Jump to content

Update on Shutterstock Watermark Progress


Recommended Posts

OK Pete. Heres 2 of your Images. both took me no longer than 3 min and I went to the toilet. your stuff was 1500 Longest side. Don't know if you do this but content aware....Just lasso off anything and as many as you want, Hit delete and gone. really no Brainer  I took your 1500 size Images and put them through Genuine Fractals and they were good to about 3100 Longest side. Thats good enough for a FU^%$*& BiLLboard Man. Is this really what you want?? Maybe you do. I have no Idea. I and Many others do not.  If you don't care about your work and where it goes thats up to you and you don't need this site to do that....Nor does anyone else.

 

I DO NOT.. I put your work on My website for sale. LOL under sports. LUCKY for you you cannot rt click as you can here. It's not the safest Place But better than Nothing Like we have now. I'll take them down when you tell me to By PM.

 

On my website below. Under sports.

 

And this is why I will no longer send Shutterstock any new images that I consider to be of "High Value". 

 

All they are doing is creating fear in contributors, forcing them to withhold images from them, sending more images to their competitors and they'll start to fall back faster than they already are. FT need no encouragement to set clear air between them and SS but SS here seem hell bent on helping them even more.This will give FT some great marketing opportunities. Your images / work is safe in our hands bla bla bla...... talk about imploding / looking to destroy your reputation.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 165
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

My Issues.     This is part of My Income. This is not a hobby. I could care less about all the V1/v2 whatever crap. I don't care. My Issue and Im sure many others is One thing. "THE LARGE PREVIEW"

PLEASE, PLEASE Shutterstock let us have an opt-in and opt-out choice! I'm begging you! I work so hard on my images and the thought of them just being given away is a blow to my income and heart. There

This whole watermark and gigantic preview situation is so ridicules I now start to think SS is doing this on purpose. It's not possible they are incompetent this much. The question is way? Is this s

Just asking: How long would it take any of you guys to remove the watermark of this illustration, one of my works?  - image below. And this is the case for most of my illustrations.

 

To Paul Brennan (shutterstock administrator):

Please tell me,  how is this watermark going to protect for instance, this image below, one of my works?

I have tried to contact Shutterstock team on all available channels asking to register my complaint about the new watermark and large preview implementation and offer me a solution so that I won't feel my work is totally without protection. After a week of not receiving any reply, I feel terribly disappointment regarding the lack of support.

 

Still hoping that this new implementation can be undone.

Respectfully,

Andrei Dobrescu

stock-photo-large-group-of-people-seen-f

Link to post
Share on other sites

i still have old inexistent watermark on all of my images except for the 2 recently approved images...

 

how long is it going to take to change the watermark on other images?

 

I've emailed support a couple of times (a week apart) and each time they say "roll out over the next week". Their concept of a week is the same as their concept of protected work. I wouldn't bet against having to email them again after another 7 days! The new Watermark isn't great but it's way better than not having one at all (version1)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've emailed support a couple of times (a week apart) and each time they say "roll out over the next week". Their concept of a week is the same as their concept of protected work. I wouldn't bet against having to email them again after another 7 days! The new Watermark isn't great but it's way better than not having one at all (version1)

 

But wouldn't it be safer to just remove the preview button until the roll out? Or create some sort of access to contributors only so that people could feedback on this subject until everyone is happy... this way everyone would avoid this kind of situation

Link to post
Share on other sites

If SS wants to take action, atleast an opt-out button for large previews would suffice.

Great Idea, I would be very happy with that. If sales fall then we have the option to test it and change it.. watermark doesn't really matter. it's so easy guys. Huge preview and ease to save it is the Problem. They can put anything on it. I don't care. I can get rid of it if I want. The bigger the Image The less time it takes.  What is it about this, they dont get? And if they do, Please explain. One of Petes GREAT Images I did. "The pit Stop" would make a beautiful 16 x 20 Print framed and matted to 20 x 24. $350.00 Framed would be a good price for it. under 2 Minutes and it's Mine. And, Im not buying the excuse that Buyers wanna be sure theres no Noise or focus Issues...Please I didn't just fall off the Back of a Cabbage truck. we have 225 "Crack" Skilled and trained reviewers with perfect Monitors Right??

 

Tell me when to delete Pete.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw version 3 rolled out on my images. My verdict:

It's better than version 1 and 2 BUT...

1. Opacity is less (if you zoom out the image, it's passable for web use)
2. Won't work in all images especially the INK SKETCHES on WHITE BACKGROUND (I was able to delete the watermark in 3 seconds just with brightness and contrast compensation/adjustment and 1 second using THRESHOLD tool via Photoshop* -- *sorry, i'm forced to say the techniques but I need to to justify my verdict.)
3. Also the sad thing is, with the large preview it could be used by bloggers who just need 72 dpi resolution images for web. 

Hope to see a version that's not easy to delete and can apply to any images esp the isolated on white or abstract backgrounds and texture. Could be great if there's still a very large Shutterstock on the center in higher opacity.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

But wouldn't it be safer to just remove the preview button until the roll out? Or create some sort of access to contributors only so that people could feedback on this subject until everyone is happy... this way everyone would avoid this kind of situation

 

I quite agree but I feel hell will freeze over before they take any notice at SS. Let's face it, most sensible people and companies would would remain in discussion with contributors to try and come to a happy middle ground so images cannot be easily lifted with minimal effort but not here. Especially seeing the examples of Pete's images stripped quickly of watermarks and upscaled to a size that looks good even on a 2560-1440 monitor! 

 

Surely they must see this is going to impact on their sales as well when images they are trying to sell are stolen and spread around like wildfire via blogs etc, they will end up devalued and clients will look for work that hasn't gone viral. 

 

Sadly I think the red mist has come down over their heads and logic has gone out the window. I'd rather see a level headed discussion from both sides to try and resolve it. I'm all for helping improve the buying experience for clients but lets make sure we can work together to improve the experience rather than made to feel it's a dictatorship. Yes, it's their company but it is also our media they are making their $m's of dollars from.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This whole watermark and gigantic preview situation is so ridicules I now start to think SS is doing this on purpose. It's not possible they are incompetent this much.

The question is way?

Is this some marketing strategy? Fight with the competition? I'm clueless.

 

OosQ4kIc4LM.jpg

 

(39 rur = 60 cent)

 

Well, maybe it can help customers select the product and reseller will buy it for them ... The man from the side. He has no idea of the quality standards and local reviewers.

He needs a big preview.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's loosing, instead of SOD sale for 10 bucks it's a few cents subscription one.

it is a question of mentality ... reseller in Russia will never take away everything, he will leave a part for the stock, and this is good money in the market where a picture is worth 60 cents

 

SS would enter this market with a price list in the dollar for the license and would have success, maybe they want to do it? Then I am ready to help them B)

Link to post
Share on other sites

PLEASE, PLEASE Shutterstock let us have an opt-in and opt-out choice! I'm begging you! I work so hard on my images and the thought of them just being given away is a blow to my income and heart. There is an opt-in for sensitive issue - why not for this option?

 

I have not uploaded any new content since the high resolution option became available. Can you please respond. We would greatly appreciate a warm awareness...

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw version 3 rolled out on my images. My verdict:

 

It's better than version 1 and 2 BUT...

 

1. Opacity is less (if you zoom out the image, it's passable for web use)

2. Won't work in all images especially the INK SKETCHES on WHITE BACKGROUND (I was able to delete the watermark in 3 seconds just with brightness and contrast compensation/adjustment and 1 second using THRESHOLD tool via Photoshop* -- *sorry, i'm forced to say the techniques but I need to to justify my verdict.)

3. Also the sad thing is, with the large preview it could be used by bloggers who just need 72 dpi resolution images for web. 

 

Hope to see a version that's not easy to delete and can apply to any images esp the isolated on white or abstract backgrounds and texture. Could be great if there's still a very large Shutterstock on the center in higher opacity.  

 

Please keep sending this to support or PM to Paul directly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Protecting one's copyright is of utmost importance to a photographer, and in this respect the financial interests of submitters is aligned with those of SS. That's why this move to create giant previews and scant watermarks is so vexing. It threatens everyone's business model. Yes image theft happens, but this is akin to a car dealership leaving their cars unlocked at night with the keys in the ignition so buyers can take test drives 24/7. Only in this case the effects will be insidious and likely not visible for a period of time. The roll out to the new and improved V2 watermark is happening so slowly that my best images are left vulnerable. I feel no sense of urgency or understanding from SS how detrimental this situation could be. I will not submit more content until I'm halfway satisfied it will be adequately protected. Already I've deleted a handful of images where protection was non existent. I'm mulling doing the same to others.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm thinking that maybe it's best to remove our most vulnerable images while the watermark is still so insufficient. I'm pondering on that right now.

 

Not a bad thought, but to be honest, we shouldn't have to do that.

 

I'm sure it got lost in the static, positioning and debate, I'd be in favor of a smaller preview.

 

No I don't think the watermark is worse than what we had before. That old one with one big word. In most cases the new is much better. Now the WM is more lines, logos and words, which are less obtrusive for buyers who look at our images. Less of  distraction than the old one which could distort and make the images look terrible.

 

So yes, very few images of the millions are subject to a weak watermark, while the other millions have a better, less distracting and improved watermark. Seems people are dwelling on the negative?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, here you go, with the latest "watermark", free to grab for anyone, bye bye sales....

Took me 1 minute to clean it up.

 

 

Excellent choice, I suspected someone would find one of those confetti shots. :)

 

We have a winner.

 

How many of my 3738 shots would be unprotected, in your opinion? Or better yet, how many would look better and more attractive to buyers with the new watermark, over the old disruptive one?

 

Yes, smaller preview would help...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...