MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Show Posts

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 - marthamarks

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 59
1
Shutterstock.com / Re: Shutterstock reviewers are idiots
« on: November 19, 2019, 12:17 »

Anyway this past weekend, after getting a couple dozen other public lands videos from my Nevada trip accepted without property releases, I re-uploaded and resubmitted all of the previously rejected Beaver Dam State Park videos. As of this morning, they are all accepted.

So all's well that ends well. I guess.

IMO it'll only "end well" if you enjoy some sales. Far too much incompetence to have to contend with. Good luck with the submissions.

Thank you!

2
Shutterstock.com / Re: Shutterstock reviewers are idiots
« on: November 19, 2019, 09:04 »
Here's a final report on my most recent Adventures in Submitting to Shutterstock:

I never got a response from the self-described "Dedicated Team" that supposedly was considering my appeal. Dead silence.

Maybe they are bots too? Or so overworked by contributor complaints that they can't be bothered to reply? Or that team doesn't exist and their non-existence is just a way for Anyta or Divya or whoever picks up the original complaint to deflect.

Anyway this past weekend, after getting a couple dozen other public lands videos from my Nevada trip accepted without property releases, I re-uploaded and resubmitted all of the previously rejected Beaver Dam State Park videos. As of this morning, they are all accepted.

So all's well that ends well. I guess.

3
Adobe Stock / Re: Preview Option for footage?
« on: November 15, 2019, 12:13 »
Great but we need the same for footages already uploaded.

Actually, you can find those by going to Dashboard, then My Portfolio, then search by keyword. Once you locate what you're looking for, either hover your cursor over it or click it (as if to edit) and you'll be able to see a larger version of your video.

It's cumbersome, but it does work.

4
Adobe Stock / Re: Preview Option for footage?
« on: November 14, 2019, 17:12 »
I just used that to submit my newest 4K uploads.

It works great and even offers the option of going full screen to really see the details of clips.

Hooray for Adobe Stock!!

5
Adobe Stock / Re: Preview Option for footage?
« on: November 14, 2019, 16:31 »
Thanks for that, Mat! It's great that you and others are here to listen to our comments/gripes and (almost always) provide the kind of helpful responses we hope for.

I can't help but compare the excellent contributor service you guys at AS give us with the zero responses we get from SS. Please keep it up. :)

6
Take that up to Shutterstock so they can do a follow and explain...

I think it's easier just to contact Shutterstock and they might have more leverage than you alone... but the options are there and payout is also different... chances are too :).

Good luck getting a reply from SS's "customer care" team!

7
Shutterstock.com / Re: Shutterstock reviewers are idiots
« on: November 14, 2019, 15:02 »
Martha's kinder version of idiots or stupid, GRP = "Goofy Reviewer Problem.  :)

I'm happy to add a new acronym, GRP, to the MSG vocabulary! :)

This morning, I got the following response back from the Shutterstock Contributor Care Team:

Hi Martha,

We will reach out to the review manager regarding the content in question and get back to you as soon as possible. Should you need any further information or assistance, please do not hesitate to contact us.

Your patience and cooperation would be highly appreciated.


The part about my patience and cooperation being highly appreciated sounded promising, but I'm still waiting for an answer as to why of 2 of 11 videos submitted of the same state park were accepted while 9 were not, when none of them had a property release.

I'll post an update when I have one.

Good luck...
I"ve been waiting months...still not response...

They like her better than the rest of us, she actually gets a stupid canned reply, while we don't even get that.  :)

Yeah, the sweet little old lady with the white hair gets a polite canned response. Everybody else gets the shaft.

Welcome to the 21st Century (nearly the 3rd decade of it). You and I, Pete, are old enough to remember when almost everybody treated almost everybody else better.

8
I got the email too, of course, but did go ahead and update my profile page. Just in case.

However, it would be much more exciting news to hear back from the "dedicated team" that seems totally uninterested in replying to my request for feedback on those videos they rejected on Monday.

9
Shutterstock.com / Re: Shutterstock reviewers are idiots
« on: November 14, 2019, 09:23 »
So, just now, after sending back their own questionnaire to them overnight, I woke up to the following reply:

***************
Hi Martha,

Thank you for your response. We are waiting for an update from our dedicated team. Once I receive any update on the issue, I will definitely inform you regarding the resolution.
 
Thanks,
Abhay
Shutterstock Contributor Care Team

***************

This must be what it felt like when Alice fell down the rabbit hole.

10
Shutterstock.com / Re: Shutterstock reviewers are idiots
« on: November 14, 2019, 05:17 »
Martha's kinder version of idiots or stupid, GRP = "Goofy Reviewer Problem.  :)

I'm happy to add a new acronym, GRP, to the MSG vocabulary! :)

This morning, I got the following response back from the Shutterstock Contributor Care Team:

Hi Martha,

We will reach out to the review manager regarding the content in question and get back to you as soon as possible. Should you need any further information or assistance, please do not hesitate to contact us.

Your patience and cooperation would be highly appreciated.


The part about my patience and cooperation being highly appreciated sounded promising, but I'm still waiting for an answer as to why of 2 of 11 videos submitted of the same state park were accepted while 9 were not, when none of them had a property release.

I'll post an update when I have one.

Good luck...
I"ve been waiting months...still not response...


FUNNY!!! What perfect timing that you wrote that just now because

I just now got the following email from SS:


************
We'd love to hear your opinion!

Hello,
 
We'd love to hear about your recent Contributor Care experience with us. Take this quick survey and tell us your thoughts. Your feedback will help us provide the best possible service to all our customers.

How knowledgeable did you find the representative that you worked with?
Extremely Knowledgeable
Very Knowledgeable
Somewhat Knowledgeable
Not Very Knowledgeable
Not At All Knowledgeable

Thank you,
Shutterstock

************

Of course, I have not yet had any resolution to my issue. It must be one heckuva tough problem for them to address.

I just forwarded the questionnaire on to the 2 "contributor care" representatives who have responded to me this week, with this note:

************
Hello, Abhay and Divya,

After four days of waiting, I have had no response from the dedicated team at Shutterstock.

But still, I just received the following email questionnaire from Shutterstock.

How do you suggest I reply to it??

Martha

************

11
New Sites - General / Re: New stock site SCOP.IO
« on: November 13, 2019, 21:46 »
Are they effing kidding the contributor has TO PAY to remove their own images??!?!

What a crock of  sheeite

"If Contributor wishes to remove one or more Images from the Company Website it must notify Company in writing of the images that it requires to be removed and pay to Company the prorated Fee (multiplied by two (2) times the prorated Fee) for each Image that is removed. In the event Contributor requests to remove more than ten (10) Images from the Company Website in any calendar month, Contributor shall pay Company three (3) times the prorated Fee for each additional Image that is removed in that calendar month. "

That might as well be their core business model, trick contributors into submitting and earn when they realize there are no sales and want to part ways.

Methinks you're right. Yes, it absolutely is a crock of sheeite.

12
Shutterstock.com / Re: Shutterstock reviewers are idiots
« on: November 13, 2019, 18:58 »

if it were a computer results wouldn't vary - we've shown that's not the case

I have to believe reviewers are real people, at least those working on videos.

Otherwise, why would they accept a whole batch of stills and 1 video of a specific named place without property releases and reject the rest of the videos of the identical named place for that precise reason?

Only humans are consistently inconsistent. Computers generally are not.

13
Shutterstock.com / Re: Shutterstock reviewers are idiots
« on: November 13, 2019, 12:04 »
Thank you, Uncle Pete. You've reaffirmed my understanding of US public-land policies.

BTW, this morning Adobe Stock accepted a couple dozen more new 4Ks of Nevada's state and federal lands that I haven't yet submitted to Shutterstock, because I'm still waiting, two days later, for SS's reply to my previous complaint.

Meanwhile, AS will get to review lots more nice 4Ks from Nevada and Arizona. :)

14
Shutterstock.com / Re: Shutterstock reviewers are idiots
« on: November 12, 2019, 17:38 »
In the UK theres a surprising number of restrictions - National Trust as I said, Royal Parks and much of London is privately owned such as Canary Wharf. I was very dissapointed when they started rejecting National Trust properties. I believe some people have had ones taken on National Parks removed which are not actually private property but areas with strict planning controls!

We have so much public land, and so many different legal entities in control of them, that I suspect it's different here from the UK.

FWIW today AS accepted all 9 of the Beaver Dam State Park videos that SS rejected. I'm happy about that, and even tho SS has yet to provide a final decision, I have a feeling they will ultimately accept them too. They're nice 4k clips the likes of which I didn't find in the SS collection before submitting mine.

15
Shutterstock.com / Re: Shutterstock reviewers are idiots
« on: November 12, 2019, 15:20 »
I'm not sure I would be drawing attention to those images as you might find them deleted. In the UK the National Trust for example became much most active in enforcing their "rights" and as a result many of us have had related images removed. The rules on what is admissable seem to get stricter all the time.

Yeah, I did think of that. However, I don't believe most public lands in the US are off limits to the kind of photography I do. For a major film shoot with trucks filled with crew, actors, and equipment, of course, they would require permits. But for an old lady stealthily shooting birds, critters, and landscapes near her car on the main road, it seems draconian.

If this backfires, however, I'll just happily "retire" from active duty at SS, which is far from my main source of income.

Funny thing if I didn't identify the locations by name, nobody at SS would ever know. Maybe from now on I'll write descriptions like: "Beautiful red rocks at unknown location in the American Southwest" or "Herd of Bighorn Sheep alongside a large petroglyph rock in No Man's Land, USA."

Wonder what the reaction to that would be? LOL

16
Shutterstock.com / Re: Shutterstock reviewers are idiots
« on: November 12, 2019, 10:19 »
My request for clarification from Shutterstock yesterday morning still has produced nothing but the following (probably worthless) back and forth with the "Contributor Care Team."

Here's the latest:

******* FROM ME:
Thank you for your reply yesterday morning. I was hoping to hear back from you by this morning. Maybe later today?
 
Last evening, I did a bit of research into my Shutterstock portfolio.
 
Over the last 3 years alone, Shutterstock has accepted my landscape stills and/or videos of the following (clearly identified) public lands, **all of them without property releases.**
 
FEDERAL
Pahranagat National Wildlife Refuge (NV) NOTE: In the last few days, 3 stills were accepted (1555068938, 1555068932, 1555068929). 1 4K video was rejected solely for lack of a property release (1040658215) before it was accepted (as 1040693750).

Red Rock Canyon National Conservation Area (NV)
Lake Mead National Recreation Area (NV)
Gold Butte National Monument (NV)
Black Canyon of the Gunnison National Park (CO)
Rocky Mountain National Park (CO)
Browns Canyon National Wildlife Refuge (CO)
Monte Vista National Wildlife Refuge (CO)
Alamosa National Wildlife Refuge (CO)
Colorado National Monument (CO)
Wichita Mountains National Wildlife Refuge (OK)
Vernal National Wildlife Refuge (UT)
Bear River Migratory Bird Refuge (UT)
Organ Mountains Desert Peaks National Monument (NM)
Carson National Forest (NM)
Bosque del Apache National Wildlife Refuge (NM)
Pecos National Historical Park (NM)
Rio Grande del Norte National Monument (NM)
Painted Desert National Monument (AZ)
Saguaro National Park (AZ)
Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument (AZ)
Wupati National Monument (AZ)
Sunset Crater National Monument (AZ)
Sabino Canyon Recreation Area, Coronado National Forest (AZ)
Chiricahua Mts. / Coronado National Forest (AZ)
Haleakala National Park (HI)
Necedah National Wildlife Refuge (WI)
Muscatatuck National Wildlife Refuge (IN)
 
STATE
Beaver Dam State Park (NV) NOTE: In the last few days, Shutterstock accepted 10 stills & 2 4K videos and rejected 9 4K videos solely for lack of property releases.

Echo Canyon State Park (NV)
Valley of Fire State Park (NV)
Spring Mountain Ranch State Park (NV)
Cathedral Gorge State Park (NV)
Kershaw-Ryan State Park (NV)
Antelope Island State Park (UT)
Moraine Hills State Park (IL)
Chain O Lakes State Park (IL)
Dead Horse Ranch State Park (AZ)
Homolovi State Park (AZ)
Kerrville-Schreiner State Park (TX)
Guadalupe River State Park (TX)
Los Maples State Natural Area (TX)
Enchanted Rock State Natural Area (TX)
City of Rocks State Park (NM)
Oliver Lee Memorial State Park (NM)
Coller State Wildlife Area (CO)
Great Plains State Park (OK)
 
COUNTY OR TRIBAL
Tucson Mountain Park (AZ)
Goose Island County Park (WI)
Several Lake County Forest Preserves (IL)
Monument Valley Tribal Park (Navajo Reservation, AZ)
Little Painted Desert (Hopi Reservation, AZ)
 
I cant understand how all these thousands of images and videos were acceptable before but would not be acceptable now. Still hoping for clarity on this matter.
 
My process of uploading and submitting recent images and videos from a recent trip is on hold until I understand if its worth the bother.
 
Thank you.
 
Martha Marks
Contributor since 2009

******* FROM A DIFFERENT "TEAM MEMBER":

Thank you for your response. The issue related to the rejection of your images has already been forwarded to our dedicated team by our previous agent. Once there is an update, we will inform you with the resolution. 

******* FROM ME AGAIN:

Perhaps you can share my reply this morning with your dedicated team since that long list of previously accepted stills and videos from public lands does seem highly relevant to the question at hand.

17
Shutterstock.com / Re: Shutterstock reviewers are idiots
« on: November 11, 2019, 16:54 »

...
The part about my patience and cooperation being highly appreciated sounded promising, but I'm still waiting for an answer as to why of 2 of 11 videos submitted of the same state park were accepted while 9 were not, when none of them had a property release.
...

I've noticed similar silliness with images rejected fo ''press credentials', 'non-lic', etc while others from same shoot are accepted - my theory is that reviewers don't get the entire batch, so a submission can actually have several reviewers

That makes sense. Maybe one reviewer got the first 2 in my series and a different reviewer got the other 9.

I'm curious as to what might be going on behind the scenes right now. Will they back Reviewer #1 or Reviewer #2?

18
Shutterstock.com / Re: Shutterstock reviewers are idiots
« on: November 11, 2019, 15:32 »
Martha's kinder version of idiots or stupid, GRP = "Goofy Reviewer Problem.  :)

I'm happy to add a new acronym, GRP, to the MSG vocabulary! :)

This morning, I got the following response back from the Shutterstock Contributor Care Team:

Hi Martha,

We will reach out to the review manager regarding the content in question and get back to you as soon as possible. Should you need any further information or assistance, please do not hesitate to contact us.

Your patience and cooperation would be highly appreciated.


The part about my patience and cooperation being highly appreciated sounded promising, but I'm still waiting for an answer as to why of 2 of 11 videos submitted of the same state park were accepted while 9 were not, when none of them had a property release.

I'll post an update when I have one.

19
Shutterstock.com / Re: Shutterstock reviewers are idiots
« on: November 10, 2019, 22:30 »
I'm late coming to this thread but am here now because I'm suddenly hitting the inconsistent, goofy-reviewer problem on SS.

After 2 delightful weeks of shooting stills and 4K videos in Nevada, I've finally got them all processed and ready to upload. AS and P5 have taken everything I've submitted to them from that trip, but suddenly SS has gone off the rails.

A couple of days ago, SS accepted two 4K videos made at a specific state park in Nevada. Neither of them had a property release, because I have never had to provide that for publicly owned land (which I photograph a lot).

This morning I woke up to find the other *nine* 4K videos from that same specific state park in Nevada rejected for lack of a property release.

I promptly contacted contributor support, provided the numbers of the two accepted clips and the nine rejected clips, and asked for an explanation. Haven't heard back, of course, because it's Sunday, and since tomorrow is a federal holiday probably won't hear back then either. But I'm very curious to see how they respond later this week.

This really matters to me because I visited a dozen state and federal parks, conservation areas, recreation areas, wildlife refuges, etc.  Made hundreds of quality stills and videos. Got no property releases for any of them. It never mattered before. I will be royally p*ssed if SS starts balking on that at this point.

20
My experiment has not gone on that long at all but lowering my prices has not helped at all.    had clips at 199 for 4K and 79 HD,   whent as low as 50 4K 25 HD    and it has done nothing.   its only been about 14 days so I guess I cant really tell to much. 

Any thoughts?

I feel like if someone wants a clip, price is not a big deal?

With all the additional cost of camera equipment, faster-processing computer, increased bandwidth and time needed for uploading, etc, why on earth would anybody undercut their own prices for 4K (or anything else really)?

I've recently taken the plunge into 4K, which means I'm currently absorbing the extra costs associated with that, and for sure I will not be undercutting my prices anytime soon.

21
Add me to the list of those saying Thank you! This was my first time to watch one of your videos. I enjoyed it and learned something too.

Nice to connect a name and static photo on MSG to an animated face and voice on YouTube. :)

22
Adobe Stock / Re: Preview Option for footage?
« on: November 07, 2019, 23:49 »
I've been informed this function will be making a return in the near future.

Thanks for your patience,

Mat

Yes, please!!!!!!!!!!!! It's a very useful feature.

23
Adobe Stock / Re: Fotolia officially closed
« on: November 07, 2019, 11:39 »
You can search your portfolio by keyword click the link on the left of the screen marked "My Portfolio" it takes you to your public profile then you can enter search terms in the search bar at the top of the page.

The search then provides matching images in your portfolio only

Yes, that does work. Thanks so much for posting that tip!

It's a bit of a cumbersome work-around, having to do that just to find an image # to input, but for sure it beats having to flip through dozens or scores or hundreds of 100-thumbnail pages searching for the one you want to edit.

It is do-able, and I'm happy with that.


24
Adobe Stock / Re: Preview Option for footage?
« on: November 06, 2019, 22:56 »
Hi Adobe team!
I can't find anymore the option to preview the footage, have you taken it out?

It was extremely useful. Because sometimes the image does not allow you to identify what video it is, in order to be able to incorporate keywords and send it for review.
Regards.
 8)

I believe you can preview the video during submission by clicking an icon in the upper right corner of the keywords/title section of the screen. Not sure, though.


I think it's not there anymore ...

You're right, it's gone...Last time I uploaded I could watch a preview. They must've taken it out somehow.

That's a shame.

25
Newbie Discussion / Re: "Cityscape" KW
« on: November 04, 2019, 19:17 »
Thus City - bigger, town - smaller.

Exactly.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 59

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results