Author Topic: Large image previews on SS ? (Read 79811 times)

ACS · « **Reply #400 on:** November 10, 2015, 13:10 »

The dark gray bar at the bottom in V2 can easily be cropped. I think, V2 brings maybe %20 improvement at max. Or am I missing something?!

cathyslife · « **Reply #401 on:** November 10, 2015, 13:56 »

Quote from: PixelBytes on November 10, 2015, 12:57

Reading this forums for over six years it seems like a lot of us complains and for good reason in this case. I never found the response 'why don't you just delete your portfolio ' to be helpful or realistic and I never saw a case where it was meant to be.

Some of the worst complainers are the least sympathetic when the others have problems.

Actually, I have photos at SS, too, so this is actually also my problem. And I do have sympathy, when the companies where we have our images do nothing. But that isn't the case in this instance. SS started doing something about it a few weeks ago, and have come up with a pretty good solution for the problem in v2. Will it solve 100% of the problem on 100% of everyone's images? No. But they have certainly made an effort. If someone is still not pleased with the outcome, the only thing left to do is to delete your portfolio. Bottom line.

Mostly I am glad that the watermark has been improved and I don't have to delete MY portfolio.

marthamarks · « **Reply #402 on:** November 10, 2015, 14:14 »

Quote from: cathyslife on November 10, 2015, 13:56

But they have certainly made an effort. If someone is still not pleased with the outcome, the only thing left to do is to delete your portfolio. Bottom line.

Mostly I am glad that the watermark has been improved and I don't have to delete MY portfolio.

Cathy, you seem very cavalier in recommending drastic measures like "delete your portfolio" to other people.

It's nice that every single watermark on your images apparently has now been upgraded to V2. But for those of us who haven't seen that magic happen yet, a bit of pointing that fact out doesn't hurt.

marthamarks · « **Reply #403 on:** November 10, 2015, 14:15 »

Quote from: PixelBytes on November 10, 2015, 12:57

I never found the response 'why don't you just delete your portfolio ' to be helpful or realistic and I never saw a case where it was meant to be.

My Thank you! to Cathy for her "helpful" suggestion was entirely sarcastic. Tongue in cheek. And she knew it.

ACS · « **Reply #404 on:** November 10, 2015, 14:18 »

Quote

Will it solve 100% of the problem on 100% of everyone's images? No. But they have certainly made an effort. If someone is still not pleased with the outcome, the only thing left to do is to delete your portfolio. Bottom line.

😯

Is it really something about to be happy or upset?

V3 would be easier and safer for us and SS 😉

Rinderart · « **Reply #405 on:** November 10, 2015, 14:52 »

And NO HUGE PREVIEWS. I think were losing this fight guys. They really do Just Ignore and we just go away. The reality Is. we can be replaced in a week and probably are anyway. By Folks that simply don't care or have no clue what this is about. wish it wasn't so...But, Im getting the vibe thats the way it is. wish it wasn't.

etudiante_rapide · « **Reply #406 on:** November 10, 2015, 16:01 »

Quote from: Rinderart on November 10, 2015, 14:52

And NO HUGE PREVIEWS. I think were losing this fight guys. They really do Just Ignore and we just go away. The reality Is. we can be replaced in a week and probably are anyway. By Folks that simply don't care or have no clue what this is about. wish it wasn't so...But, Im getting the vibe thats the way it is. wish it wasn't.

by the red line of your statement... i have to agree with you that
maybe the 500 signers are the only ones with a clue. i too was clueless what the fuss is all about until joanne showed me the problem.
so the question is how do you inform the other x,000, 000 of the clueless ones???
if you let it out of the problem, you also give the potential thieves the key to steal more.
losing proposition.

ravens · « **Reply #407 on:** November 10, 2015, 16:03 »

Quote from: ACS on November 10, 2015, 14:18

Quote
Will it solve 100% of the problem on 100% of everyone's images? No. But they have certainly made an effort. If someone is still not pleased with the outcome, the only thing left to do is to delete your portfolio. Bottom line.

😯

Is it really something about to be happy or upset?

V3 would be easier and safer for us and SS 😉

Yes. V3 would be safer, less photos would end up stolen, and both contributors and SS would make more money.

ravens · « **Reply #408 on:** November 10, 2015, 16:06 »

Quote from: cathyslife on November 10, 2015, 10:49

Quote from: ravens on November 10, 2015, 10:36
The problem is the super huge preview. You can download the image at 1500 * 1100 which is insane. The v2 watermark is too weak on many images.

I disagree. I think v2 works just fine on the large previews. As Martha said, I am still waiting for all my images to switch. I only saw 1 still not switched on my random check this morning, but there are probably more.

Yes it does work fine with the large preview.... for thieves!

Shelma1 · « **Reply #409 on:** November 10, 2015, 16:30 »

The thumbnail images on iStock's pages just grew by 50%, and the large preview is gigantic. Looks like a preview war is on.

etudiante_rapide · « **Reply #410 on:** November 10, 2015, 18:12 »

Quote from: Shelma1 on November 10, 2015, 16:30

The thumbnail images on iStock's pages just grew by 50%, and the large preview is gigantic. Looks like a preview war is on.

or let's see which agency is better at scr*wing our contributors???

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #411 on:** November 10, 2015, 19:46 »

So big previews are in...

I think SS is the largest - 1,500 pixels on the long edge. alamy, 123rf and DT are tied at 1,300 pixels, iStock 1,235, Deposit Photos around 1,024, AdobeStock at 1,000 (but with a very weak watermark) and 500px at 900 (but their current watermark is tiny), Getty is small but around 500 to 650 pixels on the long edge and a very minimalist watermark.

Before this rush to bigger previews, Shutterstock's old image was 450 on the long edge, same as 123rf, DT, iStock and most of the other other sites (give or take 20 or so pixels; Fotolia's is 500 pixels).

Some images don't do well with 123rf's watermark, but in general, it's pretty good - better than SS v2 IMO.

If you look at a google image search - for some terms and stock photograph - I don't yet see any of the new larger SS previews, and for DT and 123rf which have had their larger previews for years, some images show up in a search with those and some with the 450 pixel smaller one. I guess google takes a while to index things, or chooses only a subset?

It'd be nice to get an ISO standard for watermark size and configuration (with each agency's logo in the center) - about 1,100 pixels on the long edge? Banner at the bottom with agency, image ID, contributor name.

anathaya · « **Reply #412 on:** November 10, 2015, 19:50 »

Quote from: etudiante_rapide on November 10, 2015, 18:12

Quote from: Shelma1 on November 10, 2015, 16:30
The thumbnail images on iStock's pages just grew by 50%, and the large preview is gigantic. Looks like a preview war is on.

or let's see which agency is better at scr*wing our contributors???

At the moment it's SS. Both IS and 123RF provide large previews, but with far better watermarks compared to SS.

etudiante_rapide · « **Reply #413 on:** November 10, 2015, 19:57 »

Quote from: Jo Ann Snover on November 10, 2015, 19:46

So big previews are in...

DT and 123rf which have had their larger previews for years

is that so for dt? i dont know about 123, but if they had larger previews for years, that explains why my dls have been comatose in dls for years

anathaya · « **Reply #414 on:** November 10, 2015, 20:02 »

Quote from: cathyslife on November 10, 2015, 13:56

If someone is still not pleased with the outcome, the only thing left to do is to delete your portfolio. Bottom line.

Mostly I am glad that the watermark has been improved and I don't have to delete MY portfolio.

SS definitely made some effort, but it's not enough. Even they didn't give proper responses to contributors complains rather than sending same email to everyone. Just because of watermarks look better on your photos doesn't mean that others have no right to complain about theirs. Would you delete your port if you were a victim? If so, you should be ashamed to complain about anything here, but just delete your port.

PeterChigmaroff · « **Reply #415 on:** November 10, 2015, 20:08 »

I've recently been trying to design a watermark for my images and it's actually tough to get one that works well in all circumstances. Seems to be a case of now you see it now you don't depending on the image makeup.

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #416 on:** November 10, 2015, 21:19 »

Quote from: etudiante_rapide on November 10, 2015, 19:57

Quote from: Jo Ann Snover on November 10, 2015, 19:46
So big previews are in...

DT and 123rf which have had their larger previews for years

is that so for dt? i dont know about 123, but if they had larger previews for years, that explains why my dls have been comatose in dls for years

Back in Jan - Mar 2014 I was doing a lot of test searches to see how images from my own site fared versus my images on agency sites. 123rf and DT had some of their images using their new larger previews then, but not all of them. Not sure when prior to that they were introduced, but I seem to recall these things were new around the end of 2013

etudiante_rapide · « **Reply #417 on:** November 10, 2015, 23:22 »

Quote from: Jo Ann Snover on November 10, 2015, 21:19

Quote from: etudiante_rapide on November 10, 2015, 19:57
Quote from: Jo Ann Snover on November 10, 2015, 19:46
So big previews are in...

DT and 123rf which have had their larger previews for years

is that so for dt? i dont know about 123, but if they had larger previews for years, that explains why my dls have been comatose in dls for years

Back in Jan - Mar 2014 I was doing a lot of test searches to see how images from my own site fared versus my images on agency sites. 123rf and DT had some of their images using their new larger previews then, but not all of them. Not sure when prior to that they were introduced, but I seem to recall these things were new around the end of 2013

well that explains it. it took me 2 years to reach payout , while it takes me a month to reach payout with ss.
now, let's hope something is done before ss go the way of comatose like dt with this large preview.
well, it's good to know the kill date is 2 years. it gives me some time to take up a new
skill... maybe learn how to use a squeegee

cathyslife · « **Reply #418 on:** November 11, 2015, 06:46 »

Quote from: anathaya on November 10, 2015, 20:02

Quote from: cathyslife on November 10, 2015, 13:56
If someone is still not pleased with the outcome, the only thing left to do is to delete your portfolio. Bottom line.

Mostly I am glad that the watermark has been improved and I don't have to delete MY portfolio.

SS definitely made some effort, but it's not enough. Even they didn't give proper responses to contributors complains rather than sending same email to everyone. Just because of watermarks look better on your photos doesn't mean that others have no right to complain about theirs. Would you delete your port if you were a victim? If so, you should be ashamed to complain about anything here, but just delete your port.

I disagree. And if i thought the results werent good enough, i would have deleted my account. But thanks to all of you who just keep complaining and dont do anything meaningful. You are the reason they just keep $crewing contributors.

cathyslife · « **Reply #419 on:** November 11, 2015, 06:47 »

Quote from: Zeus on November 10, 2015, 20:08

I've recently been trying to design a watermark for my images and it's actually tough to get one that works well in all circumstances. Seems to be a case of now you see it now you don't depending on the image makeup.

Same here, i have tried creating one in the past for myself. It never works well on 100% of the images, 100% of the time.

cobalt · « **Reply #420 on:** November 11, 2015, 07:07 »

My current watermark is really, really in your way, but it has helped. With a normal watermark right across my image I was still finding my images being used elsewhere. But since I made it allover and totally ugly it has stopped. I am sorry for the designers visiting, but I am sure they can still get an idea of what I do and I don´t have a webshop on the site.

I think some people mistakingly believe that if they use my image with the watermark and my name on it, it is ok...you know...just sharing and advertising for me...

rimglow · « **Reply #421 on:** November 11, 2015, 07:59 »

Quote from: cathyslife on November 11, 2015, 06:47

Quote from: Zeus on November 10, 2015, 20:08
I've recently been trying to design a watermark for my images and it's actually tough to get one that works well in all circumstances. Seems to be a case of now you see it now you don't depending on the image makeup.

Same here, i have tried creating one in the past for myself. It never works well on 100% of the images, 100% of the time.

My favorite solution so far, is iStock's watermark. I've tried to duplicate it in style and preview size, on my web page. (watermark opacity is set at 35%)

Shelma1 · « **Reply #422 on:** November 11, 2015, 08:23 »

The issue with the first SS watermark was that it was all white and sparse, so it disappeared on white areas completely and also didn't cover enough of the image when the image was complex, like a pattern for example. They've now added a few black areas (the square background behind the SS logo) and more coverage. You need to have a combination of both transparent black and white in enough coverage to show up against different tints and tones.

etudiante_rapide · « **Reply #423 on:** November 11, 2015, 11:57 »

Quote from: Shelma1 on November 11, 2015, 08:23

The issue with the first SS watermark was that it was all white and sparse, so it disappeared on white areas completely and also didn't cover enough of the image when the image was complex, like a pattern for example. They've now added a few black areas (the square background behind the SS logo) and more coverage. You need to have a combination of both transparent black and white in enough coverage to show up against different tints and tones.

rimglow's illustration is a good idea. but even if there is black or white, on clear space like in rimglow's foto, it does not take much to remove the wm. the x x lines are effective too, but once again, on a foto like this one , it does not take much to remove all the wm black white grey or x'ed.

maybe there is no solution. not even if our camera's embedded exif to prevent theft. but i would think, for most cases , theft would be more likely in tourist attraction images like travel, more than
say rimglow's image of a cup isolation.

in general i think most commercial work will not be stolen by a customer as you and i , as business ppl will not have that sort of mentality to steal.
but more likely the teen wanting something for his/her blog would do that... although not deliberately
thinking it is theft, due to misinformation of the word "royalty-free".

but the problem is mainly those sites that outrightly steal full portfolio "for a cup of coffee" and
traffic , getting paid from ads and traffic to their site.

am i right to think this way???

Shelma1 · « **Reply #424 on:** November 11, 2015, 12:29 »

If someone is intent on stealing images, then yes, anyone can spend time removing any watermark, though they'd have to be pretty talented with a strong watermark on a complex image. But it does make it more tempting and easier when you offer a very large preview with a weak watermark...you get a nice big, image for your project and even a dolt like me can remove a weak watermark in a few minutes.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Large image previews on SS ? (Read 79811 times)

ACS

cathyslife

marthamarks

marthamarks

ACS

Rinderart

etudiante_rapide

ravens

ravens

Shelma1

etudiante_rapide

Jo Ann Snover

anathaya

etudiante_rapide

anathaya

PeterChigmaroff

Jo Ann Snover

etudiante_rapide

cathyslife

cathyslife

cobalt

rimglow

Shelma1

etudiante_rapide

Shelma1

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors