pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Shutterstock--No Downloads in six days.  (Read 4427 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #25 on: August 25, 2019, 10:19 »
0
I don't want to waste much time about it but I think it's rigged simply because it can be rigged and there are reasons why would they rig it, so I wouldn't count on corporate transparency and morals.
However there are things that probably fall out of rig calculations - asset quality and popularity of subjects which rigged or not contribute to randomness of contributor experience. Port size too, while it can be rigged I don't think they would fiddle with it much in a negative way.

Occam's Razor -- the SIMPLEST explanation for all sites yielding lower sales is supply outpacing demand

I'd agree but I'm talking about the way demand comes and goes and how it cycles between weeks of never sold assets and bestsellers.
Just because they are changing algorithms doesn't necessarily mean they're rigged (though on at least one occasion years ago iS did just that)

Well changing algorithms is rigging, thou we were never promised only one kind of algorithm, they can do whatever they want - and what they are doing we may never know. All I'm saying is that it's not a hand of God, they have database programmers.


Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #26 on: August 25, 2019, 10:38 »
+2

Explore over 300 million royalty-free images, stock footage clips, and music tracks...

Right

I still can't fathom why people don't understand the concept of more competition, and how that increase will always equal less sales.  More choices, better, newer images, less sales. Is there some kind of denial that ignores that we are producing a commodity which is provided in floods of millions, not like anything was ten years ago. But the question is "why have my sales dropped".  ::)

Agencies keep selling more, we are selling less. What could it be?

Competition, sales dilution.

Depends on the situation.  For me I typically make $800 + each month.  All of a sudden I will make $250 this month. The is not the addition of a bazillion images.  It is something else. Probably summer slump together with search changes.  Either way I have about 5,000 assets and to see a drop like this is not related to the influx of images per se.

I'm not going to say there's one answer and that's going to explain everything.

Another part that I see is, we see a good month and say, that's the way it's supposed to be, then a lower month and say, Oh they did something to make it lower. I see it as there are some regular sales and there's some consistency, while there is also some randomness. The real base number is the reliable sales, which are dropping.

The good sales or months are more unpredictable. I think I just had two weeks of subs and then a day with and OD and an EL? More income comes from SO, EL and OD, which most downloads are from subs.

I don't do video but I can only imagine how that area has taken a much bigger earnings hit with volume and new uploads, than photo. Every time something is popular and better earning, it gets slammed with collectives or groups that produce for stock.

I just don't see anything getting better or any stable income that's dependable. I think at this stage, nearly everyone is willing to accept that as an individual, none of us can keep up with, or compete with, the influx of new images, illustrations or video.

The days of upload anything and get sales are long passed. Not only is there more competition, but they keep getting better and smarter. I don't know what anyone else expects, but I don't see growth or much room for income improvement. More likely, drops and less downloads, that I can see.

If someone believes that income and uploads should stay level or gain, maybe they can explain why and how?  :) I mean instead of saying, how everything is dropping, maybe explain why everything shouldn't be dropping? Business and marketing kind of reasons.

« Reply #27 on: August 25, 2019, 11:24 »
0
Quote
but they keep getting better and smarter


Nope. They keep getting younger.

:P

« Reply #28 on: August 25, 2019, 14:03 »
0
I don't want to waste much time about it but I think it's rigged simply because it can be rigged and there are reasons why would they rig it, so I wouldn't count on corporate transparency and morals.
However there are things that probably fall out of rig calculations - asset quality and popularity of subjects which rigged or not contribute to randomness of contributor experience. Port size too, while it can be rigged I don't think they would fiddle with it much in a negative way.

Occam's Razor -- the SIMPLEST explanation for all sites yielding lower sales is supply outpacing demand

I'd agree but I'm talking about the way demand comes and goes and how it cycles between weeks of never sold assets and bestsellers.
Just because they are changing algorithms doesn't necessarily mean they're rigged (though on at least one occasion years ago iS did just that)

Well changing algorithms is rigging, thou we were never promised only one kind of algorithm, they can do whatever they want - and what they are doing we may never know. All I'm saying is that it's not a hand of God, they have database programmers.
Rigging implies some kind of deliberate change to penalise certain contributors. Of course they change algorithms to maximise sales. Why wouldn't they? Whose to say the algorithm where you got lots of sales was "fairer" than the one where you don't?

« Reply #29 on: August 25, 2019, 14:42 »
+1
I don't want to waste much time about it but I think it's rigged simply because it can be rigged and there are reasons why would they rig it, so I wouldn't count on corporate transparency and morals.
However there are things that probably fall out of rig calculations - asset quality and popularity of subjects which rigged or not contribute to randomness of contributor experience. Port size too, while it can be rigged I don't think they would fiddle with it much in a negative way.

Occam's Razor -- the SIMPLEST explanation for all sites yielding lower sales is supply outpacing demand

I'd agree but I'm talking about the way demand comes and goes and how it cycles between weeks of never sold assets and bestsellers.
Just because they are changing algorithms doesn't necessarily mean they're rigged (though on at least one occasion years ago iS did just that)

Well changing algorithms is rigging, thou we were never promised only one kind of algorithm, they can do whatever they want - and what they are doing we may never know. All I'm saying is that it's not a hand of God, they have database programmers.
Rigging implies some kind of deliberate change to penalise certain contributors. Of course they change algorithms to maximise sales. Why wouldn't they? Whose to say the algorithm where you got lots of sales was "fairer" than the one where you don't?

To ask you the same question - why wouldn't they? They could implement an algorithm, for instance, to spread the exposure (and potential sales) more evenly across all contributors - so top contributors will take a negative hit but won't really notice it much and complain given their sheer volume of assets but the deep down newbies would see a bit of positive hit for encouragement. This is probably the oldest theory on these forums.

Or for instance, you could argue that my port or models is of low quality, I certainly tend to do, but seeing my minimap almost completely blank in North America still makes me wonder, is it really me or the fact they do have a field in their database where it says that I'm from a certain country that will take away 30% from US sales.

« Reply #30 on: August 25, 2019, 15:42 »
0
For me--No downloads from Shutterstock in six days straight. I don't know why this is happening.  Anyone else having less downloads?  Thanks.
3 days for me but weekends are usually slow


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

« Reply #31 on: August 25, 2019, 16:07 »
0
I don't want to waste much time about it but I think it's rigged simply because it can be rigged and there are reasons why would they rig it, so I wouldn't count on corporate transparency and morals.
However there are things that probably fall out of rig calculations - asset quality and popularity of subjects which rigged or not contribute to randomness of contributor experience. Port size too, while it can be rigged I don't think they would fiddle with it much in a negative way.

Occam's Razor -- the SIMPLEST explanation for all sites yielding lower sales is supply outpacing demand

I'd agree but I'm talking about the way demand comes and goes and how it cycles between weeks of never sold assets and bestsellers.
Just because they are changing algorithms doesn't necessarily mean they're rigged (though on at least one occasion years ago iS did just that)

Well changing algorithms is rigging, thou we were never promised only one kind of algorithm, they can do whatever they want - and what they are doing we may never know. All I'm saying is that it's not a hand of God, they have database programmers.
Rigging implies some kind of deliberate change to penalise certain contributors. Of course they change algorithms to maximise sales. Why wouldn't they? Whose to say the algorithm where you got lots of sales was "fairer" than the one where you don't?

To ask you the same question - why wouldn't they? They could implement an algorithm, for instance, to spread the exposure (and potential sales) more evenly across all contributors - so top contributors will take a negative hit but won't really notice it much and complain given their sheer volume of assets but the deep down newbies would see a bit of positive hit for encouragement. This is probably the oldest theory on these forums.

Or for instance, you could argue that my port or models is of low quality, I certainly tend to do, but seeing my minimap almost completely blank in North America still makes me wonder, is it really me or the fact they do have a field in their database where it says that I'm from a certain country that will take away 30% from US sales.
How do Shutterstock benefit by reducing someones sales from a certain country? Yes they may want to encourage newbies and people who are still uploading regularly. Thats not "rigged" in my book. A search algorithm is never "fair" its owned by Shutterstock and they will control it in a way that benefits Shutterstock the most.

« Reply #32 on: August 25, 2019, 18:25 »
0
I don't want to waste much time about it but I think it's rigged simply because it can be rigged and there are reasons why would they rig it, so I wouldn't count on corporate transparency and morals.
However there are things that probably fall out of rig calculations - asset quality and popularity of subjects which rigged or not contribute to randomness of contributor experience. Port size too, while it can be rigged I don't think they would fiddle with it much in a negative way.

Occam's Razor -- the SIMPLEST explanation for all sites yielding lower sales is supply outpacing demand

I'd agree but I'm talking about the way demand comes and goes and how it cycles between weeks of never sold assets and bestsellers.
Just because they are changing algorithms doesn't necessarily mean they're rigged (though on at least one occasion years ago iS did just that)

Well changing algorithms is rigging, thou we were never promised only one kind of algorithm, they can do whatever they want - and what they are doing we may never know. All I'm saying is that it's not a hand of God, they have database programmers.
Rigging implies some kind of deliberate change to penalise certain contributors. Of course they change algorithms to maximise sales. Why wouldn't they? Whose to say the algorithm where you got lots of sales was "fairer" than the one where you don't?

To ask you the same question - why wouldn't they? They could implement an algorithm, for instance, to spread the exposure (and potential sales) more evenly across all contributors - so top contributors will take a negative hit but won't really notice it much and complain given their sheer volume of assets but the deep down newbies would see a bit of positive hit for encouragement. This is probably the oldest theory on these forums.

Or for instance, you could argue that my port or models is of low quality, I certainly tend to do, but seeing my minimap almost completely blank in North America still makes me wonder, is it really me or the fact they do have a field in their database where it says that I'm from a certain country that will take away 30% from US sales.
How do Shutterstock benefit by reducing someones sales from a certain country? Yes they may want to encourage newbies and people who are still uploading regularly. Thats not "rigged" in my book. A search algorithm is never "fair" its owned by Shutterstock and they will control it in a way that benefits Shutterstock the most.

I am not sure, to many unknown economic things going on that are beyond my knowledge of those things, but I'm sure there is some logic or math, some kind of tax, rewording countries with signed treaty (if I spelled that correctly), rewarding contributors from western countries, you name it. US is probably the best stock buyer force (as seen from my experience on other stock agencies) but yet I see very seldom US sales.
Well that's what I said, call it rigging or not, they don't sit around with their feet in the air and let it all be. 

« Reply #33 on: August 25, 2019, 23:28 »
+2
Or for instance, you could argue that my port or models is of low quality, I certainly tend to do, but seeing my minimap almost completely blank in North America still makes me wonder, is it really me or the fact they do have a field in their database where it says that I'm from a certain country that will take away 30% from US sales.

Well, it has been shown that buyers from the US will first and foremost buy products from the US, if they can. Also, people images from Eastern Europe don't look American, just like Nordic people images don't look Spanish, etc., and Americans are not that likely to need landscape images of non-famous locations around the world.

So, perfectly reasonable and logical explanations why a person with images from a European country (that clearly look European) will not sell as many images to the US.

« Reply #34 on: August 26, 2019, 05:15 »
0
Or for instance, you could argue that my port or models is of low quality, I certainly tend to do, but seeing my minimap almost completely blank in North America still makes me wonder, is it really me or the fact they do have a field in their database where it says that I'm from a certain country that will take away 30% from US sales.

Well, it has been shown that buyers from the US will first and foremost buy products from the US, if they can. Also, people images from Eastern Europe don't look American, just like Nordic people images don't look Spanish, etc., and Americans are not that likely to need landscape images of non-famous locations around the world.

So, perfectly reasonable and logical explanations why a person with images from a European country (that clearly look European) will not sell as many images to the US.

Yes it's all logical, except 80% of my sales on for instance Istock do come from US.
Not sure how could one differentiate US people from others since the US is a mix of people from all around the world, unless you are talking about strictly multiracial photos, which trully are popular and best represent US. 

« Reply #35 on: August 26, 2019, 07:25 »
+2
Or for instance, you could argue that my port or models is of low quality, I certainly tend to do, but seeing my minimap almost completely blank in North America still makes me wonder, is it really me or the fact they do have a field in their database where it says that I'm from a certain country that will take away 30% from US sales.

Well, it has been shown that buyers from the US will first and foremost buy products from the US, if they can. Also, people images from Eastern Europe don't look American, just like Nordic people images don't look Spanish, etc., and Americans are not that likely to need landscape images of non-famous locations around the world.

So, perfectly reasonable and logical explanations why a person with images from a European country (that clearly look European) will not sell as many images to the US.

Yes it's all logical, except 80% of my sales on for instance Istock do come from US.
Not sure how could one differentiate US people from others since the US is a mix of people from all around the world, unless you are talking about strictly multiracial photos, which trully are popular and best represent US.
US people smile a lot and have better teeth than the UK. I think US buyers like a more happy shiny people view of the world than us cynical Europeans ;-).

« Reply #36 on: August 26, 2019, 07:46 »
0
i thought today was the day when the sales would have been back after long holiday in western europe and the people going back to work...seems i have to wait 2 september. completely dead ss. as dead much more with practically zero sales of new files.  instead is seems to sell a lot...i had a glance at counter in esp and number seems matching ss this month so far and every time i look the number grow, something unusual considering that esp for me is like 20% of ss as revenue. the only drawback is that if the rpd is as low as july even the increase of sals will have small impact. but in case the rpd was like medium year rpd in esp stock could manage to be near ss so far this month.
all n all a clouds future as i see. i have already tons of charismata s stuff done last year  i will upload in september,  and see if sals get normal or better.

« Reply #37 on: August 26, 2019, 09:17 »
+1
How about summer slump+search tweaks+Global recession fears?.

Business is down everywhere in every industry in 2019, look at the thousands and thousands of layoffs and store closings in the US and Canada, other businesses laying off and of course changes in consumer demand and disruption in the marketplace.

I shoot editorial video,companies who would have bought my content in the past are fighting for their survival against the age of streaming and Netflix same like what happened in the music industry when streaming came along there.

This summer is slower than I've ever seen it, I am still getting video sales on SS but close to 50% down, almost 100% down on other sites like Pond5 and you can see this is industry wide and across all genres of content, just read the Pond5 forums.

We also have several agencies making changes this summer and I really don't think it's greed or them trying to screw us, they have a business to run, costs to cover, profits to make just like us so we see Videoblocks closing the marketplace and going to a different format, Pond5 went from being one of the best to full panic mode race to the bottom with them leading the race and SSTK is making some changes too.

I truly believe this is a result of panic in the executive offices as they look at their numbers just like we look at our numbers and worry and like us, the agencies don't print money either so they do have to try different things.





« Reply #38 on: August 26, 2019, 10:06 »
0
Quote
I truly believe this is a result of panic in the executive offices as they look at their numbers just like we look at our numbers and worry and like us, the agencies don't print money either so they do have to try different things.

I don't believe that they don't predict the financial or market future. They just ignore it.

As we say "everyone with no clue entered and gets approved"
similar,
executives or people that put capital enter the room and believe that they have the One Big Truth on everything.

I have seen it happen many times as a technician.
Companies with good administration may suffer low in a crisis but not giving away products or services for pennies just before shutting down.

« Reply #39 on: August 27, 2019, 06:21 »
0
scaring dead ss...as seemss better is much better.
don't know what they did with algorithm but seems i'm non existent.

« Reply #40 on: August 27, 2019, 15:14 »
+1
scaring dead ss...as seemss better is much better.
don't know what they did with algorithm but seems i'm non existent.

Opposite for me. AS has been very slow, about $200 down while SS is doing very good... up $400 this month. Almost as if AS has lost clients to SS when they've been * around with FT closure. Higher value sales at AS have been few and far between.

« Reply #41 on: August 27, 2019, 19:45 »
+2
Then there's something going on beyond summer slump and all industry trouble. As it seems, some people see an unexpected bump-up in their sales, while for the majority of us it's the opposite: we've become invisible. I haven't sold a single image in 15 days now, which is totally unprecedented. There's hardly any explanation other than some drastic changes in the algorithm, and i have no idea to whose benefit. Maybe some users are being penalized for reasons unknown.

On the other hand, on AS i've sold twice as much in August as in the previous three months combined. It's still diminutive though.


Tyson Anderson

  • www.openrangestudios.com
« Reply #42 on: August 27, 2019, 21:08 »
0
First month, for me, with Adobes Stock earning more than Shutterstock

« Reply #43 on: August 28, 2019, 05:26 »
0
Wao, just got an EL sale, i had forgotten their existence.

« Reply #44 on: August 28, 2019, 06:35 »
+1
Then there's something going on beyond summer slump and all industry trouble. As it seems, some people see an unexpected bump-up in their sales, while for the majority of us it's the opposite: we've become invisible. I haven't sold a single image in 15 days now, which is totally unprecedented. There's hardly any explanation other than some drastic changes in the algorithm, and i have no idea to whose benefit. Maybe some users are being penalized for reasons unknown.

On the other hand, on AS i've sold twice as much in August as in the previous three months combined. It's still diminutive though.

it's clear they control sales. only blind cannot see this. from one d ay to another completely dead. zero 2.895 in the last 10 days, i have 3 4 every day in july, zero video zero single, a bunch of sub mostly stuff who are in page one our very old files. it's clear they ned to spread sales so every body keep uploading, probably in normal circumstances most of contributor especially the new one couldn't have a single sales with their folio and they would quit uploading. they need to spread the cake to make everybody smallish happy.

« Reply #45 on: August 28, 2019, 06:37 »
+2
in addiction they last quarte was very bad, probably in the next if things don't change they will lose money and their stock will collapse,...so why not selling files who have a 0,25 cent royalty instead of the expensive 0,,38? it's 13 cent per foto and if you consider 50 million images it means a lot of money, those money they need too make balance looks much better. it's pretty simple to see this.

« Reply #46 on: August 28, 2019, 13:20 »
0
worst week since 2009 worst month since first year. speechless. at this point better don't do-nothing and just collect what comes form micro without any little effort. total waste of time this year uploading content.  maybe september start again abut after a month like this i'm without any wish to work and create content. time to focus on cavan offset and i hope stocksy this year. at least is rewarding mentally to work for such agency. working for agency with image quality like ss is also from a photography point of view depressing.

« Reply #47 on: August 28, 2019, 18:49 »
+1
Then there's something going on beyond summer slump and all industry trouble. As it seems, some people see an unexpected bump-up in their sales, while for the majority of us it's the opposite: we've become invisible. I haven't sold a single image in 15 days now, which is totally unprecedented. There's hardly any explanation other than some drastic changes in the algorithm, and i have no idea to whose benefit. Maybe some users are being penalized for reasons unknown.

On the other hand, on AS i've sold twice as much in August as in the previous three months combined. It's still diminutive though.

it's clear they control sales. only blind cannot see this. from one d ay to another completely dead. zero 2.895 in the last 10 days, i have 3 4 every day in july, zero video zero single,....
none of that is true, and these conclusions lack any supporting data
there's just no need for conspiracy theories, esp'ly when sales are declining over multiple agencies - those with small portfolios (< 5000) are going to see zero sales days as the supply keeps increasing - what most are reporting is slightly lower sub sales, but drastically lower ELs

one addtl harbinger may be the suggestion we are entering a global recession, and companies are spending less on advertising

OM

« Reply #48 on: August 29, 2019, 07:08 »
+2
By chance I came across this article on wine from June last year in the Smithsonian magazine:

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/california-wine-shows-traces-fukushima-fallout-180969726/

I think that their use of a free photo from Pixabay (pity that the meniscus of the wine is not horizontal!) also tells us that decining sales of traditional microstock may also have to do with 'free'. Before 'free', reputable magazines relied on SS etc as their first port of call for images. Now they first go to 'free' and if they can't find what they want, they then go to the regular MS agencies.

I have no doubt that many other image users also do similar. (No doubt the reason that SS and Adobe see fit to sponsor Pixabay with ads...which suggest that if the client can't find what he wants at Pixabay they should go to SS or Adobe).

« Reply #49 on: August 29, 2019, 07:34 »
+3
By chance I came across this article on wine from June last year in the Smithsonian magazine:

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/california-wine-shows-traces-fukushima-fallout-180969726/

I think that their use of a free photo from Pixabay (pity that the meniscus of the wine is not horizontal!) also tells us that decining sales of traditional microstock may also have to do with 'free'. Before 'free', reputable magazines relied on SS etc as their first port of call for images. Now they first go to 'free' and if they can't find what they want, they then go to the regular MS agencies.

I have no doubt that many other image users also do similar. (No doubt the reason that SS and Adobe see fit to sponsor Pixabay with ads...which suggest that if the client can't find what he wants at Pixabay they should go to SS or Adobe).

Who upload on Pixabay images and videos and gives them away for free?



 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
7 Replies
2499 Views
Last post January 31, 2013, 02:04
by BaldricksTrousers
53 Replies
12265 Views
Last post March 17, 2013, 20:12
by tickstock
29 Replies
6349 Views
Last post May 26, 2014, 20:16
by yuliang11
41 Replies
10805 Views
Last post March 12, 2015, 21:49
by YadaYadaYada
33 Replies
4876 Views
Last post July 11, 2018, 09:22
by Pauws99

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results