Also, why would Shutterstock change their business model? Shutterstock operates in their segment, as does Getty. Wallmart is no Wegmans either

They do keep changing it and I make more when they add higher prices. They probably do too. All I'm asking for is to allow us to drop the lower stuff. It's not going to happen, but it seems like a reasonable request.

I get it when people not submitting to micros are complaining about microstock, but I dont get it when people submitting to micros are complaining about low prices. Microstock is named micro stock because of micro prices. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microstock_photography

What's not to get? Microstock has a wide range of prices. My numbers have shown that I make a lot more from the pricing closer to the top and middle, than I do at the bottom. My earnings are basically being throttled by low prices.

Quote from: Ron on April 14, 2014, 13:06

Why submit your images for 20 cent in the first place.

Times change.   For the most part images submitted back then were much lower quality than images submitted now.  Look at Yuri or Andresr's images from back then and look at their latest work, clearly their work has become better.  It's no wonder some people have decided to take another approach.

I would add to this that it took a while for me to understand how my images sold best. Sometimes I was moving in the same direction as micro, but lately it seems like we are moving in opposite directions. I think it's a fair criticism of micro that it hasn't necessarily grown properly with its contributors. I assume that is why you see people complaining about it.

if selling digital images is becoming more difficult the agencies will be forced to pay us less, not more !

--> supply vs demand.

Sites still have to attract their vendors, so it isn't that simple. If you can't sell high volumes with lower royalty rates, contributors may lose interest. People follow the money.

We can bash all we want here (not directed at your comment, but the discussions in general) but at the end of the day, unless someone innovates something that skews it more towards the shooter, we have to adapt or quit. I hoped (and still hope) that various  Symbiostock-based networks will someday turn into coop-style marketplaces, but only time will tell.

No offense taken. I've pretty much accepted the industry for what it is. I still try to make it better for myself, but I don't think much will change until something drastic happens. There really isn't an anti-Shutterstock to balance things out. I don't mean that as a knock against SS. I just mean if they are the high volume/low value micro king, then who is the low volume/high value king? Most of the nominees would probably be smaller sites like Stocksy, but there isn't really a consensus or threat to draw artists off SS.

I suppose a new player could fill that void or DT, CanStockPhoto, P5 or some other site could move into that role. But, I have my doubts that will happen either. Frankly, I think the biggest catalyst for change at this point would be if SS failed. And by failed, I mean that they stopped making enough money for artists (the pie cut too many times). That doesn't seem imminent either, so I'm strapped in for the long ride.

I don't get it. I never will. All photos are not equal and they never have been. Trad stock was about scarcity of product. Now anyone with a decent camera can produce a reasonably saleable picture in minutes and sell it basically to the world. How much should that be worth? The only niche these days is imagination and sometimes rarity of subjects.

My pictures are worth the 38 cents or whatever because I spent the appropriate amount of time/effort to justify that sale. If you truly think your photos are worth more, there are appropriate places to sell them for more.

Using words like "forced to" or "reluctantly" just make it possible for you to do what everyone else is doing yet still hold your high ground about how this is terrible and you told us so, etc, etc. Don't like it? Find a new job and stop your crying about it. Or better yet, innovate and do something others haven't done yet. This industry is dying for something new to come along.

You can do all that, but the competition won't go away. There will still be a mob of people and sites out there undercutting you. You can't really fix that.

But it's also interesting that a lot of people on here are constantly reporting BMEs at SS. Obviously, that will normally be the case for newbies, for a certain amount of time, but some aren't newbies.

I think I said this in another thread that it sometimes sounds like people are describing some alien world when they describe their earnings.

Yeah, my load times are really bad too. I really need to address it because my site isn't too functional as is.

I guess I should start working on my time machine then so I can undo the last four years... or maybe I'll just continue on. 

My sales have continued to dip, but I don't subscribe to these conspiracy theories. I've always just assumed that SS changes their algorithms because they have so many images that they need to shuffle the deck occasionally to get new results.

Best month of the year, but that isn't saying much.

Other than Canstock, it's hard to tell where the sales come from.