Check your accounts!

I put my fingers outside the Contributor fund... 
Everywhere I can opt out, I opt out from Image data licensing 

Feeding the beast? no thanx! I destine myself for a different future.
And sorry, I am proud of it. Nobody pays for my opinions or my beliefs .

Quote from: DiscreetDuck on October 30, 2025, 19:02
I put my fingers outside the Contributor fund... 
Everywhere I can opt out, I opt out from Image data licensing 

Feeding the beast? no thanx! I destine myself for a different future.
And sorry, I am proud of it. Nobody pays for my opinions or my beliefs .

I am opted out as well - Have been since day one the opt out option became available, which was, when...2 years ago? Have not opted in for just a second, refuse to do so, because I know that's all it takes for SS to use my images to train their AI. And still somehow I got around $14 for contributor fund yesterday. 

6.90$ i got. I can buy 2 coffees

Quote from: Her Ugliness on October 31, 2025, 07:15

Quote from: DiscreetDuck on October 30, 2025, 19:02
I put my fingers outside the Contributor fund... 
Everywhere I can opt out, I opt out from Image data licensing 

Feeding the beast? no thanx! I destine myself for a different future.
And sorry, I am proud of it. Nobody pays for my opinions or my beliefs .

I am opted out as well - Have been since day one the opt out option became available, which was, when...2 years ago? Have not opted in for just a second, refuse to do so, because I know that's all it takes for SS to use my images to train their AI. And still somehow I got around $14 for contributor fund yesterday. 

Wow. I checked and, thankfully, I never received anything. However, I recently noticed that 3 photos were in the queue as pending for data marketplace. I have about 100% acceptance rate for a long time. I deleted them in the queue. Never saw this before. And there is a switch "Ignore data marketplace assets", should it be on or off?

I checked and I'm opted in but that was not me, how to opting out?

I have a very high acceptance rate on Shutterstock and just 40 images in the Data Catalog ... yep, I'm not opted out. So it was a nice surprise to receive $12.34 from the Contributor Fund. My view is that we're in the end-days of Microstock and I'm going to take what I can out of it while I can.

Quote from: 50% on October 31, 2025, 09:14
I checked and I'm opted in but that was not me, how to opting out?

Here you can read:

Can I opt out of data licensing and having my content included in future datasets?
Yes, in January 2023 we have added an option in the contributor account settings that allows you to opt out of having your content included in future datasets. In August 2024 we are modifying the control settings to allow contributors to have separate toggles for image and video data licensing.

Just go here and just have to click Edit red button on top of the page.

Quote from: DiscreetDuck on October 31, 2025, 11:21

Quote from: 50% on October 31, 2025, 09:14
I checked and I'm opted in but that was not me, how to opting out?

Here you can read:

Can I opt out of data licensing and having my content included in future datasets?
Yes, in January 2023 we have added an option in the contributor account settings that allows you to opt out of having your content included in future datasets. In August 2024 we are modifying the control settings to allow contributors to have separate toggles for image and video data licensing.

Just go here and just have to click Edit red button on top of the page.

Thanks a lot, I'm using Microstock+ for submissions I haven't been on the site itself for ages!

iam opt-out. i not uploaded in years. still they sold my data (again). what the heck 

I take astronomical photographs; I spent over €10,000 on a telescope and a cooled camera. I took a photo of the Helix Nebula with a total exposure of over three hours, then processed it for another two hours. I sent it to Shutterstock, but it wasn't approved for sale, but it was made available for data collection, which I never signed up for. Now they don't even communicate this anymore; the photo is accepted but not listed for sale. I wrote to them to ask for clarification, and they replied that, if I want, I can opt for data collection. I stopped uploading astronomical photos to Shutterstock.  As a result, they don't sell for 10 cents, but they sell for much more on the other sites where I've published them.

Quote from: Jaggy on October 31, 2025, 10:19
I have a very high acceptance rate on Shutterstock and just 40 images in the Data Catalog ... yep, I'm not opted out. So it was a nice surprise to receive $12.34 from the Contributor Fund. My view is that we're in the end-days of Microstock and I'm going to take what I can out of it while I can.

yes, it's silly that so many complain about agencies 'stealing' their work for training, yet opt out when agencies offer compensation - opting out just keeps more$ in agency pockets!

Quote from: cascoly on October 31, 2025, 14:35

Quote from: Jaggy on October 31, 2025, 10:19
I have a very high acceptance rate on Shutterstock and just 40 images in the Data Catalog ... yep, I'm not opted out. So it was a nice surprise to receive $12.34 from the Contributor Fund. My view is that we're in the end-days of Microstock and I'm going to take what I can out of it while I can.

yes, it's silly that so many complain about agencies 'stealing' their work for training, yet opt out when agencies offer compensation - opting out just keeps more$ in agency pockets!

Each person has their own equipment, when it comes to neurons. The result of thought is always related.

I opted out as well when it was possible. But not because I don't like free money but because of the acceptance rate. If you opt in the reviewer has three options, accept, reject or dataset. When you're opted out they only have two and then they only reject when there is a good reason for it (normally speaking). Since the opt-out my acceptance ratio (which was high already) got higher.
I would rather sell my photos then get some peanuts for my dataset photos.

Quote from: jar on October 31, 2025, 12:52
iam opt-out. i not uploaded in years. still they sold my data (again). what the heck 

Maybe this is your answer? " Shutterstock maintains an internal database of all assets used in all datasets that have been created since the launch of this product, so we can compensate our contributors accordingly." If you were included in anything, before you were Opted Out, you are still getting paid, when someone buys that particular dataset, but you won't be included in any new sets.

Personally, anything they toss into the Approved for Dataset only, I delete. If it's not good enough to sell, it's not going to be used for 20% of whatever the contract price per image was for a dataset. That's what we get.

My for sale images are not Opted Out of datasets, I like the money. I create and upload images, for the income. I have no control over what people do with my images, whether it's a 1¢ connect use or a dataset or a RF license that I get a crappy dime.


There's no micromanaging our stock images, just to protest against machine training, when we have no control in the first place.

Got a 3-figure contributor fund payment today!

Rejecting this entire system allows me to be consistent and legitimate in challenging these abhorrent developments in the world of microstock.
Those who enjoy now will be the first to complain in a short time...
Many seem to struggle to understand that these allocated sums serve to remove photographers from the loop, allowing agencies to make even more profits in the future.

Quote from: DiscreetDuck on November 26, 2025, 08:44
Rejecting this entire system allows me to be consistent and legitimate in challenging these abhorrent developments in the world of microstock.
Those who enjoy now will be the first to complain in a short time...
Many seem to struggle to understand that these allocated sums serve to remove photographers from the loop, allowing agencies to make even more profits in the future.

You should repost the photo of the boy cutting the branch he's sitting on... 

Last year, I read enthusiastic comments from users selling their AI content... today I'm reading here (and on Discord) many complaints about their earnings no longer growing and, in many cases, plummeting.

The cause is AI itself. The ease and speed of creating content, the ease and speed of being copied and inundated with similar content, especially since AI's style is almost always the same. You can't recognize an author like you can with photographs or illustrations.

I don't do AI, and my earnings this year (after over 15 years in this industry) grew by 14%. This is without any "contributor fund," which I obviously didn't join.

Quote from: Bauman on November 26, 2025, 08:58

Quote from: DiscreetDuck on November 26, 2025, 08:44
Rejecting this entire system allows me to be consistent and legitimate in challenging these abhorrent developments in the world of microstock.
Those who enjoy now will be the first to complain in a short time...
Many seem to struggle to understand that these allocated sums serve to remove photographers from the loop, allowing agencies to make even more profits in the future.

You should repost the photo of the boy cutting the branch he's sitting on... 

Last year, I read enthusiastic comments from users selling their AI content... today I'm reading here (and on Discord) many complaints about their earnings no longer growing and, in many cases, plummeting.

The cause is AI itself. The ease and speed of creating content, the ease and speed of being copied and inundated with similar content, especially since AI's style is almost always the same. You can't recognize an author like you can with photographs or illustrations.

I don't do AI, and my earnings this year (after over 15 years in this industry) grew by 14%. This is without any "contributor fund," which I obviously didn't join.

Nice idea, I just did it, I found another version that fits even better
Congrats for your posture and thank you for the accuracy of your words, I feel less alone. After more than 19 years, my year numbers will not finish like a disaster and I still believe that there is a possible future for honesty, skill, work and the beautiful and authentic representation of reality

Quote from: DiscreetDuck on November 26, 2025, 09:41...beautiful and authentic representation of reality

there's never been ''authentic representation' in the finearts - from sculpture, thru painting, thru film photography thru digital photography that manipulates bits with varying sensors, filters && other post processing.  art is the artist's rendition of their perceptions

and humans only have a limited range of perception using a tiny spectrum of wavelengths

there are arguments about AI but

Quote from: cascoly on November 26, 2025, 14:28
there's never been ''authentic representation' in the finearts - from sculpture, thru painting, thru film photography thru digital photography that manipulates bits with varying sensors, filters && other post processing.  art is the artist's rendition of their perceptions

and humans only have a limited range of perception using a tiny spectrum of wavelengths

there are arguments about AI but

Photography has always been an interpretation of a real scene. Then the photographer could change the colors, make it black and white, increase the contrast. The only truly authentic element has always been the act of capturing something from reality.

Otherwise, it's no longer photography; it's something else entirely.

Other forms of art begin with a blank sheet of paper or a block of stone. Their representation is in the artist's mind. Photography is different; the final result is a scene captured from reality thanks to light (photography = writing with light). Without a real scene, there is no photography.Manipulation can remove various degrees of authenticity, and the final result can diverge greatly from the captured scene. If you remove all of them, it's no longer photography.

But AI is something else. It's more of an illustration than a photograph. Photography, no matter how much you can manipulate it, is taken from reality; it requires being in places, having real people in front of you.

If I want a photograph to illustrate a Lonely Planet guide to London, I would never use AI, where Big Ben might even end up on the wrong side of the river.

In a market full of synthetic images, I choose the truth of a shot taken from the real world.

The client isn't buying just the photo: they're buying your physical presence in those places, the time you spent, the difficulty of reaching them. AI cannot replicate that dimension.

People are starting to look specifically for non-AI images, and before long it will become a dominant trend. We'll grow sick of synthetic images.

...

Quote from: Bauman on November 26, 2025, 14:56

People are starting to look specifically for non-AI images, and before long it will become a dominant trend. We'll grow sick of synthetic images.

I hope so, but until then, I'll take what I can get for the training uses. I don't use AI except for personal use, fun and humor.

Here's the real situation of artists and authors vs AI. Protesting, shouting, getting angry, isn't going to change anything.

I got $83. The highest Contributor Fund payout I've ever had.

Where do you find the amount?