Nav: Home
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 27, 2012, 01:55

Login with username, password and session length

MicrostockGroup

MicrostockGroup » Forum » Top Tier - Big 4 » Shutterstock.com » How Much do you get per Subscription Download on SS as of Jan. 1st 2011?

Microstockgroup Sponsors

Pond5

« previous next »
Poll
Question: What do you get per Sub Download on SS  (Voting closed: February 02, 2011, 18:03)
25 cents - 22 (17.5%)
33 cents - 35 (27.8%)
36 cents - 33 (26.2%)
38 cents - 36 (28.6%)
Total Voters: 122

Pages: [1] Print

Topic: How Much do you get per Subscription Download on SS as of Jan. 1st 2011?  

(Read 2360 times)
RacePhoto



« on: January 13, 2011, 18:03 »
Subs - just checking. There was a poll like this last year January also. (which I can't find)

Poll expires in 20 days, results will show then. Aprox. Feb 2nd.
« Last Edit: January 14, 2011, 03:49 by RacePhoto »

Ignore | Logged

DepositPhotos.com
gostwyck

Dreamstime GaugeiStock Gauge
« Reply #1 on: January 14, 2011, 07:14 »
Well, with 45 contributors having voted so far, I guess that answers your question Race!

Over 50% of contributors are on 36c or more per sub download and less than 16% are on the minimum 25c (and even those should move upwards fairly quickly if they uploaded a few saleable images).

That basically proves that it is against the interests of over 84% of all independent contributors to support low paying agencies like Thinkstock.


Ignore | Logged

molka


« Reply #2 on: January 14, 2011, 07:39 »
Quote from: gostwyck on January 14, 2011, 07:14
Well, with 45 contributors having voted so far, I guess that answers your question Race!

Over 50% of contributors are on 36c or more per sub download and less than 16% are on the minimum 25c (and even those should move upwards fairly quickly if they uploaded a few saleable images).

That basically proves that it is against the interests of over 84% of all independent contributors to support low paying agencies like Thinkstock.

What does it matter? All microstock agenciesare low paying.


Ignore | Logged

Eireann


Dreamstime GaugeiStock Gauge
« Reply #3 on: January 14, 2011, 09:09 »
Shutterstock payments :

Subscription : 0.33 cent
OD : 1.88 / 2.88

Port size : 480 (or so, not counting identical vector - raster)
Took me about 10 months to reach 0.33 level but I'm in no way special.

And then, there are contributors like L. Davila. A very, very talented and successful illustrator.
His first month at SS (not even a full month), 1 page port, (20 - 25 illustrations), - over 800 downloads. (Wow!)
Next month - December - he was already on 0.33 level.
It took him about 5 weeks to reach it.
But I have to admit, he's exceptional.
Not many can compare to his performance.


Ignore | Logged

lisafx


Premium Member
« Reply #4 on: January 14, 2011, 09:37 »
Quote from: molka on January 14, 2011, 07:39
Quote from: gostwyck on January 14, 2011, 07:14
Well, with 45 contributors having voted so far, I guess that answers your question Race!

Over 50% of contributors are on 36c or more per sub download and less than 16% are on the minimum 25c (and even those should move upwards fairly quickly if they uploaded a few saleable images).

That basically proves that it is against the interests of over 84% of all independent contributors to support low paying agencies like Thinkstock.

What does it matter? All microstock agenciesare low paying.

If you sell in volume it makes a big difference.


Ignore | Logged

molka


« Reply #5 on: January 14, 2011, 09:45 »
Quote from: lisafx on January 14, 2011, 09:37
Quote from: molka on January 14, 2011, 07:39
Quote from: gostwyck on January 14, 2011, 07:14
Well, with 45 contributors having voted so far, I guess that answers your question Race!

Over 50% of contributors are on 36c or more per sub download and less than 16% are on the minimum 25c (and even those should move upwards fairly quickly if they uploaded a few saleable images).

That basically proves that it is against the interests of over 84% of all independent contributors to support low paying agencies like Thinkstock.

What does it matter? All microstock agenciesare low paying.

If you sell in volume it makes a big difference.

You have to sell in volume because they are low paying.


Ignore | Logged

lisafx


Premium Member
« Reply #6 on: January 14, 2011, 10:44 »
Quote from: molka on January 14, 2011, 09:45
Quote from: lisafx on January 14, 2011, 09:37
Quote from: molka on January 14, 2011, 07:39
Quote from: gostwyck on January 14, 2011, 07:14
Well, with 45 contributors having voted so far, I guess that answers your question Race!

Over 50% of contributors are on 36c or more per sub download and less than 16% are on the minimum 25c (and even those should move upwards fairly quickly if they uploaded a few saleable images).

That basically proves that it is against the interests of over 84% of all independent contributors to support low paying agencies like Thinkstock.

What does it matter? All microstock agenciesare low paying.

If you sell in volume it makes a big difference.

You have to sell in volume because they are low paying.

Bravo.  You have perfectly described the entire concept behind microstock Smiley


Ignore | Logged

molka


« Reply #7 on: January 14, 2011, 11:43 »
Quote from: lisafx on January 14, 2011, 10:44
Quote from: molka on January 14, 2011, 09:45
Quote from: lisafx on January 14, 2011, 09:37
Quote from: molka on January 14, 2011, 07:39
Quote from: gostwyck on January 14, 2011, 07:14
Well, with 45 contributors having voted so far, I guess that answers your question Race!

Over 50% of contributors are on 36c or more per sub download and less than 16% are on the minimum 25c (and even those should move upwards fairly quickly if they uploaded a few saleable images).

That basically proves that it is against the interests of over 84% of all independent contributors to support low paying agencies like Thinkstock.

What does it matter? All microstock agenciesare low paying.

If you sell in volume it makes a big difference.

You have to sell in volume because they are low paying.

Bravo.  You have perfectly described the entire concept behind microstock Smiley

The question reamining then is how come ppl using just a ounce of common sense didn't refuse that crap offer? It's hard to beleive ppl are that stupid and shoprtsighted, but looks to be that way. It's just sad : (


Ignore | Logged

cclapper


Premium Member

Dreamstime Gauge
« Reply #8 on: January 14, 2011, 11:57 »
Quote from: molka on January 14, 2011, 11:43
Quote from: lisafx on January 14, 2011, 10:44
Quote from: molka on January 14, 2011, 09:45
Quote from: lisafx on January 14, 2011, 09:37
Quote from: molka on January 14, 2011, 07:39
Quote from: gostwyck on January 14, 2011, 07:14
Well, with 45 contributors having voted so far, I guess that answers your question Race!

Over 50% of contributors are on 36c or more per sub download and less than 16% are on the minimum 25c (and even those should move upwards fairly quickly if they uploaded a few saleable images).

That basically proves that it is against the interests of over 84% of all independent contributors to support low paying agencies like Thinkstock.

What does it matter? All microstock agenciesare low paying.

If you sell in volume it makes a big difference.

You have to sell in volume because they are low paying.

Bravo.  You have perfectly described the entire concept behind microstock Smiley

The question reamining then is how come ppl using just a ounce of common sense didn't refuse that crap offer? It's hard to beleive ppl are that stupid and shoprtsighted, but looks to be that way. It's just sad : (

Here we go.  Roll Eyes


Ignore | Logged

disorderly


Dreamstime GaugeiStock Gauge
« Reply #9 on: January 14, 2011, 12:01 »
Quote from: cclapper on January 14, 2011, 11:57
Here we go.  Roll Eyes

Please, Cathy, don't feed the troll.  Ignore him; it's all he deserves.


Ignore | Logged

molka


« Reply #10 on: January 14, 2011, 12:04 »
infantilism kicks in: 'opinion I don't like' = 'troll.' Grow up!  : )


Ignore | Logged

lisafx


Premium Member
« Reply #11 on: January 14, 2011, 12:11 »
Quote from: disorderly on January 14, 2011, 12:01


Please, Cathy, don't feed the troll.  Ignore him; it's all he deserves.

I'm guilty too.  Should have just left his irrational rantings to go unanswered.  Apologies. 


Ignore | Logged

sharpshot


Dreamstime GaugeiStock Gauge
« Reply #12 on: January 14, 2011, 15:07 »
Quote from: lisafx on January 14, 2011, 12:11
Quote from: disorderly on January 14, 2011, 12:01


Please, Cathy, don't feed the troll.  Ignore him; it's all he deserves.

I'm guilty too.  Should have just left his irrational rantings to go unanswered.  Apologies. 
39 of us have him on ignore.  Why not make it 40 Smiley


Ignore | Logged

lisafx


Premium Member
« Reply #13 on: January 14, 2011, 15:26 »
Quote from: sharpshot on January 14, 2011, 15:07
Quote from: lisafx on January 14, 2011, 12:11
I'm guilty too.  Should have just left his irrational rantings to go unanswered.  Apologies. 
39 of us have him on ignore.  Why not make it 40 Smiley

I am already one of those 39.  He was posting so much my curiosity got the better of me and I looked.  Now I'm kicking myself because it was a total waste of time.  As usual he had nothing of value to offer.   Roll Eyes


Ignore | Logged

sharpshot


Dreamstime GaugeiStock Gauge
« Reply #14 on: January 14, 2011, 15:53 »
That "show" button has got me a few times.  Would be nice if it wasn't there and we didn't see quotes from ignored people but I suppose that can't be helped.


Ignore | Logged

molka


« Reply #15 on: January 14, 2011, 18:24 »
Looks like truth hurts again. But you people sure are good at ignoring things! Great skill, it's called ignorance... and looky-look what it got you with istock and microstock in general  Wink


Ignore | Logged

cthoman



« Reply #16 on: January 14, 2011, 18:36 »
Quote from: molka on January 14, 2011, 18:24
... and looky-look what it got you with istock and microstock in general  Wink

...A fairly decent chunk of money, a large portfolio, improved skill in my field, and some financial stability. Yeah, that stuff sucks.  Grin


Ignore | Logged

Sign up with Shutterstock
lisafx


Premium Member
« Reply #17 on: January 14, 2011, 18:41 »
Quote from: cthoman on January 14, 2011, 18:36
...A fairly decent chunk of money, a large portfolio, improved skill in my field, and some financial stability. Yeah, that stuff sucks.  Grin

Bummer you have wasted all that time... Wink


Ignore | Logged

RacePhoto



« Reply #18 on: January 15, 2011, 01:31 »
Quote from: gostwyck on January 14, 2011, 07:14
Well, with 45 contributors having voted so far, I guess that answers your question Race!

Over 50% of contributors are on 36c or more per sub download and less than 16% are on the minimum 25c (and even those should move upwards fairly quickly if they uploaded a few saleable images).

That basically proves that it is against the interests of over 84% of all independent contributors to support low paying agencies like Thinkstock.

It wasn't about ThinkStock, I don't know why everything turns into a Getty bashing thread.

Last year the conclusion was that the upper 5% of all microstock shooters, are represented here. Cheesy

(and I'm never going to be one of them, because it takes hard work, dedication, models, understanding and more than snapping some sappy pictures.)

Edit: now that I read the rest of the thread, it looks like I bring out the best. LOL really I had no intention of baiting molka into an appearance.

Honest it was just the same question I asked last year. In fact if I did a survey, maybe I should find one of those free survey sites? I'd ask four questions that aren't as relevant as what Leaf does on the good survey. Maybe five? Every time they answer what I wonder and also point out that the top people for uploads, money and microstock in general, come here to chat. If someone new is looking for good information, this is the place.
« Last Edit: January 15, 2011, 01:44 by RacePhoto »

Ignore | Logged

molka


« Reply #19 on: January 15, 2011, 08:40 »
Quote from: cthoman on January 14, 2011, 18:36
Quote from: molka on January 14, 2011, 18:24
... and looky-look what it got you with istock and microstock in general  Wink

...A fairly decent chunk of money, a large portfolio, improved skill in my field, and some financial stability. Yeah, that stuff sucks.  Grin

so what's the several hundred pages of pissed of whining on istock and here is all about then? it's suddenly "woo-yay again"? Smiley my god you people are inconsistent infantile kids...


Ignore | Logged

djpadavona



« Reply #20 on: January 15, 2011, 08:45 »
How did last year's results compare with this year's?


Ignore | Logged

Danicek


Dreamstime GaugeiStock Gauge
« Reply #21 on: January 15, 2011, 10:32 »
Quote from: molka on January 14, 2011, 18:24
Looks like truth hurts again. But you people sure are good at ignoring things! Great skill, it's called ignorance... and looky-look what it got you with istock and microstock in general  Wink

Did you notice you called people stupid? Not quite an invitation for discussion.

I don't feel bad to sell my shot of plain unpainted cement wall for 0.33 a pop. I don't feel like selling it for $200 would be appropriate.

If your stuff is exceptional enough, it will still sell for $200 a pop or more, so don't whine here.
« Last Edit: January 15, 2011, 10:35 by Danicek »

Ignore | Logged

RacePhoto



« Reply #22 on: January 16, 2011, 00:45 »
Quote from: Danicek on January 15, 2011, 10:32
Quote from: molka on January 14, 2011, 18:24
Looks like truth hurts again. But you people sure are good at ignoring things! Great skill, it's called ignorance... and looky-look what it got you with istock and microstock in general  Wink


Did you notice you called people stupid? Not quite an invitation for discussion.

I don't feel bad to sell my shot of plain unpainted cement wall for 0.33 a pop. I don't feel like selling it for $200 would be appropriate.

If your stuff is exceptional enough, it will still sell for $200 a pop or more, so don't whine here.


No that's exceptional. I love it. An unpainted wall. Snowman in blizzard at North Pole? Cheesy Watch as the copy cats duplicate that and try to cash in on a best seller.

But to continue the thread, what's left of it. I found the new graphics interesting at SS. This is a Christmas chart, One year, January to January 2011 and No El. (get it?) Wink

The amounts don't matter, what does is one persons sales by the months. Maybe not interesting? But I thought it was.



This seems to be a question that comes up every year in January and July. If my sales are any indication, and I don't know if they are, here's the trend for Subs on SS.


Ignore | Logged

RacePhoto



« Reply #23 on: February 03, 2011, 01:17 »
Results are locked and 55%/39 of the people on who answered MSG have sold over $3000 on SS. Which is once again very impressive.


Ignore | Logged

Microstock InsiderEnvateo Photo Tools
Pages: [1] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Related Topics
Subject Started by Replies Views Last post
Price Freeze till 2011
iStockPhoto.com 		shank_ali 12 2247 Last post January 12, 2009, 13:40
by shank_ali
iStockphoto.com 2000-2011 R.I.P. « 1 2 »
iStockPhoto.com 		Perry 27 2309 Last post September 11, 2010, 14:33
by lisafx
Our digital future: Predictions for 2011 and beyond... « 1 2 »
General Stock Discussion 		louoates 25 2308 Last post December 29, 2010, 15:12
by microstockphoto.co.uk
iStock Watch 2011 « 1 2 3 4 »
iStockPhoto.com 		RacePhoto 75 6361 Last post January 12, 2011, 02:23
by RacePhoto
January 2011 price adjustment « 1 2 »
iStockPhoto.com 		suemack 32 3102 Last post January 20, 2011, 01:33
by qwerty

Microstockgroup Sponsors

CanstockPhoto



MicrostockGroup Email Updates

Microstock Poll Results

Site Earnings Rating
Top Tier - Big 4
Shutterstock 100 arrow
iStock 66.7 arrow
Fotolia 34.9 arrow
Dreamstime 26.7 arrow
Middle Tier
DepositPhotos 21.6 arrow
123RF 16.3 arrow
Canstockphoto 11.2 arrow
Bigstockphoto 9.5 arrow
Veer 8.7 arrow
Low Earners
PantherMedia 6.7 arrow
PhotoDune 5.8 arrow
isignstock 4.1 arrow
Zoonar 3.5 arrow
GLStockImages 2.7 arrow
Stockfresh 2.2 arrow
YayMicro 1.8 arrow
FeaturePics 1.4 arrow
MostPhotos 1.3 arrow
ScanStockPhoto 1.1 arrow
Crestock 0.8 arrow
Cutcaster 0.6 arrow
AllYouCanStock 0.1 arrow
ClipartOf
Pond5
RevoStock
Clipcanvas
DrawShop
ClipDealer
PhotoSpin
VectorStock
GraphicRiver
Pixmac
PhotoCase
The3dStudio
photaki
SuperHug
PhotoKore
iRockStock
Vivozoom
StockPhotoMedia
Regimages
ImageVortex
Imagegate
ViscoImages
More Poll Results
Updated: 2012-05-27

TinyPortal v1.0.5 beta 1© Bloc
Advertise on Microstockgroup.com | Contact: [email protected]
Sitemap | Powered by SMF 1.1.15 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines | Adagio design by Bloc