Author Topic: Shutterpoint Invitation (Read 5294 times)

takestock · « **on:** October 07, 2009, 14:02 »

I just received an invitation to re join SP.
Anyone else get same?
As a former member they are offering 15% off membership.

May not be everyone's 'cup of tea' to pay for space.
Will check out the site anyway and see what is happening.

madelaide · « **Reply #1 on:** October 07, 2009, 15:47 »

I am still at SP. Sales are still very low, apparently the low priced SL is selling more but not in high volumes anyway. I had two images in a series that I forgot to set one as FL only (FL being the liberal license equivalent of the microstock EL), and the buyer purchased both (that is, one as FL and the other as SL), so the FL price was not a hindrance. I basically sell FL there, even with images that I have in the micros.

If you had issues with ratings in the past, they still exist today.

Anyway, my earnings there in 2009 are equivalent to what I got in 123RF - which is not much anyway, 123RF is a poor seller for me compared to the others.

Storage prices have been reduced this year, as they probably told you in the email.

travelstock · « **Reply #2 on:** October 09, 2009, 10:06 »

There is some discussion of Shutterpoint in this thread:

http://www.microstockgroup.com/alamy-com/what-works-in-alamy/

basically to cut and past my comments there:

Shutterpoint was one of the first sites that I sold photos on - I pulled out after they changed to a microstock type license - the main reason for doing so though was that I had another look at their licenses. The breadth of their licensing goes further than most extended licenses on the microstock sites: Full commercial use on there (ie. anything that isn't their microstock type sales) allows purchasers:

Print Usage (Resale and Unlimited Run)

* Book jacket or interior page
* Greeting card design
* Poster for resale
* Calendar for resale
* Mug or T-shirt design
* Software packaging, CD/DVD/video or audio tape label
* Trade show display, billboard, exhibit
* Any print project covered under Standard Commercial License
* Any print project covered under Editorial Full License
* Any item/product for resale

Electronic Usage (Resale and Unlimited Run)

* Electronic greeting card
* Web application template
* Presentation software template
* Screensaver
* E-mail template
* Any electronic project covered under Commercial Standard License
* Any electronic project covered under Editorial Full License

I don't know about how others feel, but for me I'm not happy with receiving $17 (85% of $20 which is what prices start at there) for full commercial use on a one off basis and then having the purchaser be entitled to sell prints of my work forever after.

I just had another quick read over their terms - one thing that may also be relevant is the use of the image in situations where it my not be flattering to a model their terms state:
Images may not be used in any defamatory, libelous or otherwise unlawful manner whether directly or in context or juxtaposition with specific subject matter.

Most of the other agencies are far more restrictive.

madelaide · « **Reply #3 on:** October 09, 2009, 10:53 »

The subject of model release has always been a problem in SP, as they don't review images. This is not an issue for me personally as I don't upload images of people.

Recently they added a restriction that no nude shots whose subject can be recognizable (I suppose this mean not only face, but tattoos and body marks) are acceptable without a MR even as editorial. Do they check this? I don't think they do it routinely, but I can't really say. But it's an improvement, since there used to be many snapshotish nude photos sold as "editorial". I wonder how many girls would feel when they discovered that those photos taken for fun with a former boyfriend were online for sale. Another issue with nudes in SP is that some are really porn (woman with legs spread, closeup of genitals, stuff like that) and it seems SP is very lenient with that - maybe because it sells.

Currently there is another case, a requestor asked for vintage portraits of women, apparently for making paintings for resale (she asked for commercial use). People uploaded images without a MR, one of the sold images had in the description that the photographer found that image in an antique shop - so he is not even a relative of the person in the image. Not to mention that the usage, in my understanding, requires a Full License and not the Standard, microstock-style, license.

PS: in addition, given Holgs concern on their terms of full license, I think you only need to price images accordingly. Some people sell at US$20 (SP's minimum) and if the image is good, it's really an absurdly low price. I even have some at US$40 that I believe are still very cheap.

xst · « **Reply #4 on:** January 28, 2010, 21:30 »

Quote from: madelaide on October 09, 2009, 10:53

The subject of model release has always been a problem in SP, as they don't review images. This is not an issue for me personally as I don't upload images of people.

Recently they added a restriction that no nude shots whose subject can be recognizable (I suppose this mean not only face, but tattoos and body marks) are acceptable without a MR even as editorial. Do they check this? I don't think they do it routinely, but I can't really say. But it's an improvement, since there used to be many snapshotish nude photos sold as "editorial". I wonder how many girls would feel when they discovered that those photos taken for fun with a former boyfriend were online for sale. Another issue with nudes in SP is that some are really porn (woman with legs spread, closeup of genitals, stuff like that) and it seems SP is very lenient with that - maybe because it sells.

Currently there is another case, a requestor asked for vintage portraits of women, apparently for making paintings for resale (she asked for commercial use). People uploaded images without a MR, one of the sold images had in the description that the photographer found that image in an antique shop - so he is not even a relative of the person in the image. Not to mention that the usage, in my understanding, requires a Full License and not the Standard, microstock-style, license.

PS: in addition, given Holgs concern on their terms of full license, I think you only need to price images accordingly. Some people sell at US$20 (SP's minimum) and if the image is good, it's really an absurdly low price. I even have some at US$40 that I believe are still very cheap.

where can you see requests there?

madelaide · « **Reply #5 on:** January 29, 2010, 09:10 »

I don't think you can unless you are logged in.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Shutterpoint Invitation (Read 5294 times)

takestock

madelaide

travelstock

madelaide

xst

madelaide

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors