|
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 - Mantis
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 ... 217
251
« on: July 20, 2020, 15:13 »
Hi,
I am deleting my images on Shutterstock one by one. You probably know why ....
When checking it the next day, I still find many of those images that obviously have not been deleted. They are offered by shutterstock as "Get these images for FREE. Download this image now with a free trial."
How is this possible? Does anyone know how I can get these images deleted permanently?
Your help would be greatly apprechiated.
Might take 90 days to delete, in the contract you agreed to.
I manually deleted 6,800 assets with no limits from SS. Used the script for the stills and manually killed 2300 videos within two weeks. I bet they fk with us more by formally limiting how many assets one can delete in a given period.
252
« on: July 19, 2020, 14:00 »
Using the shutter speed with double value of the frame rate is necessary for stock videography always? If i shoot a video outdoors without a Nd filter everything is so overexposed and i need to increase shutter speed. Can i use these type of videos and sell in Pond5?
Just carry around some ND filters. For bright days I can toss on a 8x ND and am good to go. If you want longer shutter speeds for something like lightning during the day, use a 64X ND. Can keep ISO low. The theory is: The reason for the 180-degree rule is because it helps us to record video that contains natural movement. If the shutter speed is too slow, youll get blurred movement, if you shoot at a shutter speed thats too high, everyone in your scene will look like robots or as if they were recorded in stop motion. Sticking to the 180-rule will give you the most natural movement.
253
« on: July 19, 2020, 13:57 »
Im also banned, I guess because I pointed out that he gets barely any sales. Easy enough to see his Twitter account, though, where he spends a lot of time retweeting Jo Ann, so I thank him for that, though he only has 14 followers so hes not helping us spread the message all that much. I feel sorry for the guy.
I've been banned for 12 years.
254
« on: July 15, 2020, 18:41 »
I don't understand how anybody can still rationalize image and video uploading to SS.
Let's say you made a reasonably good image and hope to sell it 100 times over the life of the image. Very optimistically, you can assume an average price of 15c per download. Under these assumptions, you'll make in total measly $15 from that one image. Of course, there will be other images which will sell only once or never.
Hey Les, Agree totally. The pure fact that SS has not lowered prices to customers but drastically cut our royalties makes it very clear that this is a massive, greedy money grab from our hard work. That fact alone is enough for me to delete my work there. I also closed my Bigstock account today. I just don't trust SS to not somehow use the images in there as a workaround to the same images deleted on SS. Scumbags.
255
« on: July 13, 2020, 13:55 »
A brief translation:
1. Install Tampermonkey, Greasemonkey or whatever monkey is native on your browser.
2. Get this script https://openuserjs.org/scripts/fokas.pokas/ssRemover - there's a simple Install button in my case.
3. Go to Catalog Manager
4. See the grey button "Delete Images" near the Add to Set, Create Set, on top of the page
5. Select images, press the button
6. There will probably be a counter at the bottom of the page. You should wait for the countdown end and report of success. Or just wait long enough.
You can also see the pics in the post. It may be helpful.
THIS IS AWESOME. 300 images gone in 5 minutes.....only 5500 more. I just do not trust SS with my content and using "disabled" numbers as part of their portfolio count. I do not care if I lost positioning/ranking of my images. I have images that have made me $2k. I'll just re-upload later if anything positive changes enough to warrant resubmitting. But for now, at the end of today I will have removed 6,890 assets from SS, both video and stills. I will keep my account open, but with no content.
Sweet!
Positive changes ... yeah, I guess its possible, but not very probable. They have shareholder mouths to feed and toys to pay for. I did the same as you, deleted but kept my account open. Though I did leave one image in my account, but they deleted it.  😯 I want to be able to see if any rejects mysteriously appear.
I, too, will leave one image and one video. One thing I noticed was a lot of images reappeared after deleting them. Perhaps just system issues because I don't think they keep rejected files longer than a few weeks, then they get wiped off the servers. Sad time as I have 13 pretty productive years with SS. The income was over a grand a month and helped pay for a lot of stuff without me having to pilfer my savings. But I have accepted that those days are long gone and do have a plan to get that money back through other channels. We'll see but glad I have a day job.
It looks like the script does not work for video. But done with my images.
It works on Chrome, use the tampermonkey extension, load up your catalogue page and you can do the videos. might need to refresh your chrome browser after installing the tamper monkey and script mentioned above. My delete box didn't appear until I did that.
Interesting. My catalog still shows 2100 videos online. That number is not going down as the servers update over night. Some I can play and some are X'd out. Really strange.
256
« on: July 13, 2020, 13:17 »
I am getting this message when deleting videos. Is this another threat? I could not find anything in the terms about never being allowed to upload again.
I had a quick re-read of the Contributor Terms of Service and the Submitter Guidelines and I don't see anything on that topic either (I did a search for delete and remove as well). If you click on the terms link, which document does it take you to (I can't check as my account is disabled)?
I think they're discouraging deletion of content, but that's a pretty sleazy move if the terms really don't disallow uploading again
Here are their terms I snagged today.
257
« on: July 11, 2020, 08:52 »
I am getting this message when deleting videos. Is this another threat? I could not find anything in the terms about never being allowed to upload again.
258
« on: July 10, 2020, 13:07 »
A brief translation:
1. Install Tampermonkey, Greasemonkey or whatever monkey is native on your browser.
2. Get this script https://openuserjs.org/scripts/fokas.pokas/ssRemover - there's a simple Install button in my case.
3. Go to Catalog Manager
4. See the grey button "Delete Images" near the Add to Set, Create Set, on top of the page
5. Select images, press the button
6. There will probably be a counter at the bottom of the page. You should wait for the countdown end and report of success. Or just wait long enough.
You can also see the pics in the post. It may be helpful.
THIS IS AWESOME. 300 images gone in 5 minutes.....only 5500 more. I just do not trust SS with my content and using "disabled" numbers as part of their portfolio count. I do not care if I lost positioning/ranking of my images. I have images that have made me $2k. I'll just re-upload later if anything positive changes enough to warrant resubmitting. But for now, at the end of today I will have removed 6,890 assets from SS, both video and stills. I will keep my account open, but with no content.
Sweet!
Positive changes ... yeah, I guess its possible, but not very probable. They have shareholder mouths to feed and toys to pay for. I did the same as you, deleted but kept my account open. Though I did leave one image in my account, but they deleted it. 😯 I want to be able to see if any rejects mysteriously appear.
I, too, will leave one image and one video. One thing I noticed was a lot of images reappeared after deleting them. Perhaps just system issues because I don't think they keep rejected files longer than a few weeks, then they get wiped off the servers. Sad time as I have 13 pretty productive years with SS. The income was over a grand a month and helped pay for a lot of stuff without me having to pilfer my savings. But I have accepted that those days are long gone and do have a plan to get that money back through other channels. We'll see but glad I have a day job. It looks like the script does not work for video. But done with my images.
259
« on: July 10, 2020, 11:42 »
A brief translation:
1. Install Tampermonkey, Greasemonkey or whatever monkey is native on your browser.
2. Get this script https://openuserjs.org/scripts/fokas.pokas/ssRemover - there's a simple Install button in my case.
3. Go to Catalog Manager
4. See the grey button "Delete Images" near the Add to Set, Create Set, on top of the page
5. Select images, press the button
6. There will probably be a counter at the bottom of the page. You should wait for the countdown end and report of success. Or just wait long enough.
You can also see the pics in the post. It may be helpful.
THIS IS AWESOME. 300 images gone in 5 minutes.....only 5500 more. I just do not trust SS with my content and using "disabled" numbers as part of their portfolio count. I do not care if I lost positioning/ranking of my images. I have images that have made me $2k. I'll just re-upload later if anything positive changes enough to warrant resubmitting. But for now, at the end of today I will have removed 6,890 assets from SS, both video and stills. I will keep my account open, but with no content.
260
« on: July 09, 2020, 13:06 »
I'll just take the time to do translate on each paragraph.
Or you can just copy/paste the url into Google Translate and get the whole page translated 
https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=fr&sl=ru&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Ffokas-pokas.livejournal.com%2F1894.html
That link goes to a page in Russian. Not much help.
It's time consuming but I am kinda having fun doing it manually. Seeing an image that made a lot of money then deleting it feels good because I know it is going to cost Shutterstock. I am about 600 images into 7000. Just do a couple of hundred a day. Ironically, since I started deleting I have only made two 10 cent sales today.
262
« on: July 07, 2020, 12:14 »
I have decided to delete my content on Shutterstock, not just disable it. Someone wrote a script that can do it for me. One by one would take forever. Can anyone share what that script is and how to use it please?
263
« on: July 03, 2020, 21:55 »
I just talked with Josephine and she says to let everyone know her SS RPD is $10. 
264
« on: July 03, 2020, 13:03 »
So far I am better off with the new price structure of SS, in spite of many 10 to 17 cent sales.
Why should I boycot SS or even close my account? Why not accepting the 10 cent sales? I do, and I dont care what will happen next year, because nobody can forsee the future.
You have already made your position clear in other threads. You LOVE Shutterstock. You make more with the royalty cut. We've heard you before. Now, me personally, I don't believe a thing you say, but why do you insist on continuing to troll this forum?
265
« on: June 27, 2020, 09:23 »
It won't help with deleted tweets (such as the take your content & go one) but for those of us who are blocked, it's easy to see his tweets (can't interact with him though)
Go to twitter.com in a Google incognito window or log out of your own twitter account. You can then browse everything & take screenshots (or whatever).
He has also deleted his LinkedIn profile (yesterday I think). Can't imagine how he thinks this will play out.
One of the Glassdoor reviews of him called him a man-child. Another said "CEO shouldn't be allowed to lead a lemonade stand. A public company is so far beyond him it's frightening."
Funny. I left him a "GLOWING" review on Linkedin.
266
« on: June 26, 2020, 17:17 »
Someone pointed to SS employee reviews on Glassdoor a week or so ago but I could not find a reference to Comparably
https://www.comparably.com/companies/shutterstock/ceo-rating
Mr Pavlovsky does not seem to be loved by his minions: as CEO bottom 5% in similarly sized companies in NY area and in USA generally.
After a minute or two a pop-up appears asking you to rate Shutterstock either as an employee or a customer.
My guess is that he is short term. He was put in the position to pre SS to be sold/acquired. I have been there. Temporary CEO's are often put in place to foster the sale, which means get the books looking good, get the company a pretty as a picture (no pun intended) from an acquisition perspective. Once done, he's done, and walks away with a much bigger chunk of change than what is in his current compensation package. Everything that is happening just makes me think there is more to this move. It's short term thinking.
267
« on: June 24, 2020, 12:10 »
I have a lot of restepect for Africa studio for disabling their port. They are big enough that even with the now much lower payment from SS, it still means they are missing out on thousands of $ each month by pulling their port. I am also glad for them, because that must also mean that they are making enough profit on other agencies to still keep their company sustainable even with the loss.
I hope the loss of such a huge contributor will help stir customers to other agencies.
I think they are back up under a different name. I hope I'm wrong.
268
« on: June 23, 2020, 19:11 »
Someone at Stock Submitter Coalition captured the tweet below before it was deleted. It's a chilling reminder of what we are. We are the slaves, and we should keep working no matter what the pay is. I'm no Communist, but this is the very reason why Karl Marx published Das Kapital back in 1867. We are back in the same situation as industrial workers of the 19th Century together with Uber drivers and other participants of the growing gig economy.
"You have the freedom to work, to create value, as much as you want. We have the obligation to pay you as much or as little as we want, if at all, whenever we want."
It's time to create a new United Artists, a new Magnum Photos, a new artist owned cooperation to sell our content. We are many enough to do that, but we would need to organise and establish a management group to lead such a project.
Great. That's all Needed to know. Now going to delete assets one by one and close my account. What this does show, though, is that they knew this would get ugly and always knew contributors would remove content. They banked on that 300 million images keeping them afloat and this shows that they could care less what we do and, most importantly, it shows they never cared about contributors way back when....why do I say that? It's the same captain of the ship who is telling us, daring us, to remove content. Your wish is my command dickhead. Can someone message me that script for removing images? Thanks in advance.
269
« on: June 22, 2020, 11:53 »
Funny how he started off trying to deflect the cuts and now he just gave up. Facts simply do not support his garbage claim...insinuating that they added a higher tier. Very few will make that and then there is the annual reset. He truly is a disgusting person. I say that because now we know he supports Stan's move.
270
« on: June 22, 2020, 08:21 »
People need to realize just how bad this deal is! and if you think you are good now welcome to January!! When their Staff takes a 50% pay cut in January then they can come talk to me! You see the pain is just starting and the good new is you don't have to take it!!! I am uploading amazing exclusive footage to Pond5 right now!
I am experiencing January NOW. My work is no mas;). Honestly I am looking for a new home for "certain" clips (probably go exclusive on P5 with some) and some of my more creative stills (which I will apply at Stocksy and see what happens). That is for starters, but even though I have given up on SS, I have NOT GIVEN UP ON EXPOSING THEM. We need to tighten the screws, to your point.
271
« on: June 19, 2020, 08:07 »
The curve turns up here
http://shuttercounter.ddns.net
How reliable is this graph?
I read on Shutterstock's forum someone who wrote that Shutterstock has started (re)approving images that would have been rejected before. Is this possible?
Yes, I've heard that Shutterstock has approved previously rejected images. Also, they were sending emails asking people to re-enable their ports for a single sale, but the new tactic seems to be just going ahead and selling those images anyway under the theory that once an image was in a lightbox or comp it was open for licensing even though the port was disabled. So why ask permission? That just annoys buyers who might ask why so many images are suddenly missing.
Of course, we have no way of knowing what they're selling or not selling or what was or was not put into lightboxes or comps (under their free comp license, which we're not notified about that I know of).
And of course the library numbers will continue to bounce back because uploads have slowed but not stopped, and most people who were angry enough to disable their ports have already done so.
Unfortunately, the only way to avoid this is to delete your port as opposed to disabling it. My port is disabled and I have accepted that the SS game for me is over. So I'll ride this out for a bit longer before I carve out the time to manually delete my work. For me personally, that's phase two.
272
« on: June 18, 2020, 14:52 »
NYT (New York Times) wants to know if workers are paid fairly. Might be a good chance to have NYT look at Shutterstock and what they just did.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/17/opinion/are-you-paid-fairly-for-your-work.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage
I filled out the form. I think it's important that people know that artists are still being ripped off by their representatives, as has been the case for a long time in all sorts of industries, most famously the music industry, but certainly in the visual arts as well. Though we might not be official employees of the company, the fact remains that Oringer became a billionaire by underpaying the artists his company represents, and Pavlovsky is cutting already measly royalty rates even further to get his multimillion dollar bonus.
I also filled out the form. Can't hurt.
273
« on: June 18, 2020, 14:48 »
If you could get a Thai translation of this posted in the Thai Facebook group, that would be excellent
https://www.facebook.com/groups/261369748434285/permalink/275941660310427/
#BoycottShutterstock until June 30, 2020
(please 💕)
I know this will be hard for some, but please think about what you can manage.
Shutterstock (NYSE:SSTK) ends its fiscal 2nd quarter 30 June 2020.
In their Q1 2020 report, in "Key Metrics" they included: "Image collection expanded 27% to approximately 330 million images.". They report this every quarter (and it's been large increases so far).
We would very much like to have the Q2 report reflect our portfolios being withdrawn - much lower numbers. We would then have our efforts be recorded in a way that's hard for Shutterstock (or other agencies) to ignore.
If people doing a temporary freeze can wait until July 1 to turn sales back on, that's a week and a bit longer than originally planned, but it would make a huge difference.
This could be such a huge win for us
This will do nothing for the cause. If I'm Shutterstock and I'm reading the "disable for a week" threads, I'm going to get a cup of coffee and wait until the flock returns. My port is permanently off. Probably forever unless something drastic is reversed...and that probably won't happen. Fine. At least my content is no longer available there.
274
« on: June 16, 2020, 09:15 »
Um, I am not reactiviating my portfolio at all. None of this 1-week stuff. That won't do a thing to SS. They need to be hit hard and choked of content permanently. For those doing a temporary closure, that does not help with the long-term impact we're looking to achieve. All SS does is wait a week. Bang. Images reactivated. No, we need to strangle them of really well done, salable content to the point where their stock price falls significantly (and remains weak), Investors flee, the board removes Stan, and nobody wants to buy SS if they go up for sale. That takes discipline and commitment.
275
« on: June 16, 2020, 09:09 »
Maybee some kind of counter-offensive by shutterstock-hired Indians, just like they hired them for image reviewing.
You know that wherever possible they will be doing some sort of brand damage countermeasures.
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 ... 217
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
