It seems like we have to start making screenshots and keep bugging them for explanation or even try to file complaint in organizations like BBB every month.

Their opt out check box is not working so I asked to removed my images. After 10 days I got email that manual removal has been initiated.  Today (1 month minus 2 days from email), images are still on ThinkStock site. How long it would take? What other sites should I check?

Have any of your aardvarks been cut?

Quote

I'm not so sure.  Their cutting upload limits to the bone feels more like a way of reducing costs by reducing reviewers than any legitimate effort to improve their offering to buyers.  Dreamstime's definition of similars has always struck me as unreasonable; many shots of the same model are a good thing for buyers, since they allow the selection of just the right pose and expression for the project.  If Dreamstime's search engine displays too many from one session, surely that's a problem with the search engine and the way it presents results, not with having many different (if only subtly) images of the same subject.  But fixing their search and presentation would take effort and money, while cutting back on new images takes neither.

I was going to reply something similar. If they wont improve experience for buyers they would invest, expand not cut

So you two are saying that virtually identical images are ok and should be approved? Wow. I have a totally different buying experience than you guys do. I think it's an annoyance to have virtually identical pictures. I don't want to be wasting my time trying to figure out what the subtle difference is. Why would you want to clog up server space with virtually identical images?

If they spend money to improve their search engine, by adding a function whereby similar images come up as a lightbox, let's say, who do you think is going to pay for that? Yeah...the contributors. Rather than have my commissions cut so they can "improve" their search engine, ala istock, I'd rather they do exactly what they are doing. But that's just me. 

And let's suppose for a minute that they actually did make it so that one or two of a series came up in a search with a link to similars. Do you still think virtually identical images should be accepted? If so, I just see that as a way for contributors to bloat their upload numbers. In fact, you would be cannibalizing and diluting your own portfolio. But then we've had that discussion before too and some folks think that's ok, they'd rather do it to themselves than have someone else do it to them. To me it just seems like someone trying to game the system.

I do not say I like excessive similar but so far I have seen more examples of unjustifiable cuts than real issues. I would rather trust algorithm than human to make judgment cause they prove every day how easy is to make mistake. If they got search engine right and cull old images instead virtually stopping a flow of new images and and arbitrary cherry pick what reviewers like. Instead they try to "hibernate" until better times come.

For me it's a sign that company is struggling to survive. They do not make enough to pay for a storage of millions of images they ingested. It is a quick fix to cut down the cost. Maybe they try to fix balance sheets to look better for selling company.

I just wonder how long it would take till somebody starts class action suit? I am not a lawyer but maybe there is not enough people for that?

Is the site down now?

I used it for colored Easter egg photo.

Finally, I am going to be rich fast 

Just requested API key.

Unfortunately the only codec they accept is h.264. So far I was re-encoding everything into PhotoJPEG cause it most widely accepted format.

I just opened another ticket for that.

On a side note, even $11 seems to be pretty low in comparison to other sites.

Is there a way to see and edit extended prices for my files?

How can I see this?