yes the search can be automated but then what? enlighten me. how does the script tell you which images is infringing copyright or is stolen.

my guess is everyone in stock will have and if you (general, not you) havent you probably need to reassess your work as a photographer

joann, its an immense job for an agency to check millions of submitted images dragging them into google images one by one and then check through every returned result to see if it is legal usage or an infringment, not saying you are wrong, just saying its an immense manual job i am not expecting them to do.

100 grand in 4 years on ss, if you started in 2004 not in 2012

They could fire some of the reviewers or people who do contributor portfolio management. If I had a stock agency, and things like this happened for 6 months, I wouldn't be mad at the people who are abusing the system, I'd be mad I obviously hired the wrong and incompetent people. From the reviewers to the coders who couldn't identify spammy portfolios by writing a script in 30 minutes and the management who perhaps hasn't communicated the problem to the coders. In the end, I'd fire myself since I'm obviously a douche who can't run a company. But yeah, not happening. They wanted these spammy accounts so that they could pay out less royalties and "touch up" their Q3 results.

well put !

i was wondering why the first image i ever submitted, part of my exam to get in, which never sold before, was sold last week.

they sell a load of rubbish bs since they hired that crook from istock, kelly 'i hate contributors' thompson

they have locked down submissions for everyone and are going to remove portfolios. only high quality content will be allowed. they will stop reviewing and give approved authors control over content and pricing. this project will take 12 months to complete,

ow and they will start offering subscriptions for buyers

1st image is nice but no copy space
2nd image under exposed no copy space
3rd image no copy space
4th image composition is weak, no copy space
5th image probably too small because the majority is white space plus its not a good isolation

RTG, there was no reason for getty to lower commissions to 2 cent per image other than greed, no one pays that low, not even deposit, yet you seem to be ok with that, hypocrite

i see i am late to the party, everything has been said already. though not sure who's running that joint but i am the sure the whole istock management staff is suffering from delusions of grandeur,. on the other hand, its quite an achievement to come up with that indecipherable complicated horse manure and twist it into a false positive. would love to be a fly on the wall. probably would see something like this



self-pleasuring egotistical self-absorbed irritating little shits

So your "bro" approach got you 30 mil in revenue but didnt manage to get a million profit from that to further invest. basically your not a very good business man because you cant make a return on an investment. a bit like twitter and uber, turning over millions but no profit. how is your track record going to attract new investors? youve got nothing to show for bro. fo sho