MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Did SS new policity on similar content have any impact??  (Read 5695 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #50 on: October 08, 2019, 09:54 »
0
Now they are really overdoing it. I made one image where the object is isolated on white and one image where the object is in snow and a snowball is next to it. Where is that similar? I had the image with snow and the snowball rejected for similar. I have never made similar images like others where I couldn't even see the difference in the photos unless I looked at it for 10 minutes.

I do mostly editorial video and I am sure it's an AI/software application that's screening their massive database of 600 million files for similar content and rejecting it or flagging it for the reviewer to reject, I don't even know if SS has human reviewers anymore, could all be AI for all we know.

All I know is if pretty much any part of the images in the video are similar to anything already on the site it now gets rejected, I went from about 10% rejection to 90% rejection.

They most definitely are conserving server space.

They totally use an IA algorithm, but i dont think the dont have any human working for the review process; maybe just a few for very specific tasks.

If the algorithm is a learning algorithm or it is updated based in new information, maybe the experience for us will be more friendly in the future...


« Reply #51 on: October 08, 2019, 11:01 »
0
but the classic worst recently was a guy with a GoPro, driving down the street in Saigon or someplace similar, shooting time lapse through the windscreen, and uploading each as an individual image. They are fuzzy and terrible, but also hundreds if not thousands of images. I doubt that he will get more sales than if he had taken 2 good shots and uploaded them.

do you have a link to that portfolio?

It's been linked many times under spamfolio and on SS too. I'm not sure if it's OK to post the link here, but it's not anyone on the forums.  :)

Some people call out spam for multiple images, similar images, but for example, here's what I'm calling as spam, not just picking on people for their personal choices and how many of something they upload. Yes I like singles and a few of any setup, while others do well uploading dozens of well thought out variations. The later is not spam... this is!  :(

https://www.shutterstock.com/g/fiqahanugerah?page=2&section=1&sort=newest&search_source=base_gallery&language=en

https://www.shutterstock.com/g/CharoensilpPhotoData?page=10&section=1&sort=popular&search_source=base_gallery&language=en

https://www.shutterstock.com/g/fernandocomet?page=1&section=1&searchterm=chinese%20dragon&measurement=px&sort=newest&safe=true&search_source=base_gallery&language=en&saveFiltersLink=true

for example.

A whole long thread for Spamfolios.  https://forums.submit.shutterstock.com/topic/94721-spamfolio%E2%80%A6-post-here-the-link-of-spammy-portfolios-you-find-on-shutterstock/?tab=comments#comment-1690960

Well that's tomorrow morning sorted out then. Take 1000 photos of oof tree branches, call them all 'abstract art background in the nature' and use the same four keywords for all of them. I've been doing it all wrong...

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #52 on: October 08, 2019, 11:55 »
+3
Well that's tomorrow morning sorted out then. Take 1000 photos of oof tree branches, call them all 'abstract art background in the nature' and use the same four keywords for all of them. I've been doing it all wrong...

You are assuming that these spamfolios actually pay back or make anything or get downloads. Only people who think, more photos = more money, would try that. I'm not one of those people.

My answer is, less is more, specific, only better images or concepts in limited numbers. Some think dozens is limited, some 20-30, I'm more of a 1 or 2 and that's all. Personal choice, I'm not saying I know or my way is the best way.

Spamfolios, I think they are working for nothing, the waste of time keywording and uploading. Unless, it's like you say, all the same keywords, bulk upload, bam, instant portfolio.

Back to the question, has anything changed? I'll know more when we get to 299 Million. I didn't track weekly in the past. "1,259,148 new stock images added weekly" is what it says right now.


« Reply #53 on: October 08, 2019, 14:16 »
0
Now they are really overdoing it. I made one image where the object is isolated on white and one image where the object is in snow and a snowball is next to it. Where is that similar? I had the image with snow and the snowball rejected for similar. I have never made similar images like others where I couldn't even see the difference in the photos unless I looked at it for 10 minutes.

I do mostly editorial video and I am sure it's an AI/software application that's screening their massive database of 600 million files for similar content and rejecting it or flagging it for the reviewer to reject, I don't even know if SS has human reviewers anymore, could all be AI for all we know.

All I know is if pretty much any part of the images in the video are similar to anything already on the site it now gets rejected, I went from about 10% rejection to 90% rejection.

They most definitely are conserving server space.
I doubt its anything to do with server space which gets cheaper all the time. Its simply incompetence. Rejecting stuff that might sell makes no rational sense.

« Reply #54 on: October 10, 2019, 21:38 »
+1
They most definitely are conserving server space.
[/quote] I doubt its anything to do with server space which gets cheaper all the time. Its simply incompetence. Rejecting stuff that might sell makes no rational sense.
[/quote]

Incompetence of the AI software and human reviewers coupled together maybe?, but they sure are rejecting like never before, even if slightly similar to something already on the site my video gets kicked back.  They are also flagging so many clips for frame rate and artifacts etc.   Not much getting through that's for sure.

I was able to get 20,000 clips in before they applied the brakes, sales have been slower like is for everyone else but not dead like Pond5, today I had a day like never before, $1400 in editorial video sales.   Very pleased.


« Reply #55 on: October 11, 2019, 01:55 »
0
They most definitely are conserving server space.
Any evidence for that?

« Reply #56 on: October 11, 2019, 05:54 »
+1
Curation at ss it's getting ridicolous...i think they started to use AI curators,that would explain the similar content rejections..

« Reply #57 on: October 11, 2019, 08:37 »
0
Curation at ss it's getting ridicolous...i think they started to use AI curators,that would explain the similar content rejections..

Yes, I am pretty sure it's very AI assisted given the size of their video and photo database, no way humans could check manually for similar content.

I am glad I got 20,000 clips in before the started this policy, uploading 24/7 now but rejection rate is about 90% as usually there is something similar on the site, gonna have to get creative but that's probably a good thing, try and shoot more of what they don't have.

!00% rejection on all my night visuals now, was good enough before but not now for some reason.

Can't win, Pond5 accepts more but video no longer sells there and over at SS video still sells but it's getting hard to get new stuff into the system.

Pretty much down to 1-2 clips per shoot. 

« Reply #58 on: October 11, 2019, 11:23 »
+3
Same happened to me as well, they are rejecting 90% of content saying similar.
Same work has been approved 100% in other agencies. Something is seriously wrong with SS.

« Reply #59 on: October 11, 2019, 15:12 »
0
PLease post the images so we can have an opinion. thx

« Reply #60 on: October 11, 2019, 21:35 »
0
I shoot video (editorial) so I'd have to make screen grabs to post but in general it's pretty much a case of if there is something similar already on the site then it's probably gonna get rejected.

I had a tough time thinking of what to shoot today, I mean try finding something that isn't already uploaded to the site, gets a little interesting, I think I felt my brain overheating this afternoon to be honest :)

This could be a problem for many content producers though depending on where in the world they live and what resources they have available to them.

On the positive side I am very pleased with this week's sales at SS, went from a very nervous slow start to best month of 2019 by far and it's only October 11.


« Reply #61 on: Yesterday at 00:43 »
0
Now they are really overdoing it. I made one image where the object is isolated on white and one image where the object is in snow and a snowball is next to it. Where is that similar? I had the image with snow and the snowball rejected for similar. I have never made similar images like others where I couldn't even see the difference in the photos unless I looked at it for 10 minutes.

I do mostly editorial video and I am sure it's an AI/software application that's screening their massive database of 600 million files for similar content and rejecting it or flagging it for the reviewer to reject, I don't even know if SS has human reviewers anymore, could all be AI for all we know.

All I know is if pretty much any part of the images in the video are similar to anything already on the site it now gets rejected, I went from about 10% rejection to 90% rejection.

They most definitely are conserving server space.

They totally use an IA algorithm, but i dont think the dont have any human working for the review process; maybe just a few for very specific tasks.

If the algorithm is a learning algorithm or it is updated based in new information, maybe the experience for us will be more friendly in the future...

What's IA and do you know this because you know somebody, or you see the software or insider information? Do you work for SS or is this a guess.

« Reply #62 on: Yesterday at 00:49 »
0
Quote
But you'll admit the new images do get a big position boost right?

I see the opposite of that.  Although i dont subscribe to the "images need to age" theory but i get far more selling and starting to be consistent months after upload rather than days or weeks.

Previously (ie 5+ years ago) new images got a short term massive boost but if they failed to sell in that short, few day period they rapidly lost position and disappeared.  That isn't the case now (at least not what i see).

The boost is depending on how many new come after your new with the same keywords. Common subjects will get replaced faster then uncommon.

« Reply #63 on: Yesterday at 02:35 »
0
I find the new similars policy a bit heavy handed and that lots of good content is being refused.

This will only weaken shutterstocks position as adobe will eventually over take them as the top stock agency.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
9 Replies
3730 Views
Last post August 18, 2013, 21:34
by RetroColoring.com
7 Replies
6084 Views
Last post September 09, 2013, 07:38
by Canonbabe
13 Replies
4414 Views
Last post October 21, 2013, 08:12
by pixo
13 Replies
2175 Views
Last post June 20, 2019, 17:37
by pixel86
8 Replies
1368 Views
Last post August 05, 2019, 15:51
by MysteryShot

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results