Jump to content

Dave Smith 1965

Members
  • Content Count

    43
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Dave Smith 1965

  • Rank
    Member
  • Birthday 10/08/1965

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Hastings, UK
  • Interests
    Photography, computers, gaming

Recent Profile Visitors

641 profile views
  1. Thanks Theodore Must admit I am getting thoroughly demoralized. I've been experimenting with uploading perfectly good shots from the same events I'd had accepted before. It doesn't matter what camera is used it seems they just seem to find focusing issues that aren't there and noise and grain that simply doesn't exist. I wouldn't mind somebody from SS commenting here about what the hell we are meant to do to get some consistency in acceptance and to explain why the AI reviews are so erratic. Bring back humans for goodness sake !
  2. I think you're right Robin. I'll have another go next week though I still suspect a "bot" is involved in the initial process. Perhaps making judgements solely on histogram data. Whatever it is we are clearly having some very mixed results.
  3. Are "bots" used to decide focus/noise/grain issues? Because if they are they are simply not working. By now I should know what a focused subject looks like and whether noise or blurriness is an issue. These declines (which today have been 100% of submitted shots) have been made within just a couple of minutes of submission and for both commercial and editorial shots. I've submitted with different subjects, different times of day and different cameras used - the result always the same - reject If a human is involved in such a quick timescale then they are clearly declining to order, n
  4. As we head towards 10,000 signatures please could I encourage every single contributor to join me in signing this petition? We have to send a clear message to Shutterstock that this policy is grossly unfair and completely unacceptable. Many photographers will face up to a 66% (perhaps more) reduction in their income. For Shutterstock to impose this drastic reduction in payments whilst continuing to profit from OUR hard work is immoral and, quite frankly, insulting. If you do nothing, and just moan, change won't happen. If you sign this petition and it continues to reach good numbe
  5. That explains a lot after umpteen failed attempts at upload, glad I popped now before wasting any more time
  6. Now that I never understand either..... why Shutterstock grinds to a halt at the weekend?? In this world where the photographers are taking pictures 7 days a week to mainly make the company profitable why can't this company support its contributors 7 days a week?? So now you have the contributors who want to upload their footage at the weekend unable to do so until at least Monday. I am sure with the generous cut SS takes from our work they could afford enough support staff at the weekend to at least cover IT so we are not in limbo Considering we are in 2019, not 1919, it really i
  7. Donna, did you design and make that cat tag around the cats neck then? If you did then you're right because you hold the copyright and you could appeal (you'll need proof that you made it). Otherwise you don't hold the copyright on the tag and the pic would only be accepted as editorial. I am assuming here it was rejected as you submitted for commercial use. As somebody else said though if you clone it out, which in the case of that image is dead easy, you can then submit for commercial use. By the way gorgeous pic and lovely moggies !!
  8. Hey Shutterstock. This is a forum you created where your users come for help when they have technical issues. If you have a KNOWN technical issue this is where they would expect to find a notice from you that you are aware of it and trying to fix it. And to see updates from you in due course, including when it's solved. So is it really that difficult to make the top thread in this section sticky and call it KNOWN TECHNICAL ISSUES and to appoint somebody to be responsible for keeping your users updated? Can't understand why something so simple and useful doesn't already happen
  9. Thank goodness for that. I do wish Shutterstock error messages wouldn't always blame the submitter as the first option. You'd think they'd know how much time is then wasted by us trying to get things fixed
  10. "We can't read what's in your file. Please re-save or re-export your file, and try uploading it again." After no problems whatsoever uploading videos on FTP suddenly get this message on everything. Not one new video will upload.No matter if footage is re imported and resubmitted it's the same result. Is there a server problem? If not what's the solution?
  11. It looks as though we all have issues of one sort or another with video acceptance. In the meantime I've been editing minimally along the lines of what geogif is doing to see if that changes things
  12. That's not my point Doug. It's not down to a personal view or nitpicking. My point is you can't have a "system" where videos from the same device taken on the same day, edited in the same way and of the same subject are accepted one day. Then the following day you submit the rest of your material for it to be totally rejected. Either the reviewer on day one is at fault or the reviewer on day 2 is at fault. It can't be the fault of the material when it's exactly the same quality. Its either good or bad, or a mix But 100% fine one day and 100% naff the next day is total rubbish!
  13. Hard Mike isn't it? I don't know what the answer is. But I just feel like submitting video right now is one big gamble in HD or UHD. But reviewers have to work to the same standard. I don't feel that is happening.
  14. It's at the point where unless you own a 4k camera you could be completely wasting your time. It's madness that if you've already sold clips and are uploading clips produced to the same standard those clips should also be accepted. You can never be expected to upload totally perfect videos of everyday life videos. There are too many factors involved which produce irritations, very minor irritations. But with software even those can be reduced. There really has to be reviewing consistency or you have no idea whether you are completely wasting your life trying
  15. What the hell is going on with footage reviews 16 video clips submitted 16 video clips rejected. Allegedly for different reasons from focus to noise. Utter rubbish, no problem with focus in any clip and all footage has had noise reduction if needed. These clips are taken with the same camcorder I always use and many of those clips were taken at the same time as ones I previously uploaded , had accepted and sold. Sorry, but I don't believe this 100% rejection rate, I think somebody just couldn't be bothered or had too much allocated to him/her. The hours it takes t
×
×
  • Create New...