Jump to content

Updates to our Similar Content Policy


Recommended Posts

yes agree 100% and have said this so often recently as the same has happened to me too...fine if this is applied consistently but the professionalism of SS standards being applied leaves much to be desired IMHO ... this actually takes the heart out of wanting to spend time providing what the buyer might want to complete a project and give them choice of presentation...and so it goes on ...

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 176
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

they always can buy vertical or horizontal,  or square  or many other format that SS Offers to the buyer.  

they have that option already    

Seriously!!!??? 

Posted Images

In good user centric product design the customer decides what is a good or poor user experience.  It is generally poor UX Design and Product Design practice for the Company to decide for the user what their experience should be, UNLESS the company has received overwhelming user feedback about wading through too much Similar Content.  I have not had these rejections with four other stock agencies, only with Shutterstock.  The result may be a *lack* of choice for customers rather than too much similar content.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/10/2019 at 5:14 PM, Michael Warwick said:

+1

+2....3, 4, 5 to the nth

I'm not seeing how a level profile shot of an object is "similar" to a 45 rotation on the object shot from ground level, especially when the lighting conditions are different (bright blue sky vs partly cloudy), but I've had a shot rejected twice because of its apparent similarity to one that was accepted.  I'm not into posting very similar photos, even though it's certainly commercially viable, and never ran into this issue before this policy.  Gotta say, not a fan.  Particularly disheartening when there are galleries out there LOADED with nearly imperceptibly different shots of the exact same items under exact same conditions, etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm definitely having trouble understanding what "similar" means to SS.

Some examples.

Of these two pics, only the second one was accepted and the first rejected because "too similar".

Yes it's the same stone, but seen from a different angle:

image.png.263c69404e2e34fcfb870954245de2bb.png

Same for these two:

image.png.3ea60d7151a04629f9927265a916adc7.png

Second accepted, first rejected. It's the same object but seen from the opposite angle.

Again:

image.png.70f482207c9ec1e061098b5829dea8f2.png

Identical situations, the second was rejected because too similar, but the stone is seen from the opposite angle.

In all the previous cases I think that the "too similar" principle should not have been applied. I tried reuploading several times the rejected images, but with the same result.

Later I did some tests, discovering that images much more similar to each other than the previous ones, were instead all accepted.

Examples:

image.png.0799dc532317f779ffd62f04f46d9894.png

image.png.192c2d281866137bb1ab8466ae7fab4f.png

image.png.5e41f3ee1b22752b35be402ea87d56f3.png

image.png.ccfa1b94c5a638e701e18354e5a6b26d.png

All these pairs of images were both accepted at the first shot, and I am convinced that they are much more similar to each other than the previous examples, which were rejected.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Adding more grave disappointment to the disappointment: Two weeks ago I uploaded three images of an antique spirit bottle taken from different angles. Only one was accepted and the other two rejected with the notorious "similar" argument. As I thought SS hadn't chosen / accepted the best out of the three I deleted the accepted one in the catalogue manager.  After a couple of days I checked whether the deleted one was searchable with negative result; it wasn't in the database anymore. Thus I uploaded the one of my choice and it was rejected with the remark "Similar Content: This content is too similar to another image or clip that has already been submitted or published." --  

Link to post
Share on other sites

so are the reviewers trained to do our marketing?, be the mind of the buyer? those contributors who take the 'similar' policy on a professional basis certainly won't spam but would be objective and notionally take a marketing POV into consideration...especially in the light of the microstock competition imho ...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone posted this link on another thread. How on earth is this kind of image spamming still happening in October of 2019, two month after SS implemented their tighter rules??

https://www.shutterstock.com/it/g/agiampiccolo?page=1&section=1&sort=newest&search_source=base_gallery&language=it

Meanwhile I uploaded two (!) pictures of a building, a wide shot and a close up from a different angle, and had one of them rejected as similar... This inconsistency is nuts.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Milo J said:

Someone posted this link on another thread. How on earth is this kind of image spamming still happening in October of 2019, two month after SS implemented their tighter rules??

https://www.shutterstock.com/it/g/agiampiccolo?page=1&section=1&sort=newest&search_source=base_gallery&language=it

Meanwhile I uploaded two (!) pictures of a building, a wide shot and a close up from a different angle, and had one of them rejected as similar... This inconsistency is nuts.

@Anna Shutterstock input please

Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks for that but I didnot give you permission to use one of my images for your example on the public forum also up till the policy change this was acceptable as not all buyer may have time or the facility to make the necessary changes....please remove my images from your comment thank you

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/25/2019 at 9:56 AM, Milo J said:

Someone posted this link on another thread. How on earth is this kind of image spamming still happening in October of 2019, two month after SS implemented their tighter rules??

https://www.shutterstock.com/it/g/agiampiccolo?page=1&section=1&sort=newest&search_source=base_gallery&language=it

Meanwhile I uploaded two (!) pictures of a building, a wide shot and a close up from a different angle, and had one of them rejected as similar... This inconsistency is nuts.

Oh wow, and Oct. 29th, all color and B&W versions, some nothing but crops, some from a slight angle difference.

22 hours ago, Emily Veinglory said:

As a buyer I can tell you that wading through six pages of the same thing, with misleading keywords, shot badly from an awkward angle, is what made me go elsewhere last time I was looking for an image.

You and probably some others, and the change is a couple years too late, like "too late to close the barn door, after all the horses have run off." Once the collection anywhere is filled with spam keywords, poor images, substandard shots that somehow show on early pages, it's too late to start rejecting similars on an inconsistent basis.

I wouldn't mind a fair policy that isn't as arbitrary, especially if it was enforced on everyone the same way. What I mean is, similar square, landscape and portrait in some cases, but not if it's the same as any buyer can do with the online editor. True different crops and compositions.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...
  • Jeff De unfeatured this topic
  • 3 months later...

I like that there are fewer similar contents when searching for the images.  It's annoying to have 27 different versions of the same image with slightly different colour or filters added to it.

I do find it a bit hard when uploading images that are technical.  For example, I want to show the 6 or 7 very specific stages of a technique that to an untrained eye look similar but for the placement of the tool or hand, but to a professional are drastically different.  For my day job, I often need to make technical tutorials and for these, the company wants the camera angle to be stationary.  When I do this for SS, I find I can only get one approved.  I suspect the problem is that most people who review photos don't have highly technical knowledge on every single subject in the universe (which is fair enough), so I want to find a way to show that these photos are actually different.

Since I know people do use (and more importantly spend money on) a series like this, how can I best enter keywords or title to show the reviewer these photos are relevant?  

Link to post
Share on other sites

I asked shutterstock contributors today this question:

So when I am let's say going to Sudan and visit ancient pyramids located there I shall not take any photos and post them on shutterstock in fear that someone before me had been "luckier" and posted them 1-2 years earlier? That means- and author who has, let's say, very nice portfolio will get less exposure simply because he /she cannot submit his best works - this is a discrimination in my opinion.

Because often when i click on my fellow's image and also wuld like to see  other works by the same author, this decision by SS is totally denying my other works exposure

for example they have rejected 7 images of a temple from 7 different angles, i spent hours on the SS trying to locate any similar ones- to no avail..stil rejected. the SS help- the one they say is being answered not by SS but their front line of defense- contributor like we are - said clearly - if your content was rejected for similarity - it will never be accepted again... - so i have absorbed about 500 photos already that  were rejected for similarity and mostr probably will look elsewhere too for the variety, even though I like shutterstock very much - like the first love :) but when new passion is doing better job  andoffers variety I  have huge urge to reconsider.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's what I mean by technical images

close-knitting-wooden-bamboo-needles-600

This is the first of eight in a tutorial series showing how the knit stitch is made when the left wrist is injured (and yes, I know the highlights are blown - it was before I knew how to post process).  Only being able to post the one image limits the audience to more general readers.  But I think being able to share the series would increase the amount of people who find it useful

I've had magazine editors complain to me that they can't find good technical stock photography for tutorial series.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's another one.

I found a dead skate (like a flat shark) on the beach and took a few shots.  I submitted four. 

1. from a distance with lots of copy space
2. close up of head from a different angle
3. closeup of tail to show spikes
4. turned over and showing the underside - with details of teeth

With a background in natural history, I figured these are the four images I would need to accurately show the different features of a skate (although I culled the fin spikes because I didn't think the quality of that picture turned out well)

1 and 4 were rejected for similar content. 

Are the SS customers not interested in detail shots like these?  I would like to know so I would stop uploading the technical shots here and just do the "from a distance with lots of copy space" kind of thing here.  

If they are interested in technical shots, I would like to know how best to describe the images so they don't get rejected.

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...