Author Topic: The microstock new way (Read 7731 times)

Chichikov · « **on:** December 01, 2018, 02:29 »

- Few years ago iStock began to accept anything (except images with potential problem with copyright)
- Then Dreamstime did the same…
- Since one year Shutterstock does the same (and even accepts tons of double similar images - sometimes like single frames taken from a video)…
- On Alamy, as I remember I never got a rejection, or maybe one or two a year for files under 4MB (not rejected in fact but refused by the system)…
And I don’t tell about sites like Mostphotos, Picfair and similar…

Now I have noticed that Depositphotos does the same.
I you go to the tag “rejected” and then click “resubmit”, all your images will be accepted in a couple of days!

Is that the new microstock way??

Pauws99 · « **Reply #1 on:** December 01, 2018, 02:35 »

Quote from: Chichikov on December 01, 2018, 02:29

- Few years ago iStock began to accept anything (except images with potential problem with copyright)
- Then Dreamstime did the same…
- Since one year Shutterstock does the same (and even accepts tons of double similar images - sometimes like single frames taken from a video)…
- On Alamy, as I remember I never got a rejection, or maybe one or two a year for files under 4MB (not rejected in fact but refused by the system)…
And I don’t tell about sites like Mostphotos, Picfair and similar…

Now I have noticed that Depositphotos does the same.
I you go to the tag “rejected” and then click “resubmit”, all your images will be accepted in a couple of days!

Is that the new microstock way??

Yep my belief is they think powerful "intelligent" search engines will push the rubbish to the back and effectively hide it away and can be done more cheaply than employing inspectors to spend a sensible amount of time viewing images. Experience so far suggests it doesn't work. I think only adobe seem to be maintaining any kind of consistent standard.

Not Today · « **Reply #2 on:** December 01, 2018, 03:47 »

Quote from: Chichikov on December 01, 2018, 02:29

- Few years ago iStock began to accept anything (except images with potential problem with copyright)
- Then Dreamstime did the same…
- Since one year Shutterstock does the same (and even accepts tons of double similar images - sometimes like single frames taken from a video)…
- On Alamy, as I remember I never got a rejection, or maybe one or two a year for files under 4MB (not rejected in fact but refused by the system)…
And I don’t tell about sites like Mostphotos, Picfair and similar…

Now I have noticed that Depositphotos does the same.
I you go to the tag “rejected” and then click “resubmit”, all your images will be accepted in a couple of days!

Is that the new microstock way??

Yes, all agencies (with the exception of Envato) want to offer the largest database of crap, while at the same time offering a curated 'premium' section to ensure they don't lose their important clients.

filo · « **Reply #3 on:** December 01, 2018, 15:09 »

Quote from: Not Today on December 01, 2018, 03:47

Yes, all agencies (with the exception of Envato) want to offer the largest database of crap, while at the same time offering a curated 'premium' section to ensure they don't lose their important clients.

And it looks like the system is working for those that opened up their inspection process. Envato seems to be in a death spiral for a lot of the microstock sectors they tried to break into.

cthoman · « **Reply #4 on:** December 01, 2018, 18:10 »

It's not a horrible strategy. They should have accepted stuff like this from the beginning, but made entry as a contributor stricter. The theory that if you accept a contributor, then you should be happy with the majority of their work. Might have made everybody happier too.

stockastic · « **Reply #5 on:** December 01, 2018, 18:14 »

Inspection costs a lot of money. They all think they can make more money if they stop paying inspectors and let the search algorithms somehow sort it out. SS in particular makes a big deal about what a high tech software company they are. Investors bought it, for a while. But the sort of "AI" it would take to really judge photos doesn't exist, and may never exist.

NikonFThree · « **Reply #6 on:** December 02, 2018, 15:56 »

Way back in the early days of microstock, iStock, after accepting you into their fold would allow you to submit 15 images PER WEEK. If you were serious about building your port on line you made sure those images were the very best you could provide. After several hundred downloads they would raise you to 30, 50, 100 then unlimited uploads. Now, as you mentioned, everything seems to be accepted. Is it right? who knows. If you have an image that is very unusual yet a bit out of focus will a buyer use it? perhaps, but I really feel that good quality, interesting, creative images will come out on top in the long run. Those folks who are uploading everything are doing themselves and their agencies a disservice as are the agencies who are accepting everything that is uploaded.

topol · « **Reply #7 on:** December 05, 2018, 16:03 »

I would really like to talk to some of thees spammers, how it's working out for them. NO hostility or anything, truly juts curious. My bet is from my experience on how these sites work, they aren't achieving anything at all, it's a complete waste of time.

mindstorm · « **Reply #8 on:** December 05, 2018, 16:14 »

Quote from: topol on December 05, 2018, 16:03

My bet is from my experience on how these sites work, they aren't achieving anything at all, it's a complete waste of time.

Why do you think that? If I am a buyer (which I have been on occasion), I go to a site and enter my keywords. 80+% of the time, I will choose an item from the first page that shows. Sometimes onto page 2, and if i am really specific about my needs and am not seeing it, i might go further.

However, whoever is on page 1 of my search returns has by far the highest chance I will buy it. If one guy controls that entire page, he has an 80% chance of making the sale (at least if I am the one buying)...

topol · « **Reply #9 on:** December 05, 2018, 16:25 »

Quote from: mindstorm on December 05, 2018, 16:14

... If one guy controls that entire page...

Which never happens. Impossible.

I think these trashy spam pics never make it to the first page, not even the first 50.

mindstorm · « **Reply #10 on:** December 05, 2018, 17:10 »

Quote from: topol on December 05, 2018, 16:25

Which never happens. Impossible.

I think these trashy spam pics never make it to the first page, not even the first 50.

I thought we were talking about the person that literally owns the first page of each of several key search terms. Examples were given (above, I think, unless that was a different thread...) of terms and pages that were 100% all from one person on Shutterstock in particular.

topol · « **Reply #11 on:** December 06, 2018, 07:37 »

Quote from: mindstorm on December 05, 2018, 17:10

Quote from: topol on December 05, 2018, 16:25
Which never happens. Impossible.

I think these trashy spam pics never make it to the first page, not even the first 50.

I thought we were talking about the person that literally owns the first page of each of several key search terms. Examples were given (above, I think, unless that was a different thread...) of terms and pages that were 100% all from one person on Shutterstock in particular.

Can you show me those examples?

ole999 · « **Reply #12 on:** December 06, 2018, 10:38 »

at Shutterstock everything is drowning in millions of crappy smartphone images from contributors in India. 😡

OM · « **Reply #13 on:** December 07, 2018, 03:16 »

Quote from: mindstorm on December 05, 2018, 17:10

Quote from: topol on December 05, 2018, 16:25
Which never happens. Impossible.

I think these trashy spam pics never make it to the first page, not even the first 50.

I thought we were talking about the person that literally owns the first page of each of several key search terms. Examples were given (above, I think, unless that was a different thread...) of terms and pages that were 100% all from one person on Shutterstock in particular.

That was the forum topic on 'footage'. One of their footage contributors (Crossroads) had virtually the whole of page 1 of footage with any/all most popular keywords. SS admitted that they had been fiddling with the algo ahead of the launch of Shutterstock Select footage and that it was a glitch caused by them. Almost every 4K clip featured 'shot on RED' in the title. Now all back to normal....you get $1.50/video and the Club Wot You and I Aint In gets $300+ !

mindstorm · « **Reply #14 on:** December 07, 2018, 23:49 »

Quote from: OM on December 07, 2018, 03:16

That was the forum topic on 'footage'. One of their footage contributors (Crossroads) had virtually the whole of page 1 of footage with any/all most popular keywords. SS admitted that they had been fiddling with the algo ahead of the launch of Shutterstock Select footage and that it was a glitch caused by them.

Thx. I went back and tried to find that discussion again, but came up empty.

Chichikov · « **Reply #15 on:** December 08, 2018, 04:48 »

Quote from: mindstorm on December 07, 2018, 23:49

Quote from: OM on December 07, 2018, 03:16
That was the forum topic on 'footage'. One of their footage contributors (Crossroads) had virtually the whole of page 1 of footage with any/all most popular keywords. SS admitted that they had been fiddling with the algo ahead of the launch of Shutterstock Select footage and that it was a glitch caused by them.

Thx. I went back and tried to find that discussion again, but came up empty.

https://forums.submit.shutterstock.com/topic/95811-something-wrong-with-video-search-results/?tab=comments#comment-1717311

https://forums.submit.shutterstock.com/topic/95821-crossroads/?tab=comments#comment-1717434

https://forums.submit.shutterstock.com/topic/95857-we%E2%80%99re-excited-to-announce-the-launch-of-shutterstock-select-our-premium-royalty-free-footage/?tab=comments#comment-1718945

https://forums.submit.shutterstock.com/topic/95860-the-eighth-wonder/?tab=comments#comment-1718581