Quote from: Uncle Pete on November 13, 2019, 08:30

Quote from: Niakris on November 12, 2019, 23:46

@Uncle Pete

It's a network error.
Please try the following:
- restart your router;
- disable firewall on your router;
- disable antivirus;
- try on another ISP or a mobile internet connection.

Then after can I enable my firewall and antivirus again? Another ISP? So I should take my desktop to McDonald's? 

Thanks for the help. Can you explain why normal computer operations have to be disconnected to make the update work? Seems kind of unusual that anti-virus and firewall protection have to be stopped to make the software work?

Firewalls on routers do not have any useful functionality, mostly they hurt connections of your apps.

If you don't have an alternative ISP you can try USB internet tethering from your phone.

No normal operations should be disconnected, only something that blocks the connections without any reason.

StockSubmitter has quite small target audience (there are only so many microstock contributors in the world) so antivirus/firewall devs normally don't care to add it into white lists so their false positive reactions are not corrected by anything...

Interesting and the last one makes the most sense. Maybe I'll turn off the AVG and launch the software and see what happens.

Thanks for explaining.

Interesting:
10.6. Controlling Law. This Agreement shall be interpreted in accordance with the Laws of Singapore without regards to the laws regarding conflicts of law. The parties hereby agree to submit to the exclusive jurisdiction to the court located in Singapore.

and contact is "please contact us via [email protected]"

So tell me, anyone who uploads there, 50% of 26� you get 13� per sub? WOW talk about the race to the bottom.

Jonbull Prices you mention sound reasonable. I will try to contact some models for a couple of concepts I have in mind. Belgrade is not far from where I currently live - about one and a half hour flight. If financial terms end up positive, I can either fly to Belgrade or bring models to my location offering them an 8 day free vacation in an sea side airbnb villa with modern facilities including a pool, in exchange of their time - 5-6 hours photoshoot a day. TFV (time for vacation - flights included).  Will calculate costs and see if I should proceed or not.

Sorry to clip out some of the irrelevant parts. Maybe you should also calculate the earnings from those photos, not just the expenses? If you can make back your investment, time, money, everything in two years, that's not a bad plan. (except you already have the equipment and software, so you don't need to include that in a single project prediction?)

What's your return for 8 days and 40 to 48 hours of shooting. You should count your personal time editing and uploading as an expense.

How much profit do you expect?

Just wanted to point this out:

Paid downloads were up 5% Y/Y to 46.3M, and revenue per download was flat at $3.40.

The image collection expanded 34% to 297M. The video collection grew 33% to 16M.

From the earnings reports Q3 2019

Paid downloads are up, our individual downloads aren't. RPD is $3.40 while mine, lifetime, is around 72 cents. I suppose I should look at the year, but my guess is, it's lower than 72�

If I wanted to keep up with the overall site, I would need to upload 1,500 new images, every three months. And I'm pretty sure that's not actually keeping up with 10 million new images that get accepted every three months.

Low this year was $30.77 high was $50.09 I guess the granny investors are still convinced this is going somewhere? $42.19 today

Hey Morphart, and thanks for the reply.  I have that photo on SS, Adobe, Alamy, DT and 123.  I don't think any of them allow t-shirt printing for a 38 cent sub download.  I've searched the whole ad listing page on Amazon and I don't see any way to contact the seller or even know who it is.  I guess my only option now is to contact Amazon and file a complaint for copyright infringement.

Might be one of those, they don't pay, until someone orders a shirt, kind of deals. In other words, it's an offering, but none produced, so no license.

You need to know where they got it?

I think it's easier just to contact Shutterstock and they might have more leverage than you alone... but the options are there and payout is also different... chances are too .

I think the TOS says we shouldn't contact anyone on our own, without first asking the agency. They should handle it first.

Quote from: jonbull on November 14, 2019, 08:16

Quote from: Pauws99 on November 14, 2019, 03:05

Quote from: ShadySue on November 13, 2019, 19:28

Quote from: jonbull on November 04, 2019, 08:18

if you want live a normal life with micro you better move to a country with that cost of life...7k dollar of files per month at this point are not a joke i tell you.

Eh? Where are you unable to live in Europe on $7k a month? (Of course, it depends what your expenses are in getting the $7K, and I'm assuming you're talking about US$ and not, e.g. HK$). Even in London and Paris you can live very well on US$7k pm.

It may come back to the old issue about revenue vs profit. If you are using a studio models  regularly buying equipment and travelling  then you may well need to generate that kind of money. Mstock is a small and diminishing part of my income...however my return on investment is very high as I have reduced my spending to close to zero (except my time).

my experience is at this point zero investment bring zero gain...shooting snapshot don't take you money, real money,,.sure if you want buy a lens for have a bunch of meals is a lot...model released images are the only wayy to make consistent money,  is not a case that most of but seller are model shooter.
in addiction everything cost, i shoot lot of food recently and believe me seems zero cost but it's very expensive. travel shooting is expensive...sure if you walk around the city take some snapshot and sell is a zero cost but how much you can earn?

in adddiction model released images at this point are the only barrier left against free website. released images give the buyer the insurance everything is correct while using free images with person in free sites can bring problem...the problem is that for a shooting with a model i need spend minimum 200 300 euro here.

So if you are doing so well with your "strategy" why are you always complaining?

+++++++++++++++++

Quote from: Uncle Pete on November 13, 2019, 08:45

The following came from a 123RF thread, I thought it was better here. Hopefully Snow and others who have come up with this theory can provide more backing to explain how it works?

Quote from: Snow on November 13, 2019, 02:46

I don�t get people that continue complaining while they also continue uploading. SS forum is full of those people, really sad to see.
Either you stop uploading, remove your work or quit them. Also keep in mind that someone mentioned that your whole portfolio performance has input on search placement, not only individual images. That is why I am removing a few hundred low sellers from SS.

Anyway, I hope this info can be of help to some.

"Also keep in mind that someone mentioned that your whole portfolio performance has input on search placement, not only individual images. " WHO?

I'm happy with SS, unlike the people you mention. Can anyone show some evidence that my placement is based on whole portfolio and individual images? Sounds complicated like having a group line up alphabetically according to height? 

Which is first, individual images or my portfolio performance? Or maybe if everything is equal for an image, then the individuals portfolio performance will move them up?

My question is this, another new theory on how we are ranked, to add to all the rest, which is interesting, but I'd really like it if the people who introduce these, would show why they believe them and some evidence that their theory is actually true. "Everyone knows" or "It's obvious" are not evidence.

right, all too many make these conclusions based at best, on small sample size.

my % of total portfolio that's seen sales is probably low, but I continue to sell both new and 10 yr old images - just not as many nas 4-5 years ago.   but would be silly to generalize from that or to form conspiracy theories

This theory comes and goes, it's not as common as AI or capped earnings, the algorithm must have changed, the search or the agency always treats someone else better... 

I remember when IS reviewers were accused of rejecting images, because they were similar to their own. Or that SS promotes new people, because they get paid less. There should be a list, so they don't have to come up as something new. We can just refer to the list of theories and conspiracies behind the agencies and save some people the trouble of thinking of ways we're being messed with.

I mean, we're voluntarily uploading, getting 15% or 22% or some pitiful number, (aka peanuts) there are factories making images 1000 times faster than any one person can keep up, and yet some are trying to figure out reasons why or how agencies are somehow manipulating sales.

Lets ignore that hard facts, that the competition is an ocean tsunami of new images and we are a trickling little stream off in the woods.

A bad joke, that's this place:

Submitting your photos to Scopio opens the door for more chances to get seen and published, and more opportunities to impact the world. See what recent photo creators say about us.

We also connect photographers with more people that are interested in their photos. Besides boosting your follower count, this can pave the way towards future relationships with other content creators, and become a part of our community changing the world through authentic photos.

Get noticed, build a following, opens doors. But does anyone else notice, no mention of actual pay? Up to $500 LOL 

 Will I receive credit for my photos?

Yes! Your images will be credited to you when we show them to clients, and some of our clients even credit you when they publish the photos. This is a stellar way to get more eyes on your work if you�re trying to grow your following and influence, as your work will be visible to millions

Work to be seen plan. Some clients will even credit you. 

This is one step before, we pay to be seen agency, get no credit and no pay.

Quote from: Pauws99 on November 12, 2019, 15:47

In the UK theres a surprising number of restrictions - National Trust as I said, Royal Parks and much of London is privately owned such as Canary Wharf. I was very dissapointed when they started rejecting National Trust properties. I believe some people have had ones taken on National Parks removed which are not actually private property but areas with strict planning controls!

We have so much public land, and so many different legal entities in control of them, that I suspect it's different here from the UK.

FWIW� today AS accepted all 9 of the Beaver Dam State Park videos that SS rejected. I'm happy about that, and even tho SS has yet to provide a final decision, I have a feeling they will ultimately accept them too. They're nice 4k clips the likes of which I didn't find in the SS collection before submitting mine.

NT and Heritage and the rest are grabbing for money, and that's why they are claiming rights. That started with no video allowed and moved to no photos for commercial purposes. You can take them, you can't market them. Oh unless you are standing off the property. The way I understand it, many of the sites and agencies that preserve in the UK are NOT government funded.

Martha is correct. US public lands are public, owned my the taxpayers (and everyone else I suppose). The restrictions are for commercial productions, film, marketing, advertising. Mostly the permission has to do with paying for a permit. That also includes, no interfering with other visitors.

If you want to shoot your wedding, reunion, whatever, you need a permit. If you want to use lights, multiple tripods, crew, dollies, tracks... you get the idea, you need a permit.

Taking photos in the National Parks and Historic Sites that are Government owned, unless the individual site has specific regulations, are perfectly legal.

This is a really good review:

https://www.backpacker.com/skills/9-things-you-need-to-know-about-national-park-photography-rules

The problem is individual interpretation, but the bottom line is, personal use is fine, commercial needs a permit. But at the end it also says this, and I'll add the emphasis, from an attorney:

Maybe you get lucky and end up getting a photo printed in BACKPACKER. Do you need a permit then? Dickinson says no. �Generally, a photo that runs in Backpacker would not have required a permit to shoot unless it involved a model, set, or prop,� she says. The same applies to someone who makes their own greeting cards with photos from public lands or other similar hobbies. �The permit requirement for still photography is based on the activity that is taking place on federal lands, as opposed to what is going to be done with the photo once it is complete.�

Last of all, any photo agency can make their own rules, ShutterStock has done that and changed them over time. If SS decides they used to accept National Park photos, and in 2019 decided, they don't, that's the way the rules roll. Fortunately, except for cases where the site or subject claims copyright or some other infringement, Disney for example, SS will not remove older accepted photos and video. They will only reject new submissions.

I hope that adds something, and the source is an attorney not someone on a forum who thinks they have the answer. The real answer is "it depends", but the final answer is, we are legally allowed to use our photos for stock subjects.

So that means, anyone who wants to leave 123RF needs to wait until after a payment and then lose less. Good advice.

I voted with my feet and removed my account from 123RF, years ago.

I've noticed similar silliness with images rejected fo ''press credentials', 'non-lic', etc while others from same shoot are accepted - my theory is that reviewers don't get the entire batch, so a submission can actually have several reviewers

Sounds logical, we do know that Editorial is reviewed by a different track than Commercial. FIFO by license type and content type, like video, illustration or photo.

I'm curious as to what might be going on behind the scenes right now. Will they back Reviewer #1 or Reviewer #2?

More likely that they will do nothing, they don't back reviewers and you'll probably get an answer like, we have looked into this, please re-submit. AKA lip service.

I had images rejected for the title error - re-submitted, unchanged & all accepted, so it's the reviewers, not the rules (or, some/most reviewers are ignoring the rules)

Same for me, close. I had a rejection for title error (actually Description, but I'm ready to stop beating that point, until it comes around again?)  And I corrected it, uploaded, image accepted. Then when I was looking closer, I found the error, which I had not corrected. The word Background twice in the description.

I think without a doubt we've all confirmed that it's all about the reviewer and their understand of the rules, not the actual rules. Also in can be their understanding of words or English and how carefully they review.

I'd still contend that sometimes, when one of us gets a mixed review, for very similar wording or identical, one reviewer may have erred in accepting, while the other noticed the improper content or words and correctly rejected the upload. No one complains when we get something that's improper accepted? 

The rules and the changes are such a mess, I think some reviewers just don't know all the nuances. We can expect that with humans, some are better and smarter and some are having a more difficult time remembering everything. And some are "mailing it in" for the money.

I wouldn't want their job.

On title and description made the same
Point earlier in the thread.  But even though SS has only descriptions when they reject SS says �title� problem.

On . this is my question, but the new title criteria mentions special characters.

If others have been able to upload with .s, will do the same.

I think I understand now. Yes punctuation is not special characters. . , : ; - / ? should all be fine. (and probably some others)

The problem is things like a tilde, or � � � which can be coded into web pages when we cut and paste data. That and when a reviewer doesn't understand that the name of a place, isn't a foreign word to the rest of the world, just to him!

As for why SS calls the Description field the Title, that's a mystery.  One would think by now, someone at HQ would have figured out they are telling about something that doesn't exist.