image in the link is a nogo (imho)
people as main subject, no news content, father with minor in swimwear-
you are not allowed to even display this in the internet in europe.
No newspaper would dare to print this (and if, dont forget they have a legal department)

As for VIPs maybe, but arent their kids protected?

Nope not correct it depends on which country.  Most countries allow photos of people including children in public.

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Country_specific_consent_requirements

Brazil is unusual
Taking a picture of a person in a public space: Requires consent (see explanation below)
    Publishing pictures of a person in a public space: Requires consent (as per above)
    Commercial use of a published picture of a person in a public space: Requires consent (as per above)

    Article 5, sections V and X, of the Brazilian Constitution states that the privacy, private life, honour and image of persons are inviolable, and the right to compensation for property or moral damages to the image is ensured."


By the way instead of multiple posts put it in a single post.

You can go back and modify a post to add further comments to it.

I don't even bother looking at it.  I just book mark the earnings page

Quote from: Lowls on January 23, 2023, 18:18

Quote from: Uncle Pete on January 23, 2023, 10:40

Slaves were abducted, bought and sold, and forced into that position.

They didn't willingly sign up to be slaves?

Anyone who thought they could make money at stock photos and is unhappy with the agencies or the pay, can quit or leave and do something else. Slaves didn't have a choice and escaping was difficult and dangerous.

Comparing Microstock to being a slave is an insult to the people who lived as or are now slaves, and who have suffered that inhumanity.

Modern Slavery act of the UK and the forced statement for businesses, is just how dumb our world has become. Or is the word woke? Corporations have to issue statements that they don't support slavery?

It's not dumb Pete
1. That's why its called modern slavery
2. Old type slavery is rife and is rising particularly thanks to gangs of Eastern Europeans. Worryingly more and more missing people are being found having been trapped in houses for over a decade and forced to clean peoples houses at their masters behest and get given dog food to survive. In fact only today teenagers have been abducted from uk hotels where ... After escaping to the UK these ilegal immigrants... teenagers have been taken in large numbers to run what is called County lines operations.
A teenager will be abducted and given a debt for helping them. The debt will never be paid. Their families are threatened. The teenager will be given clothes matching the area where they will be placed. Once there they find a drug user and force the drug user to house them. From there the drug user is given discounted drugs to.lure all the drug user fiends they know. They in turn lure their friends in. The money all goes back to the teenager. The teenager then transports the money back along county lines to the supplier who then gives them more dugs and so the cycle continues. If they run they go missing. Teenagers are on a different judicial system and expendable.

There are many forms of modern slavery and therefore laws had to be created to provide a legal avenue to prosecute these people when found.

Compare that to Americas laws 🙄.  It isnt 'woke' it doesn't even fit in that words context. Woke is virtue signalling against an issue that is misunderstood or doesn't exist. Your statement wad actually woke. How funny lol.

And to anyone who claims that a user accepts the terms and conditions of a company when using them and therefore only has themselves to blame and can leave at any time is not correct. The use of our images has been happening since 2019 where no mention of it was stated for A.I. use. The fact that Getty are bringing a legal case against an A.I. company proves that a legal challenge has been explored by those with more intelligence than ... well others.

to liken anything described here to slavery is disgusting!

Its exploitation no matter how its spun.

And here's an interesting set of facts

Top 10 Countries with the Highest Prevalence of Modern Slavery (by total number of slaves) - Global Slavery Index 2018:

    India - 7,989,000
    China - 3,864,000
    North Korea - 2,640,000
    Nigeria - 1,386,000
    Iran - 1,289,000
    Indonesia - 1,220,000
    Congo (Democratic Republic of) - 1,045,000
    Russia - 794,000
    Philippines - 784,000
    Afghanistan - 749,000

https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/countries-that-still-have-slavery

And while certain people like to beat their breast about historical slavery they'll do nothing about the slavery that is rife in the 21st century.

Two weeks into the year I'm getting 2015 dejavu when my port was 6x smaller.   

Getting out of micros asap and trying to squeeze the last little bit of juice before this fruit goes completely rotten.

Same here shittystocks performance $13 for the first half of Jan.  if it doesn't improve I'll not make payout of $35 for the first time since 2014. 

No they don't and neither does Zoonar

I finally reached the major milestone. Recently reviewed - 0! It is a first time happening during my 4 years joinery with Shutterstock

4 years too late 

I got that dubious badge of honour not long after their crap show of screwing contributors for a few extra pennies to pay for their lifestyle

SS is clearly interested in force feeding us with the info they want, like "This Month's Shot List" and ideally they would prefer us not to see how low they are selling our work

One incorrect part of your sentence "SS is clearly interested"  its clear they are not interested they don't give a rats ass about contributors 

Quote from: sgoodwin4813 on December 01, 2022, 21:27

Why on Earth would you use a tilt-shift lens to take a picture at a flea market?  Any possible problems with perspective in such an image could be corrected easily in PS.  It looks like you have Canon gear.  When I go out and don't want to attract attention I use one of their pancake lenses - the 24 MM would be as good or better than your tilt-shift lens and much less likely to ignite someone's ire.  If you have a full-frame camera and can't use those then a small wide-angle lens should do.  My guess is the person thought you might be law enforcement or something like that - maybe they were selling stolen goods and didn't want anyone to provide documentation.

I was shooting for a book cover, so wanted some creative focus on the goods. Also liked the man's shadow on the right, so was aiming to include his shadow there as he could be part of the story (the man who aggressively approached me within a few seconds of taking that pic). Was shooting with a Nikon D800 with the 24mm Tilt-Shift.

Yes, he could have been selling stolen goods, I suppose that may explain his (over)reaction.

All these encounters are pushing me towards upgrading to a full-frame mirrorless and smaller lens. Or just shooting with the latest iPhone!

Next time why not explain to the owners/proprietors what you are doing and would they mind if you took photos for an "art project" or what ever.

If they so no then no loss.  If they say yes everyone is happy.

I'm suspecting strongly that some stupid incompetent  AI program is being employed on stockphoto sites to
accept/reject pics.
For example I submitted one video that was rejected because they didn't accept identifiable business logos or icons.
Fine with that except that my video was an animated abstract work that did not have any such thing at all.
I resubmitted it just to see if I would get the same reaction or reason for rejection.
This time it got accepted without any problems. Go figure. I can't.
I've had pics submitted on various sites only to be rejected.
Then I would submit them later on the same sites and have them accepted. Again go figure.
Once I submitted an image showing clearly a doll to one website to have it rejected.
Reason for this? No pic of identifiable person accepted without a model release form.
Since when does a Barbie doll need that in order to have it accepted?
Or does the AI have a problem discriminating the difference between doll and real person?
These type of rejections would be laughable or comical if it wasn't so annoying.
Anybody else have issues like this? I know it can't be just me.
If they are employing real humans instead then I don't know what to say.
Other than such people either have cerebral issues or vision problems. 

A Barbie doll is a recognisable brand and therefore it should be rejected for not having a property release.  You should submit it as illustrative editorial.

Two accounts and they are noticing the same images uploaded to both. You won't last long.

Seriously shitterstock don't even notice all the stolen images and similars they allow in 

I think it should at least be an optout for selling images to russia when shutterstock dont seem to have any problens selling.

Or maybe all images bought in russia going directly to aid Ukraine.

If shitterstock were around during WW2 they'd have been selling to Joseph Goebbels

Congrats on the book cover, but I'm confused: they bought your image and mostly changed it?  Other than the concept, I don't see much of your original image in the final.  New hair, new coat, new bokeh, etc.  Seems like it would have been less work for them to just shoot what they wanted rather than heavily Photoshop a stock image.

But I guess paying one Photoshop guy is cheaper than paying a model, photographer, and scouting a location.

Its common with book covers.  I had one where my photo was used as a background overlaid with models in period outfits. 

There's a lot of fiddling and adjusting with book covers