|
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 ... 38
1
« on: May 23, 2025, 10:46 »
It's not by accident that SS has a "high fraud risk" list of countries where new contributors from those IPs must wait at last 90 days until they can receive a payout as well as further checks.
Is this a racist practice? No.
Where there is smoke there is fire.
Unfortunately they dont subject those same accounts to human detailed reviews to check for IP theft, spam, AI and so on. If they did that for Pakistan/Bangladesh they could likely eliminate 85% of IP theft immediately.
2
« on: May 23, 2025, 08:08 »
Nobody is buying subscriptions.
They admitted as much in the last quarterly call. They've lost tens of millions. Trustpilot shows why.
3
« on: May 23, 2025, 03:34 »
Another high quality thief on Facebook, as per usual from Pakistan
Complaining his stolen photos got incorrectly rejected for AI but they were taken with a "good camera"
Then goes on to admit happily he's stealing them but was just wondering why they're AI rejected.
4
« on: May 22, 2025, 23:33 »
The last month or so ive been hammered by P5 buyer aimed emails offering crazy discounts (latest is 50 audio tracks for $10 etc).
Never really saw any of this. Wondering if Shutterstock enshitification is hitting them so driving bargain basement sales.
5
« on: May 22, 2025, 07:26 »
Definitely more to it than 3 years inactivity.
Friend of mine with 30k+ assets went missing, presumed dead in Aug 20. Certainly hasn't been submitted to or even logged into since that time.
Its still up and running and still selling images (and every month dumping large chunks into a never-accessed PayPal account).
6
« on: May 16, 2025, 07:25 »
The very abrupt change to random ai reviews is a very serious problem and I have never seen anything like it in 20 years of doing stock.
So complaining about abrupt changes with no real communication or feedback is perfectly sensible.
Also the only way to make them understand that we are displeased and this is not an acceptable situation.
So keep complaining, nothing about these abrupt roulette reviews is normal.
Indeed. Nobody generally complained because Adobe was pretty good. Its changed. You used to get a person responding either here or via the contact on the website. No chance now. Issues were fixed within hours or a few days. Now its weeks to months if you get one at all. Reviews used to be consistent and have a published criteria. Each image was judged on merit. Mistakes were few, rejections were fair. No we have a sudden change to absolutely random reviews despite no change to criteria. Theres no consistency, theres no feedback, there are no updates. You have no idea if an image will get inor not and its random meaning you cant adapt or change yourself to help this. The similar policy still has no clarity as to exactly what its looking for, where and when so its impossible to cater for. The lack of consistency and seemingly moving goalposts combined with a wall of silence is not a good look. We know Adobe is swamped with stolen image, non-labelled AI, accounts with many thousands of AI text prompt spam similars. We know its swamped with Pakistan and places creating 5 or 6 new accounts when banned, selling accounts, selling image sets, downloading for pay. The rapid, badly planned adoptation of AI with no control means they're swamped in a vast ocean of crap. Human reviewers cant cope. They introduced blunt, buggy AI tools as the only way to handle it, it doesnt work and they dont address it.
7
« on: May 16, 2025, 07:17 »
Somewhere higher up in the chain someone has decided we are just useless little creator ants, probably soon to be replaced by ai software completely and our experience and frustrations don't matter at all.
Just as Shutterstock, contributors are just now "data set". Once they've trained what they need the original source is no longer required and drains resources paying. Adobe has quite literally bet the company on AI. Its only headed one way.
8
« on: May 03, 2025, 02:59 »
Hello!
You may have noticed in recent weeks more content being refused as too similar. This is part of our ongoing effort to maintain the relevancy and discoverability of content within the Adobe Stock collection.
We understand that an increase in refusals can be discouraging, but this is an opportunity to refine your portfolio and submit your strongest content in future submissions.
This really tells us nothing. Are our submissions now being scanned against images in our portfolio OR now scanned against other peoples images already submitted? If its the latter, things like landscapes and other things are going to be impossible to submit. How are these being decided ? Image AI analysis? Metadata? Human involved? There are a LOT of false positives. Why arent policy changes conveyed to contributors via email? Only a tiny fraction are on this forum to read this thread.
9
« on: April 26, 2025, 04:24 »
Problem is "as it came out of the camera" is a software engineer you've never met deciding how he thinks it should look. That still doesnt mean its "real" at all.
Ultimately dull stock images dont grab as much as bright/saturated (not over). Distractions tend to be a problem for RF as opposed to editorial. Its a different mindset.
I seriously doubt AS has any human in your review chain now anyway. Under modern MS standards i cant see why its rejected. Under 10 year old standards i can see why.
AS are currently on a rejection binge in general though.
10
« on: April 25, 2025, 22:04 »
Here's interesting example, now rejected twice this week. You guessed - "Quality Reasons".
It is very sharp, specially main subject - these vases in the middle - very focused and sharp, even at 200%. Colour is not embellished. There is no chromatic aberration. Image is not crooked. I removed bit of noise in the shadows lower right. Keywords are accurate:
Title: Iron Fence Window with Arabic Flower Pot Vases, White House Wall Exterior, Traditional Andalucian Home Trendy Albaicin Neighborhood, Granada Spain
Keywords: fence, window, house, flower pots, wall, white, andalusia, albaicin, granada, arabic, flower pot, spanish, symmetry, trendy, spain, europe, home, oriental, medieval, traditional, architecture, iron, glass, building, exterior, facade, structure, cage, metal, flowers, stylish, elegant, residence, residential, old, vintage, archival, culture, ornament, decor, decoration, vase, pottery, symmetric, pattern, style, ornate
Category: Travel
Can someone please tell me if you see problem with this Image? I am honestly asking, maybe I just don't get it. Maybe I could have included "Neighbourhood" (euro version of the word), but this can't be "quality" problem. We can debate need for this type of image, but IMHO it has some potential as it is trendy old Spanish house front. I've sold images of this type from other parts of the world.
Otherwise "quality" rejection is not just silly but disrespectful.
If I was going back a decade where stock had standards I'd argue the highlights on the wall are bright, possibly burnt out. Distracting marks and hooks on the way. A little lacking in contrast and saturation. But these days you're right, normally those all get accepted.
11
« on: April 25, 2025, 22:01 »
Pattern and concept in many places is still derivative. It doesnt need to use any part of it.
Thats why "in the style of" is causing so many issues currently.
Pattern and concept can't be copy protected.
You're right, in the style of should have been banned and prevented, from the start, that's infringing on a name and artists personal identity. Style might be questionable as you can't protect Art Deco or Abstract, or Modernist. Lets say primitive for an example, anyone can do that. But you can't have AI making Grandma Moses Primitive.
Back to the bottom line, the machine learning doesn't use any portion of any specific image, it learns what a banana looks like and the possible colors, and creates a new image. The computer is trained on 10,000 bananas (as an example) is trained on the possible variations, and when someone types in the prompt using the word banana, the machine has a pattern that has been learned.
You can't copyright knowledge or facts.
No, but you can methods and mechanisms behind the final output. Which as that the AI does. It's learnt and implemented from prior works. The output literally wouldn't be possible without it.
12
« on: April 25, 2025, 05:46 »
Pattern and concept in many places is still derivative. It doesnt need to use any part of it.
Thats why "in the style of" is causing so many issues currently.
13
« on: April 25, 2025, 05:41 »
As I understand, with this unlimited plan, the customer can use the downloaded files only once, after having previously registered such use, and within the time of their subscription.
A file cannot be stored and reused, but only for a current project. This should mean that each download will be equal to one project and the authors will not be compensated once and for all, as for a normal license!
https://www.shutterstock.com/terms/fair-usage
Completely and utterly unenforceable.
14
« on: April 24, 2025, 21:58 »
The automatic unlimited only filter on SS is likely a temporary promotion for their new offering.
I expect them to eventually remove this feature. In the meantime, depending on the type of content in their portfolios, it may negatively impact the sales of non-participating contributors.
In my case, I typically make a lot of cart sales with my niche content, which suggests that I may have irregular customers who might be unaware of this new filter, potentially hurting my sales.
However, I'm okay with this, as my sales are picking up on both AS and Artlist.
Given the cost and very generous license conditions of this massively undercut their existing packages, the only way i see this going is unlimited replaces all the options except very high volume SOD stuff.
15
« on: April 24, 2025, 05:22 »
One thing I noticed since this whole IS / SS merger was announced:
SS Reviews have become much closer to IS standard - basically anything goes in technical terms, but super anal in respect to what constitutes property. Although I am still getting uploads reviewed within couple of days, while on IS I have content now waiting over a month. Perhaps IS is racing Adobe to see who is going to blink first
SS have been accepted anything, no matter how technically awful for a long time now. The release thing might just be industry wide, AS have tightened up as well.
16
« on: April 23, 2025, 21:51 »
Training a machine with images, and then the machine creates new images, without using any part of the training image, is not a breach of copyright.
That's under the derivative works clauses in many countries. They don't have to use actual content. Information or knowledge obtained is derivative.
17
« on: April 23, 2025, 21:48 »
Ftp works fine for uploads.Can't remember the last time I used the Web interface on any site.
18
« on: April 23, 2025, 09:46 »
To recap, for a buyer to see everyones content now they have to
(i) run a search
(ii) change from "Highlights" to "All images" (which isnt all images. Its misleading)
(iii) Notice the "Filter applied: 1" box
(iv) click that box
(v) scroll down
(vi) select "All images" in the filter list
That simply isnt going to happen.
I just did a search for some of my files on the buyers site. No results found. However, a message came up saying that there may have been some filters affecting the search. All I had to do was a single action (one mouse click) to deactivate the filters and then my files appeared in the search results.
I cant see any way without going from highlights to all images then to filter. Regardless, buyers wont bother. They'll see enough displayed without more hoops to jump through. Most will just select the first hits on the first page as always. They're not going to go out of their way. Most wont even understand or know its been blocked to them.
19
« on: April 23, 2025, 04:56 »
Wondering if anybody who is in for this model would like to share the earnings or they are available only by the end of the month?
According to the email it doesnt go live until next month but looks like they lied about that. Given the revenue share model they mentioned i dont see how they can do anything other than declare it monthly once they know how much it brought in during that period. I can see an IS style 2 month lag while payments are calcuated.
20
« on: April 22, 2025, 23:20 »
Its made it to my region desktop now.
So it seems now ALL searches on Shutterstock from buyers now default to "unlimited only" so hide anyone not included or opted in from being sold EVEN IF THEY BUYER HAS ANOTHER ACCOUNT OR NO ACCOUNT. A buyer wont notice, they'd need to see the little "1 filter applied" message and be bothered enough to click filters, work out whats wrong and turn it off. Most wont bother.
I notice they havent bothered telling any contributors about this change.
To recap, for a buyer to see everyones content now they have to
(i) run a search
(ii) change from "Highlights" to "All images" (which isnt all images. Its misleading)
(iii) Notice the "Filter applied: 1" box
(iv) click that box
(v) scroll down
(vi) select "All images" in the filter list
That simply isnt going to happen.
21
« on: April 22, 2025, 22:16 »
Question is if AI takes over and artists, creatives, bloggers etc are no longer seeing financial reward, or very little reward why would anyone upload anything of value to the internet. AI companies must have thought this one through, do they really think people are just going to work for free or something.
Sorry to be harsh but they sound like a self entitled bunch, lobbying governments, at least here in Britain, to weaken copyright laws. Our silly governments are swallowing the line.
"AI" is nothing more than the most open and large scale copyright breach in human history and shoved into a database. Every single generated AI image is effectively copyright theft as the models were all trained to various extents on media without permission. Ultimately Adobes gamble seems dull. NOW people are buying AI from stock. It wont be long until they just make their own from a prompt in whatever editor they're using and have no further need to buy anything so that market vanishes.
22
« on: April 22, 2025, 22:08 »
Yea. For now. But we don't know if the 'opt out' option will be removed in the future.
It'll have to be. This new offering undercuts all their existing sub offerings and the license allowances also mean theres little need to ever buy anything more expensive. The fact the default filter appeared and auto selected unlimited only shows where they want to push this. My guess is it'll be done over a 12 month period where renewals no longer offer old versions. They may still offer an "opt out" but as this effectively hides your content from buyers its unviable.
25
« on: April 21, 2025, 03:16 »
"Simple fix, completely separate real images from AI. Different website, different search engine, different review stream. This is better for contributors and customers.
"
This is not better for buyers, I don't want to waste time checking two websites. Every single buyer i know doesnt want AI and is really angry by the time it takes to filter the crap out to get actual real images they need. I dont know a single one that likes the default of showing huge number of fake images burying real stuff without jumping through extra steps. Its a completely different market. No connection at all. However uploading 20k at once, will usually lead to low sales results. Not really. Uploading the same 20k over a year will result on lower sales because you have far fewer images online. We have practical proof when people left istock exclusivity in 2013. No idea what you're on about. People leave and join exclusive at various agencies all the time. If you leave exclusive OR suddenly decide its worth trying a new agency you didnt bother with before you have a huge portfolio ready to go and upload. You're not going to drip feed it on over months or years. Theres no reason to do that. The success of our ports comes from gradually being discovered and followed by buyers. There is absolutely nothing to suggest that is true at all.
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 38
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
