It is possible if you upload 20,000+ images

20000 garbage photos maybe...no way 20000 good content all earn you 100 dollar month. i already told you...you have a big problem with quality, quantity won't help yu. that's hy you complain in every thread. if you need 75000 files to reach a 500 dollar level you should first stop uploading b...it...and focus on unity of content.

Quote from: namussi on July 09, 2018, 08:44

Quote from: jonbull on July 09, 2018, 07:30

Quote from: namussi on July 09, 2018, 07:26

Quote from: jonbull on July 09, 2018, 06:44

75000 to make 300 500 dollar months' better check the quality ad interest of your content really...with less than a 10 of photos i make much more at months.

Gibberish.

maybe yours. loser.

No idea what that means, either.

Your posts don't make sense. They are badly written.

better

Quote from: jonbull on July 09, 2018, 07:30

Quote from: namussi on July 09, 2018, 07:26

Quote from: jonbull on July 09, 2018, 06:44

75000 to make 300 500 dollar months' better check the quality ad interest of your content really...with less than a 10 of photos i make much more at months.

Gibberish.

maybe yours. loser.

No idea what that means, either.

Your posts don't make sense. They are badly written.

i don't care

75000 to make 300 500 dollar months' better check the quality ad interest of your content really...with less than a 10 of photos i make much more at months.

Quote from: Zero Talent on July 05, 2018, 10:51

Quote from: rinderart on July 04, 2018, 16:25

I just Like to see the work. call me crazy. people can write till there blue. oh, on a good Note and Bad note June was my Best month On SS in 27 Months. good but sad.Vast majority was 6/7 year old stuff.

Pretty much the same for me: June was my best month on SS in 20 months, except that my new stuff has a decent selling rate.

And no, you are definitely not crazy. I also "like to see the work".
What I don't like is to share mine. 

There's another place I can agree. I sure enjoy that most popular on SS is totally absurd and wrong. At least someone can't go look at my best sellers and start making copies or better versions. That's why I don't post my latest great seller or best earning shots. I'm not inviting 100 thousand people, scuffling for quarters, to come copy my ideas. 

New images will struggle up hill against the flood of new images coming down. I've pointed this out before but for some reason people don't see the serious effects.

2010 10 million images, sales were still reasonably good.

2012 (when the big earnings drop started) 20 million images

Now 200 million images and 1 million or more, new a week. How many buyers are there, what's the demand or need? That would have also needed to grow 100 times and even then, ratios don't explain that the market is just not big enough to sell like it did, with less competition. I'd have to upload 100 times my total, every year, just to keep up. Or we'd need 100 times more buyers every year?

Slice of the pie is going to be smaller. No way around that. The growth of earnings in Microstock has stagnated, for many regressed.

Every other "general" agency is the same or worse. Maybe, a select few agencies are still growing because they are selective, concentrate on video, or have a specific market.

this is a finished business for contributor. still there is some spare mont to be done, but how many contributor earns to make a real living n a modern country? micro can be a good side line earning. primary income is and will be soon impossible. 1millon  images added per week, and it' only the beginning. we soon see 2 3 4 5 10 million per week. there are thousand of potential contributor living in poor country where e en 50 dollar can make a difference at month. personally i'm earning more this year but the work put to earn a 5 % more is abysmal, and not rewarding. i still have a long backlog to upload but i am more interested in rm and small boutique agency.

Quote from: SpaceStockFootage on June 21, 2018, 00:00

Stock media has been dying from the day that stock media came into existence. Well, it has and it hasn't. The need for stock has been increasing gradually over the years. More channels, more shows, bigger audiences, more Youtube videos etc etc. So stock media is very much alive and well.

It's just the same old story of more and more competition when it comes to the people that sell stock media. There's no way to keep up with the increase in competition, so everyone gets a slightly smaller slice of the pie year over year. It's the same for everyone.... tv channels, slightly more viewers over the years, but more channels and more shows. Youtube channels... slightly more Youtube viewers over the years, but loads more channels and videos. There's not much that can be done about that.

Make more content than you did last year, make better content than you did last year, make sure you're on the sites you should be and not on the sites you shouldn't, revisit your descriptions, keywords, titles, think about branding, streamlining your working practices to make everything more efficient, consider cost-effective marketing, look for ways to maximise profits and minimise costs, add value, see what your competition are doing, review prices on sites where you can set your own, both from a time standpoint and a financial one, look for additional ways your work could be bringing in money, etc etc etc.

And if you've done all that and you still eventually get to the point where it's no longer worth while... then at least you'll know you did everything you could. You can then tip your hat to the world of stock media, say "Well, it was fun while it lasted kid. So long", and then turn your back before walking off into the mist. Or do what I'll do... say "See ya around suckers!" and fly off in my spaceship clutching a cheap bottle of wine in each paw.   

Entirely agree.

But the problem is that supply is accelerating and it's impossible to keep up.  I believe at the last market report Shutterstock said that the library had increased by about 40% but sales only by 2%.  This means that in order to just stand still one has to increase one's portfolio by 40% or so.

I accept that higher quality, more attractive concepts etc should eventually produce results better than the run-of-the-mill stuff being uploaded by many, but the problem of visibility arises - even the best work won't sell if it's drowned by millions of other images.

However, yours is a generally positive analysis and I agree - all we can do is try to produce good quality work and hope for the best.  Unfortunately even that approach is likely to end in disappointment in the long term.

what do you expect from a company who advertise in the last article the work oaf a professional spammer, against from russia?
https://www.shutterstock.com/ru/g/irina%20bg
f they accept portfolio like this, made of 1000 original photo and 58900 spam photos, how is it so strange they could possibly control sales? in this period with decreasing earning, moving sales bulk towards 0,26 cent contributor can be vital for a company.

the year show exactly the sale  minus think stock and getty premium i think...if you sum up them you will see that the number f our total sales is correct.
today i see changes eery hour like shutter stock.....if yu don't sell nothing clearly the number won't change. if you sell constantly it ill change hour by hour.

Personally, I think the poor quality of many of these new images is the biggest issue. They accept so much garbage these days that it is often hard to sort through to find the good stuff. Sometimes when I am searching I'll see 25 slightly different variations of the same crappy shot that no-one in their right mind would ever buy. I see vectors up there that look like they were drawn by two-year-olds. If you can't draw with a pencil and paper you have no business selling vector illustrations.

i agree. and if you want to improve your level of sales you can only rely on new files.

after a very good first 10 days the last 8 days were appalling....sure now sales will resort suddenly to read the normal quota, but really there is any motivation to upload more files or work for ss. esp contrary show growth in sales every month, fotolia too.

Quote from: jonbull on June 03, 2018, 07:27

Quote from: Sky on May 29, 2018, 11:29

Hello
Could it be using a Shutterstock controlled revenue system?
I have asked this question before
In short, you can specify your thoughts.
You can think of fixed sales amount and fixed income values.
Amount of sales declines compared to previous years. Sales have declined since mid-2017

ys. they do. every agency for me is a rollercoaster with unpredictable earning...shutertock is practically a straight upward line. i can easily predict the earning of this mont since now. no matter what u upload. in addiction for  company struggling to meet earning per Duarte for analyst a saving of royalty from 0,25 compared to 0,38 is a big saving and can save  the quarter. is not a fact that ss is the only agency in the stock market.

Jonbull: you can't even write proper sentences that make sense. I hope your statistical analysis is better. Feel free to share your working.

i'm not english spark, i write with phone and i agree i write pretty bad, but at least i can try to speak more than a single language like a pathetic idiot like you. i can save mine if you share yours so all world see a pathetic photographer in action.

So we've got one person saying they use controlled revenue because their sales are gradually decreasing, we've got one person saying they use controlled revenue because their sales are gradually increasing, we've got one person saying they use controlled revenue because their sales are wildly inconsistent, and in the majority of previous posts on the subject... we have people saying that they use controlled revenue because their sales are extremely consistent.

Very compelling evidence.

think of this...youhave a business quoted at stock exchange...your revenue are not growing as expected and analyst wait you next quarter to see what happen...you have the possibility to pay 0,25 or 0,38 cent per dollar of revenue. what you would do? especially if the revenue is not growing at all. it's clear they have some controls.

Quote from: stockmarketer on June 01, 2018, 06:22

I've been in microstock 10 years now.

I remember when it was exciting to track sales and watch my income steadily rise, like some on this page are reporting. 

But a few years back, everything changed:

- My port size hit 10,000 and each new upload was a miniscule addition as a percentage of my total collection... meaning I couldn't expect to see constant growth like I did as a newbie.

- At the same time, oversupply at the agencies was getting out of control... total collection sizes were going up by tens of millions a month, and my few hundred new images meant nothing.

- The agencies started stacking the deck against us, favoring the brand new artists to give them hope that this is a sustainable income so they keep uploading.  (news flash... it's not.)

So, how was my May?  Crap.  At least I assume, because looking too deep into the numbers is depressing and I've stopped putting myself through that.

Right except the agencies have always "stacked the deck" in favor of new artists. Look back when you started and you'll see how your files got a huge boost. You won't see that in earnings necessarily but you should be able to see disproportional download numbers for the number of files you had. Then things slowly level off, more new files, same DL numbers. Until just what you said, diminishing returns. In the early days it was called hitting the wall. Same thing, different name. 

May 2018 was the lowest May for me since May 2013, but considering the state of the business, the market and everything, same as I've been seeing for a couple years now. Plain flat sales, no changes when I add hundreds of new files in a month, for a few months, or add nothing but one photo each month for a few months.

Flat means some months are better, some lower, no growth to speak of. Also no huge drops, just kind of limping along based on what people need and buy. And yes I know some very active, good, successful people, who had sales drop in half in the last year or two, for no apparent reason. I see it as a flood of files, similar to what's working for these people... slice of the pie smaller and divided thinner, when there are hundreds of thousands of over covered subjects and concepts.

I don't see any change or any reason to believe anything will be getting better. The growth and any boom of sales, is over, never to return. Some folks talk about the next big thing or bring back the old days. Only in our memories, not going to happen. I didn't know that unsustainable was referring to all of us, but that was the right observation.

How do you warn new people that they are investing their time and hope on a doomed, sinking ship?

think of this...you are a company who barely matched analyst expectations...your financial results are not growing and probably diminish next quarter....how can you boost your earning so they match analyst expectations? silly move sales from 0,38 tile to 0,25 a save of 13 cent every dollar.. that's why new folks   experience growth of sales.
for me this is the first month lower than last year, sale where similar to last year but mostly subs so earning lower. desire new content the possibility of growth in ss is partiallyzero. some months i ill have plus 1 or minus ten but the path in ss in the last years is a straight lines. as somebody said is like receiving a salary.
alamy disappeared but i didn't work on it a lot.
the best news is lot of assignment and personal work and esp who keeps growing and according to sales since beginning of year i have already doubled april, without the accounting of files sold out of stock or getty.  if this grow keeps for some month esp will easily match ss or numbers of download despite a smaller portfolio.

i don't know if they earned more money but if i had to choose one camera to take me forever it's my 645d. i use even format, mostly pentax, have some other brand also but now i use pentax k1 mostly.
I BOUGHT Pentax 645d many years ago at a bargain, and have practically all lenses made in film era.
i use mostly k1 cause if easier, output is easier, and the sony sensor cmos is super generous. but when i use the 645d  for pad job, mostly fashion, an some landscape, is a joy, the big viewfinder is like a cinema screen, the body is ike a tank and till iso 400 the output is superb.
but 645d is ccd old sensor. it has less latitude in shadow but a more gentle roll of f of highlights who makes for more natural photos, i shoot on the left of histogram with 645d  while tie k1 i shoot mostly to save detail and push shadow.  but the output of the sony cmos sensor, is more digital, i like it but for me a good ccd sensor at base iso well exposed is still unbeatable.
all said i won't buy a fuji gx50 or hassy mirrorless at this point. well maybe fuji yes, but their sensor is just a cmos 35 mm sensor bigger, the output is the same, just more megapixel, but not that more, the lens are very good, but with 35 mm you have more choice and faster lens.
so if i suggest buy a 645d used  or skip the medium format cmos, and buy just a full frame.