Has anyone had any success submitting editorial videos through Stocksubmitter? I marked two of my recent videos featuring city scenes as editorial within the software program and used the appropriate formats for the editorial captions. And yet Shutterstock rejected them for silly reasons like visible trademarks (brands and logos being visible), infringing on intellectual property etc. It's as if SS didn't recognise them as editorial and treated them like they were commercial submissions. I haven't checked to see if Pond 5 or VB did the same yet.

Some great work there. Ive never been to London but looks like it has a nice, vibrant atmosphere. And I admire the individuals who have the patience to do hyperlapse. Ive tried that myself and it drove me mad.

Here's the video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cHp7DKxyc2g

PS. I'm the narrator of the video

Very good narration by the way!

never heard of Google       

Google brings up all sorts of results - official sites and copycat sites and pretty much everything else.

Why wouldn't you download it from the actual DeepMeta site?

To be honest, I wouldn't know where the DeepMeta site is. I could do a search for it but chances are, I might come across a copycat site and end downloading malware or something else nasty.

Got a link to the official site?

It took me months of planning, coordination, getting up at 4am and travel to the field. Shooting, grading, uploading and tagging. For the reviewer - he/she just a click of a button - REVISE.
Drives me nuts.

And for all that effort, you'd probably make about $5 if it sells on Getty.

I recommend spending less than $100 on your first 'drone' and go for a cheap toy-grade quadcopter in the $30 - $80 range. And forget about cameras and filming when you're first starting out - learn how to fly first. Later on you can attach a light weight action camera or keychain camera when you get more comfortable with flying (check if the quad is powerful enough to lift it.) The cheap toy-grades quads like the Syma X5C-1 and FY326 Q7 are fully manual with no automation. They may be more challenging to fly initially than the more expensive drones but this will make you a better pilot with arguably quicker reflexes too. Spending time practising with a cheap quadcopter will develop your manual flying skills and will allow you to get out of sticky situations in the air and reduce the chance of flyaways. However, flyaways are always an ever-present risk when you're first starting out. I admit I had my share of flyways when I first got into quadcopters over 5 years ago (during the first year) but I haven't had any since.

Yea sure the expensive drones like those from DJI are great but the technology is not perfect. Things can go wrong like the GPS playing up and acting weird. Ive fooled around with a Phantom 2 a number of times and for the most part, it was reliable. However, one day in my backyard, it started drifting wildly all over the place in GPS mode, despite getting a good GPS lock (plenty of satellites detected.) The Phantom was about waist height and it was a dead flat calm still day without the slightest breeze so it wasn't the wind that was moving it around. It was pretty extreme drift. I was constantly having to counteract that drift with the sticks all the time (never a second's rest.) There were some verandah posts in very close proximity but I was easily able to avoid them and had 0 crashes / collisions because of all the practise I had flying cheap toy-grade quads during the previous few years. Basically, the Phantom was acting like a toy-grade quad on that particular day.

The DJI Mavic is certainly a popular choice these days. Though in my opinion, it has one major design flaw for beginners. And that is no user-selectable Atti mode. The vast majority of the time, it provides a safety net with it's default GPS mode. Though in instances when the GPS decides to quit for whatever reason, the Mavic automatically switches to Atti mode. The problem is that people who are completely new to drones have no manual flying skills and no previous experience with Atti mode. Yet Atti mode is forced upon them and in such situations, the newbie pilots are often overwhelmed and as a result panic and crash or experience a flyaway.

By the way, over time, when you get proficient with flying the cheap quads, you can always upgrade to a more expensive drone later on.

Good decision.

Some agencies who earn much, much less than AS/FL should follow this example.

It would be good if DT followed this model. Over there, some people have to wait for an eternity to receive a payout.

they would LOVE to have different media than their competitors.

Indeed they would.

FWIW, I have lots of media that was accepted by x by not by y.  When I see it sold on x, I used to smirk and say "I told you so."  However, when I tracked those media that got accepted after first being rejected, I have had ZERO sales on them. ZERO. NOT ONE.  Yes, they sold at the agencies that accepted them up front, but not at those that rejected it the first time.

I guess different contributors have different experiences. Some time back, I had a particular photo rejected by SS. Later on I resubmitted it and this time around, SS accepted it. And since then, it has sold ten times on SS. That's certainly not the case with other previously rejected photos of mine but sometimes you can get lucky. Actually, I also had a video that was rejected by SS, then later accepted and eventually sold on SS.

.....everything is showing perfect in the page. Just as returned search results are dynamic

"Perfect" and "dynamic" huh? I would describe it more as "biased" myself.

Glad to know it's a glitch.

No sale yet on this particular photo. Guess I can wait a little longer.

This issue may have resurfaced. Ive just received a request via e-mail to enable the W-EL license on one of my photos for a supposedly interested client. Or it may well be genuine.

Ive got a small bunch of videos at AS. And with some of the clips, the randomly generated preview thumbnails don't really show off what the videos are about. Is there some way to change them?

I'm not someone who submits much in the way of similars. However, this morning on DT, I was surprised to find that my latest image was rejected for supposedly being identical or close to identical to another image that was already in my portfolio. I do admit that I did photograph the same subject from the same angle but with the second image, I walked back a fair few steps which revealed a number of additional elements in the background which were not included in the first image, allowing the viewer to see more of the environment.

Which begs the question - does DT have much of an image spamming problem? SS clearly does. There are pages and pages of nearly identical images on SS. Despite SS having anti-spam rules, I don't know how such contributors succeed in submitting hundreds of images like that.

As I mentioned before, I don't submit a lot of similars. I try and make sure most of my images are unique. Though just recently on SS, I discovered that having some similar images in my port can be a good thing. I admit I have two very similar images of a particular subject that were take some time apart. A few days ago, one of these images was sold in Brisbane, Australia via SS. Then the next day, the other similar image was also sold in Brisbane, Australia via SS. Most likely from the same buyer.

By the way, over half a year ago, I accidentally submitted an image to DT that was already in my portfolio. I had forgotten it was already in there. It was actually one of my first submissions to DT. And surprisingly, it was accepted. When I realised my mistake, I removed the second copy.

From this morning's discovery, I guess DT are implementing a more strict policy on similars and perhaps even a program that automatically detects similars?