Interesting and could be important information. I'll make a mental note and forget it by 5PM. 

Joining Pixels is a Fall project for me. I like the automatic link, but don't like the inability to have anything but the app they provide with no control or alterations. Disappointing lack of flexibility. Unless I missed it, collections would be really nice.

They absolutely have collections (see SM)

I just tested some of mine, and they showed up. However, I see that you say that some of yours show up but others don't.
I can't explain that - usually it's like Alamy inasmuch as any word from the keywords, even within phrases, can mix with any other.
That said, you mentioned the full multi-word titles. I'm not sure if titles are searchable, but possibly they are - I can't find any of my titles where the words aren't also in the keywords to check for you.
Would you like to post a few of your files which weren't findable so others can check - though in my case it will be tomorrow as it's now late here!

But same goes for Alamy, for example, don't they send their files to Getty also.

In general, no.
Looking on Getty, there are fewer than 160 pics on a search for Alamy: some seem to have a long list of credits (e.g.Credit: Name/Alamy Live News. (Photo by SameName/LightRocket via Getty Images), some are typos for Alamo, there is a person surnamed Alamy - and some I can't work out why they show up on a search for Alamy. 

Many Getty pics are mirrored on Alamy, however.

...apparently if you have money in your account at the time of closure that money is kept by them

As your contract says they will.
"8.3 There is a minimum payout rate per accounting period of: Thirty Five US Dollars (USD 35.00) (the "Payout Minimum"). If during an accounting period, you haven't reached the Payout Minimum or provided Shutterstock a valid electronic payment account, your compensation will be rolled over into the next accounting period. If you cancel your account prior to accrued earnings in your royalty account reaching the applicable Payout Minimum, you thereby forfeit such royalties. For clarity, you shall have no right to any earnings accrued following the disabling of your contributor account or until such time as the applicable Payout Minimum threshold is reached."

Quote from: Roscoe on May 27, 2020, 04:52

5000 contributors disabling a port of 5000 images on average is still only 7 or 8 % of the database, which is extremely competitive and loaded with similar images of the same subject anyhow. We can discuss how many contributors will leave and how big or small their portfolio's are, but don't think Shutterstock didn't do the math and didn't calculate the risk or effect. Plenty of people left who don't disable, and prefer earning less instead of getting nothing at all (some really need the money), and of course plenty of people left willing to sell out for 10$c commissions.

That said, gotta stay true to yourself, and for the sake of giving a message and easy my mind by little acts of protest, mine goes down on 1st of June.

Maybe you missed a crucial point here.
It's not 5000 contributors who will deactivate their portfolio, but 5000 of the most prominent contributors, because in the end those are the ones who have the most to lose, especially those who produce quality videos.
When Shutterstock has lost this quality content then the deal could change.

I'd imagine they looked at what happened when Getty shafted iStock. Some people left, some people became indie, some people stopped contributing but left their files onboard, some people joined. They're probably guessing the same will happen for them.

And be clear, after the Getty/iS fiasco, everyone was all over SS. Now lots of these same people are all over Adobe - just how long will they resist the 'profits above everything' scenario? (I have no crystal ball and don't offer an opinion on this, but some people on here were 'sure' that SS would never sink to Getty levels of grasping.) Kelly Thomson was tasked with increasing profit, and the new SS CEO has a similar remit. The suppliers are ususally the ones who are shafted, in retail and in stock.

I have some RMExclusive images on Alamy. Mainly more arty stuff. It tends not to sell!
So....
Can I also put these images on POD sites eg Fine Art America as well? Or not.

I would ask Alamy but they are closed for Covid. Sigh.....

Yes, you can.
https://discussion.alamy.com/topic/12736-the-importance-of-being-accurate-with-marking-images-as-exclusive-to-alamy

With all the upset people, this is the perfect storm for Adobe to swoop in with a sweet exclusive offering.

Yeah, but they'd need to guarantee it for a decent length of time.

Quote from: ShadySue on May 20, 2020, 17:39

Oh, but I've just remembered there can be quite a delay in reporting the sale to you, particularly if the image was sold via Getty, even indie pics can be sold via the Getty Connect scheme. So there's supposed to be a time which has to lapse before you take out a ticket. I'm looking for that info, but haven't found it yet.

Nobody really seems to know what Connect is allabout. As far as I understood, it's a pay-per-view system, and you need thousands of views in order to reach the 2$c payout threshold. So if your image ends up on let's say Pinterest, getting a few hunderd views per month, you'll get nothing and Getty gets just a little bit next to nothing? For contributors - at least this is how I understood it - the counters are reset per month per image, for Getty/iStock, they keep on rolling for all of the images across the years? In many cases, the pennies are for Getty, and the contributor gets zero. If your image is on a roll somewhere, but gets a reset due to the end of the month, you still might get nothing, or less than you should have gotten. There's also no detailed reporting, at least not for 2020, they just report your income, and for 2019 you get a gibberish text file with also barely any info.

No matter how you look at it, it feels like a true ripoff, and there's no way to opt-out.

That said, I do see income from Connect, although it's not much, and probably less than I would have gotten if I uploaded the image to e.g. pixabay and rely on donations.

Yes, I got muddled. What I should have said was the scheme which I think is now called Getty 360, formerly Getty Plus, whereby a particular group of buyers gets access to all Getty and iStock files seamlessly, and that includes indie files. I think that is one of several ways (and increasing) in which they can pay exclusives only 20%, by claiming it was a Getty sale, not iStock, but they still pay indies 15%.

And yes, the Connect scheme is yet another way for Getty to aggregate tiny amounts over a long time, while only paying us a pittance if our share of the earnings reaches 1c in a calendar month.

When I started with Alamy you needed $250 cleared to be paid so it could be worse ...

Except that the drop to $50 is an indication of the relative state of the market since those headier days.

Horrendous, and rpd down to $1, which isn't exactly motivating. (no covid content). First time in many years I haven't reached payout, including years when you could get payout each week in which you earned $100.

Alamy: I finally got the answer on my 6th email which looks like somebody actually read my complaints. Unfortunately the answer was "no problems there, business as usual you could wait up to 4 months for amounts to be cleared and bla bla"... but the very next day my sales from february and march were all cleared and suddenly I have 171$ cleared and ready for payout.

I've noticed this in the past, I got that sort of reply then it would be cleared.

I had one as well a few days ago, same commission (21,12).
On their website  there is no explanation for that, royalties for ELs should always be 26,40 (see: https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/royalty-details.html)

Matt? could you comment?

I'm not Matt, but there are a lot of 20% off discount codes flying about (Google Adobestock discount), and $26.40 - 20% is exactly $21.12.

@pauws99:
Hmm... I don't see anyone whining here, just sharing information.
But good to see we have guys with your level of wisdom here ;-) Thanks for your helpful comment!

You misread Paw's tone.