can't expect increasing income if the offer starts to exceed the demand. It's simple economy. Adapt or die. This is how nature works.
BS. If photographers offer their photos for free, they earn nothing. Even photographers need to pay bills! We don't live by just the fun of taking photos.
365
« on: October 22, 2015, 15:27 »
Please e-mail your complaints to [email protected]. The forums are probably not being read by the people in charge, so better let them know via the official channels.
Done. Let's all email them! Shutterstock needs to fix this.
366
« on: October 22, 2015, 08:26 »
The watermark is too weak. Shutterstock sells high quality images and the buyers know that. Buyers do not need to "review" the images. They are protected enough, they have the right for returns etc. but what are our rights? To work hard and let people steal our images?
Anyone who is serious about buying doesn't need this giant nearly-no-watermark preview. Who makes use of this novelty are those who would not buy in the first place, but who copy paste our work on websites, social media, blogs, etc etc, illegally.
The preview image is very easy to use in a small size, because in small sizes the watermark does not show. There is no need to start removing it because it simply does not show. If the background is light, or in vectors, nada.
Email the support or write on the SS forum and demand them to fix this! I just did that.
367
« on: October 11, 2015, 13:05 »
Maybe you could still learn something. If you think your photos are too good to be ever rejected, your photography will no longer progress.
368
« on: September 14, 2015, 02:11 »
What size did they post your image? Try reading through their license restrictions very carefully.
369
« on: September 02, 2015, 01:39 »
Why would anyone purchase photos taken with mobile phone? People can snap them them themselves!
What every buyer cant have is access to is quality images taken with quality gear, THAT is what they should be offered.
Stock agencies should not sell these low quality phone snaps in the first place.
370
« on: July 13, 2015, 16:02 »
Thank you, Mantis.
I wonder how the customers find what they're looking for - does the system translate and correct also their search words into IStock language??
This system is so clumsy and medieval, I don't know if I should be in awe or scream of frustration.
371
« on: July 09, 2015, 08:12 »
I am new there too and yes, DeepMeta simplifies the upload process and allows as many uploads as you can process yourself. Glad that freeware exists.
I am sure the keywording, disambiguation (sorry if I spell it wrong) have been discussed, but I am just too tired from looking for info - so I just ask - how do you work through them?
I understand why disambiguation is done but if apply it to my editorial images a lot, I mean ALOT of information is lost, like foreign names. Also this disambiguation thing messes names up and they end up something entirely different.
Do you have to do the disambiguation - remove the words that IS does not know? If you don't do it, what happens?
372
« on: July 05, 2015, 10:38 »
Thanks for your replies ! I am still waiting for their reply after emailing them 9 days ago.
373
« on: July 02, 2015, 09:30 »
Has anybody got any case numbers from SS recently? How long does it usually take? I emailed them a week ago and still no reply.
374
« on: May 21, 2015, 11:06 »
It's a great lens and an excellent walk around lens. Never had any problems with sharpness with it... that lens not being very sharp must be an urban myth 
375
« on: May 20, 2015, 08:43 »
Basically, I agree with you; I like your post! I wouldn't go as far as forbidding street photography but people should use common sense with it. If someone is sick, drunk, poor, injured, mourning, I think it is pretty sick and questionable to go take a photo of them. Nowadays that people post photos where ever it is ok not wanting to be photographed. I think every photographer should as themselves - and be honest - How would YOU feel in front of the camera, and not behind it? Every photographer should have the integrity to choose what to shoot and not to hide behind "art", and the selfish "I have the right to blah blah" attitude. Personally, I do not ever photograph accidents, illness, poor, ill, drunk, injured, anything that I imagine the person in question would not want to be photographed. People give signs if they like to be photographed. A smile, a nod is a yes, a go ahead sign. It's a good idea to look for that. I shot a lot of strangers, probably thousands, during my newspaper photojournalist job. I personally think is unethical, except for politicians, celebrities and such, since it's part of their job after all. Also, except situation where people call for attention intentionally, like protests, strikes, performances etc.
But taking pictures of passerby, homeless, children, mentally ill, victims of any kind (disasters, car accidents etc) is, in my opinion unethical. If you ask me, I would forbid street photography completely. And I have many years of experience of doing street photography.
Pages: 1 ... 10 11 12 13 14 [15] 16 17
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
