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 - KimC

Pages: [1] 2 3 4
Adobe Stock / Re: Big drop in sales
« on: September 22, 2023, 10:34 »
My sales on Adobe are also normal, perhaps a little above normal. I have no AI content..

2 / Re: No Payment
« on: September 06, 2023, 03:24 »
It was a month that started with a weekend then public holiday.

This thing happens quite often, no payment stuff gets done until people go to work.  So yesterday was the earliest they'd start doing it.

That happens now and then. The difference is that the pending unpaid amount has been returned to the monthly status.

Adobe Stock / Re: Account blocked - I need help please
« on: August 27, 2023, 02:08 »
Adobe used to be very lenient with designs, of cars. Like the one with the Tesla that JoAnn referred to. The logo seems to be cloned away. That used to ve enough for Adobe. Shutterstock and Getty are much more strict and would never have approved hat image. Now it seems that someone has taught Adobe a (expensive?)lesson, and they are cathing up on their neglects.
Review is more than pixel peeping. It may be easy enough to get some software to do the pixel peeping, but intellectual property and recognizeable persons is another thing. Mind you that there was some laugh in the istock forum because a creater was prompted for a model release from a spider. 

Adobe Stock / Re: Payment made but not received
« on: August 24, 2023, 14:38 »
Give it a day or two. Some payment methods are not that much fast either. Som days ago, I got mail from Getty that they had paid me. The payment was visible on paypal two days later.

123RF / Re: 123RF sales stopped.
« on: August 22, 2023, 07:50 »
My sales on 123RF have also become very low since the start of this year. My portfolio seems to be there, but the whole site is so buggy and appears to be made by amateurs. I think 123RF is a candidate for bankrupcy, or being "obtained" by shitterstock.

Shutterstock added that feature that tells if an image is often used or what. It is a "great help" for content thieves or copycat photographers.

7 / Re: July 2023 financial statements are in
« on: August 16, 2023, 03:18 »
A good one for me too. Only few 3 cent "sales"

The "similar images" should show the reviewer during inspection that this is a stolen file...if there is a human reviewer...

Well, you could put it this way: The agency earns on the images no matter who actually took them. They are more keen on having happy shareholders, than happy contributors.

9 / Re: DT is a Nightmarestime
« on: August 05, 2023, 14:51 »
There have recently been summer vacations in a large part of the world. I July i did not have many downloads on DT. But here in August, the sales are back again. And I am way beyound 100$

My sales on P5 are not so common as they used to be. And the average RPD is lower too. Still I consider P5 a feasible business, but the integration in the Shutterstock family will surely end up in "exciting news" some day. So for the time being I stick to easy-made videos, as the videos that require more efforts are unlikely to pay back before the exciting news come.

Tamron always pretended to be nature photographers best friend.
That is not my experience. The Tamron lenses I had were next to impossible to operate with gloves,shile this was rarely an issue with ohter lenses. The mechanism of a Tamron teleconverter I had would make noise like a tin with rusty nails inside. Even a cheap noname converter could do better.

Sorry, just my rant.

for tax info:  licence it is good and service ?

Have you read the agreement you signed with the agency?

We all know the palette the agencies use to try to get rid of us. "Exciting news", numerous rejections with shady reasons, or terminating accounts for whatever reason they come up with.  The end is near. We have seen this before with automation. One assembly worker was replaced with a machine that is now supervised by two engineers. AI will hit its limits. It may take some time to realize that, because the executives are too enthusiastic about getting rid of us, and get the whole share of the peanuts they sell imagery for themselves. 
Will it be feasible to develop AI for purposes that sell with so little profit?

We will have to adapt to whatever comes. For my part I have changed my profession to something else that does not involve photograpy or videography.

It seems that some stockphoto agencies believe that AI will soon be able to do the job. That would make them independent on those complicated contributors, and able to pay more to their shareholders.
The development of AI, the rejection politics and common greed could indicate that agencies will start to take measures in matter of getting rid of the least feasible contributors for a start.

I am afraid that the agencies face a storm of regular shithotos from people who have seen a certain, meanwhile outdated youtube video, promising them loads of money from Shutterstock. We have seen them on FB. Someone made a deadly boring photo of the first best lightpole, it was in focus and thus accepted on SS. He wondered when the sales would start. Now romours have spread that SS is not the bg deal anymore, so Adobe faces the challenge. Others do not bother to make their own photos, but pirate from other contributors, with numerous complaints, and infringment notifications as a result. 

Seen from the agencies' point of view the contributors have become a burden.

During my life I have changed my profession several times. Evverything changes faster and faster. I have realized that microstock is close to the end. I do not make new stock photos/videos anymore, but my portfolios remain and still earn med something, until that day there is an email from the agency that the service is discontinued for whatever reason they give.

15 / Re: New Data / Data set Licensing
« on: July 02, 2023, 10:19 »
For what I know Shutterstock never had any real and actually working strategy against keyword spamming. So their AI could get quite "distracted" by all thoose irellevant keywords, and end up as pure entertainment.

At least with command prompts, if you get them correct they work every time.

Shutterstock, not so much.

It could easily be that the editorial caption is machine-checked before the image is passed on to  a reviewer.

The caption seen in this actual case does not meet these standards. And got rejected.

You need to add the day. They changed the rules recently, I believe.
Oh great, I used to put the actual date but at least I still have those.

The editorial caption is like the Unix command prompt in old days. The syntax must be 100%

My account on Mostphotos still work even if I had not logged in for 3 years.

Consistently returning value to shareholders but in the meantime I'm experiencing the worst streak of revenue in 12 years of Shutterstock. SS is now nothing more than a mid-tier agency for me, while Adobe is still going strong.

One should think that the contributors may have left SS because of all that. Yet there are still people here complaining about rejections at SS, or contributors talking about sueing SS o get able to earn 10 cents on image subscription sales, and maybe some few more cents on video subscriptions. 

It's not that hard to provide it.

It's much faster to just add "Circa 2023" to your photos rather than look for specific date.

But, the purpose of the editorial caption is to prove where and when it was taken. If te picture was taken 10 years ago, and the exact time is not important, the circa statement may work. But for an image taken in 2023 the circa statment is pure laziness. If I was the reviewer, I'd booted the image with the same reason. So why not just stick to the standard format?

I have also got away with the "circa" statement in an editorial caption, if the time was some years back. Your images are from this year, so they may consider it laziness from your side. The exact date should be somewhere in the exif's. 

General Stock Discussion / Re: Rejections on adobe
« on: June 01, 2023, 01:30 »
When you say that you checked your image and it is technically perfect, what did you actually check?
oooh, focus, as you are used to at Shutterstock? It seems to me that a reasonable unsharpness is acceptable at Adobe, while they rather go nuts over burned highlights, even if only a few pixels.  That is something Shutterstock does not seen to have so much attention on. That is also something that is easy to check in an automated process.
That something got accepted on DT does not warrant any quality. They seem to accept everything as long as it is an image file of some sort. 
I have also noticed that these quality rejections from a batch come quite fast, while those images that survive the bot get reviewed by a human at a later time.

Just ticked in. Friggin' distributor sales..

Well, 57.69$ are also money. Once the payment gets cleared in 2024 or so.

General Stock Discussion / Re: Stolen Videos Re-uploaded
« on: May 04, 2023, 01:02 »
Someone must report this vietnam guy. Wow holy **** how many videos and animations from another contributors  :/

It appears that someone did. SS is now 404 on that portfolio. P5 states that this artist is no longer on P5

25 / Re: Is Alamy off line today?
« on: March 19, 2023, 15:01 »
It is the same for me. There is no statement on their Twitter channel.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4


Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results