MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Just got a $87.09 commission sale on a photo at Shutterstock. What is it for?  (Read 10222 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: August 30, 2014, 07:31 »
0
And how much is the highest you can get from a single photo sale at SS?


Valo

« Reply #1 on: August 30, 2014, 07:37 »
0
It is a licence that allows for sensitive use and the sale is called SOD, they can go at 120 dollar





   

« Reply #2 on: August 30, 2014, 07:42 »
0
It is a licence that allows for sensitive use and the sale is called SOD, they can go at 120 dollar





 

SOD can also go less then $1?

What's the highest commission on a single sales in SS do you know?  Is it $120? 

I had $72 commission on a single photo sales the day before as well.  I hope this is a new trend for me.

« Reply #3 on: August 30, 2014, 07:55 »
0
And what makes the price widely differ in SODs from less than a dollar to over $100?  Anybody knows?

« Reply #4 on: August 30, 2014, 08:39 »
0
I've had a roughly $162 SOD sale and lowest is your normal sub sale price.

Although since the search changes a few months ago i get pretty much none of either.


Shelma1

« Reply #6 on: August 30, 2014, 09:19 »
+2
I got a couple this month. Love them...hoping for more.

« Reply #7 on: August 30, 2014, 09:37 »
+2
Hello,

These higher royalty sales are the result of enterprise agreements with large companies and advertising agencies.  Typically, they work with Shutterstock through negotiated agreements, which can include things like the option for sensitive use (although very few uses would be a sensitive one), additional legal indemnification, extra workflow features, etc., to meet the exact needs of their business.   As a result, they're paying higher fees and contributors receive higher royalties. 

We have an increasing number of relationships that come to us through such custom agreements, which result in higher royalties paid out to contributors.   Those customers are typically major publishing houses, major advertising agencies, and Fortune 500 companies around the world (among others).

Best,

Scott
VP of Content
Shutterstock

That's great!  I hope that the Shutterstock will acquire all the former Getty/iStock clients!

KB

« Reply #8 on: August 30, 2014, 11:44 »
+3
That's great!  I hope that the Shutterstock will acquire all the former Getty/iStock clients!
Based on my IS sales recently, I'd guess that's already happened, more or less.

« Reply #9 on: August 30, 2014, 12:47 »
+3
That's great!  I hope that the Shutterstock will acquire all the former Getty/iStock clients!
Based on my IS sales recently, I'd guess that's already happened, more or less.

That's great because iStock uploading process is a pain. 

« Reply #10 on: August 31, 2014, 02:18 »
+1
Hello,

These higher royalty sales are the result of enterprise agreements with large companies and advertising agencies.  Typically, they work with Shutterstock through negotiated agreements, which can include things like the option for sensitive use (although very few uses would be a sensitive one), additional legal indemnification, extra workflow features, etc., to meet the exact needs of their business.   As a result, they're paying higher fees and contributors receive higher royalties. 

We have an increasing number of relationships that come to us through such custom agreements, which result in higher royalties paid out to contributors.   Those customers are typically major publishing houses, major advertising agencies, and Fortune 500 companies around the world (among others).

Best,

Scott
VP of Content
Shutterstock


Can you show us an expample for sensitive use? Kind of a broad term, I would be interested in what it means in the real world, a real example of course.

« Reply #11 on: August 31, 2014, 08:33 »
0
First of all, congrats.  Those are fun and motivating.  SOD's are one of the very few things left in MS that motivates me to shoot. Just need MORE...3-5 a month would make a significant difference in the overall "feel" of MS.....at least as a contributor.

Valo

« Reply #12 on: August 31, 2014, 08:50 »
+4
I had a couple of big SODs this month, without them it would have been abysmal. It shouldn't be that way. The SODs compensate for the drop in earnings. They should be the gravy, the cherry, the cream, etc. I appreciate the high SODs, but developments at Shutterstock are still worrisome. The fact they refuse a raise whilst reporting record sales is sad.

« Reply #13 on: August 31, 2014, 09:01 »
0
Can you show us an expample for sensitive use? Kind of a broad term, I would be interested in what it means in the real world, a real example of course.

I don't have one handy, but there are lots of theoretical examples: one example could be an image of a senior citizen used for a pharmaceutical ad about Alzheimer's medication.

A sensitive use might cause a reasonable person to believe that the subject of the image suffers from a physical or mental health condition; endorses, advocates, or believes in a particular product, service, cause or opinion; or is otherwise associated with an issue that some might consider controversial or unflattering.

So, for example, a major consumer retailer, pharma company or advertising agency that sometimes creates material related to prescription drugs, physical or mental ailments, etc., might want to have a set of licenses that allow them the flexibility to use images of people in a sensitive way - but not every use that they have would be a sensitive one (very few might fall under that category). 

The important thing is that by being opted into sensitive use, you're opted into all enterprise licenses of the type that pay $75, $120 or more, even if very few would result in an actual sensitive use.

Best,

Scott


« Reply #14 on: August 31, 2014, 09:05 »
0
I had a couple of big SODs this month, without them it would have been abysmal. It shouldn't be that way. The SODs compensate for the drop in earnings. They should be the gravy, the cherry, the cream, etc. I appreciate the high SODs, but developments at Shutterstock are still worrisome. The fact they refuse a raise whilst reporting record sales is sad.

+1  . got 2 agree. SOD should not be the saving grace of a poor (quote: abysmal) summer stats.
it does not erase the fact that SS earnings are falling off a cliff...
no doubt with all their "experiments" to  screw-up placement for many contributors with
consistently historical selling images.

if machine is not broken, what try to fix it all the time??? >:(
« Last Edit: August 31, 2014, 09:08 by etudiante_rapide »

cuppacoffee

« Reply #15 on: August 31, 2014, 09:31 »
+3
SS earnings are falling off a cliff...

For you or for everyone? Isn't it hard to compare your earnings (not you persay, but any one person) to the thousands of others at SS, or any agency? The only way to get a true picture is to take every contributor's sales and average them and that's not possible here. It's also a moving target as more images are added daily. I'm sure the agencies can crunch those types of numbers and when they see sales falling as a whole they make changes to the search algorithms that may benefit different people in order to maintain the bottom line.

Valo

« Reply #16 on: August 31, 2014, 09:56 »
-1
I had a couple of big SODs this month, without them it would have been abysmal. It shouldn't be that way. The SODs compensate for the drop in earnings. They should be the gravy, the cherry, the cream, etc. I appreciate the high SODs, but developments at Shutterstock are still worrisome. The fact they refuse a raise whilst reporting record sales is sad.

+1  . got 2 agree. SOD should not be the saving grace of a poor (quote: abysmal) summer stats.
it does not erase the fact that SS earnings are falling off a cliff...
no doubt with all their "experiments" to  screw-up placement for many contributors with
consistently historical selling images.

if machine is not broken, what try to fix it all the time??? >:(
It is not broken, it is being improved (for Shutterstock), but with doubling of the contributors base and the library in a little over 2 years, earnings are being spread thin. Face it, the only way to keep up is literally to keep up with Shutterstock. Sean Locke made $10K in 8 months, it is still possible with a couple of thousand commercial images, but he will see his sales slow down as well, when he is done submitting his backlog. It simple maths.


« Reply #17 on: September 01, 2014, 04:09 »
0
OK ... I got a SOD just $2.

« Reply #18 on: September 01, 2014, 07:21 »
0
Can you show us an expample for sensitive use? Kind of a broad term, I would be interested in what it means in the real world, a real example of course.

I don't have one handy, but there are lots of theoretical examples: one example could be an image of a senior citizen used for a pharmaceutical ad about Alzheimer's medication.

A sensitive use might cause a reasonable person to believe that the subject of the image suffers from a physical or mental health condition; endorses, advocates, or believes in a particular product, service, cause or opinion; or is otherwise associated with an issue that some might consider controversial or unflattering.

So, for example, a major consumer retailer, pharma company or advertising agency that sometimes creates material related to prescription drugs, physical or mental ailments, etc., might want to have a set of licenses that allow them the flexibility to use images of people in a sensitive way - but not every use that they have would be a sensitive one (very few might fall under that category). 

The important thing is that by being opted into sensitive use, you're opted into all enterprise licenses of the type that pay $75, $120 or more, even if very few would result in an actual sensitive use.

Best,

Scott

Thanks, I have a similar understanding of the term, but I would like to see one classified by the company as genuine sensistive, a real world example, just for the sake of it. Is it not possible to show one because of company policies, anonymity, etc?

« Reply #19 on: September 01, 2014, 10:35 »
0
Hi, I've just got 10$ for a photo, That is a hdr photo of pantheon inside, so that could not be SOD, and I'm wandering how's the commission so high.

Valo

« Reply #20 on: September 01, 2014, 11:46 »
+1
It is a SOD when it is reported as a SOD. SOD goes from 0.36c to 120 dollar and up. A 10 dollar royalty is a SOD, as the SUB and ODD royalties won't go over 3 dollar and and EL is always 28 dollar.

« Reply #21 on: September 01, 2014, 16:17 »
+1
Since SS seems incapable or unwilling to make sensitive use opt in or out by model release or individual photos I am seriously considering disabling the relatively few images I have that I am not willing to sell sensitive use (some kids, women, etc.) and opting my port in. One big SOD every few months would be more than those images get over the same time and the images would still be available at most of the other sites.

Valo

« Reply #22 on: September 01, 2014, 16:29 »
+1
Unwilling, they have said so.   :o

« Reply #23 on: September 01, 2014, 16:32 »
0
SS earnings are falling off a cliff...

For you or for everyone? Isn't it hard to compare your earnings (not you persay, but any one person) to the thousands of others at SS, or any agency? The only way to get a true picture is to take every contributor's sales and average them and that's not possible here. It's also a moving target as more images are added daily. I'm sure the agencies can crunch those types of numbers and when they see sales falling as a whole they make changes to the search algorithms that may benefit different people in order to maintain the bottom line.

i suppose u r right. SS does not lose, just the specific contributor(s) may find their earnings drop.
but perharps i am too picky, not including the rare SOD of 28, 82, 105, etc...
and saying sales have dropped compared to last year.

but bottom-line , sales has increased for me . i was just pointing out what our colleague said,
- that SOD should not be the saving grace of a poor month.

baz777

  • Im not sociable so I dont use social media
« Reply #24 on: September 01, 2014, 20:34 »
+1
An $80 SOD in August, and a similar one in July helped me to 2 very average months, can't rely on these every month though!


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
26 Replies
8940 Views
Last post March 25, 2013, 06:32
by dirkr
3 Replies
1461 Views
Last post August 27, 2012, 09:03
by ShadySue
2 Replies
2150 Views
Last post October 02, 2014, 16:35
by mike123
5 Replies
1707 Views
Last post February 15, 2015, 00:45
by pelooyen
2 Replies
2106 Views
Last post February 04, 2016, 20:20
by cobalt

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results