Quote from: gnirtS on April 21, 2025, 04:51

Guessing Shutterstock jumped the gun...

https://www.shutterstock.com/unlimited now has a 404.  Anyone screenshot it before it went?

Yes, it's 404. But, the link "Get Unlimited Downloads" in the top right corner is still working...
Also, this one:
https://www.shutterstock.com/pricing

... Why anyone would subscribe if he can get a lot more from envato elements for the same price? (psd files, graphic templates, Ae templates, Pr.....)

I have an Envato Elements account but it's photos and videos libraries are inferior to Shutterstock's.
AE templates and motion graphics templates are what makes Envato somewhat worth it.

Quote from: Noedelhap on January 11, 2025, 19:31

Maybe you are the one lying to us. Do you have a monopoly on the truth? Just asking questions, just doing some critical thinking.

Lol - "why" would I do that? If you genuinely can't figure that out on your own and need assistance, the answer is no. I am indeed telling the truth. Are YOU "lying"? Lol. Your statement is a manipulation tactic called deflection - designed to make it so you don't actually have to do any critical thinking while giving the 'illusion' of 'argument' and 'debate'..

Asking questions if fine - but that is not what you are doing. You avoided actually addressing ANYTHING in that statement.

Re-read the previous statement, because it obvious you have not, nor absorbed anything. If you have genuine questions about it, feel free to ask.

OK, assuming you're not deliberately lying, you're at the very least a conspiracy theorist who actually believes his own carefully constructed theories about the world, its systems and their agendas, to such an extent you're presenting yourself as the enlightened soul who knows everything better than those around you.
Your overuse of quotation marks to sarcastically label anything you don't trust is very telling.
You're also addressing lots of things so it's nearly impossible to deconstruct anything you say, not only because it's all one big web of theories strung together, also because you are extremely distrustful of any sources outside of your own mind. And you never, ever would admit you're wrong about anything, you always jump into a defensive state.

I wonder one thing, if you don't trust the "news", the "media", what sources do you use to get your information? Surely your critical thinking must be fueled by something other than your already imaginative mind?

POND 5 has been dead for a while anyway, who cares what SS does to a dead body

Abuse of a corpse is still an offense.

For video I think the highest was $70, I've had a few of those this year.

https://www.microstockgroup.com/pond5/how-long-until-pond5-is-paying-shutterstock-prices/

Well, it seems we have our answer.

How do you get these shots and not get eaten yourself!

When I see a cow in a field while I'm eating a steak, I'm not going to chase the cow.

Quote from: Noedelhap on October 18, 2024, 03:18

Adobe already has all your existing assets so what's the point of a strike? You can't stop the AI train we're on. It's either adapt or quit microstock altogether.

Although I don't like the direction we're going in with AI taking over, I won't pull my portfolio from Adobe. Right now Adobe makes up 70% of my revenue because other agencies failed to keep up with the competition. Shutterstock and iStock screwed us over with royalty cuts, so what do we have left once we pull away from Adobe? Nothing. It's the sad reality. Take what you can while you can.

Noedelhap is a pro-AI who also wrote:

Quote from: Noedelhap on November 22, 2023, 19:13

Using AI you're not stealing from anyone in particular or infringing copyright. The results AI systems produce are unique, but based on what it learned from other sources. Similar to what someone could create from memory whilst being inspired by something they've seen.

Look! sure this guy takes what he can while he can.
Noedelhap is such an honest guy, we must hear and follow his lessons!!!
This forum is the place for good and honest people. 

His work is left (and he did many illustrations of it), on the right, is the famous La Linea by Osvaldo Cavandoli.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Linea_(TV_series)
AI creates steals the way he does, so... where is the problem for him this Garbagetist?...


No comment. 

Go fuck yourself. You should be banned for your continuous harassment. This is the third time you accuse me of copyright infringement and I explained twice that wasn't the case.
You continue to harass me with this bs allegation so I've reported you.

I only nominate assets that haven't sold once in 5 years...the duds in my portfolio. With AI coming, I consider my future in microstock non-existent anyway. 10 years from now, maybe even sooner, business models will have drastically changed, excluding most artists. Maybe AI content farms will take over the market.

I have received a Firefly Contributor bonus in my account.

Adobe Stock dropped the ball big time. This is what microstock is heading to, AI crap that is passed off as real, while in fact it's just a distorted view of reality.
Not only does it not meet minimum video length requirements, it's also grossly misleading customers and inflating the collection with garbage.

There is also ZERO commercial value because why would you use a fake Sydney cityscape and not a real drone shot? I always thought commercial value was considered important for acceptance, but standards have clearly fallen.
Even if they remove this asset (or the entire portfolio), there's no guarantee it won't happen again, because nobody will waste time and money quality-checking every asset. If it's not already automated.

Quote from: Noedelhap on July 23, 2024, 15:38

Everything you upload should be made by you (and you should therefore own the copyright), uploading derivatives and public domain images is not allowed.

It is strongly recommended to carefully read the submission guidelines of each agency. Adobe's guidelines can be found here:
https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/submission-guidelines.html

Yes, I've seen this in the guidelines. What confused me was finding other similar-type images using public domain content with a simple search - not even AI work. It kind of makes it seem like they may allow derivative types of work, but not straight up selling of a PD image (which I also see on certain sites).

I guess I'll keep things status quo and just offer these images elsewhere!

There are many images for sale that shouldn't be on sale, but somehow passed inspection. It is confusing, and ridiculous Adobe's standards have falled this low (although I think Shutterstock is even worse in this regard).

Ironically, AI images ARE allowed (if labeled as such), so maybe it's an idea to remove any public domain elements from your pieces and replace those with AI elements.

It annoys me that 123RF is constantly sending emails about their AI tools in an attempt to get traffic. If only they had spent more marketing efforts into selling our assets in the past couple of years... The things they're promoting now are totally contradicting contributors' interests. We are simply irrelevant to them. I think it's time to say goodbye to those ungrateful people.

Adobe's reaction is disgusting. It doesn't bode well if this is how they treat (imo very obvious) copyright infringement...or at the very least a violation of their own AI policy.

I'm interested in what @MatHayward has to say about this. But I doubt he can or will respond to threads like this.