I also discover such "inspired" pictures again and again.

Here is an example. On the left is my picture, on the right the "inspired" picture. I have complained to shutterstock. But they couldn't understand where my problem was.

In the meantime, however, the contributors's portfolio has been deleted. Perhaps there were too many "inspired" images in their portfolio at some point.

Quote from: HalfFull on February 06, 2023, 17:11

Quote from: cobalt on February 01, 2023, 15:47
I am reading in a lot of places that Adobe had an usually good January, several producers reporting best January ever on Adobe.

Maybe the gen ai collection is bringing them a lot of attention and new customers.

My January at AS was up 35% on the previous Jan. Nice start to the year.

Overall, 2022 was an extremely good year at AS. I hit 100k lifetime dls mid way through the year and ended up with near on 30k for the year which was a good step up from 2021. I have zero AI imagery...for now anyway.

I prefer quality over quantity these days but I do need to pull my finger out a bit more and increase the 19k port size a bit more than I did last year.

Congrats! Impressing stats!

Quote from: Ambu on February 06, 2023, 05:33
Crossed $25k few days back

Congrats! Well done!

Quote from: pancaketom on February 05, 2023, 22:00

Quote from: Findura on February 05, 2023, 09:53
I have reached the $10,000.

Nice work, does that come with anything from SS anymore? It used to mean .38 sub downloads (or maybe that was at $30,000 lifetime earnings, I can't remember. )

$10,000 was the highest level you could reach. Unfortunately! That was better at fotolia back then.

Quote from: Findura on February 05, 2023, 09:53
I have reached the $10,000.

Congrats! A nice milestone! May many more downloads follow!

As for shutterstock, it couldn't be worse!

Quote from: Uncle Pete on January 25, 2023, 16:52

Quote from: Wilm on January 24, 2023, 22:36

What you write is correct.

However, my numbers at AS and SS are pretty much identical in terms of images sold. At AS I never deleted an image, so I have 1517 files there. Of those, 320 have no download. 79% have at least 1 download. And at shutterstock, that would be pretty much identical if I hadn't deleted an image there.

Each of my images has brought me more than $100 on average - over a long period of time. I am satisfied with that.

But especially with shutterstock, that's pretty much impossible now with new images. And that was it once. Which brings me back to the title of this thread.

How do you tell what has and hasn't got a DL on Adobe. In fact how would I tell, lifetime DLs and earnings for any image? Say I wanted that data, I don't see how to view it, without some long copy and save on Adobe.

$100 an image is very good, no make that, exceptional, for the number of images and success.

Which brings us back to the title of this thread. Shelma1 / Ms P. would be proud of her continuing thread, that she started. I think this one could be the record for the longest active and most popular. It's never going to be old. 

Pete, you can see your files under your dashboard at AS. For me, there are 16 pages - 100 images per page, whereby the last one is of course not full. There you can sort by downloads. And on the last pages there is no more number, but a dash for 0 downloads.

I can't see the revenue per image with AS either. I have an Excel table where I record my monthly downloads and revenues for the 6 agencies. So I know how many downloads and what revenue I have. And my portfolio is about the same size for all agencies and contains the same images with a few exceptions. Only at istock my portfolio is much smaller - about half as big as at AS. And a bit smaller at shutterstock.

The +$100 was not related to AS, but to all 6 agencies together. I hope that I have not formulated this in a misleading way.

Quote from: alan b traehern on January 24, 2023, 12:50

Quote from: Wilm on January 24, 2023, 08:33

Quote from: Wilm on January 22, 2023, 21:38
In my case, it looks like this:

I have 1322 images. Of these, 1198 images have at least 2 downloads. That is 90.6%. On average, each of my images has 59.2 downloads - including the unsold ones.

I had at some point deleted every image without a download that had been online for a while, because I was sure that these images would never achieve a download again, because I assumed that they would no longer be found in searches. Otherwise, I would have at least about 1500 images online - probably a few more. I left a few relatively newly uploaded images without download online. So now I also have 18 images with exactly one download.

Whether this "cleaning" of the portfolio was useful or beneficial for the portfolio ranking, I don't know. That be's only the algorithm of shutterstock.

I know that the lack of uploading hurts my performance, because I know or suspect how it develops for example with Firn or Ralf, namely positively in contrast to me. But for shutterstock I lack the motivation and therefore I accept declining numbers.

However, with all the whining I must also say: For the fact that I no longer feed the beast, I have to be satisfied with my income. As Doug Jensen would have said: Currently, I'm still harvesting from the seeds I sowed years ago. How long that will work without sowing new seeds, I don't know.

What I have written here is wrong!

I have now looked at my "Top performers" again. But they are not sorted by downloads, but by revenue. On the last page, I had seen pictures with 2 downloads and had therefore wrongly assumed that on the penultimate page and the other pages before that, no more pictures with less than 2 downloads would appear. But that was wrong. For example, on the last page there are 2 images with 2 downloads each for a total of $0.20 and on the second to last page there are images with 1 download for $0.38.

The correct way is like this:

Of 1322 images, exactly 1200 have at least one download. And there are exactly 133 images with only one download. So 1067 images have 2 or more downloads.

None of your stats matter, you deleted images.

What you write is correct.

However, my numbers at AS and SS are pretty much identical in terms of images sold. At AS I never deleted an image, so I have 1517 files there. Of those, 320 have no download. 79% have at least 1 download. And at shutterstock, that would be pretty much identical if I hadn't deleted an image there.

Each of my images has brought me more than $100 on average - over a long period of time. I am satisfied with that.

But especially with shutterstock, that's pretty much impossible now with new images. And that was it once. Which brings me back to the title of this thread.

Quote from: Wilm on January 22, 2023, 21:38
In my case, it looks like this:

I have 1322 images. Of these, 1198 images have at least 2 downloads. That is 90.6%. On average, each of my images has 59.2 downloads - including the unsold ones.

I had at some point deleted every image without a download that had been online for a while, because I was sure that these images would never achieve a download again, because I assumed that they would no longer be found in searches. Otherwise, I would have at least about 1500 images online - probably a few more. I left a few relatively newly uploaded images without download online. So now I also have 18 images with exactly one download.

Whether this "cleaning" of the portfolio was useful or beneficial for the portfolio ranking, I don't know. That be's only the algorithm of shutterstock.

I know that the lack of uploading hurts my performance, because I know or suspect how it develops for example with Firn or Ralf, namely positively in contrast to me. But for shutterstock I lack the motivation and therefore I accept declining numbers.

However, with all the whining I must also say: For the fact that I no longer feed the beast, I have to be satisfied with my income. As Doug Jensen would have said: Currently, I'm still harvesting from the seeds I sowed years ago. How long that will work without sowing new seeds, I don't know.

What I have written here is wrong!

I have now looked at my "Top performers" again. But they are not sorted by downloads, but by revenue. On the last page, I had seen pictures with 2 downloads and had therefore wrongly assumed that on the penultimate page and the other pages before that, no more pictures with less than 2 downloads would appear. But that was wrong. For example, on the last page there are 2 images with 2 downloads each for a total of $0.20 and on the second to last page there are images with 1 download for $0.38.

The correct way is like this:

Of 1322 images, exactly 1200 have at least one download. And there are exactly 133 images with only one download. So 1067 images have 2 or more downloads.

Quote from: U11 on January 23, 2023, 01:57
got enhanced license sold by SS today for below $2

What???

In my case, it looks like this:

I have 1322 images. Of these, 1198 images have at least 2 downloads. That is 90.6%. On average, each of my images has 59.2 downloads - including the unsold ones.

I had at some point deleted every image without a download that had been online for a while, because I was sure that these images would never achieve a download again, because I assumed that they would no longer be found in searches. Otherwise, I would have at least about 1500 images online - probably a few more. I left a few relatively newly uploaded images without download online. So now I also have 18 images with exactly one download.

Whether this "cleaning" of the portfolio was useful or beneficial for the portfolio ranking, I don't know. That be's only the algorithm of shutterstock.

I know that the lack of uploading hurts my performance, because I know or suspect how it develops for example with Firn or Ralf, namely positively in contrast to me. But for shutterstock I lack the motivation and therefore I accept declining numbers.

However, with all the whining I must also say: For the fact that I no longer feed the beast, I have to be satisfied with my income. As Doug Jensen would have said: Currently, I'm still harvesting from the seeds I sowed years ago. How long that will work without sowing new seeds, I don't know.

I don't understand it.
I have chosen opt out for PLUS. I also don't get any PLUS income displayed.
The PREMIUM income now looks like this:
In January so far 29 downloads for $3.87.
22 XXL downloads for $0.021 each. Is this a joke???

I will now close my account for good.

In the better times 123rf brought me more than $100 per month - quick upload, little effort. In 2022 it was only $13 per month.

Now it's finally over!

Quote from: cascoly on January 20, 2023, 20:26

Quote from: tätarätä on January 19, 2023, 22:13

What i wanted to say is that that there is an exponential declining trend.
If you start microstock photography you will see an increase in DL. On average for about the first 40 +/- months.
The next 40 +/- months you probably will see your DL stagnate. Even if you still uploading the same amount of images every month. After another 40 +/- months you will see a decrease of DL with a much larger portfolio.
So there is an exponential function against you.
Your uploads are linear, your DL per image / month are declining exponential.
After your first 40 months at microstock your DL per image / Month  are X, after 80 months your DL per image/month are X/2, after 120 months your DL per image/month are X/4 - on average.
You can't win against an exponential declining trend.

first, $/image is useless - what's important is $ earned.

What is important is the earnings in relation to the time invested. That is something quite different from the dollars earned!

Quote from: Zero Talent on January 17, 2023, 20:23
A bit later than last year:

Nice!

As it is, I can reach the minimum payout which is $100 for me. The RPD is of course absolutely underground - even dramatically worse than usual. Only 9 ODs and 5 small SODs so far.

I'm curious how big the difference between shutterstock and AS will be in the January poll. Huge for me.

Less than half of December 2021 with the same amount of downloads. But last December was my best month in 2021 - way above average.

Quote from: e_mikh on January 09, 2023, 11:47
Toothless.

This is incredible! Bad times for honest contributors!

Quote from: Her Ugliness on January 12, 2023, 09:06

Quote from: Wilm on January 12, 2023, 08:37

Quote from: Her Ugliness on January 12, 2023, 07:29

Quote from: Zero Talent on January 11, 2023, 16:02

Quote from: Her Ugliness on January 11, 2023, 15:20
Here, closing in on level 3. Not that level 1 or 2 make much of a difference really. Most sales are for $0.10 either way.

I'm level 3 since a couple of days, but it's slower than last year...

I just looked it up and suprisingly I reached level 2 on the exact same date in 23 than in 22 and last year I reached level 3 on the 13th and it looks like it will be exactly the same date that I will reach level 3 this year.

Can you see somewhere in the dashboard when you reached which level last year? Or have you made a note of it?

No, but Shutterstock sends me a mail whenever I reach a new level, I just looked up the date of last year's mails.

Ah, yes, of course that's right, thank you!

Quote from: Her Ugliness on January 12, 2023, 07:29

Quote from: Zero Talent on January 11, 2023, 16:02

Quote from: Her Ugliness on January 11, 2023, 15:20
Here, closing in on level 3. Not that level 1 or 2 make much of a difference really. Most sales are for $0.10 either way.

I'm level 3 since a couple of days, but it's slower than last year...

I just looked it up and suprisingly I reached level 2 on the exact same date in 23 than in 22 and last year I reached level 3 on the 13th and it looks like it will be exactly the same date that I will reach level 3 this year.

Can you see somewhere in the dashboard when you reached which level last year? Or have you made a note of it?

Quote from: Sstr on January 11, 2023, 21:31
Level 5 with 5113 video downloads...

Wow! Congrats!

How many videos do you have?

Quote from: JEDphoto on January 03, 2023, 00:12
Is lifetime now defined as 1 year?

No.

Quote from: Her Ugliness on January 11, 2023, 15:20
Here, closing in on level 3. Not that level 1 or 2 make much of a difference really. Most sales are for $0.10 either way.

Yes, that's what it looks like, $5 so far today, almost all $0.10 and an impressive SOD for $1.17 - that's about it. But even at level 5, the bulk of the downloads were for $0.10. The levels aren't relevant as long as no big SODs come in - and those are now rarer than a volcanic eruption.

Quote from: Her Ugliness on January 09, 2023, 18:31

Quote from: Uncle Pete on January 09, 2023, 18:01


Rank by downloads which is actually Position. But that doesn't mean the search uses the position, does it? That's an assumption people make about how the search might work.

I don't think anyone is making that assumption? At least I haven't seen anyone state it like that. Image placement and portfolio rank (or position) are 2 separate things and one has nothing to do with the other. Portfolio rank is only there to show you how good or bad you are doing in comparison to other contributors. I don't think it serves any other purpose.

Of course, I don't know how the algorithm works either. But I still believe that the portfolio ranking plays a role. I can imagine that for newly uploaded images with average quality and average sales potential, the images of a contributor with a good portfolio ranking will be found better in the search than contributors with a poor portfolio ranking. I might be wrong though.

Quote from: Big Toe on January 08, 2023, 17:24

Quote from: Reimar on January 08, 2023, 14:23
I've noticed quite a few 25 cent sales since the new year.  Is this new? 
Is it like SS where contributor splits go down every year in January?
I just don't remember sales lower than 36 cents.

If you are based outside of the US and have failed to renew your taxform yet, it may be lower due to taxes.

I was asked to renew my taxform and got a mail reminding me of it for every sale in 2023, although I did not notice anything out of the order for the earning amounts.

I hadn't thought of that at all. You are right. That could be Reimar's problem.

Quote from: gnirtS on January 08, 2023, 17:00
Not finished shoving all the details into my spreadsheets yet but for me on SS, 2022 was 10% fewer total downloads and roughly 30% less income than 2021.

The hit is entirely due to the low commissions being paid (and for the first few months, levels).  Similar amounts of stuff is being sold but for a much cheaper price.

Meanwhile on the crash down from level 5 to 1 combined with holidays im on a massive $26 this month instead of $150+.

2022 became the year AS reliably out performed SS and won comfortably by year end.

That is sad indeed. But we can join hands. For me it is exactly $25.90.

I had no sale under €0,38, Reimar.