Author Topic: fifty million stock images on Shutterstock 50 Million! (Read 54447 times)

Uncle Pete · « **Reply #25 on:** March 04, 2015, 11:07 »

Shutterstock Milestones:
September 21, 2006 - Shutterstock surpasses one million stock photos
Feb. 20th, 2009 -Shutterstock reaches 6 million photos, (5 million 2.5 years)
February 14, 2010 - Shutterstock reaches 10 million Photos (4 million 12 months)
June 19, 2012 - Shutterstock reaches 20m stock Images (10 Million 28 months)
October 30, 2013 - Shutterstock reaches 30 million images (10 million 15 months)
Aug. 4, 2014 - Shutterstock celebrates 40 million images in it's collection. (10 million 10 months)
December 31, 2014 - 46.8 million images in the collection. (1 million new files per month)
March 3, 2015 - 50 Million Image mark is reached (10 million in 7 months for those watching)

At the same rate, September 2015 60 Million Images will be available

SS Members by registration year rounded.
2005 - 4300
2006 - 3900 = 8200
2007 - 3800 = 12,000
2008 - 5500 = 17,500
2009 - 7200 = 24,700
2010 - 5000 = 30,700

(I collected this from press releases, wayback on the web and other sources. There is no claim that it's 100% accurate. But it roughly an indication of the milestones and growth of Shutterstock) Also I will be one of the first to argue that registered members is to be taken with a grain of salt. Some never pass the test, and some contribute nothing. Others have stopped uploading and moved on to other interests, but left their ports working.

The number of active, working photographers is unknown. Adding an average of 4000 a year, it could be 50,000 people who opened an account.

60 million by September 2015? that's 10 million new images in seven months. It took six years to do that in the opening days. Small wonder that sales and percentages are down. Competition multiplies at enormous numbers, even with strict reviews and rejections.

It's not a flood of new images, it's a tsunami!

stockmarketer · « **Reply #26 on:** March 04, 2015, 11:58 »

Quote from: Justanotherphotographer on March 04, 2015, 09:06

was there a thread somewhere with the size of the SS library on certain dates? I would like to work out how much the library is increasing in percentage terms and how much this is going up i.e. whether the rate of increase is also accelerating or not. I am hoping that it will get so big in absolute terms eventually that the percentage increase per period of time will start to stabilise or decrease eventually.

This is the best we can hope for at this point...

With so many images available at SS and other agencies, the newbies & non-serious-uploaders (who must be at least 50% of all contributors, right?) will try ms for a while and eventually see that the return is not worth the investment. When this becomes a money-losing proposition for them (if it's not already) they will realize they're insane for keeping at this and drop out.

The agencies must fear the reverse of this happening. Their veterans, who produce most of the quality work, could soon start deciding that the return on investment is no longer there, and they'll give up. If the upload flow of good quality, high commercial value imagery significantly slows, then the stuff that's selling will start looking old very quickly and buyers will be next out the door.

Uncle Pete · « **Reply #27 on:** March 04, 2015, 12:10 »

Excellent analysis. Possibly both could happen at the same time or already are?

Quote from: stockmarketer on March 04, 2015, 11:58

This is the best we can hope for at this point...

With so many images available at SS and other agencies, the newbies & non-serious-uploaders (who must be at least 50% of all contributors, right?) will try ms for a while and eventually see that the return is not worth the investment. When this becomes a money-losing proposition for them (if it's not already) they will realize they're insane for keeping at this and drop out.

The agencies must fear the reverse of this happening. Their veterans, who produce most of the quality work, could soon start deciding that the return on investment is no longer there, and they'll give up. If the upload flow of good quality, high commercial value imagery significantly slows, then the stuff that's selling will start looking old very quickly and buyers will be next out the door.

Hobostocker · « **Reply #28 on:** March 05, 2015, 02:58 »

Quote from: stockmarketer on March 04, 2015, 11:58

This is the best we can hope for at this point...

With so many images available at SS and other agencies, the newbies & non-serious-uploaders (who must be at least 50% of all contributors, right?) will try ms for a while and eventually see that the return is not worth the investment. When this becomes a money-losing proposition for them (if it's not already) they will realize they're insane for keeping at this and drop out.

The agencies must fear the reverse of this happening. Their veterans, who produce most of the quality work, could soon start deciding that the return on investment is no longer there, and they'll give up. If the upload flow of good quality, high commercial value imagery significantly slows, then the stuff that's selling will start looking old very quickly and buyers will be next out the door.

newbies will upload 2-300 images at most and then give up quickly after they realize they made barely 10 bucks.

SS could counterbalance this giving priority to new submissions but still the "shelf life" of new images would not last long.

Pros on the other side will focus even more on their specific niche and eventually cut production costs to the bone with the result that most of their portfolios will be made of "low hanging fruits" as there's no incentive to make anything espensive or even remotely innovative.

in conclusion, buyers will get exactly what they're paying for, while for anything else (RM, assignments, etc) the difference in pricing will be huge !

moral of the story : it will still be a buyer's market and there's nothing pointing us in any other direction at the moment, only the sudden implosion of Getty could shake up the market but the consequences are hard to predict, first of all where the rich getty clients will move on ?

FlowerPower · « **Reply #29 on:** August 12, 2015, 09:36 »

Quote from: Uncle Pete on March 04, 2015, 11:07

Shutterstock Milestones:
September 21, 2006 - Shutterstock surpasses one million stock photos
Feb. 20th, 2009 -Shutterstock reaches 6 million photos, (5 million 2.5 years)
February 14, 2010 - Shutterstock reaches 10 million Photos (4 million 12 months)
June 19, 2012 - Shutterstock reaches 20m stock Images (10 Million 28 months)
October 30, 2013 - Shutterstock reaches 30 million images (10 million 15 months)
Aug. 4, 2014 - Shutterstock celebrates 40 million images in it's collection. (10 million 10 months)
December 31, 2014 - 46.8 million images in the collection. (1 million new files per month)
March 3, 2015 - 50 Million Image mark is reached (10 million in 7 months for those watching)

At the same rate, September 2015 60 Million Images will be available

SS Members by registration year rounded.
2005 - 4300
2006 - 3900 = 8200
2007 - 3800 = 12,000
2008 - 5500 = 17,500
2009 - 7200 = 24,700
2010 - 5000 = 30,700

(I collected this from press releases, wayback on the web and other sources. There is no claim that it's 100% accurate. But it roughly an indication of the milestones and growth of Shutterstock) Also I will be one of the first to argue that registered members is to be taken with a grain of salt. Some never pass the test, and some contribute nothing. Others have stopped uploading and moved on to other interests, but left their ports working.

The number of active, working photographers is unknown. Adding an average of 4000 a year, it could be 50,000 people who opened an account.

60 million by September 2015? that's 10 million new images in seven months. It took six years to do that in the opening days. Small wonder that sales and percentages are down. Competition multiplies at enormous numbers, even with strict reviews and rejections.

It's not a flood of new images, it's a tsunami!

Since pete isn't here to keep this updated. He was off by one month, means new photos are being added faster then in March. 5 months 9 days to add what was 6 years. 62,000 new photos a day.

August 12, 2015 SHUTTERSTOCK STATS: 60,005,768 royalty-free stock images / 445,148 new stock images added this week

More pictures, more competition, less money.

cobalt · « **Reply #30 on:** August 12, 2015, 11:48 »

nearly half a million a week. Crazy numbers. Which is why the pros are all pushing more into macro or niche agencies or adding exclusive images to the agencies that allow that for better visibilty.

Even more depressing to have files rejected in such a flood. They probably don´t bother to train image editors for consistency. Too many files, who cares what makes it through? Individual files mean nothing.

PixelBytes · « **Reply #31 on:** August 12, 2015, 12:26 »

Quote from: cobalt on August 12, 2015, 11:48

nearly half a million a week. Crazy numbers. Which is why the pros are all pushing more into macro or niche agencies or adding exclusive images to the agencies that allow that for better visibilty.

Even more depressing to have files rejected in such a flood. They probably don´t bother to train image editors for consistency. Too many files, who cares what makes it through? Individual files mean nothing.

I agree. The only thing that will impress their remaining shareholders is numbers of images. They don't give a thought to image quality or uniqueness.

Rose Tinted Glasses · « **Reply #32 on:** August 12, 2015, 15:36 »

Quote from: cobalt on August 12, 2015, 11:48

nearly half a million a week. Crazy numbers. Which is why the pros are all pushing more into macro or niche agencies or adding exclusive images to the agencies that allow that for better visibilty.

Even more depressing to have files rejected in such a flood. They probably don´t bother to train image editors for consistency. Too many files, who cares what makes it through? Individual files mean nothing.

Interesting comment...

I have suggested for years that the "pros" would start to see what microstock is which is very short sighted. I also predicted that the "pros" would revert to their old ways and would eventually put a reversal of fortune back into the macros.

And I also question your observation about training image editors... since when has any microstock agency had image editors? Never. As far as I can see they only have inspectors. The total lack of abandon for editing any image is interestingly starting to be the downfall of microstock, as I predicted long ago.

It's a simple case of buyers getting tired of wading through endless amounts of mediocrity just to save a few bucks to find the perfect image. Time is money from a buyers point of view, and if your time is apent sifting through lots of unedited images, then naturally buyers will go to the source of quality and edited images.

This is not to say there is not quality on the micros, but the ratio of quality usable stock images to mediocre unusable stock images is increasing to the point that the microstock agencies are looking like a source for mediocrity and the buyers are shifting.

Give a person enough rope and they will hang themselves.

cobalt · « **Reply #33 on:** August 12, 2015, 17:54 »

The macros have millions and millions of files as well. I don´t think the situation is that much better. Maybe a certain amateur quality will not make it there, but the flood is the flood.

And yet on all agencies, micro and macro there is so much content missing. Especially localized and more personal content. Smartphonestock etc...

But unless agencies invite the crowd to curate the content like on pininterrest, nobody will ever find it. All the agencies don´t have enough editing power to sort what is coming in.

The crowd and community have that, but nobody is harvesting their talents in a professional way.

Editors have to be paid, wether they are employees or freelance crowd sourced workers. Editing costs a lot of time, and nobody will do a professional job just for fun.

ETA: upload limits or limits tied into portfolio sales success are a much better instrument to regulate incoming content than random rejections or even special editing. If it doesn´t sell, you won´t get many slots, if your customers like your work and it sells, who cares if it is overexposed.

But with upload limits, you can avoid the random - let´s empty my whole card - uploading without punishing the productive artists.

However, if number of files is given a financial weight in the company balance, then they all want to boast the largest numbers.

What would impress me, would be number of public galleries that you can browse as a customer to look at prefiltered content.

Rose Tinted Glasses · « **Reply #34 on:** August 13, 2015, 10:43 »

I think you kind of missed my point, which was simply that yes many "pros" are reverting to their old ways of more or less giving up on microstock and going back to macro and the total lack of editing on any microstock site.

My point was not about the crowd, the community, or smartphones of which you seem very fond of. I was referring to the real working world of buyers.

As per upload limits, Getty Images has none, but they edit, so if you get 10% in you are doing well, and it can also take weeks to get in image accepted, not the usual 5 minutes on every micro site.

It's actually very funny and sad at the same time, I remember reading on this very MSG about a photographer that bought a new camera and because of his camera his approval ratings soared. Did his/her skills suddenly get better? I very much doubt it.

My bet is on the for future of success is agencies that edit. I honestly think the micros have far too much crap to quality ratio. If you have 50 million images it means nothing if 30 million of them are completely sub par.

Quality over quantity is a concept that most microstock agencies have yet to grasp.

sharpshot · « **Reply #35 on:** August 13, 2015, 13:03 »

Alamy don't edit and have over 60 million images and my sales are increasing. I think the search takes care of a lot of the rubbish and I'm shocked how much my worst stuff sells on some sites. Alamy and SS wouldn't have such a huge collection if it wasn't working for them. I think its obvious that some buyers like edited collections but others want to see as much as possible, there's room for both types of stock sites.

cobalt · « **Reply #36 on:** August 13, 2015, 13:40 »

Quote from: Rose Tinted Glasses on August 13, 2015, 10:43

My point was not about the crowd, the community, or smartphones of which you seem very fond of. I was referring to the real working world of buyers.

I mean the crowd of everyone, including the millions of buyers and designers . The micros don't have this separation of producers on the one side and the companies on the other .

Buyers are also producers and are also editors that sort content for their own uses into various galleries and lightboxes. If you harvest this talent, similar to what pininterest does, you'll be able tosubdivide the content for easy access for the customers.

Istock used to have a really useful public lightbox system an das a buyer I would bookmark the galleries on certain themes of active "Collectors"

So i know it works, and the collections people created where amazing.

The macros don't have as much useful content as they claim, they have millions of old legacy files or from collections they bought. People with brick telephones etc...

If you want the latest, most modern content, it will often be first on the micros, because they can upload in realtime and content can reach the customer in 24 hours instead of two months.

It is also more international, especially if you are looking for specialized local content that the macro producers wouldn't even know about. Which is why the agencies are all trying to create a loyal following of smartphone producers, who can produce even faster, than the normal stock crowd and smartphones reach even more local regions.

What is missing is a much better sorting system and personally I believe you need to crowdsource the editing to fix the system.

Macro is a very slow world. Slow to bring content to market slow until the customers buy slow for them to pay and maybe another two months until the money reaches you.

Very difficult to spot sales trends, because you get no sales data for months you have to produce blindly.

If you do stock fulltime, I think you need a mix of both, the micros give you the latest trends and you can use that for macro production.

Anyway, we will see what happens, what adobe comes up with, how SS reacts and if getty will ever have a new CEO and how he or she then decides to lead the company.

Our industry is never boring.

YadaYadaYada · « **Reply #37 on:** August 18, 2015, 17:42 »

Quote from: PixelBytes on August 12, 2015, 12:26

Quote from: cobalt on August 12, 2015, 11:48
nearly half a million a week. Crazy numbers. Which is why the pros are all pushing more into macro or niche agencies or adding exclusive images to the agencies that allow that for better visibilty.

Even more depressing to have files rejected in such a flood. They probably don´t bother to train image editors for consistency. Too many files, who cares what makes it through? Individual files mean nothing.

I agree. The only thing that will impress their remaining shareholders is numbers of images. They don't give a thought to image quality or uniqueness.

I agree with both. If they didn't care about us before, they will care less now. Rejected files mean nothing.

etudiante_rapide · « **Reply #38 on:** August 19, 2015, 14:36 »

Quote from: PixelBytes on August 12, 2015, 12:26

The only thing that will impress their remaining shareholders is numbers of images. They don't give a thought to image quality or uniqueness.

+100 again. like those rental properties filling up their bldgs with full tenancy but none of those those left due to complaints of no repairs,etc.
the new buyer is clueless and think "waaaa, full tenancy." when they buy it, they find lots of unfinished repairs and ceilings caving in after they change ownership.

same thing here, as shareholders will be even happier to know monthly income has fallen alot... and still falling. they will not be the ones holding the bag, as these shareholders will be gone soon.

YadaYadaYada · « **Reply #39 on:** December 08, 2016, 10:51 »

Quote from: sharpshot on August 13, 2015, 13:03

Alamy don't edit and have over 60 million images and my sales are increasing. I think the search takes care of a lot of the rubbish and I'm shocked how much my worst stuff sells on some sites. Alamy and SS wouldn't have such a huge collection if it wasn't working for them. I think its obvious that some buyers like edited collections but others want to see as much as possible, there's room for both types of stock sites.

Quietly passed another mark first week of December 2016

112,510,262 royalty-free stock images / 1,215,732 new stock images added this week

Both sides are right. Some buyers want more choices, some want quality choices. Some want low prices and will look for value, others are willing to pay good price for better photos.

Josephine · « **Reply #40 on:** December 08, 2016, 12:06 »

who on earth shall read through all these long long long scientific analyses about the marketing strategies of SS?

This is a guys talk, like talking about football. Guys, cut it short!!

jonbull · « **Reply #41 on:** December 08, 2016, 12:08 »

1.200.000 images of salad
2.700.000 of christmas

what surprises me is that people are still uploading images of salad or christmas...and thy still accept everything.
in my opinion there are so many niche that still needs images cause if we analyze the photos 95% are copy of copy and similar subject.

sharpshot · « **Reply #42 on:** December 08, 2016, 12:17 »

Quote from: jonbull on December 08, 2016, 12:08

1.200.000 images of salad
2.700.000 of christmas

what surprises me is that people are still uploading images of salad or christmas...and thy still accept everything.
in my opinion there are so many niche that still needs images cause if we analyze the photos 95% are copy of copy and similar subject.

Can't find one of Santa eating salad but maybe that's a bit too niche

Gannet77 · « **Reply #43 on:** December 08, 2016, 12:29 »

Quote from: sharpshot on December 08, 2016, 12:17

Quote from: jonbull on December 08, 2016, 12:08
1.200.000 images of salad
2.700.000 of christmas

what surprises me is that people are still uploading images of salad or christmas...and thy still accept everything.
in my opinion there are so many niche that still needs images cause if we analyze the photos 95% are copy of copy and similar subject.

Can't find one of Santa eating salad but maybe that's a bit too niche

iStock has one...

http://www.istockphoto.com/gb/photo/santa-claus-holding-bowl-with-salad-gm154375930-21728484

Stockmaan · « **Reply #44 on:** December 08, 2016, 13:45 »

LOL

YadaYadaYada · « **Reply #45 on:** December 08, 2016, 15:56 »

Quote from: sharpshot on December 08, 2016, 12:17

Quote from: jonbull on December 08, 2016, 12:08
1.200.000 images of salad
2.700.000 of christmas

what surprises me is that people are still uploading images of salad or christmas...and thy still accept everything.
in my opinion there are so many niche that still needs images cause if we analyze the photos 95% are copy of copy and similar subject.
Can't find one of Santa eating salad but maybe that's a bit too niche

Did you search for Santa laughing alone with salad? Perfect stock cliche girl with a fork looking way to happy. Oh wait, I found one. This is a spot that needs to be filled, right now!

or

I'm not doing it, please use this idea for free.

YadaYadaYada · « **Reply #46 on:** December 08, 2016, 16:08 »

Quote from: Josephine on December 08, 2016, 12:06

who on earth shall read through all these long long long scientific analyses about the marketing strategies of SS?

This is a guys talk, like talking about football. Guys, cut it short!!

Short version.
March 2015 50 million
Sept 2016 100 million
Dec 2016 110 million
Dec 2017 150 million

Does that scare you? It should.

How do you compete with that many pictures of the same most popular best sellers. Maybe an ostrich view is better, then complain how sales are down because the agency is favoring other people or pushing low earners to the front. Problem is, we are now producing a commodity that's available in over supply, fixed demand. Competition is willing to produce in high number for less pay and driving us out of business and the market.

Better to find unique content or different place to sell.

tess · « **Reply #47 on:** December 09, 2016, 03:45 »

Quote from: jonbull on December 08, 2016, 12:08

1.200.000 images of salad
2.700.000 of christmas

what surprises me is that people are still uploading images of salad or christmas...and thy still accept everything.
in my opinion there are so many niche that still needs images cause if we analyze the photos 95% are copy of copy and similar subject.

The thing is the trending aesthetic keeps changing, both with food photography, lifestyle shots, graphic design etc. I’m personally more in favour of automatically deleting files that haven’t sold in 5 or more years or something along the lines. Most of the uploaded stuff never sells. I’m also for stricter limits on uploading huge batches of similar graphics/shots.

50% · « **Reply #48 on:** December 09, 2016, 07:48 »

Quote from: tess on December 09, 2016, 03:45

Quote from: jonbull on December 08, 2016, 12:08
1.200.000 images of salad
2.700.000 of christmas

what surprises me is that people are still uploading images of salad or christmas...and thy still accept everything.
in my opinion there are so many niche that still needs images cause if we analyze the photos 95% are copy of copy and similar subject.

The thing is the trending aesthetic keeps changing, both with food photography, lifestyle shots, graphic design etc. I’m personally more in favour of automatically deleting files that haven’t sold in 5 or more years or something along the lines. Most of the uploaded stuff never sells. I’m also for stricter limits on uploading huge batches of similar graphics/shots.

this is all correct BUT aesthetics doesn't change that fast we are talking about 50 million more pictures in less than two years! The sheer amount of pictures will bury you there is simply no way to build a sustainable business with these kind of figures it's like selling sand grain in the desert!

cathyslife · « **Reply #49 on:** December 09, 2016, 09:24 »

Quote from: tess on December 09, 2016, 03:45

The thing is the trending aesthetic keeps changing, both with food photography, lifestyle shots, graphic design etc. I’m personally more in favour of automatically deleting files that haven’t sold in 5 or more years or something along the lines. Most of the uploaded stuff never sells. I’m also for stricter limits on uploading huge batches of similar graphics/shots.

I more or less agree with you, but remember that fads and trends re-cycle...what's old is sometimes new again.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: fifty million stock images on Shutterstock 50 Million! (Read 54447 times)

Uncle Pete

stockmarketer

Uncle Pete

Hobostocker

FlowerPower

cobalt

PixelBytes

Rose Tinted Glasses

cobalt

Rose Tinted Glasses

sharpshot

cobalt

YadaYadaYada

etudiante_rapide

YadaYadaYada

Josephine

jonbull

sharpshot

Gannet77

Stockmaan

YadaYadaYada

YadaYadaYada

tess

50%

cathyslife

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors