|
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 - kuriouskat
Pages: 1 ... 15 16 17 18 19 [20] 21 22 23 24 25 ... 28
476
« on: February 18, 2017, 07:12 »
You can set the default licensing model to RF or RM. In the image manager on the top line right beside your name is a little gear-wheel icon. That's where you can set the default for future submissions to RF or RM.
Thanks for that  .
Yes, thank you. I though it was probably an option but I hadn't found it.
477
« on: February 18, 2017, 04:33 »
Are you sure they're actually on sale, or does it just tell you that they're on sale?
My last batch gave me a message telling me they were on sale as soon as I'd managed them (maybe before, but I didn't notice), but they weren't visible in my port or searchable.
If you can't change RM to RF, explain the situation to Support and they'll change them for you.
They are on sale. I can change it easily, (and in bulk), but I don't like that I have to remember to do so. As Paulws99 says, it would be good if we could set a default somewhere. Maybe this exists but I haven't found it yet?
478
« on: February 18, 2017, 03:35 »
Isn't Alamy up against the same wall as all the others - expected return on an image is so low that it just doesn't pay to spend time jumping through any more keyword hoops? Well maybe this new system could be a way to rise above the mob, by making the effort to meet new keyword guidelines - but first one would have to be darn sure it works
But on the other hand, when images are approved they go on sale automatically, you don't HAVE to do any further keywording once basic EXIF is transferred. Unless, of course, you think that discoverability matters....what a pickle.....
My last approved batch have gone on sale without my knowledge. Defaulted to RM, which is a bit problematic, as I'm selling the images RF elsewhere.
479
« on: February 02, 2017, 14:23 »
The cynic in me thinks this has been implemented on purpose to cause a smokesreen, whilst the new pricing structure gets quietly slipped into place.
Shutterstock will make a 'we listen to our contributors' announcement, revert back to how it was, and quietly cut our earnings in the process.
480
« on: January 31, 2017, 05:05 »
I would assume that may, in this instance, would be dependent upon whether Canva meet a certain set of criteria or not. It won't be a matter of their choice.
481
« on: January 31, 2017, 04:08 »
Ugly and clunky.
Can't see at a glance, have to click through various tabs, can't easily compare sales of old images against new, only 20 images per page.
Edit: I'm thinking this is a bug, and that nothing has actually changed, (although I'm reluctant to clear cache/cookies just in case I get stuck with the new way).
482
« on: January 30, 2017, 10:16 »
Every day I get up and hope that today will be the day when I start to see some improvement, but it just keeps going from bad to worse.
No sales = no motivation = no point.
Shutterstock, are you taking notice of the fact that we no longer consider you to be No1? Can you do something to save us, or are your sales just as bad?
There has been talk for months on your forum about tech issues, new site features in the pipeline, etc. etc. but every change you make hits us in the back pocket. Are you just fighting fires, in an attempt jolly along old technology and to stave off a haemorrhage of buyers, or are all these changes actually what you intended?
It would be so good if someone from Shutterstock would actually say something to us, because we are all getting hoarse from shouting at a wall.
shutterstock is earning the same or more money....for a user that lose money and download other gain them.... many talk about fotolia...but i have random 2 download day....dreamstime and stock are by far even this month much better than fotolia and ss is still by far the best gainers. so shutter stock cannot do nothing for u or me....we only have to upload content.
I'll reserve judgement on that until I see the financial for 2016, due to be released at the end of next month. I suspect that sales for footage have increased, and topped up the profits very nicely, but I would be very curious to see whether the profit for image sales is anywhere near in line with the actual image ingestion.
483
« on: January 30, 2017, 09:38 »
Every day I get up and hope that today will be the day when I start to see some improvement, but it just keeps going from bad to worse.
No sales = no motivation = no point.
Shutterstock, are you taking notice of the fact that we no longer consider you to be No1? Can you do something to save us, or are your sales just as bad?
There has been talk for months on your forum about tech issues, new site features in the pipeline, etc. etc. but every change you make hits us in the back pocket. Are you just fighting fires, in an attempt to jolly along old technology and to stave off a haemorrhage of buyers, or are all these changes actually what you intended?
It would be so good if someone from Shutterstock would actually say something to us, because we are all getting hoarse from shouting at a wall.
484
« on: January 29, 2017, 06:25 »
Shutterstock seems to want quantity over quality these days.
So many contributors are saying that it isn't worth their time to be working to create quality images, just to get them buried in the search. It feels as if the days of 'quality rising to the top' are long gone, (along with many talented contributors). I guess things will only change if buyers start complaining about things.
I've seen sudden changes recently that have put my portfolio out of favor, so maybe the next change will be to my advantage? Maybe there is a rotation system? Who know's what's happening these days? Every day is an adventure in the Microstock industry!
485
« on: January 28, 2017, 14:24 »
It's normal to work just to maintain
I'd be more than happy with 'work to maintain', I'm just struggling with working and accepting a 50%+ pay cut.
486
« on: January 28, 2017, 09:37 »
70 downloads in one week, from bad to worse , i am afraid the end for me is near, the decline is really rapid now.
I have to agree! never seen it like this. I'm getting an uncanny feeling its a lot more to this story like a Gordon Gekko squeeze the last drop of blood out of the business before the end. 
There was a time when 20+ downloads a day would have made me very happy, but it was back in about 2008. Now, having worked so hard to build a solid portfolio, it feels like a slap in the face to see such a huge decline.
I used to get a buzz out of watching my stats, and loved the days where the total crept over the 100 mark, but now the daily average of 70-80, (weekday average of 90), is lucky to hit 30.
I guess we should have seen this coming when the required payout went from $75 to $35, as that's proportionately in line with my monthly income drop.
Shutterstock was the flagship of the microstock industry - such a shame to see it hit an iceberg.
I don't doubt your personal numbers at all. But you might want to consider some changes since 2008 http://www.microstockgroup.com/shutterstock-com/countdown-to-100-million-on-ss-is-over/25/
There are 165,000 contributors and 110 million images. In 2008 17,000 contributors and 5 million images. Can you see why we are all losing downloads and making less? Pretty simple math when you look at it.
5 million images then, 110 million now. How thin can you make a slice of the pie when there are 165,000 asking for some?
Competition has gone up 115 million more competing images than in 2008. What should we expect, that our percentage of sales with that volume, we'd stay the same?
Might be down the toilet is right, but the reason why is fairly self evident. Competition is the answer.
I'm not doubting the reasons, although I'm sure it's not all about the image numbers, as I have seen two very distinct and overnight drops, which must relate to search changes I think. I was managing to upload and just about maintain a level income until late June of 2016, and the library was around 100mil images at that point, so I'm not trying to make a comparison against 2008 numbers, I'm just looking at changes in the last six months. In early July I saw a 30% overnight drop, and the same happened again in late November.
487
« on: January 28, 2017, 03:22 »
70 downloads in one week, from bad to worse , i am afraid the end for me is near, the decline is really rapid now.
I have to agree! never seen it like this. I'm getting an uncanny feeling its a lot more to this story like a Gordon Gekko squeeze the last drop of blood out of the business before the end.
There was a time when 20+ downloads a day would have made me very happy, but it was back in about 2008. Now, having worked so hard to build a solid portfolio, it feels like a slap in the face to see such a huge decline. I used to get a buzz out of watching my stats, and loved the days where the total crept over the 100 mark, but now the daily average of 70-80, (weekday average of 90), is lucky to hit 30. I guess we should have seen this coming when the required payout went from $75 to $35, as that's proportionately in line with my monthly income drop. Shutterstock was the flagship of the microstock industry - such a shame to see it hit an iceberg.
488
« on: January 26, 2017, 14:38 »
The ELs and mid-size SODs keep rolling in. It's like SS heard me that it's going to fall behind FT and it's making a last desperate effort to catch up. What was a lousy month is starting to turn into an decent month.
Wish I could say the same  I've gone from a daily average of 70-80 to 30 on a good day. Today, is just 15 lousy subs. I will quit if I get a zero day, but maybe that's what they are aiming for? If they p**s off all the .38c contributors they can save money. Great business plan to throw older contributors under the bus.
489
« on: January 24, 2017, 04:35 »
...I just discovered that many many of my images in my portfolio are not displayed when i click on it on buyer SS site .... Are you experiencing the same
Could you check if that 's happening with your port ?...
I did a little checking today and I don't think I see what you're experiencing. I have a buyer account and am logged in to that. I do a search that I know will produce one of my images. I click on that in the search results, then on my name. Then I search within my portfolio for some search terms and see all that I expect to see.
I am seeing again today a bug I thought was fixed last week (other people's images showing up in my sets).
It's possible that one or two images might be missing, but results look correct to me
I just checked mine from the buyer's site, and notice similar problems. A set that I know has 70+ images was only showing 37, and one of my sets was showing some random images belonging to someone else.
A refresh appeared to fix the problem, but why would a buyer refresh the screen?
Perhaps this goes part way to explaining a 50% drop in sales in the last 6 months, although I'm sure there are plenty of other factors, both intentional and caused by the bugs in the system.
I used to love Shutterstock, as they were so dependable - both for sales, their ability to keep site issues to a minimum and their willingness to communicate with contributors. These days I'm sadly not so impressed.
Almost exactly my experience. Similar pictures is someone elses pictures. Buyers will not refresh and why should they? plus about 70% of the portfolio not showing. No this is not a bug this is something completely different!
I'm not talking about the similar images but my own sets, which should only contain my images. I have random images from other contributors in my own sets. That has to be a bug rather than a strategy, doesn't it?
490
« on: January 23, 2017, 17:20 »
...I just discovered that many many of my images in my portfolio are not displayed when i click on it on buyer SS site .... Are you experiencing the same
Could you check if that 's happening with your port ?...
I did a little checking today and I don't think I see what you're experiencing. I have a buyer account and am logged in to that. I do a search that I know will produce one of my images. I click on that in the search results, then on my name. Then I search within my portfolio for some search terms and see all that I expect to see.
I am seeing again today a bug I thought was fixed last week (other people's images showing up in my sets).
It's possible that one or two images might be missing, but results look correct to me
I just checked mine from the buyer's site, and notice similar problems. A set that I know has 70+ images was only showing 37, and one of my sets was showing some random images belonging to someone else. A refresh appeared to fix the problem, but why would a buyer refresh the screen? Perhaps this goes part way to explaining a 50% drop in sales in the last 6 months, although I'm sure there are plenty of other factors, both intentional and caused by the bugs in the system. I used to love Shutterstock, as they were so dependable - both for sales, their ability to keep site issues to a minimum and their willingness to communicate with contributors. These days I'm sadly not so impressed.
491
« on: January 20, 2017, 04:05 »
It happens when you have some notifications, as, for example, unread comments, photos older than 4 years and without sale, new tax form to approve, etc.
Yes, but I have nothing outstanding and nothing to action, and I'm wondering if it's blinking simply to alert me to the fact that my tax form is still pending?
492
« on: January 20, 2017, 03:09 »
Last time this happened for me, it was because I needed to update my tax form.
That was back in December, and I notice the form still says it's 'under review'. I hope they aren't going to withhold tax for the 6 weeks that they didn't review the form?
Perhaps the blinking arrow is simply to alert the contributor to the fact that something is pending?
493
« on: January 16, 2017, 15:28 »
Any holiday today ? Having a terrible day at Shutterstock.
Yes, Martin Luther King day in US - public holiday. I'm not convinced it matters anyway, as sales have become dire there everyday. I'm currently about 70% down on the same public holiday from last year.
494
« on: January 13, 2017, 14:29 »
I was just stressing about my declining sales, and explaining to my partner the implications, (as I see them), of this latest development. His advice to me was to be adaptable and to learn to 'play the game'.
I'm just wondering if anyone has figured out the rules? I'm ****ed if I know, and I'm getting really tired of chasing after the moveable goal posts.
495
« on: January 13, 2017, 12:39 »
How can one pencil be red three blue and be two pencils and a box? Makes no sense.
In this instance, maybe you have to think outside the box? In all seriousness though, I think the OP is trying to compare apples to pears.
496
« on: January 02, 2017, 03:57 »
.38 club for several years
498
« on: January 01, 2017, 13:26 »
I have to look back to 2012 numbers to find a worse December than 2016.
I have to go back to 2010.
499
« on: January 01, 2017, 12:29 »
17% increase in portfolio size.
24% drop in revenue.
25% drop in downloads.
Most of the drop occurred in the second half of the year.
I've been a contributor for 9 years and have a portfolio of approx 6000 photos/vectors/illustrations/footage.
Overall, I have seen a drop of 15% over 2015, and Shutterstock accounts for almost all of it. I currently submit to 8 sites, and have seen growth on 5 against losses on 3, which are Shutterstock, Bigstock and Depositphoto.
500
« on: December 16, 2016, 03:43 »
My best day was on Shutterstock and was in excess of $500, (as opposed to yesterday, which was less than $20, and I have no words to describe how depressed I am).
Pages: 1 ... 15 16 17 18 19 [20] 21 22 23 24 25 ... 28
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
