|
MicrostockGroup Sponsors
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - Brasilnut
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 64
1
« on: February 02, 2025, 07:34 »
https://www.alamy.com/blog/safeguarding-your-photographs-from-copyright-theftWe have also updated our monthly process and comms about when a contributor may have incurred an Exclusivity Admin fee, so that if an image has been incorrectly marked, they'll get fair warning to fix any incorrectly marked images whilst we pause the infringements process for their portfolio. Unfortunately, these fees cannot be avoided, but we hope that the improved comms will reduce the number of incorrectly marked images we find, and this will be a benefit for both Alamy and contributors.
2
« on: February 01, 2025, 10:44 »
This is shocking.
This administrative fee made sense when Alamy paid higher for exclusive content, I believe it was 60% when sold directly...but they got rid of this benefit about two years ago.
So now it just seems like a cash grab. As someone who does occasionally upload exclusively on Alamy as RM I will be extra careful from now on in case I upload elsewhere by accident.
In related news, the lawsuit brought on by Bild where I'm involved is still pending. Had also to pay an administrative fee.
4
« on: January 17, 2025, 16:55 »
Getty replied to my ticket:
Topaz is defined as an AI tool. Please ensure any files edited using AI tools falls under our requirements.
Creative Content Retouching and Modification Requirements:
https://contributors.gettyimages.com/article/10847
I will go ahead and close this ticket. If you would like to reopen this ticket, please reply to the email notification of my response as replies via Account Management will not register a response if the ticket is closed. If you have another question or issue, please create a new ticket as we often need to assign tickets to different people and departments.
Sincerely,
Maggie
Find out more about how we license your work:
https://contributors.gettyimages.com/article/6251
Contributor Services
What did that actually say? Can you use Topaz or not, or only some parts of it?
"Did Not Connect: Potential Security Issue
Firefox detected a potential security threat and did not continue to contributors.gettyimages.com because this website requires a secure connection."
I asked why my images using Topaz solely for noise reduction and/or sharpening were rejected.
5
« on: January 17, 2025, 08:36 »
Getty replied to my ticket: Topaz is defined as an AI tool. Please ensure any files edited using AI tools falls under our requirements.
Creative Content Retouching and Modification Requirements:
https://contributors.gettyimages.com/article/10847
I will go ahead and close this ticket. If you would like to reopen this ticket, please reply to the email notification of my response as replies via Account Management will not register a response if the ticket is closed. If you have another question or issue, please create a new ticket as we often need to assign tickets to different people and departments.
Sincerely,
Maggie
Find out more about how we license your work:
https://contributors.gettyimages.com/article/6251
Contributor Services
7
« on: January 15, 2025, 15:15 »
Resubmitted one of the files without the "Topaz AI" extension on the title and it has been accepted.
8
« on: January 14, 2025, 14:29 »
Can anyone tell what certification each agency actually requires and checks to upload footage to their collection?
Do any of them ask for details of the certifications / licensing / flight training / registration required for the country of the artist or the country where the footage is taken?
Agencies require zero certification.
9
« on: January 12, 2025, 07:38 »
the question is - what will they do to our royaltiies?
because I am sure those will be streamlined across all platforms.
At least looking at my own numbers, Shutterstock currently isn't far off from the 15% royalties that iStock non-exclusives pay. Therefore, we may not see much difference in the average prices at micros once they streamlined. Average prices have really crashed at SS since they introduced those ridiculous levels scam and reduced our minimum subs to 10cents from 38 cents (also whatever happened to those $2.88+ on-demand-downloads). Footage average prices have also come crashing down at the 3 major agencies. Seems as if no difference in selling HD or 4K. More info here: https://brutallyhonestmicrostock.com/2025/01/11/getty-and-shutterstock-merger-what-it-means-for-contributors/Another discussion for those with images on Getty exclusive and Shutterstock Offset at the higher-end of prices. Lots of behind-the-scenes discussions going on I'm sure. If/when the two portals merge, what will happen to the same assets at the difference agencies? This seems like a clear loss for us. I have some 11,000 assets at both iStock and SS which are duplicated.
11
« on: January 10, 2025, 06:19 »
Thanks for sharing.
Using the help of AI, I've summarised the transcript:
Themes from the Transcript:
1. Career Journey and Adaptability
Anna Dixons career showcases adaptability across roles in print publishing, digital media, and AI-driven content strategy.
Transitioned through industries (publishing to tech) and platforms (AOL, iHeartRadio, Wall Street Journal, Google, Shutterstock).
Foundational roles in content distribution and management, shaped by industry transitions like film-to-digital and mobile/social media adoption.
2. Passion for Content and Technology Integration
Strong advocate for merging creativity and technology to address content industry challenges.
Career built on leveraging AI and systems for content distribution, from Googles product integrations to Shutterstocks AI-driven tools.
Excited about combining human creativity with AI to enhance workflows and create immersive experiences.
3. AI and Ethical Practices
Worked with Googles Responsible AI team on inclusive and ethical AI practices.
Highlights challenges like bias in AI content generation and emphasizes the importance of ethical sourcing and diversity.
Advocates for responsible AI use at Shutterstock, using licensed data for AI generators and addressing philosophical concerns about AIs role in editorial content.
4. Industry Challenges and Evolution
Identifies key challenges:
Balancing authenticity in AI-generated content.
Navigating consumer preferences for real-feeling versus AI-driven media.
Addressing the complexity of scaling global platforms with diverse, localized, and inclusive content.
Notes the rise of influencer-driven advertising and decentralization as transformative trends.
5. Future Vision for Content Strategy
Believes in balancing data-driven insights with instinct for effective strategies.
Highlights the need for creators to maintain control over content while adapting to AI advancements.
Envisions integrated tools for creators to build and innovate immersive worlds efficiently.
6. Key Career Insights and Advice
Encourages openness, adaptability, and critical thinking as core skills for success.
Advises embracing risks and continuous learning, with an emphasis on relationship building and collaboration.
Shares personal philosophy: "If you dont go, you cant come back," underscoring the value of exploration and trying new opportunities.
7. AI's Transformative Role
Acknowledges AIs growing influence in content creation, from streamlining workflows to enhancing productivity (e.g., Google AI writing over 25% of its code).
Stresses the importance of verifying AI-generated data and maintaining information literacy.
Foresees AI driving innovation in creative content hubs and immersive environments.
8. Excitement for Change and Innovation
Expresses optimism about AIs potential to transform the content industry.
Enthusiastic about exploring new technologies and collaborating with passionate individuals to drive meaningful change.
Active on LinkedIn and Instagram (@AnnaGDixon) for connecting and sharing updates.
12
« on: January 08, 2025, 18:27 »
Maybe 3 years from now this will be considered a "good day at ShutterGetty"?
Here's my Jan 8 results...
13
« on: January 06, 2025, 08:06 »
A few clarifications:
- Only used Topaz AI sharpening and/or noise reductions. I've disabled face recovery as some results are just weird.
- Didn't use Gigapixel upscaling
Next steps:
- Will test if by deleting the title will make a difference (I don't think so)
Curious theory:
- Apparently, human reviewers are paid by image/video and so it's easier for them to reject whole batches without much inspection. Perhaps they will begin adopting AI reviews as is now becoming the norm at other agencies (Depositphoto assets are accepted/rejected within seconds).
14
« on: January 05, 2025, 09:39 »
I've been using Topaz AI for noise reduction / sharpening for more than a year now and super pleased. However, I've noticed that iStockphoto have rejected whole batches of commercial and editorials. See screenshot below. I went to find out why and from November 2024 they changed their policy. See link here: https://contributors.gettyimages.com/article/10847In summary: If you want to make significant changes to your content, either separately or in addition to work youve done under the Retouching Requirements, follow these rules (Modification):
Do not apply Modification to your content with generative AI tools (only use traditional, non-generative AI tools).
Do not add location keywords, titles or descriptions more specific than Region/State/County if you modify recognizable, named, or famous locations.
Do not alter a models body shape to make them look thinner or larger than they are in real life. Find out more.
NOTE: Under these Modification Requirements, without using generative AI tools, you can:
Retouch more than 10% of the images total pixels.
Add new elements you own the copyright for, including creating composites.
Retouch your models more extensively. Had no issues at any other agency. Frustrating, might just stop uploading to iStock anyway for what they pay and now further hurdles of creating two separate batches.
16
« on: January 01, 2025, 08:22 »
Downloads is only part of the equation (it's been consistent for me for the past few years at around 15 despite regular uploads). I like to track the average return per download and it's quite steady at Pond5 but almost certain to see a 20% drop from next year after their "exciting news" announcement. Detailed stats and charts just published on here: https://brutallyhonestmicrostock.com/2025/01/01/2024-year-end-review-good-bad-and-ugly/
17
« on: January 01, 2025, 07:59 »
18
« on: December 29, 2024, 08:16 »
Spotted some AI payments on my latest sales report by iStock (November).
Check yours under "AISERVICES".
Although it's not much, even by Getty standard, at least they've started paying out.
19
« on: December 26, 2024, 09:58 »
I'm here compiling my epic year-end report and after crunching some numbers saw something interesting/worrying that I would like to share.
Since 2018 these are my average clip prices, together with total number of sales. Note that I began uploading "premium" drone footage in April 2022, leading to increased volumes.
So in summary:
- Quadrupled the number of clips sold from 2020 until 2024
- 64% drop in earnings 2020 vs 2024 (inflation during those 4 years was around 20% in the US)
What's the future of microstock? A part-time gig at best.
20
« on: December 11, 2024, 13:40 »
is this straight out of the 1984 novel
ChatGPT said:
ChatGPT
The communication style in this email does have echoes of the kind of language and framing found in George Orwell's 1984. In particular:
Parallels to Orwellian Language:
Euphemistic Framing: The reduction in royalty rates is framed as a way to maximize earning potential and position the marketplace for growth, which obscures the immediate negative impact for many contributors. This is reminiscent of 1984's Newspeak, where language is used to mask or soften harsh realities.
Focus on Long-Term Vision: The emphasis on building a "sustainable marketplace" and ensuring "future growth" shifts attention away from the present downsidesmuch like the Party in 1984 justifies sacrifices for the supposed greater good.
Avoidance of Clear Comparisons: The lack of direct acknowledgment of the prior, higher royalty rates could be seen as an attempt to control the narrative, similar to how the Party in 1984 rewrites history to suit its needs.
Key Difference:
Unlike 1984, where the intent is complete subjugation and manipulation, Pond5s changes are likely driven by business pressures, not malice. However, the way the changes are communicated may feel disingenuous to contributors, leading to the comparison.
Verdict:
While this isn't a perfect parallel to Orwell's dystopia, the careful framing of bad news as a positive development does feel reminiscent of 1984-style doublethink, where contradictory ideas (e.g., reduced royalties = maximized earnings) are presented as harmonious.
22
« on: November 13, 2024, 15:24 »
Any updates on this? I'm in the process of possibly applying to submit work there, but I can't find very much info on if others are successful!
Hi,
What would you like to know?
I'm just trying to figure out if it's worth it to submit there. I applied through their non-exclusive option, but when I received the email and contract back, it was all written in exclusive terms. I emailed them for clarification, since I'd really like to still offer any accepted images to Alamy and Arcangel too. I also want to have the option to sell prints on FAA. They responded that they would check and get back to me, but I never heard back.
I'm torn between submitting work and having it locked into a five year contract if accepted. I'm doing mostly nature and wildlife now, so although I sell some of it on micro, I feel like there may be other options. Any thoughts or new experiences would be appreciated!
I wasn't aware that RH had a non-exclusive option, must be new. Anyway, I'm exclusive there and have been since 2017.
I had some impressive earnings reports back then, one quarter I even earned $500 from just 100 images. Encouraged, I uploaded more but the earnings report became less and less...until I stopped uploading altogether for about two years until a quite impressive earnings report once again that gave me some motivation but like that flirty hot woman at the club who then ghosts you the next days RH has just been disappointing with quarterly reports around the $30-50 range with microstock-sized prices for individual sales.
Now I'm at 615 exclusive images and send them mostly drone panos - https://www.robertharding.com/alexandrerotenberg/
I don't blame RH directly though as they just distribute to some 80 different agencies, including print sellers. It's a tough market. Their cut is steep but they also do all the distribution work and keywording.
You say you do mostly nature and wildlife, I can't say whether you'd do well. You can always upload some 100 images and after a year see if you've had some sales and then make a decision on whether to commit more.
There's also no conflict with licensing at RH and on POD as long as POD isn't licensing.
Arcangel are another beast and I don't think they're taking on any new contributors.
Hope this helps!
Thank you! That was very helpful. So if my thoughts are correct, RH is more of a high end distribution agency. Yeah, I had some covers with Arcangel years back but the past two have been crickets. The last batch I submitted (wildlife), was completely declined, but they aren't really that type of agency.
I submitted an initial batch with RH and I'll see what happens!
Arcangel can be a bit strange on what they want...I've had whole batches rejected with no feedback. At the end of the day they are a very good idea of what may sell and rarely take a gamble on work that has little chance to sell, especially now that they've surpassed 1 million images. Having said that they seem to love my drone top downs and I mainly send them those these days and since I started uploading them drone stuff in April 2021, 6/19 of my covers since then have been drone shots...def not by accident. Anyway, as for RH I would hardly call them a "high end distribution" agency. Perhaps once upon a time they were but with the prices that I currently see in my sales report they're just slightly higher than microstock yet demanding premium quality. The market is broken. Why do I keep sending to them? I'm not sure, I think it's less work for me than uploading to all the microstock agencies and sells the same.
23
« on: November 11, 2024, 17:29 »
Any updates on this? I'm in the process of possibly applying to submit work there, but I can't find very much info on if others are successful!
Hi,
What would you like to know?
I'm just trying to figure out if it's worth it to submit there. I applied through their non-exclusive option, but when I received the email and contract back, it was all written in exclusive terms. I emailed them for clarification, since I'd really like to still offer any accepted images to Alamy and Arcangel too. I also want to have the option to sell prints on FAA. They responded that they would check and get back to me, but I never heard back.
I'm torn between submitting work and having it locked into a five year contract if accepted. I'm doing mostly nature and wildlife now, so although I sell some of it on micro, I feel like there may be other options. Any thoughts or new experiences would be appreciated!
I wasn't aware that RH had a non-exclusive option, must be new. Anyway, I'm exclusive there and have been since 2017. I had some impressive earnings reports back then, one quarter I even earned $500 from just 100 images. Encouraged, I uploaded more but the earnings report became less and less...until I stopped uploading altogether for about two years until a quite impressive earnings report once again that gave me some motivation but like that flirty hot woman at the club who then ghosts you the next days RH has just been disappointing with quarterly reports around the $30-50 range with microstock-sized prices for individual sales. Now I'm at 615 exclusive images and send them mostly drone panos - https://www.robertharding.com/alexandrerotenberg/I don't blame RH directly though as they just distribute to some 80 different agencies, including print sellers. It's a tough market. Their cut is steep but they also do all the distribution work and keywording. You say you do mostly nature and wildlife, I can't say whether you'd do well. You can always upload some 100 images and after a year see if you've had some sales and then make a decision on whether to commit more. There's also no conflict with licensing at RH and on POD as long as POD isn't licensing. Arcangel are another beast and I don't think they're taking on any new contributors. Hope this helps!
24
« on: November 07, 2024, 06:56 »
AFAIK nothing has changed about Getty's AI payment schedule. They said it would be late December, they have reiterated in their forum that it will be late December. But I guess that doesn't provide anything dramatic for a blog post.
Slow news day 
25
« on: November 06, 2024, 14:55 »
They've said in the iStock forum that the payment will be late December, so I don't think there's any point in applying pressure to them to pay up now.
Thanks for this info, I also don't participate on that forum. If they promised they would start paying up by December t hen great. Just hope that they are transparent about how they come up with calculations. If there are no payments by the end of January then we should start putting pressure on them to deliver.
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 64
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
