pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Did SS new policity on similar content have any impact??  (Read 8810 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: August 17, 2019, 14:25 »
0
Just wonder if any of you looks less image spam now they implement new "policity" about this...


dpimborough

« Reply #1 on: August 18, 2019, 01:12 »
+1
Its too early too say.

Give it a month or two

« Reply #2 on: August 18, 2019, 01:49 »
0
I thought this policy was already effective since a few years, am i wrong ?

dpimborough

« Reply #3 on: August 18, 2019, 04:13 »
+1
I thought this policy was already effective since a few years, am i wrong ?

Technically yes but actually no as they never enforced it like a lot of their policies.


« Reply #4 on: August 18, 2019, 04:51 »
+3
Until they stop reporting the sheer number of images as a Key Indicator I doubt it.

« Reply #5 on: August 18, 2019, 05:33 »
+9
Its causing a meltdown on their forum from people who werent on SS in the days they actually had standards who are now faced with the terrifying thought of having to spend some time and extra effort selecting and editing only their best photos (and who cant grow the library exponentially any more).

I really dont see this is a bad thing at all - i'd love them to reintroduce technical checks for photos and similars.  All i ask is they do it with a degree of consistency.

« Reply #6 on: August 18, 2019, 06:23 »
0
Its causing a meltdown on their forum from people who werent on SS in the days they actually had standards who are now faced with the terrifying thought of having to spend some time and extra effort selecting and editing only their best photos (and who cant grow the library exponentially any more).

I really dont see this is a bad thing at all - i'd love them to reintroduce technical checks for photos and similars.  All i ask is they do it with a degree of consistency.
Glad to hear it even if they only removed the most "extreme" examples of similars there would be millions. I've seen people complaining on Shutterstock's Facebook page about being rejected for focus. I submit stuff now that I wouldn't have dreamt of sending a few years back.

ShadySue

« Reply #7 on: August 18, 2019, 07:00 »
+4

I really dont see this is a bad thing at all - i'd love them to reintroduce technical checks for photos and similars.  All i ask is they do it with a degree of consistency.
From comments I read here on msg back in the day, I don't think consistency was ever their strong suit.

« Reply #8 on: August 18, 2019, 11:48 »
+1
. I submit stuff now that I wouldn't have dreamt of sending a few years back.

Same.  Im way less selective than i used to be and am forced to upload more similars/variations than i would before purely so i dont get buried immediately in the search.
Id rather not have to do this for time, effort, storage and bandwidth reasons!

Quote
From comments I read here on msg back in the day, I don't think consistency was ever their strong suit.

There were issues for sure but its a lot better than now where anything and everything is fine.  You did get whole batch rejections for random reasons at times etc but nothing a resubmit often wouldnt fix.

OM

« Reply #9 on: August 20, 2019, 06:40 »
+2
I wouldn't know whether the new policy is having any impact on spamfolios already accepted but it does seem to have reduced the number of images being added which is now down from the regular 1.6 million/week to 950K this week.

« Reply #10 on: August 20, 2019, 07:21 »
0

I really dont see this is a bad thing at all - i'd love them to reintroduce technical checks for photos and similars.  All i ask is they do it with a degree of consistency.
From comments I read here on msg back in the day, I don't think consistency was ever their strong suit.
Things are relative ;-). We can only dream at that level of "inconsistency" now.

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #11 on: August 20, 2019, 11:36 »
+2
I wouldn't know whether the new policy is having any impact on spamfolios already accepted but it does seem to have reduced the number of images being added which is now down from the regular 1.6 million/week to 950K this week.

I think that's a sign.

I thought this policy was already effective since a few years, am i wrong ?

Technically yes but actually no as they never enforced it like a lot of their policies.



My view is, they did enforce the rule, long ago, but along with one and your in, which was at the same time as, almost everything passes unless it's really nasty, they also stopped actually caring about similars. I mean there used to be some of that, 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.

Somewhere they stopped caring and were going for numbers. Some bean counter must have seen that "we have more" isn't working, so now they will change the program to enforcing the rule which has been there from the start. Or maybe they just wanted 300 Million images by the end of 2019, to brag. They will. Then What?

If we look back, SS have changed what they accept every year, most of the time, rejecting more and more areas. The whole similar and duplicates is absurd.

And I might as well add, the amount of people with stolen images, coming to SS, is because they are targeting the place that makes the most money. Why would they bother uploading to Canstock? It's not all because SS doesn't find them or care, and others do. It's also because the same collection of crooks aren't uploading to places with low returns.


Noedelhap

  • www.colincramm.com

« Reply #12 on: August 28, 2019, 13:54 »
0
I did notice their similar policy is in full effect. More than 2/3 color variations is considered spammy. Which seems a bit overkill to me, especially considering their habit of accepting every piece of identical crap (did anyone say weed pictures?) in the past.

Is there some way to check my approval rate?

steheap

  • Author of best selling "Get Started in Stock"

« Reply #13 on: August 28, 2019, 15:08 »
0
I just had 2 out of 3 stitched panoramas of the same scene rejected as similars... They, of course, were from different shooting locations and were different in framing from each other, but it does mean that they are applying their policy to me!

Steve

« Reply #14 on: August 28, 2019, 18:06 »
+1
Definitely having an impact as far as my uploads are concerned not that I upload much these days.  Had my first rejections in years this week, both for Similar Content, both were uploaded at the same time as the presumed similar. One was a black and white version of the other (something I have done many times in the past with both being allowed) and the second was a very different coloured version of the other (likewise allowed in the past, even the distant passed when it was presumed more strict than recent times).

 I also uploaded two images that had variations already uploaded many years ago, which on the same basis should have been rejected, but both were allowed.  Lesson learned, leave it a while before I upload a similar, definitely not in the same batch.

 Small sample, but I think that by today's standard my best selling image with 1,133 downloads would not have been allowed.

Edit to say I did have two similars in the same batch accepted this week, so they are not consistent.
« Last Edit: August 28, 2019, 18:10 by obj owl »

« Reply #15 on: September 06, 2019, 09:10 »
+3
I think the big drama is going to hit all the heavily invested production houses that pay for studios and models that until now submitted massive amounts of similars hoping that can now upload very few files of each setting.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

« Reply #16 on: September 06, 2019, 09:17 »
+2
I think the big drama is going to hit all the heavily invested production houses that pay for studios and models that until now submitted massive amounts of similars hoping that can now upload very few files of each setting.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

you are spot on ...their tactic most of time is producing similar content and uploading at different times so they can have more chance for a files to sell.


« Reply #17 on: September 06, 2019, 09:53 »
0
I think the big drama is going to hit all the heavily invested production houses that pay for studios and models that until now submitted massive amounts of similars hoping that can now upload very few files of each setting.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

you are spot on ...their tactic most of time is producing similar content and uploading at different times so they can have more chance for a files to sell.

Dont get me wrong, if I go and shoot an aerial of a lake, I will shoot north/south/east west motions at zero altitude and at lets say 100 feet high and out of these 8 files Ill submit 5 or 6. 
Until now it worked good and I honestly think that they have a different look. I think I play fair but if SS will make me feel that this is not ok Ill reduce it till I hit the sweet spot.
But...except for the net time of shooting and editing these similars (I honestly think they are not) Im not taking a big hit.

I also believe in slow release of files, not as a way to push them in but as an actual slow release into the market and give them a chance to pop at different times.

Im a mega huge supporter of SS, Ill respect and adjust to the new similar guidelines, I think its for the benefit of most contributors.

SS sells like crazy and I will serve them as long as they exist.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

« Reply #18 on: September 06, 2019, 11:14 »
+2
"Over 293,187,520 royalty-free images with 1,180,191 new stock images added weekly."

Im sure that was roughly 1.5M recently so they maybe 20% or so down.  Thats not as big a change as i'd expected.

« Reply #19 on: September 06, 2019, 12:39 »
0
"Over 293,187,520 royalty-free images with 1,180,191 new stock images added weekly."

Im sure that was roughly 1.5M recently so they maybe 20% or so down.  Thats not as big a change as i'd expected.

Maybe because similars are not representing such a huge amount in terms of percentage... Maybe because there are way bigger reasons than similars to blame for the market...

« Reply #20 on: September 06, 2019, 13:48 »
0
I think the big drama is going to hit all the heavily invested production houses that pay for studios and models that until now submitted massive amounts of similars hoping that can now upload very few files of each setting.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

you are spot on ...their tactic most of time is producing similar content and uploading at different times so they can have more chance for a files to sell.

Dont get me wrong, if I go and shoot an aerial of a lake, I will shoot north/south/east west motions at zero altitude and at lets say 100 feet high and out of these 8 files Ill submit 5 or 6. 
Until now it worked good and I honestly think that they have a different look. I think I play fair but if SS will make me feel that this is not ok Ill reduce it till I hit the sweet spot.
But...except for the net time of shooting and editing these similars (I honestly think they are not) Im not taking a big hit.

I also believe in slow release of files, not as a way to push them in but as an actual slow release into the market and give them a chance to pop at different times.

Im a mega huge supporter of SS, Ill respect and adjust to the new similar guidelines, I think its for the benefit of most contributors.

SS sells like crazy and I will serve them as long as they exist.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

i use also but there ae limits...i shoot food and offer different setup of a recipe, not 2000 like some contributor did in past shooting the same setup 2000 times and uploading it in 3 years month after month. is not a case that i have practically zero refusal for similar continent, despite some fotos own to the same setup.
ss sold like crazy till julep than plain dead.

« Reply #21 on: September 06, 2019, 14:35 »
+1
I want to point out that as far as I know, the search engines on the stock sites have a bias towards newer files. How much bias, I don't know? At some point, your current images will get demoted in ranking by the search engine. That pretty much means there is an incentive to reshoot similar things that have sold well in the past but don't sell anymore. Obviously old images still sell, I still sell old images, and I also sell new images but I do have a lot of best sellers from past years that no longer sell at all. Those images haven't changed, they are not dated. They don't sell because the search engine no longer ranks them well. One of my best sellers ever was on the the first page of a popular search result for at least a year, maybe two, it no longer sells.
« Last Edit: September 06, 2019, 14:37 by charged »

« Reply #22 on: September 06, 2019, 19:44 »
+6
Not sure i believe that.  My older stuff generally sells more than newer.  Its fairly common as well for an older image thats never previously sold to suddenly come to life.

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #23 on: September 11, 2019, 12:22 »
0
Not sure i believe that.  My older stuff generally sells more than newer.  Its fairly common as well for an older image that's never previously sold to suddenly come to life.

But you'll admit the new images do get a big position boost right? That gives them a chance against established images. Otherwise we'd be uploading new images into a black hole.  ;)

Yes some of my older images sell over and over and keep selling. Some that used to sell, have dropped off and are now not one sale a year. A couple of new images have caught on and sell often.

I think it's wrong to make a general conclusion about age, when the probable answer is, good images, the ones that buyers want, sell best.  ;D Old or new.

An older image coming to life is good news. Maybe something topical or a couple sales will boost the placement. We can all hope for more of that.

Back to similar. I'm happy that they woke up, I think they have over reacted when it's obvious that some people are getting rejections based on similar description or shoot date, when the image is clearly, visually, a variation. I still don't know how some of those hundreds of minute by minute, sometimes seconds, were passed. If they had been reviewing right in the first place, we wouldn't be getting punished for what others have done wrong.


« Reply #24 on: September 11, 2019, 13:02 »
+2
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).

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #25 on: September 11, 2019, 16:59 »
+1
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).

Yes and no. Yes you are right the boost isn't as long, but I don't think anything changed, it's just that we are up against 1 million new images uploaded when five years ago (just to pick one point) it was thousands of images.

What I mean is, we just get buried faster, but the initial boost is the same as it was. You are correct in the effect and results of course.

I'll make a suggestion, which isn't new and I've pretty much repeated this for years. See if you can find something that's needed and not well covered, and upload that kind of material. You'll have less competition and more of a chance to be "discovered".  :) Yes the subjects that aren't well covered, aren't the most popular, but when there's a need and a demand, the sales will make up for the not as popular and less competition.

I don't mean find something so specialized that hardly anyone can use it, try for something in the middle, but not what everyone else is uploading. It's a good game trying to find things and make them.


PZF

« Reply #26 on: September 27, 2019, 11:16 »
0
Grrrrr...yes.....the new Similar policy means that if I send up two views of an object or series of objects from very different angles, then one gets rejected.
Similarly, if I send up two variations on an Illustration, then one gets rejected.
Grrrr....
The bright side?
It worries me less than it would have done in the past because sales are now so low.
SS used to be out and away the best and most important site, so not having images there had an impact. Now....I just feel rather irritated!
 :(


StockDaebak

« Reply #27 on: September 29, 2019, 09:35 »
+3
Editorial video here, I've sure noticed an impact under the new policy, clips get rejected if there is a similar clip already on the site not just your portfolio so I am suddenly getting 75% rejection rate on new uploads because there is often something similar already there.

The good thing is it forces me to shoot better and different and perhaps more creatively so that more clips squeak through the new system and in turn that gives buyers more variety to choose from.

« Reply #28 on: September 29, 2019, 10:44 »
+1
I am with their similar policy and support it.

But to my surprise, I think they have built an AI technology to track similar content which seems to be buggy. Or if it is human approval then they have no idea of their job position.

I recently got lot of files rejected of being similar. But the content is entirely new and unique work. I don't know with what is similar with what?

They have no idea how to execute it.

« Reply #29 on: September 29, 2019, 15:58 »
0
Lot of rejections not only for similarity, but also for noise, artifacts, pixelation, banding all together :) nice

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #30 on: September 29, 2019, 23:21 »
0
Lot of rejections not only for similarity, but also for noise, artifacts, pixelation, banding all together :) nice

And if a cloud or dust is part of the photo, for focus.  ::)

"Focus: The main subject of this image is not in focus." Maybe I need my eyes tested?  ;)

« Reply #31 on: September 30, 2019, 13:32 »
+3
Someone doesn't know what similar means. I just got one shot of food from directly above accepted and every other view of it rejected. Apparently side view and top view are "too similar".

« Reply #32 on: September 30, 2019, 13:55 »
0
Lot of rejections not only for similarity, but also for noise, artifacts, pixelation, banding all together :) nice

It is a joke. 100% accepted video content or 100% rejected video content for the reasons above. And my wife has the same with her illustrations, but the excuse there is she needs to use English keywords??? what??? The keywords are all in English.

« Reply #33 on: September 30, 2019, 14:22 »
0
Sounds like their AI isnt learning much.

« Reply #34 on: September 30, 2019, 22:32 »
+1
ok, I have emailed them,.

They are rejecting my 90% content for being similar(which they are not) including some other weird reasons. Their AI technology is pre-mature for usage.

I urge you all to email them please.
They need to understand the definition of being similar.

« Reply #35 on: October 01, 2019, 00:11 »
+1
I emailed them, too, to point out the system doesn't seem to be working properly.

« Reply #36 on: October 01, 2019, 03:22 »
0
Lot of rejections not only for similarity, but also for noise, artifacts, pixelation, banding all together :) nice

And if a cloud or dust is part of the photo, for focus.  ::)

"Focus: The main subject of this image is not in focus." Maybe I need my eyes tested?  ;)

yeah, i had a picture of a train worker on a steam train, engulfed in Steam- clearly described, rejected for focus... 


« Reply #37 on: October 02, 2019, 02:55 »
0
I emailed them, too, to point out the system doesn't seem to be working properly.
And it was a waste of time. They just brushed me off referring to a generic post about similars. I guess nobody read what I'd written.

« Reply #38 on: October 02, 2019, 02:56 »
0
Lot of rejections not only for similarity, but also for noise, artifacts, pixelation, banding all together :) nice

And if a cloud or dust is part of the photo, for focus.  ::)

"Focus: The main subject of this image is not in focus." Maybe I need my eyes tested?  ;)

yeah, i had a picture of a train worker on a steam train, engulfed in Steam- clearly described, rejected for focus...
I guess they haven't got a reject button for "lens flare".  ;D

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #39 on: October 03, 2019, 11:37 »
+2
I emailed them, too, to point out the system doesn't seem to be working properly.
And it was a waste of time. They just brushed me off referring to a generic post about similars. I guess nobody read what I'd written.

Looks like reviewers gone wild, over the top rejections for anything marginally similar. It's humans, because no AI could be that stupid.

yeah, i had a picture of a train worker on a steam train, engulfed in Steam- clearly described, rejected for focus... 

I just had clouds and mist covered distant hill, rejected for the usual, Focus: The main subject of this image is not in focus.

Well you could have fooled me, I never knew that a distant hill in the fog was supposed to be in focus.  ;D

Maybe I'll try distant hills obstructed by fog and mist? Or maybe I'm just wasting time as it's just a landscape background. Whatever I do it's no rush and not important. I don't see buyers lining up for yet another soft focus landscape of clouds and mist over the distant woods.

Let me check... oh wait this could make me rich, great unfulfilled concept, only 29 here. (just kidding of course)  29 clouds and mist over the distant woods stock photos

« Reply #40 on: October 03, 2019, 12:07 »
0
Yes, their system has gone crazy.
To get rid of similar images they are also punishing good contributors who put lot of efforts trying to make every work different than other.

SS team needs a good counseling

« Reply #41 on: October 03, 2019, 12:43 »
+2
Yes, their system has gone crazy.
To get rid of similar images they are also punishing good contributors who put lot of efforts trying to make every work different than other.

SS team needs a good counseling

Absolutely! I have a series of vintage backgrounds in light and dark version and now they systematically reject one if the other was uploaded before.
But they sell both!

« Reply #42 on: October 04, 2019, 02:59 »
+5
I went to their support and they replied, accepting their fault and saying there is always room for improvement and urged me to resubmit.

Next, I resubmitted and it was again re-rejected. This is height of stupidity.

« Reply #43 on: October 04, 2019, 05:14 »
0
I went to their support and they replied, accepting their fault and saying there is always room for improvement and urged me to resubmit.

Next, I resubmitted and it was again re-rejected. This is height of stupidity.

Nope, just OCD under order and symmetry disordered behaviour symptoms.
Thank God they don't go abusive or suicidal from time to time.
Oh wait...
:P

PZF

« Reply #44 on: October 06, 2019, 02:06 »
0
Someone doesn't know what similar means. I just got one shot of food from directly above accepted and every other view of it rejected. Apparently side view and top view are "too similar".

That's my problem too.....
One item/setup - one image allowed.
:(

« Reply #45 on: October 06, 2019, 02:49 »
+4
With the number of submissions they have encouraged with their free for all entry requirement I would imagine its impossible to recruit and train enough competent reviewers and give them time to review at a economic price.

fotorob

  • I am a professional stock photographer

« Reply #46 on: October 07, 2019, 01:26 »
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?


Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #47 on: October 07, 2019, 10:20 »
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

« Reply #48 on: October 08, 2019, 07:40 »
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.

StockDaebak

« Reply #49 on: October 08, 2019, 08:52 »
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.

« 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.

StockDaebak

« 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..


StockDaebak

« 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 »
+4
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

StockDaebak

« 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: October 14, 2019, 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: October 14, 2019, 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: October 14, 2019, 02:35 »
+1
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.

« Reply #64 on: October 18, 2019, 15:22 »
+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.

Same for me, if anything looks close it's similar gets rejects. Some are very different views but that doesn't matter. Reject. They may stop the spam but they are also cutting our good uploads that could sell.

« Reply #65 on: October 19, 2019, 02:19 »
0
Stupid reasons for rejections. Stopping uploading to SS for one month. I try again next month.

« Reply #66 on: October 19, 2019, 03:30 »
0
SS actually encourages users of the contributor app to add similar content, because every time an image reaches 5-20-50-100 downloads the app whites "Add more like this".


StockDaebak

« Reply #67 on: October 19, 2019, 10:04 »
0
They sure don't want anything similar to what is already on the site (video here), 100% acceptance on my climate strike protests clips but near 95% rejection on other stuff including some POV driving shots in which each shot was somewhat different but that didn't fly.

I guess the other thing we have to keep in mind is this, you might submit 10 clips or shots, they might now only accept two might not be the best ones of the batch, I prefer to upload all ten and let the customer browse through and decide but now maybe not.

As for those getting frustrated and stopping uploading, I say keep at it, re-submit the batch maybe once and see if a few more get picked up but if I had stopped uploading out of frustration I would be left with no income whatsoever after sales all but completely stopped at Pond5.

Lesson learned for me out of the pond5 sales collapse was no matter what, no matter how frustrating or how tired you are, keep at it, SS could further tighten or change it's rules tomorrow for all we know.




StockDaebak

« Reply #68 on: October 19, 2019, 10:05 »
0
SS actually encourages users of the contributor app to add similar content, because every time an image reaches 5-20-50-100 downloads the app whites "Add more like this".

I suspect they just didn't update the app when they changed the policy, probably a different department.

« Reply #69 on: October 22, 2019, 05:17 »
+1
Someone will draw a vector similar to mine and it will be accepted because it was not drawn by me! And if I draw a vector similar to mine, it will be rejected.

« Reply #70 on: October 22, 2019, 06:03 »
0
Someone will draw a vector similar to mine and it will be accepted because it was not drawn by me! And if I draw a vector similar to mine, it will be rejected.

A-ha! Here is a new conspiracy theory from me:

they push contributors to create parallel-new accounts in order to say the usual

"some billions assets of content"

plus

 "thousands of new artists registered with us!"

:P

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #71 on: October 22, 2019, 13:08 »
+1
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.

Adobe has a fairly strict similar policy too. But yes, you are right, AS is slowly grinding them down and gaining.

Someone will draw a vector similar to mine and it will be accepted because it was not drawn by me! And if I draw a vector similar to mine, it will be rejected.

Sad but true? Another side effect I hadn't thought of. That applies to similar photos also.

Once again, AS has rejected one of mine for similar when I had nothing even close. I asked why and they said, too many already in the system that were similar, not just mine were used to determine too many similar. But, make a note, unlike just about every other agency, they actually answered and actually answered what I was asking about instead of some boilerplate link to some irrelevant answer!

That's why Adobe will pass SS some day, and why Adobe passed IS. Remember when IS was #1?


Brasilnut

  • Author Brutally Honest Guide to Microstock & Blog

« Reply #72 on: October 23, 2019, 03:04 »
0
I recently published a short blog related to the discussion above. I'm 95% convinced that they're using AI!

https://brutallyhonestmicrostock.com/2019/10/22/are-agencies-using-artificial-intelligence-to-review-images/

...to be continued...

« Reply #73 on: October 24, 2019, 10:01 »
0
Vertical and horizontal are the same f picture now?

(river with medieval bridge and reflections, different distance)
« Last Edit: October 24, 2019, 10:06 by trabuco »

gillian vann

  • *Gillian*
« Reply #74 on: October 25, 2019, 19:49 »
+1
i recently ULd a small batch that had 2 same files, one which I'd tweaked/fixed a small issue, and hadn't removed from the line-up, and both got accepted. oops.

OM

« Reply #75 on: October 28, 2019, 07:14 »
+2
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

Clearly Mr Fuzzy continues unperturbed by the similars policy.....P1 of recently uploaded:

https://www.shutterstock.com/g/CharoensilpPhotoData?search_source=base_gallery&language=en&page=1&sort=newest&measurement=px&safe=true

Don't really understand how they get unsharp pics of bird behind glass door approved either (bottom P1).

spacedrone808

  • spacedrone808


« Reply #76 on: October 28, 2019, 09:06 »
0
Not sure i believe that.  My older stuff generally sells more than newer.  Its fairly common as well for an older image thats never previously sold to suddenly come to life.

Confirmed. Even newer stuff is better in terms of image quality and design, but sells very badly.


« Reply #77 on: October 28, 2019, 10:49 »
0
Not sure i believe that.  My older stuff generally sells more than newer.  Its fairly common as well for an older image thats never previously sold to suddenly come to life.

Confirmed. Even newer stuff is better in terms of image quality and design, but sells very badly.

I disagree here, this month by far has been doing very well for me. And my new stuffs too sold very well.

spacedrone808

  • spacedrone808


« Reply #78 on: October 28, 2019, 12:30 »
0
Not sure i believe that.  My older stuff generally sells more than newer.  Its fairly common as well for an older image thats never previously sold to suddenly come to life.

Confirmed. Even newer stuff is better in terms of image quality and design, but sells very badly.

I disagree here, this month by far has been doing very well for me. And my new stuffs too sold very well.

I am glad that it worked for you! Really!

« Reply #79 on: October 28, 2019, 12:45 »
0
Not sure i believe that.  My older stuff generally sells more than newer.  Its fairly common as well for an older image thats never previously sold to suddenly come to life.

Confirmed. Even newer stuff is better in terms of image quality and design, but sells very badly.

I disagree here, this month by far has been doing very well for me. And my new stuffs too sold very well.

I am glad that it worked for you! Really!

There might be some algorithm change as SS always gives a shock surprise. :)

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #80 on: October 28, 2019, 16:56 »
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

Clearly Mr Fuzzy continues unperturbed by the similars policy.....P1 of recently uploaded:

https://www.shutterstock.com/g/CharoensilpPhotoData?search_source=base_gallery&language=en&page=1&sort=newest&measurement=px&safe=true

Don't really understand how they get unsharp pics of bird behind glass door approved either (bottom P1).

That's terrible and was and still is? The bird? ID 1,404,274,253, while my latest is 1,541,339,921 but May was 1,395,085,925 - July 1,433,084,726 so the birds were accepted between May and July 2nd. Blurred lights, which at least four are the identical shot, cropped - 1,475,614,787 before September I believe.

When was the new policy announced? August. So he slipped some past.


« Reply #81 on: October 29, 2019, 03:15 »
+1
In shutterstock all contributors are equal but some are more equal than others...he probably has the golden "go straight past review" ticket.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
7 Replies
6286 Views
Last post September 09, 2013, 07:38
by Canonbabe
13 Replies
4609 Views
Last post October 21, 2013, 08:12
by pixo
13 Replies
2646 Views
Last post June 20, 2019, 17:37
by pixel86
8 Replies
1800 Views
Last post August 05, 2019, 15:51
by MysteryShot
2 Replies
344 Views
Last post November 08, 2019, 11:45
by trabuco

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results