|
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 - gnirtS
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 ... 38
76
« on: March 15, 2025, 23:40 »
Half the problem is the misuse/misunderstanding of the word "AI".
Its become a marketing slogan just as years ago everyone added "HD" after everything to make it sound cool.
AI in terms of sharpening/denoise etc is just a marketing term for "algorithm". We've always used algorithms in photo and video work to produce and edit images. Nothing has changed.
Thats different from *Generative AI* where the algorithm invents new things that weren't there at all instead of basing calculations on the content of the file itself.
Generative AI is frowned upon and can lead to accidental copyright infringement. Algorithm stuff basically cant.
Adobe have a fairly clear page on what constitutes AI use for flagging and what doesn't and its a fairly sensible, if hard to police, guideline.
77
« on: March 14, 2025, 00:38 »
Has anyone else here dealing with video noticed a sudden and large crash in RPD for video sales on SS?
January was fine (by SS standards, the normal $8 or so average rpd) but suddenly Feb and March all video sales seem to be for $1 or under, most $0.25. And this is level 3.
RPD has gone down to $0.8 as a result so a drop of 10x relative to previous. It did it throughout Feb and March looks the same.
Its almost as if all videos now are low price subscription and absolutely nothing else. I havent had a single "normal" sale this month or last.
78
« on: March 07, 2025, 23:56 »
You know what really grinds my gears? Shutterstock seems to be on some level somewhat interested in contributor feedback about interface changes. I dont think they care in the slightest. Shoving out a survey is standard for any development but if all the results go direct to /dev/null then the purpose is entirely to pretend to be engaged whilst actually not caring. Every new interface change in Shutterstock seems to be focused on how to make it look good on mobile, and how to make submitting more intuitive for a completely new contributor.
Because its now a bulk dataset company not a media company. Quality doesn't matter so by dumbing it down to this level it can massively increase the bulk submitted by mobiles from half of the Indian sub-continent who don't own a computer, post process or do anything to an image. That said, no idea what it looks like on a mobile. I dont think ive ever tried submitting via the mobile website.
79
« on: March 07, 2025, 22:48 »
So I still have no answer how people have seen images removed, or a notice of which images, when Adobe says it wasn't going to start until today. If someone has a different link, so I can see where they are seeing changes and removals, I'd like to go look at mine.
Digging deeper i see the same as you, a coincidence batch with rejections (commonish now) but none that i can see removed previously. The count is the same. So i had the mail but so far have no images gone. That said, the way AS is going i fully expect to wake up in morning and find 80% of my portfolio scrubbed due to the AI going wild. Quite why they cant tell you which images will be removed or when is mystifying.
80
« on: March 02, 2025, 08:15 »
Very interesting. With the first editorial video that I submitted under the new system, they accepted 'shops' as a keyword but would not accept 'shopping.' However, they did accept 'shopping center.'
This is not anything new, Shutterstock uploading system works like that for eternity. It always removed "ing" version of the words unless it had some more distinguished meaning. The only way was to put that into the phrase. I was never able to put "shop", "mall" and "shopping" to one image, it always had to be "shop" and "shopping mall" otherwise only "shop" and "mall" will survive but "shopping" was deleted.
The difference now is when pasting in lists or CSVs instead of just removing the one it dislikes it gives no error at all to the users, lets them go through everything, shows all the keywords, looks like its saved but actually hasnt saved at all. Previously it just tidied up its warped logic behind the scenes and let you save those changes.
81
« on: February 28, 2025, 20:37 »
another destructive change - it removes what it sees as incorrect keywords but doesnt show the offenders - mine are usually typos, but i can no longer correct them
Mine are often typo but also English v US spelling (the search treats them differently)
82
« on: February 28, 2025, 04:36 »
I just want to be able to directly communicate with Shutterstock.
Thats the last thing Shutterstock want. Contributors are just a drain on time and financial resources.
83
« on: February 27, 2025, 21:14 »
Just to add the uploader is completely broken to me on some files.
It simply wont accept copy/paste keywords separated by commas or CSVs containing.
They go in, it shows "45 out of 50" keywords or whatever, you click save, spinning wheels, no "saved" dialog box and reload the patch and they've all vanished.
The ONLY way i can get it to take keywords is manually typing them in one by one. Obviously there:s no way in hell im going to do that onhundreds of videos or images in a session.
Using Edge (Chromium) with no extensions in basic safe mode.
It works fine on SOME videos but fails totally on others.
It now looks like theres no way to reliably upload at all.
EDIT:- Problem found
OK after more digging ive found a possible cause and its moronic.
They SEEM now to split base form verbs.
Enter "Ski" and it goes in. Then enter "Skiing" and its rejected for an invalid keyword.
Same for run/running, walk/walking.
If you enter skiing first it accepts it. If you then enter "ski" then Ski produces an error. Reloading the page shows "skiing" chaged to "ski" silently.
But its also dumb... hack/hacking, snowboard,snowboarding and others etc ARE accepted in both forms.
So its based on an obscure error that doesnt tell you why which is based on a poor quality dictionary.
In other words, they've changed how they validate and process without telling anyone.
Yes, i know MS sites generally only use the base form verb BUT Google searching (which indexes those sites externally) DOES distinguish so there is benefit in doing so for SEO outside the agencies own search.
Also not all stock sites split this so the change here means you now need separate keyword lists to please SS as opposed to others.
The other dumb UI is i you read a CSV or paste in a list and it detects these it wont tell you at all, it'll just not save even though its pretended its saved so you have no idea which word, or what caused it. Ive just spent 3 hours trying keyword tests on sample files to get this thing working.
84
« on: February 27, 2025, 09:46 »
I had this email too.
It seems to have binned 15 out of 20 of my last upload batch and nothing else at all. No idea what criteria they used there. Seems very random.
These were real images not AI (aerial shots of tropical rainforest).
85
« on: February 27, 2025, 09:13 »
Finding the "new" uploader useless for video.
Standard workflow, upload my CSV, it gets applied.
SOME assets will submit no issues. Other assets despite meeting all the keyword and description criteria show no errors, on submit it comes up with "This asset needs attention" but doesnt say what. Changing things, even wiping all keywords and pasting again does nothing at all.
The only solution is to delete the asset and reupload. Even then the web uploader fails (Error, file size is over 4gb when the file is 700mb).
I dont think ive got the patience to sit through this for tens or hundreds of assets. Its time consuming, error riddled and effectively unfit for purpose
86
« on: February 20, 2025, 20:51 »
Yep its gone.
Its also clear that despite getting people to use the feedback option over the last year for bugs and changes they literally ignored absolutely everything suggested by everyone and just ploughed ahead with the buggy, slow, inefficient form almost unchanged in all that time.
Its clear they had a pre-set idea of what they wanted and no amount of actual feedback would change it.
Whats also obvious is nowhere in the coding OR testing team are actual users with an actual workflow. Nobody who actually uses Shutterstock to contribute would use the interface in this way.
Ill go back to what ive said for a while - Shutterstock's unofficial policy now is "Contributors are an irritating drain on resources".
87
« on: February 20, 2025, 20:47 »
Clearly their poor treatment of contributors has not helped Shutterstock Inc and when they turned off a lot of contributors,
I dont see anything to suggest thats a factor. Treatment of contributors is irrelevant, they already have a big enough library and still have plenty of existing and new contributors (mainly stolen and ai content but thats another matter). What is hurting them are their packages, pricing and customer facing service and policies. Lots of people are signing up, want 4 free images, get those (so contributors lose out) but then they're being stung with small print 100s of dollars cancellation fees so go elsewhere. Their market are people signing up for a few free images with no intention of staying enrolled.
88
« on: February 16, 2025, 21:06 »
Interesting - im seeing about $0.44 RPD for Feb as well (vs 0.77 or so for Jan) and thats despite level increases. For context December was $1.22 and November was $1.05. Last Feb was $0.78.
Most i know seem to have RPD dropping to the low 40c area this month. People not renewing subscriptions or packages? Another killer SS giveaway or sale?
89
« on: February 16, 2025, 04:15 »
Have to agree with the above.
My January SS wasn't too bad even with the levels reset (not as good as before but better than any Jan under the "new" system.
Feb im seeing the same download numbers but despite having levelled up, ALL the sales are tiny. Im under half the RPD for last month.
Absolutely everything is a low value SOD or Sub. I have "sold" 2 videos though.... at $0.25 each.
90
« on: February 11, 2025, 07:51 »
To create an account, you need to upload a valid passport. Do these people have so many passports?
After all, Shutterstock not only deletes the portfolio, it also blacklists the author by passport.
It does not have to be a passport and i believe now, not even photo. Nothing stopping someone from using their driving licence, national ID it ID from their wife/sister/47 cousins neighbour and so on. Which most of Pakistan seem to be doing.
91
« on: February 08, 2025, 07:01 »
This does tally with a few buyers i know who use AS primarily. They dont want AI, chances are will never want AI but the search keeps turning up AI and the filters keep disappearing.
One in particular wonders if its a deliberate attempt by Adobe to force it on people as they've literally bet the company on it.
The more i think about this the more i think it needs two totally different portals and searches to clearly and easily separate the 2 things. They're not compatible with each other.
92
« on: January 30, 2025, 21:28 »
I remember in the days when SS had active forums, there were occasions when thieves would post on those forums! They would ask for advice or report issues they were experiencing. And it was clear that their ports that were filled with stolen content. I can't believe the nerve of those guys. Absolutely no shame.
They do this constantly on the AS and SS Facebook groups. Nothing has changed except where they do it. (and possibly the regional breakdown of who is doing it)
93
« on: January 23, 2025, 06:35 »
Well, Adobe Stock does have the most responsive algo, where files that have been downloaded move up in search results almost immediately. Whether this is the best algo or not, idk.
They move up immediately? Why does Adobe tell us the rank is set in the first 30 days and doesn't change? SS I see more change when I get downloads.
Its more complicated than that anyway. The transition from initial keyword base to one of ranking over 30 days etc.
94
« on: January 22, 2025, 13:12 »
For me, no, Shutterstock's algorithm is much better for 3 reasons:
- It favors quality over quantity
I assume this is sarcastic ? The agency where unless its an IP violation is literally impossible to get a rejection from and swamped by stolen, poor quality content is better?
95
« on: January 21, 2025, 08:29 »
I use gamma 2.4 timeline with output gamma set to same as timeline.
Probably doesn't make a lot of difference. My assumption is our stock video footage will be used in a larger project whose final output's gamma is set to whatever they need/want.
Thats my working assumption. Unlikely most other video work, in the case of stock you really dont know what the final output format will be. Could be anything from web to mobile device to broadcast or cinema. My only possible thought is the stock websites by default that buyers will see are generally displaying in 2.2 or similar so the previews and thumbnails if set as 2.4 are going to look too bright and maybe washed out. But again that assumes the site reads and uses the tags correctly to generate those previews. Still open to any other suggestions but so far "makes no difference" is my working assumption.
96
« on: January 21, 2025, 07:58 »
The deletion of his account seemed to coincide with the news about the Getty and SS merger.
People seem to be blaming everything on a merger that (i) hasnt had any details finalised (ii) nothing signed (iii) no regulator approval and (iii) unlikely to happen at all this year or even further years. Most likely is the timing is purely coincidental.
97
« on: January 21, 2025, 07:55 »
Twice i asked for data supporting those claims and none was given.
I don't owe you anything, and I'll most likely add you to my ignore list.
Im going with "I made a batshit claim at odds with data, unable to back it up, dont like being challenged so now going to hide away from scrutiny" then.
98
« on: January 20, 2025, 15:09 »
So what do I see? I see that the video review and acceptance on Shutterstock has become very long. I have been waiting for a video review for over a week. This has never happened before! It is obvious that the reviewer has been fired or transferred to work at Getty. This is the beginning of the end for Shutterstock.
I was actually wondering if iStock have begun using Shutterstock reviewers with a number of strange rejects on iStock just recently.
They haven't merged yet, how would that happen?
It amuses me people putting 2+2 together and getting 38. They havent merged, the final details havent been decided, nothing has been signed and there hasnt been regulatory approval. I reckon 2-3 years before anything happens, if ever.
99
« on: January 19, 2025, 16:21 »
You really think writing to Shutterstock will help?
Contributors are an inconvenience and an unwanted financial drain. They really, REALLY dont care what we think.
100
« on: January 18, 2025, 18:32 »
I received the email and sent a letter to my MP.
I urge all UK based creatives to do the same.
https://www.creativerightsinai.co.uk
Ive already done it already.
So have i. But as my MP lives in one of the safest Labour seats in the country where people would rather eat their grandmother than vote anyone else and he has a record of being a 100% sycophant having not once ever voted against the party guide there's absolutely no chance it'll do anything.
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 ... 38
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
