Last Friday

Beat me by $2.00
Nice extra income.

Quote from: UPLOAD-UPLOAD-UPLOAD on October 21, 2022, 10:54

Think about it. You are competing with thousands of images in any category you chose to submit.
Good luck

Wow, amazing, I never thought about it in over 10 years of selling images. I have to thank you for your infinite wisdom I guess   

I don't recall sending my post to you. I'm glad it does not apply to you.
Why are you afraid to post the link to your port.
In fact, why are almost all users of this group afraid to post the link to your ports?
I'm sure all of us could learn from that.

Personally, I am annoyed about the discussion of the technical quality of images anyway. What do buyers expect for the pennies they pay?

I think it's a huge mistake to worry about this as a contributor. If shutterstock doesn't want the images, then just sell them somewhere else - for more money.

I have to agree wholeheartedly with this post.
I have uploaded to SS, DT and AS quite a few images I took with my Apple 11 phone. They get accepted and they sell.
I now use the Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max with excellent results.
No, the phones will never replace professional grade cameras but they are excellent for stock.
Phones make the best cameras because they are always with you.
In today's environment good phone cameras make perfect sense and totally replace those not so cheap DX cameras. Why buy a Nikon Z30 for instance when your phone can already to the same job and probably better?
Of course opinions vary and this is my view.
So now I shoot with the Z9, Z7 II and the Apple Iphone. I think the other brands of phones and cameras are just as good but I'm used to Apple and Nikon.

I no longer use Wirestock. I recently submitted about 100 images with 90 of them rejected for "Poor aesthetic quality: Image aesthetics don't meet our requirements and the image cannot be accepted."
Well, poo, poo and stink on you. These images were accepted by the stock agencies I mentioned before.

The way I judge agencies is in how easy they are to work with.
Shuttertock ranks tops with me because they have the best seller support of all.
The best and about 90% of my sales are from SS.
A lot of people in this group have been really stupid, stupid for deleting their ports on SS.
If you think you are hurting SS because they gave you a bit of butt hurt then you are stupid!
SS does not even know you are gone and other people are making money that you could be making.

But to each his or her own, do as you have to do for yourself and ignore opinions that don't make sense.
The thing about Wirestock is why should I pay someone to sell my pictures when other stock agencies sell more for more?
Do as you have to do, and good luck to you.
If you don't like my opinions then block me. I don't care.

This is a really excellent post.
Keywording is key.
One thing I always do is look at the pictures my competitors (all of shutterstock) post and how they got the top position. Then I look at the ports of the top contributors and see what they do.
Not copy cat, not posting likes as some idiots claim I do, but posting stock photos.
It's a rough and tough game but I love it.
I'm sorry SS no longer shows the keywords and only shows the title. The title is super, super important but so are the key words.
Thanks!

Quote from: UPLOAD-UPLOAD-UPLOAD on September 10, 2022, 15:53

Why don't people show the links to their ports?

This is a super super competitive business.
If you find a new subject, a new style, a new image source, or something else that sell well in any way...
It's quite obvious that no one want to reveal his way and share a portfolio, no surprise at all.
By the way, in general, it's very easy to search for most sold images, just do very large search on any agencies database and you will have a clear landscape of subjects, theme, styles

Well, looking at my port unless you are a real stock expert you can't tell the winners from the stinkers.
Even Shutterstock's rating is really goofy. I have images rated as high usage but are actually disappointing. My image of the two starships down in Boca Chica is a good example.
Very little competition and also very little interest. It's a static image - no smoke and fire
It's rated by SS as high usage, a super star. The image has been in my port for a year now, has been downloaded 38 times and I've made $20.25.
I don't think anyone is going to run down to Boca Chica to get some shots for that kind of money.
A person seeing the high usage and super star rating might think this is a gold mine.
Far from it. I'm not complaining about Shutterstock. I actually love that agency but their current love affair with AI does create some irritation at times.
$20.25 for a year comes to about $1.68 a month. Not all that great.
I'm not complaining, I'm just pointing out that looking at my port you can't really tell where the real money comes from.
Beginners can look at my port and get an idea of what to upload. Maybe.
Posting pictures of your rejections can be helpful to the person that posted it and to a lot of people that look at it.
I'm going to upload a bunch of pictures this week, if I get any rejections I'll post some.
I don't get a lot of them. I'm a lot more careful with focus, noise and composition then I was even a year ago. I don't do a lot of action shots and I stopped crawling around in swamps to get a good shot of a gator. I don't do that anymore.
Getting back to subjects. Before I go shoot a subject if I'm not familiar with it I search on Shutterstock to see how many uploads there are. Usually you end up seeing anywhere from 100,000 to a few million uploads. Even if someone copies your work the impact would be minimal. There are just too many images with the agencies. That's why you get a dime a lot of times. The numbers are so overwhelming that it's really hard to stand out. So I don't worry about copy cats. I treat stock as a commercial enterprise dealing in commodities.
Do a search on "woman walking a dog" and you get about 114,000 hits. Kinda low actually. I might have my wive walk our dog so I can make some pictures. Better yet, "man walking a dog" only has 79,100 hits.
Hell, I'm going to have my wife photograph me. These are good, under used subjects.
So anyway, you get the idea.
This forum, like all forums is full of whiners and complainers. That's one reason you don't see me much on forums. I  like positive, upbeat posts, not a bunch of crying and I stay busy taking pictures and uploading or researching. I get no information from whiners and criers. So I'm not a frequent poster.
Cheers

If you are not doing stock, why are you here?

What are you trying to accomplish, Joe? Do you really think that people here post masses of images that sell well, so that other contributors then copy these images? I think that will not work.

I'm trying to encourage more useful and positive conversations.
BTW, I have always liked and admired your port. I like the clean lines of your
architecture shots.
That being said, I have no idea how many of your images sell and for how much.
Your port is just one of thousands that is really excellent and I'm sure you get a nice income from it.
Still, that does not mean I want to copy your images.
There is a huge difference between inspiration and copy.
Looking at my port people have no idea what sells and what does not sell.
I'm not afraid of copy cats because I don't disclose what images sell and which don't.
Yeah, I do talk about sellers and losers on general terms and sometimes I get specific, like
with the case of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. No way anyone can copy that work because it's history.
People should go out and photograph controversial people. Those pictures sell.
Don't bother with politicians that are never in the news. Nobody cares.
Thanks for sharing your port.

Here is my take on Shutterstock
Yes, they can be irritating at times
BUT Shutterstock has the best contributor support of any agency
Model releases are easy to do
Uploads are a breeze
Sales, despite what people constantly whine about are great
Shutterstock is the greatest stock agency in existence. Absolutely!

Whining about rejections does no good.
I look at the rejections I get very closely to see what the cause was and then try to not repeat the mistake.
Focus and Noise
Yup, those are the two most common of all rejections
I shoot in RAW and run all of my images thru DxO Pure Raw
I don't get rejections for noise much anymore
Focus I shoot with the Nikon Z7 II and the Z9 and have very little rejected for focus
Shooting for stock is not art it's commerce so a lot of creative really fine images get rejected or don't sell.
My best sales performing images are
Alexandria Ocasio- Cortez - She is mostly 10C stuff but a lot of them. I have 74 pictures of her and they sell all the time. Been doing this since July 2019 with no let up.
Hawks in flight are great subjects
News items like my border fences shots are constant sellers
Fad shots are great, baby food shortage, Aunt Jemima, Sriracha shortage, things like that.
I sell a lot of junk images of items in stores. They are dime bait but they sell all the time.
That's why I'm going to buy the new Iphone 14 with improved cameras. You can take pictures with smart phones and never draw any attention. Great stuff!
That's it for now. I don't post much because I'm way too busy shooting pictures and doing searches.
I do a lot of searches on Shutterstock, I constantly look at the best sellers list on Adobe.
When I upload images I look for what other people have done and if I can do better.
https://www.dreamstime.com/blog/stock-photos-sell-best-55713

making some graphic  image changing flag to show different country, they keep refusing all but one for similar content....unbielevable,...they accept crap over crap then refuse there images with great potential....they don't have a clue what they are aiming at...

looks this guy portfolio i spotted in ss forum...te guy who claims one ann expert uploading more crap and crap to reach 10000

https://www.shutterstock.com/da/g/Grossinger?sort=newest

People like you who are totally in love with your self and feed on posting crap about other people are just too common on every forum.
First of all, since you posted the link (Thank you) to my forum I think you are obligated to also post your link, just so I can admire your port and maybe even comment on it.


this is an offense to me and author who spend time....people talk about past times, well in past times no even a single files of this 10000 bull...it would have minimally accepted....and they refuse files for similar content because idiot ai spot similar pixel but not the general meaning of a photo...i hope they go bankrupt int a bunch of year..

Yep, right now they are really slow with images and video.
Not as slow as Wirestock tho. Those people set the record for slow.

Quote

free money

even if you work for 0/hour there are costs for internet electricity equipment
insurance for copyright infringements etc, just to name a few
its your money that gets tossed

i strongly advise you a business consultant!

Well maybe. As long as it's not you.
The internet cost is there regardless because like most Americans I have the net regardless of stock agencies or not.
Equipment costs? I had my cameras way before I started doing stock.
So any money earned is FREE money. I would be taking the pictures anyway.

And, Joe - natural gas is a fossil fuel composed mainly of methane. It just seems to be a waste of time and money converting to natural gas, when it still presents a problem.

Natural gas is a clean burning very low polluting energy source. It's so clean you can burn it in your home without having an exhaust.
This fuel will have to see us until nuclear or fusion become options. Fusion is the ideal but every 30 years it's only 30 years from becoming reality.
https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/us-energy-facts/

https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/natural-gas/natural-gas-and-the-environment.php

Regarding solar and wind energy, America is building that infrastructure very rapidly.
They all come with their problems. Solar panels are resource hogs and especially when combined with batteries.
We are replacing the old coal fired plants with natural gas, solar, wind and geothermal energy.
Yes, it all takes time. About 30 years to replace all coal fired plants. However, unlike Germany, Australia and a lot of other places
we are not building anymore coal plants. I don't want to pick on Germany just because Mutti Merckerl screwed up Germany's energy
plan. Nobody is perfect. I like to pick on the EU because they do a lot of bragging but little in the way of making progress.

Nuclear power comes with a crap load of problems, so for the next 30 or so years natural gas is the king of energy.
Let's not forget carbon sequestration. New technologies are in the labs in universities all over America.
Turning CO2 into gasoline is a great way to go if we can get the costs down.
https://news.stanford.edu/2022/02/09/turning-carbon-dioxide-gasoline-efficiently/
I think it's silly to play the blame game because every nation is different and has different infrastructure and needs.
The title of this thread is also stupid. As if the Republicans actually have a plan to keep the economy humming with no inflation.
It's all stupid talk.
Texas and California are bigger than the entire EU in both land mass and especially in GDP.
So yeah, we have to burn a whole lot more fuel to run our economies.
Massachusetts and California are the technology powerhouses of the world.
Actually Massachusetts is the technology leader, but California has the largest tech corporations.
Texas, a Republican state lags way behind in technology. Way behind Democrat controlled Massachusetts and California.
So all that talk is really nonsense. The corporations and not the politicians control most of the power and produce all of the innovation.

Joe,

And unfortunately, as you yourself have written, we are still waiting in vain for a breakthrough in nuclear fusion and other new technological advances.


Here ist the truth:
Perhaps the greatest stupidity of mankind - to give an allegorical example - is that it still thinks it can drive a V12 pickup truck with over 700 hp, weighing 2.5 tons and consuming over 20 liters per 100 km, to the bakery 500 meters away to get bread rolls.

Hahahahaha! I like that pickup truck. Have not seen one like this but it sounds like fun.
Germany has a massive problem producing electricity. That is why they are powering up coal powered plants.
The other problem is fuel. Fuel for cars and trucks is not that much of the equation. Fuel use for cargo ships is enormous.
About 60,000 gallons of marine fuel per day! Add in the airplanes and the military use and pretty soon you are talking big numbers.
Yeah, a lot of people all over the world are stupid crazy in their use of automobiles and trucks. But that is a tiny number compared to the industrial uses.
I myself right now drive a GMC Terrain. I get about 20 mpg give or take. I'm waiting for my new Ford Transit Connect cargo van so I can travel more and camp out. Because it's 10 years newer than my Terrain it does get slightly better mileage. About 24 mpg in city.
I have waited on that van for 6 months now and have only 6 more months to go. World wide chip shortage they tell me.
The blame game won't solve anything. Wishing won't solve anything. The truth is we are about 30 years from converting from current
energy production into carbon free energy production. There is nothing politicians, activists or loony tunes can do to speed this up.
Most of the goodies like converting CO2 into gasoline or other fuels is decades away. Most methods in the lab don't make it into reality because of cost or whatever. Those that do are decades from lab to mass production.
America is doing a super job in the green energy field. We have different states like California and Texas who have a totally different approach to name just a few. Once something becomes profitable to do you can bet the evil energy companies will jump on it.
For now the entire planet is on a fossil fuel diet because fossil fuels are cheap.
Me? I'm not going to worry about it. I'm 77 years old, so I'm not buying solar panels for my house. I will never get the money back.
I have 4 air conditioners in my home. Sometimes I use all four on full turbo blast. This week temperatures have been in triple digits every day. BUT the electricity I use comes from a nuclear power plant with natural gas plants to kick in when electric use spikes.
Coal fired plants in America are being converted to natural gas. It's a slow process. People seem to think a politician can just snap his or her fingers and cure the problem. Good luck with that.