MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Shutterstock Custom is born  (Read 29240 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #25 on: September 22, 2017, 11:33 »
+14
What ss is doing is simple.  They are taking another photography vertical, comissioned shoots, and turning that into cheap microstock royalties, effectively destroying another element of our business for personal gain. And the sad part is that photographers will do these shoots for pennies. 


« Reply #26 on: September 22, 2017, 11:41 »
+3
Well, I've just signed up and they're reviewing my application. 

At least they're trying to stay competitive by innovating...whether it will pay well is another matter altogether but at this stage it's insane to believe that only Microstock is the way forward.
I'm not sure buying other companies is particularly innovative but might be worth applying I guess. FWIW I believe SS want to move away from "straight" Microstock as its not a particularly profitable field.

I think it's quite profitable, but only for them.
  I think though some people might not like it stock photos are basically a commodity big money is made by adding perceived value....like the difference between selling wheat and "artisan" bread.

Hence the majority of contributors (wheat growers) won't be applying or at least they won't be accepted, only artisans need apply, but not being monkeys will they accept peanuts?

Brasilnut

  • Author Brutally Honest Guide to Microstock & Blog

« Reply #27 on: September 23, 2017, 10:08 »
0
I just wrote a blog post about SS Custom:

http://brutallyhonestmicrostock.com/2017/09/23/review-introducing-shutterstock-custom/

It appears that they've accepted me :)

Shelma1

« Reply #28 on: September 23, 2017, 12:32 »
+3
So you have no idea how much the jobs will pay. Wonder when they'll let you in on that little secret.

« Reply #29 on: September 23, 2017, 13:46 »
+4
What ss is doing is simple.  They are taking another photography vertical, comissioned shoots, and turning that into cheap microstock royalties, effectively destroying another element of our business for personal gain. And the sad part is that photographers will do these shoots for pennies.

I couldn't agree more and joining without knowing the complete Deal and commissions? really?.

« Reply #30 on: September 23, 2017, 15:45 »
+1
I just wrote a blog post about SS Custom:

http://brutallyhonestmicrostock.com/2017/09/23/review-introducing-shutterstock-custom/

It appears that they've accepted me :)


sorry but what a bruttaly idiotical title for an author with only $ in his eyes. :-*

« Reply #31 on: September 23, 2017, 17:48 »
+1
I don't see any risk in joining up as it doesn't commit you to do anything as far as I can see. I don't think I'm what they are looking for but if an location based project came up near me it might be worth my while.

Brasilnut

  • Author Brutally Honest Guide to Microstock & Blog

« Reply #32 on: September 23, 2017, 17:58 »
0
Quote
sorry but what a bruttaly idiotical title for an author with only $ in his eyes. :-*

Don't judge a book by its cover

« Reply #33 on: September 23, 2017, 18:45 »
0
Quote
sorry but what a bruttaly idiotical title for an author with only $ in his eyes. :-*

Don't judge a book by its cover

His comment reads like he's judging the cover by the book.  Anyway, I look forward to your update now that you are accepted?  I hear payments are tiered like ELs and in the smallprint it says that they keep the copyright, would newbies sell their content for 20% or veterans for 30%?  I guess that would be a deal breaker for many, if true.

« Reply #34 on: September 23, 2017, 20:16 »
0
I just wrote a blog post about SS Custom:

http://brutallyhonestmicrostock.com/2017/09/23/review-introducing-shutterstock-custom/

It appears that they've accepted me :)


Did you get accepted or just the second email to complete the application?

« Reply #35 on: September 24, 2017, 00:47 »
0
Quote
sorry but what a bruttaly idiotical title for an author with only $ in his eyes. :-*

Don't judge a book by its cover
Though not necessarily what you would say when selling images for book covers :o

« Reply #36 on: September 24, 2017, 01:48 »
+3
I just wrote a blog post about SS Custom:

http://brutallyhonestmicrostock.com/2017/09/23/review-introducing-shutterstock-custom/

It appears that they've accepted me :)


sorry but what a bruttaly idiotical title for an author with only $ in his eyes. :-*


Iam judging the author by his behaviour. Bruttaly heavy spaming...

Brasilnut

  • Author Brutally Honest Guide to Microstock & Blog

« Reply #37 on: September 24, 2017, 03:51 »
0
Quote
Anyway, I look forward to your update now that you are accepted?

Yeah, for sure I'll update.

Quote
I hear payments are tiered like ELs and in the smallprint it says that they keep the copyright, would newbies sell their content for 20% or veterans for 30%?  I guess that would be a deal breaker for many, if true.

Yes, they keep the copyright which is fair enough as it's fit-for-purpose exclusive content tailored for a client. In return I would expect higher payments for this burden. It would be highly advisable not to license the content elsewhere.

I imagine SS will have no issue recruiting enough contributors from their current army of 250,000 Microstock contributors. Not sure yet what the % is yet - probably a bit higher than 30% I think because it's supposed to be a "premium" service (probably wishful thinking).

What I found encouraging is that some briefs will allow contributors to file expense reports for some briefs to receive some reimbursements. Here's from their FAQ:

"On some assignments, you may receive an allotted amount for an expense budget. Expenses are for you to purchase props and/or product depending on the brief specifications. Sometimes, you will have the ability to select props to your wish, but other times there will be a set guideline on what you are to purchase according to the brief. It is your responsibility to check the brief guidelines to find out exactly what your expense budget should be used on. You will be reimbursed for your expenses by submitting all receipts."

They go on to add that the contributor would still be reimbursed even if the client decides not to use the images once the brief has been accepted.

"If they dont use the images I submit, do I still get reimbursed for product?" Answer: "Yes, you will be reimbursed for approved expenses as long as youve completed the assignment. You can upload receipts for up to your allocated expense amount when submitting your images."

Quote
Did you get accepted or just the second email to complete the application?

Didn't receive any confirmation email but I can login into their dashboard. See screenshot.

Quote
Iam judging the author by his behaviour. Bruttaly heavy spaming...

I love haters, they make me work harder.




« Last Edit: September 24, 2017, 03:57 by Brasilnut »

Shelma1

« Reply #38 on: September 24, 2017, 04:58 »
+8
This sounds worse every minute. You'll be reimbursed for your expenses if they decide not to use your photos, but it says nothing about you being paid for the assignment if they decide not to use your photos. So Arm & Hammer could hire ten photographers to shoot something, reimburse them all 50 cents for one box of baking soda, and pay only one person $50 for four photos that they then own the copyright to, so those photos cannot be licensed elsewhere.

What SS is doing is trying to keep clients from contacting artists directly and hiring them to do custom work. By offering clients prices much, much lower than any independent artist would ever, ever charge. And then SS keeps the lion's share of the fee, too.

I find this despicable, honestly, as low as anything iStock has ever done.

Brasilnut

  • Author Brutally Honest Guide to Microstock & Blog

« Reply #39 on: September 24, 2017, 05:07 »
+1
Quote
but it says nothing about you being paid for the assignment if they decide not to use your photos.

If they don't use the images, surely they can still be uploaded as regular stock? Need to see the t&cs but seems logical that it should be OK considering someone has gone through so much time and expense (of which some was recovered) to create the content.

Shelma1

« Reply #40 on: September 24, 2017, 05:16 »
+1
How would you use them as regular stock? They'd feature a copyrighted product, I'm guessing. I think SS stopped accepting photos of products. Even if they did accept them they'd be editorial, no?

Really, they're just trying to grab the lion's share of fees for custom work from clients by underpricing the very people they represent. I'd think the folks who are getting independent assignments would see their assignments disappear as their clients realize they can get that stuff for a few bucks, and have ten or twenty people work on it, if they go through sS.

Brasilnut

  • Author Brutally Honest Guide to Microstock & Blog

« Reply #41 on: September 24, 2017, 05:24 »
0
Quote
Really, they're just trying to grab the lion's share of fees for custom work from clients by underpricing the very people they represent. I'd think the folks who are getting independent assignments would see their assignments disappear as their clients realize they can get that stuff for a few bucks, and have ten or twenty people work on it, if they go through sS.

I agree, although this could be a great networking opportunity for contributors.

Depending on legalities such as confidentiality, client poaching etc, this may mean that contributors may be able to perhaps work directly with such clients. Again need to analyse t&cs carefully. I do have a legal background so does come in handy once in a while. 

After all, there's nothing stopping a contributor networking and if it leads to opportunities down the line, perhaps from a client's contact via referrals it's going to be much more profitable. Tread carefully though.   
« Last Edit: September 24, 2017, 05:26 by Brasilnut »


niktol

« Reply #42 on: September 24, 2017, 05:59 »
0
Not sure who will agree to work on these conditions but those who will aren't competition.

« Reply #43 on: September 24, 2017, 06:03 »
0
Custom image 20 to 30% just like ELs https://submit.shutterstock.com/payouts

Shelma1

« Reply #44 on: September 24, 2017, 07:08 »
+4
Quote
Really, they're just trying to grab the lion's share of fees for custom work from clients by underpricing the very people they represent. I'd think the folks who are getting independent assignments would see their assignments disappear as their clients realize they can get that stuff for a few bucks, and have ten or twenty people work on it, if they go through sS.

I agree, although this could be a great networking opportunity for contributors.

Depending on legalities such as confidentiality, client poaching etc, this may mean that contributors may be able to perhaps work directly with such clients. Again need to analyse t&cs carefully. I do have a legal background so does come in handy once in a while. 

After all, there's nothing stopping a contributor networking and if it leads to opportunities down the line, perhaps from a client's contact via referrals it's going to be much more profitable. Tread carefully though.

I don't see how. The client will see you as a cheap resource. They paid you ten bucks an image to own your copyright. Why would they ever pay you more?

Brasilnut

  • Author Brutally Honest Guide to Microstock & Blog

« Reply #45 on: September 24, 2017, 07:37 »
0
Quote
I don't see how. The client will see you as a cheap resource. They paid you ten bucks an image to own your copyright. Why would they ever pay you more?

Everything is negotiable, I suppose.

Shelma1

« Reply #46 on: September 24, 2017, 09:07 »
+4
If SS was acting like a real rep and negotiating large fees on your behalf, especially for a buyout, it would be fine, I guess, although keeping 70-80% for themselves would suhck, because real reps keep, like, 20%.

However, what they're doing is undercutting any price you'd negotiate with a client and keeping 80% of that. IF your photos are chosen. Big IF. Otherwise you get to submit receipts to get back the $1.50 you spent on the client's product.

And how do you know you'll wind up with contacts? It sounds like you'll get a brief, submit your photos and that's it. I don't see any mention of direct client contact. My guess is you'll get no contact information for a human being on the client side. SS will keep that to themselves. Otherwise clients would be inundated with emails from all the people who worked on that brief.

« Reply #47 on: September 24, 2017, 09:12 »
+3
Quote
I don't see how. The client will see you as a cheap resource. They paid you ten bucks an image to own your copyright. Why would they ever pay you more?

Everything is negotiable, I suppose.

Rose Colored Glasses ;)

« Reply #48 on: September 24, 2017, 09:57 »
0
How would you use them as regular stock? They'd feature a copyrighted product, I'm guessing. I think SS stopped accepting photos of products. Even if they did accept them they'd be editorial, no?

Really, they're just trying to grab the lion's share of fees for custom work from clients by underpricing the very people they represent. I'd think the folks who are getting independent assignments would see their assignments disappear as their clients realize they can get that stuff for a few bucks, and have ten or twenty people work on it, if they go through sS.

Not true. They still accept Illustrative Editorial images.

Shelma1

« Reply #49 on: September 24, 2017, 10:20 »
0
How would you use them as regular stock? They'd feature a copyrighted product, I'm guessing. I think SS stopped accepting photos of products. Even if they did accept them they'd be editorial, no?

Really, they're just trying to grab the lion's share of fees for custom work from clients by underpricing the very people they represent. I'd think the folks who are getting independent assignments would see their assignments disappear as their clients realize they can get that stuff for a few bucks, and have ten or twenty people work on it, if they go through sS.

Not true. They still accept Illustrative Editorial images.

Hmmm. Some of mine were rejected because "we no longer accept this type of image." Anyway, a shot with a trademarked product in it can't be submitted as commercial. But really, that's the least of the problems with this scheme.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
2 Replies
3160 Views
Last post December 05, 2007, 07:26
by SStevenson
44 Replies
11178 Views
Last post April 29, 2008, 01:57
by Bateleur
2 Replies
1723 Views
Last post June 15, 2012, 08:01
by hjalmeida
4 Replies
2373 Views
Last post June 22, 2016, 12:53
by Jo Ann Snover
5 Replies
1877 Views
Last post December 10, 2017, 13:51
by Mantis

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors