Jump to content

David Calvert

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


About David Calvert

  • Rank

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
  • Instagram
  • Facebook

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Much Hadham, Hertfordshire

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. When I first joined SS about 18 months ago, approvals normally took less than an hour (often a few minutes). During the pandemic, they took a few hours at most, but in the last month or so, I'm finding it typically takes 24-36 hours. Is it just me, or are you finding the same?
  2. Just been approached by someone who wants to use one of my images that would be classed as an illustrative editorial shot for a commercial purpose. I don't have a people/property release on the shot. I'm a relative newcomer to stock, so I would be interested to know if any of you sell editorial images on a commercial licence? If you do, do you put some sort of clause in the licence that covers you if someone makes a complaint about how the image is being used?
  3. Calm down everyone! Reading the guidance and the examples given here: https://support.submit.shutterstock.com/s/article/Guidelines-for-Submitting-Diverse-and-Inclusive-Content?language=en_US, it's quite clear that you do not have to always ask models about their religion or sexual orientation etc on every shoot you do with them. You only have to put it if it's relevant and in context with the photo you have taken. e.g, if you are photographing someone who is transgender, and the theme of the shot is clearly related to transgender issues, then yes, you mention it. If it's just a couple wat
  4. I think what the problem is with 13aug21oatscutw.mp4 is the out of focus background. In the past, I've had clips rejected for noise and focus when there is a large quantity of out of focus foliage in the background. Also, images/clips with large quantities of water often get rejected too. The AI doesn't understand its OOF foliage, so it rejects it.
  5. I reported the spam posts to SS on Twitter yesterday. They responded to me quickly and it looks like they’ve dealt with the posts.
  6. Yes, I got this for the first time yesterday. Thankfully the ‘adjustment’ was only $0.12. Was slightly worried that they thought I was the one being fraudulent.
  7. 'Patchy' would be the best description for the last two weeks with me, but it's starting to pick up again.
  8. I still consider myself a new boy, but since Feb 2020 mine is $1.60 - that's based on 627 image downloads. What's helped this rate is recently someone bought 5 of my images at around $130 each.
  9. Currently down on this time last month. Hoping things will improve.
  10. I think it's reviewer error as you suggest. The cemetery isn't mentioned anywhere in the details I've given. The keywords relate to the type of kerb shown and materials used.
  11. The attached photo has not only been rejected for noise (I think the AI thinks the soil and the grass seed is noise), but it has also been rejected because the shot contains 'sensitive information' - i.e. "signatures, credit card numbers, email addresses, isolated license plates, etc." Am I missing something here - but I can't see anything that is 'sensitive'...? There is a cemetery in the background, but you can't see any names on the headstones. The photo was submitted as a commercial photo.
  12. I have a very small portfolio… around 800 pics and videos combined. I managed my highest amount of downloads ever this month - namely 99, and I also got to Level 4, but I made less money than last month where I had 89 downloads. Rather demoralising.
  • Create New...