pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: New dimension for EPS files (4 megapixels)  (Read 17165 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #50 on: April 10, 2019, 00:31 »
0
The news is here! SS decided, if we don't fit 50MB with 4MP, then the best choice is to extend 50MB to... Nobody knows.

So, heres the next, more clear petition.
https://www.change.org/p/shutterstock-cancel-generation-of-previews-from-eps-on-shutterstock

First petition is restored with almost 1400 supporters, so you better check it first
https://www.change.org/p/shutterstock-cancel-the-limitation-of-eps-files-to-4-megapixels-on-shutterstock
« Last Edit: April 10, 2019, 07:09 by PokemonMaster »


Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #51 on: April 10, 2019, 09:05 »
+4
Yeah, I finally signed. Seems that SS is going the way that IS did, right before they started their steady decline.

Ignore the artists and have someone behind a desk who possibly never created an image or a vector, decide based on some programmer who has not concept of how vectors are created or how they work as a file.

Plain, out of touch, blind decision.

« Reply #52 on: April 12, 2019, 09:18 »
+3
LOL. I guess they postponed the changes again.  ::)

« Reply #53 on: April 12, 2019, 23:13 »
0
Quote

Hi everyone,

Thank you again for all the comments and feedback you have provided. We understand the importance of having embedded metadata recognized during the upload process as well as the change in workflow when working with large files. We have collected all of your input and are actively working with our product and engineering teams to come up with the best path forward.

While we continue to delve into the numerous points that were brought up in your responses, we will postpone the release of the 4MP requirement and the auto generation of JPEGs from EPS files. Well continue working on perfecting the tools that empower and support all of our contributors, and well be back with an update soon.

Thank you again for all your input and for being such an active part of our community of artists!

I am still not convinced with their response.
The point is why they want to develop the new process. Why wasting time and money on engineering team on a useless topic.

Everything is working perfectly fine, even the 15mb file was also good. Why disturbing the whole process?

They don't want to listen to contributors, nor customers. Even the employee reviews on glassdoor are bad.

I can predict the SS downfall. In coming years I am seeing Adobe Stock as the new leader.

« Reply #54 on: April 13, 2019, 11:17 »
+1
LOL. I guess they postponed the changes again.  ::)

I really spend a lot of time those days looking for the way to properly reach the 4MP request without increase significantly the size of the file  :-\ :-\ :-\

I almost stop to produce designs to fit new requests for about one week... wasted time :( :(

« Reply #55 on: April 13, 2019, 12:11 »
0
LOL. I guess they postponed the changes again.  ::)

I really spend a lot of time those days looking for the way to properly reach the 4MP request without increase significantly the size of the file  :-\ :-\ :-\

I almost stop to produce designs to fit new requests for about one week... wasted time :( :(

Hard to say how much time to waste on something that seems destined for failure. Judging from the SS forums, it seems like the wide variety of contributors have a variety of reasons why they can't or won't bother with this current proposal.

« Reply #56 on: April 13, 2019, 14:43 »
0
LOL. I guess they postponed the changes again.  ::)

I really spend a lot of time those days looking for the way to properly reach the 4MP request without increase significantly the size of the file  :-\ :-\ :-\

I almost stop to produce designs to fit new requests for about one week... wasted time :( :(

Hard to say how much time to waste on something that seems destined for failure. Judging from the SS forums, it seems like the wide variety of contributors have a variety of reasons why they can't or won't bother with this current proposal.

I agree, this is unpractical implementation by them, but as they give a time limit i just start to work to being able to keep uploading my designs

« Reply #57 on: April 17, 2019, 09:29 »
0
Sigh. I listened to them and their last email:
Quote
   On April 15th 2019, all EPS files will need to be at least 4 MP with a new maximum MB size. We are currently working to determine the optimal limit, but it will be greater than 50MB. Our goal is to ensure contributors can continue uploading vectors of various complexity.

   On April 17th 2019, a JPG will automatically be created for your vectors when you upload.

I prepared a full batch of a thousand vector like they wanted. Then I upload the EPS only.

Guess what...:
Quote
    Batch8-Christmas_Angel_01.eps
    All vector images must be accompanied by JPG images with the same name. You uploaded the vector image but did not upload a corresponding JPG file named .jpg.

Maybe Shutterstock living on another dimension but ain't we the 17th? Why do they take the time to send us and email with specific dates so we can adapt and they do not stick to it :-/

« Reply #58 on: April 17, 2019, 09:58 »
+1
Sigh. I listened to them and their last email:
Quote
   On April 15th 2019, all EPS files will need to be at least 4 MP with a new maximum MB size. We are currently working to determine the optimal limit, but it will be greater than 50MB. Our goal is to ensure contributors can continue uploading vectors of various complexity.

   On April 17th 2019, a JPG will automatically be created for your vectors when you upload.

I prepared a full batch of a thousand vector like they wanted. Then I upload the EPS only.

Guess what...:
Quote
    Batch8-Christmas_Angel_01.eps
    All vector images must be accompanied by JPG images with the same name. You uploaded the vector image but did not upload a corresponding JPG file named .jpg.

Maybe Shutterstock living on another dimension but ain't we the 17th? Why do they take the time to send us and email with specific dates so we can adapt and they do not stick to it :-/

You are outdated, after this claims they give new information about this changes are postponed to unknow date...

« Reply #59 on: May 09, 2019, 15:53 »
+7
And it is back on. I'm not sure why they are so enamored with this garbage idea.

« Reply #60 on: May 09, 2019, 20:18 »
0
Please continue to voice your opinion on the matter. We need more voices to make this stop. 4MP requirement will be a big headache to all of us.

https://forums.submit.shutterstock.com/topic/97235-were-updating-how-you-upload-vectors/page/2/?tab=comments#comment-1758494

« Last Edit: May 09, 2019, 20:53 by leremy »

« Reply #61 on: May 10, 2019, 01:56 »
+1
Its like talking to the wall. They don't want to listen.
They are just putting their leg in the nail.

The era of SS is coming to end now, I now see AS and Getty have good opportunity to take over this.

« Reply #62 on: May 11, 2019, 05:17 »
+2
meanwhile in SS

« Reply #63 on: May 11, 2019, 06:44 »
0
Monday they will make a big party in Adobe Stock!!!

« Reply #64 on: May 11, 2019, 08:40 »
+1
My sales at Adobe are really bad, it all just sounds like a huge disaster  :'(

« Reply #65 on: May 11, 2019, 09:53 »
0
Ive had a theory for some time on why theyre doing this and it has been kind of confirmed for me with their latest email. I even made an account here specifically to share my thoughts on this and see what you guys think: could I be right or should I hang up my Sherlock Holmes hat? (And sorry for the long tl:dr post...)

Here goes my wild theory: in their email from Thursday when they announced the 100 MB max file size, they wrote: You will only need to upload vectors, with no JPEG required. A JPEG will automatically be created for your vectors when you upload. This ensures there is a correct matching preview for your vectors, with consistent quality and minimum dimensions. (emphasis mine.)

And to me, that is the reason for this whole ugly change to the upload requirements, right there.

Why? If you upload 2 files, jpeg + vector, that have to look exactly the same, then SS needs to check if that is true, right? It would be embarrassing if a customer bought a vector and discovered that it doesnt match the preview. And that can happen easily, if the contributor has a bad design workflow or is a bit scatterbrained. You create the jpeg, then you make a quick last-minute change to the vector, forget to export a new preview, upload the two files damage done.

So SS presumably has some automated process that compares the vector to the preview (because I dont think some poor employees had to do that by hand up to now, that would be an awful waste of time & money, and even more reason to make their own previews if that is truly the case.)

And maybe that automated checking process is flawed and creates a lot of hassle for them and they want to abandon it. Or maybe they dont check if the preview and vector match at all and had problems with customers in the past because of that.

Or maybe Im totally wrong. But this is the only reason I could think of that makes sense to me, and also explains why they are not budging on this, despite all the hate theyre getting from the contributor community... it's just a shame that the program they use to create the preview is so crappy that now we all have to hike up the size of our vectors.

« Reply #66 on: May 11, 2019, 10:15 »
0
Ive had a theory for some time on why theyre doing this and it has been kind of confirmed for me with their latest email. I even made an account here specifically to share my thoughts on this and see what you guys think: could I be right or should I hang up my Sherlock Holmes hat? (And sorry for the long tl:dr post...)

Here goes my wild theory: in their email from Thursday when they announced the 100 MB max file size, they wrote: You will only need to upload vectors, with no JPEG required. A JPEG will automatically be created for your vectors when you upload. This ensures there is a correct matching preview for your vectors, with consistent quality and minimum dimensions. (emphasis mine.)

And to me, that is the reason for this whole ugly change to the upload requirements, right there.

Why? If you upload 2 files, jpeg + vector, that have to look exactly the same, then SS needs to check if that is true, right? It would be embarrassing if a customer bought a vector and discovered that it doesnt match the preview. And that can happen easily, if the contributor has a bad design workflow or is a bit scatterbrained. You create the jpeg, then you make a quick last-minute change to the vector, forget to export a new preview, upload the two files damage done.

So SS presumably has some automated process that compares the vector to the preview (because I dont think some poor employees had to do that by hand up to now, that would be an awful waste of time & money, and even more reason to make their own previews if that is truly the case.)

And maybe that automated checking process is flawed and creates a lot of hassle for them and they want to abandon it. Or maybe they dont check if the preview and vector match at all and had problems with customers in the past because of that.

Or maybe Im totally wrong. But this is the only reason I could think of that makes sense to me, and also explains why they are not budging on this, despite all the hate theyre getting from the contributor community... it's just a shame that the program they use to create the preview is so crappy that now we all have to hike up the size of our vectors.

It could be, but they are essentially creating the same problem on their end. It is difficult to batch process thousands of vector files into jpegs. There is a lot that can go wrong and a lot of variables. Credit to them if they are smart enough to get it done without a million headaches. I have my doubts though.

From a contributor perspective, I feel a bit like a factory that has spent years honing the efficiency of its production only to have one distributor ask to dismantle that whole process for no clear or relevant reason. I'm just glad I don't really have to deal with this since microstock isn't really a growing business for me anymore.


« Reply #67 on: May 11, 2019, 10:31 »
0
Quote
It could be, but they are essentially creating the same problem on their end. It is difficult to batch process thousands of vector files into jpegs. There is a lot that can go wrong and a lot of variables. Credit to them if they are smart enough to get it done without a million headaches. I have my doubts though.

Maybe they won't worry about it at all. Maybe if they mangle the preview, they'll just reject the file and we'll get a "your vector is crap and you suck" type of rejection reason. It honestly wouldn't surprise me.  :P

But as I said, I could be completely wrong with all of this. I just think, there has to be a solid, pressing reason for them for making this change. The whole "we want to make the upload process easier for you because we luuuurve you" ... yeah, sure SS. Sure.  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Shelma1

« Reply #68 on: May 11, 2019, 11:06 »
+6
Heres an even wilder theory....the change has something to do with the new feature that allows some customers to resell our work. Maybe that requires that all jpg files be similar sizes or something. The fact that theyre doing both things at the same time must have a connection. Tinfoil hat is working fine.

« Reply #69 on: May 11, 2019, 12:13 »
0
Offtopic idea.

Still a newbie, i read you all in other SS threads talking for first, second quarter, millions of $, investors, and similar. So here is another wild subjective guess.

Whatever "innovative" that implies technology, removing human (error) factor that requires big spending on eg storage, R&D and AI, is always welcomed as investment, upgrade, or just "exciting new feature" for customers, investors and shareholders right? Perhaps with a good tax return, or perhaps due to a new partnership with a tech or social or whatever platform?

Excited to wait and read more exciting news! :P

« Reply #70 on: May 11, 2019, 17:01 »
0
Offtopic question, but it has connection with SS, and it's caused by "exciting" news.

If I opt out from Image sales, Footage sales, Sensitive use and Enhanced license (in SS account settings) will all my files be removed from all SS searches, including partners sites?

Thanks!

« Reply #71 on: May 11, 2019, 19:03 »
+1
Offtopic question, but it has connection with SS, and it's caused by "exciting" news.

If I opt out from Image sales, Footage sales, Sensitive use and Enhanced license (in SS account settings) will all my files be removed from all SS searches, including partners sites?

Thanks!

Yes, if you look at your dashboard where it says Image portfolio it will have 0 next to it. Click on it and it will say "This contributor has no active images in their portfolio."
Partner sites, who knows?  Give me a partner sight and I will have a look.

« Reply #72 on: May 12, 2019, 09:28 »
+1
Offtopic question, but it has connection with SS, and it's caused by "exciting" news.

If I opt out from Image sales, Footage sales, Sensitive use and Enhanced license (in SS account settings) will all my files be removed from all SS searches, including partners sites?

Thanks!

Yes, if you look at your dashboard where it says Image portfolio it will have 0 next to it. Click on it and it will say "This contributor has no active images in their portfolio."
Partner sites, who knows?  Give me a partner sight and I will have a look.

Thanks for reply! Actually, SS has easiest way to remove all files. Something good from them...

« Reply #73 on: May 14, 2019, 03:08 »
+2
Instead of signing petitions that never reach the direct interested / responsible, why don't you send a message of protest to Jon Oringer on his Facebook page and on his Twitter account? When he receives 2000 messages expressing our discontent, maybe he will begin to worry about the situation? (Or maybe he absolutely doesn't care)

« Reply #74 on: May 14, 2019, 03:19 »
0
Unworkable. Needs to be reversed ASAP.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
46 Replies
12204 Views
Last post February 12, 2008, 09:02
by kosmikkreeper
1 Replies
3198 Views
Last post August 19, 2010, 06:59
by dirkr
3 Replies
2790 Views
Last post December 19, 2012, 02:03
by Poncke
2 Replies
1679 Views
Last post November 14, 2014, 15:59
by stefanocarocci
13 Replies
4164 Views
Last post April 24, 2017, 16:15
by pancaketom

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results