You don't stand a chance against my iDreamshutterfotovillage.com. I plan to take over 100% of the microstock market   

I just did some statistics for the first 8 days in January. Not much to base anything on, but:

SS: down 23% from 2007

All sites combined: up 99% from 2007

DT and IS are each almost as big as SS so far. If I didn't have the vectors at SS, I could as well have closed my account.

I opted out at StockXpert when they launched subscriptions. Minimum MP at SS is a good idea. DT is a headache though. They are selling well but don't have an opt out possibility for subs.

Yuri Arcurs
Freezingpictures
GeoPappas
Smithore
rene
sharpshot
ldambies
epixx

Yuri,
I'm seeing the same thing as you are seeing, and with a completely different portfolio. One of the problems is subscriptions, and why more and more agencies are jumping on that bandwagon is beyond me. It's as if your local grocery store said: we know you have been buying food from us for umpteen years, but as from tomorrow, you can buy ten times as much food every day for the same price.

Obviously, after a couple of years, you would have gathered enough food to last a lifetime, and you would no longer need the grocery store.

And, as many have said already: designers don't really care if an image costs 1 or 10 dollars. The price is so low compared to the total project cost even when creating the tiniest little brochure or website, that the difference totally insignificant.

If microstock is going to survive as a profitable business model, it needs to look at itself in a long term economic perspective. Since "we" are an important part of "it", we have to do what is necessary from our side to contribute to our own future. For me, that equals opting out of subscriptions when possible and consider removing my portfolio where it's not possible and to support agencies that charge better prices and pay a higher percentage to the photographers.

We often talk about microstock and midstock. I think it's simpler than that. To survive, microstock needs to become midstock, and microstock, that's us.

There will obviously always be new agencies popping up with lower prices, but as we are now in a situation with 5-10 large, established companies that "rule" the market, a small, cheap one won't have much impact long term. Customers shop for quality and diversity most of the time. The can't afford wasting time looking for the lowest price if quality is to be found elsewhere.

Just my 2p (or was that 15p?)


Jorgen

Get the prices up! The whole point with an agency like FP, is that we have the possibility to earn more. If we set the prices there at 1 or 2 dollars, we're just pushing the price barrier further down. No point in doing that. They are fully competitive at 5-10 dollars, and smaller sizes will sell for a lower price still.

For me, uploading seems to time out if I upload more than 7MB or thereabout in one batch. If I upload one or two images in each batch, it works fine. There are some routines at SV that work very badly. I'm surprised how slow they are to react.

Long term, I wouldn't worry about IS. They are up and down for me as well, but all in all, they sell well.

If you are serious about doing vectors, it's difficult to avoid Illustrator. Trying out with a freeware program may work for you, but since Illustrator is so dominant, it's probably a good idea to start learning sooner rather than later. It's a good program, but there's a lot to learn.

It's difficult to make predictions, but the big times at Shutterstock may be coming towards an end. They used to represent 50-60% of my total earnings, but at the moment, both IS and DT is breathing down their neck. My December sales at SS this year are just 60% of those last year, although my portfolio has grown by almost 100%.

Why is this happening? One reason is probably that those who have been subscribers for a number of years have built large portfolios themselves. Another is that the competition has increased, and the other agencies who offer subscriptions, offer conventional sales as well.

It's difficult to say what subscription sales will do for the value of your photos, but I'm skeptical to the concept. If you have a unique photo (if there is such a thing anymore), why should customers be able to download it as a part of a dirt cheap subscription scheme, when they would happily pay 5, 10 or even 50 dollars for it anyway.

I'm still in, but if the sales continue to decline, I can't really see the point. At other agencies, I opt out of subscriptions when possible. A logical consequence would be to opt out of SS as well. We'll see...

One thing those of us who are designers can do, is quite obvious: buy from FP whenever possible. There's a lot to choose from, also photos that can't be found elsewhere, since they accept most of what many of us upload, and editorial photos as well.

He didn't talk about his own portfolio, but the icons of sodafish. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

I'll post a few questions at the SS forum, and see what kind of responses I get. Hope they don't ban me then   

I won't be the judge of anyone here, but this seems to be the story:

You have, with or without knowing it, copied or made identical icons to another user named sodafish. I haven't seen the icons, so I have no idea. The only way for you to clear up the mess, would be to contact admin at SS directly, preferably by phone, and very, very politely.

I've had a look at your portfolio at DT and IS, and if it's legit, you're work is excellent. Still, getting too inspired by others when it comes to vector graphics is not a good idea. I do vectors myself, and know that it's not always easy to see what's inspiration and what's copying.

You can be pretty sure that SS is one safe legal ground when it comes to money. They don't like to take chances (which they showed when they banned you). A piece of advice: go through your other portfolios, and be 100% sure that you have no conflicts coming up there as well.

Good luck.

Why don't you try the forum at SS? The admins do read the forums there.