Agency Based Discussion > Shutterstock.com
Shutterstock has given up on reporting detailed collection size
Jo Ann Snover:
https://twitter.com/joannsnover/status/1302000947867119616
Shutterstock can't be bothered to update various parts of the web site so they tell a consistent story to prospective subscribers about how many images they have an how many are being added.
Tenebroso:
And they better not touch the web much, their technical team is a disaster. Any day the web goes down, and they can't get back on the air. Although it is only text, it is better not to move the web much.
To do things well, they must pay money. Not the plan, apparently. I do not think that in the corridors of his office, love is breathed.
Suspect:
As contributors' portfolio sizes change from hour to hour without adding or deleting images Sstock are either incompetent or manipulating numbers ...🤔
https://forums.submit.shutterstock.com/topic/100898-disappearing-images/
gnirtS:
Im seeing remarkably consistent image sale earnings at the end of the month since june. Similar to within 1-2 dollars in several hundred. Never saw anything as consistent as that previously.
It started a very consistent earnings (not numbers) decrease then stabilised at almost the same every month since June.
10+ years submitting and not come across monthly figures as suspiciously consistent.
Uncle Pete:
--- Quote from: Suspect on September 11, 2020, 12:13 ---As contributors' portfolio sizes change from hour to hour without adding or deleting images Sstock are either incompetent or manipulating numbers ...🤔
https://forums.submit.shutterstock.com/topic/100898-disappearing-images/
--- End quote ---
You left out, or both and maybe a third. When we connect, anyone of us, we get directed to a server somewhere in the world (how's that for vague?) which has the entire database of images, mirrored from another source. In order to keep all of these synchronized, they have to be taken down, or partially disabled for segments of data, because you can't be reading and writing at the same time and have a duplicate that's 100% of the original.
Now image that the database is 300 million images. Someone can hit a server that has one or more of their images, in the locked section, during an update. 404 error image can't be found. I think people get overly excited when an image is "missing" and they worry that their sales will drop. Remember when people said, their images were being blocked? Remember the blackouts of portions of the world, by times? All of these might be true, in that something isn't found or accessible, when someone looks, but the conclusions and interpretations are just conjecture.
What I mean is, there are not artist or zone blackouts and SS isn't manipulating if our images are seen or not and "missing" images aren't really gone. They are temporarily unavailable while the system is updating. The fact that my portfolio count and my actual image count are NOT the same, isn't really too sinister, and which one is right, which one is wrong? Is the higher number the error or the one image lower number? ;D
When I was removing images a while back, I'd delete, back up, delete, back up, and after awhile, I'd reload the page. Sometimes the last ten would be gone. Other times, I'd reload and suddenly everything was back. Gone... back. Because all the servers are not always in sync, it could take (I know everyone reads this but seems to forget) "Up to 72 hours" which means, 72 hours for a change in keywords, everywhere in the world.
A missing image, can be invisible in Wisconsin, yet be available for download in Texas, Alaska and Australia. Micro inspecting a huge system, for one image, when we are randomly sent to a server, who knows where, doesn't produce anything except a guess and perception, that something is wrong. And then when the image "returns" it's been fixed, when nothing was actually broken?
I confess, I don't sit and check if my images are there or not, I have other things to do with my time. Just like (remember when) someone wrote some software that would monitor live, checking every minute to see if our account got a download? I mean up to the minute. The agencies blocked these because like a DNS attack it was bringing the response times down on the servers. What's the point? Checking, checking, checking?
And for the people who want to watch and check and see if all their images are there, and try to find the one that's missing. Why? I mean, knowing changes nothing and we don't really know, because we can only look under a microscope, and can't see the whole world view. You need to remember to leave the website, clear your cache, then come back, every time you look. ;D
As for the OP, "We have more than 340 million images as of June 30, 2020." which is what it says now, is pretty funny. I thought the idea of reporting how many images and how many new, was irrelevant, when they did report it. Now they have dropped the, we have more, claims. Dupes and similar have been hit hard. Some portfolios that most of us would have called nothing but filler and spam, have been closed.
None of that matters to me, or changes my collection, but maybe it will make the site look better for buyers. Who needs all that junk and crapstock, just to say "we have more images". I mean, how many buyers, thought that a terrible search with all kinds of duplicates, made their buying better.
Meanwhile: "215 million stock images, vectors, videos and 360-degree panoramic images. Greater choice from Alamy, the world’s most diverse stock photo collection." LOL
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version