pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Shutterstock - downsizing to 6mp - thoughts?  (Read 36855 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

« Reply #50 on: April 14, 2014, 16:37 »
+3
Hi All,

IMO what you need is some sort of formal appeals process, possibly limited to a certain number a month, or to contributors with a certain number of sales to prevent the process from being overwhelmed by things that really are junk. That sort of process would help you calibrate reviewers and improve the quality of reviews. In the long run that will benefit Shutterstock as much as it will contributors.

Hi Jo Ann,

Agreed. Anyone is invited to disagree with a review determination.  If they're right -- or the case was borderline -- we will reverse the reviewer's decision.  As long as that process is not abused, it's important part of the feedback process for us.  We "review our reviewers" and go through regular training with them, but it's helpful for us to determine when issues occur so we can give feedback to the reviewers themselves.

There are three possibilities in these situations:

- The images are clearly out of focus or back-focused when viewed at 100%.
- The images are slightly soft due to motion, lens choice, equipment, etc., but we'll give the nod to the contributor in a second review (we do ask our reviewers to consider whether softness is due to equipment limitations or poor technique). 
- The images were sharp and the reviewer made the wrong determination.

We appreciate that it takes time to produce images and our goal is to have "0" issues across the millions of images that we review.  If you feel the review was incorrect, it's important to let us know, and please write in.

Best,

Scott
VP of Content
Shutterstock




« Reply #52 on: April 14, 2014, 17:10 »
0
Anyone is invited to disagree with a review determination. 
...
If you feel the review was incorrect, it's important to let us know, and please write in.

Best,

Scott
VP of Content
Shutterstock

Hi Scott,

what's the normal time to receive a response to such a request? I sent one (whole batch rejected for reasons I did not agree to) almost a week ago (on April 8) and haven't heard back yet...
Other submissions since then have been accepted without issues.

thanks,
Dirk


lisafx

« Reply #54 on: April 14, 2014, 21:43 »
+23
I would like to thank Scott for taking the time to come in to this thread and reply multiple times with helpful and substantive answers.  It's a rare thing to have such interactions with admins from most sites, and agree or not with all Shutterstock's policies on this, he is to be commended IMO.

« Reply #55 on: April 14, 2014, 21:50 »
+4
I would like to thank Scott for taking the time to come in to this thread and reply multiple times with helpful and substantive answers.  It's a rare thing to have such interactions with admins from most sites, and agree or not with all Shutterstock's policies on this, he is to be commended IMO.

Totally agree Lisa. Wish more agencies acted as professionally as SS and Scott. Vote up for ya.

« Reply #56 on: April 15, 2014, 02:19 »
+2
Scott Braut has stated a few times that image size is one criteria some buyers use when selecting images. I wonder, though, how much weight this criteria  places on the buying decision? I would think not a lot. Buyers find one at 6mp and a similar one at 24 mp and would likely choose the one that fits their visual needs first over the larger size. Sure there are times a buyer needs size as a selection factor but not many I suspect.

What is definitely true - and you can see it at DT all the time - is that if buyers don't pay extra for a large size then they will take the largest size possible.  I suspect that it is the "maybe someday I'll need it big so I might as well grab it" syndrome, rather than almost all the subs at DT being sold for use as posters two yards (metres) high. In fact I should think very few of our pictures are ever used larger than A4, but buyers still show a preference for downloading them at A0 size. But if they want it for a half-page magazine ad then they are not going to be put off because it is only available as a 4MP download.
The time when a supersized version would be useful would be when a very small part of the image is needed for inclusion in a design, but that's not likely with single-subject stock shots.

« Reply #57 on: April 15, 2014, 05:50 »
0
Hello,

If you sent a note to our "submit" support address, you should hear back within 1-2 business days.  If you didn't get any response, I would try again, in case it went into a spam folder.  I can check with the team on the current status of the escalation queue, but they've been pretty fast. 

If you don't receive a response after multiple email attempts, PM me (not the best first path, since the submit email address creates a ticket in our system and goes directly to the right people). 

Best,

Scott

Thanks Scott, I re-sent my message.

Tror

« Reply #58 on: April 15, 2014, 08:32 »
+6
Thanks Scott and SS for paying attention and taking the time to reply on this Forum...very appreciated.

Regarding downsizing: Although you recommend not to do it for maintaining the possibility of higher priced corporate sales, I downsize since some time. The problem is simply that with a handfull of sales on some high priced sites I outperform already SS. For me, from a economic viewpoint, it is getting harder to justify pumping supreme quality into a subscription Model.

Don`t get me wrong, it is not really an emotional thing, it is just the fact that I feel every year a bit more that with such low priced sales I cannibalize the (growing) high priced sales on various other sites. Maybe it would be really time to think about a raise in the subscription Model?

« Reply #59 on: April 15, 2014, 09:14 »
+2
Thanks Scott and SS for paying attention and taking the time to reply on this Forum...very appreciated.

Regarding downsizing: Although you recommend not to do it for maintaining the possibility of higher priced corporate sales, I downsize since some time. The problem is simply that with a handfull of sales on some high priced sites I outperform already SS. For me, from a economic viewpoint, it is getting harder to justify pumping supreme quality into a subscription Model.

Don`t get me wrong, it is not really an emotional thing, it is just the fact that I feel every year a bit more that with such low priced sales I cannibalize the (growing) high priced sales on various other sites. Maybe it would be really time to think about a raise in the subscription Model?

$0.50 per for highest pay category instead of .38.

« Reply #60 on: April 15, 2014, 09:51 »
+5
Hi Tror,

Thanks for your feedback.  I think it's important to think about Shutterstock's business outside of just subscriptions.  The reality is that images are sold under many different price points and many different products, and that our enterprise business is growing daily on a global basis.   There are nearly 1 million customers at Shutterstock (and more through our Facebook integration, which has 1 million active advertisers).   It's not an "either-or" scenario.  At our service, the same image that sells to a small local business in Utah under the subscription model can sell for hundreds of dollars to an ad agency in Germany, the UK or Japan.   When you're putting quality images into the collection, you're making them available for every kind of purchase opportunity, unless you've specifically opted out of some.

The other thing to keep in mind is that our products grow and mature every single day.  As a tech company, we're constantly testing and deploying small iterations of new features. A few years ago, $50 - $120 royalties didn't exist at the scale that they do now.  Many features didn't exist, or were different.  If you do something against our recommendations today because you're making future assumptions about who the customers are, what features are available, etc., then you're doing yourself a disservice. 

For example, our search algorithms focus on image performance and complex analyses of large amounts of behavioral data.  Over time, your images build up histories of customer behavior.  Those are very important assets for you. 

Avoid bad advice and chances that you may want to "change" an image in the future to take advantage of emerging opportunities.  You might lose an important thing of value -- customer data -- that you earn on a hourly basis over the course of years. 

Best,

Scott
VP of Content
Shutterstock



ruxpriencdiam

    This user is banned.
  • Location. Third stone from the sun
« Reply #61 on: April 15, 2014, 13:50 »
-5
Hi Tror,

Thanks for your feedback.  I think it's important to think about Shutterstock's business outside of just subscriptions.  The reality is that images are sold under many different price points and many different products, and that our enterprise business is growing daily on a global basis.   There are nearly 1 million customers at Shutterstock (and more through our Facebook integration, which has 1 million active advertisers).   It's not an "either-or" scenario.  At our service, the same image that sells to a small local business in Utah under the subscription model can sell for hundreds of dollars to an ad agency in Germany, the UK or Japan.   When you're putting quality images into the collection, you're making them available for every kind of purchase opportunity, unless you've specifically opted out of some.

The other thing to keep in mind is that our products grow and mature every single day.  As a tech company, we're constantly testing and deploying small iterations of new features. A few years ago, $50 - $120 royalties didn't exist at the scale that they do now.  Many features didn't exist, or were different.  If you do something against our recommendations today because you're making future assumptions about who the customers are, what features are available, etc., then you're doing yourself a disservice. 

For example, our search algorithms focus on image performance and complex analyses of large amounts of behavioral data.  Over time, your images build up histories of customer behavior.  Those are very important assets for you. 

Avoid bad advice and chances that you may want to "change" an image in the future to take advantage of emerging opportunities.  You might lose an important thing of value -- customer data -- that you earn on a hourly basis over the course of years. 

Best,

Scott
VP of Content
Shutterstock
Thanks Scott.

Now if you could just get all of the naysayers to listen to you then you would be doing something but that is like trying to just casually walk through a brick wall!

And that's not going to happen so they will continue the argument over and over.

Oh well their loss.

« Reply #62 on: April 15, 2014, 14:23 »
+4
Thanks for the thoughts Scott.  It's great to hear information direct from the source.

« Reply #63 on: April 16, 2014, 03:30 »
+2
After reading this thread I took my last 20 rejections, downsized them to 6MP, and had 14 accepted. That settles it for me.

Ron

« Reply #64 on: April 16, 2014, 03:51 »
0
As Paul said, rejected images dont sell, downsized images which are accepted do.

I am submitting standard 12MP images, downsized from 20MP. If they dont cut it, I downsize further.

The only images that are over 12MP are my panoramas they go at 15-30MP. My latest pano of Berlin was 129MP. Why would I submit such sizes to microstock? Sub packages make no distinction between size, 36 cent for S and XXXL, doesnt make sense. 30MP is big enough for 36 cents and 120 dollar.

« Reply #65 on: April 16, 2014, 09:53 »
+4
After reading this thread I took my last 20 rejections, downsized them to 6MP, and had 14 accepted. That settles it for me.

I understand the Realpolitik of that, but it's just stupid. I really hate having to accept stupid...

« Reply #66 on: April 16, 2014, 10:11 »
+1
It is occasional XXL credit sale vs everyday XXL subscription sale. If you downsize you will not get the first one and will be less sorry about second one.


« Reply #67 on: April 16, 2014, 11:30 »
-4
We downsize all as much as possible.

Batman

« Reply #68 on: April 18, 2014, 08:12 »
0
Does SS pay the same regardless of the image size? Cause i seem to be getting. 0.25$ a pop on all downloads.

I'm such a case why would i upload hi res files to them?

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2

For sub they want a XXL so they can make more. We make nothing extra. I don't upload full size.
« Last Edit: April 18, 2014, 08:14 by Batman »

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #69 on: April 18, 2014, 08:33 »
+2
Generally, if you keep ISO to 100, or no more than 200, or 250 tops, ...
There speaks someone from Florida  ;)  8)

lisafx

« Reply #70 on: April 18, 2014, 12:55 »
0
Generally, if you keep ISO to 100, or no more than 200, or 250 tops, ...
There speaks someone from Florida  ;)  8)

LOL- Fair point.  Although if you looked out my office window the last several days you would swear I lived in Seattle or some other very rainy place :)

« Reply #71 on: April 19, 2014, 14:51 »
0
After reading this thread I took my last 20 rejections, downsized them to 6MP, and had 14 accepted. That settles it for me.
Maybe it settles it for you in the easy way, but there is a lesson you didnt learn.
Question: Can you not shoot quality in full size?
Answer: it is not always possible (convenient), and sometimes you have to downsize to maintain image quality.

But if you have to do it on a regular basis, it shows that your are either working in a borderline field or are not good enough as a photographer.
« Last Edit: April 19, 2014, 23:48 by JPSDK »

ruxpriencdiam

    This user is banned.
  • Location. Third stone from the sun
« Reply #72 on: April 19, 2014, 15:38 »
0
After reading this thread I took my last 20 rejections, downsized them to 6MP, and had 14 accepted. That settles it for me.
Maybe it settles it for you in the easy way, but there is a lesson you didnt learn.
Question: Can you not shoot quality in full size?
Answer: it is not also possible (convenient), and sometimes you have to downsize to maintain image quality.

But if you have to do it on a regular basis, it shows that your are either working in a borderline field or are not good enough as a photographer.
No one wants to hear this here!

They will come up with all kinds of reasons and explanations as to why they downsize.

Just look at the minuses I get for talking like that!?

w7lwi

  • Those that don't stand up to evil enable evil.
« Reply #73 on: April 19, 2014, 18:30 »
0
Barry, you get minuses if you just say it's a beautiful day and we should all get outdoors and enjoy the sunshine.   ;D

« Reply #74 on: April 19, 2014, 19:26 »
+3
I normally downsize according to the size I think the focus looks good enough at 100% that I would buy it. Sometimes that's full size, sometimes and often smaller. Really varies on the shot. I think that's a good way to work.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk



 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
1 Replies
3408 Views
Last post September 19, 2007, 10:21
by w7lwi
35 Replies
14739 Views
Last post May 25, 2009, 11:09
by KB
11 Replies
4776 Views
Last post June 07, 2011, 05:50
by Gannet77
1 Replies
2350 Views
Last post March 15, 2012, 13:08
by sgoodwin4813
29 Replies
15459 Views
Last post February 24, 2014, 22:24
by MicrostockExp

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors