Author Topic: SS continues to deteriorate (Read 32465 times)

Uncle Pete · « **Reply #125 on:** March 06, 2020, 11:54 »

Quote from: georgep7 on March 06, 2020, 04:43

Uncle Pete, resubmit with notice that specific race track in an up-hill!

Hey good suggestion? Add uphill to the description.

Quote from: Pauws99 on March 06, 2020, 06:04

Quote from: pics2 on March 06, 2020, 04:35
Quote from: Pauws99 on March 06, 2020, 03:57
The root cause for me is that they have made it possible to become a contributor with zero knowledge of photography or stock photography creating an unmanagable tsumani of images. There was a time when at least you needed to demonstrate a reasonable level of competence. The quicker in a process you filter out poor quality the cheaper it is. Can you imagine a supermarket using a supplier where 90% of their product has to be rejected as sub-standard? I'm pretty sure SS have such people.
Sorry, but that's not true. It was like this since the day one of Shutterstock and microstock itself. We can't pretend now that microstock was some kind of macrostock once upon a time. Microstock ruined macrostock and any appreciation of quality in photography years ago.
You had to have 7 out of 10 images approved. On Istock it was three but to high standard and if you failed you had to wait at least a month to be approved. Thats a fact.

No it wasn't Macrostock but a cetain level was required. I failed myself and had to up my game.

Question and there's lots of room below. What microstock agencies required any sort of test to be allowed to upload? Please name all of them. I'll start:

1) Shutterstock
2) iStock
3) Alamy (not microstock but close enough)

I do agree, that I had to up my game to Microstock levels, not just photos that were actually good, nice, printable and maybe even artistic. No I had to peek at full size, 100%, make sure every pixel was perfect, no unsightly shadows, no depth of field in front of a subject, or not too much. Everything illuminated like a dinner from a nuclear plant, glowing and bright. Isolation, without a speck, and sharp? We needed to have calibrated monitors and needed to wear eye protection so we didn't cut them while viewing.

That sharp!

For a quarter?

At least that silly upsizing for Alamy ended. And iStock, where are they now?

But my favorite part is, one person says the problem is they are accepting substandard images and another is going to say, they are rejecting my good images that could be selling.

Or maybe the problem is new images don't sell, but they are forcing new images to the top of everything and hiding old images? Plus they are favoring "someone else" and hurting my sales. My income is capped, reviewers are not human, the reviewers are favoring other contributors who are friends. Some countries are getting better placement to force out the higher paid quality contributors. The stock holders are behind this. Well kind of, they don't tell the company what to do, but the fact that any business has investors, means they have to show a profit for those investors.

You can make up nearly anything to support any argument you want, without any logic, evidence or proof. Then you know you have stepped into...

jonbull · « **Reply #126 on:** March 06, 2020, 12:38 »

had chat with a person at ss...for me even those who help are ai machine) unbelievable the kind of answer....similar content? maybe they are similar to content of other contributors...this is the answer.... by the way super slow march forme everywhere...coronavirus kicking in stock market probably,

Tenebroso · « **Reply #127 on:** March 06, 2020, 15:29 »

The new collaborators I suppose ...... that in SS ....

I suppose the new collaborators will leave. It is not about tanned skin or lack of professionalism or weak mind. I believe that if someone comes to SS now, they leave before 30 days. Since they now use all the variety of excuses to reject.

There is a comment on the official forum of many fewer images, some millions of images less, will they be cleaning old files? They are no longer interested in being the Agency with the most files? I think that seeing the behavior, there is no doubt that they are doing very badly economically. It seems that we will soon know the extent of the real situation of a huge failure.

I think the situation is more serious than we can imagine.

Pauws99 · « **Reply #128 on:** March 07, 2020, 02:12 »

If it sells its not crap this is a business.

Pauws99 · « **Reply #129 on:** March 07, 2020, 02:16 »

Question and there's lots of room below. What microstock agencies required any sort of test to be allowed to upload? Please name all of them. I'll start:

1) Shutterstock
2) iStock
3) Alamy (not microstock but close enough)

I'm pretty sure Fotolia did but maybe I'm wrong..I remember when I started I got lots of rejections and couldn't understand it as my friends all said how great my pictures were ;-).

MicroVet · « **Reply #130 on:** March 07, 2020, 02:46 »

I do not remember any agency back in 2006 that did not require a photographer to pass an acceptance test. Sure, some were more stringent than others but all asked a number of candidate images to pass to be approved as a contributor.

A really strange thing is happening with searches on SS on the "Fresh Content" order.

I searched for "palace interior" to take a look at what is being approve nowadays and what was being approved years back. Ordered by the "Fresh Content"option, jumped at page 1000 (out of 1091) and I see images from 2019, 2018 and other recent years in the mix. Even on page 1091 that happens. The same happens with other searches where I have mages from 2007 and on the last page I get recent images and none of mine.

Am I missing something? Isn't "Fresh Content" synonym of newest? Or does it mean unsold or something like that?

Pauws99 · « **Reply #131 on:** March 07, 2020, 03:09 »

Quote from: MicroVet on March 07, 2020, 02:46

I do not remember any agency back in 2006 that did not require a photographer to pass an acceptance test. Sure, some were more stringent than others but all asked a number of candidate images to pass to be approved as a contributor.

A really strange thing is happening with searches on SS on the "Fresh Content" order.

I searched for "palace interior" to take a look at what is being approve nowadays and what was being approved years back. Ordered by the "Fresh Content"option, jumped at page 1000 (out of 1091) and I see images from 2019, 2018 and other recent years in the mix. Even on page 1091 that happens. The same happens with other searches where I have mages from 2007 and on the last page I get recent images and none of mine.

Am I missing something? Isn't "Fresh Content" synonym of newest? Or does it mean unsold or something like that?

I guess it might mean unsold...I get quite a lot of old images that never sold getting a sale and some pretty poor ones at that. Which shows its never a good idea to remove your "crappy" content.

Uncle Pete · « **Reply #132 on:** March 07, 2020, 10:10 »

Quote from: Pauws99 on March 07, 2020, 03:09

Quote from: MicroVet on March 07, 2020, 02:46
I do not remember any agency back in 2006 that did not require a photographer to pass an acceptance test. Sure, some were more stringent than others but all asked a number of candidate images to pass to be approved as a contributor.

A really strange thing is happening with searches on SS on the "Fresh Content" order.

I searched for "palace interior" to take a look at what is being approve nowadays and what was being approved years back. Ordered by the "Fresh Content"option, jumped at page 1000 (out of 1091) and I see images from 2019, 2018 and other recent years in the mix. Even on page 1091 that happens. The same happens with other searches where I have mages from 2007 and on the last page I get recent images and none of mine.

Am I missing something? Isn't "Fresh Content" synonym of newest? Or does it mean unsold or something like that?
I guess it might mean unsold...I get quite a lot of old images that never sold getting a sale and some pretty poor ones at that. Which shows its never a good idea to remove your "crappy" content.

We have no hint what any of the words mean on SS. Easy example, Top Images, which just like Most Popular, is in no imaginable way, what any of us would call either of those phrases. One of my recent uploads just jumped to the first "top Image, after I uploaded about 100 other new images. Why? No downloads, the new images are a couple lines below, and almost all editorial, filling page 1 and 2, but why would a photo of bread, suddenly be my Top Image.

We can spend forever trying to figure this out, but there's no answer.

Every site in 2006 would be what? iStock, Shutterstock and Alamy? LOL

Quote from: Pauws99 on March 07, 2020, 02:16

Question and there's lots of room below. What microstock agencies required any sort of test to be allowed to upload? Please name all of them. I'll start:

1) Shutterstock
2) iStock
3) Alamy (not microstock but close enough)

I'm pretty sure Fotolia did but maybe I'm wrong..I remember when I started I got lots of rejections and couldn't understand it as my friends all said how great my pictures were ;-).

I don't recall, but I do remember those three had qualification submissions for entry and IS even had the written test, that had to be 100% right, or you would have to go back and change answers until all were correct. Not a bad idea, I mean what can you contribute, what's the minimum size, some pretty basic things.

I had plenty of rejections myself. I went bad the other day, looking for rejections that I could re-edit and upload. Sometimes that's been useful. Oh No! Not only are they terrible, bad, flawed, poor concepts, I see some that were accepted that I'd hit with a DEL key in seconds, now. Sure photos, events, scenery, I have been taking photos since the 60s, a few from the 50s. (talk about old timer?) Some are actually good, but unsuitable for Microstock, film is just too grainy, most of them would take far too much effort to edit. For what?

I think though, that if reviewers do their job right, there doesn't need to be an entrance exam. The agencies are responsible for what they accept and their content. If it's poor quality and rubbish, they should reject it. If the agencies accept Crapstock, it's not the contributors fault, it's the agency. With that, I say, open to everyone and let them meet the standards. I'd hope that someone who gets enough rejections, would get the message and go away, or improve to meet the requirements.

MicroVet · « **Reply #133 on:** March 07, 2020, 11:31 »

Quote from: Uncle Pete on March 07, 2020, 10:10

Quote from: Pauws99 on March 07, 2020, 03:09
Quote from: MicroVet on March 07, 2020, 02:46
I do not remember any agency back in 2006 that did not require a photographer to pass an acceptance test. Sure, some were more stringent than others but all asked a number of candidate images to pass to be approved as a contributor.

A really strange thing is happening with searches on SS on the "Fresh Content" order.

I searched for "palace interior" to take a look at what is being approve nowadays and what was being approved years back. Ordered by the "Fresh Content"option, jumped at page 1000 (out of 1091) and I see images from 2019, 2018 and other recent years in the mix. Even on page 1091 that happens. The same happens with other searches where I have mages from 2007 and on the last page I get recent images and none of mine.

Am I missing something? Isn't "Fresh Content" synonym of newest? Or does it mean unsold or something like that?
I guess it might mean unsold...I get quite a lot of old images that never sold getting a sale and some pretty poor ones at that. Which shows its never a good idea to remove your "crappy" content.

We have no hint what any of the words mean on SS. Easy example, Top Images, which just like Most Popular, is in no imaginable way, what any of us would call either of those phrases. One of my recent uploads just jumped to the first "top Image, after I uploaded about 100 other new images. Why? No downloads, the new images are a couple lines below, and almost all editorial, filling page 1 and 2, but why would a photo of bread, suddenly be my Top Image.

We can spend forever trying to figure this out, but there's no answer.

Every site in 2006 would be what? iStock, Shutterstock and Alamy? LOL

In 2007 I already was in almost all the Microstock agencies I'm today except for a couple I joined later. I do not not remember back then joining an agency without having to be approved unless my memory is betraying me. And this means SS, IS, FL, DT, 123RF, BS and Alamy (was Macro).

Of course, not all had the same level of requirements but none accepted you just by registering.

pancaketom · « **Reply #134 on:** March 07, 2020, 12:59 »

DT was my first agency and I think that as soon as an image passed QC you were in. I think I was hovering around 50% acceptance for the first few months or more. I had some pretty good images, but I also had some really really poor ones and it definitely took me more time to make an image acceptable. It didn't help that I was using a not quite 4 mp point and shoot. RPI that hit $1 per image per month really helped the motivation though.

There are a few things I have images of that I wish I could re-shoot with the gear I have now.

georgep7 · « **Reply #135 on:** March 07, 2020, 15:24 »

Quote

There are a few things I have images of that I wish I could re-shoot with the gear I have now.

Don't think about it, probably quite many people already did....

Tenebroso · « **Reply #136 on:** March 07, 2020, 15:37 »

Microstock is a file store. There must be everything to reach all customers. It's like going fishing, you may go to the same place, but the tides change, waves, currents, temperature, sea salinity, luck, chance, .....

In this business, there must be children's drawings, I do not mean drawings for children, but drawings as if they were made by a three-year-old child. It is something necessary. A drawing of these that simulate a children's drawing will never be in an art exhibition.
This business is industrial photography.

The problem is that they insist on offering a farmer model, when people know that farmers have calluses on their hands.

Clients want naturalness, quality for wedding photos, or international competitions.

I do not argue that any client understands photos, but most only want what they like and / or need for their work. He cares little if he has noise, logically, with noise the image will not go on sale.

In conclusion, agencies must have files capable of adapting to any client within a minimum of quality. The mistake, the pretty girl of agriculture. It is valid, but SS strives to hide the real farmers.

And then we try to prove ourselves that we are image professionals. Here you need all the images, with a minimum of quality, to be able to offer it to anyone, with the tastes of the variety to any corner of the world.

If you like color in India, it cannot be that SS only offers the same old dandruff per system. The problem lies in hiding the virus files after three pages of spam to sell what they want to sell.

At the time they offered variety, do not hide files, switch to the entire department of those who place the images in the Escaparete of Relevant, SS will sell more. The customer is tired of always seeing the same. But it is not the quality of the files or the exaggerated number of files, the problem is the pointless funnel of offering all similar images if or if they themselves. Without granting variations, different things, .......

They have a global customer market, but they do badly by offering the taste of an old apartment, which must go home or modernize, the department that chooses to hide new things and offers only dandruff.

A person can be number one selling fridges and unable to sell a car.

therefore, if photo quality were needed, only the best photographers in the world would work.

What happens that the best photographers in the world are not needed here, a drawing that looks like a child is needed when talking about children's issues. Is that drawing bad? do not. It is very good, especially for the agency that has everything and for the client who finds what he was looking for.

The problem is that SS does not offer everything, hides things and offers with a shoehorn, others. I guess they do it with good intention, they probably think they are the gods of taste and cerebral delicacy. but I fear that the taste is varied, and above all changing.

Therefore, they must be updated.

Uncle Pete · « **Reply #137 on:** March 07, 2020, 15:44 »

Quote from: MicroVet on March 07, 2020, 11:31

Quote from: Uncle Pete on March 07, 2020, 10:10
Quote from: Pauws99 on March 07, 2020, 03:09
Quote from: MicroVet on March 07, 2020, 02:46
I do not remember any agency back in 2006 that did not require a photographer to pass an acceptance test. Sure, some were more stringent than others but all asked a number of candidate images to pass to be approved as a contributor.

A really strange thing is happening with searches on SS on the "Fresh Content" order.

I searched for "palace interior" to take a look at what is being approve nowadays and what was being approved years back. Ordered by the "Fresh Content"option, jumped at page 1000 (out of 1091) and I see images from 2019, 2018 and other recent years in the mix. Even on page 1091 that happens. The same happens with other searches where I have mages from 2007 and on the last page I get recent images and none of mine.

Am I missing something? Isn't "Fresh Content" synonym of newest? Or does it mean unsold or something like that?
I guess it might mean unsold...I get quite a lot of old images that never sold getting a sale and some pretty poor ones at that. Which shows its never a good idea to remove your "crappy" content.

We have no hint what any of the words mean on SS. Easy example, Top Images, which just like Most Popular, is in no imaginable way, what any of us would call either of those phrases. One of my recent uploads just jumped to the first "top Image, after I uploaded about 100 other new images. Why? No downloads, the new images are a couple lines below, and almost all editorial, filling page 1 and 2, but why would a photo of bread, suddenly be my Top Image.

We can spend forever trying to figure this out, but there's no answer.

Every site in 2006 would be what? iStock, Shutterstock and Alamy? LOL

In 2007 I already was in almost all the Microstock agencies I'm today except for a couple I joined later. I do not not remember back then joining an agency without having to be approved unless my memory is betraying me. And this means SS, IS, FL, DT, 123RF, BS and Alamy (was Macro).

Of course, not all had the same level of requirements but none accepted you just by registering.

Since I wasn't there, I can't argue.

And things do change.

I can tell you that I joined everywhere in 2008, only the three had any sort of test or application. DP didn't exist. 123RF, BS, DT and FT had no test (I would have failed) I started out, uploading to the four, FT, DT, 123 and BS. Then when I had 20 accepted at each, with many rejections, I took the "best" 10 and applied to SS, IS and waited. IS took me after some rejections, SS asked me to wait and try again. Alamy I didn't upload Microstock I did some scenic and outdoors, I passed.

That's my memory of 2008. And until about 2012 IS, SS and Alamy held up the standards with consistent reviews. Then IS suddenly dropped. I actually took files from the IS rejected folder and uploaded them and they passed. Soon SS was following and starting to accept images that I wouldn't have uploaded in 2011.

The small agencies I dropped, I didn't want to be part of them. Talk about no standards? Alamy to this day, holds to their quality standards, but they eventually dropped the dumb upsizing requirements? FT got sold and Adobe changed some things, but at this point, is probably the closest to old days reviews, and trying to only take the best quality products for their customers.

Only saying Microstock, the smaller agencies, the ones that are on life support, will take almost anything, because like the people that feed them, they are desperate to make any money they can. The big sorting out is coming. The only reason things haven't adjusted sooner is we're being paid such insulting tiny percentages, so the abusive parasites are hanging on, bleed artists until the last drop.

What use is a test or proof skill application? If the agencies held their standards, the people who produce sub-standard images would be rejected and rejected, until they got the message and went away. Instead the agencies accept total crap. There's the problem, and the agencies are the ones responsible, not the people who are trying to make some money.

I can only blame the agencies for their own fate. GIGO

I'm happy with SS, AS and Alamy. If DT made a comeback that would be nice.