Jump to content

Rudy Umans

Members
  • Content Count

    481
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Rudy Umans


  1. 13 minutes ago, balajisrinivasan said:

    Happy photography day to you too! Hope we keep doing it more for the love of it and less for the money (even though money is nice).

    Yep! More love, appreciation and respect for the medium and less dollar signs can only improve one's photography and if the photography improves, the basis to make more money improves with it.

    Some people in the microstock community have that backwards I noticed.


  2. There is a lot wrong with it, but the EL terms are very wrong to begin with. $3.65, $15.00, or $30.00 is the same insult.

     

    AN ENHANCED IMAGE LICENSE grants you the right to use Images (which rights are in addition to 1-5 above and exclusive to Enhanced Image Licenses):

    1. In any manner permitted under a Standard Image License, without any limitation on the number of reproductions, impressions, or budget;

    2. Incorporated into merchandise intended for sale or promotional distribution (collectively "Merchandise"), including, without limitation, textiles, artwork, magnets, wall-art, calendars, toys, stationery, greeting cards, and any other physical reproduction for resale or distribution, provided that such Merchandise incorporates material creative or functional elements apart from the Image(s).

    3. In wall art (and without requiring further creative or functional elements) for decorative purposes in a commercial space owned by you or your client, and not for sale.

    4. Incorporated as elements of digital templates for sale or distribution.

     

    This is one of the worst parts of microstock. (not just SS) Can you imagine to have your image on hundreds of thousands event posters or calendars and you only got $3.65 - $15.00 or so?  If that's not degrading, I don't know what is and for that reason, none of my images on microstock anywhere are poster or calendar quality. (I make my own calendars anyway)

    If you are approached directly by a poster company and they tell you they want to use your image for a 500.000 print run for posters for a nationwide event but they can only pay you $5.00, would you say  "sure, no problem" ?  "Digital Templates" are even worse

    so, instead of throwing a fit about $0.10 for a subscription, this clause is what people should throw a fit about imo


  3.  

    Quote

     

    AN ENHANCED IMAGE LICENSE grants you the right to use Images (which rights are in addition to 1-5 above and exclusive to Enhanced Image Licenses):

    1. In any manner permitted under a Standard Image License, without any limitation on the number of reproductions, impressions, or budget;

    2. Incorporated into merchandise intended for sale or promotional distribution (collectively "Merchandise"), including, without limitation, textiles, artwork, magnets, wall-art, calendars, toys, stationery, greeting cards, and any other physical reproduction for resale or distribution, provided that such Merchandise incorporates material creative or functional elements apart from the Image(s).

    3. In wall art (and without requiring further creative or functional elements) for decorative purposes in a commercial space owned by you or your client, and not for sale.

    4. Incorporated as elements of digital templates for sale or distribution.

     

    In other words, if there are no graphic elements on the prints, the answer is no.  Not allowed

     

     


  4. On 8/15/2020 at 3:09 AM, Studio 2 said:

    I went to the Helmut Newton exhibition in Petworth yesterday. Inevitably loved it partly because of the house it is set in. HN's photos wouldn't have passed Sstock's 'high' acceptance standards but that's 'Art' for you 😊 Link below to videos

    https://m.facebook.com/pg/newlandshouse.gallery/videos/

     

    He surely was one of the greats. (and who gives a flying rat's @$$ about SS's "high standards" nowadays?) 


  5. 4 hours ago, HodagMedia said:

    Well that's all good, especially B.

    So that means no one has access to your computer, there's no keystroke logging infection, you don't use any password manager, you have never logged into a public internet source, and you have eliminated all other ways someone could get into your SS account, to change your password, except through their own system.

    Since we get scattered reports like this, and not a massive breach of hundreds of accounts at a time, I keep thinking, someone inside, whether it's SS or Webdam occasionally gets account information and sells it to the hackers? Rather than attack many, they just pick a few here and there. Always end of the month too, it seems. Another inside, not SS but another agency, could be attacking because so many people will use the same password for many agencies.

    They would actually be better off, looking for inactive people, who don't read the forums, and don't login to their accounts, or don't pay attention, rather than someone like you, who is active and would notice the same day.

    Good that you resolved the problem. And nice that SS reports unusual activity to us. I have other sites that tell me when I change my password, or make a lost password request. "was this you?" Nice if someone is trying to get in, that attacks are reported.

     

     

    Challenge me with enough questions and concerns I am willing to address or not and you could end up with enough information about me to wake up a whole new generation of hackers

    Like what I told Doug, rest assured the problem is not with me.

    The bottom line is that the problem is with Shutterstock (as they admitted in not so many words to Luisa) 

    subject closed on my end.


  6. 1 hour ago, HodagMedia said:

    OK maybe I didn't ask the question right. How do you know that the source of your hack into Shutterstock was the fault of Shutterstock and not that someone got in, from information they got somewhere else?

    A. That information is not somewhere else

    B. Password is unique

    C. That "somewhere else" would have been hacked too. 

    D. Shutterstock's security is insufficient as others also pointed out. I know that what happened to me has been going on for years and nothing has been done so far and that cavalier attitude towards our personal information is a disgrace and apparently not one of the priorities.  

    E. Potential limited control by SS. I know that the digital assets (the database) are managed by Webdam, that Shutterstock used to own, but was sold not too long ago to Bynder, a Dutch company. I do not know if that includes contributor's profiles. (The forum software is also 3rd party)

     


  7. On 7/31/2020 at 4:05 AM, Studio 2 said:

    obfuscation. 

    Learn something every day! 
    Word of the day: 
     
    ob·fus·ca·tion
    /ˌäbfəˈskāSH(ə)n/
    noun
    1. the action of making something obscure, unclear, or unintelligible.
      "when confronted with sharp questions they resort to obfuscation"
       
       
       

  8. On 8/2/2020 at 8:16 AM, HodagMedia said:

    How do you know for sure it was Shutterstock? Just wondering?

    I got a warning email from SS for "unusual activity"

    22 hours ago, Luisa Puccini said:

    It happened to me maybe one year ago. They spammed me with thousand emails and I wasn't fast enough to understand what was going on. Luckily SS refunded me for the lost payment. They admitted in some ways that the security of our account is their business.

    That's their tactics. They try to hide SS's warning email by spamming your inbox with as many spam emails as they can get in hoping that you miss that one important email.


  9. 3 hours ago, Doug McLean said:

    Probably not Shutterstock's fault at all. Usually when an account gets hacked it is because the user did something really stupid, like using the same password on more than one web site, or using too simple a password.

    BS

    Easy to blame the user and the "user" would be me in this case and I don't think so. I have been around.  This is the first time in 25 years or so that one of my accounts was hacked and there is a reason for that. This is not user  error I am afraid.  Even if the "user" did something really stupid as you put it,  SS's website security is still not the user's responsibility. (We pay SS handsomely for that responsibility) 


  10. 42 minutes ago, chris kolaczan said:

    Hacked accounts seem to be an end of the month tradition around here.

     

    If only Shutterstock could implement something like two-factor authentication or something to reduce the occurrence of this sort of thing.

    Its almost like they don't care.

    The irony is that Jon started in the tech business with a successful computer security software program.  I guess he is pre-occupied now by other things


  11. 1 hour ago, Sari ONeal said:

    One step you can do to prevent the hackers "hiding" the SS account change notification in your mail:

    Set up a filter for your incoming mail so your Shutterstock (or other stock site's) emails go in their own separate folders, and it's easy and quick to see if there is new mail in that/those important folders.

    When they spam you with 500 trash mails, their attempt is to make it hard for you to find that ONE important email in the sea of trash email in your general incoming folder.

    So, get around it with the separate folder(s), you should be able to do that with most email accounts.

    I had to delete all those emails pretty much one by one since there were also legit emails mixed in and a notification from SS was one of them

    I have all kinds of accounts that potentially can be hacked. My computers and my network are protected as good as I can, but I have obviously no control over somebody else's server. 

    I have yahoo email and it sucks , but gmail is even worse. 


  12. Like slicing the royalties by a lot wasn't enough yet,  my shutterstock account was hacked this morning and my PayPal email was changed. I changed it back and changed my password.

    In the process they also got access to my email with the result I got over 500 junk emails mainly with subscription based crap, which should keep me busy unsubscribing for a while.  So, I changed that password as well.  

    I also changed my PayPal password to be on the safe side

    Better check yours

    Thanks again Shutterstock &^%$*@


  13. 47 minutes ago, Sari ONeal said:

    I mean, Rudy is so sad, but what can I say....

     

    🤐

    Nah.. I am Okay. lol. The forums are a nice distraction. Maybe I should rejoin the Hummer thread (again) I was the first person to reply to the OP there. Paul asked something about hummingbirds and I told him to ask Kelly. Then you jumped in with Hey! What about me? .....  and the rest is history. (at least that's how I remember it lol) 

    olemme kaikki ystäviä täällä!


  14. 14 minutes ago, Merlin Photography said:

    'Positive discrimination' or 'affirmative action', as I understand the concept, is the opposite to a 'head start' but rather 'catch up'. It's giving groups, sectors of society etc an opportunity to be included where they have historically been excluded. 

    You're right. Wrong choice of words. ( I used "catch up" in the same post actually) From all people I should know.  See my posts to Milo J and Barry P


  15. 55 minutes ago, Tony Dunn said:

    I've been discriminated against because I had sight problems at birth & suffered with prejudice all my life - similar to non white people & in some ways even worse.  Unfortunately people in my position don't have a voice because there's far fewer of us than people who are non white.

    did it make you stronger?

×
×
  • Create New...