As I said previously, at this time I have absolutely no doubt that the earnings are controlled. I'll exemplify what I said earlier which happened to me recently. Numbers are completely fictitious and used to exemplify what happened.

	Mon	Tue	Wed	Thu	Fri
Week 1:		75			70
Week 2:	70	75	80	61	50
Week 3:	70	75	80	60	50
Week 4:	70				70
Week 5:					70

Are those sales pattern are a product of coincidence? Yeah... right... Not even with anyone selling 5 to 10 images per day that would be normal, much less when we're talking of a larger sales volume.

I've also noticed what others said, and happened to me for many months now. Like having very low sales half the month and all of the sudden buyers discover my portfolio. And this is not just on SS but on DT and 123RF is pretty evident too. Or sales drying up after a large SO or even EL sale.

I believe SS uses different methods to control the exposure/income of the contributors, not just one. And rotates the methods. Honestly, I would do the same in their position and in terms of programing it's not even that hard.

I think some people wouldn't believe in this even if Jon Oringer said it on video. They would probably argue that it was a doppelganger...

Quote from: MicroVet on June 11, 2019, 04:59

And it does not matter if they are single, double, triple or whatever.

Oh, it doesn't? Well, that tells me everything I need to know... (hint, it matters one heck of a lot).

Quote from: MicroVet on June 11, 2019, 04:59

Comparing the needs of tenths of thousands buyers across the world with the need of a single person regarding supermarket needs is non-sense.

Not at all. And if you read the post the habits of one person (but maybe instead of milk, the next likes tomatoes) stretches out to the entire population, which is why a store doesn't sell 1,000 cartons one week, and 23 the next.

And they always, every week, sell more candy on Saturdays than on Mondays. Coincidence?

Listen, I'm on the Microstock, Mid and Macrostock business for almost 15 years and have a portfolio just under 20.000 images across several agencies. I've told you that my sales are NOT single digits and I live solely from Stock income.

I have a lot of images on the first page of competitive themes, and I've been featured on SS lightboxes a lot of times.

I'm not someone with 100 mediocre images that produce 100 more, doubling the portfolio which impacts clearly the earnings and with luck strikes one good image creating continuous BME's (I've been there). Contributors earning 0,25c and being promoted by SS to avoid paying 0,38c to older members earning them more money.

Your supermarket comparison is non-sense from the point of view of a contributor.

I just told you that my sales from the several Mondays were very different in terms of themes each week. From your logic they should be somewhat the same in terms of themes. After all people always buy the same amount of milk and eggs each week, right? They are not buying the sames images to me except the ones that are best sellers. Not only in terms of themes but varied greatly in terms of subscriptions vs OS and SO.

You cannot say that having the same number of sales on a weekday for several weeks is normal. Even more when that happens to whole weeks for several weeks! You just can't!

And they claim sales aren't fixed ~ yeah right 

This happened to me recently in a period of 3 or 4 weeks. Can someone explain?

- Three consecutive Mondays with the exact same number of sales.

- Followed by three consecutive Tuesdays with the exact same of downloads.

- And two similar and consecutive Wednesdays.

- And two Thursdays with the difference of a single download. But the following two Fridays were equal but higher.

- And two consecutive Fridays with same number of downloads. But the previous Friday was equal to the following two Fridays. Which means that in five weeks I could count two variations of daily downloads. So I can add a new pattern here.

- The weekend was more irregular but always is.

Could this be a coincidence? Really?

So, in this period I can say that the number of downloads I had were the number of downloads I was allowed to have. If I want to be positive I may say that this allowed me to have those sales, otherwise I could have less.

I understand that we may have roughly the same downloads per week based on our portfolio. But that number being achieved by having consecutive weeks almost xeroxed days from the previous week?

One thing no one can convince me at this time. That the downloads we have are not controlled by Shutterstock.

My 20 year old car not giving me mechanic expenses.

How often have we read here people saying that although prices are higher on Alamy, they make more on Micro, so that's where they're putting their efforts. I have rejoined that camp, with reluctance, but with an eye on the bottom line. And micros are squeezing Alamy, as they have made the expectation of super low prices, so Alamy's rpd is falling, without any rise in sales volume (OK, that  statement is only based on the small number who report on their forums. And for sure, the $$$ earned from Live News is much higher, but that's not 'stock' as most of us know it.

Last year on alamy I had a 60% increase in the number of images licensed compared to 2017. It was my best year in terms of sales since 2012.

Yet, the average sale value (net) dropped 25% compared to 2017. I still ended earning a bit more in 2018 than on 2017 because of the large amount in the number of sales but nothing exciting.

The average sale (net) in 2018 is about 10% of what it used to be in 2008.

Quote

Our editorial content is sourced through outside agencies at this time.

Still a newbie but i beleive that eng editorial sublects (from reuters and similar) as migrant crisis, politics, environmental issues, sports etc are a whole totally diferent world than stock editorials on local markets, walks, landmarks, whatever from around the world is classified as editorial but actually have no "news"worthy value.

Exactly. There are a lot of places, like travel destinations or even shops or product brands, which have a lot of value in stock photography but do not classify as news worthy.

Not news but still editorial, not only because they include elements that are not released and cannot be Commercial, but even because they are essentially sought by the editorial press like magazines or newspapers, and not by advertisers.

As an example, I have a photo of a name of a Bank on a building which has been involved in an ongoing scandal for years now. It's far from my best seller but it regularly sells. Why? Because economy and financial sections of newspapers and magazines need images to illustrate an article about that bank.

When it comes to travel places and tourist destinations, then the sales multiply incomparably. I believe I could almost double my income on Adobe with the acceptance of my editorial portfolio. In fact, I believe it's the reason why I still sell about half of what Shutterstock gives me.

Where the h3II do I find latest download, for example.

This is my preferred view when I go to the site. On a daily basis I want to see my latest sales, and on occasion other type of statistics.

Because of the change I have returned to the Fotolia site despite the abusive imposition of a new login on every visit, despite the change is still months away.

As others have mentioned, the Adobe site is terrible. Really confusing to navigate and unappealing. The Fotolia site is superior by far.

This is just f*cking unbelievable. Started with 65% and now I'll receive 40%.

We've paid for the NY office which is established for years with a commission cut, and after all this time we did not see our commission restored to what was before. And now this.

This year, the sales have been up about 7% compared to 2017, but the average commission I've earned (net) has fallen about 25%, which in the end makes for an insignificant raise in the total amount I've earned for the year. With the cut to 40%, even if I sell even more I'll be earning even less!

There's a huge problem with alamy which is, they are lowering the prices and cutting commissions but they do not have the volume other micro agencies have. And when that happens, the road for failure is paved as we have seen countless times in the past decade with other agencies.

And what will happen to the distribution sales? The distributor gets 40% and alamy and us 30% each? Will there be a cut there also?

I'm extremely disappointed with alamy. I can honestly say that with this move I've placed them on par with the micro agencies in terms of support. No more defense from me for alamy in any discussion. They've become like the rest.

Quote from: DallasP on November 01, 2018, 20:41

I changed it anyway ... because it was an old password but, bruteforce targeting of user accounts isn't a "hack" so there very well could be some attempts ... but, it'd take years for them to even make a dent.

They could over a long period of time take a bit here and there!  nobody would notice or be alarmed and it could go on for years!........when you write to support to check your account all you get back is the same waffle " we're constanly improving our Tech department and so on"

Again, how can someone take a bit of the contributor income to be unnoticed on SS if they do not pay on request, but monthly, automatically, with all the value that is payable and to all contributors?

Any hack would take all or nothing and surely be noticed. Especially by those having a payment every month, which I'm sure are going to SS daily and would note immediately any problem with a password hack.

Someone comes here and announces a possible hack, without any evidence or references and no indication from SS that this is happening, and people start changing the passwords?

Imagine if the hack is real but it's not targeting the current password because they cannot do it, and instead are targeting the new password when people change it because they have found a way to do it?

Or trying to cause some panic to overload SS systems and take advantage of some weakness created then?

So, if I make any type of alarmist announcement will you follow it just because Leaf confirmed my contact, but not my information? This is all very strange.

May I remind you that we are talking about an innocent piece of clothing.

This is the basic reason why you fail to understand all that follows.

That "innocent piece of clothing" is a strong religious symbol dictated by the religious norms, not the latest fashion trend adopted by some women for a season or two. So much that in many countries women failing to use it (in any of its different forms) are punished by law. So much for an innocent piece of clothing, right?

Plus, in many of the countries where the use is not enforced by law there's a strong criticism and pressure from society against those women that do not use it. How much of that criticism do you think becomes harassment or discrimination?

I remember in my own country when women started to use mini-skirts, trousers, going to pastry shops (cafes and pubs were unthinkable to women) what they were called. "Whore" was one of the nicest things...

There was a huge pressure for women not to dress like that. But since the everyday clothing did not have any religious imposition it was possible for the brave ones, with the support or tolerance of their fathers, boyfriends or husbands, to go through and path the way to other women initially more shy. Today, no one cares about it.

But society and peer pressure plays a huge role limiting that free will. When religions gets in the way then things get ugly.

In my country many women still use the scarf, especially in the interior. As far as I know they are not imposing it or criticizing those who not wear them anymore.

I am also talking about free will and you give me examples of mutilation and child abuse, having nothing to do with it. Do you actually think that the concept of free will can be extrapolated to babies, when you give such examples?

I'm not talking about babies. The examples I have given refer to adolescents. They understand what is happening and consent it (the way an adolescent is able to, anyway), but were brought to believe that that's the correct way to do things. Many times led to believe that the people not doing it are wrong and they are better.

Plus, you're being shortsighted because you are ignoring that it's the education they receive as children that will form their adult personalities. And the continuing of unacceptable traditions.

So you might be subject of many Stockholm syndromes yourself, when you side with such oppressive lawmakers, who made you believe that oppressive laws are good for you. Have ever thought about it?

I have full conscience that I'm a product of my society and education. Having that conscience I regularly question many things since and don't accept blindly what people want to stick down my throat. I also used unacceptable haircuts and clothing (punk with mohawk) and know very well . I went through the public condemnation the peer pressure process. So I know what I'm talking about. Now I see kids with mohawks imitating footballers.

Yet, I know I continue to be a product of my society. Maybe a bit misfit, but still...

I told you the origins of the veil and burka. In many places, like Eastern Europe, this tradition evolved into the scarf. Even today, in some of these places, women consider impolite to show their hair in public and wear the scarf, all the time. Are all these women also affected by the Stockholm syndrome?
Far from that, I would say. It is a tradition and you must respect that. Nobody is forcing them to do it, not their husbands and not any law. It is their choice, their free will. The same thing is valid for many middle eastern women who chose to wear the veil, because it is their tradition and they like it.

There's a difference between a tradition and religious imposition, many time punished by law as I mentioned. The Burka and it's less invasive variation belong to the latest kind.

How hard is to understand that?

That is a question you should ask yourself.

I guarantee there is more than one man on this site that makes those types of comments, or has that mentality regarding women. Yes, most here are respectful, men and women alike...some are not.

Unless you're telling me that the vast majority of men on this forum disrespect women continuously, and that attitude is tolerated by the owner and moderators, I will not accept that some women in this forum classify all men as abusers or imply that there is a women intolerant environment to the point that a women specific section is needed!

Just grow up, thicken your skin and fight those who disrespect you. That's how conquests have been made in the past. In fact, that's how you even got the right to be in this forum and express your voice freely, instead of being locked up in a house tending to your man needs. Not by creating women only clubs and forums.

And I'm absolutely sure that you will not be surprised that many men will take your side, which is also one of the major reasons women conquered more freedom in the past 100 years than in the thousands of years before. Because many men sided with women and agreed with their reasons.

"Me too."
Maybe we need a women's only section of this forum. Guys seriously this is insulting to all of us.

I shiver every time I read a comment like this. Step by step women get closer to using Burkhas, and worse of all, willingly. You should fight to be a recognized and valuable participant of the society, to be present in all areas, and not to be removed from it and much less by voluntary action.

Plus, your comment accused and condemned ALL the men in this forum as offenders because ONE made a comment that it's disrespectful to women.
 
The fact that most men understand, or at least start to understand that some things are disrespectful to women and should not be said, breaking thousands of years of culture and tradition to acknowledge women as equals, doesn't seem to hold any value to you.

I don't know what it's worse, the crude comment from one man, or your crude stereotyping of men and apartheid mentality. Maybe we should start having water fountains and park benches for women only.

Here's a thought, just push men to the back of the bus and reserve the front to women. That way you won't have man staring at you as you pass and it's safe since ALL men are abusers.

Unbelievable!