Quote from: leaf on June 29, 2012, 11:21

Quote from: ShadySue on June 29, 2012, 10:40

Quote from: ProImage on June 29, 2012, 05:01

Agreed, he knows the paths he could have taken.

Great marketing

Hmmm. "I made a mistake so I made my minions work overnight".
Some buyers won't like that.

I'm pretty sure it was optional and it looks like it was a 'good time'

Hmmm, 'optional' when you're in a new job and in an area of high unemployment?
That video didn't make it look anything remotely like a 'good time'. They were drinking coffee out of paper cups - puh-leeeeze 
Would they put in a marketing video an unhappy employee  who said, "Why am I paying for Yuri's bad arithmetic? I should be with my spouse/partner/baby/dying mother/at the pub ..."?

Nobody would have done it then by using your logic.  I agree with Leaf...it looked like a fun time with a challenging goal.

10% Less than in May, but DT -60%

$200 down mostly due to a sudden drop at DT.  FT continues to fall; I used to get about $200 a month now it's $70.  Bigstock even beat FT this month, first time ever for me.

Best I've had is an $18 dl, but I'll take that any day over a 38 CENT SALE.

Carls Jr. is much better tasting.....BY FAR

Going through this experience of "claw backs" at Alamy really makes me wonder what would happen if one day I get a $5000 sale. I'll be jumping from one leg to the other for a few months until the payment would eventually clear.

It's still quite nerve-wrecking to see a sale and then get it taken away again.

The higher the sale the more we worry.  That mega-wait time is exhausting.  BTW, I have also had a few refunds worth some serious coin.

Maybe they should rethink this similars policy now that subs buyers are going to be buying so many more images...

I guess I should suggest that over on DT, not that they ever listen to me.

It just looks like a price drop for buyers and for us. At least it doesn't come with a commission % cut too, although if this moves subs buyers from SS to DT it won't benefit me any (unless I get enough regular credit sales of images that are higher level because of subs sales - doubtful). If it moves them from thinkstock, that is great.

It does come with a commission % cut more or less.  You will now get a less percentage of an image because they dumped the tire system.  No more 70 cent subs, just 30 or 35 cent subs.  DT simply caved in to the other agencies' pricing and realized a quick revenue scheme.  Those in here that say this won't be a big deal then why did DT make that move?  Revenue, margins.

There is no way to see what images sold on Thinkstock. You can tell how many and how much you've made by clicking on the balance in the lower right, the stats, then click the left arrow to get to the previous month. When this happens, there will be blue and green bars for each day of your sales.  Just drag your cursor over the bars and it will show you sales and # of downloads.  If you want to know it by month, click the drop down and change it from daily to monthly. Then ghost over again.  That's all the info you get.

Quote from: MatHayward on June 07, 2012, 18:12

We must be getting different reviewers because I would guesstimate my acceptance rate at well over 90% there.  Why don't you post a couple of examples of rejected images here and we can give you some feedback.  

I have found Shutterstock to be a very fair company.  It's hard to look at your own work with impartial eyes.  If you didn't think it was great you probably wouldn't have submitted it right?  

I haven't run into any problems either, Mat. SS is the most consistent reviewing site I know of.

The reality is that MS is moving more and more to only accepting high-end images, and farther and farther away from basic, and conceivably acceptable images like isolations and other non-electric images.  It is interesting that this came up.  I know of several photographers, including me, who have submitted very nice natural images of nature, mouintain-scapes, etc. But the rejections are "please look at what is in our database....and it's by in large nothing more than fancy HDR images, nothing naturally lit.  Basic MS is fading away. Images have to be something special, more than every day reality...for the most part.

Quote from: Karimala on June 05, 2012, 15:04

Whenever I have a lot of photos from a single shoot, I submit them in batches over a period of a year.  Avoids the dreaded "too many" rejections.    

DT and most sites store everything we upload for an indefinite period of time, so I'll upload the shoot all at once and then slowly process them during the year.  I haven't noticed the processing delay affecting search placement or sales.  

no it doesn�t, they look in your portfolio, they go back and search those keywords, if they find they will say you have already online.. (talking about too many or similar rejections)

I am convinced that the very first thing DT does is an electronic, automated search of your uploads to compare them to your port.  Any matching sets get an auto rejection for too similar regardless of the image differences.  Very frustrating indeed.

Here's their twitter post as well.  I'm not sure whether to congratulate them or not?  That's a lot of competition for my images
https://twitter.com/Shutterstock/status/215120276902522881/photo/1

Totally agree.  The day that a microstock photographer really has to differentiate themselves from those 20,000,000 images was five years ago, let alone today.

Just as well then that I care far more about R than about RPD.  This month DP is #4 for me in revenue at 12% of my total, behind SS (30%), 123RF (15%), and iS (13%).  I often get bursts of sales from the same shoot, one of the reasons Dreamstime's no similars policy bugs me.  (Bugs me even more when I get several sales at DT from the same shoot, but I digress.)

Point is, my revenue at DP is up 5X year over year.  Their submission process is among the least painful.  They accept nearly everything I submit, which, I grant, have all been vetted by SS before DP sees them.  Given past results, I'm looking forward to what another year brings.

That's great that you are growing with them.  Hope that continues and they continue gaining momentum....for the rest of our sakes

Quote from: Poncke on June 23, 2012, 11:57

Fair enough. But I still dont see the need to go public with it. Reporting is one, going public with it is two. Completely unnecessary, no value add whatsoever. I'll leave it at that.

Because it's hard to have a conversation on a public forum without it being public.  And that was the point of the original post: to talk about this peculiar violation or reviewing failure or misunderstanding or whatever it turned out to be.  It wasn't about reporting the violation, but about talking amongst ourselves.  What you're suggesting is that we should not talk about certain subjects because of ramifications of their being made public.  Sorry, but I'm here to talk and listen and learn and maybe even teach.  Can't do that and keep others' potential transgressions secret.

Sorry, but I respectfully disagree.  This was a witch hunt.  If the OP wanted to discuss acceptance/rejection at IS then he could have used his own images.  We all get some accepted and others rejected that conflict with one and another. This person chose to take out his own frustration on ONE contributor, not on the situation as a whole. If he truly was concerned about infringement then go to Istock directly, not a public forum. Instead he did both.  That is a * shame.