Jump to content
Bearfruit Idea

What does "Similar Content" means???

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, geogif said:

@Studio 2 , @Whiteaster

If you talk about someones port, who is not involved in the thread, but everybody knows whom you are talking about, politness should at least call his name, so he can watch and react, @Grossinger

(Of course you are right, but nevertheless it looks like bad behavior). 

I was talking about inconsequent review and I gave a hint to an example because otherwise you would have said that it is not true.

I just said the truth and I don't need anyone's reaction to this, it is true. I don't care about the rest of the gossip but thanks for the lesson about forum manners anyway.

You should use some too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Whiteaster said:

I was talking about inconsequent review and I gave a hint to an example because otherwise you would have said that it is not true.

I just said the truth and I don't need anyone's reaction to this, it is true. I don't care about the rest of the gossip but thanks for the lesson about manners anyway.

You should use some too.

I didn't say you'd say anything wrong. On the contrary. You said the truth, I also think so. 
But I think, regardless of the content of what is said, that even an indirect quotation in a forum deserves that the quoted person himself gets the opportunity to comment on it (if he wants). 
That's what I said, no more and no less, and I stand by it. 
By the way, this would also have been helpful for those who want to look at the PF you indirectly mentioned (but do not know @Grossinger). 
Why do you feel that such a thing, which I take for granted, is an attack?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Whiteaster said:

Oh man, I apologize, I was the superficial one. I got carried away in the middle of the night but now, in the morning I realized that you said the same thing in a single sentence.

Sorry for that.

Do be too sorry, I welcome anyone who questions and looks beyond the surface of things. 👍

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, geogif said:

Why do you feel that such a thing, which I take for granted, is an attack?

Because you have quoted that same slogan several times yourself but I don't remember that you mentioned the author of it. I don't have time to look up your posts where that happened (here's one) but you know it is true.

Or do I have to mention the person's name only in a pejorative context (which was not the case because I complained about the review)? I would like to know when is it bad behavior and when it is not.

So how does this work for you:

43 minutes ago, geogif said:

regardless of the content of what is said, that even an indirect quotation in a forum deserves that the quoted person himself gets the opportunity to comment on it (if he wants). 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Whiteaster said:

Because you have quoted that same slogan several times yourself but I don't remember that you mentioned the author of it. I don't have time to look up your posts where that happened (here's one) but you know it is true.

To make it clear: @Grossinger was the first (as far as I remeber) to use the slogan "upload, upload, upload", this is correct.

And with this catchy slogan he also expressed my opinion. So I used it very often and I still use it, this is true. Because it is a right slogan. 

And I always found Joe's PF, except for the inglorious conclusion, very interesting and quite instructive. Seriously and without sarcasm.

That is something completely different than quoting a PF as a negative example without giving the owner the chance to reply. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/15/2020 at 10:14 AM, HodagMedia said:

Yeah, I don't know why a vertical and horizontal crop would be rejected. Old advice was, make three, one portrait, one landscape and one square. I guess that's over the hill and out of date.

 

I agree. I'd not heard that advice. Ages ago when I'd done some reading about medium format cameras, I read (or think I did) that one reason to use them for professional photography shoots/advertizing shoots is that it gave the client flexibility in how to crop the image. Or at least something along those lines.

Though I recently (a month or two ago I think, could have  been a bit longer) submitted two images of a waterfall. One was landscape and one was portrait. And that's it. No 50 different angels No 50 slightly different views. Just the two and one got rejected for  "being too similar". I just figured it would give a bit more flexibility to who needed an image of that particular waterfall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Firn said:

Not Acceptable:

True, what's the date? Header image looks to be sometime in 2016. Good link that everyone should read and understand:

If your content was rejected with “Similar Content - This content is too similar to another image or clip that has already been submitted or published”, it is because the content you submitted closely resembles another image or clip that has already been accepted to our site. 

It doesn't say another from the same specific artist, just another accepted image.

You're right the simple vertical and horizontal crop is unacceptable. I was pointing out, in the past and what some people did. I'm not sure I ever did that? But the fact that anyone could create three versions back then and they were acceptable, means providing ready images for buyers.

Here's the crux of the problem. Lets say the rules were already in place, for many years, and SS never enforced them. That's what led to people abusing the system and posting all kinds of unacceptable variations, like just swapping backgrounds. Changing colors. Rotating the same image. Using one background and swapping in different overlays. Same text bubble, different quotes. Not allowed.

Not hard to find those flag series accounts. Someone with one image and 250 different world flags. There are also the same guys in hard hats, hundreds of images, only the background changed. Just a couple of easy ones, there are more. They were acceptable, now the guidelines are being enforced and over the top tough. What should anyone think, except, "Hey this is not right, or what we expect." 🙂

The one that grabbed me was a yellow and blue canoe, single. Then another with different alignment and two canoes, yet the colors set off the similar alert and the reviewer rejected it for similar. Give Me A Break! That's nothing like the unacceptable versions and images. (unless we only saw two and there are 20 other shots of the same canoe and two canoes?)

Bottom line for me, the rules are now being enforced excessively, and the change wasn't just enforcing the already existing rules, it was, one day, you could upload a series of shots, the next, you could upload one, if the colors or some obvious content element is the same. That's hard to take.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, HodagMedia said:

True, what's the date? Header image looks to be sometime in 2016. Good link that everyone should read and understand:

I do not know what the date of the article itself is, but it was linked in the announcement about new similar rules from  August 19, so I would assume that's also the date of the article:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/6/2020 at 2:58 AM, Firn said:

Not Acceptable:

I get that. Not that I recall seeing that line about portrait/landscape orientation, though it's been a long time since I've looked at that page. Though part of me still feels like certain subjects (eg, some waterfalls) might benefit if there are infrequent such pairs of photos. I'm not talking a whole port of portrait/landscape pairs, more  like some small percentage (like 0.5-1% of a port). Not being one to be too ornery or wanting to be too antagonistic, I'm not about to test the waters with that thought.

Share this post


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...