pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: First full year of the "levels"  (Read 7459 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: December 31, 2021, 11:54 »
+1
Just run through my yearly SS figures so the first 12 months of the level system.

Firstly, January as expected was a huge drop.  Over 80% decrease in revenue.

One thing that did surprise me for video in particular is just how random the RPD for video was regardless of level.  The graphs are all over the place throughout the year.  So many special offers/giveaways and so on the thing varies by a factor of 3 from month to month despite actual volume remaining fairly constant.
Both do show a shallow increase throughout the year which makes the reset even hard to stomach.  Somewhat surprising of an increasing average despite constant levels though.

Data set is likely large enough to not have huge fluctuations from individual freak sales.

Overall average for year RPD for video $12.40 and images $0.72
(Contrast with roughly $19 video and $0.98 before the new system).
« Last Edit: December 31, 2021, 11:58 by gnirtS »


« Reply #1 on: December 31, 2021, 15:10 »
0
similar here - levels didn't seem to make any difference - for first 6 months 2021 RPD was either near 2020 or higher, actually declined in 2nd half
        2020  2021
Jan   0.73   0.71
   0.69   1.01
   0.83   0.64
Apr   0.76   0.95
   0.61   0.5
   0.52   0.66
Jul   0.28   0.49
   0.58   0.49
   0.63   0.37
Oct   1.21   0.4
   0.5   0.66
   0.47   0.75

 
« Last Edit: January 01, 2022, 13:10 by cascoly »

« Reply #2 on: December 31, 2021, 23:36 »
+2
Surprised at how low dec was for me. Seems like shutterstock buyers went on a break almost mid Dec. Will try doing this analysis today

« Reply #3 on: January 01, 2022, 06:12 »
+1
Well for me, with almost identical download numbers for January 2020 and 2021, January 2021 was less than half of 2020's earnings.

February 2021 saw a small drop in download numbers, (around 10%), but again the earnings were less than half of the same month in 2020.

Averaging across the course of a whole year, download numbers were down 5% on 2020 but income was down 18%

Comparing to 2019, which was wholly on the old earnings scheme, 2021 was 12% lower in terms of downloads but 33% lower in income.

I am not seeing the levels average out across the year - I am seeing a very real drop in earnings.

My RPD has dropped as follows:

2019 - 77c

2020 - 68c

2021 - 59c
« Last Edit: January 02, 2022, 05:44 by KuriousKat »

« Reply #4 on: January 01, 2022, 07:05 »
0
Alread posted this in another thread, but here is my revenue comparison for the past year:
January 20->21: +131%
February 20->21: +214%
March 20->21: +151%
April 20->21: +74%
May 20->21: +132%
June 20->21: +140%
July 20->21: +148%
August 20->21: +123%
September 20->21: +45%
October 20->21: +98%
November 20->21: +23%
December 20->21: +11%

« Reply #5 on: January 01, 2022, 07:34 »
0
Alread posted this in another thread, but here is my revenue comparison for the past year:
January 20->21: +131%
February 20->21: +214%
March 20->21: +151%
April 20->21: +74%
May 20->21: +132%
June 20->21: +140%
July 20->21: +148%
August 20->21: +123%
September 20->21: +45%
October 20->21: +98%
November 20->21: +23%
December 20->21: +11%

That's an impressive increase and congratulations to you. It's nice to see that some people are still on an upward trajectory. Your Shutterstock figures are very close to my Adobe returns over the period.

Do you mind if I ask whether you significantly increased your portfolio and what your RPD comparison was?

Also, out of curiosity, can I ask when you started submitting? My income grew year on year from 2008-2015, but has declined a little each year since 2016, with 2020 and 2021 seeing more significant drops.

I didn't join Adobe until 2015, and I'm still seeing year on year growth there, although I am expecting it to plateau at some point.
« Last Edit: January 01, 2022, 07:42 by KuriousKat »

« Reply #6 on: January 01, 2022, 08:17 »
0
Alread posted this in another thread, but here is my revenue comparison for the past year:
January 20->21: +131%
February 20->21: +214%
March 20->21: +151%
April 20->21: +74%
May 20->21: +132%
June 20->21: +140%
July 20->21: +148%
August 20->21: +123%
September 20->21: +45%
October 20->21: +98%
November 20->21: +23%
December 20->21: +11%

That's an impressive increase and congratulations to you. It's nice to see that some people are still on an upward trajectory. Your Shutterstock figures are very close to my Adobe returns over the period.

Do you mind if I ask whether you significantly increased your portfolio and what your RPD comparison was?

Also, out of curiosity, can I ask when you started submitting? My income grew year on year from 2008-2015, but has declined a little each year since 2016, with 2020 and 2021 seeing more significant drops.

I didn't join Adobe until 2015, and I'm still seeing year on year growth there, although I am expecting it to plateau at some point.

Thank you. Actually Adobe is the agency with the smalles increase for me, on some months I even had a decrease compared to last year  :-[

I increased my SS portfolio by about 2500 images, same as every year as I have a somewhat regular upload shedule. I don't know my RPD, but I increased my port by around 28%, but my earnings increased by 107%, so my RPD should also have increased.
I started submitting at the beginning of 2019, but my first year where I mostly tried to submit illustrations wasn't very sucessfull.
« Last Edit: January 01, 2022, 08:22 by Firn »

« Reply #7 on: January 01, 2022, 11:57 »
+1
Starting at 2019 and uploading 2500 photos per years explains your growth. It will eventually level out.

« Reply #8 on: January 01, 2022, 11:58 »
+1
Alread posted this in another thread, but here is my revenue comparison for the past year:
January 20->21: +131%
February 20->21: +214%
March 20->21: +151%
April 20->21: +74%
May 20->21: +132%
June 20->21: +140%
July 20->21: +148%
August 20->21: +123%
September 20->21: +45%
October 20->21: +98%
November 20->21: +23%
December 20->21: +11%

That's an impressive increase and congratulations to you. It's nice to see that some people are still on an upward trajectory. Your Shutterstock figures are very close to my Adobe returns over the period.

Do you mind if I ask whether you significantly increased your portfolio and what your RPD comparison was?

Also, out of curiosity, can I ask when you started submitting? My income grew year on year from 2008-2015, but has declined a little each year since 2016, with 2020 and 2021 seeing more significant drops.

I didn't join Adobe until 2015, and I'm still seeing year on year growth there, although I am expecting it to plateau at some point.

Thank you. Actually Adobe is the agency with the smalles increase for me, on some months I even had a decrease compared to last year  :-[

I increased my SS portfolio by about 2500 images, same as every year as I have a somewhat regular upload shedule. I don't know my RPD, but I increased my port by around 28%, but my earnings increased by 107%, so my RPD should also have increased.
I started submitting at the beginning of 2019, but my first year where I mostly tried to submit illustrations wasn't very sucessfull.

Interesting, and thanks.

My income steadily increased for 7 years on Shutterstock before it reached a plateau and then started dropping. I'm watching Adobe with interest, as I'm 6 years in and still climbing. There definitely does appear to be a point at which you hit critical mass.

My uploads are fairly consistent each year, and my RPD rose steadily on Shutterstock year on year, largely due to the incremental increases as each level was achieved. From 2015 the RPD remained consistent until the commission change in 2019, and has been dropping since then.

However, you mention your portfolio growth against income growth and assume that your RPD must have increased, but that's not necessarily the case, as RPD is a calculation based purely on income over downloads.

For example, 10000 downloads per annum earning $10,000 = RPD $1, but 15000 downloads earning $12,000 the following year is a 20% increase in earnings but an RPD of only 75c.

On the surface of things, 20% income growth looks great, but the reality here is that you are only earning 75% of the rate you had the year before.




« Reply #9 on: January 01, 2022, 12:27 »
+1
Alread posted this in another thread, but here is my revenue comparison for the past year:
January 20->21: +131%
February 20->21: +214%
March 20->21: +151%
April 20->21: +74%
May 20->21: +132%
June 20->21: +140%
July 20->21: +148%
August 20->21: +123%
September 20->21: +45%
October 20->21: +98%
November 20->21: +23%
December 20->21: +11%

That's an impressive increase and congratulations to you. It's nice to see that some people are still on an upward trajectory. Your Shutterstock figures are very close to my Adobe returns over the period.

Do you mind if I ask whether you significantly increased your portfolio and what your RPD comparison was?

Also, out of curiosity, can I ask when you started submitting? My income grew year on year from 2008-2015, but has declined a little each year since 2016, with 2020 and 2021 seeing more significant drops.

I didn't join Adobe until 2015, and I'm still seeing year on year growth there, although I am expecting it to plateau at some point.

Thank you. Actually Adobe is the agency with the smalles increase for me, on some months I even had a decrease compared to last year  :-[

I increased my SS portfolio by about 2500 images, same as every year as I have a somewhat regular upload shedule. I don't know my RPD, but I increased my port by around 28%, but my earnings increased by 107%, so my RPD should also have increased.
I started submitting at the beginning of 2019, but my first year where I mostly tried to submit illustrations wasn't very sucessfull.

Interesting, and thanks.

My income steadily increased for 7 years on Shutterstock before it reached a plateau and then started dropping. I'm watching Adobe with interest, as I'm 6 years in and still climbing. There definitely does appear to be a point at which you hit critical mass.

My uploads are fairly consistent each year, and my RPD rose steadily on Shutterstock year on year, largely due to the incremental increases as each level was achieved. From 2015 the RPD remained consistent until the commission change in 2019, and has been dropping since then.

However, you mention your portfolio growth against income growth and assume that your RPD must have increased, but that's not necessarily the case, as RPD is a calculation based purely on income over downloads.

For example, 10000 downloads per annum earning $10,000 = RPD $1, but 15000 downloads earning $12,000 the following year is a 20% increase in earnings but an RPD of only 75c.

On the surface of things, 20% income growth looks great, but the reality here is that you are only earning 75% of the rate you had the year before.


I submit about the same amount of photos each year, have the same work, but earned more than double as much for the same work than the year before. That's good enough for me because I only care about the money I earn and not how much I sell my images for on an average or how many downloads I have. :)


 I don't understand people's fixation with RPD.  Someone can have an RPD of 10$ and still make no profit or basically work for free, because he has to pay rent for locations, props and models. Someoen else might have an RPD of 0.50$, but has no costs and spends almost no time on his photos because he only shoots his backyard flowers. The first person could make a financial loss with his photos or barely cover his costs without being paid for his time, the second a profit. RPD is a strange factor to care about so much as it says nothing about how much money you actually get for your work, just for a photo, which is a very random factor as creataing a photo can be a matter of seconds and cost you not more than the  usage of your gear, or cost thousands of dollars and take hours of time.
Also, I don't care whether I have 10000, 20000  or 200000 downloads per year. :) I can't pay my rent with downloads. I pay it with the money I get at the end of the month. To me it always seems like some opeople have such strange priorities in this microstock bussiness.
« Last Edit: January 01, 2022, 12:46 by Firn »

« Reply #10 on: January 01, 2022, 12:45 »
+1

I submit about the same amount of photos each year, have the same work, but earned more than double as much for the same work than the year before. That's good enough for me because I only care about the money I earn and not how much I sell my images for on an average.
 I don't care about RPD and don't understand people's fixation with it.  Someoen can have an RPD of 10$ and still make poor money, because he has to pay rent for locations, props and models. Someoen else might have an RPD of 0.50$, but has no costs and spends almost no time on his photos because he only shoots his backyard flowers. The first person could make a financial loss with his photos or barely cover his costs without being paid for his time, the second a profit. RPD is a strange factor to care about so much as it says nothing about how much money you actually get for your work, just for a photo, which is a very random factor as creataing a photo can be a matter of seconds and cost you not more than the gear you have, or cost thousands of dollars and take hours of time.

I agree 100% - it's all relative, and you can only work with what is relevant to you and your business.

I think the fixation with RPD is simply that it is the only true comparison that we can make that shows real increase or loss regarding what the actual companies are paying us.

If you tell me you are up 100% in December 2021 compared to December 2020, then that's impressive on the surface of things. However, if that increase is from $100 to $200, maybe it's not so impressive if I am reporting a 20% drop, but that's from $1000 a month to $800.

Also, RPD is a big factor in business planning and projections, as a drop in RPD on Shutterstock means I have to either upload more to compensate, or earn that loss back from another site.

I care very much about RPD, as I would prefer that those 10000 downloads earned me $10,000 rather than $5000.
« Last Edit: January 01, 2022, 12:56 by KuriousKat »

« Reply #11 on: January 01, 2022, 13:09 »
+1

I care very much about RPD, as I would rather that those 10000 downloads earned me $10,000 rather than $5000.

And I care very much about my earnings, because I  would rather have 1000 hours of my work earn me $10,000 than $5000.  :) That's my priority.


 I want to work and get paid for my work and pay my rent and food and as long as the agencies are paying me the same, or as it has been so far, even more for my work each year, that's good enough for me.

And I didn't post my stats to impress anyone. I just wanted to show that not everything is gloom and doom and going downhills in microstock bussiness. Everyone is so negative these days. It's not all only bad, even agencies like SS or iSTock. But you have to put some work into it, not stop submitting content to Shutterstock and then complain that your earnings are declining. I see that quite often and maybe that has something to do with people's obsession with RPD - The expection that "images uploaded in the past" should earn your money for you past work, not your continouse work.

I don't think continuing this discussion will lead anywhere, we obviously have different priorities. As long as you are happy with your business model and I am happy with mine, everything is fine.  :)
« Last Edit: January 01, 2022, 13:14 by Firn »

« Reply #12 on: January 01, 2022, 13:17 »
0

And I care very much about my earnings, because I  would rather have 1000 hours of my work earn me $10,000 than $5000.  :) That's my priority.


I think we are both agreeing from a different direction! I'm certainly not looking to argue, as I'm sure we are all agreed that bottom line profit is always the priority.

I am just using RPD as a fairly accurate way to extrapolate that forward to predict my earnings and create a meaningful budget for the year.


« Reply #13 on: January 01, 2022, 13:50 »
+1
Interesting results.  The levels do seem to make a huge hit initially at least.
My portfolio has only increased by maybe 1000 images and 300 video in the last 12 months (covid related lack of work) which is treading water and sinking slightly.

Ive just worked out Adobe in terms of revenue has pulled in $1000 less than Shutterstock *but* due to not having editorial means my portfolio there is smaller.  Its also grown year on year whereas SS has shrunk.  On current trends 2022 could be the year Adobe overtakes SS for total annual revenue.

I was sticking to RPD for my calculations to try to factor out things like portfolio size changes etc.  Firn is of course right that ultimately the actual money coming in is likely the most important provided it doesn't take excessive extra time to produce.

In terms of raw download numbers, 2021 was above average for both images and video - the drop in RPD was the main issue.

« Reply #14 on: January 01, 2022, 14:11 »
0
Interesting results.  The levels do seem to make a huge hit initially at least....

based on what?  reported RPD don't show a big drop - if levels were a big influence, we'd expect RPD in the .2-.3 range. and some reports show better RPD in 1st 6 months than last - opposite of what you'd expect if levels made an impact - decreased income is much more likely due to market conditions
« Last Edit: January 01, 2022, 14:14 by cascoly »

« Reply #15 on: January 01, 2022, 14:25 »
+1
Interesting results.  The levels do seem to make a huge hit initially at least....

based on what?  reported RPD don't show a big drop - if levels were a big influence, we'd expect RPD in the .2-.3 range. and some reports show better RPD in 1st 6 months than last - opposite of what you'd expect if levels made an impact - decreased income is much more likely due to market conditions

My RPD in January 2021 was 43c and had risen to 68c by December.

Market conditions may affect the overall number of downloads and earnings, but they don't affect RPD.

My sale overall are down in 2020 and 2021, which is based on market conditions, as my portfolio is largely travel and wildlife. Covid has certainly had an impact on demand for the images I produce.

If RPD has increased for some in the earlier months, it is because of a disproportionate rate of higher value commissions over and above the 10c rate.

« Reply #16 on: January 01, 2022, 14:54 »
0
I find RPDs (average return per download) to be a fairly static ratio. They are good for comparing average commissions between agencies, but they don't actually tell you if you made more income.

I use RPIs - return per image. (Sales divided by number of images). This tells you what income has gone up or down compared to the last time you calculated it. I use it to tell me what subjects to keep shooting (if it has risen) or alternatively what to stop shooting.

Because I shoot/create a lot of different types of images - photos, videos, stop motion animation, graphic design layouts, it helps me enormously to show where I should direct my resources in the next 3 or 6 months.

Back to the topic: I calculated my RPIs for the past year and it was very encouraging. For my top 5 areas, I found 3 photoshoot subjects that have performed really well, that I can keep shooting. The other 2 were real surprises. Subjects that I had forgotten about but show a lot of potential. And then I compared it all to what I have been earning via direct sales. And that topped the lot!  So more of the latter for me as well.  ;D

Of course, as Cascoly said on another thread, all ratios are based on past performance, but I find that positive recent movements are a great guide to what to keep doing. You keep monitoring it, and if the RPIs fall, then you stop. Plus, the analysis exercise itself, even though I thought I knew my numbers really well, always brings up a couple of surprises.

This may sound like a lot of hard work to some people, but its not really. Its actually a short exercise on a regular basis, once you have it all set up.

Bottom Line: Ratios only show potential, but then you have to decide what you can create that would increase sales in this area and not compete with your existing images.

« Last Edit: January 01, 2022, 15:36 by Annie »


H2O

    This user is banned.
« Reply #17 on: January 01, 2022, 15:10 »
+8
However anyone looks at the arrangement that Shutterstock has implemented, IT IS A COLD HEARTED SCAM perpetrated by Jon Oringer and his side kick Stan Pavlovsk, to steal money from the talent.

These two are nothing more than low life criminals pertaining to be running a business.

Anyone who is still uploading to help these two is insane.

The way forward in the Western World is a change in the law for companies like this, there should be a 'Stakeholders Law' which basically gives all the contributors a equal vote on what happens to the money. 

H2O

    This user is banned.
« Reply #18 on: January 01, 2022, 15:14 »
+1

I care very much about RPD, as I would rather that those 10000 downloads earned me $10,000 rather than $5000.

And I care very much about my earnings, because I  would rather have 1000 hours of my work earn me $10,000 than $5000.  :) That's my priority.


 I want to work and get paid for my work and pay my rent and food and as long as the agencies are paying me the same, or as it has been so far, even more for my work each year, that's good enough for me.

And I didn't post my stats to impress anyone. I just wanted to show that not everything is gloom and doom and going downhills in microstock bussiness. Everyone is so negative these days. It's not all only bad, even agencies like SS or iSTock. But you have to put some work into it, not stop submitting content to Shutterstock and then complain that your earnings are declining. I see that quite often and maybe that has something to do with people's obsession with RPD - The expection that "images uploaded in the past" should earn your money for you past work, not your continouse work.

I don't think continuing this discussion will lead anywhere, we obviously have different priorities. As long as you are happy with your business model and I am happy with mine, everything is fine.  :)

This is just insane, how much are you proposing that Oringer and Pavlovsk sell your work for, would you be happy with 1c a download.


« Reply #19 on: January 01, 2022, 15:46 »
0

Anyone who is still uploading to help these two is insane.

So thousands of dollars of income is "insane" vs a guaranteed zero?

Really?

Level6

« Reply #20 on: January 01, 2022, 17:05 »
+2
However anyone looks at the arrangement that Shutterstock has implemented, IT IS A COLD HEARTED SCAM perpetrated by Jon Oringer and his side kick Stan Pavlovsk, to steal money from the talent.

These two are nothing more than low life criminals pertaining to be running a business.

Anyone who is still uploading to help these two is insane.

The way forward in the Western World is a change in the law for companies like this, there should be a 'Stakeholders Law' which basically gives all the contributors a equal vote on what happens to the money.

Maybe the way forward is to find a way around these evil startups if and when there is away and often there isn't, the taxi industry lost worldwide to Uber....

I'm wondering though if at least in Canada and the US the jig will soon be up for the gig economy, it's not fun anymore and it's a ticket to bankruptcy.   The few that are still making living at this?, good for them but so many are not anymore and same is happening with those food deliver startups as their commissions are cut, it's the standard startup playbook they all follow, their businesses are not sustainable, that's why they raise VC funding, the banks won't lend them a penny.

I was reading that Oringer is now in Miami working with some other startup people but Stan is the guy in charge and it's take it or leave it with him even for his own employees, if they don't think it's ethical to screw contributors the door is open for them to leave too.

Sad to see people like Jon go they way they did because he he started Shutterstock from scratch, his own programming, photography, then paying a few models and finally launching the company with his own money so he knows what it's like to start with nothing, he's been there but I guess once they take VC investment or do an IPO it's all about the shareholders and maximum disrespect for employees, contributors and customers.

If I was Jon Oringer, I would have had to cut costs as well to keep shareholders happy and I'd start with the office space, what do they need an entire floor of the Empire state building for?.

Stan...he's just another ignorant, clueless ruthless MBA they hired.

I guess the only semi-ethical stock agency left is Pond5, far from perfect these days as they have investors to answer to and they did that awful deal with Reuters and Newsflare which sunk all the editorial contributors in 2019 but right now I'd still say Pond5 and Adobe are the only two semi-ethical websites left.







marthamarks

« Reply #21 on: January 01, 2022, 20:48 »
+2


I guess the only semi-ethical stock agency left is Pond5, far from perfect these days as they have investors to answer to and they did that awful deal with Reuters and Newsflare which sunk all the editorial contributors in 2019 but right now I'd still say Pond5 and Adobe are the only two semi-ethical websites left.

I'm not a pro, just a long-time part-timer, but I think you've hit the nail on its head there.

And maybe add Dreamstime to the list of ethical (semi and otherwise) websites. Even though they don't sell/pay much, I've never seen any evidence that they deliberately screw their contributors in any way.
« Last Edit: January 01, 2022, 21:11 by marthamarks »

« Reply #22 on: January 01, 2022, 21:15 »
0
Surprised at how low dec was for me. Seems like shutterstock buyers went on a break almost mid Dec. Will try doing this analysis today

Same here.

Level6

« Reply #23 on: January 01, 2022, 22:48 »
+1


I guess the only semi-ethical stock agency left is Pond5, far from perfect these days as they have investors to answer to and they did that awful deal with Reuters and Newsflare which sunk all the editorial contributors in 2019 but right now I'd still say Pond5 and Adobe are the only two semi-ethical websites left.

I'm not a pro, just a long-time part-timer, but I think you've hit the nail on its head there.

And maybe add Dreamstime to the list of ethical (semi and otherwise) websites. Even though they don't sell/pay much, I've never seen any evidence that they deliberately screw their contributors in any way.

This is true and if Pond5 has had to do some unpleasant things once in awhile and they have it's due to pressure from the investors "above" but their management team is a class act but they also have to come up with hefty returns for the investors.

I'm doing editorial video so I can't upload to Adobe but they seem to be pretty good as well and they have Mat who is allowed to come into forums like this and help explain things from time to time.

I love Pond5 and their new website but I just wish my sales hadn't crashed there this year but this is the worst economy since the depression and covid is not over yet.

Maybe if every Pond5 contributor promoted their work all over social media it would boost their ranking on Google and do some good, the big powerhouse brand name is SSTK and for the free stuff is Pexels now so pond seems to have fallen off the radar, need to get them back on the radar.







« Reply #24 on: January 02, 2022, 01:09 »
+3

I care very much about RPD, as I would rather that those 10000 downloads earned me $10,000 rather than $5000.

And I care very much about my earnings, because I  would rather have 1000 hours of my work earn me $10,000 than $5000.  :) That's my priority.


 I want to work and get paid for my work and pay my rent and food and as long as the agencies are paying me the same, or as it has been so far, even more for my work each year, that's good enough for me.

And I didn't post my stats to impress anyone. I just wanted to show that not everything is gloom and doom and going downhills in microstock bussiness. Everyone is so negative these days. It's not all only bad, even agencies like SS or iSTock. But you have to put some work into it, not stop submitting content to Shutterstock and then complain that your earnings are declining. I see that quite often and maybe that has something to do with people's obsession with RPD - The expection that "images uploaded in the past" should earn your money for you past work, not your continouse work.

I don't think continuing this discussion will lead anywhere, we obviously have different priorities. As long as you are happy with your business model and I am happy with mine, everything is fine.  :)

This is just insane, how much are you proposing that Oringer and Pavlovsk sell your work for, would you be happy with 1c a download.

I am repeating myself here: I don't care how much I am being paid for a download, as long as I am paid adequately for my work. I have an expectation of how much money I want to be paid per hour of my work and Shutterstock is one of the agencies that pays me the most. An agency like Alamy might pay me 20x more per download, but what good is it to me if they sell so few images that the money they pay me per hour of my work is not even 1/10th of minimum wage?
« Last Edit: January 02, 2022, 03:46 by Firn »

thijsdegraaf

« Reply #25 on: January 02, 2022, 03:27 »
+1

I care very much about RPD, as I would rather that those 10000 downloads earned me $10,000 rather than $5000.

And I care very much about my earnings, because I  would rather have 1000 hours of my work earn me $10,000 than $5000.  :) That's my priority.


 I want to work and get paid for my work and pay my rent and food and as long as the agencies are paying me the same, or as it has been so far, even more for my work each year, that's good enough for me.

And I didn't post my stats to impress anyone. I just wanted to show that not everything is gloom and doom and going downhills in microstock bussiness. Everyone is so negative these days. It's not all only bad, even agencies like SS or iSTock. But you have to put some work into it, not stop submitting content to Shutterstock and then complain that your earnings are declining. I see that quite often and maybe that has something to do with people's obsession with RPD - The expection that "images uploaded in the past" should earn your money for you past work, not your continouse work.

I don't think continuing this discussion will lead anywhere, we obviously have different priorities. As long as you are happy with your business model and I am happy with mine, everything is fine.  :)

This is just insane, how much are you proposing that Oringer and Pavlovsk sell your work for, would you be happy with 1c a download.

I am repeating myself here: I don't care how much I am being paid for a download, as long as I am paid adequately for my work. I have an expectation of how much money I want to be paid per hour of my work and Shutterstock is one of the agencies that pays me the most. An agency like Alamy might pay me 20x more per download, but what good is it to me if they sell so few images that the money they pay me per hour of my work is not even  1/10th of minimum wage?

Agree with Firn.

It is (often said) a matter of faster growing supply than demand. Prices than drop in the real world.

We used to have the butter mountain in Europe. At that time, the price was kept somewhat high with subsidies for the farmer if I remember correctly.

We have a growing photo mountain, which keeps getting higher. So the prices will drop (also at more social stock sites, probably due to a smaller sale).
Only when you upload more, you can earn more every year with the same effort, because the work for the old photos / videos is done. Only the photo mountain gets even bigger.  ;D
If you do nothing, your earnings will drop, but then you won't spend any more time on Stock and still earn some money.

For someone just starting out, I think it's much more difficult now than it used to be because you have to have a stock of photos/videos first.
Your port does grow in terms of number of photos/videos. May be smaller in percentage because the total is growing faster.

This has got to go wrong at some point, so if you're young, I wouldn't only focus my earnings on Stock.
« Last Edit: January 02, 2022, 16:24 by thijsdegraaf »

« Reply #26 on: January 02, 2022, 05:22 »
0
I find RPDs (average return per download) to be a fairly static ratio. They are good for comparing average commissions between agencies, but they don't actually tell you if you made more income.

I use RPIs - return per image. (Sales divided by number of images). This tells you what income has gone up or down compared to the last time you calculated it. I use it to tell me what subjects to keep shooting (if it has risen) or alternatively what to stop shooting.

Because I shoot/create a lot of different types of images - photos, videos, stop motion animation, graphic design layouts, it helps me enormously to show where I should direct my resources in the next 3 or 6 months.


I agree, the RPI is a very important indicator, although it's more of a personal statistic than RPD which, as you say, is good for comparing average commissions between agencies, and is a good indicator of whether the Shutterstock Levels have had a positive or negative impact on earnings.

I use Stock Performer to access  all of this information at a glance, as I can view total earnings for a particular shoot, plus number of files/downloads, total revenue, RPD, RPI per month and RPI overall. I also have the cost shown, and can see at a glance whether a shoot has run at a loss, broken even or is in profit. Drilling down further, I can check the earnings per site, first upload date, average file age and STR, (sell through rate).

It's an invaluable tool if you are running this as a business and find statistical information to be beneficial, and maybe one to consider if you don't already use it?

This, alongside my monthly management accounts, gives me a very clear picture of where my business is going.


« Reply #27 on: January 02, 2022, 09:06 »
+2
However anyone looks at the arrangement that Shutterstock has implemented, IT IS A COLD HEARTED SCAM perpetrated by Jon Oringer and his side kick Stan Pavlovsk, to steal money from the talent.

These two are nothing more than low life criminals pertaining to be running a business.

Anyone who is still uploading to help these two is insane.

The way forward in the Western World is a change in the law for companies like this, there should be a 'Stakeholders Law' which basically gives all the contributors a equal vote on what happens to the money.

if that's your definition of Scam, most for profit business are a Scam, as they take away from someone to pay bosses and shareholders

« Reply #28 on: January 02, 2022, 09:14 »
+1
There are 2 ways of looking at this.

If you shoot content specifically to sell on stock than all the equipment, time spent and so on has to be balanced against that so a time or RPD becomes relevant.

However, if you shoot content for elsewhere as part of a day job etc and also upload that to stock then a lot of the gear, time and so on is already invested outside stock so RPD is less relevant and the money is the only useful metric.

Im lucky (or was pre covid!) in that the things i put on stock are almost all obtained and edited as part of the day job so the extra resources needed to upload and keyword are minimal.  So for me theres no real negative shovelling the stuff on even if RPD is low.



« Reply #29 on: January 02, 2022, 14:03 »
+2
...

We used to have the butter mountain in Europe. At that time, the price was kept somewhat high with subsidies for the farmer if I remember correctly.

We have a growing photo mountain, which keeps getting higher. So the prices will drop (also at more social stock sites, probably due to a smaller sale)....

in the US we have massive subsidies for agriculture aka socialism for giant conglomerates such as sugar and ethanol - gasoline mandates support corn production - and end up giving corn-based, white, rural Iowa an outsized role in presidential politics as they control the first (otherwise irrelevant) caucus

but again, the decline in ms prices is a natural progression in an economy that prioritizes profits for the already rich over the needs of society in general (but that would be socialism for all). eg, in the US we still don't have basic health care for everyone
« Last Edit: January 03, 2022, 16:21 by cascoly »

Level6

« Reply #30 on: January 02, 2022, 14:18 »
+1
However anyone looks at the arrangement that Shutterstock has implemented, IT IS A COLD HEARTED SCAM perpetrated by Jon Oringer and his side kick Stan Pavlovsk, to steal money from the talent.

These two are nothing more than low life criminals pertaining to be running a business.

Anyone who is still uploading to help these two is insane.

The way forward in the Western World is a change in the law for companies like this, there should be a 'Stakeholders Law' which basically gives all the contributors a equal vote on what happens to the money.

if that's your definition of Scam, most for profit business are a Scam, as they take away from someone to pay bosses and shareholders

Kinda thinking that the term scam in this industry is more the deals that the agencies do with distribution companies around the world, podn5 has partnered with many, the only ones we know of are Adobe, newsflare and Reuters and sure there's a tiny bit of "incremental income" when something tells and now they have a deal with PA media/Alamy and our content is going there.

Alamy has some deal with a Chinese company as you can see in the Alamy 7 cents thread and there are many more of these deals that we don't even know about plus once the content is on the servers in China or Russia our laws, regulations and the TOS's don't apply in those counties plus some agencies front these FREE sites.

So the scamming is basically us being out of out of our ability to make a living at this because right now and as it's going it's over, no matter which route you rake to try and make a living at this with whatever agency....CHECKMATE!.

So it feels like a scam but it's not a scam in the sense of any fraud happening. The agencies, all of them, simply can no longer be trusted, once our content is on their servers, they can do what they want, legally change the TOS and you're left with pennies if anything at all.

If it wasn't for those content deals I think we would be making a living but still less due to large supply of videos and photos plus the recession, can't deny this is the worst economy since the depression, add in the content deals and it's ended.

« Reply #31 on: January 02, 2022, 15:44 »
+2
I find RPDs (average return per download) to be a fairly static ratio. They are good for comparing average commissions between agencies, but they don't actually tell you if you made more income.

I use RPIs - return per image. (Sales divided by number of images). This tells you what income has gone up or down compared to the last time you calculated it. I use it to tell me what subjects to keep shooting (if it has risen) or alternatively what to stop shooting.

Because I shoot/create a lot of different types of images - photos, videos, stop motion animation, graphic design layouts, it helps me enormously to show where I should direct my resources in the next 3 or 6 months.


I agree, the RPI is a very important indicator, although it's more of a personal statistic than RPD which, as you say, is good for comparing average commissions between agencies, and is a good indicator of whether the Shutterstock Levels have had a positive or negative impact on earnings.

I use Stock Performer to access  all of this information at a glance, as I can view total earnings for a particular shoot, plus number of files/downloads, total revenue, RPD, RPI per month and RPI overall. I also have the cost shown, and can see at a glance whether a shoot has run at a loss, broken even or is in profit. Drilling down further, I can check the earnings per site, first upload date, average file age and STR, (sell through rate).

It's an invaluable tool if you are running this as a business and find statistical information to be beneficial, and maybe one to consider if you don't already use it?

This, alongside my monthly management accounts, gives me a very clear picture of where my business is going.

I trialed Stock Performer! back in 2015 or maybe it was 2016, on the advice of a friend but decided not to go ahead with it.

But I am a bit confused, your information here is a bit different to what you first said to Firn above. Plus, if your income is declining as you said in your first response, and Firn's is increasing, then maybe Firn is the one who should be giving us all advice  ;)  :D  (just kidding - to each his own)


« Reply #32 on: January 02, 2022, 18:41 »
0
I find RPDs (average return per download) to be a fairly static ratio. They are good for comparing average commissions between agencies, but they don't actually tell you if you made more income.

I use RPIs - return per image. (Sales divided by number of images). This tells you what income has gone up or down compared to the last time you calculated it. I use it to tell me what subjects to keep shooting (if it has risen) or alternatively what to stop shooting.

Because I shoot/create a lot of different types of images - photos, videos, stop motion animation, graphic design layouts, it helps me enormously to show where I should direct my resources in the next 3 or 6 months.


I agree, the RPI is a very important indicator, although it's more of a personal statistic than RPD which, as you say, is good for comparing average commissions between agencies, and is a good indicator of whether the Shutterstock Levels have had a positive or negative impact on earnings.

I use Stock Performer to access  all of this information at a glance, as I can view total earnings for a particular shoot, plus number of files/downloads, total revenue, RPD, RPI per month and RPI overall. I also have the cost shown, and can see at a glance whether a shoot has run at a loss, broken even or is in profit. Drilling down further, I can check the earnings per site, first upload date, average file age and STR, (sell through rate).

It's an invaluable tool if you are running this as a business and find statistical information to be beneficial, and maybe one to consider if you don't already use it?

This, alongside my monthly management accounts, gives me a very clear picture of where my business is going.

I trialed Stock Performer! back in 2015 or maybe it was 2016, on the advice of a friend but decided not to go ahead with it.

But I am a bit confused, your information here is a bit different to what you first said to Firn above. Plus, if your income is declining as you said in your first response, and Firn's is increasing, then maybe Firn is the one who should be giving us all advice  ;)  :D  (just kidding - to each his own)

Sorry, I'm not sure what information here you are referring too? I agreed with you that RPI is an important statistic, and discussed the value of other factors that I find useful, such as RPD, and also recommended the software I use to obtain them, just in case anyone is interested

How does this contradict my first post to Firn?




SpaceStockFootage

  • Space, Sci-Fi and Astronomy Related Stock Footage

« Reply #33 on: January 03, 2022, 02:47 »
+3
Anyone who is still uploading to help these two is insane.

I completely agree, anyone who is still uploading to help these two might very well be insane. But you'll find that the majority of people are still uploading to help themselves (rather than those two)... which is considerably less insane. Them getting rich is only a side effect of something I do that benefits me, it's not why I do it.

H2O

    This user is banned.
« Reply #34 on: January 03, 2022, 07:47 »
+3
Anyone who is still uploading to help these two is insane.

I completely agree, anyone who is still uploading to help these two might very well be insane. But you'll find that the majority of people are still uploading to help themselves (rather than those two)... which is considerably less insane. Them getting rich is only a side effect of something I do that benefits me, it's not why I do it.

This is just a naive comment; looking at your portfolio you are the exception to the vast majority of contributors and thus have a vested interest in talking Shutterstock up.

In fact I would say, like in all situations you are an anomaly, a deviation from the norm, in any given situation you always get this, the reality for 99% of Shutterstock contributors is very different.

The vast majority of people still uploading have little to contribute, the real talent has moved on, in the long term SS will wither and decay, how long this takes is anyones guess, three, maybe five years, whatever it is finished, as those who buy cant find decent images move on to other sites.

As for the shareholders, in time this business model will show that it isnt compatible with the creative industries, Getty who are slightly ahead in this model, are running out of money.

Your short-sightedness in wasting your time uploading to them will come back to bite you, as SS is a subscription site the amount of buyers will dwindle, along with your sales.
 

SpaceStockFootage

  • Space, Sci-Fi and Astronomy Related Stock Footage

« Reply #35 on: January 03, 2022, 08:16 »
+4
I may be the anomaly, but the reality for 99% of contributors to SS is that they earn money from being on SS... and 100% of those that aren't on SS, don't earn money from SS.

If you think that there's been some kind of, or will be some kind of, mass exodus of buyers from SS due to a relatively small percentage of contributors leaving (or that lost earnings from SS will automatically be made up elsewhere), then you might be the one who is being naive. Sure, my earnings might dwindle over time... they might at any agency, and that can be reviewed on an ongoing basis, but in the meantime I'm earning money from the time I'm spending uploading, so nothing will come back to bite me. And they're not dwindling now... I made a decent amount more last year then I did the year before.

And if you think my post was 'talking up' SS then... well, that's just strange. 

« Reply #36 on: January 03, 2022, 11:45 »
+3
I may be the anomaly, but the reality for 99% of contributors to SS is that they earn money from being on SS... and 100% of those that aren't on SS, don't earn money from SS.

If you think that there's been some kind of, or will be some kind of, mass exodus of buyers from SS due to a relatively small percentage of contributors leaving (or that lost earnings from SS will automatically be made up elsewhere), then you might be the one who is being naive. Sure, my earnings might dwindle over time... they might at any agency, and that can be reviewed on an ongoing basis, but in the meantime I'm earning money from the time I'm spending uploading, so nothing will come back to bite me. And they're not dwindling now... I made a decent amount more last year then I did the year before.

And if you think my post was 'talking up' SS then... well, that's just strange.

I don't think you are an anomaly and I agree with your post.

I don't particularly care about SS, Adobe or any of the others. I use SS because it serves my purpose and when it stops serving that purpose I will move on.

The reality is that I still sell more on SS than any other site. I also made more in 2021 than I did in 2020. Not much more - 3.38% - but still more. Adobe did well for me last year too although still not as well as SS.

In addition, the absolute number of downloads I got at SS increased last year and at a greater rate than I added to my portfolio. So that suggests that the buyers haven't gone away.


« Reply #37 on: January 03, 2022, 12:14 »
+1
I may be the anomaly, but the reality for 99% of contributors to SS is that they earn money from being on SS... and 100% of those that aren't on SS, don't earn money from SS.

If you think that there's been some kind of, or will be some kind of, mass exodus of buyers from SS due to a relatively small percentage of contributors leaving (or that lost earnings from SS will automatically be made up elsewhere), then you might be the one who is being naive. Sure, my earnings might dwindle over time... they might at any agency, and that can be reviewed on an ongoing basis, but in the meantime I'm earning money from the time I'm spending uploading, so nothing will come back to bite me. And they're not dwindling now... I made a decent amount more last year then I did the year before.

And if you think my post was 'talking up' SS then... well, that's just strange.

I don't think you are an anomaly and I agree with your post.

I don't particularly care about SS, Adobe or any of the others. I use SS because it serves my purpose and when it stops serving that purpose I will move on.

The reality is that I still sell more on SS than any other site. I also made more in 2021 than I did in 2020. Not much more - 3.38% - but still more. Adobe did well for me last year too although still not as well as SS.

In addition, the absolute number of downloads I got at SS increased last year and at a greater rate than I added to my portfolio. So that suggests that the buyers haven't gone away.

I also agree. I am less than happy with the Shutterstock levels, but I still sell a lot there, and certainly can't afford to walk away and lose a good chunk of my income.

My Shutterstock downloads were slightly reduced in 2021, but I expected that with a portfolio of mainly travel and wildlife. Income there was down by a higher margin, but the loss was more than covered by a good increase in income at Adobe an Istock, plus a couple of others. However, I think that was mostly to do with organic growth, rather than buyers jumping ship.

That said, I certainly know of a couple of companies that have not renewed subscriptions in recent months, but they also deal with travel subjects, (travel agents/websites), so that may be more to do with market conditions than anything else. It will be interesting to see what happens to the market post-pandemic.

H2O

    This user is banned.
« Reply #38 on: January 03, 2022, 12:58 »
+1
I may be the anomaly, but the reality for 99% of contributors to SS is that they earn money from being on SS... and 100% of those that aren't on SS, don't earn money from SS.

If you think that there's been some kind of, or will be some kind of, mass exodus of buyers from SS due to a relatively small percentage of contributors leaving (or that lost earnings from SS will automatically be made up elsewhere), then you might be the one who is being naive. Sure, my earnings might dwindle over time... they might at any agency, and that can be reviewed on an ongoing basis, but in the meantime I'm earning money from the time I'm spending uploading, so nothing will come back to bite me. And they're not dwindling now... I made a decent amount more last year then I did the year before.

And if you think my post was 'talking up' SS then... well, that's just strange.

I don't think you are an anomaly and I agree with your post.

I don't particularly care about SS, Adobe or any of the others. I use SS because it serves my purpose and when it stops serving that purpose I will move on.

The reality is that I still sell more on SS than any other site. I also made more in 2021 than I did in 2020. Not much more - 3.38% - but still more. Adobe did well for me last year too although still not as well as SS.

In addition, the absolute number of downloads I got at SS increased last year and at a greater rate than I added to my portfolio. So that suggests that the buyers haven't gone away.

I also agree. I am less than happy with the Shutterstock levels, but I still sell a lot there, and certainly can't afford to walk away and lose a good chunk of my income.

My Shutterstock downloads were slightly reduced in 2021, but I expected that with a portfolio of mainly travel and wildlife. Income there was down by a higher margin, but the loss was more than covered by a good increase in income at Adobe an Istock, plus a couple of others. However, I think that was mostly to do with organic growth, rather than buyers jumping ship.

That said, I certainly know of a couple of companies that have not renewed subscriptions in recent months, but they also deal with travel subjects, (travel agents/websites), so that may be more to do with market conditions than anything else. It will be interesting to see what happens to the market post-pandemic.


Somehow the above replys are missing the point, I believe that Shutterstocks business model of scamming the contributors will lead to their downfall.

As I keep saying, its not about now and how much your portfolio is making at the moment, which I bet is far less than three years ago.

Its about the talent not uploading, sure your going to get the odd person who will continue too, but overall the bigger picture is, the majority of creative people are not going to be uploading and this will in time have an impact, I predict (and it is the Season for predicting) that five years from now Shutterstock will be a mere shadow of what it was five years ago.

Maybe it will even go bust, Agencies and Designers are not going to be buying from a company that shafts their contributors.

Cutting the commission rates is a double whammy for Shutterstock, designers, art directors and image buyers, the people who buy from them will get to know that the commission rate has been cut and simply not renew their contracts, this along with the talent not uploading new work, is really the death nail for them, and it will be a slow death, any independent shareholder should seriously think about getting out as soon as they can.

« Reply #39 on: January 03, 2022, 13:10 »
+3
I may be the anomaly, but the reality for 99% of contributors to SS is that they earn money from being on SS... and 100% of those that aren't on SS, don't earn money from SS.

If you think that there's been some kind of, or will be some kind of, mass exodus of buyers from SS due to a relatively small percentage of contributors leaving (or that lost earnings from SS will automatically be made up elsewhere), then you might be the one who is being naive. Sure, my earnings might dwindle over time... they might at any agency, and that can be reviewed on an ongoing basis, but in the meantime I'm earning money from the time I'm spending uploading, so nothing will come back to bite me. And they're not dwindling now... I made a decent amount more last year then I did the year before.

And if you think my post was 'talking up' SS then... well, that's just strange.

I don't think you are an anomaly and I agree with your post.

I don't particularly care about SS, Adobe or any of the others. I use SS because it serves my purpose and when it stops serving that purpose I will move on.

The reality is that I still sell more on SS than any other site. I also made more in 2021 than I did in 2020. Not much more - 3.38% - but still more. Adobe did well for me last year too although still not as well as SS.

In addition, the absolute number of downloads I got at SS increased last year and at a greater rate than I added to my portfolio. So that suggests that the buyers haven't gone away.

I also agree. I am less than happy with the Shutterstock levels, but I still sell a lot there, and certainly can't afford to walk away and lose a good chunk of my income.

My Shutterstock downloads were slightly reduced in 2021, but I expected that with a portfolio of mainly travel and wildlife. Income there was down by a higher margin, but the loss was more than covered by a good increase in income at Adobe an Istock, plus a couple of others. However, I think that was mostly to do with organic growth, rather than buyers jumping ship.

That said, I certainly know of a couple of companies that have not renewed subscriptions in recent months, but they also deal with travel subjects, (travel agents/websites), so that may be more to do with market conditions than anything else. It will be interesting to see what happens to the market post-pandemic.


Somehow the above replys are missing the point, I believe that Shutterstocks business model of scamming the contributors will lead to their downfall.

As I keep saying, its not about now and how much your portfolio is making at the moment, which I bet is far less than three years ago.

Its about the talent not uploading, sure your going to get the odd person who will continue too, but overall the bigger picture is, the majority of creative people are not going to be uploading and this will in time have an impact, I predict (and it is the Season for predicting) that five years from now Shutterstock will be a mere shadow of what it was five years ago.

Maybe it will even go bust, Agencies and Designers are not going to be buying from a company that shafts their contributors.

Cutting the commission rates is a double whammy for Shutterstock, designers, art directors and image buyers, the people who buy from them will get to know that the commission rate has been cut and simply not renew their contracts, this along with the talent not uploading new work, is really the death nail for them, and it will be a slow death, any independent shareholder should seriously think about getting out as soon as they can.

I don't feel I'm missing your point and I don't really disagree with what you are saying. However, I think the demise will be slow, and good content will be uploaded whilst money is being made - even if it is at a lower rate.

Most people who have invested a lot of time and money over the years, simply aren't in a position to pull it down and take the financial loss. Some might stop uploading or slow down their efforts whilst building elsewhere, but Shutterstock still have enough pull to keep many of us there for now - even if we like to moan about the way they have treated us.

« Reply #40 on: January 03, 2022, 16:30 »
+2
This is just a naive comment; looking at your portfolio you are the exception to the vast majority of contributors and thus have a vested interest in talking Shutterstock up.

In fact I would say, like in all situations you are an anomaly, a deviation from the norm, in any given situation you always get this, the reality for 99% of Shutterstock contributors is very different.

The vast majority of people still uploading have little to contribute, the real talent has moved on, in the long term SS will wither and decay, how long this takes is anyones guess, three, maybe five years, whatever it is finished, as those who buy cant find decent images move on to other sites.....
 

99%?? vast majority???your source for those ridiculous claims???  how can you possibly know that??
 

« Reply #41 on: January 03, 2022, 23:35 »
+1
I find RPDs (average return per download) to be a fairly static ratio. They are good for comparing average commissions between agencies, but they don't actually tell you if you made more income.

I use RPIs - return per image. (Sales divided by number of images). This tells you what income has gone up or down compared to the last time you calculated it. I use it to tell me what subjects to keep shooting (if it has risen) or alternatively what to stop shooting.

Because I shoot/create a lot of different types of images - photos, videos, stop motion animation, graphic design layouts, it helps me enormously to show where I should direct my resources in the next 3 or 6 months.


I agree, the RPI is a very important indicator, although it's more of a personal statistic than RPD which, as you say, is good for comparing average commissions between agencies, and is a good indicator of whether the Shutterstock Levels have had a positive or negative impact on earnings.

I use Stock Performer to access  all of this information at a glance, as I can view total earnings for a particular shoot, plus number of files/downloads, total revenue, RPD, RPI per month and RPI overall. I also have the cost shown, and can see at a glance whether a shoot has run at a loss, broken even or is in profit. Drilling down further, I can check the earnings per site, first upload date, average file age and STR, (sell through rate).

It's an invaluable tool if you are running this as a business and find statistical information to be beneficial, and maybe one to consider if you don't already use it?

This, alongside my monthly management accounts, gives me a very clear picture of where my business is going.

I trialed Stock Performer! back in 2015 or maybe it was 2016, on the advice of a friend but decided not to go ahead with it.

But I am a bit confused, your information here is a bit different to what you first said to Firn above. Plus, if your income is declining as you said in your first response, and Firn's is increasing, then maybe Firn is the one who should be giving us all advice  ;)  :D  (just kidding - to each his own)

Sorry, I'm not sure what information here you are referring too? I agreed with you that RPI is an important statistic, and discussed the value of other factors that I find useful, such as RPD, and also recommended the software I use to obtain them, just in case anyone is interested

How does this contradict my first post to Firn?

Its ok, KKat, you can relax. It was just a little bit of a joke on my part that obviously went horribly wrong.

I'll try and explain>

You started off by saying "with 2020 and 2021 seeing more significant drops", and prior to that " I am seeing a very real drop in earnings" ... but then ended with a whole lot of stats info from Stock Performer! saying 'It's an invaluable tool if you are running this as a business".  (Confusing part: you are promoting a very expensive analysis tool even though its not helping your income ??? )

There was lots of discussion re RPDs in between. You kept talking RPDs. Firm doesn't see the fuss with RPDs.

My silly Aussie humour kicked in and my thoughts were, if Firn's income is going up without stats, and yours is going down (with lots of stats) then maybe Firn should be the one giving us all advice.

But its just a joke. Being an accountant, I am a stats person myself but I can see the funny side of it all. The joke is on me as well. I also know Firn's port and she has put a lot of hard work into her shoots, has created some very good stock imagery, and has done extremely well in a relatively short period of time in a very difficult market.

Anyway, the bottom line is: To each his own. You like stats, I like stats, Firn doesn't. No one is right or wrong, its what works for us individually. And of course, the absolute bottom line: CONTENT is KING.


(In case you're wondering, my photo sales are doing fine, but it's video income where I have lost money. I have the wrong content that can withstand the income drop with SS's video subs and the fall in the Aussie Tourism market. I need different video content.)

« Last Edit: January 04, 2022, 02:23 by Annie »

« Reply #42 on: January 04, 2022, 03:59 »
+1
Its about the talent not uploading, sure your going to get the odd person who will continue too, but overall the bigger picture is, the majority of creative people are not going to be uploading and this will in time have an impact, I predict (and it is the Season for predicting) that five years from now Shutterstock will be a mere shadow of what it was five years ago.
When I started in 2019, SS was number 1 for the majority of contributors in terms of revenue and downloads.
And that is still the case today. Still the majority of contributors write that SS is the 'best horse in the race'. Also with me.
SS are the best sellers. There is no downward trend to be seen.
Anyone who wants to make money must logically be with the number 1 agency.

« Reply #43 on: January 04, 2022, 05:36 »
+1
I find RPDs (average return per download) to be a fairly static ratio. They are good for comparing average commissions between agencies, but they don't actually tell you if you made more income.

I use RPIs - return per image. (Sales divided by number of images). This tells you what income has gone up or down compared to the last time you calculated it. I use it to tell me what subjects to keep shooting (if it has risen) or alternatively what to stop shooting.

Because I shoot/create a lot of different types of images - photos, videos, stop motion animation, graphic design layouts, it helps me enormously to show where I should direct my resources in the next 3 or 6 months.


I agree, the RPI is a very important indicator, although it's more of a personal statistic than RPD which, as you say, is good for comparing average commissions between agencies, and is a good indicator of whether the Shutterstock Levels have had a positive or negative impact on earnings.

I use Stock Performer to access  all of this information at a glance, as I can view total earnings for a particular shoot, plus number of files/downloads, total revenue, RPD, RPI per month and RPI overall. I also have the cost shown, and can see at a glance whether a shoot has run at a loss, broken even or is in profit. Drilling down further, I can check the earnings per site, first upload date, average file age and STR, (sell through rate).

It's an invaluable tool if you are running this as a business and find statistical information to be beneficial, and maybe one to consider if you don't already use it?

This, alongside my monthly management accounts, gives me a very clear picture of where my business is going.

I trialed Stock Performer! back in 2015 or maybe it was 2016, on the advice of a friend but decided not to go ahead with it.

But I am a bit confused, your information here is a bit different to what you first said to Firn above. Plus, if your income is declining as you said in your first response, and Firn's is increasing, then maybe Firn is the one who should be giving us all advice  ;)  :D  (just kidding - to each his own)

Sorry, I'm not sure what information here you are referring too? I agreed with you that RPI is an important statistic, and discussed the value of other factors that I find useful, such as RPD, and also recommended the software I use to obtain them, just in case anyone is interested

How does this contradict my first post to Firn?

Its ok, KKat, you can relax. It was just a little bit of a joke on my part that obviously went horribly wrong.

I'll try and explain>

You started off by saying "with 2020 and 2021 seeing more significant drops", and prior to that " I am seeing a very real drop in earnings" ... but then ended with a whole lot of stats info from Stock Performer! saying 'It's an invaluable tool if you are running this as a business".  (Confusing part: you are promoting a very expensive analysis tool even though its not helping your income ??? )

There was lots of discussion re RPDs in between. You kept talking RPDs. Firm doesn't see the fuss with RPDs.

My silly Aussie humour kicked in and my thoughts were, if Firn's income is going up without stats, and yours is going down (with lots of stats) then maybe Firn should be the one giving us all advice.

But its just a joke. Being an accountant, I am a stats person myself but I can see the funny side of it all. The joke is on me as well. I also know Firn's port and she has put a lot of hard work into her shoots, has created some very good stock imagery, and has done extremely well in a relatively short period of time in a very difficult market.

Anyway, the bottom line is: To each his own. You like stats, I like stats, Firn doesn't. No one is right or wrong, its what works for us individually. And of course, the absolute bottom line: CONTENT is KING.


(In case you're wondering, my photo sales are doing fine, but it's video income where I have lost money. I have the wrong content that can withstand the income drop with SS's video subs and the fall in the Aussie Tourism market. I need different video content.)

Thanks for coming back to clarify, and no harm done.

My comments about income drop were related specifically to Shutterstock, (as the thread was about Shutterstock Levels). At one point many years back, Shutterstock sales accounted for around 70% of my income but the ratio has changed over the years, as I've simultaneously added to other sites. Other sites are now more than picking up the slack from Shutterstock and, although I wouldn't want to lose my Shutterstock earnings, I have spread things out to reduce the dependancy.

I too come from an accounts background, (from many years back), and value statistical information to help me ascertain where to concentrate my efforts. Shutterstock were my number one site for monthly earnings until 2021, but for at least a few of the months, other sites knocked them into 2nd or even third place. During lockdown, when I've been unable to travel, I've been concentrating on uploading the balance of my portfolio to other sites and, so far, the efforts are paying off. 2021 is marginally up overall on 2020, despite an 18% drop in annual income on Shutterstock.

My portfolio is approx 75% travel and wildlife, so it's difficult to tell how much of that Shutterstock loss is due to market conditions, increased competition or buyers changing suppliers. Hopefully 2022 will quickly see the back of the Covid pandemic and will be able to get back to something a bit more normal.

I'm familiar with both Firn's and your portfolio, and appreciate the work put into these. For myself, when I signed up here many years ago, I did so anonymously, as I wanted to be able to voice opinions of the various sites without fear of any retribution. I'm not sitting here in a tinfoil hat, but we all have seen people banned from sites over the years for speaking out.


« Reply #44 on: January 04, 2022, 05:44 »
+3
Its about the talent not uploading, sure your going to get the odd person who will continue too, but overall the bigger picture is, the majority of creative people are not going to be uploading and this will in time have an impact, I predict (and it is the Season for predicting) that five years from now Shutterstock will be a mere shadow of what it was five years ago.
When I started in 2019, SS was number 1 for the majority of contributors in terms of revenue and downloads.
And that is still the case today. Still the majority of contributors write that SS is the 'best horse in the race'. Also with me.
SS are the best sellers. There is no downward trend to be seen.
Anyone who wants to make money must logically be with the number 1 agency.

I had a very steep upward trend with shutterstock. I started there in November 2010 and it went steeply uphill until 2015. In 2012, shutterstock was better than Fotolia (Adobe Stock) for the first time.  Since 2016, I have been going downhill with shutterstock. Since 2018 Adobe Stock is better than shutterstock again.

In the poll results, shutterstock was listed as the number 1 for a very long time. Meanwhile, it is often the case that Adobe Stock is number 1. This is despite the fact that there is no money to be made there in editorial for many contributors.

I don't know how many contributors offer their numbers in the Poll results. But if that number is high enough to indicate a trend, you can see that your statement is not a blanket statement.


thijsdegraaf

« Reply #45 on: January 04, 2022, 05:52 »
+1
I'm familiar with both Firn's and your portfolio, and appreciate the work put into these. For myself, when I signed up here many years ago, I did so anonymously, as I wanted to be able to voice opinions of the various sites without fear of any retribution. I'm not sitting here in a tinfoil hat, but we all have seen people banned from sites over the years for speaking out.

I do regret that. I also know Firns and Annie's work through the Shutterstock forum.
I think people on this forum are more careful. More often a pseudonym, more often without showing their work.
At Shutterstock we did have discussions about that with people who did that because they were afraid of stealing their work.
(I tried to create a shutterstock link with icon, but that went wrong. So I mentioned my website, which also contains a link to my stock sites)
But the reason is the fear of reactions from the Stocksites?

thijsdegraaf

« Reply #46 on: January 04, 2022, 06:02 »
0
Its about the talent not uploading, sure your going to get the odd person who will continue too, but overall the bigger picture is, the majority of creative people are not going to be uploading and this will in time have an impact, I predict (and it is the Season for predicting) that five years from now Shutterstock will be a mere shadow of what it was five years ago.
When I started in 2019, SS was number 1 for the majority of contributors in terms of revenue and downloads.
And that is still the case today. Still the majority of contributors write that SS is the 'best horse in the race'. Also with me.
SS are the best sellers. There is no downward trend to be seen.
Anyone who wants to make money must logically be with the number 1 agency.

I had a very steep upward trend with shutterstock. I started there in November 2010 and it went steeply uphill until 2015. In 2012, shutterstock was better than Fotolia (Adobe Stock) for the first time.  Since 2016, I have been going downhill with shutterstock. Since 2018 Adobe Stock is better than shutterstock again.

In the poll results, shutterstock was listed as the number 1 for a very long time. Meanwhile, it is often the case that Adobe Stock is number 1. This is despite the fact that there is no money to be made there in editorial for many contributors.

I don't know how many contributors offer their numbers in the Poll results. But if that number is high enough to indicate a trend, you can see that your statement is not a blanket statement.

Can't that be because you upload new photos to Adobe and not to Shutterstock Wilm? (I know your port on Shutterstock well, the one on Adobe not)


« Reply #47 on: January 04, 2022, 06:06 »
+1
I'm familiar with both Firn's and your portfolio, and appreciate the work put into these. For myself, when I signed up here many years ago, I did so anonymously, as I wanted to be able to voice opinions of the various sites without fear of any retribution. I'm not sitting here in a tinfoil hat, but we all have seen people banned from sites over the years for speaking out.

I do regret that. I also know Firns and Annie's work through the Shutterstock forum.
I think people on this forum are more careful. More often a pseudonym, more often without showing their work.
At Shutterstock we did have discussions about that with people who did that because they were afraid of stealing their work.
(I tried to create a shutterstock link with icon, but that went wrong. So I mentioned my website, which also contains a link to my stock sites)
But the reason is the fear of reactions from the Stocksites?

I used to be very active on the Shutterstock forums, but stopped posting many years back after several of my ideas got copied. However, I still read them and it's why I'm familiar with Firn and Annie's work.

Here I will remain anonymous for a number of personal reasons.

thijsdegraaf

« Reply #48 on: January 04, 2022, 06:10 »
0
I'm familiar with both Firn's and your portfolio, and appreciate the work put into these. For myself, when I signed up here many years ago, I did so anonymously, as I wanted to be able to voice opinions of the various sites without fear of any retribution. I'm not sitting here in a tinfoil hat, but we all have seen people banned from sites over the years for speaking out.

I do regret that. I also know Firns and Annie's work through the Shutterstock forum.
I think people on this forum are more careful. More often a pseudonym, more often without showing their work.
At Shutterstock we did have discussions about that with people who did that because they were afraid of stealing their work.
(I tried to create a shutterstock link with icon, but that went wrong. So I mentioned my website, which also contains a link to my stock sites)
But the reason is the fear of reactions from the Stocksites?

I used to be very active on the Shutterstock forums, but stopped posting many years back after several of my ideas got copied. However, I still read them and it's why I'm familiar with Firn and Annie's work.

Here I will remain anonymous for a number of personal reasons.

So also a reason for you.
I respect that of course.

« Reply #49 on: January 04, 2022, 07:01 »
0
I made $190 last month on shutterstock and  My income has not reset to zero yet. anyone having this issue ?

« Reply #50 on: January 04, 2022, 07:16 »
0
I made $190 last month on shutterstock and  My income has not reset to zero yet. anyone having this issue ?

Yes, my earnings also haven't reset.
Usually I would not worry about it, because sometimes it can take a bit longer, because I had to update my tax form and wasn't sure the update had gone through (as I kept getting notifications that it needed to be updated, even though I already had) so I was not sure I would get my payment this month and  contacted support and was told that there was nothing to worry about, the payment process was delayed because of the holiday weekend. Since this was not an answer from real support, but just an "expert contributor", I don't know how much validity it has.

« Reply #51 on: January 04, 2022, 07:23 »
+1
Its about the talent not uploading, sure your going to get the odd person who will continue too, but overall the bigger picture is, the majority of creative people are not going to be uploading and this will in time have an impact, I predict (and it is the Season for predicting) that five years from now Shutterstock will be a mere shadow of what it was five years ago.
When I started in 2019, SS was number 1 for the majority of contributors in terms of revenue and downloads.
And that is still the case today. Still the majority of contributors write that SS is the 'best horse in the race'. Also with me.
SS are the best sellers. There is no downward trend to be seen.
Anyone who wants to make money must logically be with the number 1 agency.

I had a very steep upward trend with shutterstock. I started there in November 2010 and it went steeply uphill until 2015. In 2012, shutterstock was better than Fotolia (Adobe Stock) for the first time.  Since 2016, I have been going downhill with shutterstock. Since 2018 Adobe Stock is better than shutterstock again.

In the poll results, shutterstock was listed as the number 1 for a very long time. Meanwhile, it is often the case that Adobe Stock is number 1. This is despite the fact that there is no money to be made there in editorial for many contributors.

I don't know how many contributors offer their numbers in the Poll results. But if that number is high enough to indicate a trend, you can see that your statement is not a blanket statement.

Can't that be because you upload new photos to Adobe and not to Shutterstock Wilm? (I know your port on Shutterstock well, the one on Adobe not)

Thijs,

I also uploaded very little to Adobe Stock. But at the time when shutterstock was going downhill for me, I uploaded as much there as I did on Adobe Stock.
I don't know exactly, but maybe there is some element in shutterstock's algorithm that penalizes you for uploading little. And with AS, I don't think there is.

Anyway: Obviously most of the contributors at shutterstock meanwhile don't earn more than at AS. And that used to be different.

marthamarks

« Reply #52 on: January 04, 2022, 10:22 »
0

My portfolio is approx 75% travel and wildlife

So is mine, as you can see if you click my link below. Except mine includes what I call "Avian Impressions," some of my own digital bird photos that I've creatively manipulated to produce unique decorative images.

I would love to see your portfolio, not to copy or steal anything but just to admire and appreciate. However, I also respect your desire to remain private.

To each her own, I suppose.

Good luck in 2022! :)
« Last Edit: January 04, 2022, 10:45 by marthamarks »

« Reply #53 on: January 04, 2022, 10:33 »
0
I made $190 last month on shutterstock and  My income has not reset to zero yet. anyone having this issue ?

Yes, my earnings also haven't reset.
Usually I would not worry about it, because sometimes it can take a bit longer, because I had to update my tax form and wasn't sure the update had gone through (as I kept getting notifications that it needed to be updated, even though I already had) so I was not sure I would get my payment this month and  contacted support and was told that there was nothing to worry about, the payment process was delayed because of the holiday weekend. Since this was not an answer from real support, but just an "expert contributor", I don't know how much validity it has.


Exactly the same happened to me, Firn. I had submitted my new W8BEN and several days later got the same notification.

The payout will follow in the next days.

« Reply #54 on: January 04, 2022, 10:58 »
+2

My portfolio is approx 75% travel and wildlife

So is mine, as you can see if you click my link below. Except mine includes what I call "Avian Impressions," some of my own digital bird photos that I've creatively manipulated to produce unique decorative images.

I would love to see your portfolio, not to copy or steal anything but just to admire and appreciate. However, I also respect your desire to remain private.

To each her own, I suppose.

Good luck in 2022! :)

Thank you, Martha - and best of luck to you too!

I do have valid personal reasons for remaining anonymous, (other than having some content closely copied in the past), but if those ever reason change, I will identify myself ;)

marthamarks

« Reply #55 on: January 04, 2022, 11:47 »
+1

My portfolio is approx 75% travel and wildlife

So is mine, as you can see if you click my link below. Except mine includes what I call "Avian Impressions," some of my own digital bird photos that I've creatively manipulated to produce unique decorative images.

I would love to see your portfolio, not to copy or steal anything but just to admire and appreciate. However, I also respect your desire to remain private.

To each her own, I suppose.

Good luck in 2022! :)

Thank you, Martha - and best of luck to you too!

I do have valid personal reasons for remaining anonymous, (other than having some content closely copied in the past), but if those ever reason change, I will identify myself ;)

Deal!  8)

Level6

« Reply #56 on: January 04, 2022, 11:54 »
+1
I made $190 last month on shutterstock and  My income has not reset to zero yet. anyone having this issue ?

It will, just a little slower these days just like the payout was later last month, maybe a different trusted 3rd party they're using to process payments, mine hasn't reset yet either, probably will reset any day now and then payout will be on or just after the 15th like last time.

I'm not worried, $35.75


« Reply #57 on: January 04, 2022, 13:05 »
+1
It's funny how Adobe is winning for me right now in January. $19 for 19 downloads on Adobe vs $10 for 51 downloads on SS.

SpaceStockFootage

  • Space, Sci-Fi and Astronomy Related Stock Footage

« Reply #58 on: January 04, 2022, 13:17 »
+1
Agencies and Designers are not going to be buying from a company that shafts their contributors.

Well the last full year of revenue before they were shafting us... was $623m. And the first full year of revenue after they started shafting us was $666m. Not to mention the totals for 2021 are looking to be even higher. So did these agencies and designers not get the memo, or are they just still willingly buying from a company that shafts their contributors?

Level6

« Reply #59 on: January 04, 2022, 14:01 »
+2
Agencies and Designers are not going to be buying from a company that shafts their contributors.

Well the last full year of revenue before they were shafting us... was $623m. And the first full year of revenue after they started shafting us was $666m. Not to mention the totals for 2021 are looking to be even higher. So did these agencies and designers not get the memo, or are they just still willingly buying from a company that shafts their contributors?

I don't think most customers care or even care to look.  A few ethical customers might but the masses don't unfortunately, same in the physical world, lost cause sadly.



thijsdegraaf

« Reply #60 on: January 04, 2022, 14:27 »
+4
Agencies and Designers are not going to be buying from a company that shafts their contributors.

Well the last full year of revenue before they were shafting us... was $623m. And the first full year of revenue after they started shafting us was $666m. Not to mention the totals for 2021 are looking to be even higher. So did these agencies and designers not get the memo, or are they just still willingly buying from a company that shafts their contributors?

I don't think most customers care or even care to look.  A few ethical customers might but the masses don't unfortunately, same in the physical world, lost cause sadly.

The few customers I've spoken to often don't know. But to be honest, I also don't know if all my clothes are made under good conditions for a good wage, or if all the wood I use is responsibly harvested.
The customers I know are people who don't buy for themselves, but for a company they work for.

« Reply #61 on: January 04, 2022, 14:57 »
+3
The few customers I've spoken to often don't know. But to be honest, I also don't know if all my clothes are made under good conditions for a good wage, or if all the wood I use is responsibly harvested.
The customers I know are people who don't buy for themselves, but for a company they work for.

Absolutely right Thijs.
No one has the time to critically scrutinize every product they buy.
And the purchase of photos from stock agencies should be at the bottom of the list of priorities  ;)

Level6

« Reply #62 on: January 04, 2022, 16:01 »
+1
Agencies and Designers are not going to be buying from a company that shafts their contributors.

Well the last full year of revenue before they were shafting us... was $623m. And the first full year of revenue after they started shafting us was $666m. Not to mention the totals for 2021 are looking to be even higher. So did these agencies and designers not get the memo, or are they just still willingly buying from a company that shafts their contributors?

I don't think most customers care or even care to look.  A few ethical customers might but the masses don't unfortunately, same in the physical world, lost cause sadly.

The few customers I've spoken to often don't know. But to be honest, I also don't know if all my clothes are made under good conditions for a good wage, or if all the wood I use is responsibly harvested.
The customers I know are people who don't buy for themselves, but for a company they work for.

I honestly didn't know either when shopping at Walmart until the factory collapse and factory fire that killed well over 1000 people hit the mainstream media here in Canada, that's when I started to check the labels and look more closely but until that happened I simply didn't know, I just bought what i needed and what looked good at a good price.

I think same with stock or any other gig economy service, free or nearly free labour, no one looks and no one cares,

thijsdegraaf

« Reply #63 on: January 04, 2022, 16:39 »
+1
Agencies and Designers are not going to be buying from a company that shafts their contributors.

Well the last full year of revenue before they were shafting us... was $623m. And the first full year of revenue after they started shafting us was $666m. Not to mention the totals for 2021 are looking to be even higher. So did these agencies and designers not get the memo, or are they just still willingly buying from a company that shafts their contributors?

I don't think most customers care or even care to look.  A few ethical customers might but the masses don't unfortunately, same in the physical world, lost cause sadly.

The few customers I've spoken to often don't know. But to be honest, I also don't know if all my clothes are made under good conditions for a good wage, or if all the wood I use is responsibly harvested.
The customers I know are people who don't buy for themselves, but for a company they work for.

I honestly didn't know either when shopping at Walmart until the factory collapse and factory fire that killed well over 1000 people hit the mainstream media here in Canada, that's when I started to check the labels and look more closely but until that happened I simply didn't know, I just bought what i needed and what looked good at a good price.

I think same with stock or any other gig economy service, free or nearly free labour, no one looks and no one cares,

Today our government pays more attention to that and you cannot compare the circumstances of those people with ours. Then they would laugh really hard at you. Of course when it's in the news you pay more attention to it, especially when there are good alternatives.
And if you buy a cup of coffee or a chocolate bar somewhere, you of course check whether a fair price has been paid for the beans. When you buy a gold ring, make sure it doesn't come from mines with poor conditions. You should also be careful when buying batteries.
Try to see life a little sunnier. There are worse things in the world than an underpaid stock photographer. Also, look at yourself if things in your life aren't going the way you want them to.

« Reply #64 on: January 04, 2022, 16:53 »
0
I made $190 last month on shutterstock and  My income has not reset to zero yet. anyone having this issue ?

it happens first few days each month (it updated this morning) but you can always get accurate numbers by month by using the earnings tab

« Reply #65 on: January 04, 2022, 16:54 »
+4
There are worse things in the world than an underpaid stock photographer. Also, look at yourself if things in your life aren't going the way you want them to.

Yes, there are worse things - colored tattoos.
I am so happy that the EU is now completely and finaly eradicating cancer by taking tattoo artists europe-wide off the scene into bankruptcy.
Next, we should turn off the harmful sun  ;)
« Last Edit: January 04, 2022, 16:59 by RalfLiebhold »

Level6

« Reply #66 on: January 04, 2022, 19:13 »
0
There are worse things in the world than an underpaid stock photographer. Also, look at yourself if things in your life aren't going the way you want them to.

Yes, there are worse things - colored tattoos.
I am so happy that the EU is now completely and finaly eradicating cancer by taking tattoo artists europe-wide off the scene into bankruptcy.
Next, we should turn off the harmful sun  ;)

Thought you were joking but it's true https://www.politico.eu/article/tattoo-parlors-brace-new-eu-ink-bans/  This might be a good editorial stock video and photo idea, shots of the bottles of coloured ink that are now banned and if any model has a coloured tattoo even better.

I'm just waiting for our Ontario Canada politicians to ban toilet paper as there are no doubt some cancer causing chemicals in the manufacturing process of the paper.


« Reply #67 on: January 04, 2022, 21:34 »
0

I'm just waiting for our Ontario Canada politicians to ban toilet paper as there are no doubt some cancer causing chemicals in the manufacturing process of the paper.

Hope so! I have a couple of toilet roll photos already uploaded and accepted and they have even sold a few times. Would be a good opportunity to sell them a few more times.

« Reply #68 on: January 05, 2022, 02:05 »
0
There are worse things in the world than an underpaid stock photographer. Also, look at yourself if things in your life aren't going the way you want them to.

Yes, there are worse things - colored tattoos.
I am so happy that the EU is now completely and finaly eradicating cancer by taking tattoo artists europe-wide off the scene into bankruptcy.
Next, we should turn off the harmful sun  ;)

Thought you were joking but it's true https://www.politico.eu/article/tattoo-parlors-brace-new-eu-ink-bans/  This might be a good editorial stock video and photo idea, shots of the bottles of coloured ink that are now banned and if any model has a coloured tattoo even better.

I'm just waiting for our Ontario Canada politicians to ban toilet paper as there are no doubt some cancer causing chemicals in the manufacturing process of the paper.

Unfortunately, many of the eu parliament's decisions really do seem like a joke and are not comprehensible with clear common sense. For the banned tattoo inks it is not even proven that they are carcinogenic and this assumption probably applies to almost all substances - so your comparison with toilet paper is not so far-fetched.

« Reply #69 on: January 05, 2022, 02:46 »
0

Thought you were joking but it's true https://www.politico.eu/article/tattoo-parlors-brace-new-eu-ink-bans/  This might be a good editorial stock video and photo idea, shots of the bottles of coloured ink that are now banned and if any model has a coloured tattoo even better.


If only Shutterstock hadn't that rule that you need a property release from the atttoo artist for models with tattoos, which makes things quite complicated.  ::)
Apparently once you get tattooed you lose the right to decide over your own body.
« Last Edit: January 05, 2022, 02:55 by Firn »

thijsdegraaf

« Reply #70 on: January 05, 2022, 03:07 »
+2
There are worse things in the world than an underpaid stock photographer. Also, look at yourself if things in your life aren't going the way you want them to.

Yes, there are worse things - colored tattoos.
I am so happy that the EU is now completely and finaly eradicating cancer by taking tattoo artists europe-wide off the scene into bankruptcy.
Next, we should turn off the harmful sun  ;)

Thought you were joking but it's true https://www.politico.eu/article/tattoo-parlors-brace-new-eu-ink-bans/  This might be a good editorial stock video and photo idea, shots of the bottles of coloured ink that are now banned and if any model has a coloured tattoo even better.

I'm just waiting for our Ontario Canada politicians to ban toilet paper as there are no doubt some cancer causing chemicals in the manufacturing process of the paper.

Unfortunately, many of the eu parliament's decisions really do seem like a joke and are not comprehensible with clear common sense. For the banned tattoo inks it is not even proven that they are carcinogenic and this assumption probably applies to almost all substances - so your comparison with toilet paper is not so far-fetched.

I find that difficult.
I used to cut asbestos sheets for behind my stove. I sometimes find the security measures a bit exaggerated, but it is now clear that it is harmful.
In my youth it was said, the harmfulness of smoking has yet to be proven.
The hole in the ozone layer turned out to be our own cause and the ban on the use of some substances has helped.
In the Netherlands there are processes because people have become seriously ill from spraying paint with Hexavalent chromium (chromium(VI), Cr(VI), chromium 6). It was much too late to intervene with regard to the inadequate safety regulations.
I think taking the tattoo inks off the market before new ones are also overkill. Although I would never want to have a tattoo.  ;D
I just wonder what happens if (now that it is known that there are harmful substances in it) someone gets cancer maybe as a result. Then someone can sue the tattoo artists or the ink makers. Or the European legislators, because they did nothing about it.
Think of Philips' breathing devices  (breathing machines with harmful foam) . They have already set aside millions for possible lawsuits. While you also hear the harmful effect is actually not that bad.
We live in a strange world in that regard.

But we are straying from the topic. :-X

« Last Edit: January 05, 2022, 03:36 by thijsdegraaf »

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #71 on: January 05, 2022, 13:18 »
0
There are worse things in the world than an underpaid stock photographer. Also, look at yourself if things in your life aren't going the way you want them to.

Yes, there are worse things - colored tattoos.
I am so happy that the EU is now completely and finaly eradicating cancer by taking tattoo artists europe-wide off the scene into bankruptcy.
Next, we should turn off the harmful sun  ;)

Thought you were joking but it's true https://www.politico.eu/article/tattoo-parlors-brace-new-eu-ink-bans/  This might be a good editorial stock video and photo idea, shots of the bottles of coloured ink that are now banned and if any model has a coloured tattoo even better.

I'm just waiting for our Ontario Canada politicians to ban toilet paper as there are no doubt some cancer causing chemicals in the manufacturing process of the paper.

Unfortunately, many of the eu parliament's decisions really do seem like a joke and are not comprehensible with clear common sense. For the banned tattoo inks it is not even proven that they are carcinogenic and this assumption probably applies to almost all substances - so your comparison with toilet paper is not so far-fetched.

Here's one more from the news:  The Taliban have ordered shop owners in western Afghanistan to cut the heads off mannequins, insisting figures representing the human form violate Islamic law.

Extremist Politics and Extremist Religions some of the worst offenders of common sense. And then there are places that love to ban and regulate things. The EU is becoming one but California is the biggest bunch of proposition regulation weenies in the world. They are now suing the power companies for Acts of God, like when a tree in a storm, falls on a power line and it starts a fire.

California Prop 12: The "Bacon" Law

The contentious law over farm animals -- specifically bringing bacon and pork products into the conversation -- was passed in 2018. The first deadline passed Jan. 2020, and required that egg-laying hens have adequate space. The hens have to be housed with a minimum of 144 square inches per hen. Calves intended to be sold as veal must be housed with a minimum of 43 square feet per calf.

The second part of the law is what goes into effect in January 2022. Egg-laying hens must be cage-free, and breeding pigs must be allotted 24 square feet per pig.


Anyone with any math sense can see that 144 square inches is a square foot. That seems pretty small, and I wonder how they could pack them any closer than that in the first place, terrible conditions, that should be banned, but... just wait until 2022, oh that's now? Hey anyone who lives in CA, watch your bacon prices go through the sky, bigger than Bitcoin, because the laws forbid importing of bacon that doesn't meet the CA standards.  ::)

Black market Tats are in the forecast for the EU.

Level6

« Reply #72 on: January 05, 2022, 14:27 »
0
There are worse things in the world than an underpaid stock photographer. Also, look at yourself if things in your life aren't going the way you want them to.

Yes, there are worse things - colored tattoos.
I am so happy that the EU is now completely and finaly eradicating cancer by taking tattoo artists europe-wide off the scene into bankruptcy.
Next, we should turn off the harmful sun  ;)

Thought you were joking but it's true https://www.politico.eu/article/tattoo-parlors-brace-new-eu-ink-bans/  This might be a good editorial stock video and photo idea, shots of the bottles of coloured ink that are now banned and if any model has a coloured tattoo even better.

I'm just waiting for our Ontario Canada politicians to ban toilet paper as there are no doubt some cancer causing chemicals in the manufacturing process of the paper.

Unfortunately, many of the eu parliament's decisions really do seem like a joke and are not comprehensible with clear common sense. For the banned tattoo inks it is not even proven that they are carcinogenic and this assumption probably applies to almost all substances - so your comparison with toilet paper is not so far-fetched.

Here's one more from the news:  The Taliban have ordered shop owners in western Afghanistan to cut the heads off mannequins, insisting figures representing the human form violate Islamic law.

Extremist Politics and Extremist Religions some of the worst offenders of common sense. And then there are places that love to ban and regulate things. The EU is becoming one but California is the biggest bunch of proposition regulation weenies in the world. They are now suing the power companies for Acts of God, like when a tree in a storm, falls on a power line and it starts a fire.

California Prop 12: The "Bacon" Law

The contentious law over farm animals -- specifically bringing bacon and pork products into the conversation -- was passed in 2018. The first deadline passed Jan. 2020, and required that egg-laying hens have adequate space. The hens have to be housed with a minimum of 144 square inches per hen. Calves intended to be sold as veal must be housed with a minimum of 43 square feet per calf.

The second part of the law is what goes into effect in January 2022. Egg-laying hens must be cage-free, and breeding pigs must be allotted 24 square feet per pig.


Anyone with any math sense can see that 144 square inches is a square foot. That seems pretty small, and I wonder how they could pack them any closer than that in the first place, terrible conditions, that should be banned, but... just wait until 2022, oh that's now? Hey anyone who lives in CA, watch your bacon prices go through the sky, bigger than Bitcoin, because the laws forbid importing of bacon that doesn't meet the CA standards.  ::)

Black market Tats are in the forecast for the EU.

Just like black market haircuts became a think in Ontario Canada during the lockdown, self-haircuts with clippers or on friends and family and then laid off stylists who are mostly and technically self employed as they rent the chair basically in these salons started risking massive fines and doing black market haircuts in their homes for customers they know and trust.

Same will happen with the tattoos, the artists will find a way to get the coloured ink and they will find a way to serve regular customers.

All the rules, regulations and laws, surveillance and tracking in the EU, California and Ontario Canada, it's just hard to accept for those of use who remember what it used to be like, I think we are going to become like communist China but taking a different route to get there. Will it eventually lead to civil war in some places?, maybe, can't rule anything out. There's only so much people cant take, being screwed at every turn by businesses, employers and now the governments and omicron isn't helping.



 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
4 Replies
8152 Views
Last post December 01, 2010, 18:38
by ShadySue
40 Replies
8641 Views
Last post October 21, 2011, 16:34
by cobalt
25 Replies
38430 Views
Last post May 26, 2015, 05:40
by cathyslife
6 Replies
5313 Views
Last post December 05, 2017, 14:28
by JimP
2 Replies
2005 Views
Last post January 18, 2018, 03:17
by SuperPhoto

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle