MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - tpack

Pages: [1] 2 3
Adobe Stock / Re: Opting in for electronic 1099
« on: December 24, 2020, 20:54 »
Really bad business practice. Tech company like Adobe could do better than just use a third party to send emails to their contributors with a link that redirects to unknown party website which requires personal sensitive information...Hey Adobe, have you heard of API?

Until it is done properly, Ill let Adobe pay for mailing me 1099-Misc

Adobe Stock / Re: Opting in for electronic 1099
« on: December 24, 2020, 13:02 »
That email to me looks like a typical phishing email since it redirects to a third party website. I simply deleted it.

General Stock Discussion / Re: Need opinion for computer update
« on: October 28, 2020, 23:11 »
Take a closer look at refurbished (like new) iMacs. It saves money without compromising quality. You may even afford 5K retina 27inch iMac. I have been buying refurbished Apple products for years with any problems.

Here is one example https://www.apple.com/shop/product/GMVTCLL/A/Refurbished-27-inch-iMac-37GHz-6-core-Intel-Core-i5-with-Retina-5K-display?fnode=

Easy to upgrade RAM later for 1/2 price.

Newbie Discussion / Re: How is PressFoto ?
« on: October 28, 2020, 23:03 »
No one in their right mind would use Russian agency for their portfolio.

Over $800 on Shutterstock.

Welcome back to another detailed monthly report during these increasingly strange and desperate times! August proved to be a terrible month but can be somewhat forgiven for traditionally being a holiday month, as well as everything else thats going on.

Let's see how I did in September...


Alex, Re Alamy. I vaguely remember you outsourced keywording to a third party. Could that be the reason for poor performance of your portfolio?

Shutterstock.com / Re: We are having some impact
« on: July 20, 2020, 22:35 »
On a slightly hilarious note I see stockphotofan1 is still banging the drum for his paymasters  ;D


I never even knew about this guy, followed the link to Twitter out of curiosity only to find out he/she had blocked me  ::)

Shutterstock.com / Re: Why not accepting the 10 cent sales?
« on: July 05, 2020, 10:59 »
So far I am better off with the new price structure of SS, in spite of many 10 to 17 cent sales.

Why should I boycot SS or even close my account? Why not accepting the 10 cent sales? I do, and I dont care what will happen next year, because nobody can forsee the future.

Stan Pavlovsky, is that you?

Pull out completely from the Facebook platform and move to a self-hosted platform like forum on your own website.

I wont be surprised if FB scans group discussions and shares relevant information with their major advertisers and then gags articles related to #boycottshutterstock as a result of that.

sold 64 videos yesterday for 84 cents each under 'clip packs'

Congratulations on your journey...all the way to the bottom. Thats why many of us disabled our video portfolios and moved to Pond5 as exclusive contributors. I suggest that you do the same, #BoycottShutterstock #DontFeedTheGreed

Its time to quit Facebook too

« on: June 19, 2020, 09:08 »
To sue you would have to show damages. SS gave you fair warning they were dropping payment to you the seller . Yes they drooped payment to almost zero. No one forced you to stay and get almost no money. I see no damages. I do see a company that is bad...but no damages.

No damages? I'm unsure about the outcome of or basis for a class action, but damages are the easiest thing to show...your income decreased with the new royalty scheme, and if you didn't like it your only choice was to leave and make no money, which damaged your income even further.

How do you document decreased income with the new royalty scheme when many of us disabled our portfolios?

The "stock coalition" would be better served by fleshing out their website, listing goals, members, etc.  Because it comes across as "some guy made bought a domain and is pretending to speak for everyone".  That it has "joined the call"  comes off as somewhat meaningless.


Shutterstock.com / Re: Boycott Shutterstock
« on: June 15, 2020, 09:33 »

Would be a good time to start RussianStock. With rents and salaries below the NY rates, the new Russia-based stock company could afford to raise artist commissions and be still quite profitable.

Another brash Russian-government-run agency like RT and Sputnik? Thanks, but no thanks.

I really don't understand this attitude.

I'm a fellow SS contributor who's also affected by this cut of royalty, but i still fail to see how SS is responsible for the current economic hardships of that alleged single mother or anyone else here. SS is a business not a charity. We are not employees, we are just contracted freelancers, and SS as an organization has zero responsibility towards us. They never made any promises and you are free to terminate your contract any time. The only reason you don't is because the rest of the agencies are just as crap or worse. A few agencies who are committed to fair trade, like pond5 or alamy, don't sell sh*, so it doesn't matter that they give you 40 to 60% of nothing. SS remained the only big one that actually sells and now it's gone too. I don't count istock/getty. The business landscape keeps shifting.

Let's face it: creating stock is a skill of very little added value, at least according to the market. No one cares how long it took you to learn photography and how much you spent on gear. Photography is extremely hard to sell even outside stock, otherwise we wouldn't bother selling for 20 cents a pop. As for me, i just stopped uploading and don't care any more.

It's not SS management's mistake that the single mother failed to obtain more marketable skills. We are all free to move on. Why would you rely on a single source of income, especially if it's known to be very unreliable?

Stan Pavlovsky ... is that you?

I deactivated my video portfolio on June 1 and am watching my photo sales closely...

SSTK....That is the Stock Symbol for SS. What I am going to say no one is going to like but this is one way to make some of your money back from SS. I really can't figure out how much money I am going to lose from my photos at SS but it is quite significant. My 38 cents sells are now 10-17 cents each. My 2.85 sells are now 87 cents. So it looks like I will lose somewhere in 60-75 % of my sells /dollars from last year. If my math is even close to correct SS (SSTK) Wall Street stock will have a huge increase in profits(60-75%) . Which means their Wall Street stock will go up , a lot. Buy their stock SSTK now and sell it when it goes up. It will go up most likely. No this is not what anyone here on microstock group wants to hear but this is one way of getting some of your losses back. I really see no other way. If you stay on SS with your photos you will lose money, if you close your account you will lose money. Yes this is a creepy/sorry way to get your money back but I see no other way if you want your money back. Money is not everthing and yes I know dignity is important but neather of these items buys you food or photo equipment. i am guessing this post will get some haters.

Personally, Im not convinced that SSTK will outperform ADBE or even basic stock indexes like S&P500. You will be better off investing elsewhere.

Curious to know what people are getting paid for on demand sales.
Yesterday I got two, $2.75 and $3.28. I am level 4.
I was not expecting that much to be honest, but apart from that it is a disaster...

Level 4 here too. Got few $2.94 on demand sales.

Alamy.com / Re: Very little sales
« on: June 02, 2020, 12:23 »
Alamy sales are very unpredictable. My sales in April ca $200 while barely made $40 in May. Overall, Im quite pleased with Alamy, top 3 or 4 agency, in my opinion.

Shutterstock.com / Re: Shutterstock just became iStock 2.0
« on: June 02, 2020, 11:05 »
0.10 here too.


If you type Shitterstock.com in your browser it takes you directly to the Pavlovsky Agency. Domain registered in 2006

They must have changed it. I just typed it in, and it went to shutterstock.

The Pavlovsky Agency aka Shutterstock

Shutterstock.com / Re: Shutterstock just became iStock 2.0
« on: June 02, 2020, 10:11 »
0.10 here too.


If you type Shitterstock.com in your browser it takes you directly to the Pavlovsky Agency. Domain registered in 2006

General Stock Discussion / Re: Pond5 exclusively
« on: June 01, 2020, 18:55 »
I also contacted Pond5 support and asked whether I may leave my video files currently with Adobe if I sign up as an exclusive contributor. Ryans (Pond5) answer was loud and clear:

Thanks for writing in. No, you may not have the same videos on Adobe and Pond5 exclusive. If you are exclusive to Pond5, that means that the videos can only be offered on Pond5, or through Pond5 to our partners via the Global Partner Program (GPP).

Shutterstock.com / Re: Shutterstock just became iStock 2.0
« on: June 01, 2020, 15:42 »
From now, on my social media channels, I will be referring to SS as the Pavlovsky agency aka Shutterstock I hope others will join me.

I suggest this brief edit, based on inspiration from our friend Trabuco:

 the Pavlovsky agency aka Shitterstock

Shitterstock it is

$0.14 and $0.87 over here, both listed as Single & Other ... (Level 4 / 30%)

Shutterstock.com / Re: June so far
« on: June 01, 2020, 09:25 »
When people switch off their ports SS seems also to completely delete assets from their portfolio manager. I switched off my video port and noticed through the day (yesterday) items being deleted from my video portfolio...until zero left in my video portfolio

No they are still on the servers if you turn on sales they will come back over 72 hours

Good to know

Pages: [1] 2 3


Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results