Maybe stockphoto.com is linking to photos on other stock sites and then makes affiliate commissions if someone comes to his site and buys the photo?

No, they are not linking to other sites. That's the strange thing, you purchase the images - that have watermarks from Depositephots - on theirs site.

What information did you want? He says he bought the domain name and he owns the site? Does any site actually say "we're a partner site for agency 1, agency 2, agency 3, Etc."?

I want information about why this site is selling my images with a depositphotos logo.
I don't know whether any site says "we're a partner site for agency 1, agency 2", but then again I don't know any stock site that sells images from other agencies. Partner sites from stock agencies, at least the ones I know, usually sell some kind of product where you can use images from stock sites - blog layouts, wall prints, puzzles, etc.  There are "stock photography" sites  that have free images mixed with mages from some other agencies, but usually, when you click on these images, they just lead you to the other agency where you can regularly purchase the images.

But there are hardly any sales. Over the last three months I had 10 sales on BS. With a portfolio of 1700 pictures. Ridicolous.....

I had 223 images sold there in the past 3 months with a portfolio of 2,019 images, so, like so often, personal experiences can vary. It's still not a lot (I sell a multiple of that within one month on other agencies), but it's not as dreadful. Alamy is doing much worse for me.

Same. I see the Depositphotos watermark and the Stockphoto watermark on the previews AND I see my own images there, even though I never submitted to them.

I serached their FAQ and google, but can't find any mentioning of any connection between Stockphoto and Depositphotos.

 

My overall earnings increased from 2019 to 2020 by 73%, I earned more on Shutterstock in December 20 alone than I earned there during all of 2019.
But I don't think my numbers are very representative, as I only started doing microstock at the end of 2018, so my portfolio was rather small for at least the first half of 2019, so comparing 2019 and 2020 isn't really working well in my case.

However, just looking at 2020  I can say that on SS my earnings were rather steady with a slow rise during the first half of the year, then took a small fall when the new earning structure was introduced, but kept their overall "slow rising course" from there and then everything sky-rocketed for me starting in October.

On iStock my earnings have been rather steady through the whole year with a constant slow rising trend over the months as I kept expanding my portfolio.

Adobe has been the big disappointment for me. Like all other sites it started with a rising trend over the first months, had a really nice and promising peek in the middle of the year, then earnings fell significantly and for the last months of the year have been stagnating and I am basically back to where I was in January 2020.
I have the feeling that more than any other agency, Adobe has a problem promoting newly added content, because all my newly added season-related content that has been doing really well on other agencies (hundrets of sales on some images, multiple adds to the editor's choice collection on Dreamstime and so on...) had basically no sales there.

Dreamstime is also having a constant slow rise. Alamy stays the only agency where sales are so rare and inconsistent that it's impossible to see any trend at all and I only started submitting to Bigstock and Depositphotos a few months ago, so not enough images and numbers there to see a trend.

Is the contributor liable if a person in the photo decide to sue?

Yes.

I know at least from Alamy that this happens quite often, because I've heard from multipe people that they find some of their images credited to Alamy online that were never reported as sold on Alamy. Usually after contacting Alamy they get the sale, but no one knows how many sold images are out there that we don't find where Alamy does not pay us.
Also, there is a very recent thread in the Shutterstock forum where someone found an image used by a newspaper that also never sold. Upon contacting them he was told they purchase their images from Shutterstock and if there was any issue he should contact Shutterstock as it was not their problem. He contacted Shutterstock, Shutterstock claimes the image never sold. Dead end.


I think this is happening more often than we suspect.

Quote from: Justanotherphotographer on December 03, 2020, 03:02

I got a contributor's survey a few months ago after stopping uploads. Filled it in explaining why I wasn't contributing any more.

Have also had a couple of emails asking me to start upoloading again, looked pretty automated. Of course hell no, not until they change their comission structure.

BME across the other agencies.

Makes me wonder if anyone at SS reads them? I mean, honestly has anyone written back and said, "Wow we really like the 66% cut in commissions?" Or maybe some dim bulb at SS decided that they needed a survey to find out what was obvious?

I don't know about others, but that pops up every day for me, and I ignore it. Maybe it has something to do with time on the site, in the catalog manager or something. Or could be a cookie with a nag screen association.

Let me say, if they don't know what most artists think at this point, they aren't paying attention or are in some kind of serious denial.  Their own forum has almost 300 pages of angry posts over the announcement, and that's with some deletions. I'm not wasting my time.

I never got a contributor survey, I just get customer surveys all the time.

But at this point, if they really do contributor surveys, the only reason for these might be to pretend they care and give contributors some kind of option to vent and voice their frustration. I have high doubts they will actually look at the results and even higher doubts that, if they look at them, they will really act upon thes results in any kind of way. Because we all know what contributors want and what they are dissatisfied with. All want more money, all want their levels not to be reset or at least the past 12 months being taken into account and at least some want less rejections. But the interests of contributors and of Shutterstock don't align, so this won't lead anywhere....

Don't expect too much from it.
 I don't know about Alamy, but on Dreamstime multiple of my photos made it into their 'Editor's Choice' collection in the past and some of them haven't sold even once and I sell far more on Dreamstime than I do on Alamy.
You can see it as a nice confirmation that someone out there appreciated your pictures, but as far as promotion goes - I don't even know where to find the AlamyPOTM gallery linked from their main page, so I doubt all that many customers will see it?

Quote from: Clair Voyant on November 18, 2020, 16:50

Seriously who gives a flying duck about Shutterstock. I am surprised anyone still even gives them anything. Between the lottery of content acceptance and those pathetic low royalties my only question is why would anyone of sound mind even care about anything related to Shutterstock?

You know, some people are willing to sell their work for almost free. I have something that some people don't have: self esteem and principle. SS was never my biggest income but even if I did sell the most there, I would not be a part of this robbery. There is something more than money. As far as I see it, some people don't really mind if they sell video for a dollar or photo for 10 cents.

Look at this from a different perspective. If you bring food to the table, make the meal, serve it, and end up getting scraps from what others ate, on the scale from 1 to 10, how big of an idiot would you fell? Well thats exactly what "I need to put food on the table" people are doing. Getting a straight 10 on the idiocy scale.

But hey, to each their own right? Also I totally agree with you.

First of all, yes, there is more than money, of course, but it does not change a single thing about the fact that I need to pay my rent and pay my food and that I simply need money.

Second, let's try a different metaphor than yours:

You are a cleaning lady in a big household. Each week you do some basic cleaning and you get paid 25$ per hour, regardless of what work you do and how time you take.
You get a list in which each task you perform, from dusting to vaccum cleaning, get's a value. You see that cleaning windows only earns you 0.10$ and are upset and quit your job, even though you still get $25 per hour you work, because you are upset that the task of cleaning a window is not valued enough. Instead you take on a new job. That one only pays you $5 per hour, but clenaing windowns is valued at $3, so you are content.

Does this make sens to you?

What good is it to me if another agency like Alamy "values" my work more? I can sell a photo  there for 30,40  or 150$, but sales are so rare for me, that, at the end of the month, I don't even reach minimum payouts in most months. On Shutterstock on the other hand I make several hundred $ each month.
And, here is the most important thing: Taking photos, keywording and submitting them - that's the exact same work for all agencies. But on alamy I get paid a couple of $ each month, while it's several hundred on Shuttrstock - FOR THE EXACT SAME TIME AND WORK.

 If you mean Amazon Prime, the problem is, they put all kinds of bait ads and popups, that mask the fact that by getting a free trial, or free shipping on this order, you just signed up for a years account. And my experience hasn't been as simple as click and it's gone. I had to contact Amazon, when the bill came through on my credit card and explain, I didn't want Prime. Valerie also had the same.

Maybe it's different where you live and only the German version is (or was) so trial-friendly then? Because I used that trial and after I signed up I could go to my account settings right away and just uncheck a "extend prime membership" (don't remember the exact wording) checkbox and that was it. Not a single cent was taken from my account. I was actually impressed with how easy it was, because with every other free trial I have ever seen, it was always made very difficult to get out of it, but this was really as simple as it could get. I don't know how it is now, maybe it was changed.

Quote from: Firn on November 08, 2020, 12:18

Quote from: Uncle Pete on November 08, 2020, 11:19

Don't even start with Amazon Prime, free trial, that starts a subscription with, bait links and how that one traps people, over and over. 

Huh? Adobe Prime is the most user-friendly easy-to-unsubscripe free trial I have ever come across. You just have to check a checkbox  and it will not be automatically prolonged. At least that's how it was 2 or 3 years ago.

Yes, I�ve found that part to be true, too. But I am a little disgusted with them...I have started watching a couple of shows, get thru one season, I�m hooked, then find out in order to watch more, you have to pay! I know why. Because they are, say, Showtime programs. So Prime gives you a �preview�, but they don�t make it clear upfront. Who knew you had to check thru episodes and seasons to see if that�s going to happen. I know now.

If I wanted to watch programs from Showtime, I�d subscribe. I pay for a Prime subscription. When I login to Prime, I expect all the programs to be available for free under my subscription.

Sounds like one or more of the stock sites are employing the same kind of �marketing.� I�m thinking of SS, where I read some say that after the free trial, they bill you even after you cancel.

Usually you just have to wait a bit longer - if they have one season of a series in their free prime collection, the newer ones will be added to the free collection at some point too, but it can take a while. I can live with that. I am just not very thrilled with how few shows are added to the free collection each month. The selection isn't that great. When I got prime it was super cheap (something like only 30� each year?), so it was worth it, because even though you did not get all that much for it, it wasn't much money and there is also a small selection of free music and the free shipping (though, from my experience items that have free shipping for prime members usually cost a few � more than on other sites, so they just add the shipping costs to the item price....). But I think they have trippled the price by now, not sure I am going to keep it for another year, especially since their service has gone downhill.
But I think this is getting a bit off topic....

Something else to consider is Shutterstock do similar - a free trial.

Adobe has a free trial too.