Quote from: ShadySue on July 25, 2019, 14:58

Ironically:
https://www.shutterstock.com/blog/protect-your-content?fbclid=IwAR0tiYqNHX5ZEGGFY5FcCEf0RvAqdcHybIj8HC4MkCdzNM2O603HS6l42JQ

"We pride ourselves on the integrity of the content submitted by our contributors...."

Right. But that was said in 2014 - clearly a different time . . . to be judged by the standards of the day . . .

Goes along with "Your call is very important to us.."

Tossers!

Ha! I was just going to post that first line too. What a joke they are.

Glad to hear they are cracking down on similars! I�m guessing there are a whole lot of contributors getting accounts blocked.


It pays to read the contributor agreements.

Quote from: Orchidpoet on July 11, 2019, 13:16

I made this suggestion before and will say it again:

Copyright holders can initially set up a GOFUNDME account and appoint some trustees including a reputable lawyer to manage the money, in trust. The trustees will determine how the money should be used, including appointing attorneys and expenses.

The legal fees can be paid out of the trust money.

A percentage of the money recovered will go back to the trust fund.

If we pool the efforts together, there will be a defense fund available for the future.

Good luck with that

Yeah, sounds like the fox guarding the henhouse.

As a full time contributor myself, I do hope agencies don't block us without warning or talking to us first. This kind of "immediate block" has always been the biggest nightmare to any contributor. I do hope agencies will review case by case. For those who are confirmed violators (thief) should be banned immediately, but for case like this one, they should be given a chance to redeem themselves first at least. Just my 2 cent.

It�s simple, don�t upload many versions of the same file, videos or images, and you have nothing to worry about. If you have a question, ask first.

Ok, lets say reviewers are always right and never make mistakes. Being here from 2004 you must know this is truth

I never said that. You yourself admitted wrong. This isn�t Adobe�s mistake. And I am no more angrier, and no less angrier, than any other contributors. Between spammers and thieves, and poor sales, it�s tough for even the top contributors to make a buck anymore. That said, I do pretty well with Adobe. 😃

Quote from: cathyslife on July 08, 2019, 15:58

Quote from: Rasika on July 08, 2019, 15:49

I am not submitting images for 2 years, so we are talking about footage. And I have about 10,000 videos in my Adobe stock portfolio, so there is no way I can know which of the files they found to be problematic.
Now, don't get me wrong, I am not insisting I am right. The problem is they can at least let you know, something is not fit for them, or any other issue.
If you don't want it, you can just reject it and say "sorry, this is similar" etc. I wrote them 3 days ago asking to work this out/show me where is the problem/have any communication, but no replay so far.

You don�t know which files you just made color changes to, or you just don�t want to be bothered sorting them out? And they did let you know, before you even starting uploading! You are learning the hard way, unfortunately.

Do you know the difference between graded footage and raw footage?

I do now, but no, I don�t do video. You still violated their terms, so what I know or don�t know is irrelevant. I am sure Adobe does, so why don�t you ask them that same question? I bet you won�t.

I am so sorry for this Rasika! I heard about this practice of Adobe before. Closed accounts without warning for "similar" file uploads. We all know that in stock you have to produce a number of similar files in orders to stay profitable. This is many times a thin line and actually it would help if the agencies gave more feedback regarding this instead of destroying the economic life of someone without warning.

Unfortunately, the lack of contributors to support each other and form a lobbying entity increases the randomly applied power of the agencies. Too many naysayers. While it might be legal or their "right" it is still a very destructive business practise eventually for both parties. Most of us professional contributors build incomes, production pipelines and lifes around stock and do not want to harm the agencies.

I think in the case I heard about it could be fixed, just contact them and explain. Maybe Matt Hayward here can help as well?

From my point of view it does not sound like spam, but giving the client the choice of either colour grade themselves (pro clients which need raw material) or use the pre-graded version (end users which need just a beautiful clip) sounds absolutely reasonable. Understandable to offer this choice to the client IMHO.

Good luck!

I don�t support any contributor who spams a site in an attempt to cheat. And the rules are there in the agreement for everyone to read. How is it Adobes fault if a contributor doesn�t? And it�s certainly not a destructive business practice for Adobe to punish those who try to cheat. I�d say they are doing those contributors who follow the agreement a favor.

Apparently they can and warned us photo requirements

Be careful not to spam

Select only the best images from a shoot and ensure that each submission offers something different. Don�t submit multiple images with minimal changes in angle or depth, or copies of the same image with different postproduction effects applied. Customers apply their own creative effects to suit their project. Submitting multiple copies of similar or identical content can be perceived as spam by our moderation team. Spamming is strictly prohibited and may prompt us to block your account or close it permanently.

Exactly. It�s in the agreement (that some don�t read, apparently).

It is their site and their rules. Even if you have gotten away with it before, looks like your number is up. What you describe sounds like spamming to me. Without seeing exactly what you mean by �color grading� and how many images/videos we are talking about, it�s difficult to say for sure. But in the end, it doesn�t matter what we think, it�s Adobe�s call. You apparently violated their terms, and they have every right to terminate your account. Frankly, I am glad to hear they are cracking down on this nonsense. Uploading tons of the same image with slight color variations is an attempt to cheat and game the system. If that�s NOT what you did, and you have a reasonable explanation, you should contact Adobe and try to sort it out.

fubar and close relative snafu � situation normal all -effed- up

Quote from: cathyslife on July 04, 2019, 10:08

Quote from: dcwcreations on July 04, 2019, 06:03

A very close friend of mine who also did stock photography passed last year. we used each other as models and did hundreds of shoots together. We often talked about long after were gone our photos will still be out there somewhere so it's what we left to the worl. Our mark if you will. I think it's an honor and a tribute to leave them on there.

...you are profiting from someone else�s tragedy.

I can't agree.  You are profiting from their work, and arguably from their life.  But the tragedy has nothing to do with your work together or any profit you may continue to derive from it.  Unless you somehow benefit from the fact or details of your death, it's no different than enjoying the work of any performer who has died.

Feel however you feel, but you're under no obligation, moral or otherwise, to give up work you paid for because your collaborator is no longer around.

You have pulled out a small piece of my post and now it�s out of context.

A very close friend of mine who also did stock photography passed last year. we used each other as models and did hundreds of shoots together. We often talked about long after were gone our photos will still be out there somewhere so it's what we left to the worl. Our mark if you will. I think it's an honor and a tribute to leave them on there.

I agree with all of that, but don�t forget, you are profiting from someone else�s tragedy. when money is involved, it sometimes changes the thought. Some might see that as wrong, like maybe the family. I don�t necessarily think it�s wrong, especially if you talked about it beforehand.

friday is an holiday?

But it is summer in the US, so lots of people go on holiday (vacation). IIRC summers are usually slow. Then sales start to pick back up for the winter holidays right around Sept.