MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Majority of my Shutterstock photo sales are $0.10 and the average per  (Read 4466 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: July 13, 2022, 17:58 »
+4
download is less than the lowest I get on Adobe Stock photo sales.  This is sad.  Majority of my Adobe Stock photo sales are above $1.  I enabled my Shutterstock photo sales this month, but now I worry these parade of dimes on Shutterstock is eating my Adobe Stock photo sales.  Once in a while, Shutterstock has high price sales.  So, I just hope that'll happen soon or I may have to make a decision to turn off my photos on Shutterstock and see if photo sales on Adobe Stock increases.
« Last Edit: July 13, 2022, 19:42 by blvdone »


« Reply #1 on: July 13, 2022, 20:37 »
+6

It certainly is an interesting year, with more and more focus on Adobe. They dont even have to do anything, they just keep things as they are and become the easily favored agency.

And the customers automatically follow the best content.

« Reply #2 on: July 14, 2022, 05:23 »
+9
download is less than the lowest I get on Adobe Stock photo sales.  This is sad.  Majority of my Adobe Stock photo sales are above $1.  I enabled my Shutterstock photo sales this month, but now I worry these parade of dimes on Shutterstock is eating my Adobe Stock photo sales.  Once in a while, Shutterstock has high price sales.  So, I just hope that'll happen soon or I may have to make a decision to turn off my photos on Shutterstock and see if photo sales on Adobe Stock increases.

In my experience, turning off my portfolio on SS (or leaving my work there) didn't affect my sales on Adobe (or any other agency). Different clients, different preferences.

« Reply #3 on: July 14, 2022, 05:39 »
+2
download is less than the lowest I get on Adobe Stock photo sales.  This is sad.  Majority of my Adobe Stock photo sales are above $1.  I enabled my Shutterstock photo sales this month, but now I worry these parade of dimes on Shutterstock is eating my Adobe Stock photo sales.  Once in a while, Shutterstock has high price sales.  So, I just hope that'll happen soon or I may have to make a decision to turn off my photos on Shutterstock and see if photo sales on Adobe Stock increases.

In my experience, turning off my portfolio on SS (or leaving my work there) didn't affect my sales on Adobe (or any other agency). Different clients, different preferences.

Thanks for your info.  I'll find out eventually.

« Reply #4 on: July 14, 2022, 11:51 »
+1
...
And the customers automatically follow the best content.

1. no evidence this is true - and buyers w subscriptions are unlikely to switch

2. how does one determine which site has 'best content'


SVH

« Reply #5 on: July 14, 2022, 13:37 »
0
download is less than the lowest I get on Adobe Stock photo sales.  This is sad.  Majority of my Adobe Stock photo sales are above $1.  I enabled my Shutterstock photo sales this month, but now I worry these parade of dimes on Shutterstock is eating my Adobe Stock photo sales.  Once in a while, Shutterstock has high price sales.  So, I just hope that'll happen soon or I may have to make a decision to turn off my photos on Shutterstock and see if photo sales on Adobe Stock increases.

In my experience, turning off my portfolio on SS (or leaving my work there) didn't affect my sales on Adobe (or any other agency). Different clients, different preferences.
Very true. Clientbase at Adobe is completely different then at Shutterstock. Between these two I would never expect oppurtunistic clients shopping around. Between SS and IS is a different story though I think.

« Reply #6 on: July 14, 2022, 16:59 »
+1
download is less than the lowest I get on Adobe Stock photo sales.  This is sad.  Majority of my Adobe Stock photo sales are above $1.  I enabled my Shutterstock photo sales this month, but now I worry these parade of dimes on Shutterstock is eating my Adobe Stock photo sales.  Once in a while, Shutterstock has high price sales.  So, I just hope that'll happen soon or I may have to make a decision to turn off my photos on Shutterstock and see if photo sales on Adobe Stock increases.

In my experience, turning off my portfolio on SS (or leaving my work there) didn't affect my sales on Adobe (or any other agency). Different clients, different preferences.
Very true. Clientbase at Adobe is completely different then at Shutterstock. Between these two I would never expect oppurtunistic clients shopping around. Between SS and IS is a different story though I think.

I think this is partly true.

Yes, AS has its own client base from its software users but if AS themselves didn't feel any threat from SS, then they wouldn't have introduced free images, or video subs.

Overall I tend to agree more with Cobalt above. Or at the very least, a certain type of customer certainly do.
« Last Edit: July 14, 2022, 17:06 by Annie »

« Reply #7 on: July 14, 2022, 18:13 »
0

[/quote]

Overall I tend to agree more with Cobalt above. Or at the very least, a certain type of customer certainly do.
[/quote]

Cobalt is more often than not clueless about a buyers point of view. If one continually follows this "community" nonsense then yes the buyers keep moving to where the "best content" is.

Cascoly is perhaps more accurate in stating...

1. no evidence this is true - and buyers w subscriptions are unlikely to switch

2. how does one determine which site has 'best content'

Pick any topic of your choosing and IS, GI, SS, and AD will give you pretty much the same content. If you are an editorial buyer you'd most likely run to AL, IS, GI, and SS, and once again get pretty much the same content. If you really want cool, hip, trendy content that ages very quickly you'd go to Stocksy, and again you could find incredibly similar imagery at the other sites for a fraction of the price, albeit they might not be image exclusive.

Long gone are the days where agencies lock you into a contract that ensures they have the best content. Long gone are the days where any photographer in his/her right mind would be exclusive to any agency and this in my view includes image exclusive. Long gone are the days where there is any loyalty from any agency or contributor. Very very very few of us produce content that is the "best content".


 



« Reply #8 on: July 15, 2022, 01:22 »
+1
Predicting buyer behaviour can end up in something misleading.

I experienced that assets aimed at small/one person companies appear more likely to sell by on demand licences, but would not get into guessing why, or if this is a mere coincidence. 

Then what determines where the buyer goes sockshopping. Most customers have subscription plans at one agency. Their Shutterstock subscription plan will not work on Dreamstime etc. The boss may be he one who decides what agency to purchase from, looking at the bill is probably quite common.
The other part of me that is not stock photo is a one person company that sometims buy visual assets that it is not feasible for me to produce myself. These purchases are always on demand, as even the smallest subscription packages expire before I get them used. Thus I am not bound to any agency. So what are the actual costs buying from an agency. A spot-on search function saves me a lot of time browsing trough the collections. Adobe and Dreamstime does well here. Alamy, iStock and 123RF less, but it still works. Shutterstock is the looser here. Often I will have to browsee trough a ton of assets that abviously have no relation to my search whatsoever. Or one contributor has found a trick to basically own the first page of a search with semi-dull images. The right image is most likely there somewhere on page 35. Being able to select I go elsewhere, knowing that Shutterstock has no exclusive contributor agreements. So the things I search for may indeed be somewhere on Shutterstock, but is lkely to be somewhere else too, where it may be easier to find. The "get rich fast" with their keyword spamming and loads of identical assets tend to cling to Shutterstock 

« Reply #9 on: July 15, 2022, 01:47 »
0
Predicting buyer behaviour can end up in something misleading.

I experienced that assets aimed at small/one person companies appear more likely to sell by on demand licences, but would not get into guessing why, or if this is a mere coincidence. 

Then what determines where the buyer goes sockshopping. Most customers have subscription plans at one agency. Their Shutterstock subscription plan will not work on Dreamstime etc. The boss may be he one who decides what agency to purchase from, looking at the bill is probably quite common.
The other part of me that is not stock photo is a one person company that sometims buy visual assets that it is not feasible for me to produce myself. These purchases are always on demand, as even the smallest subscription packages expire before I get them used. Thus I am not bound to any agency. So what are the actual costs buying from an agency. A spot-on search function saves me a lot of time browsing trough the collections. Adobe and Dreamstime does well here. Alamy, iStock and 123RF less, but it still works. Shutterstock is the looser here. Often I will have to browsee trough a ton of assets that abviously have no relation to my search whatsoever. Or one contributor has found a trick to basically own the first page of a search with semi-dull images. The right image is most likely there somewhere on page 35. Being able to select I go elsewhere, knowing that Shutterstock has no exclusive contributor agreements. So the things I search for may indeed be somewhere on Shutterstock, but is lkely to be somewhere else too, where it may be easier to find. The "get rich fast" with their keyword spamming and loads of identical assets tend to cling to Shutterstock

I agree.
« Last Edit: July 15, 2022, 15:47 by Annie »

« Reply #10 on: July 15, 2022, 03:21 »
+1
I can't judge at all how buyers behave in general.

But since my office buys pictures, I can at least say something about it from my personal point of view.

We had one customer account with Shutterstock and one with Adobe Stock. Today we only have the one at AS. We cancelled the one at Shutterstock 3 years ago.

Why?

Well, it's mostly because of the search results.

If you have to make ads in a certain region for the target group in that region with products typical for that region, it is important to be able to find images that fit that target group.

Two examples:

Search term "house"

If I search for images of houses on shutterstock, I get a lot of images that do not show any houses in Germany/middle Europe at first glance. It doesn't matter whether I choose the German or the English language for the search. The results are almost identical. So I have to search much longer at shutterstock to find the right images for my region.

If I search for pictures of houses at AS, I can set the search region. If I search for houses in German, I get very specific houses that fit here. If I change the search to USA, I get mostly houses that look American. Here the search is clearly better.

Search term "family"

Here the same problem arises as with the search term "house". With shutterstock I get a lot of images that just don't fit my region. Here, too, the search results at AS are clearly better adapted to my search region.

From my point of view, the algorithm at AS is much better than that of shutterstock. In addition, from my point of view, shutterstock is more internationally oriented, while AS is more at home in the European market. However, I cannot judge at all how the search results look like in other countries. And of course I have no idea if other customers see this problem as well and therefore change the agency.

« Reply #11 on: July 15, 2022, 03:32 »
+1
Weird, if customers dont shop around why have been contacted by two of the top four agencies in the last couple of weeks offering me sweeteners to upload more of my portfolio (which they noticed has more work in it on a rival agency)?

Seems like a lot of effort if they know buyers dont shop around.

« Reply #12 on: July 15, 2022, 04:43 »
+1
...
And the customers automatically follow the best content.

1. no evidence this is true - and buyers w subscriptions are unlikely to switch

2. how does one determine which site has 'best content'

Of course they do, customers always prefer the site that has the best quality and selection.

Subscriptions usually run for a year, but some clients already start a new subscription at a better place and then let the old one at a different site run out.

There is a time lag in the process.

Adobe is very heavily lobbying their immense client group to take up an Adobe subscription. Which is why we are seeing a rise in sales.

If customers never left, agencies wouldn't be fighting over them.

Why would Shutterstock pay 210 million for pond5 if they were not losing business to them? Pond5 has a much better video selection than Shutterstock.

IMO the logical step would have been to fix what is wrong with Shutterstock, but of course if they buy pond5 they have near monopoly on editorial video and maybe the majority stock video market under their control.

« Reply #13 on: July 15, 2022, 05:08 »
+3
Be careful not to overthink this. Lots of organizations use stock images but don't really put much thought into where they come from.

I worked for one of the big public accounting firms and we used images for things like proposals. So, for example, we needed a picture of a swimming pool (proposal to a corporation that made chemicals for swimming pools) and we told the marketing guys to find one.

I doubt they trawled through multiple agencies looking for great swimming pool photos. They probably used one agency (don't know which) and grabbed a couple for us. We weren't too fussy either. The photo worked because, according to the client, our competition hadn't made the link between chemicals and swimming pools so didn't show that they understood the business. So it could have been any swimming pool photo. Didn't need to be a great one.

My guess is that our marketing guys had one subscription with one firm. They didn't have time to go shopping around for the best possible photo for end-users that really didn't care that much and were much more focused on the contents of the proposal than the images.


Brasilnut

  • Author Brutally Honest Guide to Microstock & Blog

« Reply #14 on: July 15, 2022, 05:08 »
+2
I'm seeing a 35% drop 2022 vs 2019 on average download commissions at SS.

Note: Also includes video sales.

« Last Edit: July 15, 2022, 05:15 by Brasilnut »

« Reply #15 on: July 15, 2022, 05:18 »
+1
Of course they do, customers always prefer the site that has the best quality and selection.
I doubt that. There are countless examples in various industries that show that the cheapest prize is the main attrackting factor for most customers.
Stores like Primark that sell shirts for 3$ that fall appart after you have worn them 5 times being extremely successfull.
Governments buying face masks of qustionable quality from China during a pandemic instead of supporting local companies, because they get to save 0.05$ per mask.
There are retail researches out there that show: Low prices are the most important thing to draw customers.

There is a also reason why there is a race to the bottom regarding lowest prices/commissions between agencies and not a race for the highest quality images.

Of course there are customers who will prefere high quality over a cheap price - I imagine mostly customers who use images for physical merchandise and in advertisemet. But I have high doubts that all customers always prefer quality over price, like you claim. If you look for example at blogs or news sites online you can often easily tell that they didn't even bother to spend time browsing the database for the best quality image within that microstock database, but just picked the first image that popped up. They just need something to illustrate their article.
« Last Edit: July 15, 2022, 10:00 by Firn »

« Reply #16 on: July 15, 2022, 05:27 »
+3
Weird, if customers dont shop around why have been contacted by two of the top four agencies in the last couple of weeks offering me sweeteners to upload more of my portfolio (which they noticed has more work in it on a rival agency)?

Seems like a lot of effort if they know buyers dont shop around.

Me too. I was approached a little while back by one agency and yes, they knew exactly how many more files I had on SS. 1,507 files, in fact! I mean, not 1,500 but 1507! Refer below.

But I also have heard of lots of first hand stories of contributors being approached by different agencies and being offered special deals, if you have the content they need to fill gaps in their databases.

I have come to believe that agencies know who's out there and who has content they need, and that overall its very, very competitive.   

« Last Edit: July 15, 2022, 05:32 by Annie »


« Reply #17 on: July 15, 2022, 07:28 »
0
Weird, if customers dont shop around why have been contacted by two of the top four agencies in the last couple of weeks offering me sweeteners to upload more of my portfolio (which they noticed has more work in it on a rival agency)?

Seems like a lot of effort if they know buyers dont shop around.

Buyers with subscriptions and contracts on an agency don't shop around. The agency, the two that Annie shows, both seem to have the same data and the same broken English. Maybe one place, not two. Almost everything on all the agencies is the same because so many people upload everything to all of them. When the place asking comes across good images, they troll for new artists.

« Reply #18 on: July 15, 2022, 07:55 »
+1
Weird, if customers dont shop around why have been contacted by two of the top four agencies in the last couple of weeks offering me sweeteners to upload more of my portfolio (which they noticed has more work in it on a rival agency)?

Seems like a lot of effort if they know buyers dont shop around.

Buyers with subscriptions and contracts on an agency don't shop around. The agency, the two that Annie shows, both seem to have the same data and the same broken English. Maybe one place, not two. Almost everything on all the agencies is the same because so many people upload everything to all of them. When the place asking comes across good images, they troll for new artists.

Hi Stock4Me.

Just to explain a bit further, my attachments are both from the same agency. I just screen grabbed 2 sentences from a long email conversation, to demonstrate that they knew exactly how many files I had on the other agency. Which I must admit threw me at the time. The lady that approached me had a European name. Eastern European if I was to have a guess. And she worked for a prominent mid-tier agency that we all know and probably upload to.


Cheers,
Annie
« Last Edit: July 15, 2022, 08:23 by Annie »

« Reply #19 on: July 15, 2022, 08:13 »
0
I'm sure that there is intense competition amongst agencies just as there is intense competition between companies in other industries.

But how much do the end-users care? What will it take for an end-user to change agencies? Is quality so bad that they will jump ship? How much do they need the supplied 'tools' or do they just want to grab an image?

From time to time I do a Google search for my images and it is very rare to find one where the buyer has reworked the image using the SS tool. Generally, the photo is there just as I uploaded it to SS.

So do most end-users really care about the tools or do they just want a low-cost and massive library of images?

There is always a tendency to thinks that what we do is important. However, for most companies, users of our images and videos, we are just one supplier of very many, one component of a complex business model and process. They buy images like they buy envelopes.

« Reply #20 on: July 15, 2022, 10:01 »
0
I can't judge at all how buyers behave in general.

But since my office buys pictures, I can at least say something about it from my personal point of view.

We had one customer account with Shutterstock and one with Adobe Stock. Today we only have the one at AS. We cancelled the one at Shutterstock 3 years ago.

Why?

Well, it's mostly because of the search results.

If you have to make ads in a certain region for the target group in that region with products typical for that region, it is important to be able to find images that fit that target group.

Two examples:

Search term "house"

If I search for images of houses on shutterstock, I get a lot of images that do not show any houses in Germany/middle Europe at first glance. It doesn't matter whether I choose the German or the English language for the search. The results are almost identical. So I have to search much longer at shutterstock to find the right images for my region.

If I search for pictures of houses at AS, I can set the search region. If I search for houses in German, I get very specific houses that fit here. If I change the search to USA, I get mostly houses that look American. Here the search is clearly better.

Search term "family"

Here the same problem arises as with the search term "house". With shutterstock I get a lot of images that just don't fit my region. Here, too, the search results at AS are clearly better adapted to my search region.

From my point of view, the algorithm at AS is much better than that of shutterstock. In addition, from my point of view, shutterstock is more internationally oriented, while AS is more at home in the European market. However, I cannot judge at all how the search results look like in other countries. And of course I have no idea if other customers see this problem as well and therefore change the agency.

Perhaps learn how to use a search bar on any agency. "house' overall does yield houses in America, at least from where I am sitting. "house germany" yields nothing but houses in Germany.

Common sense.

« Reply #21 on: July 15, 2022, 10:39 »
+1
If I search for images of houses on shutterstock, I get a lot of images that do not show any houses in Germany/middle Europe at first glance. It doesn't matter whether I choose the German or the English language for the search. The results are almost identical. So I have to search much longer at shutterstock to find the right images for my region.

Perhaps learn how to use a search bar on any agency. "house' overall does yield houses in America, at least from where I am sitting. "house germany" yields nothing but houses in Germany.

Common sense.

With "house germany" in Sutterstock, I get indeed predominantly typical houses from Germany, mainly single family homes ranging from postwar to modern. It is roughly comparable to what Adobe yields for "Haus".

However, if I enter "Haus Deutschland", as a German user would most likely do, I get mostly iconic touristic stuff, like views of Rothenburg ob der Tauber with the town gate and half timbered houses and only a few pictures with more typical modern houses interspersed. This is of course not wrong for the search, but it depends on what you want, whether you will be satisfied with the results. This is a bit different from what Wilm reports, as I get drastically different results depending on the language I search in.

If you search for typical German houses, instead of iconic touristic sites, you may have an easier time finding what you are looking for at Adobe, unless for some reason you try to search for German houses in English.
« Last Edit: July 15, 2022, 13:10 by Big Toe »

« Reply #22 on: July 15, 2022, 10:56 »
+1
Weird, if customers dont shop around why have been contacted by two of the top four agencies in the last couple of weeks offering me sweeteners to upload more of my portfolio (which they noticed has more work in it on a rival agency)?

Seems like a lot of effort if they know buyers dont shop around.

Me too. I was approached a little while back by one agency and yes, they knew exactly how many more files I had on SS. 1,507 files, in fact! I mean, not 1,500 but 1507! Refer below.

But I also have heard of lots of first hand stories of contributors being approached by different agencies and being offered special deals, if you have the content they need to fill gaps in their databases.

I have come to believe that agencies know who's out there and who has content they need, and that overall its very, very competitive.

Yes, I believe all the agencies know that they cant run without the content. Both my recent approaches I think were from different agencies to yours from the text and description.

I used to frequently shop around when I was more of a buyer. It is always surprising how hard it can be to find the perfect image. Even with subs, an employee will will look elsewhere if they cant find precisely what they are looking for. The cost of a license is so, so cheap in a corporate context, even for extended licenses, the idea that you would settle for good enough in your companys marketing when you can pay an extra $20 or $100 for perfect is crazy.

« Reply #23 on: July 15, 2022, 12:28 »
+2
I do not know, but I am guessing that there are companies where the bean counters buy a big sub plan, and the image users are stuck with it - unless the search results get so bad that they complain a lot (either because the images are not there, or the search just sucks due to poor algorithm and spam. It takes a long time for changes to percolate through the system. There are others where the people who choose images choose the site - and there I am guessing the quality of the search results is pretty key. I am always amazed at how bad some of the searches are for specific things at the sites. Some day a site will improve that and it might be a game changer for them.

With my tiny and not very unique portfolio (at least for popular images) I did not see any increase in sales elsewhere when I stopped selling at SS or IS, but I did notice I felt less violated. Sadly they have pretty much ruined the business for me, fortunately I am not dependent on it for food or a roof over my head.

« Reply #24 on: July 15, 2022, 12:39 »
+1
Weird, if customers dont shop around why have been contacted by two of the top four agencies in the last couple of weeks offering me sweeteners to upload more of my portfolio (which they noticed has more work in it on a rival agency)?

Seems like a lot of effort if they know buyers dont shop around.

It is all about the customers with deep pockets, both for the agencies and us as producers.

Yes, there are companies that will always choose the cheapest plan only. But these people might as well go to flickr or any photo sharing site that offers content with cc license for free.

It is the companies that are ready to pay a lot of money that the agencies want and that we want.

There are huge holes in the collections. Most newbies just sort by popular look at the top ten images and duplicate them.

But if you do a search with a buyers hat one, you see just how much is missing everywhere. And it does not have to be super expensively produced people stock, created with a large team and 1000 dollars a day models.

Just content that looks authentic and that was taken by someone that actually understands the subject.

That is why so many people still make a full time living with stock. They avoid what is already there and look for what is missing.

« Reply #25 on: July 15, 2022, 16:07 »
+1
I can't judge at all how buyers behave in general.

But since my office buys pictures, I can at least say something about it from my personal point of view.

We had one customer account with Shutterstock and one with Adobe Stock. Today we only have the one at AS. We cancelled the one at Shutterstock 3 years ago.

Why?

Well, it's mostly because of the search results.

If you have to make ads in a certain region for the target group in that region with products typical for that region, it is important to be able to find images that fit that target group.

Two examples:

Search term "house"

If I search for images of houses on shutterstock, I get a lot of images that do not show any houses in Germany/middle Europe at first glance. It doesn't matter whether I choose the German or the English language for the search. The results are almost identical. So I have to search much longer at shutterstock to find the right images for my region.

If I search for pictures of houses at AS, I can set the search region. If I search for houses in German, I get very specific houses that fit here. If I change the search to USA, I get mostly houses that look American. Here the search is clearly better.

Search term "family"

Here the same problem arises as with the search term "house". With shutterstock I get a lot of images that just don't fit my region. Here, too, the search results at AS are clearly better adapted to my search region.

From my point of view, the algorithm at AS is much better than that of shutterstock. In addition, from my point of view, shutterstock is more internationally oriented, while AS is more at home in the European market. However, I cannot judge at all how the search results look like in other countries. And of course I have no idea if other customers see this problem as well and therefore change the agency.

Perhaps learn how to use a search bar on any agency. "house' overall does yield houses in America, at least from where I am sitting. "house germany" yields nothing but houses in Germany.

Common sense.

Thanks for pointing that out, but since I've been doing this for a few decades now, I'm quite familiar with searching and entering search terms.

"House Germany" does not bring up what I meant by the desired search result. And I would never enter it that way either. Because the search would be reduced by the countless good search results that show houses in Belgium, the Netherlands, Switzerland, Austria, northern Italy, western France, the Czech Republic, Poland, etc..

Since many contributors know that some of the architectural differences in this Central European region, which includes all these countries, are small, many use the country as a keyword only when it is relevant to tourism, not architecture. The result is then more like what Big Toe wrote. The contributors would dramatically limit their circle of buyers, which cannot be in their interest.

After all, there are agencies where a country has to be assigned when uploading. In my view, this is also not expedient in some cases. Instead of "Germany", the assignment "Central Europe" would have to be possible in the example in question in order to provide the buyers with a suitable selection. That would then be common sense.

« Reply #26 on: July 15, 2022, 18:38 »
+2
Since I re-enabled Shutterstock photo sales this month, downloads on Adobe Stock are clearly down.  I understand low downloads on July 4th holiday week, but this week has been low too.  It may be due to summer holiday season.  I don't know. I don't want to turn off my Shutterstock photos, but in order to find out what the relationship between low price Shutterstock photo sales and Adobe Stock photo sales, I'll have to turn it off if this low downloads on Adobe Stock continues.  Shutterstock photo sales aren't much because of all the $0.10 sales dominating.  So, it won't hurt me financially.  I just keep it in hope of rare high price photo sales Shutterstock is good at that happens once in a while.  Day to day Shutterstock photo sales revenue is just sad and depressing to look at.
« Last Edit: July 15, 2022, 18:48 by blvdone »


« Reply #27 on: July 16, 2022, 00:57 »
+2

It is the companies that are ready to pay a lot of money that the agencies want and that we want.


Again, I disagree. Agencies are pushing subscription plants like crazy. That's what they want the most, but not what we want as for us that's the 0.10$ sales. And these costomers - the ones with subscription plants for 750 images per month are very often the customers that need hundreds of images per month for random news articles online and will not hunt down the best quality image for each of these 750 images.

« Reply #28 on: July 16, 2022, 01:37 »
+1
I am working for a big company. We get every week a company newsletter where are lots of images used.
This images are from the big 5 in microstock and more and more images from free sites like unsplash.
Actually i can't see any difference between microstock images and free images they use.
So we probably will see more competition between free sites and microstock.
This 10 cent downloads will be the future of microstock. With some extended licenses. But most or the downloads will be at 10 cent.
The company i am working for is paying thousands of $$$ for a advertisement image. But not from microstock. This have been mostly by Getty images. Since there is no more RM they buy nowadays  from agencies like Westend61 for Europe area usage.

« Reply #29 on: July 16, 2022, 02:41 »
+3
or I may have to make a decision to turn off my photos on Shutterstock and see if photo sales on Adobe Stock increases.

Adobe Stock is not the cure for more revenue or more downloads.
1) You are now selling videos for 2.80. Before it was 28,-.
2) You sell only one image/video when Shutterstock sells 10 images/videos.
3) Adobe Stock closes portfolios if they don't like the contributor. They closed my portfolio and won't tell me why.

« Reply #30 on: July 16, 2022, 03:12 »
+1
or I may have to make a decision to turn off my photos on Shutterstock and see if photo sales on Adobe Stock increases.


2) You sell only one image/video when Shutterstock sells 10 images/videos.

Its not about the downloads.
Have been exklusive at istock in earlier times i made about $1600 a month with only 200 DL.

« Reply #31 on: July 16, 2022, 07:05 »
+1
I just checked my Shutterstock photo sales from last year.  Revenue per a photo sale/download was constantly above $1 in probably half of months last year.  This month, it's less than $0.35 per download.  Everybody seeing the same trend now?  This is so demoralizing.

« Reply #32 on: July 16, 2022, 07:18 »
+1
I just need a couple of $100/download photo sale on Shutterstock to make it above $1/download this month.  lol.  Otherwise, I'll disable my photos on Shutterstock in August to see my photo sales on Adobe Stock will go up to the level before I re-enabled Shutterstock photo sales.  I suspect there is a co-relation there.

« Reply #33 on: July 16, 2022, 10:15 »
+1
Disagree for this one.


2) You sell only one image/video when Shutterstock sells 10 images/videos.


And they fetch about 1/10 of AS per sale. Selling at lower price hurts the agency too.
I'm talking about images only, BTW.
« Last Edit: July 16, 2022, 11:26 by flywing »

wds

« Reply #34 on: July 17, 2022, 12:55 »
0
Oops, wrong topic, sorry!
« Last Edit: July 17, 2022, 13:04 by wds »

« Reply #35 on: July 18, 2022, 11:43 »
0
it's around 50-60 cents per image for the last few months on SS.

« Reply #36 on: July 18, 2022, 11:49 »
+6
I'm going to disable photo sales on Shutterstock soon (again).  Just can't take this pain anymore seeing all those $0.10 sales and wonder how much I could've made if those were sold on Adobe Stock instead, even if the half of those were made on Adobe Stock, I would've made way more.  I feel like getting robbed.  It's not good for my mental state to see those $0.10 sales piling up daily.  It's not healthy.  I'd rather be happy not seeing those demoralizing numbers.  It'll be turning on and off my Shutterstock photo portfolio to see if I get one of those high price photo sales while I turn my photo port on.
« Last Edit: July 18, 2022, 11:57 by blvdone »


« Reply #37 on: July 18, 2022, 11:51 »
+1
it's around 1 dollar per image for the last few months on Adobe, but Adobe sells just 1/3 of SS sales.

I do not plan to disable SS, because there are lot of copypasters in my niche on SS, so disabling my SS portfolio will give them advantage. :)

« Reply #38 on: July 18, 2022, 12:06 »
0
Just checked my earnings report.  A year ago, only like 10-20% of photo sub sales were $0.10-0.14.  Now 50-90% of photo sub sales are $0.10-0.14.  That means more and more photo buyers on Shutterstock are buying the $199/month annual commitment package.  About 90% of all photo sales are subscription.
« Last Edit: July 18, 2022, 12:09 by blvdone »

« Reply #39 on: July 18, 2022, 13:02 »
+1
I just need a couple of $100/download photo sale on Shutterstock to make it above $1/download this month.  lol.  Otherwise, I'll disable my photos on Shutterstock in August to see my photo sales on Adobe Stock will go up to the level before I re-enabled Shutterstock photo sales.  I suspect there is a co-relation there.

since individual months sales are near random, esp'ly for low # od DL, you won't learn anything from a 1-month change (1 large sale will skew your results) - correlation is not causation

« Reply #40 on: July 18, 2022, 13:21 »
+1
I just need a couple of $100/download photo sale on Shutterstock to make it above $1/download this month.  lol.  Otherwise, I'll disable my photos on Shutterstock in August to see my photo sales on Adobe Stock will go up to the level before I re-enabled Shutterstock photo sales.  I suspect there is a co-relation there.

since individual months sales are near random, esp'ly for low # od DL, you won't learn anything from a 1-month change (1 large sale will skew your results) - correlation is not causation

It's OK.  I just want to be happy.  My strategy is, 1 month off and then 2 weeks on, repeat.

« Reply #41 on: July 19, 2022, 08:23 »
0
Just un-published my photos.  I'll re-publish a month later for a few weeks at least to see if I get high price sales.  Otherwise, Shutterstock is the new Storyblocks imo.

« Reply #42 on: July 19, 2022, 13:31 »
+3
Just un-published my photos.  I'll re-publish a month later for a few weeks at least to see if I get high price sales.  Otherwise, Shutterstock is the new Storyblocks imo.

i've found my AS sales are most affected by the phase of the moon

OM

« Reply #43 on: July 26, 2022, 11:58 »
+1
Just un-published my photos.  I'll re-publish a month later for a few weeks at least to see if I get high price sales.  Otherwise, Shutterstock is the new Storyblocks imo.

i've found my AS sales are most affected by the phase of the moon

LOL! Are you implying that Adobe customers are lunatics???!!  ;D

« Reply #44 on: July 26, 2022, 14:22 »
+2
Quote
In my experience, turning off my portfolio on SS (or leaving my work there) didn't affect my sales on Adobe (or any other agency). Different clients, different preferences.

thats just lame thinking.

If all turn off portfolio, clients move over in a day.

But its pointless argueing here on msg...




« Reply #45 on: July 26, 2022, 19:14 »
0
Just un-published my photos.  I'll re-publish a month later for a few weeks at least to see if I get high price sales.  Otherwise, Shutterstock is the new Storyblocks imo.

i've found my AS sales are most affected by the phase of the moon

LOL! Are you implying that Adobe customers are lunatics???!!  ;D

visiting the OR coast where one of my favorite restaurants is Luna Sea

« Reply #46 on: July 26, 2022, 19:15 »
0
.. dupe...


« Reply #47 on: July 29, 2022, 16:28 »
+2
So, I turned off my Shutterstock photo sales this week.  So far Adobe Stock photo downloads (how many, not $ revenue) went up about 20% from previous 3 weeks I had Shutterstock photo sales enabled.  It's back to the downloads amount before I enabled Shutterstock photo sales at the beginning of July.  This may be a coincidence, but I really suspect $0.10 photo sales on Shutterstock were eating up sales on Adobe Stock.  Also, seeing those parade of $0.10 one after another on Shutterstock is emotionally painful.  I didn't have that pain this week I just realized. 
« Last Edit: July 29, 2022, 16:38 by blvdone »

« Reply #48 on: July 31, 2022, 05:24 »
+1
So this week's number of sales on Adobe Stock jumped after 3 weeks of low sales during enabling Shutterstock $0.10 photo sales.  Revenue wasn't high this week on Adobe Stock due to video sales being not great, but photo sales are back to the level before Shutterstock parade of $0.10 subs.  Is this seasonal or has to do with Shutterstock $0.10 photo sub sales eating up Adobe Stock sales?  Anybody having the similar lower sales on Adobe Stock during previous 3 weeks like me?
« Last Edit: July 31, 2022, 05:28 by blvdone »

« Reply #49 on: July 31, 2022, 08:32 »
+1
Anybody having the similar lower sales on Adobe Stock during previous 3 weeks like me?
Yes, i had the same low numbers on AS during the last 3-4 weeks - about 50-70% of the 'normal' sales.

« Reply #50 on: July 31, 2022, 09:08 »
0
Anybody having the similar lower sales on Adobe Stock during previous 3 weeks like me?
Yes, i had the same low numbers on AS during the last 3-4 weeks - about 50-70% of the 'normal' sales.

How about this most recent week?  Did you have 3 weeks dip and then back to normal like I did this week?

« Reply #51 on: July 31, 2022, 10:30 »
+1
Anybody having the similar lower sales on Adobe Stock during previous 3 weeks like me?
Yes, i had the same low numbers on AS during the last 3-4 weeks - about 50-70% of the 'normal' sales.

How about this most recent week?  Did you have 3 weeks dip and then back to normal like I did this week?
This week was a liitle bit better then the previous 3 weeks, so yes - 3 weeks almost only low sales and not many, last week some more sales and for a better rpd again.

« Reply #52 on: July 31, 2022, 11:07 »
+1
RPD is down.

SVH

« Reply #53 on: July 31, 2022, 12:13 »
0
Order of photos have been changed recently in the search results. Maybe that is what is causing it.

« Reply #54 on: July 31, 2022, 12:33 »
+1
So, I turned off my Shutterstock photo sales this week.  So far Adobe Stock photo downloads (how many, not $ revenue) went up about 20% from previous 3 weeks I had Shutterstock photo sales enabled.  It's back to the downloads amount before I enabled Shutterstock photo sales at the beginning of July.  This may be a coincidence, but I really suspect $0.10 photo sales on Shutterstock were eating up sales on Adobe Stock.  Also, seeing those parade of $0.10 one after another on Shutterstock is emotionally painful.  I didn't have that pain this week I just realized.

likely just statistical noise - have you done comparisons for other 2-3-week(!) periods?  do they show no decrease in AS vs SS?

« Reply #55 on: July 31, 2022, 12:39 »
0
...  Is this seasonal or has to do with Shutterstock $0.10 photo sub sales eating up Adobe Stock sales?  Anybody having the similar lower sales on Adobe Stock during previous 3 weeks like me?
nice to see you're finally realizing there are other explanations for your sales - esp'ly since you're dealing w such tiny sample size

my AS sales down 20% in July with no changes elsewhere.  (?? maybe AS is going out of business!!)

« Reply #56 on: July 31, 2022, 13:41 »
0
So, I turned off my Shutterstock photo sales this week.  So far Adobe Stock photo downloads (how many, not $ revenue) went up about 20% from previous 3 weeks I had Shutterstock photo sales enabled.  It's back to the downloads amount before I enabled Shutterstock photo sales at the beginning of July.  This may be a coincidence, but I really suspect $0.10 photo sales on Shutterstock were eating up sales on Adobe Stock.  Also, seeing those parade of $0.10 one after another on Shutterstock is emotionally painful.  I didn't have that pain this week I just realized.

likely just statistical noise - have you done comparisons for other 2-3-week(!) periods?  do they show no decrease in AS vs SS?

Shutterstock photo port on for 3 weeks and off this past week.  Depending on how things will go next 2 weeks or so on Adobe Stock, I'll draw my own conclusion.  Everybody's sales is different.  But right now, my plan is to turn off Shutterstock photo portfolio for a month and then turn on for 2 weeks, repeat.  I just hope I'll catch high price sale on Shutterstock while I turn on my photo portfolio during those 2 weeks.  Otherwise, I just can't mentally take seeing $0.10 sales that's often like 70-90% of my daily sales on Shutterstock.  It's just painful and brutal.  Not good for my mental health.


« Reply #57 on: July 31, 2022, 19:45 »
+2


likely just statistical noise - have you done comparisons for other 2-3-week(!) periods?  do they show no decrease in AS vs SS?

Shutterstock photo port on for 3 weeks and off this past week.  Depending on how things will go next 2 weeks or so on Adobe Stock, I'll draw my own conclusion....

drawing conclusions on bad data is worse than useless - you havent bothered to run the control!  what did your week-to-week sales look like before your brief experiments?  are there 23-week intervals where AS sales increased or decreased while your SS was active?  most likely explanation is still noise

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #58 on: August 02, 2022, 14:03 »
+1
But right now, my plan is to turn off Shutterstock photo portfolio for a month and then turn on for 2 weeks, repeat. 

What is that supposed to do? Image rank will drop, your download count will drop, photos will age and have no views or sales.

« Reply #59 on: August 02, 2022, 15:12 »
0


likely just statistical noise - have you done comparisons for other 2-3-week(!) periods?  do they show no decrease in AS vs SS?

Shutterstock photo port on for 3 weeks and off this past week.  Depending on how things will go next 2 weeks or so on Adobe Stock, I'll draw my own conclusion....

drawing conclusions on bad data is worse than useless - you havent bothered to run the control!  what did your week-to-week sales look like before your brief experiments?  are there 23-week intervals where AS sales increased or decreased while your SS was active?  most likely explanation is still noise

Those first 3 weeks of July I turned on my Shutterstock photo portfolio, I had the least number of sales on Adobe stock in 6 months.  So, it's kinda clear to me the effect of those $0.10 Shutterstock photo sub sales.  My guess is nearly half the buyers shop around for the same kid of image especially those who have Shutterstock subscription.  If they can find the same or very similar image from the same contributor on both Adobe Stock and Shutterstock, they'll take advantage of Shutterstock subscription if they have one.
« Last Edit: August 02, 2022, 15:17 by blvdone »

« Reply #60 on: August 02, 2022, 15:24 »
+4


likely just statistical noise - have you done comparisons for other 2-3-week(!) periods?  do they show no decrease in AS vs SS?

Shutterstock photo port on for 3 weeks and off this past week.  Depending on how things will go next 2 weeks or so on Adobe Stock, I'll draw my own conclusion....

drawing conclusions on bad data is worse than useless - you havent bothered to run the control!  what did your week-to-week sales look like before your brief experiments?  are there 23-week intervals where AS sales increased or decreased while your SS was active?  most likely explanation is still noise

I agree! The number of sales during 2-3 weeks is too low to be statistically relevant, and it's very likely to be influenced by many other factors. It's just noise, indeed!

« Reply #61 on: August 02, 2022, 15:41 »
0


likely just statistical noise - have you done comparisons for other 2-3-week(!) periods?  do they show no decrease in AS vs SS?

Shutterstock photo port on for 3 weeks and off this past week.  Depending on how things will go next 2 weeks or so on Adobe Stock, I'll draw my own conclusion....

drawing conclusions on bad data is worse than useless - you havent bothered to run the control!  what did your week-to-week sales look like before your brief experiments?  are there 23-week intervals where AS sales increased or decreased while your SS was active?  most likely explanation is still noise

I agree! The number of sales during 2-3 weeks is too low to be statistically relevant, and it's very likely to be influenced by many other factors. It's just noise, indeed!

Don't worry about it.  I feel happy not seeing those $0.10 sales everyday.  I don't need that pain for 4 weeks straight.  It's bad for my mental health.

« Reply #62 on: August 02, 2022, 15:57 »
+7
I would say turning off SS for your mental health and dignity makes more sense than thinking that it will make Adobe sales go up - although maybe you have content that is unique and in demand and that is actually the case. If so I would definitely turn of SS and Getty and force the buyers to go somewhere you get a better percent and sales aren't quite so cheap.

« Reply #63 on: August 02, 2022, 16:28 »
0
I would say turning off SS for your mental health and dignity makes more sense than thinking that it will make Adobe sales go up - although maybe you have content that is unique and in demand and that is actually the case. If so I would definitely turn of SS and Getty and force the buyers to go somewhere you get a better percent and sales aren't quite so cheap.

Exactly.

« Reply #64 on: August 03, 2022, 12:12 »
+2


likely just statistical noise - have you done comparisons for other 2-3-week(!) periods?  do they show no decrease in AS vs SS?

Shutterstock photo port on for 3 weeks and off this past week.  Depending on how things will go next 2 weeks or so on Adobe Stock, I'll draw my own conclusion....

drawing conclusions on bad data is worse than useless - you havent bothered to run the control!  what did your week-to-week sales look like before your brief experiments?  are there 23-week intervals where AS sales increased or decreased while your SS was active?  most likely explanation is still noise

I agree! The number of sales during 2-3 weeks is too low to be statistically relevant, and it's very likely to be influenced by many other factors. It's just noise, indeed!

Don't worry about it.  I feel happy not seeing those $0.10 sales everyday.  I don't need that pain for 4 weeks straight.  It's bad for my mental health.

so, you're going to hit your head w a hammer by continuing this 'test'?

« Reply #65 on: August 03, 2022, 13:39 »
0


likely just statistical noise - have you done comparisons for other 2-3-week(!) periods?  do they show no decrease in AS vs SS?

Shutterstock photo port on for 3 weeks and off this past week.  Depending on how things will go next 2 weeks or so on Adobe Stock, I'll draw my own conclusion....

drawing conclusions on bad data is worse than useless - you havent bothered to run the control!  what did your week-to-week sales look like before your brief experiments?  are there 23-week intervals where AS sales increased or decreased while your SS was active?  most likely explanation is still noise

I agree! The number of sales during 2-3 weeks is too low to be statistically relevant, and it's very likely to be influenced by many other factors. It's just noise, indeed!

Don't worry about it.  I feel happy not seeing those $0.10 sales everyday.  I don't need that pain for 4 weeks straight.  It's bad for my mental health.

so, you're going to hit your head w a hammer by continuing this 'test'?

Whatever man.  If you want to do your own test, just go ahead and do it.  I did mine and reached my own conclusion.  Stop BSing me forever.  I aint got no time for that.  Have a nice day!!

« Reply #66 on: August 05, 2022, 09:47 »
+3
It is starting to get ridiculous with the 10-14 cent downloads at Shutterstock.

This month, I have 2.5 times as many downloads at Shutterstock as at Adobe so far.

And yet I earned about 7 times as much at Adobe. And that is without an extended license or something like that.
« Last Edit: August 05, 2022, 10:06 by Big Toe »


« Reply #67 on: August 05, 2022, 10:33 »
+2
I only have older work on SS now, but I am definately seeing the same trend. All sales are moving towards 10c. Most are now less than 20c. I often make the same on a week day as I did on a weekend. What a joke, just doube checked and lately its 70-80% sub 20c sales!!!

« Reply #68 on: August 05, 2022, 12:24 »
+2
What I find most annoying is getting mostly 10 cent SOD downloads where they often used to be $20 or more. Now it is rare to get any above $1.

« Reply #69 on: August 05, 2022, 13:29 »
+1
It is starting to get ridiculous with the 10-14 cent downloads at Shutterstock.

This month, I have 2.5 times as many downloads at Shutterstock as at Adobe so far.

And yet I earned about 7 times as much at Adobe. And that is without an extended license or something like that.

Exactly.  It's disgusting and demoralizing.

« Reply #70 on: August 05, 2022, 13:30 »
+1
I only have older work on SS now, but I am definately seeing the same trend. All sales are moving towards 10c. Most are now less than 20c. I often make the same on a week day as I did on a weekend. What a joke, just doube checked and lately its 70-80% sub 20c sales!!!

Yes, it's sad really.

« Reply #71 on: August 05, 2022, 13:32 »
+1
What I find most annoying is getting mostly 10 cent SOD downloads where they often used to be $20 or more. Now it is rare to get any above $1.

Yes, it's like "What's the point?" uploading to Shutterstock at this point.  Only reason for keeping it is rare high price sales that may or may not come once in a while.  Otherwise, it's painful to check daily earnings report.

« Reply #72 on: August 05, 2022, 13:47 »
+3
Due to bereavement and personal health issues I virtually stopped uploading anything four years ago.
Much as I would like to start again I am finding it impossible to find any motivation.

« Reply #73 on: August 05, 2022, 13:49 »
+1
Due to bereavement and personal health issues I virtually stopped uploading anything four years ago.
Much as I would like to start again I am finding it impossible to find any motivation.

I hear you.  Totally understandable.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
3 Replies
3041 Views
Last post January 30, 2008, 18:08
by madelaide
22 Replies
8460 Views
Last post August 20, 2008, 12:28
by chumley
22 Replies
6585 Views
Last post February 20, 2017, 03:16
by Pauws99
25 Replies
11090 Views
Last post October 13, 2019, 13:29
by steheap
24 Replies
3391 Views
Last post July 22, 2022, 08:36
by blvdone

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle