I came across the new watermark today and it's a HUGE improvement over the previous one. It seems like it's only on a small percentage of images so far, but I expect a bigger migration in the next week or so.

The logo much larger and it's covers the image very well.

Here is an example of the new one:
http://image.shutterstock.com/z/stock-photo-the-sunset-highway-pavement-224655796.jpg

Compare to the old one:
http://image.shutterstock.com/z/stock-photo-traffic-on-the-highway-blurred-image-background-concept-about-transportation-267385760.jpg

Your new one is the very old V2 announced on 24the Nov. and criticized here on all these pages.
Still good that you finally came across it too.

But really what percentage are we crying about anyways thats gonna steal your precious images? I would probably say the percentage of people stealing images would be less than 5% and do you think shutterstock will cater to the less than 5% chance of thieves stealing content that they don't own or catering to the other 95% of buyers who dont give a rats ass if the watermark is too subtle. Look at the watermark at stocksy. subtle and barely seen. 

90% of bloggers using pictures are stealing them with or without watermark, regardless of quality. Many of them are even bragging about it and call you stupid if you mention buying images.
I could prove this (but I don't) with my long list to DMCA of thousands of link to stolen images and the action taken:

We have received your DMCA take-down notice dated xxxxx
regarding the following:
http://YYYYYYYYhtml
 We have reviewed the allegedly infringing content in question. In
accordance with our policies, we have taken the content offline and
notified the blogger of the complaint. Should the allegedly infringing
content reappear at this post, please let us know and we will take further
action.

Of course it will reappear but at that time you are too tired to care. That doesn't mean we should make things easier for them.

the problem of stealing , no doubt, is due to misinformation, rather than a blogger,etc deliberately
stealing your work.

I agree when we talk about simple bloggers but many, like domain resellers are stealing everything with special software, no mercy.

Quote from: Dodie on October 30, 2015, 08:28

Whatever they decide, I would like to hear their final word about this subject. I have a bad feeling about something much bigger being cooked here for us and this watermark scandal is just the first step of it.

Think!
They implemented the first version instantly, for everyone,  so why is such a long delay needed for the second one? Why let Google index all highrez images with version 1 when it will be changed? It almost looks like they are deliberately delaying to implement (at least) version two in order to distract us from the big picture.

Who could benefit the most of this huge favor SS is doing?

Creepy comment

I think that it take a long time to implement the week (mistaked) watermark, of course we just saw the change in moment, but it must take long time to them...

Yes, creepy, it's almost Halloween. What if I'm right?

Just Google, you will find them

Looking at this search result, I just found out that square images are even bigger, 1500px x 1600px. I didn't know that before.

Did you guys read the topic in SS forum

They say the new watermark will be different from now because it's going to have a black footer instead of white ( mine are whit white footer) and they say it will take few days to change the watermark...

This was wrote on 26th October ... Let's wait and see what happen...  meanwhile I have wrote to support ... Let's see

Yes we did, did you? Let's see what? They gave us three examples with the black footer in the very first post of that thread. Not much of a difference, still not visible on white background or texture.
Good morning sunshine!

Here's that petition link again:

https://secure.avaaz.org/en/petition/Shutterstockcom_team_Infringes_copyrights_of_contributors_by_Shutterstock


475 signatures at present. Thanks, Laurin, for signing!

475 out of  60,000 contributors (wikipedia 2014), nice!

I don't think they will fix it.  They do what customers ask them to do, not contributors.
BTW, where is Vincent?

That's what I'm thinking too. At the moment all my images are still with version 1, no protection at all after a week of waiting.

Can anyone tell me please, what is that opt in/out button good for? If I opt out:
- does SS stop sales on the site?
- does SS stop sales at partners as well?
- can I opt in back without consequences ?
I just want to know, I shall still wait a week or so before I decide.

I am more concerned about sales on FT. As Martha said, I prefer to go exclusive (or partial) on FT if SS continues to give out images for free.

Please, don't use social media, you are just attracting even more scumbags.

Now the forum loads but I can't sign in.

Signed.

Quote from: mcp on October 27, 2015, 11:04

Signed - up to 436 now.

I've been watching this petition since it was announced. Spotted a bunch of signatures from Russia, Ukraine, Romania, and Thailand, etc, but not a whole lot (yet) from the USA.

C'mon, fellow Americans, let's add our voices to this effort.

That is what I had on my mind too. Except Laurin, veterans are very quiet now, when they are needed.

Quote from: 60D on October 25, 2015, 09:15

why they cannot remove that preview thing from old images till they fix it? 

ShutterStock is certainly capable of removing all 'Preview' links and disabling all images (within 5 minutes time) but they choose not to.

In the meantime, Google's publishing the "small subset of images".

How do you got this search result page? This is not just any search but a custom one, this is what you mean by "small subset"? Did you search for all the keyword contained in the URL of this page? G00gle search result doesn't come in subsets, unless you put the keyword in there.

I'm with you but to stress fellow contributors with such a search result is going too far. They'll take you at your word, without checking. Sorry, and again, I'm with you and unhappy concerning the preview and watermark.

Despite what many people want to believe, socialism is bad. Dreamstime is a good example of it.

I agree with the first part but I wonder, how do you know that? Have you ever lived in socialism? I've spent a big part of my life in socialism and I'm thankful it is gone but I can tell you for sure, socialism means (before anything else) people and their lack of attitude. People who are afraid to speak out loud, people who turn the other cheek, people who kiss the hand that beats them. There never was equity among people in socialism (or anywhere else).

I can see lots of such people from all over the word on these forums. Just take a look at the "new preview image" thread at SS and read all the flattering thanks (for nothing): "Thank you for listening; the new watermark is much better (when it's not); a step in the right direction".......
They are all lying because they are afraid to speak out. What are they thanking for? This (false)humble, demagogic attitude is characteristic to socialism but it is present everywhere among humans.