The criminality comes from their behaviour, nobody signed up to a change with this new contract, in effect it was forced on everyone.

 
Everybody signed up because they had to, in effect it was coercion

hoist on your own petard - you can't even remember what you first wrote!!

I could go on but in reality if you want to continue to be taken advantage of,

yes but all your blather doesnt provide any actual evidence of your claims

otherwise here in the UK, we would still have the same rights (which would be none) as when we had the seventh century mill owners claiming poverty as to why they were cutting the wages of the workers, while living in palatial mansions.

so you failed history as well as economics!  SEVENTH century???  (understanding you have no actual links to these absurdities)
 

.... I made Level 1 in eight days ....

Hmm, ok, I assume that most of us have reached level 1 much earlier 
 The rest of your text I have not really understood even after translation and found it quite confused. In any case, I wish you much success, for whatever.

Quote from: RalfLiebhold on January 25, 2022, 15:34

Quote from: H2O on January 25, 2022, 15:11

BUT, be my guest, continue to upload and live in poverty.

I don't want to get so deeply into what for me is a rather strange discussion.
Although January was, as expected, not so great, Shutterstock's revenues at least compensate for the increased energy prices. I really can't see that this agency is driving me into poverty.

AND in five years time . . . . .  You will have realised to late, it's simple, just like the thousands of contributors on Shutterstock's Forum who have stopped uploading.

Personally I'm just leaving my Portfolio on SS as I have put thousands of hours and over ten years into it, I made Level 1 in eight days, I really don't care about the money and have never been governed by it.

If you want to wast your time  . . . carry on uploading . . .  Ha, Ha, Ha

Not that I want to feed the beast, but why haven't you closed your account with them, if they are your personal enimies and the greatest criminals of all times?

I personally think that working for (almost) free is no go for me. I opt out at SS because I don't feel happy with (video) revenue. Yes, my portfolio contains 98% of video. So, I'm staying (for now) at SS and P5. How long I don't know. This market is really dripping down. Like crypto right now.

Quote from: RalfLiebhold on January 25, 2022, 15:34

Quote from: H2O on January 25, 2022, 15:11

BUT, be my guest, continue to upload and live in poverty.

I don't want to get so deeply into what for me is a rather strange discussion.
Although January was, as expected, not so great, Shutterstock's revenues at least compensate for the increased energy prices. I really can't see that this agency is driving me into poverty.

AND in five years time . . . . .  You will have realised to late, it's simple, just like the thousands of contributors on Shutterstock's Forum who have stopped uploading.

Personally I'm just leaving my Portfolio on SS as I have put thousands of hours and over ten years into it, I made Level 1 in eight days, I really don't care about the money and have never been governed by it.

If you want to wast your time  . . . carry on uploading . . .  Ha, Ha, Ha

You still have your portfolio on SS?! My God, man... I can't believe you're contributing to the wealth of Jon and Stan and are supporting their criminal ways by allowing them to sell your content and get richer off it. Where are your morals... your ethics?! You should be ashamed of yourself.

 

Quote from: H2O on January 25, 2022, 15:41

Quote from: RalfLiebhold on January 25, 2022, 15:34

Quote from: H2O on January 25, 2022, 15:11

BUT, be my guest, continue to upload and live in poverty.

I don't want to get so deeply into what for me is a rather strange discussion.
Although January was, as expected, not so great, Shutterstock's revenues at least compensate for the increased energy prices. I really can't see that this agency is driving me into poverty.

AND in five years time . . . . .  You will have realised to late, it's simple, just like the thousands of contributors on Shutterstock's Forum who have stopped uploading.

Personally I'm just leaving my Portfolio on SS as I have put thousands of hours and over ten years into it, I made Level 1 in eight days, I really don't care about the money and have never been governed by it.

If you want to wast your time  . . . carry on uploading . . .  Ha, Ha, Ha

You still have your portfolio on SS?! My God, man... I can't believe you're contributing to the wealth of Jon and Stan and are supporting their criminal ways by allowing them to sell your content and get richer off it. Where are your morals... your ethics?! You should be ashamed of yourself.

 

You still haven't explained to me where to find these special companies you were talking about where by working for them you don't contribute to the wealth of your superiors and the company owners.

We all know and agree with you that the money contributors get from Shutterstock is not a fair share. But you really need to get this strange notion out of your head that Jon and Stan are the only people in the world that get rich off other people's work and that this wasn't basically how every single company in the world was run. People at the top of every company always get the most money and live fancy lives while people at the bottom work their ass off for as little as minimum wage. Yes, their are companies that pay their employees more than others. They still work to make the CEOs and company owners richt.  So stop pretending like this was some Shutterstock-unique evil sheme and Oringer any worse than every other CEO. Every CEO's goal is to get his company and hismelf as much money as possible. You have some sick obsession with Oringer and sound like some bitter dropped ex-girlfriend.
 You don't want to support this and talk about morals and ethnics? The only way to get around it is by being self employed. You will not find an employment job where your boss pays you equaly or more than he gets himself.  But not everyone can work like this. I tried the self-employment route for many years, it didn't work out for me. But microstick works for me.

Most of all, stop slandering every contributor who still contributs to Shutterstock. You sound incredibly bitter, because other people still make decent money with Shutterstock, but apparently you don't. What's the point in telling people who make decent money there to go to some other place where they will be exploited in the same way? I could quit my microstock job and go to McDonals to flip burgers. I would still make someone else incredibly rich, I'd get less money and have a goss job. Why should I?

Quote from: SpaceStockFootage on January 25, 2022, 18:12

Quote from: H2O on January 25, 2022, 15:41

Quote from: RalfLiebhold on January 25, 2022, 15:34

Quote from: H2O on January 25, 2022, 15:11

BUT, be my guest, continue to upload and live in poverty.

I don't want to get so deeply into what for me is a rather strange discussion.
Although January was, as expected, not so great, Shutterstock's revenues at least compensate for the increased energy prices. I really can't see that this agency is driving me into poverty.

AND in five years time . . . . .  You will have realised to late, it's simple, just like the thousands of contributors on Shutterstock's Forum who have stopped uploading.

Personally I'm just leaving my Portfolio on SS as I have put thousands of hours and over ten years into it, I made Level 1 in eight days, I really don't care about the money and have never been governed by it.

If you want to wast your time  . . . carry on uploading . . .  Ha, Ha, Ha

You still have your portfolio on SS?! My God, man... I can't believe you're contributing to the wealth of Jon and Stan and are supporting their criminal ways by allowing them to sell your content and get richer off it. Where are your morals... your ethics?! You should be ashamed of yourself.

 

You still haven't explained to me where to find these special companies you were talking about where by working for them you don't contribute to the wealth of your superiors and the company owners.

We all know and agree with you that the money contributors get from Shutterstock is not a fair share. But you really need to get this strange notion out of your head that Jon and Stan are the only people in the world that get rich off other people's work and that this wasn't basically how every single company in the world was run. People at the top of every company always get the most money and live fancy lives while people at the bottom work their ass off for as little as minimum wage. Yes, their are companies that pay their employees more than others. They still work to make the CEOs and company owners richt.  So stop pretending like this was some Shutterstock-unique evil sheme and Oringer any worse than every other CEO. Every CEO's goal is to get his company and hismelf as much money as possible. You have some sick obsession with Oringer and sound like some bitter dropped ex-girlfriend.
 You don't want to support this and talk about morals and ethnics? The only way to get around it is by being self employed. You will not find an employment job where your boss pays you equaly or more than he gets himself.  But not everyone can work like this. I tried the self-employment route for many years, it didn't work out for me. But microstick works for me.

Most of all, stop slandering every contributor who still contributs to Shutterstock. You sound incredibly bitter, because other people still make decent money with Shutterstock, but apparently you don't. What's the point in telling people who make decent money there to go to some other place where they will be exploited in the same way? I could quit my microstock job and go to McDonals to flip burgers. I would still make someone else incredibly rich, I'd get less money and have a goss job. Why should I?

I really do hope that's aimed at H2O! 

I had hoped the severity of the comment would make it clear I was being sarcastic, while also giving H2O a 'dose of his own medicine', while also highlighting the irony of his severe aversion to SS even though he still sells his content there!

I really do hope that's aimed at H2O! 

I had hoped the severity of the comment would make it clear I was being sarcastic, while also giving H2O a 'dose of his own medicine', while also highlighting the irony of his severe aversion to SS even though he still sells his content there!

Yes, that was aimed at H2O, sorry! Was very early in the morning. 

I've been on SS for 7 years, and my downloads have continued to decline over the past year for the first time. A bigger issue is that 2 years ago my most common royalty was $ .38.  Since SS "restructured their payments" that has changed to $ .10.
Do the math, and it's no surprise that I used to make twice my minimum payout every month and it now takes me 3 months to barely make it.

I stopped uploading to them a year ago when I saw that no new images were being purchased and my income from SS dropped every month.

AdobeStock, on the other hand, is going gangbusters. BigStock, Dreamstime, and Deposit are dead to me.

My earnings are nothing compared to others (and have only been working for over two years), but I earn in January at least more than last year and about the same as December. If I take into account that I went from about 1200 photos to 2200, the increase in sales numbers is way too low.
However.... my port has become much bigger, but the number of photos I have to compete with on Sutterstock is also much larger in a year. So actually my port has grown a lot less than it seems.
That's why I find it strange that some people have not uploaded photos for a long time and still continue to sell about the same numbers (at a lower average). Apparently their photos don't sink into the crowd.

Quote from: thijsdegraaf on January 27, 2022, 03:14

My earnings are nothing compared to others (and have only been working for over two years), but I earn in January at least more than last year and about the same as December. If I take into account that I went from about 1200 photos to 2200, the increase in sales numbers is way too low.
However.... my port has become much bigger, but the number of photos I have to compete with on Sutterstock is also much larger in a year. So actually my port has grown a lot less than it seems.
That's why I find it strange that some people have not uploaded photos for a long time and still continue to sell about the same numbers (at a lower average). Apparently their photos don't sink into the crowd.

The contributor we know who reports on his sales in this way, is professional and has been contributing for quite a few years.  He also specialises in a sought after subject.

I think that is partly the reason why.  His images would presumably remain at the top of the searches because they have sold so well for so long. Self perpertuating.

It would be interesting to know if there are any other contributors with static portfolios (ie for years) whose sales numbers have remained consistent.

I mainly thought of Wilm and OM. OM lives near me and is indeed professional. I don't really know about Wilm (but his pictures do look very professional indeed). It would indeed be interesting to know how it is with others.

Thank you for that detailed analysis Wilm.

Interesting how Sstock algorithm appears to work in favour of an active port.

Maybe I should start uploading to them again to rejuvinate my sales.

Or maybe not ...