I got the same banner early this month then got a single photo sale on ss the other day for $15.47 yipee! The highest single sale before that was $1.47

Quote from: k_t_g on April 12, 2022, 17:03

Yeah heard about this on he news.
Probably not going to be in favor of the artists and crafters no matter what people demand. Look what happened to Elance, Shutterstock and others? 

Unless people really do something to change this. Only having a few protesters won't make much happen so long as the CEO'S have the bucks and the layers. 

Yes to my surprise I saw it on the TV news. I guess they did a better job of reaching out to the media than the Stock Coalition did. Imagine seeing the plight of the stock photographer on the evening news. I would have liked that.

"Microstock individual artists and creatives, who depend on the extra income from Shutterstock have their commissions cut down to 10 cents. Protests, petitions and artists revolt, as many pull their portfolios and leave the agency."

But instead, no one noticed. 

The biggest profit for Etsy (in my opinion, that's not an established financial fact, just apparent) is artists have to pay listing fees and repeat paying the fees, whether they make a sale or not. When someone does make a sale Etsy gets a percentage of that. Steady income for Etsy. And then there are the frauds, fakes and cons going on too, but Etsy just takes the fees and turns their back. TOS violations, you'll get no reply. My opinion is, that makes the honest people, hard working artists look bad. It makes the whole platform look sleazy.

Good article:  https://www.wbur.org/news/2022/04/15/independent-sellers-etsy-strike-massachusetts?msclkid=fbe0ba50bce111ecac5b21ff2bda113c

The seller transaction fee, or the percentage Etsy takes from each sale, was raised on Monday from 5% to 6.5%.

Hey, maybe there is a place in the market for Pay Microstock. You pay to list your images and then pay a percentage when they sell... well at least we can set our own prices?

Yes like an ebay for images only

Quote from: DO on February 09, 2022, 12:08

Quote from: Wilm on February 07, 2022, 17:23

You're not serious, are you, Debbie? You don't seriously think you're worthy of earning $0.10 a day with that cheap trinket! How arrogant can you be? Do you seriously think you can enter a Formula 1 race with a used 2CV? Sorry, but that's really naive. And when I read your lines again, I come to the conclusion that you haven't bought from pacesetter at all, otherwise you wouldn't write such crap and would have known better long ago!

You have to put some money in your hand if you want to make it in this business. I have understood that. I now own a Hasselblatt H6D. I will have paid it off in no time. My asset manager has assured me that the 53rd generation of my descendants will live in prosperity thanks to the sales I have made with it. Microstock is clearly a sensible and sustainable investment in the future.

I just picked myself off the floor after looking at the price of this camera.  (Link below).

Who pays that much for a camera?

https://www.parkcameras.com/shop/hasselblad-h6d-100c-medium-format-camera_h015767c?of_tid=MFRWG5B5GM3TMJTGMVSWISLEHUYSM4DSN5SESZB5HEYTIOI&adGroupId=91916221675&device=c&gclid=CjwKCAiA6Y2QBhAtEiwAGHybPRzVC87GdKm3GOk-EUlFsTEchBBq_ERLyf29aGY7kK3qZAITQ_eArBoCTgUQAvD_BwE

I didn't mean that cheap 100 MP model, Deb. There's also one that can do 400 MP. And that's the least a buyer can expect in terms of technical quality when he spends so much money that we even get 10 cents for it.
[/quote]
I don't think anyone in their right mind buys this camera for micro. For huge fine art prints for a gallery exhibition yes maybe.

Feb 2022 is my best ever for number of DLs but not amount Thats after just over two yrs of submitting to Sstock

Quote from: wds on April 09, 2022, 08:30

Quote from: Firn on April 09, 2022, 02:32

Quote from: wds on April 08, 2022, 12:38

I believe so, you can always try it and see. As I understand it, the only Editorial they won't accept are photos with people in them.....unfortunately.

I keep hearing this, but my experience is a very different one: I can hardly get any editorial images accepted on Adobe at all. The only ones that always go through are the strict illustrative editorial ones, whith a product placed on a white background for example. As for everything else, like street shots, fabric buildings (without any people!) I always get the the image is against the " Illustrative Editorial Guidelines" rejection.  I could never figure out why this seems to work for other people on Adobe, but not for me.

Maybe Matt can weigh in on this one?

Maybe he can. I don't know.

Luckily I don't really do many editorial photos in general, so it isn't that much of a big deal to me. They are just a tiny fraction of my port. It just always puzzles me when people here say that Adobe basically accepted everything as editorial as long as there are no people in the photos. For me, unless it's a product photo, my editorial photos get rejected more often than accepted and I can't even figure out a pattern.
Randomly rejected photos:

I think Mat said on another thread that some photos submitted as editorial get rejected if adobe thinks it qualifies as commercial so some of your nice colorful photos here will be accepted as commercial certainly if they're public buildings. I submit building & even street photos & as long as some things are cloned out, they are accepted. I don't yet qualify for editorial.

Quote from: Uncle Pete on March 22, 2022, 11:11

They have a Hal 9000 system doing reviews now.

This one genuinely made me laugh.

The topic of Shutterstock rejections has been discussed to death, and the general consensus is that it's ridiculous.
Some people still claim they have no rejections at all... well, they must have a magic trick.

Every now and then I keep trying because I feel like an image really has sales potential or it has sold on other platforms.
Had to upload my bestseller 3 times before it got accepted and now it is... well, my bestseller.

Another thing that seems to mitigate the problem is downsizing to 5MP.
At 10 cents per sale that's still 4MP too much.

All in all very time consuming, and for most of the images not worth the effort if you ask me.
Just fire and forget.

I found some old images last week from a vacation in Portugal in 2009. Shot with a Panasonic Lumix FX33 if I'm not mistaken.
They were bad. I mean the images. The vacation was great actually. 
Snapshots with a point and shoot standard end consumer camera and looking at the images, it's clear that I had no idea of what I was doing.
But you know what? Screw it. I uploaded a few shots which I think are still half-useful. Even did some post-processing on those old dusty jpg's.
BAM. All accepted by Shutterstock's evil Hal 9000.

Yep I can get 10yr old photos with a cheap olympus P&S camera accepted but only if processed & downsized to 4-5mp. yet SS's stupid machine often rejects my high quality sony mirrorless camera shots (even if downsized) 
I filed a complaint but the person who replies doesn't even work for SS & did nothing except send a standard reply. They don't even check the photos to see if review was wrong anymore. I did the same with adobe & they accepted a photo that was rejected and it ended up selling. These agencies should start trusting contributors more like alamy does.

Recently from last 2 batch of uploads Shutterstock rejected all of my photos with some various reasons. I don't know if they are dying, someone hate me at SS or they don't like Easter.

yes the same happened to me mainly for focus or noise (& they were editorial) because they can't be bothered to tick the real reason why they don't want then. yet I uploaded a photo which I knew had a problem: a raindrop on the lens showed up & was accepted. If the photo is a subject that's more likely to sell (how whould a machine know that?)  then they accept it.

 

Therefore, if I do the math correctly,
if a customer buys a credit pack for up to 500 video downloads,
I earn
$.0.056 for HD, or
$0.14 for 4K.

Do I shoot in 4K using an expensive camera with custom profiles, color correct, denoise, export in 4K ProRes for that amount?
On a personal note, it's more viable to only upload photos for a minimum of 0.33.
Unless photos sales also take the road to the subscription plan.

Even if someone buys a sinlge clip, that's $2.80 - $5.60 per clip now.
I suppose if one wants to keep on uploading videos, he just sends his content as is.
Shaken, uncorrected at H.264.
Since it's a game of numbers, some wil be rejected, some will be accepted.
That is what these prices lead us to do.
Treat them accordigly, low care for the low price they wil deserve.

That cannot be right

That you had good months with Istock might mean something or nothing at all. Depends on if you sell dozens o thousands of images every 30 days. I sell over 1000 images per month at Istock and just a few weeks ago I made a 15000$ market freeze sale. Does it mean iStock is doing good. No, not at all. They are slowly sinking for different reasons. Debt that is dragging them down is a big issue and that is the reason that they have to go public again so investors can pump in money that they don't have now for their expansion plans. Let's see how this pans out.
Adobe on the other side is a huge player. Their stock value is 222 billion. Shutterstock Mkt is only 3.2billion. So who do you think is going to be the last man standing in just a couple of years. We surely will find out. I made my bet. It will be surely be interesting. I for once hope that SS sinks . They surely deserve it   

Can someone sell more on istock than SSTK for the same images?

To get to the original question. I haven't had a DL since Feb 26 which was on SS so probably buyers are all watching the news

Whe don't know yet. Once they get public if they do as the whole stock market is in turmoil now we will see for how much the company thinks is worth. Much closer to SS that Adobe thats for sure.

Quote from: Diana Herrmann on March 03, 2022, 22:26

Quote from: everest on March 03, 2022, 15:07

That you had good months with Istock might mean something or nothing at all. Depends on if you sell dozens o thousands of images every 30 days. I sell over 1000 images per month at Istock and just a few weeks ago I made a 15000$ market freeze sale. Does it mean iStock is doing good. No, not at all. They are slowly sinking for different reasons. Debt that is dragging them down is a big issue and that is the reason that they have to go public again so investors can pump in money that they don't have now for their expansion plans. Let's see how this pans out.

Adobe on the other side is a huge player. Their stock value is 222 billion. Shutterstock Mkt is only 3.2billion. So who do you think is going to be the last man standing in just a couple of years. We surely will find out. I made my bet. It will be surely be interesting. I for once hope that SS sinks . They surely deserve it   

What is Getty stock value?

SS will decline like getty did then they won't be stupid with rejections ie. for noise / focus when the photos are perfectly fine.

Quote from: Camillo on February 23, 2022, 11:06

They have dropped for me like 60% compared to how it was a few months ago.

You should not compare your February sales with sales from a few months ago. Sale numbers are very different in different months, depending on what your port has to offer. February tends to be a rather slow month for most contributors comapred to other months.

Quote from: Camillo on February 23, 2022, 11:06

 I uploaded about 1000 images and around 300 videos and guess how many got accepted? around 300 photos and les than 10 videos.

Compare to Adobe stock they accepted around more than 500 photos and about 100 videos.

If you have a rejection rate of 90% on Shutterstock and 50% at Adobe you should really re-think your strategy, because there is something seriously wrong with your content. It's not Shutterstock, it's your photos.
A rejection rate of less than 5% on both SS and Adobe would be normal. With everything more than 10% I'd really re-evaluate the quality of the content I submit.

I just had 17 out of my last 18 photos rejected for noise / focus 1 for trademark yet they are downsized & have no noise & are sharp at 100%.Haven't had this rejection rate before.  I process from RAW & save to JPEG. Same photos were accepted on DT Alamy & even Abobe so something has definately changed at SSTK recently but the never say what. I even contacted support but no joy. I'm giving up on them they aren't worth the hassle.
I wouldn't care if I got enough sales on other sites but I only had two DLs on adobe this year vs 25 DLs on sstk & none on DT since Dec 2021 when I had 2 in one day. Alamy not a sale since July last year.