MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Large image previews on SS ?  (Read 78399 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #325 on: November 02, 2015, 16:15 »
+1
And then get slated for complaining no thanks
They practically donate all your images free.

What do you got to lose?


« Reply #326 on: November 02, 2015, 19:34 »
0
Why dont you guys write something On the SS forums. they dont think we care. They don't come here that much Guys.
Some of us did.

What's with the petition, anybody knows something? How many signatures do they need?
« Last Edit: November 02, 2015, 19:41 by Dodie »

angelawaye

  • Eat, Sleep, Keyword. Repeat

« Reply #327 on: November 03, 2015, 09:53 »
+1
I understand your point, yes, many of my images are on blogs, facebook etc without watermarks but with the SS watermark someone can just click on my entire portfolio and steal the images right at their fingertips and assume it is okay because they are just "stock images". I think theft occurs more with stock images because people assume it is okay. The "photo robbers" probably don't just take images off random facebook pages and blogs - they go to stock agencies and then remove the watermark. Just my thoughts... Correct me if I am wrong...

angelawaye

  • Eat, Sleep, Keyword. Repeat

« Reply #328 on: November 03, 2015, 09:57 »
+1
Why dont you guys write something On the SS forums. they dont think we care. They don't come here that much Guys.
I haven't been able to get on the forum in months - every since they changed it I get errors. (I'm on Firefox) Wish I knew what was going on over there.

« Reply #329 on: November 03, 2015, 10:25 »
+2
I understand your point, yes, many of my images are on blogs, facebook etc without watermarks but with the SS watermark someone can just click on my entire portfolio and steal the images right at their fingertips and assume it is okay because they are just "stock images". I think theft occurs more with stock images because people assume it is okay. The "photo robbers" probably don't just take images off random facebook pages and blogs - they go to stock agencies and then remove the watermark. Just my thoughts... Correct me if I am wrong...

I can't correct you - I'm not an image thief or buyer. But buyers will buy and thieves will thieve, whether it photos, music, clothes, cars or groceries -- whatever. The problem is much deeper than a weak watermark. The term 'Royalty-Free' is no help, and that so many think that everything on the internet is or should be free. I just don't think anybody is going to wholesale copy your portfolio and sit there and remove 1200 watermarks. Doesn't sound cost effective. They'd probably get a subscription and just download the whole lot without watermark, or more likely use Google to find un-watermarked images.

It's just one opinion but I think those who are suspending uploads, deleting images and even whole portfolios are 'cutting off their nose to spite their face".

If anyone thinks all this hubbub will really affect the way SS does business is sadly wrong. They will do the things they decide will help their business, not your business. We are not partners, their success is not dependent on any 1 or 500 contributors. They spent the time and money to give us a 'final' watermark - don't expect anything more.

« Reply #330 on: November 03, 2015, 10:30 »
0
Why dont you guys write something On the SS forums. they dont think we care. They don't come here that much Guys.
Agree.

« Reply #331 on: November 03, 2015, 11:03 »
+7
I can't correct you - I'm not an image thief or buyer. But buyers will buy and thieves will thieve, whether it photos, music, clothes, cars or groceries -- whatever. The problem is much deeper than a weak watermark. The term 'Royalty-Free' is no help, and that so many think that everything on the internet is or should be free. I just don't think anybody is going to wholesale copy your portfolio and sit there and remove 1200 watermarks. Doesn't sound cost effective. They'd probably get a subscription and just download the whole lot without watermark, or more likely use Google to find un-watermarked images.

It's just one opinion but I think those who are suspending uploads, deleting images and even whole portfolios are 'cutting off their nose to spite their face".

If anyone thinks all this hubbub will really affect the way SS does business is sadly wrong. They will do the things they decide will help their business, not your business. We are not partners, their success is not dependent on any 1 or 500 contributors. They spent the time and money to give us a 'final' watermark - don't expect anything more.

If all of us think as you do, of course, SS will do whatever they want. Fortunately, everyone is not like you. It's pathetic to see contributors like you.

« Reply #332 on: November 03, 2015, 12:52 »
+4
I can't correct you - I'm not an image thief or buyer. But buyers will buy and thieves will thieve, whether it photos, music, clothes, cars or groceries -- whatever. The problem is much deeper than a weak watermark. The term 'Royalty-Free' is no help, and that so many think that everything on the internet is or should be free. I just don't think anybody is going to wholesale copy your portfolio and sit there and remove 1200 watermarks. Doesn't sound cost effective. They'd probably get a subscription and just download the whole lot without watermark, or more likely use Google to find un-watermarked images.

It's just one opinion but I think those who are suspending uploads, deleting images and even whole portfolios are 'cutting off their nose to spite their face".

If anyone thinks all this hubbub will really affect the way SS does business is sadly wrong. They will do the things they decide will help their business, not your business. We are not partners, their success is not dependent on any 1 or 500 contributors. They spent the time and money to give us a 'final' watermark - don't expect anything more.

If all of us think as you do, of course, SS will do whatever they want. Fortunately, everyone is not like you. It's pathetic to see contributors like you.

They are already doing what they want.
I was probably one of the first to write support directly when the 1st new watermark came out.
You're entitled to your opinion - I just think you're getting your blood pressure up over something you can't change.


« Reply #333 on: November 03, 2015, 14:58 »
0

What's with the petition, anybody knows something? How many signatures do they need?

the number is pointless. as i said, twit jon oringer at his twitter site. only this would make a difference.
why i say that?

it takes as much time and effort to make a 2nd, 3rd, 4th...etc etc etc watermark.
if the dept wanted to fix it , it would have been done first time correct.
it's like the old age homes where they serve tea and coffee to the seniors who suffer from incontinence. why? when all these nurses and doctors know from nursing 101 that coffee/tea is a diuretic and the last thing someone with incontinence needs it tea or coffee.
still , they do it... because they are not interested in humanity or saving lives; only making money off you for your granny and grand-dad.

same applies for the dept doing the watermark for ss. the more overtime they do to re-improve the watermark, the more they get paid.
only jon oringer is unaware of this.

..the last line, i am sure of it. so, forums and wailing wall is useless. 28 pages, 5 million signed petition
etc... nothing will get done other than what you see is being done..
ie. "let's do another stupid one so they are dumb enough to think we are listening"

Rinderart

« Reply #334 on: November 03, 2015, 15:13 »
+13
Bottom Line...all I want is a Opt out option for a gigantic preview. Dont care about whatever watermark They come up With. Stealing and removing stuff is a 1000 Times easier on the huge preview. For * sake it's our work and our copyrights at stake. Not theres.

« Reply #335 on: November 03, 2015, 16:47 »
+1
Bottom Line...all I want is a Opt out option for a gigantic preview. Dont care about whatever watermark They come up With. Stealing and removing stuff is a 1000 Times easier on the huge preview. For * sake it's our work and our copyrights at stake. Not theres.

agree

Fab

« Reply #336 on: November 03, 2015, 19:05 »
+3
I can't correct you - I'm not an image thief or buyer. But buyers will buy and thieves will thieve, whether it photos, music, clothes, cars or groceries -- whatever. The problem is much deeper than a weak watermark. The term 'Royalty-Free' is no help, and that so many think that everything on the internet is or should be free. I just don't think anybody is going to wholesale copy your portfolio and sit there and remove 1200 watermarks. Doesn't sound cost effective. They'd probably get a subscription and just download the whole lot without watermark, or more likely use Google to find un-watermarked images.

It's just one opinion but I think those who are suspending uploads, deleting images and even whole portfolios are 'cutting off their nose to spite their face".

If anyone thinks all this hubbub will really affect the way SS does business is sadly wrong. They will do the things they decide will help their business, not your business. We are not partners, their success is not dependent on any 1 or 500 contributors. They spent the time and money to give us a 'final' watermark - don't expect anything more.

Their success IS dependent on each of those 500 contributors, because every contributor is important, your work is important and must be protected. If a big company cant protect/represent your work because there is a watermark that everybody can clean up in a minute with the clone stamp tool or even the brush, they are failing in their job.

remember: chance of stealing decreases = more $$$$ in your bank account

« Reply #337 on: November 04, 2015, 02:18 »
+1
Still nothing? Just checked again, now it's small preview with no watermark (at least I can't see it).

« Reply #338 on: November 04, 2015, 08:53 »
0
Why dont you guys write something On the SS forums. they dont think we care. They don't come here that much Guys.
I haven't been able to get on the forum in months - every since they changed it I get errors. (I'm on Firefox) Wish I knew what was going on over there.

I have the same problem before. All you have to do is click "sign in" on the top-right corner of the forum page and you will be able to get in each section.  :)

« Reply #339 on: November 04, 2015, 17:16 »
+1
This company is sounding more evil everyday!

« Reply #340 on: November 04, 2015, 17:44 »
+5
Bottom Line...all I want is a Opt out option for a gigantic preview. Dont care about whatever watermark They come up With. Stealing and removing stuff is a 1000 Times easier on the huge preview. For * sake it's our work and our copyrights at stake. Not theres.

+10
it's the least they can do to reflect good faith on this issue. no need for their mofos to bleed ss out of their paycheck to do more overtime creating even more asinine watermarks.
just give us the option to opt out , dudes...

*.... there i said it for rinderart 8)

« Reply #341 on: November 05, 2015, 01:18 »
+2
Ok it'sprobably  not because we're signing or tweeting or emailing that we'll get something, but if we do nothing we will get nothing.

petition :
https://secure.avaaz.org/en/petition/Shutterstockcom_team_Infringes_copyrights_of_contributors_by_Shutterstock

tweet
https://twitter.com/jonoringer

mail :
[email protected]

 >:(


« Reply #342 on: November 05, 2015, 01:42 »
0
Still nothing? Just checked again, now it's small preview with no watermark (at least I can't see it).
Yes no watermark on small previews at all.

« Reply #343 on: November 05, 2015, 01:54 »
+1
Actually with rotations, search manipulations and exposure there is a real reason to worrry with news on SS. Somebody will have his port under danger, somebody stay protected.

« Reply #344 on: November 05, 2015, 05:07 »
+1
They have almost completed rolling out V2 watermark. Only few images left in my port with V1 watermark.

When you click preview button, it shows a medium size preview. I'm OK with that size of preview. But one can easily get that large preview (1500px) just by right clicking on that medium size preview. If SS just wants to show a medium size preview, what's the point of releasing those large images?

If it is medium size preview, I think current watermark is effective on most of the images, but definitely not on all. I don't want them to have those 1500px previews by any means. So, I too think an opt out option is essential.
« Last Edit: November 05, 2015, 06:10 by anathaya »

« Reply #345 on: November 05, 2015, 06:02 »
+1
They have almost completed rolling out V2 watermark. Only few images left in my port with V1 watermark.

When you click preview button, it shows a medium size preview. I'm OK with that size of preview. But one can easily get that large preview (1500px) just by right clicking on that medium size preview. If SS just wanted to show a medium size preview, what's the point of releasing those large images.

If it is medium size preview, I think current watermark is effective on most of the images, but definitely not all. I don't want them to have those 1500px previews by any means. So, I too think an opt out option is essential.

I sent another email to support yesterday because some of my images have the latest and some do not. Since your port is the same way, i guess they are still in the midst of changing over. I will double check again today.

I agree with you. The huge previews are unnecessary. We need an opt out.

edit: Just sent another email to support complaining about...can't get to the forum to see the Progress thread on the watermark either.
« Last Edit: November 05, 2015, 06:13 by cathyslife »

« Reply #346 on: November 05, 2015, 06:04 »
+1
Ok it'sprobably  not because we're signing or tweeting or emailing that we'll get something, but if we do nothing we will get nothing.

petition :
https://secure.avaaz.org/en/petition/Shutterstockcom_team_Infringes_copyrights_of_contributors_by_Shutterstock

tweet
https://twitter.com/jonoringer

mail :
[email protected]

 >:(


"If we do nothing we will get nothing"
Exactly!

We need to keep telling them what we think. It is OUR WORK.

« Reply #347 on: November 05, 2015, 06:27 »
0
edit: Just sent another email to support complaining about...can't get to the forum to see the Progress thread on the watermark either.

It works for me on chrome and IE, have you tried those?
Try them if you want to read stupid black burnt comments  ;D

« Reply #348 on: November 05, 2015, 08:32 »
+3
edit: Just sent another email to support complaining about...can't get to the forum to see the Progress thread on the watermark either.

It works for me on chrome and IE, have you tried those?
Try them if you want to read stupid black burnt comments  ;D

No, I use firefox, and I refuse to have to change what browser I use, especially for multi-million dollar companies who can afford to build their sites to work on all the major browsers. If I can't read it, then whatever. And I am on a mac, so IE is out anyway. And if there are stupid comments, probably best I don't read anyway then. My blood would probably just start to boil. :-)

FlowerPower

« Reply #349 on: November 05, 2015, 10:32 »
0
I use firefox it works fine and has since the open. It's not a firefox problem. Where are small previews no watermark, I don't see any with missing. Screen capture example please.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
4 Replies
4945 Views
Last post February 17, 2012, 21:51
by antistock
2 Replies
2991 Views
Last post January 11, 2014, 03:56
by Leo Blanchette
2 Replies
2778 Views
Last post January 24, 2016, 06:39
by Karen
6 Replies
6096 Views
Last post June 05, 2017, 05:11
by BigBubba
16 Replies
3430 Views
Last post May 27, 2020, 03:40
by photographybyadri

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors