What is this?
Why accepting this Crap?

I don't know the answer, but you're 100% correct. This is CRAP!!!!!

And it's also pretty CRAPPY for SS to allow it.

Amusingly, this user's name is popular.vector! There are 64,723 items in their portfolio and it's about 100 or so objects presented in endless variations of box color & shape, background color & shape. It's mind-numblngly boring repetition of super-simple objects, each one to a file. Does that mean the trend on SS of ever-increasing collections of icons in one file is pass�?

http://www.shutterstock.com/portfolio/search.mhtml?gallery_landing=1&gallery_id=2939971&page=1&safesearch=1&sort_method=newest

About the only good thing I can think of is that the keywords are pretty close (so there are a few misplaced words like computer on an icon of an eye dropper, but they're mostly OK)

yes, according to her avatar she is a lady and she created 64K in one year. wow, that's more than I can make in my lifetime . .. even if the robot reviewer approved the other half of my properly produced photographs ( yes, I average between 10 % /50% rejection... weekdays/ weekends , and some weekends 90% rejection ( which I resubmit a month later during the weekdays to get 100% approval anyway.. ..  irritating but oh well, what can I do???

back to topic, I wouldn't even be able to create 6400 in one year never mind 64000
. she is a super woman from ukraine

Quote from: Groman on December 03, 2015, 11:04

Spammers coming from mostly 2015-2014. Its a new wave from third World.
Vector spammers making mostly black ugly clipart icons.
Here is some new spammer:

http://www.shutterstock.com/gallery-3671666p1.html
http://www.shutterstock.com/gallery-3261299p1.html
http://www.shutterstock.com/gallery-120811p1.html
http://www.shutterstock.com/gallery-3202118p1.html
http://www.shutterstock.com/gallery-3380741p1.html
http://www.shutterstock.com/gallery-2677336p1.html
http://www.shutterstock.com/gallery-2741491p1.html
http://www.shutterstock.com/gallery-3442481p1.html
http://www.shutterstock.com/gallery-1158365p1.html
http://www.shutterstock.com/gallery-3460061p1.html
http://www.shutterstock.com/gallery-1790906p1.html
http://www.shutterstock.com/gallery-1536035p1.html
This is the most intresting:
http://www.shutterstock.com/gallery-3026732p1.html
He started 2015 and, have 76 000 icon? Why?

Now this is 420 000 Spam Pictures from mostly 2015 - 2014, from 13 vector "artist". How many spammer are in total?
My soul crying.
it would be best to fire them all.

I think it's wrong to criticize vectors artist like this. Photographers spend more time on post-productions but there are tens of thousands who take every day snap shots and upload them.

There is a market for both. Another mail icon is no worst than another photo of a tomato or a strawberry. As someone who has a mixed portfolio, to call one side's work ugly is misguided.

Who's singling out vector artists? Most of this thread is about a photographer if you read back. How can you defend the kind of behaviour linked to here? It's straight up spamming the library.

This is the most intresting:
http://www.shutterstock.com/gallery-3026732p1.html
He started 2015 and, have 76 000 icon? Why?

76,000 on Dec 3 and 94,000 five weeks later.  Super productive!

Quote

This is the most intresting:
http://www.shutterstock.com/gallery-3026732p1.html
He started 2015 and, have 76 000 icon? Why?

76,000 on Dec 3 and 94,000 five weeks later.  Super productive!

wow, another superhuman.
so, what happened to that reviewer(s) who kept harassing photographers for
"poor composition" if it was correct WB, well exposed ... and no other rejectionable reasons???

oh, i forgot, that ANALysis only applies to contributors 2 years and more experienced with ss 

look on button of  page

http://www.shutterstock.com/gallery-1891259p2.html?sort_method=newest&safesearch=1

boring, background changed

Here's another one (from the US).

 

http://www.shutterstock.com/portfolio/search.mhtml?gallery_landing=1&gallery_id=395407&page=1&safesearch=1&sort_method=newest

Clearly quick to produce in order to spend more time on SS forums. 

Here's another one (from the US).

 

http://www.shutterstock.com/portfolio/search.mhtml?gallery_landing=1&gallery_id=395407&page=1&safesearch=1&sort_method=newest

Many of these images appear to be exact duplicates.  Not just similars, but duplicates.  Many have the marijuana leaf at slightly different opacities, but many do not.  This looks like another case of zero reviews or a portfolio from an SS insider.  Pathetic!   

I don't know why you even bother with this spammers...let them spam nobody will ever buy those crappy photos. The problem isn't the one who uploads, but is the one who review it and approved the photos that guy should be fired asap.

Here's another one (from the US).

 

http://www.shutterstock.com/portfolio/search.mhtml?gallery_landing=1&gallery_id=395407&page=1&safesearch=1&sort_method=newest

The spammer way to work, was not successful in Dreamstime 
http://www.dreamstime.com/justcause_info

Quote from: andy_arden on January 30, 2016, 13:24

I don't know why you even bother with this spammers...let them spam nobody will ever buy those crappy photos. The problem isn't the one who uploads, but is the one who review it and approved the photos that guy should be fired asap.

Does anyone know if there is any advantage in the search algorithms in terms of sheer weight of numbers? I just cant see a reason why people produce similars in such epic numbers it must be brain frying! The review process at SS seems to have problems...as far as I know there is not rejection reason for similars or LCV

As far as I know, there is no advantage. Images only moves up if it gets downloaded. All the spam images of the same kind tend to fall into the same spot on the search engine results, sometimes create a wall between the good stuff and the garbage lurking at the bottom.