No, they didn't.
To be honest, I don't understand how people come up with such weird conspiracy theories in the first place. It's becoming a habit here.

Since Elan Musk hasn't completely shot up the Shutterstock headquarters with his lasers from space, downloads are completely normal, revenue in January is expectedly poor.

Quote from: RalfLiebhold on January 14, 2025, 14:55

No, they didn't.
To be honest, I don't understand how people come up with such weird conspiracy theories in the first place. It's becoming a habit here.

Since Elan Musk hasn't completely shot up the Shutterstock headquarters with his lasers from space, downloads are completely normal, revenue in January is expectedly poor.

My sales are up and I found one of my images, first in a search, there's obviously some unfair manipulation going on there! 

I'm genuinely surprised by the low figures from Shutterstock and Pond5 this January. Considering their business practices, I can't help but wonder if they might be manipulating the numbers or hiding sales�but is that even possible?

I'm experiencing a drop of around 70% compared to the same month last year. Is anyone else noticing something similar?
 

Quote from: RalfLiebhold on January 15, 2025, 18:59

Quote from: Uncle Pete on January 15, 2025, 14:53

Quote from: RalfLiebhold on January 14, 2025, 14:55

No, they didn't.
To be honest, I don't understand how people come up with such weird conspiracy theories in the first place. It's becoming a habit here.

Since Elan Musk hasn't completely shot up the Shutterstock headquarters with his lasers from space, downloads are completely normal, revenue in January is expectedly poor.

My sales are up and I found one of my images, first in a search, there's obviously some unfair manipulation going on there! 

No Pete, this is not manipulation. I have personally noticed that downloads increase when you dance naked around a public fountain in winter.
I'll submit photos later 

Please don't, just imagining that scene is scaring me. 

I generally sacrifice chickens, under a Full Moon. (others call it grilling BBQ Wings, but close enough?) I burn offerings to the all powerful and wise God of Microstock, Hephaestus, who is the Greek god of artisans, blacksmiths, carpenters, craftsmen, fire, metallurgy, metalworking, sculpture and volcanoes.


Also covering other options, I celebrate Saturnalia, with a Scotch tasting festival, near the winter solstice.

Charms are also something that everyone should have and use, for good luck. The rabbits foot is extremely powerful for more illustration downloads.

Quote from: Video1977 on January 14, 2025, 09:08

I'm genuinely surprised by the low figures from Shutterstock and Pond5 this January. Considering their business practices, I can't help but wonder if they might be manipulating the numbers or hiding sales�but is that even possible?

I'm experiencing a drop of around 70% compared to the same month last year. Is anyone else noticing something similar?
 

Very easy to do programatically. Its literally a couple lines of code, and yes - that is a risk you have selling on a 3rd party platform.

Easy way to test - get several friends to purchase several of your assets. If you are not credited with ALL the sales, then yes - they are manipulating the numbers.

I believe someone (here) had done that 1-2 years ago with shitterstock (& posted the results), and came to the conclusion that shitterstock was indeed keeping/hiding some sales. You should be able to do a search and find that.

Quote from: Video1977 on January 16, 2025, 18:20

Quote from: SuperPhoto on January 16, 2025, 16:11

Quote from: Video1977 on January 14, 2025, 09:08

I'm genuinely surprised by the low figures from Shutterstock and Pond5 this January. Considering their business practices, I can't help but wonder if they might be manipulating the numbers or hiding sales�but is that even possible?

I'm experiencing a drop of around 70% compared to the same month last year. Is anyone else noticing something similar?
 

Very easy to do programatically. Its literally a couple lines of code, and yes - that is a risk you have selling on a 3rd party platform.

Easy way to test - get several friends to purchase several of your assets. If you are not credited with ALL the sales, then yes - they are manipulating the numbers.

I believe someone (here) had done that 1-2 years ago with shitterstock (& posted the results), and came to the conclusion that shitterstock was indeed keeping/hiding some sales. You should be able to do a search and find that.

Interesting...

Someone CLAIMED that he knew someone who ran a test and they claimed that they didn't receive credit for all the downloads, but they were waiting to check the data in case there was a delay. In other words, no one had anything except someone on FB who said it happened.

Sorry about having a little fun, jezz.

The only people who see manipulation of earnings are the ones who have lower sales than they think they should have. Anyone who's sales are up, doesn't claim there's any manipulation or favoritism, because that persons sales are up. Get it? I wasn't lying, my images are 1st in some searches and on another I'm 2,3,5 on the first page. One more, I see my images, depending on the variety of the exact search, moving around, but six are on the first page.

According to the conspiracy people, I am getting biased position and an unfair advantage. People with lower sales, of course will claim, it's some software manipulation.

In truth, I think it's just what it is and since my images that got better position, have sold or have a different view from the spammed, multiple other images, I got better rank. No conspiracy. (Of course I'd deny the conspiracy, because it's favoring me...)

I'm seeing more than a few reports of contributors reporting very poor earnings this month on Shutterstock. My earnings are 4.35x more on Adobe Stock than Shutterstock so far this month / year. Shutterstock has really gone downhill over the past year and seems it has dropped off another ledge since the start of 2025.

I'm certainly one of the people who would report exceptionally poor earnings this month and I'm on target for the worst month there since 2009. Adobe is currently 3 times higher in earnings, and usually, Shutterstock and Adobe are neck and neck.

Part of this is due to the level reset, and January last year was also poor until I got back to level 4, but the download numbers are lower by about 30%.

I'm sure that Shutterstock report sales, and whilst I also have a good number of images in top search positions, I do see that mine are mostly being pushed down by AI coming up to the top.

The cynic in me assumes that this is advantageous to them, as they can turn a blind eye, get the income, and then close down these portfolios, allowing them to keep 100% of the profit.

Quote from: RalfLiebhold on January 14, 2025, 14:55

No, they didn't.
To be honest, I don't understand how people come up with such weird conspiracy theories in the first place. It's becoming a habit here.

Since Elan Musk hasn't completely shot up the Shutterstock headquarters with his lasers from space, downloads are completely normal, revenue in January is expectedly poor.

Lol - why do you call anything you personally don't agree with a "conspiracy theory", and on top of that - not offer ANY intelligent discourse, other than labelling it as such? It would be like someone trying to discredit anything & everything you say by simply saying "Oh, there is ralf again, the left wing nut, yada yada yada, spouting his left wing nut nonsense". ARE you a left wing nut - and do you prefer just name calling? OR... are you capable of intelligent discourse?

For the month of December, Getty gave me twice as much income as Shutterstock.
This has never happened before. It means our money is being stolen. Or Shutterstock is being deliberately bankrupted.

Quote from: stoker2014 on January 18, 2025, 09:04

For the month of December, Getty gave me twice as much income as Shutterstock.
This has never happened before. It means our money is being stolen. Or Shutterstock is being deliberately bankrupted.

Or customers are going elsewhere? A drop in income doesn't mean that anything underhanded is happening and, if you look at the search, there is a lot of very ordinary content at the top of the search, and a lot of AI content. Couple this with the facility to search by 'new' being removed, and perhaps customers have just got fed up with not finding what they need, so they are going elsewhere.

As my RPD is so low on Shutterstock, I'd be much happier if customers went to Adobe or Istock, as the RPD there is more than double Shutterstock's rate.

I have another theory about what�s happening, especially on Adobe. I won�t go too deep into it for now since my numbers on Adobe are still growing, but something has caught my attention.

Lately, I�ve seen new accounts appearing on Adobe, filled exclusively with AI-generated content�images and videos that look suspiciously similar to the top-selling ones on the platform.

Of course, last year, we got paid quite a bit because they "trained" their AI using our images. But what really worries me is the possibility that these accounts aren't real people, but rather fake company-run accounts, designed to grab all the earnings from contributors who actually put in the work and figured out what sells.

Through AI, they could be generating almost identical content under these fake profiles to compete with and replace real contributors. If that�s the case, they wouldn�t just be profiting from AI�they�d be cutting us out entirely.

I really hope these accounts belong to independent people who are simply analyzing top-selling content and artificially copying it. Because if they are actually company-run accounts, created to take even more of our earnings, it would be a massive disappointment�especially coming from Adobe, which so far has been the most contributor-friendly platform.
 

Quote from: Video1977 on January 18, 2025, 09:38

I have another theory about what�s happening, especially on Adobe. I won�t go too deep into it for now since my numbers on Adobe are still growing, but something has caught my attention.

Lately, I�ve seen new accounts appearing on Adobe, filled exclusively with AI-generated content�images and videos that look suspiciously similar to the top-selling ones on the platform.

Of course, last year, we got paid quite a bit because they "trained" their AI using our images. But what really worries me is the possibility that these accounts aren't real people, but rather fake company-run accounts, designed to grab all the earnings from contributors who actually put in the work and figured out what sells.

Through AI, they could be generating almost identical content under these fake profiles to compete with and replace real contributors. If that�s the case, they wouldn�t just be profiting from AI�they�d be cutting us out entirely.

I really hope these accounts belong to independent people who are simply analyzing top-selling content and artificially copying it. Because if they are actually company-run accounts, created to take even more of our earnings, it would be a massive disappointment�especially coming from Adobe, which so far has been the most contributor-friendly platform.
 

You started with a leading question and suspicion that Shutterstock is manipulating the numbers, based on your sales being down. Now you are suspicious about Adobestock having company run AI accounts to copy best sellers and your work. But you don't want to start rumors about conspiracy theories, or plots. No you wouldn't want to do that.

Quote from: RalfLiebhold on January 18, 2025, 14:37

Quote from: gnirtS on January 18, 2025, 13:00

Its rare to see reviews as uniformly poor, even for stock sites.

Did a fact check in 10 seconds. Adobe the same negative picture.

https://www.trustpilot.com/review/stock.adobe.com

No this can't be true. Adobe is the best company in the world that only spreads love and is only here to support creative people, be it a contributor or customer. They can never have a bad review. That can not exist. You must have visited a fraudelent website or it's just the evil competitors writing all this negative reviews. Must be. C'mon man, it's Adobe we are speaking hereof (I will praise Adobe at all times).

Quote from: Diana Herrmann on January 18, 2025, 13:59

Quote from: Video1977 on January 18, 2025, 09:38

I have another theory about what�s happening, especially on Adobe. I won�t go too deep into it for now since my numbers on Adobe are still growing, but something has caught my attention.

Lately, I�ve seen new accounts appearing on Adobe, filled exclusively with AI-generated content�images and videos that look suspiciously similar to the top-selling ones on the platform.

Of course, last year, we got paid quite a bit because they "trained" their AI using our images. But what really worries me is the possibility that these accounts aren't real people, but rather fake company-run accounts, designed to grab all the earnings from contributors who actually put in the work and figured out what sells.

Through AI, they could be generating almost identical content under these fake profiles to compete with and replace real contributors. If that�s the case, they wouldn�t just be profiting from AI�they�d be cutting us out entirely.

I really hope these accounts belong to independent people who are simply analyzing top-selling content and artificially copying it. Because if they are actually company-run accounts, created to take even more of our earnings, it would be a massive disappointment�especially coming from Adobe, which so far has been the most contributor-friendly platform.
 

You started with a leading question and suspicion that Shutterstock is manipulating the numbers, based on your sales being down. Now you are suspicious about Adobestock having company run AI accounts to copy best sellers and your work. But you don't want to start rumors about conspiracy theories, or plots. No you wouldn't want to do that.

And who said I don�t want to start rumors? 

Maybe you should try reading a little slower and focusing more on the subtext of what you're reading.
It helps.
 

Not saying it�s a fact, but� is there some manipulation going on from time to time?
 

I have another theory about what�s happening, especially on Adobe. I won�t go too deep into it for now since my numbers on Adobe are still growing, but something has caught my attention.

Lately, I�ve seen new accounts appearing on Adobe, filled exclusively with AI-generated content�images and videos that look suspiciously similar to the top-selling ones on the platform.

Of course, last year, we got paid quite a bit because they "trained" their AI using our images. But what really worries me is the possibility that these accounts aren't real people, but rather fake company-run accounts, designed to grab all the earnings from contributors who actually put in the work and figured out what sells.

Through AI, they could be generating almost identical content under these fake profiles to compete with and replace real contributors. If that�s the case, they wouldn�t just be profiting from AI�they�d be cutting us out entirely.

I really hope these accounts belong to independent people who are simply analyzing top-selling content and artificially copying it. Because if they are actually company-run accounts, created to take even more of our earnings, it would be a massive disappointment�especially coming from Adobe, which so far has been the most contributor-friendly platform.
 

Quote from: YadaYadaYada on January 18, 2025, 15:44

No and Adobe didn't create zombie AI accounts to steal our best sellers.

No conspiracy needed - half of Pakistan is doing that job.  Nothing to do with Adobe.

Quote from: RalfLiebhold on January 18, 2025, 16:07

Quote from: Video1977 on January 18, 2025, 09:38

I have another theory about what�s happening, especially on Adobe. I won�t go too deep into it for now since my numbers on Adobe are still growing, but something has caught my attention.

Lately, I�ve seen new accounts appearing on Adobe, filled exclusively with AI-generated content�images and videos that look suspiciously similar to the top-selling ones on the platform.

Of course, last year, we got paid quite a bit because they "trained" their AI using our images. But what really worries me is the possibility that these accounts aren't real people, but rather fake company-run accounts, designed to grab all the earnings from contributors who actually put in the work and figured out what sells.

Through AI, they could be generating almost identical content under these fake profiles to compete with and replace real contributors. If that�s the case, they wouldn�t just be profiting from AI�they�d be cutting us out entirely.

I really hope these accounts belong to independent people who are simply analyzing top-selling content and artificially copying it. Because if they are actually company-run accounts, created to take even more of our earnings, it would be a massive disappointment�especially coming from Adobe, which so far has been the most contributor-friendly platform.
 

At this point, I have to agree with you on the whole.
There seem to be accounts that specifically copy bestsellers with the help of AI and fill the entire account with them. In another forum, someone explained how this is technically possible on a large scale.
Maybe he will explain it here.
Because I'm not very good at this sort of thing, I can't reproduce it here.

But it has nothing to do with Adobe.

Wow! That's interesting...!

No, they didn't.
To be honest, I don't understand how people come up with such weird conspiracy theories in the first place. It's becoming a habit here.

Since Elan Musk hasn't completely shot up the Shutterstock headquarters with his lasers from space, downloads are completely normal, revenue in January is expectedly poor.

So what do I see? I see that the video review and acceptance on Shutterstock has become very long. I have been waiting for a video review for over a week. This has never happened before! It is obvious that the reviewer has been fired or transferred to work at Getty. This is the beginning of the end for Shutterstock.

So what do I see? I see that the video review and acceptance on Shutterstock has become very long. I have been waiting for a video review for over a week. This has never happened before! It is obvious that the reviewer has been fired or transferred to work at Getty. This is the beginning of the end for Shutterstock.

Quote from: stoker2014 on January 19, 2025, 03:39

So what do I see? I see that the video review and acceptance on Shutterstock has become very long. I have been waiting for a video review for over a week. This has never happened before! It is obvious that the reviewer has been fired or transferred to work at Getty. This is the beginning of the end for Shutterstock.

I was actually wondering if iStock have begun using Shutterstock reviewers with a number of strange rejects on iStock just recently.

Quote from: YadaYadaYada on January 20, 2025, 10:15

Quote from: Pacesetter on January 19, 2025, 17:49

Quote from: stoker2014 on January 19, 2025, 03:39

So what do I see? I see that the video review and acceptance on Shutterstock has become very long. I have been waiting for a video review for over a week. This has never happened before! It is obvious that the reviewer has been fired or transferred to work at Getty. This is the beginning of the end for Shutterstock.

I was actually wondering if iStock have begun using Shutterstock reviewers with a number of strange rejects on iStock just recently.

They haven't merged yet, how would that happen?

It amuses me people putting 2+2 together and getting 38.

They havent merged, the final details havent been decided, nothing has been signed and there hasnt been regulatory approval.  I reckon 2-3 years before anything happens, if ever.