|
MicrostockGroup Sponsors
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - pics2
101
« on: June 08, 2020, 05:52 »
I just got SS July shooting list. I'm so happy
102
« on: June 08, 2020, 04:46 »
Especially the way they left the artists alone in dealing with Getty is very sarcastic. They did not even give them a specific contact partner, just deal deal with them yourself, then report back to us. I find that heartless and cold.
Exactly! They are our representatives at Getty. They have to take care of this. It's their reputation ruined and they want to blame \'some photographers that have duplicate files". No, you (EyeEm) have duplicate files on Getty. You cheated the system, take responsibility. I'm surprised that their account hasn't been close by Getty yet. But, it is not, because EyeEm is blaming photographers now, like how could we know photographers sent the same files through Istock. They knew exactly what was going on.
103
« on: June 07, 2020, 09:22 »
He failed big time.
104
« on: June 07, 2020, 09:14 »
Hahaha, I will stay in ss because I need money. 
Whats funny
105
« on: June 07, 2020, 09:09 »
Iakov Filimonov just announced that he will be disconnecting 440k images on Monday. My new hero!
106
« on: June 07, 2020, 06:43 »
This astockfagget088 is SSbot and manipulator, he is here to misinform contributor community. Just ignore him. He put everybody on ignore list, he is not even reading what you write, screw him
107
« on: June 07, 2020, 03:35 »
People had been reporting losing images then which I assume might be related to SS deleting similars and duplicates. Thats my guess.
What was that about, I didn't even know. They did delete some of my pictures containing word polaroid few years back.
108
« on: June 07, 2020, 00:06 »
That's interesting. The big players leave in silence. When Andrea Rodriguez left few years ago they had to delete around 200k images.
109
« on: June 06, 2020, 13:05 »
This was expected. I was always puzzled how eyeem pictures passed Getty's inspection when many of them are already in Getty's collections via Istock. It has never been a secret that many established microstock photographers are uploading to as many agencies as possible including Eyeem and Istock. But same goes for Alamy, for example, don't they send their files to Getty also. Eyeems business model will fall apart now. Their main source of income was Getty and they are in deep debt, recognized as a prospective start up, they took millions of euros to developthe business. By the way, do you know why there are less and less those big Getty sales on through Eyeem? It was a part of this start up genius plan, to attract as many as possible contributors with large sales (they lost money intentionally ), and now the commissions are put back to real realistic ones. Actually this project had no future, because they never had real contact with microstock contributors, they never bothered to get to know what microstock photographers want or need. They are those cool Berlin guys smoking weed, preferring cool outfits and bright offices  (I dont blame them) But who are we, simple people producing these stupid stock pictures to talk to them.
110
« on: June 06, 2020, 11:52 »
What a liar and manipulator this astockphotographer088. He's saying that he has to pay a rent with SS earnings, so he won't disable his port. Level 4 can't afford to pay rent and make a living out of this job. i don't trust him anything.
111
« on: June 06, 2020, 05:52 »
I really dont like the negativity, guys stop it. People assuming higher levels could actually increase the earnings are VERY wrong. People who have large amounts of traffic and sales can provide better samples. I am nowhere near the big guns but I have managed to get here in 5 years while being a father of 2 while having other things to do. I really havent slept much, that is for certain 😂. I never wanted to negotiate a special deal nor do I intend to. What really pisses me off is that I have 20.000+ New photos ready to be uploaded which are way above my microstockish quality I have been adding thus far and I am not willing to upload high quality content to be sold off for 10 cents. So For the past months I kept uploading subpar quality images from 4-5 years ago..
So where does one sell high quality macrostock other than getty? I really dont fancy them either.
Well, if it turns out to be 30%, it is not the end of the world, especially because Adobe is overtaking a part of your and everyone elses income. It is roughly 15% of overall loses then. Just trying to make things look better, since I noticed it took a big hit on you Regarding your top quality content, well I know you are emotional, but Getty is still the biggest player in that field.
I just cant let them keep humiliating us/me even so now when I know that the change was not done to help them cope with the new challenges and all that pr crap they throw at us.
I agree with you on that. I would also like to see some kine of exclusivity scheme from Adobe, for example, I would accept it in a blink. I have had few arguments and disappointments with ss down the road, so I could expect this from them, it didn't hit me that hard emotionally. But, what are the options - Adobe exclusivity (slim chances) and Istock exclusivity (another unfair slavery scheme)?
112
« on: June 06, 2020, 05:37 »
I really dont like the negativity, guys stop it. People assuming higher levels could actually increase the earnings are VERY wrong. People who have large amounts of traffic and sales can provide better samples. I am nowhere near the big guns but I have managed to get here in 5 years while being a father of 2 while having other things to do. I really havent slept much, that is for certain 😂. I never wanted to negotiate a special deal nor do I intend to. What really pisses me off is that I have 20.000+ New photos ready to be uploaded which are way above my microstockish quality I have been adding thus far and I am not willing to upload high quality content to be sold off for 10 cents. So For the past months I kept uploading subpar quality images from 4-5 years ago..
So where does one sell high quality macrostock other than getty? I really dont fancy them either.
Well, if it turns out to be 30%, it is not the end of the world, especially because Adobe is overtaking a part of your and everyone elses income. It is roughly 15% of overall loses then. Just trying to make things look better, since I noticed it took a big hit on you Regarding your top quality content, well I know you are emotional, but Getty is still the biggest player in that field.
113
« on: June 06, 2020, 04:12 »
You are taking a 5 day sample of one person's earnings and then telling people they need to understand maths maybe you could brush up on your statistics.
With a 25% sample you can accurately determine election results also. It's called statistics and they work. The 25% is because I counted 5 working days out of ~20 average that stock sales are most active.
So please be as kind as to explain my numbers then. I am a mathematician and a software engineer by trade so I might know a thing or two. I have not been posting on forums because I am emailing shutterstock directly BUT I am lvl 6 and I have had a steady 500+ images sold on every freaking day for the past 3 years. That gives you a clear picture and a good enough sample to draw conclusions. 70% of the sales are below 0.2 and most are just 0.1. I do get 100+ sales as well but the overall numbers are dreadful. We are looking at a 30% decrease in earnings. I am waiting for another week and I am gone.
You are right, I'm level 6 also, and the numbers look more like 40% to 50% decrease. Maybe you were talking about impact on your overall income (including all the agencies)?
114
« on: June 05, 2020, 03:02 »
Many contributors are praising Adobe. What about if Adobe just follows SS?
In my oppinion this is very likely.
Unfortunately, even at this level and at this time when Adobe are considered more fair to contributors, the income I get from them is not enough to compensate for SS loses. This is unsustainable business now. It just doesn't matter for me anymore what Adobe does, they are not going to take over SS customers. SS is not shutting down, they screwed contributors,there won't be much customer migration because they are not affected. Maybe some of them will hear about our problems and actually care about it, maybe 10% no more. One more thing is very important - Adobe and the others are not ready to take over the leadership in the industry. All these years all these agencies were parasitizing on SS. In a way that contributors produce their content primarily for SS, because SS was their biggest earner, and then they send already made content to other agencies to earn some extra money. Without SS the business was not sustainable. So, we are relying on these parasites now, that is not good position for us at all. They are used to be parasites, they have parasites mentality and it can't be changed easily.
115
« on: June 04, 2020, 14:44 »
What I cannot understand is reducing commissions to the point many large contributors will disappear. At the same time rejecting 90% of the images uploaded.
In the long term SS database will decline when companies such as Alamy and DT will continue to increase in size. In the long run, this does hurt SS because it will no longer be the Top Dog in the stock market.
Cannot understand their business plan??
Because it is short term thinking. That is what made me think that something else is in play here than just a royalty grab.
They will offer exclusivity soon, when we get on our knees. The only real competitor to them is Getty, without exclusivity, they are lagging.
116
« on: June 04, 2020, 08:08 »
https://www.microstockgroup.com/shutterstock-com/shutterstock-just-became-istock-2-0/msg551342/?topicseen#new
Yes, it is real. But, it is 13K plus 13K earler this year, which is not even 2% of his 6M shares, that means nothing. Maybe he is just buying a new house.
If you want to sell a large number of shares, you cannot dump them on the stock market on one day, especially for a small company like SS that does not have a large buyer circle.
Instead they sell small parcels every week,sometimes every day. And very carefully, so not to attract to much attention.
Oringer of course has to announce these sales, but selling for 500 000 a parcel is not dramatic.
So even if he actually wants to cash out via the stock market, he is forced to do it in these small parcels, always of varying size.
If he wants to sell everything at once, he can usually only do it in a private swap with a buyer who buys him out and the shares are ascribed to a new owner without passing through the markets.
You are right, I wanted to look into history of his transaction during last few years, but I don't know where to look. It would be an interesting info.
119
« on: June 03, 2020, 12:26 »
For me today is the first time that Adobe will outperform SS in exactly 14 years of experience.
120
« on: May 31, 2020, 05:15 »
...meanwhile, I read on some Facebook groups that Shutterstock terminated and suspended the accounts of some contributors who criticize them on the Forum and Social media. In one case I read that even the Portfolio continuous to be on sale but without the name of the contributor! How low can you fall?
I've seen the blurred out name and avatar account because the person posted in a thread here yesterday. Does anyone have any specific information about a contributor account (not forum posting privileges) that's been suspended?
That was one of Fotolia's favorite tactics and I'd love to make noise about it if Shutterstock's done/is doing it. My quick scan of twitter and facebook this morning didn't reveal anything
I guess they delete everything from the account and the images need some time to vanish from the site.
There is nothing anymore on my portfolio just the link still exist as you can see by clicking it.
Did you remove your port or they did? Because, at first you were only banned from forum, the portfolio was up. This is really fcked.
Nope, they did it, just the photos were slowly disappearing. Also the status of the account was first suspended, then disabled then no account is connected to this email address.
Then they went to find me on forum and ban me there cause I could write on forum for hours after my portfolio account was banned, and I wrote nothing special to stand out from the crowd for a ban.
They obviously didn't like changes on my profile description tagline
Sorry to hear that.
121
« on: May 31, 2020, 05:14 »
People keep saying (hoping) that customers will go to Adobe. They will go to Istock and Getty, unfortunately. There is bigger possibility for that, it's a bigger stock company.
Right. Most of the contributors take their desires for a reality...
I know different people who went from Shutterstock to iStock, not Adobe.
Buyers go where they think it's more convenient for them, and frankly they don't give a dаmn about our "little problems" as contributors!
The agencies know who the buyers are, who has come and gone over the years. Shutterstock have not been able to compete with Istock on subs until now so have only had half a product with which to compete. Both are now able to trash the competition with discounting and if they compete with each other heavy discounting. This will also trash you returns.
The next step is to introduce exclusivity, there is no way they can compete with Istock without that move. If that's on the horizon Adobe should react faster and introduce exclusivity right now, because this is the right moment for that.
You'd be crazy to accept exclusivity with SS when you've seen they are happy to slash commissions with a few days notice.
I know, but, they could do it soon, if that new CEO is obsessed with Getty performance.
122
« on: May 31, 2020, 03:22 »
Making a script for easy file removal from Istock was not against the terms.
123
« on: May 31, 2020, 01:54 »
People keep saying (hoping) that customers will go to Adobe. They will go to Istock and Getty, unfortunately. There is bigger possibility for that, it's a bigger stock company.
Right. Most of the contributors take their desires for a reality...
I know different people who went from Shutterstock to iStock, not Adobe.
Buyers go where they think it's more convenient for them, and frankly they don't give a dаmn about our "little problems" as contributors!
The agencies know who the buyers are, who has come and gone over the years. Shutterstock have not been able to compete with Istock on subs until now so have only had half a product with which to compete. Both are now able to trash the competition with discounting and if they compete with each other heavy discounting. This will also trash you returns.
The next step is to introduce exclusivity, there is no way they can compete with Istock without that move. If that's on the horizon Adobe should react faster and introduce exclusivity right now, because this is the right moment for that.
124
« on: May 31, 2020, 01:51 »
...meanwhile, I read on some Facebook groups that Shutterstock terminated and suspended the accounts of some contributors who criticize them on the Forum and Social media. In one case I read that even the Portfolio continuous to be on sale but without the name of the contributor! How low can you fall?
I've seen the blurred out name and avatar account because the person posted in a thread here yesterday. Does anyone have any specific information about a contributor account (not forum posting privileges) that's been suspended?
That was one of Fotolia's favorite tactics and I'd love to make noise about it if Shutterstock's done/is doing it. My quick scan of twitter and facebook this morning didn't reveal anything
I guess they delete everything from the account and the images need some time to vanish from the site.
There is nothing anymore on my portfolio just the link still exist as you can see by clicking it.
Did you remove your port or they did? Because, at first you were only banned from forum, the portfolio was up. This is really fcked.
125
« on: May 30, 2020, 05:39 »
People keep saying (hoping) that customers will go to Adobe. They will go to Istock and Getty, unfortunately. There is bigger possibility for that, it's a bigger stock company.
Why would they go anywhere?
Well, we hope they will. Because the whole idea behind boycott is to reduce a stream of fresh content on SS, so customers realize they can find better files elsewhere, and go. Haven't you realized that yet? We also hope it will be Adobe. But, if it turns out to be Istock, the whole sacrifice and effort would be for someone elses benefit (istock and Istock exclusives). That would be almost tragicomical.
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
