|
MicrostockGroup Sponsors
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - wds
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 ... 38
76
« on: August 31, 2024, 18:46 »
Weird, some people are seeing growth and others are seeing virtual collapses. Maybe it's geographic?
more likely portfolio contents - i sell many editorial images on SS but AS doesn't accept editorial
and then depends whether you concentrate on food, people, travel, etc
I have editorial on both (AS generally accepts editorial without people), in fact more editorial on SS than AS, and SS earnings are far below AS at this point.
77
« on: August 30, 2024, 12:52 »
Weird, some people are seeing growth and others are seeing virtual collapses. Maybe it's geographic?
78
« on: August 30, 2024, 08:59 »
Could be they have an algorithm whereby if a contributor has a large queue there is some priority given?
79
« on: August 29, 2024, 16:17 »
Do assets accepted into the free collection get automatically back to the regular paid collection after 1 year?
80
« on: August 29, 2024, 08:48 »
When all is said and done, it comes down to how many $$$ do you get from a given agency at the end of the month.
81
« on: August 22, 2024, 20:10 »
I have an AI image that is sitting in queue for 11 days....I wonder if they are attempting to equalize the queue length between AI and non-AI creative?
82
« on: August 22, 2024, 16:04 »
How difficult can it be to write an algorithm with a few adjustable parameters so the queue is always at maximum two weeks or whatever their desired target range is depending on the content?
I think the problem is that they are just overwhelmed with AI content and no shuffling around of resources between different queues is going to solve this problem. They very likely would have to expand the available resources.
They may be reluctant to do this, because they do not know how long the current influx will remain at this level. Or perhaps they are working on tools that allow the help of AI with reviewing AI content (and possibly other content).
My guess is that that AI influx will increase as tools are more widely available and generate "accurate" content more quickly.
83
« on: August 19, 2024, 08:02 »
Upload slots or similar ideas are not bad ideas.
However, I believe that the fact remains that AI assets get reviewed much more quickly than non-AI photo assets.
Therefore it seems Adobe really wants to grow the AI collection. If they implement slots, that would
also limit AI collection growth, which seemingly is not what they want to do.
I feel Adobe should be more even handed regarding AI vs. photos review queues/time, so the photo queue is significantly
less than two months.
84
« on: August 18, 2024, 11:02 »
From what I've seen, the monthly commissions have dropped way down from where they were a year or two ago. Still worth the effort for now.
85
« on: August 17, 2024, 13:17 »
FYI. I figured out the problem.
There were certain keywords SS did not like.
When I would attempt to submit the image, the system would say something like "invalid keywords removed"
It looked as if the invalid keyword(s) were gone. So then I would resubmit and still get an error.
I noticed that it put the "invalid keywords" back!
I found that if I manually deleted the keywords SS didn't like, then I could successfully submit the image.
86
« on: August 17, 2024, 09:36 »
I have just tried submitting some innocuous editorial and non-editorial content (street signs, storefronts etc.) and SS is not accepting the submission. When attempting to submit, it says "invalid keywords removed" and "This asset needs attention Please review errors".
- I have submitted hundreds of these types of images in the past with no problem
- It says "invalid keywords removed" yet no keywords were removed at all and the keywords were very "plain vanilla"
Also, another in the series was accepted.
Is anyone else seeing this?
(If SS had real support, I would just call them up and ask them, but their support is pretty much non-existent in recent years.)
Thanks!
87
« on: August 09, 2024, 16:20 »
Interesting, thanks. From my viewpoint, SS has already "fell through the floor", so it can't get much worse. We'll see what happens with P5...I like the uniform pricing, but otherwise we'll see.
88
« on: August 07, 2024, 09:04 »
Now my sales are going down aigain, especially in German day timezone.
Everybody is on vacation.
currently pos 2730
Interesting....my sales yesterday and so far today are on the significantly low side as well...in sync with the last time...what was that a week ago?
89
« on: August 06, 2024, 15:56 »
As annoying as it is nothing is going to change, so constantly moaning and whining is not going to help. Does it really make or break the bank if you wait for a few months to have an edit?
Well, it's somewhat demotivating. More importantly, what if an image gets rejected and you resubmit? Then you are pushing 1/3 to 1/2 a year to get it accepted. It also doesn't help if the rejection "reason" is that it didn't meet standards with no specifics. Two months and they can't take the time to be more specific about what technical issue the reviewer perceived?
90
« on: August 06, 2024, 07:59 »
Over two months and still waiting on non-Editorial photo
91
« on: August 02, 2024, 13:48 »
Not a holiday, but FWIW, I am seeing very low sales today....wondering if it's an Adobe glitch?
92
« on: July 29, 2024, 21:39 »
I am also seeing png's getting reviewed significantly more quickly than plain old non-editorial, non-AI jpg's.
Could it be that Adobe wants to increase the numbers of AI and png's as they already have lots of "plain old non-editorial, non-AI stock content"?
They may see that as a competitive advantage.
93
« on: July 27, 2024, 21:33 »
It wasn't all that long ago that "authentic" content was the big thing.
In some sense, AI content is about as inauthentic as you can get. I guess things change.
94
« on: July 27, 2024, 13:11 »
a
95
« on: July 27, 2024, 07:16 »
No contributor should have to wait months to get photos reviewed. What happens if it goes to 6 months?...if it goes to 1 year?
96
« on: July 16, 2024, 21:14 »
Downfall must be due to video sales falling because they started the cheap video subs. I don't see such a fall in photo sales. I'm making more money from photos ever on Adobe Stock due to adding thousands of AI generated photos. So, thanks Adobe Stock for accepting AI photos.
No, 95% of portfolio is images, 80% are AI,
my downloads are down from 250+ to ~70 within few months
This is a total guess. 80% of your images are AI. Were you an early AI "adopter" and did you produce a large number of images early on? Maybe you got a lot of sales initially, but when the "masses" started contributing AI images and given that many times the AI image generators tend to produce similar results your portfolio got overwhelmed with competition?
97
« on: July 13, 2024, 07:34 »
I think Adobe should make some public statement about review time and review time inconsistencies.
98
« on: July 12, 2024, 13:02 »
I submitted 3 Editorial yesterday and they got approved overnight. Last week 1 RF, waited 3 or 4 days only.
My theory was QA Failures push submitted images down the queue, but apparently that might not be true. Only other explanation I can think off is that AI pre-processing assigns some sort of "worthiness" token, so assets with estimated lower sale potential have to wait longer (i.e flowers).
It would actually be quite interesting to hear from Adobe about this. If someone really has to wait 8 weeks or more, that is quite brutal
Was your RF AI?....I have experienced AI's going through the queue much quicker than non-AI (non-editorial)
99
« on: July 10, 2024, 13:10 »
I have a file in queue at Adobestock for seven weeks yet to be reviewed! It is Commercial non-AI.
What are others seeing?
100
« on: July 09, 2024, 08:11 »
Did anyone ask the Canva CEO if they think the design world also needs more alternatives to Canva?
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 ... 38
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
