MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Poll

How Much Total did you get paid for Contributor Fund, from Shutterstock?

Nothing
$0.01-$20
$20-40
$40-60
$60-80
$80-100
$100-120
$120-140
$140-160
$160-180
$180-200
$200-220
$220-240
$240-260
$260-280
$280-300
Over $300

Author Topic: How Much Did SS pay you TOTAL last year for "Contributor Fund"  (Read 894 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« on: January 21, 2023, 15:48 »
+2
Poll is anonymous, one vote per person. Some people have asked this question before and the answers are scattered. I thought maybe all in one place might be interesting?

Just from a few people, it's not a part of total earnings, because I don't make that much and I got more than some people who are much better and successful.
It's not based on how many images. Same thing. People with more images have been paid less than I got.

We don't know.

Just wondering what kind of numbers, different people got paid for Contributor Fund last year?

I found all my payments in December, I don't know if anyone got anything else before or since?
« Last Edit: January 21, 2023, 15:54 by Uncle Pete »


« Reply #1 on: January 21, 2023, 17:46 »
0
I don't believe I was aware of it, so as far as I know, nothing. What exactly is it?

« Reply #2 on: January 22, 2023, 03:58 »
+1
$0-$1

« Reply #3 on: January 22, 2023, 06:08 »
+2
I got a whopping $.28 all in December.  I checked the rest of 2022 and it was only in December.  You need another poll option of <$1 ;)

« Reply #4 on: January 22, 2023, 11:55 »
0
december was the only month - next payment is in june. 

for those who had zero did they also have an active SS acct? 

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #5 on: January 22, 2023, 22:50 »
0
I got a whopping $.28 all in December.  I checked the rest of 2022 and it was only in December.  You need another poll option of <$1 ;)

Fixed that.

december was the only month - next payment is in june. 

for those who had zero did they also have an active SS acct? 

Good logical question. But I suppose I assumed that only people with an account would answer? OK too late to add, "If you have an account..."  :)

Now I want to know who that lone person is that got over $120. They must have something truly amazing. Either in numbers or in what kind of content they have that AI wanted for training. Nice to see that someone got a nice gift.


« Reply #6 on: January 24, 2023, 17:21 »
+2
Next time, it will be better if each range is larger than the previous one and not all of them are using 20USD steps. In such a case, there will be a large number of votes in one "basket" but nothing in the others, especially in the larger ones. 20 and 40 USD is 100% difference but 280 and 300 USD is just 7%. It will be miracle that someone will fit there. 0,01-20USD basket is extremely big and we have not got much information (is everybody near 0,01 or near 20? That is a huge difference). It will be better something like 0-1, 1-2, 2-4, 4-8, 8-16,... or slightly rounded (like 0-1, 0-2, 2-5, 5-10, 10-25, 25-50, 50-100, 100-250,...)

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #7 on: January 25, 2023, 11:57 »
0
Next time, it will be better if each range is larger than the previous one and not all of them are using 20USD steps. In such a case, there will be a large number of votes in one "basket" but nothing in the others, especially in the larger ones. 20 and 40 USD is 100% difference but 280 and 300 USD is just 7%. It will be miracle that someone will fit there. 0,01-20USD basket is extremely big and we have not got much information (is everybody near 0,01 or near 20? That is a huge difference). It will be better something like 0-1, 1-2, 2-4, 4-8, 8-16,... or slightly rounded (like 0-1, 0-2, 2-5, 5-10, 10-25, 25-50, 50-100, 100-250,...)

Yes, but no. By specific ranges that are all the same, I won't bias the results with an unknown predetermined group. If I do what you say, many more people could incidentally cluster in one range and we wouldn't know.

Knowing now from what I see, and I couldn't have known, I could have made $10 spreads and further divided the specifics.

As it is, I think we have a close enough idea of what most people got paid? 92% made $60 or less.

Yes, if I knew in advance, that 60% were in that same range, I would have used lower brackets, say $5 for the first $100, then $20 after that. But I don't think the specifics are as important as the general numbers. Most people got $20 or less.

I didn't know. It could have been that everyone clustered at $40 and all the lower and little divisions would have been irrelevant?
« Last Edit: January 25, 2023, 12:05 by Uncle Pete »

« Reply #8 on: January 25, 2023, 13:48 »
0
Next time, it will be better if each range is larger than the previous one and not all of them are using 20USD steps. In such a case, there will be a large number of votes in one "basket" but nothing in the others, especially in the larger ones. 20 and 40 USD is 100% difference but 280 and 300 USD is just 7%. It will be miracle that someone will fit there. 0,01-20USD basket is extremely big and we have not got much information (is everybody near 0,01 or near 20? That is a huge difference). It will be better something like 0-1, 1-2, 2-4, 4-8, 8-16,... or slightly rounded (like 0-1, 0-2, 2-5, 5-10, 10-25, 25-50, 50-100, 100-250,...)

Yes, but no. By specific ranges that are all the same, I won't bias the results with an unknown predetermined group. If I do what you say, many more people could incidentally cluster in one range and we wouldn't know.

Knowing now from what I see, and I couldn't have known, I could have made $10 spreads and further divided the specifics.

As it is, I think we have a close enough idea of what most people got paid? 92% made $60 or less.

Yes, if I knew in advance, that 60% were in that same range, I would have used lower brackets, say $5 for the first $100, then $20 after that. But I don't think the specifics are as important as the general numbers. Most people got $20 or less.

I didn't know. It could have been that everyone clustered at $40 and all the lower and little divisions would have been irrelevant?

the $20-100 range is less than the 'none' so not much info gained by knowing more received $51 than those who got $47

and combine $100-200, 200+

that' the best that can be done with a poll like this.  a better approach would be to have the smaller increments, then report with combined numbers - 4 or 5 points on a graph

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #9 on: January 27, 2023, 13:45 »
0
Next time, it will be better if each range is larger than the previous one and not all of them are using 20USD steps. In such a case, there will be a large number of votes in one "basket" but nothing in the others, especially in the larger ones. 20 and 40 USD is 100% difference but 280 and 300 USD is just 7%. It will be miracle that someone will fit there. 0,01-20USD basket is extremely big and we have not got much information (is everybody near 0,01 or near 20? That is a huge difference). It will be better something like 0-1, 1-2, 2-4, 4-8, 8-16,... or slightly rounded (like 0-1, 0-2, 2-5, 5-10, 10-25, 25-50, 50-100, 100-250,...)

Yes, but no. By specific ranges that are all the same, I won't bias the results with an unknown predetermined group. If I do what you say, many more people could incidentally cluster in one range and we wouldn't know.

Knowing now from what I see, and I couldn't have known, I could have made $10 spreads and further divided the specifics.

As it is, I think we have a close enough idea of what most people got paid? 92% made $60 or less.

Yes, if I knew in advance, that 60% were in that same range, I would have used lower brackets, say $5 for the first $100, then $20 after that. But I don't think the specifics are as important as the general numbers. Most people got $20 or less.

I didn't know. It could have been that everyone clustered at $40 and all the lower and little divisions would have been irrelevant?

the $20-100 range is less than the 'none' so not much info gained by knowing more received $51 than those who got $47

and combine $100-200, 200+

that' the best that can be done with a poll like this.  a better approach would be to have the smaller increments, then report with combined numbers - 4 or 5 points on a graph

Valid points. Fortunately this is not a scientific or valid poll question in so many ways. Just an effort to get a general idea of how much did most people make from this deal. And now we can see that.

I never would have expected myself to be one of the better off? But then I have always said "Shutterstock Likes Me Better!"


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
4 Replies
8366 Views
Last post December 01, 2010, 18:38
by ShadySue
6 Replies
5609 Views
Last post December 05, 2017, 14:28
by JimP
12 Replies
2733 Views
Last post July 09, 2022, 12:39
by YadaYadaYada
117 Replies
9112 Views
Last post January 18, 2023, 13:58
by cascoly
11 Replies
683 Views
Last post Today at 13:23
by Uncle Pete

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle