Quote from: KuriousKat on September 14, 2022, 01:30

Doesn't the map just show the location of the IP address of the purchaser? So if a customer signs in via a VPN, the location could show as Moscow, but the real location could be anywhere in the world?

Unless you're in Russia, or you've specifically chosen to have your IP address show as being in Russia... then you won't have an IP address that shows you as being in Russia. And while some people outside of Russia may choose to have a Russian IP address, that's going to be very rare... unless you're Russian.

Oh, I just thought it was a random selection based upon the last server used. Thanks for the information.

Quote from: KuriousKat on August 25, 2022, 02:56

Open the ESP page and click on 'Upload and review content'.

Next, click the three lines icon top left and select 'Profile'.

This opens your contributor Profile page and there is a hyperlink, Istock portfolio name, in the Profile box at the top.

Wow, thanks - glad somebody knows how to use their system.  I haven't uploaded anything there in years - are they still using that stupid CV or have they finally seen the light?

Not much has changed on their contributor site over the years. I use the Qhero option for uploading, and it's OK, but you still have to do the disambiguation stuff before submission.

https://www.istockphoto.com/photos/xyz where xyz is your user name

Open the ESP page and click on 'Upload and review content'.

Next, click the three lines icon top left and select 'Profile'.

This opens your contributor Profile page and there is a hyperlink, Istock portfolio name, in the Profile box at the top.

Quote from: Roscoe on August 15, 2022, 10:34

Quote from: Uncle Pete on August 15, 2022, 10:23

stock answers

good one. Made me laugh.

Inadvertent but so true.     I still say that there are more people here, who know more and give better answers than the "Experts". Writing to SS support gets some pretty strange results, if you get anything at all.

Does anyone else know that case numbers expire? That's what I was told when I uploaded to a case and it was rejected. There's something new, for anyone who cares. You might be rejected for something that we were never notified existed?    If it's true. The reply sounded like someone who just wanted to brush off the question and didn't have an answer.

I have a case number for some specific submissions. I was told when it was issued that it would be good for two years, so I guess they aren't open-ended.

Their selection criteria appears to be off. I just got the option to opt out when I logged in today, and have read the notes on what will be included. This is the information given on new uploads:

For newly updated content, you will be able to choose a catch-all setting to include these uploads into PLUS. However, we�re prioritizing content that has been unsold into PLUS. Hence, we may relax or change the criteria and allow newer content into PLUS in the near future.

It implies that only older, unsold content will be included unless I select otherwise, but on checking the content that was approved within the last 24 hours, it's all opted in.

So I've checked closely on my 'manage content' page and 456 pages of commercial images are included in Plus and Premium, and only 2 pages are labelled as Premium only.

So I'm opted in by default, haven't had any emails, and I'm only aware of this because I logged in to check approval status.

No thanks, 123RF - you can pay me like Adobe does, or count me out. That, or guarantee a minimum earning per download, as 50% of an unstated amount is much too vague for my liking.

I can only speak for myself, but yesterday I uploaded a couple of images to my portfolio and everything worked fine. The uploading process and editing the images is a bit of a pain, but that's the way it's always been.

Try uploading with another browser if that would help. 

OK, thanks for letting me know. I've reset my router, cleared cache and cookies, tried three separate browsers and a different computer - all behave in the same way. Uploading the image is fine, but the editing is super slow. If I switch on a product, it takes about 6 seconds to register. If I go to edit a product, when I save it and return to the products page, all the thumbnails that were visible have to reload, and it takes about a minute before the page is fully reloaded and i can move to the next item.

Well I've had Shutterstock tell me it's a fault that they're working on and Bigstock tell me that the program is discontinued.

Who knows what's going on?

It looks like my portfolio stopped transferring photos on April 20th.

Thanks, at least I know I'm not alone.

I've notified Shutterstock support already, but I'll also send a ticket to Bigstock.

Quote from: wds on May 04, 2022, 21:21

Quote from: PigsInSpace on May 04, 2022, 19:57

The only way SS would increase commissions is if it�s in their business interest to do so. Very few folks left when they cut commissions. As far as they�re concerned, lower commissions doesn�t hurt their business.

Agreed. I would like to see them do something to stop their download numbers from slipping....and maybe get them to increase??

The only way they are going to get DL numbers to go up is to charge less - and pay you less and no - you won't make up the difference in volume. If they can't treat artists right I hope they crash and burn.

There is another way, but it would involve staffing a department to clean up the database of all the dross they've approved in the last few years, sort out the search so that it doesn't return rubbish as being the best they have to offer, bring back the 7 out of 10 test and clamp down on stolen content.

If they housekeep, it would improve downloads for contributors with good, solid portfolios. At the moment we are losing to thieves, newbies who get their 3 slightly out of focus back yard shots pushed high in the search, just because they are new, and a system that loses images left and right, meaning when they finally get published they are buried on page 57.

It's short term cost for long term gain but, as the last few years have shown, Shutterstock  CEOs prefer to go with short term gain, and to hell with the future.

Whoever takes over, let's hope he/she has a mind to build some bridges with the suppliers.

Edit: I don't think that there's any chance that the commissions will be raised again and, despite the hollow promise that, on balance, we would earn as much as before, a good way to rebuild a relationship with contributors would be to calculate levels based on the previous year's downloads or on a rolling 12 month period. I don't hold out much hope, but there might be an olive branch in there somewhere.

Quote from: KuriousKat on April 27, 2022, 09:08

Quote from: Mimi the Cat on April 27, 2022, 05:56

Quote from: KuriousKat on April 27, 2022, 05:48

Quote from: Jo Ann Snover on April 26, 2022, 18:04

Still going after Canva's business, but Canva has a completely free tier which I don't think SS has. Stan talks about SS being able to broaden its presence beyond the content selection phase of projects.

But Shutterstock bought out a lot of content from contributors last year, with lump sum payments up front, but no further right to any royalties going forward. Presumably, this was why.

I don't recall seeing anything about lump sum payments where was that announced?

There were a few threads on different forums where it was mentioned, but those approached didn't say much, as they had to agree to a Non-Disclosure agreement to get more information.

Which is true but how does that become "Shutterstock bought out a lot of content" vs Shutterstock bought out some content from some contributors? Even with NDAs superficial or generalized information can be leaked.

Good point if they own content, we don't know how much?

You are right that we don't know how much, but we do know from other posts that Shutterstock were actively buying out content. I have a couple of friends who were approached within my circle of contributor friends, and saw 3 or 4 posts on this forum and another. All I can do is extrapolate from that and make an educated guess that it wasn't an insignificant amount. I could, of course be totally wrong.

Still going after Canva's business, but Canva has a completely free tier which I don't think SS has. Stan talks about SS being able to broaden its presence beyond the content selection phase of projects.

But Shutterstock bought out a lot of content from contributors last year, with lump sum payments up front, but no further right to any royalties going forward. Presumably, this was why.

Shutterstock 2022:

Level 1 RPD = 17c
Level 2 RPD = 26c

Adobe 2022 RPD to date = 91c

Other sites don't have enough sales yet to make any statistics meaningful, but Shutterstock is showing the lowest RPD all round.