MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: OFFSET opened doors  (Read 37109 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #100 on: October 04, 2013, 18:41 »
-1
I cant believe what i see.....
Look here ....specially the first line of images:
http://www.offset.com/search/kids

Even our interns would get fired if they`d make "images" like this.

and that crap was announced as the new high quality stock agency???
what a laugh...


Wow, I thought it was going to be all national geographic type stuff, not vacation snaps.

I agree but as I see Stocksy is not much better.
http://www.stocksy.com/search?src=home&text=kids


Sorry, I disagree.


fritz

  • I love Tom and Jerry music

« Reply #101 on: October 04, 2013, 18:47 »
+3
I cant believe what i see.....
Look here ....specially the first line of images:
http://www.offset.com/search/kids

Even our interns would get fired if they`d make "images" like this.

and that crap was announced as the new high quality stock agency???
what a laugh...


Wow, I thought it was going to be all national geographic type stuff, not vacation snaps.

I agree but as I see Stocksy is not much better.
http://www.stocksy.com/search?src=home&text=kids


Sorry, I disagree.

It's ok. The only place in the world where is 99.9% agree is North Korea. God forbid!

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #102 on: October 04, 2013, 18:49 »
+1
I cant believe what i see.....
Look here ....specially the first line of images:
http://www.offset.com/search/kids

Even our interns would get fired if they`d make "images" like this.

and that crap was announced as the new high quality stock agency???
what a laugh...


Wow, I thought it was going to be all national geographic type stuff, not vacation snaps.

I agree but as I see Stocksy is not much better.
http://www.stocksy.com/search?src=home&text=kids

It's a trend. Apparently.

« Reply #103 on: October 04, 2013, 18:52 »
+2
I cant believe what i see.....
Look here ....specially the first line of images:
http://www.offset.com/search/kids

Even our interns would get fired if they`d make "images" like this.

and that crap was announced as the new high quality stock agency???
what a laugh...


Wow, I thought it was going to be all national geographic type stuff, not vacation snaps.

I agree but as I see Stocksy is not much better.
http://www.stocksy.com/search?src=home&text=kids


Sorry, I disagree.


Despite the evidence provided in the link?

« Reply #104 on: October 04, 2013, 18:55 »
+2
Hey all,

We regularly go in and iterate on the exact edit, but for some perspective -- Offset isn't meant to simply be about standalone, exceptional and perfect "hero" images.  What we're looking for in Offset is imagery that resonates with editorial and commercial art directors and sometimes, those are images that look very "real" and work as part of a set or a broader multi-image story.   

As one example of an impactful single image:
http://www.offset.com/photos/62666

In general, as criteria, we generally look for exceptional, "authentic" images and / or images with a storytelling quality to them - images that are useful, but those that also work together. 

For example, you can easily pull a number of images out of this search that immediately hang together:
India Search

For that storytelling quality, you can also see:
Farm to Table
The Art of Cooking

And then, of course, there are exceptional individual artists who through the quality of their art direction, styling, subject and lighting, provide unique work:

http://www.offset.com/artist/Gentl+and+Hyers

Just in response to Sean's comment - it's not all about National Geographic-style images.  It's about authenticity, storytelling, art direction and style.  It's also about what we know resonates with art directors, ad agencies, and publications based on the conversations we're having every day with them.   

Best,

Scott
VP of Content




« Last Edit: October 04, 2013, 19:16 by scottbraut »

« Reply #105 on: October 04, 2013, 19:14 »
0
Sorry, that's the impression I had from the early advertising, and I haven't looked since.


« Reply #107 on: October 04, 2013, 19:58 »
0
Funny, on SS authentic images are also known as rejected for LCV. Maybe I would have done better waiting for offset.

That said, there are many fantastic images there. If SS gets Bigstocked I'll definitely be looking for an outlet for better images.


« Reply #108 on: October 04, 2013, 20:00 »
0
Hey all,

We regularly go in and iterate on the exact edit, but for some perspective -- Offset isn't meant to simply be about standalone, exceptional and perfect "hero" images.  What we're looking for in Offset is imagery that resonates with editorial and commercial art directors and sometimes, those are images that look very "real" and work as part of a set or a broader multi-image story.   

As one example of an impactful single image:
http://www.offset.com/photos/62666

In general, as criteria, we generally look for exceptional, "authentic" images and / or images with a storytelling quality to them - images that are useful, but those that also work together. 

For example, you can easily pull a number of images out of this search that immediately hang together:
India Search

For that storytelling quality, you can also see:
Farm to Table
The Art of Cooking

And then, of course, there are exceptional individual artists who through the quality of their art direction, styling, subject and lighting, provide unique work:

http://www.offset.com/artist/Gentl+and+Hyers

Just in response to Sean's comment - it's not all about National Geographic-style images.  It's about authenticity, storytelling, art direction and style.  It's also about what we know resonates with art directors, ad agencies, and publications based on the conversations we're having every day with them.   

Best,

Scott
VP of Content


Well 99.9% of people do not and never will have the talent of Amos. He is Nat Geo level.

« Reply #109 on: October 04, 2013, 20:45 »
+1
Funny, on SS authentic images are also known as rejected for LCV. Maybe I would have done better waiting for offset.

That said, there are many fantastic images there. If SS gets Bigstocked I'll definitely be looking for an outlet for better images.

Well, for what it's worth, the good news here is that we did away with LCV rejections a long time ago.  The original idea behind LCV (back in the day) was that it shouldn't be used as a standalone rejection.  We would get spammed with abstract backgrounds for example, so the concept of LCV was intended to stem the tide of similars that didn't provide anything of added value.  Eventually, it was too confusing as a rejection for everyone involved, so we did away with it. 

There is a different editing and curation process with Offset, which gives us some more flexibility in how we think about acceptance criteria, but we're also continuously evaluating our standards in our Core offering as well. 

These things evolve.  We have an obligation to create clarity for contributors as to what our standards are, but we also don't expect things to be rigidly set in stone forever.

Best,

Scott
VP of Content
Shutterstock
 




« Reply #111 on: October 04, 2013, 22:17 »
0
Hello Scott,

When  we apply as contributor for OFFSET how long it take to get our application processed?
Cheers
Laurent

EmberMike

« Reply #112 on: October 04, 2013, 22:25 »
0

There are illustrations on Offset, something Stocksy doesn't have. And I'm not necessarily talking about vectors, just the illustration category in general. Stocksy seems to be photo-only at the moment.

« Reply #113 on: October 05, 2013, 08:38 »
0
Hello Scott,

When  we apply as contributor for OFFSET how long it take to get our application processed?
Cheers
Laurent

Hello Laurent,

Someone would typically contact you within a few weeks or sooner.  In these early days, all of the artists being selected represent a body of work with high relevance to the criteria I mentioned earlier, which is a varying combination of:

  • Assignment-quality images
  • Authenticity (high quality, but naturalistic lighting, posing, and people)
  • Impactful single images or those that work well together to tell a story
  • Contemporary art direction or style
  • Images that are generally harder to find in existing stock


We're very focused on what art directors and designers are looking for today, but struggling to find easily through traditional outlets.

As time goes on, we'll be expanding the number of contributors coming into the collection (so don't be discouraged if you're not contacted in the short-term), but the selection criteria is going to stay close to those values.  We encourage everyone to familiarize themselves with the artists and content being selected.

Thank you for the consideration.  :)

Best Regards,

Scott




« Reply #114 on: October 05, 2013, 08:56 »
0
Thanks Scott for the quick reply, I ll check my inbox:)
Cheers

« Reply #115 on: October 05, 2013, 11:48 »
-2
Oh.......oh.....
i thought it couldnt get worse then in my posted searchresult "kids".
But i was wrong....

Look at this:
http://www.offset.com/search/fashion

Really, i was not kidding when i said that we usually fire even interns when they bring back such rubbish.
Maybe i should call that guy back we kicked out last week, hire him and send his "work" to Offset?


I have around 8.000 images online at SS , many! of them much better then the stuff i have seen at Offset - but nobody invited me.
I will send them some vacation snaps.
Maybe that works

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #116 on: October 05, 2013, 11:58 »
+3
Like I said, it's a trend.
I find it amusing ahnd ironic to find that my local natural light, which was an automatic rejection on iStock in the old days, is now applauded by the very same people who used to tell me how evil it was, over on Stocksy.
What goes around, comes around.

However, not mentioning the quality of the photos in that fashion search, it seems that keywording is as lax there as it is most other places.
Why isn't anyone interested in getting keywording right.?
OTOH, 'fashion' is probably as useless/subjective a word as 'adorable' or 'sexy'. After all, one could say I generally dress in a (at worst) frumpy, or (at best) eclectic) 'fashion'.  ::)
« Last Edit: October 05, 2013, 12:21 by ShadySue »


« Reply #117 on: October 05, 2013, 12:22 »
-5
hmmmm...
fashion?
http://www.offset.com/photos/64217
Thats storytelling art-directors stuff??

Hey Scottbraut...
can i put my trash on an HD and send it over??

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #118 on: October 05, 2013, 12:27 »
+2
hmmmm...
fashion?
http://www.offset.com/photos/64217
Thats storytelling art-directors stuff??


Keywords are:
" day, sunlight, street, residential district, built structure, building exterior, facade, charming, shabby chic, rustic, capital cities, berlin, germany, city life, apartment, urban scene, roof, outdoors, window, balcony, flower, plant, architecture, block, european, nostalgia, old-fashioned, ivy, lush foliage, color image, square, unknown"

Is 'fashion' being derived from 'old-fashioned'?


« Reply #119 on: October 05, 2013, 12:41 »
-3
@Scottbraut:
Lets leave the sarcastic level and lets get serious.

What you are doing is a kick in the ass for every single serious photographer.

Do you sometimes have a look at the "images" you accept???
http://www.offset.com/photos/62875
http://www.offset.com/photos/65488
http://www.offset.com/photos/64783
http://www.offset.com/photos/65726
http://www.offset.com/photos/65718
http://www.offset.com/photos/65534
http://www.offset.com/photos/67512
http://www.offset.com/photos/67490
http://www.offset.com/photos/67255
http://www.offset.com/photos/67093
http://www.offset.com/photos/60931
http://www.offset.com/photos/60397

I would call that (its not even technical OK, not to mention professional) crap, garbage, trashwork, far away of beeing something conceptional or story-telling.
Its just cheap crap any Pro would be ashamed to show.
Serious Photographers are learning, planning, getting new gear every year, working hard...just to see their work go away for peanuts on SS while they have to face that boaring crap on Offset is been sold for 500$.

Ok, i think i gonna cancel my account on SS and just forget that idiotic stock-market-crap.
Glad i make my income with something else and not rely on that bloody exploiters-business.

« Reply #120 on: October 05, 2013, 13:12 »
+2
@ fritzfox,

We're still talking about stock, yeah?  So, all about product that is marketable, not art or however you measure quality.  These guys (and the stocksy guys) aren't dumb and if they think they can sell this stuff at these prices, then they probably can.  The world is full of people prepared to spend over the odds based on a label rather than the product.


« Reply #122 on: October 05, 2013, 13:43 »
+1
Sorry Scott, but this is the usual blah-blah we all know very well from shutterstock.
kind words - no substance.

But lets accept for a moment that what you say is true:
That means there are no reliable rules which helps a potential contributor to estimate if his/her stock is suitable for Offset.
Do you really think that any reasonable person spends his time to submitt to Offset if there is a chance that tomorrow his/her content is not welcome anymore?


Fact is:
You accept at Offset rubbish (out of focus / blurred / poor framed) bul(l)shi(t).


And now a very simple question and i guess (but maybe you surprise us) you will talk around the topic like always and do not answer:
Why didnt i get an invitation to offset?
From the 10.000 images i submitted around 1500 got rejected.
Around 500 because of "poor framing" etc.

As far is i see these images would than perfect suits to Offset.
Or are they still to good???

I think many other members ask theirself the same question.

« Reply #123 on: October 05, 2013, 14:06 »
+3
Hi Fritz,

As a practical answer - since you're posting anonymously - did you apply to Offset? 

The selection process has been invitation-only focused on assignment photographers and illustrators, with some collections.   We're not averse to taking Shutterstock artists or applicants into Offset.   That being said, we're also not segmenting our "core" collection into many price points as some other agencies have done.   And as noted, we're focused very specifically on images with the aforementioned qualities. 

There are many amazing, top-quality images at Shutterstock.com. We have higher price points (up to $400 or more), as well as ad agencies and other major buyers transacting on images in our main collection, so current Shutterstock contributors can already access higher-royalty sales at Shutterstock.com, in addition to all of the volume that subscriptions generate.  Therefore, we encourage many contributors to be on the appropriate platform for their work.  For many, that's Shutterstock.com. 

In terms of the risk of having an image removed from the collection - most of the artists that we work with are very understanding about creating a good experience for image customers, even if it means making decisions about the quantity of their work. They understand and believe in what we're doing.  In practical terms, we're usually talking about a few images per contributor, not wholesale collections, when a further edit is done.

Best,

Scott




« Last Edit: October 05, 2013, 16:09 by scottbraut »

« Reply #124 on: October 05, 2013, 14:22 »
-5
Hi Fritz,

As a practical answer - since you're posting anonymously - did you apply to Offset? 



No.
And i dont want to.
I am already fed up with SS , the lack of reliability and proper support, your arrogance and your strategy of never ever answer to a question.
And i dont want to be "double-fed-up".


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
29 Replies
12329 Views
Last post December 17, 2009, 18:12
by PixelBitch
2 Replies
2919 Views
Last post August 29, 2012, 17:47
by Mantis
9 Replies
5099 Views
Last post May 24, 2013, 07:02
by Deyan Georgiev Photography
7 Replies
9260 Views
Last post April 15, 2015, 21:47
by onepointfour
13 Replies
6608 Views
Last post March 07, 2018, 20:16
by RAW

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle