|
MicrostockGroup Sponsors
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 - alan b traehern
101
« on: December 31, 2021, 06:15 »
102
« on: December 31, 2021, 06:11 »
SVH some of what you write is not true, but for keywords anybody who doesn't do their own is going to get what you write, pretty bad. I don't know why anybody would send images to Wirestock without keywords, that's just a bad plan, and we all know that. If somebody is being lazy, keyword before upload or get bad keywords.
Photos do take a long time to be reviewed. I have accepted status on some for Alamy, Adobe, SS and DT, maybe because I have been there longer and have more then 70 images? No one cares who you are and most they don't go buy from your portfolio. I see when sales are made and they are listed by agency. Just look at last 7 days or last 30 days. Wirestock is a distributor answer not a sales answer. Pictures that don't sell anywhere, won't sell better at Wirestock.
If you want to get your work out to more agencies without doing the work or take time, then use Wirestock, but don't think anything will be different from uploading yourself. Wirestock is only a delivery system for your work, nothing more.
103
« on: December 28, 2021, 12:01 »
What I find surprising in this post is that some contributors
appear to have no problem allowing the SS to manipulate and
change the original agreement you had with the agency when
you first signed up with them.
I signed up with the SS in 2009. The signed agreement stated
that I would receive a minimum of $0.35us and I would start as a
Level 1 contributor. If I sold more than 10,000 images I would
move up to Level 2 and earn a minimum $0.38us per image, etc.
HD videos, at the time, started at a minimum $23us per clip and,
like images, increased when you achieved a certain amount of
sales.
There was nothing in that agreement that stated the SS could
lower commissions or do whatever they * well pleased. It may be
in your agreement if you signed up more recently but in my
original agreement there is nothing stating that the SS would lower
my commission or drop me back to Level 1 whenever they * well
pleased.
This was a binding agreement. Changing that agreement arbitrarily
is illegal and unethical.
My hopes that we would launch a Class Action lawsuit against the SS
will not happen based on this post. My apologies if I upset a few
contributors.
I've learned a lot in this particular post.
You're wrong the contract says, "Please note that Shutterstock reserves the right to modify these terms at any time in its sole discretion, it being understood that no changes shall apply to any pending arbitration proceeding commenced or legal claims asserted prior to such change. Shutterstock will notify you of any such change by an announcement on this page, your login page, and/or by other means to provide you the opportunity to review the modifications before they become effective. Modifications to these TOS will not apply retroactively. By continuing to make Content available through Shutterstock, you agree to be bound by all such changes. If you do not agree with any of the changes, please remove from Shutterstock, pursuant to the terms herein, all or that portion of your Content to which you do not wish the changes to apply."  Nobody started at 35c we all got 25c. There was nothing about selling 10,000 images, your memory is wrong and your facts are wrong. There's no class action suit except in your imagination. No agreement was ever binding forever contract. SS is underhanded and unethical but not illegal.
104
« on: December 22, 2021, 06:01 »
You are correct, some of the free sites are clearly linked to the agencies and they don't hide it but there are a others that "appear" to be stand alone free sites like Pexels.
I just think "free" is bad, stores have had sales since the beginning of time but not free, there is some really good free stuff out there and I can't sell my video clips if there's a reasonably good free clip out there that will do and especially in this economy?, people are loading up on the free stuff.
Wow.....I think we're missing something, reading that and the unsplash link there it makes me wonder how agencies like SSTK and Pond5 can even compete let alone us. I went looking on Pexels for some video content similar to what I have selling on pond5 and I should similar but better quality on pexels for free.
So now the question is for both editorial and commercial video and photos, how to WE compete with free and how is money made with FREE?,
Not even gonna try to figure out the contributors who give their work away for free to these sites, only think I can think of it they needed a massive loss for tax purposes before they went out of business.
Pexels pays nothing, but there is a donate button, every time someone downloads an image. I don't think I'd rely on donations or trust people to use my images properly. But there's your answer.
Top Ten List - maybe ask one of them? How much does someone make from 2 million views?
1 10.3M Views
Kasia Palitava (56 photos?)
2 3.59M Views
Цвета Тишины
3 3.08M Views
Yaroslava Borz
4 3.05M Views
Alexey Demidov
5 2.24M Views
Alex Kozlov
6 2.18M Views
Veronika Bykovich
7 1.98M Views
Daria Kruchkova
8 1.98M Views
Rizky Sabriansyah
9 1.92M Views
Svetlana🎞
10 1.91M Views
Nikita Igonkin
Unsplash the book and their story: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/mikaelcho/the-unsplash-book
Please learn to start your posts after the quote you make the forum look like disorganized crap.
105
« on: December 22, 2021, 06:00 »
The new compensation model allows contributors to receive a true percentage share from each download, rewarding content creators for producing quality work that is fresh, relevant and currently in demand by our customers.
This sums up SS...by the way, the port is full of stolen images.....
https://www.shutterstock.com/g/Rockkss
Have you reported it to SS or don't they care?
I did...3 years ago.....and they don't care.
I can see why any agency doesn't care, unless they are forced to care as in legislation or massive lawsuits it's more profit for them when the stolen goods are trafficked so real incentive for them plus it would cost them as they need staff to manually deal with it.
Please learn to start your posts after the quote you make the forum look like crap.
106
« on: December 22, 2021, 05:53 »
Legislation, which makes internet companies more responsible for the sale of stolen goods, will be introduced. Just like banks are now being held responsible for money laundering criminal money and receive high fines in the Netherlands.
Not sure if legislation like that will ever come about in Canada or the US but it might, it's interesting and sometimes well meaning legislation can have unintended consequences even for those playing by rules.
I think it was this year, a large adult content site, P--rnhub had to delete most of it's content and contributors had to prove it was their own content and 18+ actors in the content and real names and ID needed to be used in the application process, a lot of people lost their way of making a living overnight.....even those who were in compliance with the laws but now had to upload their ID to a "secure" server.......
So with stock video/photos, the legislation might require agencies to verify they content the are trafficking in is not stolen but that won't stop the free sites and the free stock YouTube channels.
Please learn to start your posts after the quote you make the forum look like crap.
107
« on: December 14, 2021, 14:46 »
Microstock has made me a better photographer, but the enjoyment is the real answer. Any money is a fringe benefit.
108
« on: December 03, 2021, 08:08 »
Kind of. It's not our reposibility for their bad corrupt business decisions, which servers only to those in the power and not their people.
I am not going to get deep into it here because it isnt something that I can convince anyone of with a few posts on a forum. I would recommend studying politics, history, economics and current events with regards to the relationship between what has been called the first and third world (I know the history of the terms and I am misapplying them but I am just speaking colloquially). Their situation is largely our responsibility and those leaders are there in many cases due to outside interests. Thats not to say we necessarily should be throwing money to NGOs/ charities with sometimes questionable motivations and efficacy, but it does give you some perspective.
No this is not our responsibility it's their own, and they need to stop reproducing with no control. Politics and history doesn't tell me that these people should live in poverty forever, in terrible conditions, because of your blaming outside interests. They need to govern and work from within and throwing money or food at them which will be stolen or traded, and never make it to the people who need it, is not the answer. These billionaires should send money to the artists who did the work.
109
« on: November 28, 2021, 15:19 »
Sometimes I think the pollution of the Shutterstock collection by removing the 7/10 admission criteria and accepting almost anything just to boost the collection size was a terrible anti-contributor move. Not secret or behind the scenes, but it really made it hard to maintain sales growth.
Jo Ann, I believe that's when I first began to sour on SS. Not sure what year they made that change, but I do know I'd already been there for several years when that major policy change kicked in.
It was a point of pride back then to pass the 7/10 test, especialy when one made it on the first pass, as I did with a submission of 10 bird images, all of which were accepted. That gave me (and others too, I'm sure) a real sense of value and bragging rights.
But then to watch them open the floodgates to any and all comers with all kinds of duplicates and low-quality crappola The pride of being a SS contributor fizzled, but there still were the frequent, high-value EL sales to soften the blow to the ego.
When those ELs went poof a few years later, the slippery slope began in earnest, ending (as we all know) 1.5 years ago. I left in disgust and never looked back.
But hey, Jon's a billionaire, so all's good! 
I find no pride in continuing with SS but I do for the money. You're right, ELs poof, duplicates and low-quality crappola policy changes lowered the standards.
110
« on: November 18, 2021, 07:26 »
I assume they want to show what a diverse contributor base they have and use that as a marketing strategy? Or something.
That's certainly their story, and they're sticking to it.
Marketing
111
« on: November 18, 2021, 07:24 »
Is there a market for drains at fall images ? 
Small market I suspect. I have some pictures. So far I have earned the most with this photo. 
Good work when they sell.
112
« on: November 18, 2021, 07:22 »
This petition is about protecting people, from reading it, it is about consumer rights for both the sellers and purchasers.
I can't see anything wrong in that.
Just looked them up, they are based in New York, another problem company from the US. These people like SS, Getty, simply don't care about anything other than personal wealth.
American companies are far worse than European, just look at them all with there capricious greed, over here in the UK, US companies, especially Private Equity ones are renowned for asset stripping our companies and loading them with debt, this is not just in cash terms, but transferring our technology.
After they own the companies for a few years, they sell them on, just leaving a smouldering wreck, loaded with debt after nicking the pension fund as well.
Terrible people in the American Capitalist System, that seems to have turned in to a monster for many countries in the world, is not a force for good, it needs to be regulated to work fairly, and that is what the petition is about.
I'm surprised they didn't start the petition with 'Great News'.
This petition is not about protecting anyone except Etsy. If you hate the American Capitolists so much, don't work for them. You like having your work stolen and resold when Etsy does nothing, you'll be happy as a poor socialist giving away your images for free, you are also happy staying poor on the dole.
113
« on: October 26, 2021, 20:03 »
I'm pitching my tent here where they can't get me.
There goes the neighborhood.
114
« on: September 19, 2021, 07:50 »
I thought people were deleting accounts rather than creating new ones. 
Exactly. And lots of threads here about SS. Guess everybody reactivated their accounts. 
Or never deleted our account because we make money from SS.
115
« on: September 19, 2021, 07:47 »
For real?
I would have appreciated honest communication and prompt action.
By the way, Sue, I did open a forum account to bring this matter to the attention of management. I particularly asked for a contact person.
But my message has been pending for approval since August 20. It does not look like it would get approved.
Your mistake not Alamy?
116
« on: July 11, 2021, 21:08 »
Welcome back to the June 2021 detailed monthly report during these increasingly strange and desperate times!
In addition to my monthly earnings, I discuss my first experience with capturing and uploading drone footage.
https://brutallyhonestmicrostock.com/2021/06/29/june-2021-brutally-honest-earnings-report/
How did you do this month?
Looking at yours numbers, I think it's not worth investing in equipment for microstock . For me last month (June) I made profit on image stock sites around $ 40. That earning include Adobe Stock, 123Rf, Dreamstime, Alamy, FAA, Deposit Photos, Pond5 and Istock. I was banned from Shitterstock .. Thank God I have other jobs, because if I only have microstock, I would be lost! .
How did you get banned from SS? They will keep anyobody and sell our work for 10c.
117
« on: April 28, 2021, 09:38 »
Scum bag thieves 
Sent to me PM I wanted to share with everyone and maybe for writing to the law or suing him. His name is Philip Shapiro and he uses @Phillychzsteak The FB page is gone now, https://www.facebook.com/glstock1closed, [email protected]During the GLstock auction when he tried to sell. @Phillychzsteak could you comment more on what Reserve vs demand AWS means and how it impacted costs? What will be the current status at the sale of the company? https://affnext.com/listing/cpatrend/ he can be found here.
118
« on: April 05, 2021, 08:28 »
Dear Jim,
Carstickers is an API partner. When someone purchases a sticker from them, you will get a royalty.
Kind Regards,
Lynne
IP Team, Shutterstock
Wow. So they now admit carstickers being a partner. And I had to wait like half a year for them to tell me they are not partners. Just when I was thinking SS can not be shittier than this. I am pretty mad now - apparently they just lied to me, so they could keep the royalties. I wonder how anyone still trusts this crappy company.
How many downloads did you get that you aren't paid for?
119
« on: March 05, 2021, 08:07 »
Canstock files not uploading to Pending. Anyone else having this problem. Thanks
I thought they were out of business?
120
« on: March 05, 2021, 08:06 »
Just unlicensed my video and photo portfolio on Shutterstock (again). Moved all my editorials to Pond5 exclusive account to get 60% royalty, not $3 on 4k video sale on Shutterstock video sub. I don't know if it's a coincidence, but already having the best sales day of February on Adobe Stock today. It's likely to become the best sales day of the year on Adobe Stock at this pace. Feeling good. You can always turn your portfolio back on after a month on Shutterstock to see what happens and if it's worth it.
on again off again... why? if you are that unsure of yourself then keep the images and videos on Shutterstock so you can feel the burn each and every time you make a sale that does not even cover the costs to power your computer to see if you made a sale or close your account and be thankful you don't support an operation like Shutterstock.
I'm free to do whatever I want to do. And just in case Shutterstock change their way back to it was before, it's unwise to delete contents and close account. I have 15,000 video clips and 6,000 photos. It's stupid to upload and tag all over again just in case Shutterstock changes back to how they were.
You should remember this quote
"An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodilehoping it will eat him last. Sir Winston Churchill, Reader's Digest, December 1954.
Seriously do you think SS will ever change the system back?
I think thats why you keep making these announcements on their forum in the vain hope SS will actually say "whoa BLVDone has deleted their portfolio! Quick we better pay more!"
Buddy they aren't listening to you or any contributor the system they have now will never change back.
Your only choice is either take the hit or remove your portfolio.
There's plenty of idiots out there willing to take 10 cents or 1 cent to keep uploading their stuff.
So many good points, all in a row! + + + + + + of them.
Right, writing on the SS forum that they don't read, or someone else writing to management and wondering why he gets no reply? Really, did someone actually expect the CFO to answer an email?
In Case They Change?
There have been petitions, coalitions, protests, removals, complaints, forum icons there no 10c, never ending crying... and this one person thinks if he disables his portfolio, maybe SS will change?
OK you hater HodagMedia on Shutterstock forum. You should work on your photo skill rather than wasting your time posting craps you stupid redneck MFer.
Snowflake at his best.
121
« on: March 05, 2021, 07:56 »
All those nobody stock contributors hate me. LOL!! Whatever.
They got nothing better than ridiculing people. Useless posters.
They've never started a meaningful thread/conversation. All they do is to come in and ridicule people. And then I strike back, they get upset like a little punk. LMAO!! Weak.
At least they don't start the same thread 100 times like you do and they don't rant at anybody who disagrees calling them names and attacking them. You're a flaming narcissist striking out at anybody who disagrees with you.
122
« on: March 05, 2021, 07:51 »
Portfolio size isnt the important thing at all. There used to be some sort of an Industrial guy with just 4000 images and he was earning well over 5K a month. The last I hear he was shooting assignments only but he said he was 70% down and that was over a year back! he deactivated his port needless to say!
If its who I think it is I woudn't take those claims too seriously  .
I wouldn't either. If that's who we think, was barely over 2,000 photos on SS and liked to brag on forums.
123
« on: February 21, 2021, 07:21 »
I'll just hope that most others who might care are making more than that.
My regular sales usually make up for that ridicolous connected stuff....
Although January 2021 was quite low in regular sales compared to previous months.
Connect is views not sales.
124
« on: February 21, 2021, 07:16 »
....
This will also drastically reduce the demand since fewer customers will be able to afford the new prices....
this is as wrong as Sean is wrong in naming the user H2O by the wrong name.
web design companies have no problem with photo prices at all nor do they insist on cheaper ones. they charge it most often from the customer's design anyway. nor does anyone go bankrupt because of the high prices of photos on the internet.
but I see that you are accustomed to this wild west and the real question is whether you should be paid more at all when you think you are worth less.
The real question is why do you think you are an employee when the agency doesn't even own what you produce? Or perhaps why Shutterstock have a duty to pay you what you think you are worth.
Where did i wrote that? That we are employees, nonsense.
The real question is why do you think that things don't ever change? 15 years ago you could use stolen music on your youtube video, try it now. 2 years ago social media haven't accused or banned anyone for writing whatever they think is a fact(even i personality don't agree with censorship for whatever reason). 3 days ago uber drivers had no benefits. Today we have no control of our contents, where it will be sold or given away for free. Internet changed a lot in last few years and that's only start.
EU based contributors doesn't have anything to do with that, because it doesn't work like that, but agencies can of course choose not to sell in EU market.
This is beginning to be repeatable and pointless conversation, putting some word i didn't even wrote, time will tell. Cheers and good luck!!
The thread is about the judgement that some Uber employees being classed as employees. You agree that we are not employees so we would probably need to look at monopoly and unfair competition laws rather than employment. I don't think the laws of supply and demand in a capitalist world are going to change anytime soon. Shutterstock could easily decide what countries they accept contributors from. Music is an interesting parallel. Recorded music per se is now close to worthless so the industry now focusses on value added products such as Vinyl and live music. We have to adopt the same thinking. But you are right in that only time will tell.
you are kind of right about music, problem is that those streaming services where billions of people listen to music on their phone is not the same thing as buying music to use it in your commercial project like stock photos works. try to buy some artist music to use in your movie and see is it still worth few cent like just personally listening to it in your home.
agencies (I am not talking here about SS, all of them) are wrong if they think few millions buyers unlimited subscription will translate to photos/illustrations/videos because demand is not the same like almost few billions people using music streaming services only for their joy and not for business projects.
$5 music https://audiojungle.net/search?msclkid=04d4707019f415dcaf481042543d2307&sort=price-asc&tempo=upbeat&utm_campaign=bing_market_aj_en_1_b&utm_content=music_stock_b&utm_medium=cpc&utm_source=bing&utm_term=%2Bstock%20%2Bmusic&view=grid
125
« on: January 12, 2021, 07:55 »
I admired Colin Powell's response: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BgEU7qIYzhI
70,000 Twitter accounts linked with the far-right QAnon conspiracy movement have been banned. Could the far left radicals be banned too?
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
