MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Envato Elements

Author Topic: SS worst Spammed Portfolios  (Read 8717 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.




msg2018

« Reply #27 on: November 12, 2018, 17:36 »
0
I tried a handful of those out of focus background back when almost everything sold, and never sold once. It took me a couple of days to realise that it wasn't a good idea. He/she may be spamming but not selling. But his/her newest 5 photos are at least partly in focus, there's still hope.
« Last Edit: November 12, 2018, 17:39 by msg2018 »

« Reply #28 on: November 13, 2018, 02:12 »
0
Wow, those similars look like he uploaded every single photos from a time lapse.

« Reply #29 on: November 13, 2018, 02:35 »
+3
Wow, those similars look like he uploaded every single photos from a time lapse.

pure spam.. having 1-2 versions is ok but this is nothing but spam

« Reply #30 on: November 13, 2018, 04:39 »
0
Wow, those similars look like he uploaded every single photos from a time lapse.

Takes a special kind of dedication to upload 20,000 of that kind of image. ???

They have to be making money though otherwise they'd have to be a real moron to do it and not make money  ;D

« Reply #31 on: November 13, 2018, 04:45 »
+1
Wow, those similars look like he uploaded every single photos from a time lapse.

Takes a special kind of dedication to upload 20,000 of that kind of image. ???

They have to be making money though otherwise they'd have to be a real moron to do it and not make money  ;D
How they do is what baffles me

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #32 on: November 13, 2018, 08:29 »
+1
Wow, those similars look like he uploaded every single photos from a time lapse.

Takes a special kind of dedication to upload 20,000 of that kind of image. ???

They have to be making money though otherwise they'd have to be a real moron to do it and not make money  ;D

Actually I'd vote for real moron.  ;D

When one of these spammers uploads, lets be moderate, 200 of the same series, inch by inch, time-lapse, video frame capture... whatever, they are only going to sell a few of them. Just like people who would complain "I have 2,000 photos and only make 3 downloads a day", if they are duplicates or images that no one wants, they will only make 3 downloads a day. It's not how many. (is there an echo in here?)

We shouldn't assume that 200 pages of this spam is making money, just because someone uploads it. There could be potentially useful photos there someplace, but what buyer is going to wade through 200 pages of similar crapstock, just to find a good one?

« Reply #33 on: December 12, 2018, 19:31 »
0
Do you wonder if SS is more lenient with photos taken outside of the USA or those themed "non-Western"?  We all know if we submitted anything like these they would be rejected in a heartbeat.

« Reply #34 on: December 13, 2018, 09:30 »
+7
No one is loading 20,000 by hand and getting them inspected. This stuff is coming in through a back door with inside help.

« Reply #35 on: December 13, 2018, 13:59 »
0
No one is loading 20,000 by hand and getting them inspected. This stuff is coming in through a back door with inside help.

I am also convinced, there must be a fail in the system that allows to upload in a portfolio without going through the inspection.

« Reply #36 on: December 13, 2018, 16:03 »
0
LOL, anything in relation to the description of 'hand drive wheel' car for this one? And there's a whole bunch of these. Sad, very sad.

Picture blurred for background abstract and can be illustration to article of hand drive wheel car - Image
https://www.shutterstock.com/fr/image-photo/picture-blurred-background-abstract-can-be-628691948


« Reply #37 on: December 13, 2018, 16:07 »
0
LOL, anything in relation to the description of 'hand drive wheel' car for this one? And there's a whole bunch of these. Sad, very sad.

Picture blurred for background abstract and can be illustration to article of hand drive wheel car - Image
https://www.shutterstock.com/fr/image-photo/picture-blurred-background-abstract-can-be-628691948

And this led to 'similar images' from another contributor with a very similar portfolio:
https://www.shutterstock.com/g/Aperture75

steheap

  • Author of best selling "Get Started in Stock"

« Reply #38 on: December 13, 2018, 21:04 »
+3
They are not really all the same - there are two darker green ones that slipped in there. These are all 9500 pixel files so they must just be created in photoshop I guess.

Steve

steheap

  • Author of best selling "Get Started in Stock"

« Reply #39 on: December 13, 2018, 21:05 »
+2
And only 6 pages (at 100 a page) before they move on to pink. Wow.

Brasilnut

  • Author Brutally Honest Guide to Microstock & Blog

« Reply #40 on: December 13, 2018, 21:12 »
+3
"1,693,154 new stock images added this week"

1 million of which are probably similars.

« Reply #41 on: December 13, 2018, 23:07 »
0
No one is loading 20,000 by hand and getting them inspected. This stuff is coming in through a back door with inside help.

I am also convinced, there must be a fail in the system that allows to upload in a portfolio without going through the inspection.

You both think SS doesn't know what's going on, but we do, they don't know what the fuck is being uploaded without inspection. We report this crap, do you think they don't know or can't remove this? They know they approve they allow. Back door uploads what .. I'm convinced you haven't any brain.


« Reply #42 on: December 14, 2018, 05:44 »
+1
Easy money for reviews to accept all, even if theyre a few pennies each.

Ss is broken, and no one seems to care as long as revenues keep on increasing


« Reply #43 on: December 14, 2018, 06:24 »
0
Easy money for reviews to accept all, even if theyre a few pennies each.

Ss is broken, and no one seems to care as long as revenues keep on increasing
But I guess they are paid the same money if they reject the files.
I believe these files are reviewed by AI which obviously is far away from perfect.

« Reply #44 on: December 14, 2018, 06:31 »
+2
I believe they are paid per image a fee
But accept all or reject all is easy peasy and quick

« Reply #45 on: December 14, 2018, 06:51 »
+3
Reminds me of a documentary I watch about Vietnam. There was no easy way for the US to measure who was winning or losing except by death toll on each side, so they used that as the main metric. You can guess the result.

Once SS started reporting library size growth to shareholders as the main measure of "health" of the collection/ contributor satisfaction there could only be one result.

If shareholders had any idea they would start also demanding a breakdown of DLs per image or views (on the results page) vs downloads.

« Reply #46 on: December 14, 2018, 07:56 »
+1
Easy money for reviews to accept all, even if theyre a few pennies each.

Ss is broken, and no one seems to care as long as revenues keep on increasing
But I guess they are paid the same money if they reject the files.
I believe these files are reviewed by AI which obviously is far away from perfect.

It shouldn't matter how lame their AI or human review is, they could throw out pics by the tens of thousands with a couple of clicks if they wanted to. The only way this could make sense to me:
- They want boast about the numbers in their ads, I find this unlikely at this point, after reaching numbers like 100 million there is no point to this.
- They want to split up the collection again similar to select/offset to justify having a go at raising prices, but probably not as high as offest etc...
« Last Edit: December 14, 2018, 08:49 by topol »

« Reply #47 on: December 14, 2018, 08:32 »
+4
Reminds me of a documentary I watch about Vietnam. There was no easy way for the US to measure who was winning or losing except by death toll on each side, so they used that as the main metric. You can guess the result.

Once SS started reporting library size growth to shareholders as the main measure of "health" of the collection/ contributor satisfaction there could only be one result.

If shareholders had any idea they would start also demanding a breakdown of DLs per image or views (on the results page) vs downloads.


Library size is the answer but AI or stupid shareholders is not. Has anybody who makes these absurd claims ever read the quarterly reports? Number of photos is not important, profit is. Shareholders read debt, investment, income, growth, profit and things, not how big the number of photos. Shareholders don't care about us, views, DLs per image. I hate the spam and the junk that's accepted but friend paid reviewer conspiracy, back door sneak or secret plot of some sort is stupid. SS is doing this on purpose and that's worse and more stupid.

« Reply #48 on: December 30, 2018, 11:37 »
+5
Because of the new year I wanted to add some humor to the topic. https://www.shutterstock.com/contributorsupport/articles/kbat02/000012339 support article that explains similar and rule for this.

ShadySue

« Reply #49 on: December 30, 2018, 11:54 »
+1
Because of the new year I wanted to add some humor to the topic. https://www.shutterstock.com/contributorsupport/articles/kbat02/000012339 support article that explains similar and rule for this.

LOL!

Envato ElementsMicrostock Insider

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
4 Replies
2809 Views
Last post October 23, 2007, 19:28
by Dr Bouz
1 Replies
2588 Views
Last post March 23, 2008, 22:20
by jorgeinthewater
6 Replies
2950 Views
Last post July 20, 2008, 14:43
by daintee
0 Replies
2045 Views
Last post August 14, 2008, 04:42
by stozka
4 Replies
2630 Views
Last post September 17, 2011, 16:36
by icefront

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

Envato Elements