MicrostockGroup
Agency Based Discussion => Shutterstock.com => Topic started by: thijsdegraaf on December 25, 2021, 13:20
-
Another new topic. Hopefully that stays alive, because my two topics with Christmas and New Year wishes have been remover (Update: The New Years topic has been moved back :) Update 2: Again removed!! :'( :-[ ::) ) .
If someone from the management is reading along: I was just on a Dutch nature forum. The management thanked everyone there and wished everyone a nice day. They do that every year.
Well now my question.
I had a sale on December 23 of a close up of the flowers of ragwort (Jacobaea vulgaris) for 9.98 (level 4). https://www.shutterstock.com/nl/image-photo/flowers-seed-heads-ragwort-jacobaea-vulgaris-1799221774 (https://www.shutterstock.com/nl/image-photo/flowers-seed-heads-ragwort-jacobaea-vulgaris-1799221774) That was the highest amount I've received for a photo from Shutterstock (member for two years). I know from the Shutterstock forum that someone had received over $300, but she mainly photographed American celebrities and I mostly flowers, insects, nature and Dutch buildings, cities.
I'm curious what your highest sales figures are this year at Shutterstock. (Maybe I'm getting all depressed reading the answers 8) )
-
$1,000 Shutterstock Premium picture of Metropolitan Cathedral Mexico City
-
$1,000 Shutterstock Premium picture of Metropolitan Cathedral Mexico City
How long ago?
-
Another new topic. Hopefully that stays alive, because my two topics with Christmas and New Year wishes have been removed.
If someone from the management is reading along: I was just on a Dutch nature forum. The management thanked everyone there and wished everyone a nice day. They do that every year.
Well now my question.
I had a sale on December 23 of a close up of the flowers of ragwort (Jacobaea vulgaris) for 9.98 (level 4). That was the highest amount I've received for a photo from Shutterstock (member for two years). I know from the Shutterstock forum that someone had received over $300, but they mainly photographed American celebrities and I mostly flowers, insects and Dutch buildings, cities.
I'm curious what your highest sales figures are this year at Shutterstock. (Maybe I'm getting all depressed reading the answers 8) )
Only 10 cents for photos but then again the only photos I upload are frame grabs off the 4K video but back in the fall of 2019 I had three editorial video sales, dark night POV driving shots done with the GoPro Hero 8 black my cut was $900 to $930 and I also had a couple of $400 sales.
Haven't had anything even close since SSTK made their changes so maybe those licenses don't exist anymore or we don't get anything above the standard 10 cents for photo and $1.70 for video...not sure.
-
Last year. Had one for $500 plus this year.
-
Last year. Had one for $500 plus this year.
Wow....so they still happen at least for photos, have had one even close for video this year. Pays to leave the content up I guess just in case.
-
Yep. When SS dropped their commissions on subscriptions to 10 cents was pretty discouraged. Talked to a friend with a lot of years in stock because there was a movement to leave SS. She told me what can you do and as to movement of photographers leaving SS, she said “good”. Less competition.
And then I started getting higher single sales. So better to hang in there.
-
Hello thijsdegraaf,
my 3 highest photo sales in 2021 were...
1. $40.58 - 09. Feb 2021: https://www.shutterstock.com/de/image-photo/modern-office-building-facades-glass-reflecting-1543720496 (https://www.shutterstock.com/de/image-photo/modern-office-building-facades-glass-reflecting-1543720496)
2. $29.85 - 27. Sep 2021: https://www.shutterstock.com/de/image-photo/beautiful-pink-purple-infrared-panorama-european-1495086146 (https://www.shutterstock.com/de/image-photo/beautiful-pink-purple-infrared-panorama-european-1495086146)
3. $16.99 - 12. Jul 2021: https://www.shutterstock.com/de/image-photo/detailed-close-view-on-water-surfaces-1829792567 (https://www.shutterstock.com/de/image-photo/detailed-close-view-on-water-surfaces-1829792567)
Highest sale ever was a $80.00 in late 2019: https://www.shutterstock.com/de/image-photo/orange-sunset-clouds-on-blue-sky-1188915043 (https://www.shutterstock.com/de/image-photo/orange-sunset-clouds-on-blue-sky-1188915043)
I never hat any sale with '3 digits', but I am only a small contributor without any people images :)
-
Yep. When SS dropped their commissions on subscriptions to 10 cents was pretty discouraged. Talked to a friend with a lot of years in stock because there was a movement to leave SS. She told me what can you do and as to movement of photographers leaving SS, she said “good”. Less competition.
And then I started getting higher single sales. So better to hang in there.
and not go "exclusive" any other other video or photo agency, what a scam that is......
-
No exclusives at SS.
Also believe going exclusive is the wrong move. Gives to much power to the site. Put your photos up on a number of sites and you will do better.
The only protection a stock photographer has is the number of sites he is on.
Stock is a bulk business so more you put up more money you will make.
-
Thank you Michael (too bad that the highest amount was in February, when you didn't have the highest level yet) and William. So there is still hope. I'll have to do my best next year (good intentions) :)
Not fun for you level 6, but you're not alone.
-
No exclusives at SS.
Also believe going exclusive is the wrong move. Gives to much power to the site. Put your photos up on a number of sites and you will do better.
The only protection a stock photographer has is the number of sites he is on.
Stock is a bulk business so more you put up more money you will make.
I 100% agree, when Pond5 launched the exclusive program I saw more red flags than at a bull fight but my main concern was not all customers shop at the one website that you're exclusive with, some can't if they have corporate accounts and others just don't want to.
You want to be on as many viable sites as possible, not many left with all the deals and scamming going on but definitely you want to be in as many viable or semi-viable places as possible to try and get seen by the most customers.
Same in the physical world.
-
Thank you Michael (too bad that the highest amount was in February, when you didn't have the highest level yet) and William. So there is still hope. I'll have to do my best next year (good intentions) :)
Not fun for you level 6, but you're not alone.
True, not good for me at all but this is one more reason to leave all the content up there and many add more when I can.
-
Had one SOD for $66.69 (thought the devil bought that ;D) and another for $20+ this month so that keeps me 'Innit2Winnit' at SS for the time being.
-
Got $200 for a video. Not too shabby.
-
My highest this year: 72$, 66$, 64$, 48$ and plenty in the 15-25$ range (level 4)
My highest ever: 98$
Highest for video: 120$ (this month, level 2)
-
Thanks OM (I knew you had higher sales too) SpaceStockFootage and Dumc.
-
I got 50$ for a vector !
-
My highest this year: 72$, 66$, 64$, 48$ and plenty in the 15-25$ range (level 4)
My highest ever: 98$
Highest for video: 120$ (this month, level 2)
What a complete and totally useless topic and response. Share with us Dumc, how much would you have made pre-2018 before the SS slashed commissions? Are you an agent working for the SS? When you cuddle up to them do you thank them each time for being so generous? You have no idea how all of us collectively are delighted to learn your SS story and success. Just goes to show it doesn't matter how much the industry slashes commissions when you're a brilliant photographer and videographer. You'll still make 72$, 66$, 64$, 48$, 15-25$, 98$ and 120$.
-
What the f*u*c*k is your problem, he asked a question and I've anwsered it.
-
My highest this year: 72$, 66$, 64$, 48$ and plenty in the 15-25$ range (level 4)
My highest ever: 98$
Highest for video: 120$ (this month, level 2)
What a complete and totally useless topic
Well... what is a useless topic.... We have rightly talked countless times about the 10 cent earnings. I would like to know if higher payments still occur. Not with me until now. That doesn't seem like a strange question to me.
I don't understand your anger towards us. Of course I understand the anger about our pay cut from Shutterstock.
-
My highest this year: 72$, 66$, 64$, 48$ and plenty in the 15-25$ range (level 4)
My highest ever: 98$
Highest for video: 120$ (this month, level 2)
What a complete and totally useless topic and response. Share with us Dumc, how much would you have made pre-2018 before the SS slashed commissions? Are you an agent working for the SS? When you cuddle up to them do you thank them each time for being so generous? You have no idea how all of us collectively are delighted to learn your SS story and success. Just goes to show it doesn't matter how much the industry slashes commissions when you're a brilliant photographer and videographer. You'll still make 72$, 66$, 64$, 48$, 15-25$, 98$ and 120$.
Sooooo...Christmas dinner wasn't too good I presume?
OT:
Highest this year was $59 for a digital raster image, highest ever was around $130 or so for a vector illustration and $174 for video.
-
Nice to see a few are still making more than 10 cents for a photo and $1.70 for a video.....once in awhile but I think it's crystal clear, no one can make a living at this anymore. Even if I got a $900 video sale on SS today, that's nice and it will help but it's a on-off.
The agencies are dealing out content wholesale to those trusted global partners around the world who remain anonymous for "privacy concerns", seriously?. The agencies, like SS and P5 will tell you that it's a competitive market and we need to price lower and in the case of SS take a pay cut, true that there are way more photos and video files on these websites now and there is the free stuff and free sites but here's a question.....how are the agencies staying in business if sales are this slow?.
Answer: Because they aren't slow.
-
No one said you can make a living at stock.
But a $1,000 sale for one photo ain’t bad.
Make your bread somewhere else, but in retirement not a bad gig.
Through stock some of my photos have shown up in National Geographic publications.
So get out if you want to make a living . As one senior person in Stock told me about people leaving SS because of the cut in commissions “good”. Less competition. By the way, she is not working at SS.
This is simple market reality.
-
My highest this year: 72$, 66$, 64$, 48$ and plenty in the 15-25$ range (level 4)
My highest ever: 98$
Highest for video: 120$ (this month, level 2)
What a complete and totally useless topic and response. Share with us Dumc, how much would you have made pre-2018 before the SS slashed commissions? Are you an agent working for the SS? When you cuddle up to them do you thank them each time for being so generous? You have no idea how all of us collectively are delighted to learn your SS story and success. Just goes to show it doesn't matter how much the industry slashes commissions when you're a brilliant photographer and videographer. You'll still make 72$, 66$, 64$, 48$, 15-25$, 98$ and 120$.
I can only guess that you and Dumc have a history? If not that seems a bit over the top.
I wasn't going to respond to this thread at all because really it's no ones business but my own. However "all of us collectively" is not accurate and I just want to let you know that you are definitely not speaking for me. First though I want to make clear that I am not an agent of SS or any other agency for that matter. I'm neither a fan nor a hater of any of them. To me they're just a necessary means to an end and my emotional attachment to all or any of them is probably on par with their emotional attachment to me. I don't consider myself "brilliant" at anything, especially photography and video, and like you I'm also not thrilled with what's happening to the market right now.
That's why I am actually delighted to hear about Dumc's numbers. It shows that maybe just maybe there's a little more to be eeked out of this industry at least for a little while. That is while we're still in the transitional period of Shutterstock's move to subscription only. For myself all I will say is that my portfolio is tiny (887 images, 137 videos). So far this month on SS I've had 562 downloads for a total of $561.41. You can do the math but it's obviously similar to Dumc in that they are far from .10 downloads. It's also an average RPD which has been more or less consistent for me since the new earnings structure. Some months it's more. Some months it's less. It's actually the overall number of downloads that are down for me. Would I have made more before the cut? Perhaps, but it's impossible to tell for sure. Too many variables and moving parts right now. All I know is that to me the difference between 10 cents and 38 cents is negligible anyway, and always has been. It's the higher value sales that keep me in for now. Once those dry up completely with microstock it's all useless anyway.
So yes, good for you Dumc!
-
Agree with you David.
Think it is better to hang in there.
-
No one said you can make a living at stock.
But a $1,000 sale for one photo ain’t bad.
Make your bread somewhere else, but in retirement not a bad gig.
Through stock some of my photos have shown up in National Geographic publications.
So get out if you want to make a living . As one senior person in Stock told me about people leaving SS because of the cut in commissions “good”. Less competition. By the way, she is not working at SS.
This is simple market reality.
Maybe now no but just before sales stopped like a switch was pulled on April 1 2019 I was making $3500/month on pond5 with editorial video, $800/month on SS with editorial and before Videoblocks closed to contributors I made $1500/month there and all with editorial, maybe 10% commercial. There was another contributor at pond5 who was reportedly making $10,000/month with some high end severe weather content and it went downhill for him as well.
I want out, I stayed in too long after April 1 2019 happened and that was my fault, Pond launched the exclusive program which I didn't fall for but either way sales didn't come back, they lower our prices as they claim they are the "stewards of the marketplace", it never ends and then SS cut commissions.
So yes, now it's a hobby...if that.
Finding other work has been one hell of a wake up call, I'm in Ontario Canada, I've done so many things before and when in college and even after before I got into video, everything from fast food to cleaning, maintenance, painting, stocking shelves, driving and I love driving, so many things and yet now since I've been looking for a real job for a year now I can't get hired for literally anything.
"This job isn't for you", "You wouldn't want this job", "You can't do this job", and from a boss at a local business who knows me as a customer, "unfortunately you're no the type of person head office wants".....that was for a job washing and detailing rental cars if you can believe it.
With self employed and camera work as my work history for 12 years I might as well be a made man in the mafia, actually no, a made man in the mafia would have a better chance at finding a real job I believe.
I have a clean police and driving record but my employment record is self-employed/camera work and most places need 3-4 verifiable manager references before they even look at your application and an employment record with no gaps unless it's for education.
I definitely want out believe me. The agencies are all startups, all working from the same playbook and it's the end game for contributors and there's no going back, this COVID times could be boom times for stock considering travel is limited, risky and expensive.....it's boom times alright but for the agencies.
-
Look at other work with your camera.
Talked to one photographer a while ago and he marketed to law firms at his small studio. Did head shots of all the new lawyers.
Get into web design that might work.
I have already retired. So good luck in your search. It is never easy. So keep on fighting.
-
My highest this year: 72$, 66$, 64$, 48$ and plenty in the 15-25$ range (level 4)
My highest ever: 98$
Highest for video: 120$ (this month, level 2)
What a complete and totally useless topic and response. Share with us Dumc, how much would you have made pre-2018 before the SS slashed commissions? Are you an agent working for the SS? When you cuddle up to them do you thank them each time for being so generous? You have no idea how all of us collectively are delighted to learn your SS story and success. Just goes to show it doesn't matter how much the industry slashes commissions when you're a brilliant photographer and videographer. You'll still make 72$, 66$, 64$, 48$, 15-25$, 98$ and 120$.
I can only guess that you and Dumc have a history? If not that seems a bit over the top.
I wasn't going to respond to this thread at all because really it's no ones business but my own. However "all of us collectively" is not accurate and I just want to let you know that you are definitely not speaking for me. First though I want to make clear that I am not an agent of SS or any other agency for that matter. I'm neither a fan nor a hater of any of them. To me they're just a necessary means to an end and my emotional attachment to all or any of them is probably on par with their emotional attachment to me. I don't consider myself "brilliant" at anything, especially photography and video, and like you I'm also not thrilled with what's happening to the market right now.
That's why I am actually delighted to hear about Dumc's numbers. It shows that maybe just maybe there's a little more to be eeked out of this industry at least for a little while. That is while we're still in the transitional period of Shutterstock's move to subscription only. For myself all I will say is that my portfolio is tiny (887 images, 137 videos). So far this month on SS I've had 562 downloads for a total of $561.41. You can do the math but it's obviously similar to Dumc in that they are far from .10 downloads. It's also an average RPD which has been more or less consistent for me since the new earnings structure. Some months it's more. Some months it's less. It's actually the overall number of downloads that are down for me. Would I have made more before the cut? Perhaps, but it's impossible to tell for sure. Too many variables and moving parts right now. All I know is that to me the difference between 10 cents and 38 cents is negligible anyway, and always has been. It's the higher value sales that keep me in for now. Once those dry up completely with microstock it's all useless anyway.
So yes, good for you Dumc!
We don't have any history. And I am far from any "success story". I have less downloads, I have less ODD's, there are 10 cent subs, so although I made on average more than last year, I still make less than 2 or 3 years before. But it's still possible to get those big sales and those make the difference. I'm not running any statistics here, but I would say I even have more of these sales then before, but when those dry up, it's pretty much game over.
-
My highest this year: 72$, 66$, 64$, 48$ and plenty in the 15-25$ range (level 4)
My highest ever: 98$
Highest for video: 120$ (this month, level 2)
What a complete and totally useless topic and response. Share with us Dumc, how much would you have made pre-2018 before the SS slashed commissions? Are you an agent working for the SS? When you cuddle up to them do you thank them each time for being so generous? You have no idea how all of us collectively are delighted to learn your SS story and success. Just goes to show it doesn't matter how much the industry slashes commissions when you're a brilliant photographer and videographer. You'll still make 72$, 66$, 64$, 48$, 15-25$, 98$ and 120$.
I can only guess that you and Dumc have a history? If not that seems a bit over the top.
I wasn't going to respond to this thread at all because really it's no ones business but my own. However "all of us collectively" is not accurate and I just want to let you know that you are definitely not speaking for me. First though I want to make clear that I am not an agent of SS or any other agency for that matter. I'm neither a fan nor a hater of any of them. To me they're just a necessary means to an end and my emotional attachment to all or any of them is probably on par with their emotional attachment to me. I don't consider myself "brilliant" at anything, especially photography and video, and like you I'm also not thrilled with what's happening to the market right now.
That's why I am actually delighted to hear about Dumc's numbers. It shows that maybe just maybe there's a little more to be eeked out of this industry at least for a little while. That is while we're still in the transitional period of Shutterstock's move to subscription only. For myself all I will say is that my portfolio is tiny (887 images, 137 videos). So far this month on SS I've had 562 downloads for a total of $561.41. You can do the math but it's obviously similar to Dumc in that they are far from .10 downloads. It's also an average RPD which has been more or less consistent for me since the new earnings structure. Some months it's more. Some months it's less. It's actually the overall number of downloads that are down for me. Would I have made more before the cut? Perhaps, but it's impossible to tell for sure. Too many variables and moving parts right now. All I know is that to me the difference between 10 cents and 38 cents is negligible anyway, and always has been. It's the higher value sales that keep me in for now. Once those dry up completely with microstock it's all useless anyway.
So yes, good for you Dumc!
We don't have any history. And I am far from any "success story". I have less downloads, I have less ODD's, there are 10 cent subs, so although I made on average more than last year, I still make less than 2 or 3 years before. But it's still possible to get those big sales and those make the difference. I'm not running any statistics here, but I would say I even have more of these sales then before, but when those dry up, it's pretty much game over.
Speaking of game over, I wouldn't wait another day, start sending out those resumes and applying for jobs, it's been one hell of a wake up call and nightmare tying to find a real job now that stock is ending after 12 years and I'm not applying for anything high end, with self employed and camera work as my work history I can't get a job in fast food or cleaning hotel rooms.
-
Thanks again everyone. Amount of photos, quality, uniqueness, will probably bring more high prices, which makes it worth a little more.
I will happily continue shooting next year, but don't expect too much.
I know, of course, that stock is not what it used to be. The beautiful, golden times are over.
I have to think of Muratart https://www.shutterstock.com/nl/g/muratart (https://www.shutterstock.com/nl/g/muratart) from Turkey on the Shutterstock forum. I don't think he's here. When many of us stopped uploading in protest in June, he worked just ten times as hard and kept earning about the same amount. He made beautiful photos with photo editing and the success was therefore heartily awarded to him. But I suspect they are exceptions.
-
My highest this year: 72$, 66$, 64$, 48$ and plenty in the 15-25$ range (level 4)
My highest ever: 98$
Highest for video: 120$ (this month, level 2)
What a complete and totally useless topic and response. Share with us Dumc, how much would you have made pre-2018 before the SS slashed commissions? Are you an agent working for the SS? When you cuddle up to them do you thank them each time for being so generous? You have no idea how all of us collectively are delighted to learn your SS story and success. Just goes to show it doesn't matter how much the industry slashes commissions when you're a brilliant photographer and videographer. You'll still make 72$, 66$, 64$, 48$, 15-25$, 98$ and 120$.
I can only guess that you and Dumc have a history? If not that seems a bit over the top.
I wasn't going to respond to this thread at all because really it's no ones business but my own. However "all of us collectively" is not accurate and I just want to let you know that you are definitely not speaking for me. First though I want to make clear that I am not an agent of SS or any other agency for that matter. I'm neither a fan nor a hater of any of them. To me they're just a necessary means to an end and my emotional attachment to all or any of them is probably on par with their emotional attachment to me. I don't consider myself "brilliant" at anything, especially photography and video, and like you I'm also not thrilled with what's happening to the market right now.
That's why I am actually delighted to hear about Dumc's numbers. It shows that maybe just maybe there's a little more to be eeked out of this industry at least for a little while. That is while we're still in the transitional period of Shutterstock's move to subscription only. For myself all I will say is that my portfolio is tiny (887 images, 137 videos). So far this month on SS I've had 562 downloads for a total of $561.41. You can do the math but it's obviously similar to Dumc in that they are far from .10 downloads. It's also an average RPD which has been more or less consistent for me since the new earnings structure. Some months it's more. Some months it's less. It's actually the overall number of downloads that are down for me. Would I have made more before the cut? Perhaps, but it's impossible to tell for sure. Too many variables and moving parts right now. All I know is that to me the difference between 10 cents and 38 cents is negligible anyway, and always has been. It's the higher value sales that keep me in for now. Once those dry up completely with microstock it's all useless anyway.
So yes, good for you Dumc!
Those are excellent numbers, David! To get 560 downloads with a portfolio of this size just on shutterstock is really good these days. I used to have as many downloads a month as images in the portfolio back in the golden days. But for me, that's a thing of the past.
I can't keep up with the astronomical numbers by far! Two SODs at $120 each in one day was my personal highlight. For photos, because videos I have never made.
-
Sorry, I just understood. It now seems to be about this year.
In December, a download at $ 70.70 was the highest. In November and October $40 each. In July I had two at $35 each. In May it was one for $80 and one for $60. April $86 and $36. All others were less than $30.
-
Another new topic. Hopefully that stays alive, because my two topics with Christmas and New Year wishes have been remover (Update: The New Years topic has been moved back :) ) .
If someone from the management is reading along: I was just on a Dutch nature forum. The management thanked everyone there and wished everyone a nice day. They do that every year.
Well now my question.
I had a sale on December 23 of a close up of the flowers of ragwort (Jacobaea vulgaris) for 9.98 (level 4). https://www.shutterstock.com/nl/image-photo/flowers-seed-heads-ragwort-jacobaea-vulgaris-1799221774 (https://www.shutterstock.com/nl/image-photo/flowers-seed-heads-ragwort-jacobaea-vulgaris-1799221774) That was the highest amount I've received for a photo from Shutterstock (member for two years). I know from the Shutterstock forum that someone had received over $300, but she mainly photographed American celebrities and I mostly flowers, insects, nature and Dutch buildings, cities.
I'm curious what your highest sales figures are this year at Shutterstock. (Maybe I'm getting all depressed reading the answers 8) )
Thijs, you're really good at getting people to talk about their numbers. How about for the next thread, you can see if people would reveal their RPIs, RPDs, and what subjects they shoot? Then we will all be cooking with gas :)
Ref: https://www.microstockgroup.com/general-stock-discussion/you-have-a-good-photographer-friend-who-says/msg570706/?topicseen#new (https://www.microstockgroup.com/general-stock-discussion/you-have-a-good-photographer-friend-who-says/msg570706/?topicseen#new)
RPI = Total Sales / Number of Files
RPD = Total Sales / Number of DLs
Use only one agency (say SS), separate Photos from Videos, and only use Total Sales for 2021 - to ensure we are comparing apples with apples.
:)
-
how much money earning every month from stock photo and videos in order to maintain standard living in USA?
-
how much money earning every month from stock photo and videos in order to maintain standard living in USA?
Sadly, I don't think it's possible in the USA or Canada anymore, I was doing quite well until April 1 2019 and then it collapsed.
-
Yes you can. I now make over 50.000$ year on photos and videos. It is more tough every year. My peak was at 150.000$ year so yeah feeling the pressure.
I have made over 23k for a photo in the "good old days" and dozens over 2k. Now it is very rare. That's not the game anymore. You should not count on those rare sales
You are right that for retirement and a side income stock is not bad. You probably spent way more on equipment, software, gas, computer, time. But if that's just a hobby it is fine. Usually hobbies don't get any returns at all so. But don't be deluded and take those costs into consideration before saying you made 2000$ in a year if you spent 4000 to get there.
So your stock has shown at National Geographic. Well done. Does it mean something, or will it get to enjoy the national photographer life or revenue. I doubt it. But if that makes you happy go ahead. I understand that people might feel amazing for their 1s of glory.
By the way the market reality is not dependent on SS, as I have not made a single penny on them as they don't carry any of my creative work. So every dollar of the 50k earned has been made somewhere else. Trust me . If your work is good you will get your work purchased . No need to be in the SS cheap marketplace where you are a small fry among millions of assets and you are being paid 10c a pop
You see . Your reality is different to some that are a little more experienced in this game. Nothing wrong that you go after your reality but take into account that many other ones exist and with a much better return that the loosing Shutterstock proposition.
No one said you can make a living at stock.
But a $1,000 sale for one photo ain’t bad.
Make your bread somewhere else, but in retirement not a bad gig.
Through stock some of my photos have shown up in National Geographic publications.
So get out if you want to make a living . As one senior person in Stock told me about people leaving SS because of the cut in commissions “good”. Less competition. By the way, she is not working at SS.
This is simple market reality.
-
If you could tell me where you are selling to make $50,000 a year. We would all like to know.
-
Another new topic. Hopefully that stays alive, because my two topics with Christmas and New Year wishes have been remover (Update: The New Years topic has been moved back :) ) .
If someone from the management is reading along: I was just on a Dutch nature forum. The management thanked everyone there and wished everyone a nice day. They do that every year.
Well now my question.
I had a sale on December 23 of a close up of the flowers of ragwort (Jacobaea vulgaris) for 9.98 (level 4). https://www.shutterstock.com/nl/image-photo/flowers-seed-heads-ragwort-jacobaea-vulgaris-1799221774 (https://www.shutterstock.com/nl/image-photo/flowers-seed-heads-ragwort-jacobaea-vulgaris-1799221774) That was the highest amount I've received for a photo from Shutterstock (member for two years). I know from the Shutterstock forum that someone had received over $300, but she mainly photographed American celebrities and I mostly flowers, insects, nature and Dutch buildings, cities.
I'm curious what your highest sales figures are this year at Shutterstock. (Maybe I'm getting all depressed reading the answers 8) )
Thijs, you're really good at getting people to talk about their numbers. How about for the next thread, you can see if people would reveal their RPIs, RPDs, and what subjects they shoot? Then we will all be cooking with gas :)
Ref: https://www.microstockgroup.com/general-stock-discussion/you-have-a-good-photographer-friend-who-says/msg570706/?topicseen#new (https://www.microstockgroup.com/general-stock-discussion/you-have-a-good-photographer-friend-who-says/msg570706/?topicseen#new)
RPI = Total Sales / Number of Files
RPD = Total Sales / Number of DLs
Use only one agency (say SS), separate Photos from Videos, and only use Total Sales for 2021 - to ensure we are comparing apples with apples.
:)
We have been cooking electrically (induction) Annie for a year now. ;D I know Pete's topic (answered one myself)
For me it was all about photos, this year on Shutterstock (I know you sell well too (quite rightly) )
Like many others, I didn't upload anything for three months after the 10 cents introduction and became a member of Alamy and Adobe. I noticed that not uploading didn't work and that I sold less at Adobe and much less at Alamy.
Like many others I started again at Shutterstock (Muratart did the opposite. Murat has added another hundred pages of photos since the last time I checked with him ::) )
Every now and then I read (in addition to all the complaints) about quite high amounts that were still received for a photo at Shutterstock.
I was curious about that, although I know that the quality and subject of my photos probably contribute to the fact that I won't receive them so soon. I will try a little more, but it must remain a hobby that I enjoy.
Due to the input of level6, this topic is now also about whether you can still earn a good living with Stock. Pete's topic is much more appropriate to answer that question.
Impressive Everest. Thanks.
Thank you Wilm. I suspected something like that because I know your photos of course.
-
Late to the party here.
My highest commission this year on SS was 72$.
Two in the 50$ range, a few in the 30$ and some in the 20$ range.
I also had one customer buying 7 of my images for 3.74$ each. Does that count too?
The lower the commission, the more relatively frequent they occur.
These "surprise" sales are very nice to get, and I only get them on Shutterstock, (very "once a year or so" scarce on iStock, never on Adobe) but not gonna sugarcoat it either: they are merely window dressing and they don't fully compensate the 10c'ers. My RPD on Shutterstock is still lower than it is on Adobe.
-
Highest Price for a photo this year $120.65.
of course it happened in early February, so SS got $96.52 and i only got $24.13
-
Late to the party here.
My highest commission this year on SS was 72$.
Two in the 50$ range, a few in the 30$ and some in the 20$ range.
I also had one customer buying 7 of my images for 3.74$ each. Does that count too?
The lower the commission, the more relatively frequent they occur.
These "surprise" sales are very nice to get, and I only get them on Shutterstock, (very "once a year or so" scarce on iStock, never on Adobe) but not gonna sugarcoat it either: they are merely window dressing and they don't fully compensate the 10c'ers. My RPD on Shutterstock is still lower than it is on Adobe.
Thanks Roscoe. Adobe is still the highest for me at $22 for a photo.
-
Highest Price for a photo this year $120.65.
of course it happened in early February, so SS got $96.52 and i only got $24.13
Thanks, Yes that is a mixed feeling.
-
What I find surprising in this post is that some contributors
appear to have no problem allowing the SS to manipulate and
change the original agreement you had with the agency when
you first signed up with them.
I signed up with the SS in 2009. The signed agreement stated
that I would receive a minimum of $0.35us and I would start as a
Level 1 contributor. If I sold more than 10,000 images I would
move up to Level 2 and earn a minimum $0.38us per image, etc.
HD videos, at the time, started at a minimum $23us per clip and,
like images, increased when you achieved a certain amount of
sales.
There was nothing in that agreement that stated the SS could
lower commissions or do whatever they * well pleased. It may be
in your agreement if you signed up more recently but in my
original agreement there is nothing stating that the SS would lower
my commission or drop me back to Level 1 whenever they * well
pleased.
This was a binding agreement. Changing that agreement arbitrarily
is illegal and unethical.
My hopes that we would launch a Class Action lawsuit against the SS
will not happen based on this post. My apologies if I upset a few
contributors.
I've learned a lot in this particular post.
-
I actually made more money on level 1 on first couples months of the year than I have on level 4 at later part of the year. It is just luck of the draw who buys what, levels don't really help to a big extent at all, I certainly still have as many 10 cent sales on level 4.
-
What I find surprising in this post is that some contributors
appear to have no problem allowing the SS to manipulate and
change the original agreement you had with the agency when
you first signed up with them.
I signed up with the SS in 2009. The signed agreement stated
that I would receive a minimum of $0.35us and I would start as a
Level 1 contributor. If I sold more than 10,000 images I would
move up to Level 2 and earn a minimum $0.38us per image, etc.
HD videos, at the time, started at a minimum $23us per clip and,
like images, increased when you achieved a certain amount of
sales.
There was nothing in that agreement that stated the SS could
lower commissions or do whatever they * well pleased. It may be
in your agreement if you signed up more recently but in my
original agreement there is nothing stating that the SS would lower
my commission or drop me back to Level 1 whenever they * well
pleased.
This was a binding agreement. Changing that agreement arbitrarily
is illegal and unethical.
My hopes that we would launch a Class Action lawsuit against the SS
will not happen based on this post. My apologies if I upset a few
contributors.
I've learned a lot in this particular post.
Too bad the Shutterstock forum is gone, then you could have read how many people protested in vain.
We are not employed by a company, but supply products. When there is overproduction, it is easy for a company to change the rules and pay less.
Is that social? No. What can you do about it? As I wrote, not uploading didn't help, because of the huge stock of photos, illustrations that were already there and the many people who kept uploading.
So I went to Adobe and Alamy. At Alamy next year, according to their new rules, I will go back to 20% and you will also have even 0.01 cents in earnings. At Adobe, I earn less, but treat us more fairly so far. Things have gone wrong at Istock much earlier.
There is no union, we are scattered all over the world and incompatible, not employed.
Everyone has made a decision based on their circumstances how to proceed or not to proceed with Shutterstock. No one talks about Shutterstock with enthusiasm and affection anymore the way they did when I was new to the Shutterstock forum.
If you think so, I suggest you read this thread again. The only answer is whether some of us sometimes still have good sales. Something that wasn't quite clear to me.
That's all!
Discussing whether stock can still be earned and if so how and on which Stocksites it is better to discuss the topic of Pete, which Annie pointed out. https://www.microstockgroup.com/general-stock-discussion/you-have-a-good-photographer-friend-who-says/msg570706/?topicseen#new (https://www.microstockgroup.com/general-stock-discussion/you-have-a-good-photographer-friend-who-says/msg570706/?topicseen#new)
If you want to discuss how badly we've been treated by Shutterstock, you'd better open a new topic. But I suspect these topics can already be found on this Microstock forum.
-
Yes you can. I now make over 50.000$ year on photos and videos. It is more tough every year. My peak was at 150.000$ year so yeah feeling the pressure.
I have made over 23k for a photo in the "good old days" and dozens over 2k. Now it is very rare. That's not the game anymore. You should not count on those rare sales
You are right that for retirement and a side income stock is not bad. You probably spent way more on equipment, software, gas, computer, time. But if that's just a hobby it is fine. Usually hobbies don't get any returns at all so. But don't be deluded and take those costs into consideration before saying you made 2000$ in a year if you spent 4000 to get there.
So your stock has shown at National Geographic. Well done. Does it mean something, or will it get to enjoy the national photographer life or revenue. I doubt it. But if that makes you happy go ahead. I understand that people might feel amazing for their 1s of glory.
By the way the market reality is not dependent on SS, as I have not made a single penny on them as they don't carry any of my creative work. So every dollar of the 50k earned has been made somewhere else. Trust me . If your work is good you will get your work purchased . No need to be in the SS cheap marketplace where you are a small fry among millions of assets and you are being paid 10c a pop
You see . Your reality is different to some that are a little more experienced in this game. Nothing wrong that you go after your reality but take into account that many other ones exist and with a much better return that the loosing Shutterstock proposition.
No one said you can make a living at stock.
But a $1,000 sale for one photo ain’t bad.
Make your bread somewhere else, but in retirement not a bad gig.
Through stock some of my photos have shown up in National Geographic publications.
So get out if you want to make a living . As one senior person in Stock told me about people leaving SS because of the cut in commissions “good”. Less competition. By the way, she is not working at SS.
This is simple market reality.
$50.000 still is very impressing! May I ask how many images and videos there are in your Portfolio? And those 50.000 are not only at shutterstock, I guess?
-
There was nothing in that agreement that stated the SS could
lower commissions or do whatever they * well pleased. It may be
in your agreement if you signed up more recently but in my
original agreement there is nothing stating that the SS would lower
my commission or drop me back to Level 1 whenever they * well
pleased.
And after 13 year you remember the exact content of the full agreement?
Because it says "Please note that Shutterstock reserves the right to modify these terms at any time in its sole discretion." and not just in the current version. I couldn't find any version older than 7 years, but the sentence was already in there back then and it would surprise me if it wasn't there from the start. That's something you basically put in every ToS agreement online.
-
These high(er) value SODs are the only reason I leave my port up at SS. Haven't uploaded much for 3 years and nothing since the SS heist was put in place. If I were to get no dls larger than subs for a few months, I'd be inclined to delete my port there altogether. However, all SODs so far this year amount to 42% of my year's total earnings and, for absolutely no effort on my part, I'd be daft to toss it all away by deleting my port out of distaste at senior management's greed. In total, from SS and Adobe I get a nice little extra bit of passive income/pension of $1.5K/year.
Adobe has been pretty good for me this year this year.....and I don't have to swear at the screen as my lowest dl rate is Ł0.27 but many come in at Ł0.74 and above. Average this year per dl at Adobe works out at $0.95 and $0.60/dl at SS. Pity that Adobe is only 40% of the SS income but mustn't forget to include PS CC free for 2 years running which is a sort of €120 bonus each year!
-
Highest sale this year was a dutch windmill from Kinderdijk for 90 $ and one for 70 $ (flowers). Then still 10 sales between 30 - 40 $ and about 50 sales around 10 $.
During the facebook outage in october one photo on the subject brought me about 160 downloads in one evening only on Shutterstock, which means about 80 $.
And no, I am not a shutterstock agent. ;)
-
Just so people will know that I am not blowing smoke, this is the file I made $510 this year from SS.
Check out the following image on Shutterstock - A global marketplace for creativity: https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/1534144853
-
Just so people will know that I am not blowing smoke, this is the file I made $510 this year from SS.
Check out the following image on Shutterstock - A global marketplace for creativity: https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/1534144853 (https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/1534144853)
That's funny. It states 'never used' :)
-
I don't have a single file on SS. I deactivated immediately and deleted all my portfolio a few months later of their commission cut.
I have 21k images and 4k videos.
Yes you can. I now make over 50.000$ year on photos and videos. It is more tough every year. My peak was at 150.000$ year so yeah feeling the pressure.
I have made over 23k for a photo in the "good old days" and dozens over 2k. Now it is very rare. That's not the game anymore. You should not count on those rare sales
You are right that for retirement and a side income stock is not bad. You probably spent way more on equipment, software, gas, computer, time. But if that's just a hobby it is fine. Usually hobbies don't get any returns at all so. But don't be deluded and take those costs into consideration before saying you made 2000$ in a year if you spent 4000 to get there.
So your stock has shown at National Geographic. Well done. Does it mean something, or will it get to enjoy the national photographer life or revenue. I doubt it. But if that makes you happy go ahead. I understand that people might feel amazing for their 1s of glory.
By the way the market reality is not dependent on SS, as I have not made a single penny on them as they don't carry any of my creative work. So every dollar of the 50k earned has been made somewhere else. Trust me . If your work is good you will get your work purchased . No need to be in the SS cheap marketplace where you are a small fry among millions of assets and you are being paid 10c a pop
You see . Your reality is different to some that are a little more experienced in this game. Nothing wrong that you go after your reality but take into account that many other ones exist and with a much better return that the loosing Shutterstock proposition.
No one said you can make a living at stock.
But a $1,000 sale for one photo ain’t bad.
Make your bread somewhere else, but in retirement not a bad gig.
Through stock some of my photos have shown up in National Geographic publications.
So get out if you want to make a living . As one senior person in Stock told me about people leaving SS because of the cut in commissions “good”. Less competition. By the way, she is not working at SS.
This is simple market reality.
$50.000 still is very impressing! May I ask how many images and videos there are in your Portfolio? And those 50.000 are Not only Fromm shutterstock, I guess?
-
Make your bread somewhere else, but in retirement not a bad gig.
Through stock some of my photos have shown up in National Geographic publications.
Both of those statements apply to me, too.
Thanks to a successful previous career and my current advanced age, I enjoy the luxury of picking and choosing which commercial stock sites have the privilege of representing my photographic work. If one of them goes off track, I take my business elsewhere. :)
And when I find my shots published in books like National Geographic Pocket Guide to Birds of North America (2013) and National Geographic Guide to Scenic Highways and Byways (2018), I'm thrilled. It doesn't matter that I didn't get a gazillion dollars for those shots, because I don't need to.
However, as I've written many other times on this forum, I do feel very bad for peopke whose main income comes from stock. So if learning about some contributors' large royalties helps, I'm happy for both those contributors and the others who may be inspired by them.
-
What I find surprising in this post is that some contributors
appear to have no problem allowing the SS to manipulate and
change the original agreement you had with the agency when
you first signed up with them.
I signed up with the SS in 2009. The signed agreement stated
that I would receive a minimum of $0.35us and I would start as a
Level 1 contributor. If I sold more than 10,000 images I would
move up to Level 2 and earn a minimum $0.38us per image, etc.
HD videos, at the time, started at a minimum $23us per clip and,
like images, increased when you achieved a certain amount of
sales.
There was nothing in that agreement that stated the SS could
lower commissions or do whatever they * well pleased. It may be
in your agreement if you signed up more recently but in my
original agreement there is nothing stating that the SS would lower
my commission or drop me back to Level 1 whenever they * well
pleased.
This was a binding agreement. Changing that agreement arbitrarily
is illegal and unethical.
My hopes that we would launch a Class Action lawsuit against the SS
will not happen based on this post. My apologies if I upset a few
contributors.
I've learned a lot in this particular post.
The problem is and the agencies know this is no one can afford to sue let alone launch a class action and proceed to trial, the retainer for a law firm alone is more than anyone in this ticket to bankruptcy of a business can afford.
Same like the news media taking anything they can off social media and using it for free, at worst they might be told to take it down but they know the average Twitter user can't afford a lawyer to sue them..
And in the case of these stock agencies, most lawyers will tell you it's a lost cause, move on and spend the time and energy finding a real job.
It's not good.....
-
If you want to discuss how badly we've been treated by Shutterstock, you'd better open a new topic. But I suspect these topics can already be found on this Microstock forum.
OOOOOHHHHHH, YES!!!
-
The highest sale I've done was when someone bought five of my images for $137.84... each.
-
Yes you can. I now make over 50.000$ year on photos and videos. It is more tough every year. My peak was at 150.000$ year so yeah feeling the pressure.
I have made over 23k for a photo in the "good old days" and dozens over 2k. Now it is very rare. That's not the game anymore. You should not count on those rare sales
You are right that for retirement and a side income stock is not bad. You probably spent way more on equipment, software, gas, computer, time. But if that's just a hobby it is fine. Usually hobbies don't get any returns at all so. But don't be deluded and take those costs into consideration before saying you made 2000$ in a year if you spent 4000 to get there.
So your stock has shown at National Geographic. Well done. Does it mean something, or will it get to enjoy the national photographer life or revenue. I doubt it. But if that makes you happy go ahead. I understand that people might feel amazing for their 1s of glory.
By the way the market reality is not dependent on SS, as I have not made a single penny on them as they don't carry any of my creative work. So every dollar of the 50k earned has been made somewhere else. Trust me . If your work is good you will get your work purchased . No need to be in the SS cheap marketplace where you are a small fry among millions of assets and you are being paid 10c a pop
You see . Your reality is different to some that are a little more experienced in this game. Nothing wrong that you go after your reality but take into account that many other ones exist and with a much better return that the loosing Shutterstock proposition.
No one said you can make a living at stock.
But a $1,000 sale for one photo ain’t bad.
Make your bread somewhere else, but in retirement not a bad gig.
Through stock some of my photos have shown up in National Geographic publications.
So get out if you want to make a living . As one senior person in Stock told me about people leaving SS because of the cut in commissions “good”. Less competition. By the way, she is not working at SS.
This is simple market reality.
Everest, so you've been there, peaked at $150,000/year, When did you notice a steep drop?, for me and other editorial contributors on Pond5 it was April 1 2019, actually March 15th 2019 but we started to get seriously worried by April 1 and it never recovered. It was very sudden and very planned.
-
Highest sale this year was a dutch windmill from Kinderdijk for 90 $ and one for 70 $ (flowers). Then still 10 sales between 30 - 40 $ and about 50 sales around 10 $.
During the facebook outage in october one photo on the subject brought me about 160 downloads in one evening only on Shutterstock, which means about 80 $.
And no, I am not a shutterstock agent. ;)
Not bad Ralf, also because there are many photos of Kinderdijk.
-
The highest sale I've done was when someone bought five of my images for $137.84... each.
Wow!! If I sell a few photos at a time to one customer, it's always around ten cents.
-
For me it was 2012 with photos. I started at the end of 2009 with Istock (I was already with Getty) 2010 I made 6000$(only Istock) 2011 60.000 (only Istock) 2012 120.000$ only Istock. 2013 crashed to 70.000 $ (only Istock). Video I started very late in the game. Only 4 years now. Only growth so far around 23k/year. Images have been steadily falling. Nowadays, I make only 2000-2400$ month very far from the hay days in 2012.
[/quote]
Everest, so you've been there, peaked at $150,000/year, When did you notice a steep drop?, for me and other editorial contributors on Pond5 it was April 1 2019, actually March 15th 2019 but we started to get seriously worried by April 1 and it never recovered. It was very sudden and very planned.
[/quote]
-
$105 for this one and I don't think even think I did a great job to correct the barrel distortion
-
For me it was 2012 with photos. I started at the end of 2009 with Istock (I was already with Getty) 2010 I made 6000$(only Istock) 2011 60.000 (only Istock) 2012 120.000$ only Istock. 2013 crashed to 70.000 $ (only Istock). Video I started very late in the game. Only 4 years now. Only growth so far around 23k/year. Images have been steadily falling. Nowadays, I make only 2000-2400$ month very far from the hay days in 2012.
Everest, so you've been there, peaked at $150,000/year, When did you notice a steep drop?, for me and other editorial contributors on Pond5 it was April 1 2019, actually March 15th 2019 but we started to get seriously worried by April 1 and it never recovered. It was very sudden and very planned.
[/quote]
[/quote]
Oh ok, well I guess $2000 - $2400/month is still considered "good" I guess these days in this business, I'd be so happy to get back to that level, for me video sales just went off a cliff around April 1 2019, not just for me but many others are Pond5 as well.
-
$420 and $350 this year, both editorial, but one of them was far from unique (it was not even unique in my portfolio ;D)
-
Another new topic. Hopefully that stays alive, because my two topics with Christmas and New Year wishes have been remover (Update: The New Years topic has been moved back :) ) .
If someone from the management is reading along: I was just on a Dutch nature forum. The management thanked everyone there and wished everyone a nice day. They do that every year.
Well now my question.
I had a sale on December 23 of a close up of the flowers of ragwort (Jacobaea vulgaris) for 9.98 (level 4). https://www.shutterstock.com/nl/image-photo/flowers-seed-heads-ragwort-jacobaea-vulgaris-1799221774 (https://www.shutterstock.com/nl/image-photo/flowers-seed-heads-ragwort-jacobaea-vulgaris-1799221774) That was the highest amount I've received for a photo from Shutterstock (member for two years). I know from the Shutterstock forum that someone had received over $300, but she mainly photographed American celebrities and I mostly flowers, insects, nature and Dutch buildings, cities.
I'm curious what your highest sales figures are this year at Shutterstock. (Maybe I'm getting all depressed reading the answers 8) )
Thijs, you're really good at getting people to talk about their numbers. How about for the next thread, you can see if people would reveal their RPIs, RPDs, and what subjects they shoot? Then we will all be cooking with gas :)
Ref: https://www.microstockgroup.com/general-stock-discussion/you-have-a-good-photographer-friend-who-says/msg570706/?topicseen#new (https://www.microstockgroup.com/general-stock-discussion/you-have-a-good-photographer-friend-who-says/msg570706/?topicseen#new)
RPI = Total Sales / Number of Files
RPD = Total Sales / Number of DLs
Use only one agency (say SS), separate Photos from Videos, and only use Total Sales for 2021 - to ensure we are comparing apples with apples.
:)
We have been cooking electrically (induction) Annie for a year now. ;D I know Pete's topic (answered one myself)
For me it was all about photos, this year on Shutterstock (I know you sell well too (quite rightly) )
Like many others, I didn't upload anything for three months after the 10 cents introduction and became a member of Alamy and Adobe. I noticed that not uploading didn't work and that I sold less at Adobe and much less at Alamy.
Like many others I started again at Shutterstock (Muratart did the opposite. Murat has added another hundred pages of photos since the last time I checked with him ::) )
Every now and then I read (in addition to all the complaints) about quite high amounts that were still received for a photo at Shutterstock.
I was curious about that, although I know that the quality and subject of my photos probably contribute to the fact that I won't receive them so soon. I will try a little more, but it must remain a hobby that I enjoy.
Due to the input of level6, this topic is now also about whether you can still earn a good living with Stock. Pete's topic is much more appropriate to answer that question.
Impressive Everest. Thanks.
Thank you Wilm. I suspected something like that because I know your photos of course.
I think you may have misunderstood me, Thijs. I didnt mean the whole of Pete's thread, I meant my first post on top of the page that I linked above - and a few more related ones after that.
If people are to go to all the trouble of talking numbers then those are the numbers, if collected and compared, that would greatly benefit everyone. (ie. the comparison of the average return for different types of subjects. No-one has collected that kind of comprehensive data before, I don't think. And that would be a goldmine of important info.)
But I fully understand your position with microstock and where you are coming from. Sorry to have troubled you. (But definitely an idea if anyone's interested for another thread as I said above.)
-
$420 and $350 this year, both editorial, but one of them was far from unique (it was not even unique in my portfolio ;D)
$105 for this one and I don't think even think I did a great job to correct the barrel distortion
Thank you. It seems that almost everyone has such high sales from time to time. But of course it is only a very small part that reacts.
Not everyone had high expectations of those photos. So there is still hope for me. ;D
-
Another new topic. Hopefully that stays alive, because my two topics with Christmas and New Year wishes have been remover (Update: The New Years topic has been moved back :) ) .
If someone from the management is reading along: I was just on a Dutch nature forum. The management thanked everyone there and wished everyone a nice day. They do that every year.
Well now my question.
I had a sale on December 23 of a close up of the flowers of ragwort (Jacobaea vulgaris) for 9.98 (level 4). https://www.shutterstock.com/nl/image-photo/flowers-seed-heads-ragwort-jacobaea-vulgaris-1799221774 (https://www.shutterstock.com/nl/image-photo/flowers-seed-heads-ragwort-jacobaea-vulgaris-1799221774) That was the highest amount I've received for a photo from Shutterstock (member for two years). I know from the Shutterstock forum that someone had received over $300, but she mainly photographed American celebrities and I mostly flowers, insects, nature and Dutch buildings, cities.
I'm curious what your highest sales figures are this year at Shutterstock. (Maybe I'm getting all depressed reading the answers 8) )
Thijs, you're really good at getting people to talk about their numbers. How about for the next thread, you can see if people would reveal their RPIs, RPDs, and what subjects they shoot? Then we will all be cooking with gas :)
Ref: https://www.microstockgroup.com/general-stock-discussion/you-have-a-good-photographer-friend-who-says/msg570706/?topicseen#new (https://www.microstockgroup.com/general-stock-discussion/you-have-a-good-photographer-friend-who-says/msg570706/?topicseen#new)
RPI = Total Sales / Number of Files
RPD = Total Sales / Number of DLs
Use only one agency (say SS), separate Photos from Videos, and only use Total Sales for 2021 - to ensure we are comparing apples with apples.
:)
We have been cooking electrically (induction) Annie for a year now. ;D I know Pete's topic (answered one myself)
For me it was all about photos, this year on Shutterstock (I know you sell well too (quite rightly) )
Like many others, I didn't upload anything for three months after the 10 cents introduction and became a member of Alamy and Adobe. I noticed that not uploading didn't work and that I sold less at Adobe and much less at Alamy.
Like many others I started again at Shutterstock (Muratart did the opposite. Murat has added another hundred pages of photos since the last time I checked with him ::) )
Every now and then I read (in addition to all the complaints) about quite high amounts that were still received for a photo at Shutterstock.
I was curious about that, although I know that the quality and subject of my photos probably contribute to the fact that I won't receive them so soon. I will try a little more, but it must remain a hobby that I enjoy.
Due to the input of level6, this topic is now also about whether you can still earn a good living with Stock. Pete's topic is much more appropriate to answer that question.
Impressive Everest. Thanks.
Thank you Wilm. I suspected something like that because I know your photos of course.
I think you may have misunderstood me, Thijs. I didnt mean the whole of Pete's thread, I meant my first post on top of the page that I linked above - and a few more related ones after that.
If people are to go to all the trouble of talking numbers then those are the numbers, if collected and compared, that would greatly benefit everyone. (ie. the comparison of the average return for different types of subjects. No-one has collected that kind of comprehensive data before, I don't think. And that would be a goldmine of important info.)
But I fully understand your position with microstock and where you are coming from. Sorry to have troubled you. (But definitely an idea if anyone's interested for another thread as I said above.)
I see what you mean Annie. Then you should indeed create another topic with a very clear description.
-
Whatever your getting on Shutterstock, just remember, Jon Oringer and his side kick Stan Pavlovsky are getting at least ten times the amount you get paid.
The whole site is run by a bunch of criminals, who have suckered the talent in and are now ripping them off.
-
Another new topic. Hopefully that stays alive, because my two topics with Christmas and New Year wishes have been remover (Update: The New Years topic has been moved back :) ) .
If someone from the management is reading along: I was just on a Dutch nature forum. The management thanked everyone there and wished everyone a nice day. They do that every year.
Well now my question.
I had a sale on December 23 of a close up of the flowers of ragwort (Jacobaea vulgaris) for 9.98 (level 4). https://www.shutterstock.com/nl/image-photo/flowers-seed-heads-ragwort-jacobaea-vulgaris-1799221774 (https://www.shutterstock.com/nl/image-photo/flowers-seed-heads-ragwort-jacobaea-vulgaris-1799221774) That was the highest amount I've received for a photo from Shutterstock (member for two years). I know from the Shutterstock forum that someone had received over $300, but she mainly photographed American celebrities and I mostly flowers, insects, nature and Dutch buildings, cities.
I'm curious what your highest sales figures are this year at Shutterstock. (Maybe I'm getting all depressed reading the answers 8) )
Thijs, you're really good at getting people to talk about their numbers. How about for the next thread, you can see if people would reveal their RPIs, RPDs, and what subjects they shoot? Then we will all be cooking with gas :)
Ref: https://www.microstockgroup.com/general-stock-discussion/you-have-a-good-photographer-friend-who-says/msg570706/?topicseen#new (https://www.microstockgroup.com/general-stock-discussion/you-have-a-good-photographer-friend-who-says/msg570706/?topicseen#new)
RPI = Total Sales / Number of Files
RPD = Total Sales / Number of DLs
Use only one agency (say SS), separate Photos from Videos, and only use Total Sales for 2021 - to ensure we are comparing apples with apples.
:)
Leaf used to do annual surveys and then worked the data and had some interesting conclusions. And he didn't fudge the numbers or use creative math. What was entered was anonymous which allowed people who wanted to keep their work or name private, could answer.
I know I'm asking Leaf to do much more work than the payback, but maybe the same survey with lees number crunching, could be compared to the older data, before the whole market changed? Like RPD, RPI, gross earnings, and some basic data.
I'm not going to dig back, but people used to report RPIs of $1 or $2 a month.
I think I'm out of stats and numbers. Most are just that, numbers. A way to look back at history and the timeline of how things have changed.
-
How about for the next thread, you can see if people would reveal their RPIs, RPDs, and what subjects they shoot? Then we will all be cooking with gas :)
RPI = Total Sales / Number of Files
RPD = Total Sales / Number of DLs
Use only one agency (say SS), separate Photos from Videos, and only use Total Sales for 2021 - to ensure we are comparing apples with apples.
:)
Hi Annie, why not just start the topic? I'll share. I think lot of people would be interested and willing to share.
-
What I find surprising in this post is that some contributors
appear to have no problem allowing the SS to manipulate and
change the original agreement you had with the agency when
you first signed up with them.
I signed up with the SS in 2009. The signed agreement stated
that I would receive a minimum of $0.35us and I would start as a
Level 1 contributor. If I sold more than 10,000 images I would
move up to Level 2 and earn a minimum $0.38us per image, etc.
HD videos, at the time, started at a minimum $23us per clip and,
like images, increased when you achieved a certain amount of
sales.
There was nothing in that agreement that stated the SS could
lower commissions or do whatever they * well pleased. It may be
in your agreement if you signed up more recently but in my
original agreement there is nothing stating that the SS would lower
my commission or drop me back to Level 1 whenever they * well
pleased.
This was a binding agreement. Changing that agreement arbitrarily
is illegal and unethical.
My hopes that we would launch a Class Action lawsuit against the SS
will not happen based on this post. My apologies if I upset a few
contributors.
I've learned a lot in this particular post.
You're wrong the contract says, "Please note that Shutterstock reserves the right to modify these terms at any time in its sole discretion, it being understood that no changes shall apply to any pending arbitration proceeding commenced or legal claims asserted prior to such change. Shutterstock will notify you of any such change by an announcement on this page, your login page, and/or by other means to provide you the opportunity to review the modifications before they become effective. Modifications to these TOS will not apply retroactively. By continuing to make Content available through Shutterstock, you agree to be bound by all such changes. If you do not agree with any of the changes, please remove from Shutterstock, pursuant to the terms herein, all or that portion of your Content to which you do not wish the changes to apply."
(https://xpiksapp.com/images/posts/2020/shutterstock-earnings/old-earning-breakdown.png)
Nobody started at 35c we all got 25c. There was nothing about selling 10,000 images, your memory is wrong and your facts are wrong. There's no class action suit except in your imagination. No agreement was ever binding forever contract. SS is underhanded and unethical but not illegal.
-
How about for the next thread, you can see if people would reveal their RPIs, RPDs, and what subjects they shoot? Then we will all be cooking with gas :)
RPI = Total Sales / Number of Files
RPD = Total Sales / Number of DLs
Use only one agency (say SS), separate Photos from Videos, and only use Total Sales for 2021 - to ensure we are comparing apples with apples.
:)
Hi Annie, why not just start the topic? I'll share. I think lot of people would be interested and willing to share.
Thanks. The more I think about it, the more I realise it needs a poll. A matrix one with say, SS Categories, down one side, and ranges of RPIs across the top. (ie. 0 - 0.25c, 25c- 50c, 50c - 1.00, etc) In that way, it would keep it anonymous. RPIs are very revealing and you can immediately work out how much someone earns if you know how many files they have. So keeping it anonymous is best.
But I dont know how to set that up here. Maybe someone else can help with that?
Pete, I read what you said above, and yes, I now remember Leaf's annual questionnaire and results now.
But if stats are used properly then they can be much, much more than just numbers. All good businesses are run by numbers. Ratio Analysis. And its the comparisons, not the stats themselves, that are important to assist with future decision-making. And after all, we are all in the business of selling photos - whether we like that term or not. ;D For example, you wouldn't buy into a business or assess its viability without looking into its ratios compared to industry standards.
But for this exercise, I would suggest basing it just on 2021 total sales figures for SS. To keep it simple and easy to gather data for. And collecting RPIs (total 2021 sales divided by total number of files) for each of the different categories that we shoot for.
The bottom line for all of this, is that we can then decide whether to keep shooting a particular type of subject - or not. Or whether we can try other types of subjects to maximise our income. Then we have choices and thats much more proactive than just looking back and complaining, or feeling downhearted about the whole situation. It may not be the complete solution but it can help.
But just saying I received $100 for my top sale is not enough, in my mind, to make those type of decisions. You could have got next to nothing the rest of the time.
-
*
-
The bottom line for all of this, is that we can then decide whether to keep shooting a particular type of subject - or not. Or whether we can try other types of subjects to maximise our income. Then we have choices and thats much more proactive than just looking back and complaining, or feeling downhearted about the whole situation. It may not be the complete solution but it can help.
But just saying I received $100 for my top sale is not enough, in my mind, to make those type of decisions. You could have got next to nothing the rest of the time.
Totally agree Annie. Good points you are making. I left and then came back with a new account (but even my original account was not that old) so I can't help you out, I don't have the powers to do so, unfortunately.
The funny thing is that I came, to this site, in the first place to find the answers to the questions you are asking, actually. I am sure an old guard here is willing to help you out.
Right folks?
Maybe Brasilnut can help you out. He does it all the time with his own sales, likes the numbers and is a diamond member. What do you say Alexandre?
-
The bottom line for all of this, is that we can then decide whether to keep shooting a particular type of subject - or not. Or whether we can try other types of subjects to maximise our income. Then we have choices and thats much more proactive than just looking back and complaining, or feeling downhearted about the whole situation. It may not be the complete solution but it can help.
But just saying I received $100 for my top sale is not enough, in my mind, to make those type of decisions. You could have got next to nothing the rest of the time.
Totally agree Annie. Good points you are making. I left and then came back with a new account (but even my original account was not that old) so I can't help you out, I don't have the powers to do so, unfortunately.
The funny thing is that I came, to this site, in the first place to find the answers to the questions you are asking, actually. I am sure an old guard here is willing to help you out.
Right folks?
Maybe Brasilnut can help you out. He does it all the time with his own sales, likes the numbers and is a diamond member. What do you say Alexandre?
Sure, I'll contribute with my own sales...I have little to no hope in this industry anyways so if people want to copy they can go right ahead (good luck traveling these days).
-
It would be interesting to pole contributors and find out how many are dependent on SS earnings and how many are not. A drop in commission does not effect me but how many contributors in small eastern European countries or African countries or South American countries depend on extra income in US dollars from the SS to feed their families, pay their rent or help their extended families? Did dropping the basic commission from $0.35us to $0.10us have a direct effect on photographers relying and dependent on stock photo income? Is this a moral issue as well?
-
It would be interesting to pole contributors and find out how many are dependent on SS earnings and how many are not. A drop in commission does not effect me but how many contributors in small eastern European countries or African countries or South American countries depend on extra income in US dollars from the SS to feed their families, pay their rent or help their extended families? Did dropping the basic commission from $0.35us to $0.10us have a direct effect on photographers relying and dependent on stock photo income? Is this a moral issue as well?
I don't think there were many people from those areas on the Shutterstock forum. And those who were on the forum, I don't think they belonged to the poorest. I don't know how many are here from those areas on this Microstock forum. Then it doesn't make much sense to pole contributors. But you can try it in a topic. (I see you've posted this idea in two different threads)
In any case, I'm afraid Shutterstock won't lose any sleep over it.
They will probably say that they would then be better off working for the competitor, knowing that you usually earn even less there.
By the way... I told my wife, the amounts that are sometimes still received for a photo. My 9.99 makes much less impression now. ;D
-
(https://i.ibb.co/KVq6pH5/Screenshot-2021-12-29-at-17-58-24.png) (https://ibb.co/9yTnkjp)
Yesterday received $72 for one photo, before received $102 for the same photo.
-
(https://i.ibb.co/KVq6pH5/Screenshot-2021-12-29-at-17-58-24.png) (https://ibb.co/9yTnkjp)
Yesterday received $72 for one photo, before received $102 for the same photo.
Congratulations! Just in time!
-
(https://i.ibb.co/KVq6pH5/Screenshot-2021-12-29-at-17-58-24.png) (https://ibb.co/9yTnkjp)
Yesterday received $72 for one photo, before received $102 for the same photo.
You're going to have a dandy lopsided RPD for that one, aren't you. ;D Nice going
-
Just so people will know that I am not blowing smoke, this is the file I made $510 this year from SS.
Check out the following image on Shutterstock - A global marketplace for creativity: https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/1534144853 (https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/1534144853)
Congrats - like some of my high earners, it's not an image i would predict for a high RPD and might even be rejected by some sites for LCV. but when it fits a particular need it's a welcome surprise
-
Agreed. Cannot predict what the high earners are.
And now with SS rejecting so many files, which are accepted by other sites simply do not know what their game plan is.
-
Whatever your getting on Shutterstock, just remember, Jon Oringer and his side kick Stan Pavlovsky are getting at least ten times the amount you get paid.
The whole site is run by a bunch of criminals, who have suckered the talent in and are now ripping them off.
They're getting more than $4550 each this month? Well, yeah... I would have thought they'd be getting paid more than ten times what I get paid. Or are you saying that they're getting ten times more than all contributors combined? I mean, that would only be possible if the maximum royalty they pay out is less than 10%, Shutterstock have no other expenses whatsoever... other than contributors and shareholder/CEO compensation, and those two own 100% of the company combined. But hey, why let the truth get in the way of expressing your frustration, right?!
-
But for this exercise, I would suggest basing it just on 2021 total sales figures for SS. To keep it simple and easy to gather data for. And collecting RPIs (total 2021 sales divided by total number of files) for each of the different categories that we shoot for.
The bottom line for all of this, is that we can then decide whether to keep shooting a particular type of subject - or not. Or whether we can try other types of subjects to maximise our income. Then we have choices and thats much more proactive than just looking back and complaining or feeling downhearted about the whole situation. It may not be the complete solution but it can help.
i like the idea, but (of course?) see some problems:
unfortunately, past sales aren't a good predictor of future sales, and with a very limited dataset ($50 images vs $.10 ones), 1 or 2 sales can distort the totals. and esp'ly with very competitive areas, sales are effectively random - eg shooting more images of the senate columns is highly unlikely to generate a high RPD
that example also argues against RPI - having a large portfolio gives a better chance of getting sales of a few images with low popularity. for example, a highly curated portfolio of 1000 images vs an extensive one of 10,000 - each might have $100 sales, but RPI wouldn't reflect that
bigger problem is those with large portfolios are unlikely to be tracking sales by category
-
The bottom line for all of this, is that we can then decide whether to keep shooting a particular type of subject - or not. Or whether we can try other types of subjects to maximise our income. Then we have choices and thats much more proactive than just looking back and complaining, or feeling downhearted about the whole situation. It may not be the complete solution but it can help.
But just saying I received $100 for my top sale is not enough, in my mind, to make those type of decisions. You could have got next to nothing the rest of the time.
Totally agree Annie. Good points you are making. I left and then came back with a new account (but even my original account was not that old) so I can't help you out, I don't have the powers to do so, unfortunately.
The funny thing is that I came, to this site, in the first place to find the answers to the questions you are asking, actually. I am sure an old guard here is willing to help you out.
Right folks?
Maybe Brasilnut can help you out. He does it all the time with his own sales, likes the numbers and is a diamond member. What do you say Alexandre?
Sure, I'll contribute with my own sales...I have little to no hope in this industry anyways so if people want to copy they can go right ahead (good luck traveling these days).
If you have little to no hope for this industry with the content you have then that's a bad sign, I still firmly believe the content is selling, the demand didn't go away especially once COVID hit, it's "other things". If demand went away then the agencies would all be closing.
and yeah, good luck with travel these days, as I watch Twitter scrolling on my phone here it's like literally everyone I follow is sick or getting sick, I'm not even taking my local bus around town right now, I'm walking I'm so worried about getting omicron.
-
The bottom line for all of this, is that we can then decide whether to keep shooting a particular type of subject - or not. Or whether we can try other types of subjects to maximise our income. Then we have choices and thats much more proactive than just looking back and complaining, or feeling downhearted about the whole situation. It may not be the complete solution but it can help.
But just saying I received $100 for my top sale is not enough, in my mind, to make those type of decisions. You could have got next to nothing the rest of the time.
Totally agree Annie. Good points you are making. I left and then came back with a new account (but even my original account was not that old) so I can't help you out, I don't have the powers to do so, unfortunately.
The funny thing is that I came, to this site, in the first place to find the answers to the questions you are asking, actually. I am sure an old guard here is willing to help you out.
Right folks?
Maybe Brasilnut can help you out. He does it all the time with his own sales, likes the numbers and is a diamond member. What do you say Alexandre?
Sure, I'll contribute with my own sales...I have little to no hope in this industry anyways so if people want to copy they can go right ahead (good luck traveling these days).
If you have little to no hope for this industry with the content you have then that's a bad sign, I still firmly believe the content is selling, the demand didn't go away especially once COVID hit, it's "other things". If demand went away then the agencies would all be closing.
and yeah, good luck with travel these days, as I watch Twitter scrolling on my phone here it's like literally everyone I follow is sick or getting sick, I'm not even taking my local bus around town right now, I'm walking I'm so worried about getting omicron.
I'm new to Stock. But when I read the old stories of the experienced people, the sales used to be better/higher (apart from our pay cut at Shutter). Reason, of course, is that supply is growing faster than demand and the increasing supply of free photos. Discussed so many times. This is not going to change after covid.
Agencies wouldn't be closing, because demand is still rising (maybe suffer from competing agencies like Shutterstock).. Only we providers have much more competition from each other. As a result, less is bid for an image and less is sold.
Due to covid there may be less demand for travel photos and more demand for hospital photos. But you also saw at the start of the covid outbreak that the stock sites were flooded with mouth caps photos.
Quality and number of photos / videos / illustrations is still important, although I see in this topic that people are often surprised that just that one photo yields so much.
As long as I see that people deliver a higher quality than I do, I will not complain.
-
New sales record of 11.50 for me. :) Yesterday's sales were also good. Too bad I'm still in level 1. I am surprised to read that some are already in much higher levels!!! I feel like a real amateur in that regard.
The photo is under 'Enhanced'. I haven't figured out what that means yet. Until now it was always 'Subscription' 'On demand' or 'Single & other'
Edit: Found it: https://support.shutterstock.com/s/article/What-is-an-Enhanced-License?language=en_US (https://support.shutterstock.com/s/article/What-is-an-Enhanced-License?language=en_US)
-
Enchanced means it can be printed on a product for resale, or for example for Calendar or whatever with 500.000+ print runs
-
Enchanced means it can be printed on a product for resale, or for example for Calendar or whatever with 500.000+ print runs
Thanks. I'd never looked into that, because I've never sold anything under Enchanced.
-
Are we including a buyout via SS (where you have to remove from other agencies too)? I have made 4 figure sums for that, really throws out my graphs.
-
... What I find surprising in this post is that some contributors
appear to have no problem allowing the SS to manipulate and
change the original agreement you had with the agency when
you first signed up with them. ...
The agreement with Shutterstock - and with all the agencies - has always included terms that permit them to modify the agreement at their sole discretion and your continued use of their site indicates agreement. It's not an ideal situation, but it's what all contributors agreed to.
The current section is 18f (https://submit.shutterstock.com/legal/terms) which says, in part: "Please note that Shutterstock reserves the right to modify these terms at any time in its sole discretion...Shutterstock will notify you of any such change by an announcement on this page, your login page, and/or by other means ...By continuing to make Content available through Shutterstock, you agree to be bound by all such changes...."
Edited to add that I went to the Wayback Machine to look at the old terms of service back to 2004 and the agreement allowed Shutterstock to modify terms unilaterally. For example (when it was just bullet points, not even a numbered list!) "Shutterstock reserves the right to modify these terms at any time and to notify you by email of the modifications." from Nov 26 2004.
-
New sales record of 11.50 for me. :) Yesterday's sales were also good. Too bad I'm still in level 1. I am surprised to read that some are already in much higher levels!!! I feel like a real amateur in that regard.
The photo is under 'Enhanced'. I haven't figured out what that means yet. Until now it was always 'Subscription' 'On demand' or 'Single & other'
Edit: Found it: https://support.shutterstock.com/s/article/What-is-an-Enhanced-License?language=en_US (https://support.shutterstock.com/s/article/What-is-an-Enhanced-License?language=en_US)
Congratulations thijsdegraaf. This little fella (photo composition) made a $60 commission last September...
-
New sales record of 11.50 for me. :) Yesterday's sales were also good. Too bad I'm still in level 1. I am surprised to read that some are already in much higher levels!!! I feel like a real amateur in that regard.
The photo is under 'Enhanced'. I haven't figured out what that means yet. Until now it was always 'Subscription' 'On demand' or 'Single & other'
Edit: Found it: https://support.shutterstock.com/s/article/What-is-an-Enhanced-License?language=en_US (https://support.shutterstock.com/s/article/What-is-an-Enhanced-License?language=en_US)
Congratulations thijsdegraaf. This little fella (photo composition) made a $60 commission last September...
Congratulations Pacesetter. If my photo had sold in September, it would have yielded more because of the higher level ;) . But definitely not $60.
-
Are we including a buyout via SS (where you have to remove from other agencies too)? I have made 4 figure sums for that, really throws out my graphs.
Sorry. I do not understand you. Usually when I read English I don't need a translator. But even with the translator I can't figure it out.
-
Are we including a buyout via SS (where you have to remove from other agencies too)? I have made 4 figure sums for that, really throws out my graphs.
Sorry. I do not understand you. Usually when I read English I don't need a translator. But even with the translator I can't figure it out.
I think he means the situation that a client wants the copyright of the photo and then buys the contributor out by paying a lumpsum payment for it. So, really buying the asset wiht all the rights attached to it. That's why it has to be removed from other sites as well.
-
But for this exercise, I would suggest basing it just on 2021 total sales figures for SS. To keep it simple and easy to gather data for. And collecting RPIs (total 2021 sales divided by total number of files) for each of the different categories that we shoot for.
The bottom line for all of this, is that we can then decide whether to keep shooting a particular type of subject - or not. Or whether we can try other types of subjects to maximise our income. Then we have choices and thats much more proactive than just looking back and complaining or feeling downhearted about the whole situation. It may not be the complete solution but it can help.
i like the idea, but (of course?) see some problems:
unfortunately, past sales aren't a good predictor of future sales, and with a very limited dataset
Being exclusive at istock years ago, i used to use an excel sheet to calculate future sales.
I also used an analysys tool , i think it was named something like pomato.
I analyzed uploads of one quarter with the sales of the following 8 quarters.There has been a clear trend.
It was relative precise to calculate the sales of uploads in quarter1 of year XXXX with the sales the following 2 years.
There is a need of a database including data of at least 4 years. But even with only 500 - 800 uploads a year it was relative precise to calculate the trend of sales.
-
Are we including a buyout via SS (where you have to remove from other agencies too)? I have made 4 figure sums for that, really throws out my graphs.
Sorry. I do not understand you. Usually when I read English I don't need a translator. But even with the translator I can't figure it out.
I think he means the situation that a client wants the copyright of the photo and then buys the contributor out by paying a lumpsum payment for it. So, really buying the asset wiht all the rights attached to it. That's why it has to be removed from other sites as well.
Just spotted this. Yes that's what I meant. Had a few of these from various agencies over the years. The highest through SS was for a four figure sum.
-
My highest price for a photo at Sstock this year is half a small bar of chocolate (59 cents).
Beat that.
-
My highest price for a photo at Sstock this year is half a small bar of chocolate (59 cents).
Beat that.
That's not much. Finally someone lower than me. :) Hopefully things get better for you this month.
-
Are we including a buyout via SS (where you have to remove from other agencies too)? I have made 4 figure sums for that, really throws out my graphs.
Sorry. I do not understand you. Usually when I read English I don't need a translator. But even with the translator I can't figure it out.
I think he means the situation that a client wants the copyright of the photo and then buys the contributor out by paying a lumpsum payment for it. So, really buying the asset wiht all the rights attached to it. That's why it has to be removed from other sites as well.
Just spotted this. Yes that's what I meant. Had a few of these from various agencies over the years. The highest through SS was for a four figure sum.
Thanks
-
My highest price for a photo at Sstock this year is half a small bar of chocolate (59 cents).
Beat that.
That's not much. Finally someone lower than me. :) Hopefully things get better for you this month.
Thank you. I'm glad that my failure accentuates your success :)
Just checked for 2021 and the highest was $2.74 :-[
2020 was $14.
The further back I go, the higher the sum.
-
My highest price for a photo at Sstock this year is half a small bar of chocolate (59 cents).
Beat that.
That's not much. Finally someone lower than me. :) Hopefully things get better for you this month.
Thank you. I'm glad that my failure accentuates your success :)
Just checked for 2021 and the highest was $2.74 :-[
2020 was $14.
The further back I go, the higher the sum.
For me it's exactly the other way around. Although I haven't been working that long (end of 2019). Your highest amount is slightly higher than mine. :)
-
My highest photo sale on SS this year was $100 when I was level 3.
-
My highest photo sale on SS this year was $100 when I was level 3.
I can only dream of that. A disadvantage is that I would then be even less satisfied with the low prices.
-
My highest photo sale on SS this year was $100 when I was level 3.
I'd be interested to know when you uploaded that image and what you think makes it stand apart so that it can fetch such a good price.
Annie has talked previously about it being worthwhile uploading 'high quality' (ie mp/size) images. Was this the case with this one?
I'd also be interested to know if you have such successes with images uploaded in the last 12 months or so.
-
Way in the past I used to regularly get $25.00 downloads every month along with $50 - 75 every now and then, I seem to remember getting $150 a few times, these days 10c seems to be the norm.
I would lay money on high priced downloads being on there way out, even now Pavlovsky, deep in the dungeons of the Empire State Building is masterminding his latest attack on the talent.
I suspect he will end up charging the contributors to have a portfolio on the site, all part of the continuing spiral of ever decreasing shareholder returns, forcing him to steal more cash from the talent.
-
My highest photo sale on SS this year was $100 when I was level 3.
I'd be interested to know when you uploaded that image and what you think makes it stand apart so that it can fetch such a good price.
Annie has talked previously about it being worthwhile uploading 'high quality' (ie mp/size) images. Was this the case with this one?
I'd also be interested to know if you have such successes with images uploaded in the last 12 months or so.
The higher sales for me are usually not the best sellers, but surprise sales even of older images. Why customers chose exactly this photo is honestly a mystery to me. Here are 4 example of sales around 100$, the first and second one was made on the side with the iPhone.
https://www.shutterstock.com/de/image-photo/top-view-on-isolated-echinacea-flowers-1779167648 (https://www.shutterstock.com/de/image-photo/top-view-on-isolated-echinacea-flowers-1779167648)
https://www.shutterstock.com/de/image-photo/oberhausen-centro-ruhrgebiet-germany-july-9-2021174987 (https://www.shutterstock.com/de/image-photo/oberhausen-centro-ruhrgebiet-germany-july-9-2021174987)
https://www.shutterstock.com/de/image-photo/view-on-natural-turquoise-pool-surrounded-1236635590 (https://www.shutterstock.com/de/image-photo/view-on-natural-turquoise-pool-surrounded-1236635590)
https://www.shutterstock.com/de/image-photo/closeup-four-shiny-red-ripe-bell-1652773057 (https://www.shutterstock.com/de/image-photo/closeup-four-shiny-red-ripe-bell-1652773057)
-
My highest photo sale on SS this year was $100 when I was level 3.
I'd be interested to know when you uploaded that image and what you think makes it stand apart so that it can fetch such a good price.
Annie has talked previously about it being worthwhile uploading 'high quality' (ie mp/size) images. Was this the case with this one?
I'd also be interested to know if you have such successes with images uploaded in the last 12 months or so.
The photo was made in December 2014 and it has about 23Mpx.
I didn't upload much last year, so there is nothing much to say about the performance of what I uploaded in the last 12 months or so. ;)
-
My highest photo sale on SS this year was $100 when I was level 3.
I'd be interested to know when you uploaded that image and what you think makes it stand apart so that it can fetch such a good price.
Annie has talked previously about it being worthwhile uploading 'high quality' (ie mp/size) images. Was this the case with this one?
I'd also be interested to know if you have such successes with images uploaded in the last 12 months or so.
The photo was made in December 2014 and it has about 23Mpx.
I didn't upload much last year, so there is nothing much to say about the performance of what I uploaded in the last 12 months or so. ;)
Ah. My main interest is in the high sales of the last two years after the introduction of the 10 cent. To get an impression of whether those high sales still occur.
-
My highest photo sale on SS this year was $100 when I was level 3.
I'd be interested to know when you uploaded that image and what you think makes it stand apart so that it can fetch such a good price.
Annie has talked previously about it being worthwhile uploading 'high quality' (ie mp/size) images. Was this the case with this one?
I'd also be interested to know if you have such successes with images uploaded in the last 12 months or so.
The higher sales for me are usually not the best sellers, but surprise sales even of older images. Why customers chose exactly this photo is honestly a mystery to me. Here are 4 example of sales around 100$, the first and second one was made on the side with the iPhone.
https://www.shutterstock.com/de/image-photo/top-view-on-isolated-echinacea-flowers-1779167648 (https://www.shutterstock.com/de/image-photo/top-view-on-isolated-echinacea-flowers-1779167648)
https://www.shutterstock.com/de/image-photo/oberhausen-centro-ruhrgebiet-germany-july-9-2021174987 (https://www.shutterstock.com/de/image-photo/oberhausen-centro-ruhrgebiet-germany-july-9-2021174987)
https://www.shutterstock.com/de/image-photo/view-on-natural-turquoise-pool-surrounded-1236635590 (https://www.shutterstock.com/de/image-photo/view-on-natural-turquoise-pool-surrounded-1236635590)
https://www.shutterstock.com/de/image-photo/closeup-four-shiny-red-ripe-bell-1652773057 (https://www.shutterstock.com/de/image-photo/closeup-four-shiny-red-ripe-bell-1652773057)
Thanks Ralf. Yes, these are indeed not the photos where you immediately expect such a high price. I see your port is expanding fast!!! Right now I'm not doing anything with this grey weather.
-
My highest photo sale on SS this year was $100 when I was level 3.
I'd be interested to know when you uploaded that image and what you think makes it stand apart so that it can fetch such a good price.
Annie has talked previously about it being worthwhile uploading 'high quality' (ie mp/size) images. Was this the case with this one?
I'd also be interested to know if you have such successes with images uploaded in the last 12 months or so.
The higher sales for me are usually not the best sellers, but surprise sales even of older images. Why customers chose exactly this photo is honestly a mystery to me. Here are 4 example of sales around 100$, the first and second one was made on the side with the iPhone.
https://www.shutterstock.com/de/image-photo/top-view-on-isolated-echinacea-flowers-1779167648 (https://www.shutterstock.com/de/image-photo/top-view-on-isolated-echinacea-flowers-1779167648)
https://www.shutterstock.com/de/image-photo/oberhausen-centro-ruhrgebiet-germany-july-9-2021174987 (https://www.shutterstock.com/de/image-photo/oberhausen-centro-ruhrgebiet-germany-july-9-2021174987)
https://www.shutterstock.com/de/image-photo/view-on-natural-turquoise-pool-surrounded-1236635590 (https://www.shutterstock.com/de/image-photo/view-on-natural-turquoise-pool-surrounded-1236635590)
https://www.shutterstock.com/de/image-photo/closeup-four-shiny-red-ripe-bell-1652773057 (https://www.shutterstock.com/de/image-photo/closeup-four-shiny-red-ripe-bell-1652773057)
Thanks Ralf. Yes, these are indeed not the photos where you immediately expect such a high price. I see your port is expanding fast!!! Right now I'm not doing anything with this grey weather.
Thijs, well, the photos are not that badc ;).But I know what you mean, that's why I posted these examples.
Here in Germany in our area we have fog for weeks, I would be happy if I could at least see gray skies.
I'm looking forward again to the bike tours in the summer in 'Holland, when I can poach in your territory photographically :D
-
Thanks Zero Talent (a misnomer if ever I heard one but I can guess the history of that name) and Ralf.
It's very interesting and sometimes perplexing to see where success lies.
-
Just had a look at my photo that has earned me the most in one sale (a swan head macro for $52) and was told by Shutterstock that its popularity is 'high' and that it is 'frequently used'.
LOL. It's only sold 3 times.
It's extraordinary that Sstock hasn't yet seen fit to sort out this misleading information.
-
Just had a look at my photo that has earned me the most in one sale (a swan head macro for $52) and was told by Shutterstock that its popularity is 'high' and that it is 'frequently used'.
LOL. It's only sold 3 times.
It's extraordinary that Sstock hasn't yet seen fit to sort out this misleading information.
Yes it works a little better than in the beginning, but it's still not good.
-
By the way, the sale that I made $1000 on at SS in 2020 involved a take down from other sites request but I kept the Copyright. And it was exclusive for only one year.
The $500 sale in 2021 did not require a take down from other sites.
-
My highest photo sale on SS this year was $100 when I was level 3.
I'd be interested to know when you uploaded that image and what you think makes it stand apart so that it can fetch such a good price.
Annie has talked previously about it being worthwhile uploading 'high quality' (ie mp/size) images. Was this the case with this one?
I'd also be interested to know if you have such successes with images uploaded in the last 12 months or so.
The higher sales for me are usually not the best sellers, but surprise sales even of older images. Why customers chose exactly this photo is honestly a mystery to me. Here are 4 example of sales around 100$, the first and second one was made on the side with the iPhone.
Thanks Ralf. Yes, these are indeed not the photos where you immediately expect such a high price. I see your port is expanding fast!!! Right now I'm not doing anything with this grey weather.
Thijs, well, the photos are not that badc ;).But I know what you mean, that's why I posted these examples.
Here in Germany in our area we have fog for weeks, I would be happy if I could at least see gray skies.
I'm looking forward again to the bike tours in the summer in 'Holland, when I can poach in your territory photographically :D
Same weather as with us. And there will be no improvement this month. This was a photo of the sky above our garden on a "beautiful" day a few days ago. I just sold it for 10 cents in Poland. :) https://www.shutterstock.com/de/image-photo/dark-clouds-sky-silhouette-trees-winter-2101821232 (https://www.shutterstock.com/de/image-photo/dark-clouds-sky-silhouette-trees-winter-2101821232)
-
My highest photo sale on SS this year was $100 when I was level 3.
I'd be interested to know when you uploaded that image and what you think makes it stand apart so that it can fetch such a good price.
Annie has talked previously about it being worthwhile uploading 'high quality' (ie mp/size) images. Was this the case with this one?
I'd also be interested to know if you have such successes with images uploaded in the last 12 months or so.
The higher sales for me are usually not the best sellers, but surprise sales even of older images. Why customers chose exactly this photo is honestly a mystery to me. Here are 4 example of sales around 100$, the first and second one was made on the side with the iPhone.
Thanks Ralf. Yes, these are indeed not the photos where you immediately expect such a high price. I see your port is expanding fast!!! Right now I'm not doing anything with this grey weather.
Thijs, well, the photos are not that badc ;).But I know what you mean, that's why I posted these examples.
Here in Germany in our area we have fog for weeks, I would be happy if I could at least see gray skies.
I'm looking forward again to the bike tours in the summer in 'Holland, when I can poach in your territory photographically :D
Same weather as with us. And there will be no improvement this month. This was a photo of the sky above our garden on a "beautiful" day a few days ago. I just sold it for 10 cents in Poland. :) https://www.shutterstock.com/de/image-photo/dark-clouds-sky-silhouette-trees-winter-2101821232 (https://www.shutterstock.com/de/image-photo/dark-clouds-sky-silhouette-trees-winter-2101821232)
With your photo Caribbean feelings arise with me ;). The visibility here was 50 - 100 m, today the fog is gone for a long time, but continuous rain now. >:(
-
My highest photo sale on SS this year was $100 when I was level 3.
I'd be interested to know when you uploaded that image and what you think makes it stand apart so that it can fetch such a good price.
Annie has talked previously about it being worthwhile uploading 'high quality' (ie mp/size) images. Was this the case with this one?
I'd also be interested to know if you have such successes with images uploaded in the last 12 months or so.
The higher sales for me are usually not the best sellers, but surprise sales even of older images. Why customers chose exactly this photo is honestly a mystery to me. Here are 4 example of sales around 100$, the first and second one was made on the side with the iPhone.
Thanks Ralf. Yes, these are indeed not the photos where you immediately expect such a high price. I see your port is expanding fast!!! Right now I'm not doing anything with this grey weather.
Thijs, well, the photos are not that badc ;).But I know what you mean, that's why I posted these examples.
Here in Germany in our area we have fog for weeks, I would be happy if I could at least see gray skies.
I'm looking forward again to the bike tours in the summer in 'Holland, when I can poach in your territory photographically :D
Same weather as with us. And there will be no improvement this month. This was a photo of the sky above our garden on a "beautiful" day a few days ago. I just sold it for 10 cents in Poland. :) https://www.shutterstock.com/de/image-photo/dark-clouds-sky-silhouette-trees-winter-2101821232 (https://www.shutterstock.com/de/image-photo/dark-clouds-sky-silhouette-trees-winter-2101821232)
With your photo Caribbean feelings arise with me ;). The visibility here was 50 - 100 m, today the fog is gone for a long time, but continuous rain now. >:(
Yes, that rain comes from us. ;D It was also foggy here the days before.
-
Yes, that rain comes from us. ;D It was also foggy here the days before.
As much as I like your country, this is a very serious problem here with huge political explosives. The rain and thus any bad weather always comes from Holland. You should change that. ;)
-
Thanks Zero Talent (a misnomer if ever I heard one ...
Not really a misnomer. Here are 10 things that require me. :P
-
Thanks Zero Talent (a misnomer if ever I heard one ...
Not really a misnomer. Here are 10 things that require me. :P
lol
So are you good at the body language bit ? ;) ;D
-
Just had a look at my photo that has earned me the most in one sale (a swan head macro for $52) and was told by Shutterstock that its popularity is 'high' and that it is 'frequently used'.
LOL. It's only sold 3 times.
It's extraordinary that Sstock hasn't yet seen fit to sort out this misleading information.
Thanks for sharing that. That's interesting about only 3 downloads. I am starting to think now whether the ratings are based on dollars earned?
...
As for the thread topic ...
I received an $85.00 SOD yesterday. Not a great photo, but one of my better performers. Highest SOD I received was last February for $140.
-
Just had a look at my photo that has earned me the most in one sale (a swan head macro for $52) and was told by Shutterstock that its popularity is 'high' and that it is 'frequently used'.
LOL. It's only sold 3 times.
It's extraordinary that Sstock hasn't yet seen fit to sort out this misleading information.
Thanks for sharing that. That's interesting about only 3 downloads. I am starting to think now whether the ratings are based on dollars earned?
...
As for the thread topic ...
I received an $85.00 SOD yesterday. Not a great photo, but one of my better performers. Highest SOD I received was last February for $140.
Thanks Annie. Those are nice amounts. :o
-
Thanks Zero Talent (a misnomer if ever I heard one ...
Not really a misnomer. Here are 10 things that require me. :P
lol
So are you good at the body language bit ? ;) ;D
Good? I speak the best body language! :P
;D
-
Thanks Thijs !
@Zero LOL
-
The higher sales for me are usually not the best sellers, but surprise sales even of older images. Why customers chose exactly this photo is honestly a mystery to me. Here are 4 example of sales around 100$, the first and second one was made on the side with the iPhone.
same here - you just never know what a buyer needs - which is why the rejections for LCV are rediculous
-
The higher sales for me are usually not the best sellers, but surprise sales even of older images. Why customers chose exactly this photo is honestly a mystery to me. Here are 4 example of sales around 100$, the first and second one was made on the side with the iPhone.
same here - you just never know what a buyer needs - which is why the rejections for LCV are rediculous
If anyone is feeling bad about LCV, and I'd agree, let the buyer decide not some reviewers personal opinion, I want to share my first rejection in maybe a year on DT.
Your image might not be suitable as a stock image because of one or more of the following reasons:
We have reviewed your file and this is not quite what we're looking for. Please note that this image is not eligible for resubmission.
Image is not RF stock oriented or its sales potential is too low at this stage. Please note that Stock photography is a commercial type of imagery, so, snapshots are not Stock. It is also very important to understand that Art and Stock are two fundamentally different categories of imagery, that only meet when an artwork can adapt to a wide range of commercial usage.
Lack of concept.
This event is too old and no longer presents interest in the editorial section.
Holy Cow! I should have had a can of this before I uploaded?
(https://i.postimg.cc/s20QTtvQ/try_not_to_suck.jpg)
I feel like I've gone back in time to grade school. (https://i.postimg.cc/28jPGV4s/knocksense.gif)
ps Accepted at Adobe Stock...
-
The higher sales for me are usually not the best sellers, but surprise sales even of older images. Why customers chose exactly this photo is honestly a mystery to me. Here are 4 example of sales around 100$, the first and second one was made on the side with the iPhone.
same here - you just never know what a buyer needs - which is why the rejections for LCV are rediculous
If anyone is feeling bad about LCV, and I'd agree, let the buyer decide not some reviewers personal opinion, I want to share my first rejection in maybe a year on DT.
Your image might not be suitable as a stock image because of one or more of the following reasons:
We have reviewed your file and this is not quite what we're looking for. Please note that this image is not eligible for resubmission.
Image is not RF stock oriented or its sales potential is too low at this stage. Please note that Stock photography is a commercial type of imagery, so, snapshots are not Stock. It is also very important to understand that Art and Stock are two fundamentally different categories of imagery, that only meet when an artwork can adapt to a wide range of commercial usage.
Lack of concept.
This event is too old and no longer presents interest in the editorial section.
Holy Cow! I should have had a can of this before I uploaded?
(https://i.postimg.cc/s20QTtvQ/try_not_to_suck.jpg)
I feel like I've gone back in time to grade school. (https://i.postimg.cc/28jPGV4s/knocksense.gif)
ps Accepted at Adobe Stock...
Pete, at Dreamstime I don't even pay attention to the rare reasons for rejection.
But the rejection of german style lager because of lack of sales potential hits me personally. ;)
-
The higher sales for me are usually not the best sellers, but surprise sales even of older images. Why customers chose exactly this photo is honestly a mystery to me. Here are 4 example of sales around 100$, the first and second one was made on the side with the iPhone.
same here - you just never know what a buyer needs - which is why the rejections for LCV are rediculous
If anyone is feeling bad about LCV, and I'd agree, let the buyer decide not some reviewers personal opinion, I want to share my first rejection in maybe a year on DT.
Your image might not be suitable as a stock image because of one or more of the following reasons:
We have reviewed your file and this is not quite what we're looking for. Please note that this image is not eligible for resubmission.
Image is not RF stock oriented or its sales potential is too low at this stage. Please note that Stock photography is a commercial type of imagery, so, snapshots are not Stock. It is also very important to understand that Art and Stock are two fundamentally different categories of imagery, that only meet when an artwork can adapt to a wide range of commercial usage.
Lack of concept.
This event is too old and no longer presents interest in the editorial section.
Holy Cow! I should have had a can of this before I uploaded?
I feel like I've gone back in time to grade school. (https://i.postimg.cc/28jPGV4s/knocksense.gif)
ps Accepted at Adobe Stock...
Pete, at Dreamstime I don't even pay attention to the rare reasons for rejection.
But the rejection of german style lager because of lack of sales potential hits me personally. ;)
As long as it's not our Dutch Heineken, I don't care. ;D
-
As long as it's not our Dutch Heineken, I don't care. ;D
Thijs, do you know that we in Germany call Heineken "Grachtenpisse" (dutch canal pee) ;)
Seriously, you guys have excellent specialty brews. However, you think in smaller dimensions. While we drink away half liters here, you sip on your 0.2 liter glasses (klein biertje flutje) ;)
-
As long as it's not our Dutch Heineken, I don't care. ;D
Thijs, do you know that we in Germany call Heineken "Grachtenpisse" (dutch canal pee) ;)
Seriously, you guys have excellent specialty brews. However, you think in smaller dimensions. While we drink away half liters here, you sip on your 0.2 liter glasses (klein biertje flutje) ;)
;D
-
As long as it's not our Dutch Heineken, I don't care. ;D
Thijs, do you know that we in Germany call Heineken "Grachtenpisse" (dutch canal pee) ;)
Seriously, you guys have excellent specialty brews. However, you think in smaller dimensions. While we drink away half liters here, you sip on your 0.2 liter glasses (klein biertje flutje) ;)
4 brewery CEOs in a bar, after a conference:
The CEO of Heineken: "A Heineken, please!"
The CEO of Amstel: "An Amstel, please!"
The CEO of Grolsch: "A Grolsch, please!"
"And you, Sir?" says the waitress asking the Leffe CEO.
"Same for me, a glass of water, please".
-
As long as it's not our Dutch Heineken, I don't care. ;D
Thijs, do you know that we in Germany call Heineken "Grachtenpisse" (dutch canal pee) ;)
Seriously, you guys have excellent specialty brews. However, you think in smaller dimensions. While we drink away half liters here, you sip on your 0.2 liter glasses (klein biertje flutje) ;)
4 brewery CEOs in a bar, after a conference:
The CEO of Heineken: "A Heineken, please!"
The CEO of Amstel: "An Amstel, please!"
The CEO of Grolsch: "A Grolsch, please!"
"And you, Sir?" says the waitress asking the Leffe CEO.
"Same for me, a glass of water, please".
You're even worse than Ralf. Fortunately, we also have Hertog Jan. :)
-
As long as it's not our Dutch Heineken, I don't care. ;D
Thijs, do you know that we in Germany call Heineken "Grachtenpisse" (dutch canal pee) ;)
Seriously, you guys have excellent specialty brews. However, you think in smaller dimensions. While we drink away half liters here, you sip on your 0.2 liter glasses (klein biertje flutje) ;)
4 brewery CEOs in a bar, after a conference:
The CEO of Heineken: "A Heineken, please!"
The CEO of Amstel: "An Amstel, please!"
The CEO of Grolsch: "A Grolsch, please!"
"And you, Sir?" says the waitress asking the Leffe CEO.
"Same for me, a glass of water, please".
You're even worse than Ralf.
Why? I don't think he ordered tap water. :P
-
As long as it's not our Dutch Heineken, I don't care. ;D
Thijs, do you know that we in Germany call Heineken "Grachtenpisse" (dutch canal pee) ;)
Seriously, you guys have excellent specialty brews. However, you think in smaller dimensions. While we drink away half liters here, you sip on your 0.2 liter glasses (klein biertje flutje) ;)
4 brewery CEOs in a bar, after a conference:
The CEO of Heineken: "A Heineken, please!"
The CEO of Amstel: "An Amstel, please!"
The CEO of Grolsch: "A Grolsch, please!"
"And you, Sir?" says the waitress asking the Leffe CEO.
"Same for me, a glass of water, please".
You're even worse than Ralf. Fortunately, we also have Hertog Jan. :)
Thijs, I put you out of your misery. Hertoog Jan has the best wheat beer, even better than bavarian snow mountain pee ;)
-
„Waiter, please bring another beer before the misery is starting.“
„Can you pay at all?“
„Okay, there we go: The misery is already starting!“ ;D
-
The higher sales for me are usually not the best sellers, but surprise sales even of older images. Why customers chose exactly this photo is honestly a mystery to me. Here are 4 example of sales around 100$, the first and second one was made on the side with the iPhone.
same here - you just never know what a buyer needs - which is why the rejections for LCV are rediculous
If anyone is feeling bad about LCV, and I'd agree, let the buyer decide not some reviewers personal opinion, I want to share my first rejection in maybe a year on DT.
Your image might not be suitable as a stock image because of one or more of the following reasons:
We have reviewed your file and this is not quite what we're looking for. Please note that this image is not eligible for resubmission.
Image is not RF stock oriented or its sales potential is too low at this stage. Please note that Stock photography is a commercial type of imagery, so, snapshots are not Stock. It is also very important to understand that Art and Stock are two fundamentally different categories of imagery, that only meet when an artwork can adapt to a wide range of commercial usage.
Lack of concept.
This event is too old and no longer presents interest in the editorial section.
Holy Cow! I should have had a can of this before I uploaded?
I feel like I've gone back in time to grade school. (https://i.postimg.cc/28jPGV4s/knocksense.gif)
ps Accepted at Adobe Stock...
Pete, at Dreamstime I don't even pay attention to the rare reasons for rejection.
But the rejection of german style lager because of lack of sales potential hits me personally. ;)
As long as it's not our Dutch Heineken, I don't care. ;D
they make very funny ads
https://youtu.be/yIutgtzwhAc (https://youtu.be/yIutgtzwhAc)
https://youtu.be/gjAZ5esOBZw
-
Just had a look at my photo that has earned me the most in one sale (a swan head macro for $52) and was told by Shutterstock that its popularity is 'high' and that it is 'frequently used'.
LOL. It's only sold 3 times.
It's extraordinary that Sstock hasn't yet seen fit to sort out this misleading information.
Thanks for sharing that. That's interesting about only 3 downloads. I am starting to think now whether the ratings are based on dollars earned?
I just looked through my list and picked out an image that also only sold 3 times, for a total of $41.49. It says popularity "none" and "never used".
Another image that sold 3 times for a total of only 8.60$ has popularity "high" and "high usage".
This rating is all a mistery to me.
Neither download times nor dollars earned seem to be the main factor. Maybe downloads per time? Like an image that sold 3 times within 3 months will get a better rating than an image that sold 3 times within 3 years? Though, if you ask me, no image that only sold 3 times should be labeled with "high usage", regardless of any other factors, just like no image that has ever sold should be labeled "never used". It's both wrong and misleading to the customer.
-
Just had a look at my photo that has earned me the most in one sale (a swan head macro for $52) and was told by Shutterstock that its popularity is 'high' and that it is 'frequently used'.
LOL. It's only sold 3 times.
It's extraordinary that Sstock hasn't yet seen fit to sort out this misleading information.
Thanks for sharing that. That's interesting about only 3 downloads. I am starting to think now whether the ratings are based on dollars earned?
I just looked through my list and picked out an image that also only sold 3 times, for a total of $41.49. It says popularity "none" and "never used".
Another image that sold 3 times for a total of only 8.60$ has popularity "high" and "high usage".
This rating is all a mistery to me.
Neither download times nor dollars earned seem to be the main factor. Maybe downloads per time? Like an image that sold 3 times within 3 months will get a better rating than an image that sold 3 times within 3 years? Though, if you ask me, no image that only sold 3 times should be labeled with "high usage", regardless of any other factors, just like no image that has ever sold should be labeled "never used". It's both wrong and misleading to the customer.
for a long time search placement was some combination of sales/time with a boost early on, and perhaps an increasing penalty as time went on. Then they decided as a technology company that was too simple and shook everything up and now it doesn't really make any sense. I wonder if they even really know what is going on with it anymore.
-
for a long time search placement was some combination of sales/time with a boost early on, and perhaps an increasing penalty as time went on. Then they decided as a technology company that was too simple and shook everything up and now it doesn't really make any sense. I wonder if they even really know what is going on with it anymore.
Yes for a technology company the ratings and some things are terribly screwed up.
IS did that too and you could watch your image rank drop. One DL in the first week and your image would be like Captain Marvelous. By the end of the month, it would slowly get adjusted, down and down. SS did use the same, something about the number of days vs the number of downloads. Then sometime back when there was a big re-rank, all the people who held the top page since 2004 (just a little humor, but close to true) lost their King of the Hill status and dropped down into the depths.
That's where all the rank rumors and complaints started. New algorithm came in. Now we don't know and can only imagine what invisible means is sorting the images. Even with changing every 15 minutes, some watching has shown me, it doesn't actually change very much past the new image boost, while they are on top and then slowly move down the pages.
(https://i.postimg.cc/R03JFGf6/sliced-tomato-2018-two.jpg)
(https://i.postimg.cc/6QpSGfFC/SS-sliced-tomato-may-2020.jpg)
(https://i.postimg.cc/RZqnCGtc/Sliced-Tomato-SS-Jan-2022.jpg)
What do your eyes tell you about how the image positions have changed?
-
Just received.
-
Just received.
Wow! A good start to the year. Congratulations! Highest for me today: 1.21 ;D
-
I guess everyone who is making claims that sales are controlled by position and uploading and we lose because of the algorithm have decided to ignore my photo evidence to the contrary? Or at least look at it?
The same photos are on the first page, except for a very small number, for years. The same photos move around on the front page.
Also since most of this is simple personal experience and not collected empirical data, I need to add, I upload a bit, on a consistent basis, day to day and week to week, and my sales and income have dropped. That includes images that used to sell more often, year after year. Some of those are still on page one, first few lines.
It's nice to believe that SS "punishes" people for not uploading, but there is also contrary personal observation from people who stopped completely for a couple years, and their downloads are stable.
It's just too easy to see what we want to see and come up with some theory to pass around on the forum. My theory is based more on facts. We don't know.
-
I guess everyone who is making claims that sales are controlled by position and uploading and we lose because of the algorithm have decided to ignore my photo evidence to the contrary? Or at least look at it?
The same photos are on the first page, except for a very small number, for years. The same photos move around on the front page.
Also since most of this is simple personal experience and not collected empirical data, I need to add, I upload a bit, on a consistent basis, day to day and week to week, and my sales and income have dropped. That includes images that used to sell more often, year after year. Some of those are still on page one, first few lines.
It's nice to believe that SS "punishes" people for not uploading, but there is also contrary personal observation from people who stopped completely for a couple years, and their downloads are stable.
It's just too easy to see what we want to see and come up with some theory to pass around on the forum. My theory is based more on facts. We don't know.
Pete,
your example is interesting. And it's great that you kept the screenshots.
Still, I think you have to distinguish a bit between different subjects.
A tomato does not change. It looked exactly the same 100 years ago as it does today. The same goes for tigers, trees, etc.
But there are other subjects where there are changes over the years. For example, color trends, hairstyles, fashion trends. If someone generates now purposefully mock ups and orients itself thereby at current color trends, it is quite conceivable from my view that the pictures do not slip only therefore, in the ranking, because the buyer taste changed, but because possibly the Algo considers with new uploads whether a picture corresponds to the current trends better, than a comparable picture, which does not meet any longer hundred per cent the current trend.
Just a thesis - I can't prove anything anyway.
-
My theory is based more on facts. We don't know.
Pete, I don't want to offend you, but the only facts you have are that there is not much action on the first page on the subject of tomatoes.
My observation on other topics is quite different. For images that I sell frequently, I always try to track where they land in the ranking. And I actually experience it consistently that there is always a lot of movement on the first site. New images are added, old ones are removed.
Why the image is so static on tomatoes, no idea, but is rather atypical.
How the algo works at Shutterstock, I stay out of it, no idea.
-
I disagree that old images are removed. Yes, new images show up on the front page but also dissapear if they are not sold. Older images remain, if they are regulary sold. I have this deer image on the top of the first page for about 2 years for "deer" keyword and it's also selling regulary. I'm also seeing other deer images on the first page, that are there what seems like "forever".
-
I disagree that old images are removed. Yes, new images show up on the front page but also dissapear if they are not sold. Older images remain, if they are regulary sold. I have this deer image on the top of the first page for about 2 years for "deer" keyword and it's also selling regulary. I'm also seeing other deer images on the first page, that are there what seems like "forever".
Dumc, I think we can discuss this for pages and pages because everyone has their own view on things. ;)
I myself observe more current topics and there is quite a lot of movement in it - perhaps this is the difference in perception.
But the fact is, if e.g. a dozen new pictures on page 1 prove themselves, 12 other pictures must disappear from page 1 for it.
-
I guess everyone who is making claims that sales are controlled by position and uploading and we lose because of the algorithm have decided to ignore my photo evidence to the contrary? Or at least look at it?
The same photos are on the first page, except for a very small number, for years. The same photos move around on the front page.
Also since most of this is simple personal experience and not collected empirical data, I need to add, I upload a bit, on a consistent basis, day to day and week to week, and my sales and income have dropped. That includes images that used to sell more often, year after year. Some of those are still on page one, first few lines.
It's nice to believe that SS "punishes" people for not uploading, but there is also contrary personal observation from people who stopped completely for a couple years, and their downloads are stable.
It's just too easy to see what we want to see and come up with some theory to pass around on the forum. My theory is based more on facts. We don't know.
Pete,
your example is interesting. And it's great that you kept the screenshots.
Still, I think you have to distinguish a bit between different subjects.
A tomato does not change. It looked exactly the same 100 years ago as it does today. The same goes for tigers, trees, etc.
But there are other subjects where there are changes over the years. For example, color trends, hairstyles, fashion trends. If someone generates now purposefully mock ups and orients itself thereby at current color trends, it is quite conceivable from my view that the pictures do not slip only therefore, in the ranking, because the buyer taste changed, but because possibly the Algo considers with new uploads whether a picture corresponds to the current trends better, than a comparable picture, which does not meet any longer hundred per cent the current trend.
Just a thesis - I can't prove anything anyway.
Yes I'm forced to agree I could have picked a better search. But that one is humorous and doesn't involve any of my images. I have more, but I'm never going to show anyone what I sell or my tracking for those. I think you can understand? I have tracked some of mine on Alamy as well. I have some that are on SS on page one and have been since the day I uploaded them.
I will admit, niche subject, but they do sell. Two word search, I'm on the first page and first lines. Different three word search, none the same, I'm also on page one and first few lines. If the search was biased, it's pretty much in my favor. There are others who can find their images, on the first page and they didn't drop. So I think it's only fair to stop guessing and blaming. We're all equal and equally don't know anything that would make a difference.
Yes trends can change, positions can change and I know you keep saying how important the algorithm is, but included in the screen shots is two that are 15 minutes apart and they are different. There's just too much searching for Bigfoot in trying to decipher how the search works and too much time and effort wasted, because we can't control that?
(https://i.postimg.cc/4ywsmy2Y/sliced-tomato-search-2012.jpg)
10 years later, look at that first one. Are we supposed to accept that no one made a better sliced tomato on white, in all that time? Some of the others are also, still on page one, just that the page shows more now. And 55,000 sliced tomatoes has become, 900,000 sliced tomatoes. Many other subjects have the same problem with so much competition.
You are right, Adobe is far different from Shutterstock. And iStock is also different from those. But, the algorithm and the search are not what makes someone buy an image, their needs are what causes them to license something. I think there's too much dwelling on some invisible mystery instead of working on what actually sells?
Another mystery is why do people keep uploading sliced vegetables? :o
-
I wanted to make this point separate.
Supposed evidence of the existence of Bigfoot is based on a number of anecdotal sightings, disputed video and blurry photographs. Yet many people believe that Bigfoot is real.
How the agency search algorithm is controlling earnings, is based on anecdotal personal accounts, and open ended claims of how or why the search changes. Yet many people believe the algorithm controls their income and earnings.
What makes both the same is the lack of evidence and proof while many people believe and waste all kinds of time, searching for answers.
I don't think that the quest for the mystical SS search algorithm is as important as some other people do. What I upload and how I make quality or in demand products is what creates downloads and earnings.
GIGO
-
The search placement is almost everything for sales of common easy subjects. Sure, you need a good enough image, but that is within the capabilities of almost every producer. What it takes to get onto the first page, or even the first few lines is a much more complex subject and you can endlessly try to game the system, but you probably don't know what all goes into the sauce and even if you did it might change or be something you can't control or can only somewhat control (like location based parameters).
For about 5 years I had an image almost always on the top line of the search for a common 1 word search on SS. It sold about once a day. One day they changed something in the search and I couldn't find it going back 10 or more pages. Eventually it moved back up to somewhere in the page 5-10 range, but sales were never the same (more like once a month). When I uploaded it SS had an indexing glitch right after it was indexed and no new images were indexed for a few days - so it was on the first line of newest first and got enough sales there to put it on page one where it stayed until it wasn't. Obviously that isn't something I can repeat or count on ever happening again, especially for a subject with over 11,000 pages of results. It certainly would be worth taking pics of all the things that they say not to bother photographing if you could be on page 1 of the search for them though - flowers, sliced foods, pets, sunsets, you name it.
-
(https://i.ibb.co/dPVSFTh/Screenshot-2022-02-11-at-13-08-39.png) (https://ibb.co/8rfJqCh)
-
(https://i.ibb.co/dPVSFTh/Screenshot-2022-02-11-at-13-08-39.png) (https://ibb.co/8rfJqCh)
Congratulations! :)
-
Recently I sold a photo on shutterstock for 62,50 usd. I am also from the Netherlands..
Hallo Thijs:)
-
Recently I sold a photo on shutterstock for 62,50 usd. I am also from the Netherlands..
Hallo Thijs:)
Hi Devy. A nice amount. I keep hope. This month it is very much 0.10 cents.
Groeten, Thijs :)
-
1,000 bu that was 2 years ago
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Just happened today!
-
$15.47 for a DL last year on SS. This is by far the highest amount I got from any agency (including Alamy) for a single photo since I started just over 3 years ago
-
$15.47 for a DL last year on SS. This is by far the highest amount I got from any agency (including Alamy) for a single photo since I started just over 3 years ago
Here's to beating that record sometime soon.