MicrostockGroup
Agency Based Discussion => Shutterstock.com => Topic started by: Suspect on September 30, 2021, 12:41
-
I'm pitching my tent here where they can't get me.
8)
-
I'm pitching my tent here where they can't get me.
8)
LOL! ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
Welcome.
-
I'm pitching my tent here where they can't get me.
8)
Oh, they track this site as well lol!
-
I misread the title at first - I thought you'd been "murdered" (banned) in the Shutterstock forums :)
-
I misread the title at first - I thought you'd been "murdered" (banned) in the Shutterstock forums :)
Well, the dissenters will be silenced in one fell swoop ad infinitum On Oct 14th (nice of them to give us a date). No bans required.
Best solution possible for Shutterstock.
-
If you read this announcement from AnnaShutterstock it will become clear. https://forums.submit.shutterstock.com/topic/124108-sunsetting-the-forum-when-one-door-shuts-another-one-opens/ (https://forums.submit.shutterstock.com/topic/124108-sunsetting-the-forum-when-one-door-shuts-another-one-opens/)
How can you say with nice words that you don't care about the forum anymore, it is only difficult with the criticism, costs money
-
https://forums.submit.shutterstock.com/topic/124108-sunsetting-the-forum-when-one-door-shuts-another-one-opens/ (https://forums.submit.shutterstock.com/topic/124108-sunsetting-the-forum-when-one-door-shuts-another-one-opens/)
Good riddance.
AnnaShutterstock reminds me of the worthless Lobo on the old iStock forum before I bailed out there in 2011.
-
Good riddance to one of the most spiteful agencies out there. I hope they just just fold.
-
Good riddance to one of the most spiteful agencies out there. I hope they just just fold.
Odds are verrrry good you ain't the only one hopin' that.
-
I seriously wish I could type "eff" them
I am so tired of their happy clappy inclusivity BS while they screw us.
-
I seriously wish I could type "eff" them
I am so tired of their happy clappy inclusivity BS while they screw us.
Yep. They like to portray themselves as super-hip ethical whereas in reality they seem to have no moral principles at all in regard to the contributors who give them their content which makes them tick. Virtue signalling at its lowest.
Anna Shutterstock's announcement is so full of c**p it made me nauseous.
-
I'm pitching my tent here where they can't get me.
8)
LOL! ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
Welcome.
Thank you. It's nice to be talking somewhere where you're not likely to be told off like a naughty school child if you criticise.
Thank you too whoever first created this forum. Great idea to be independent.
-
I'm pitching my tent here where they can't get me.
8)
LOL! ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
Welcome.
Thank you. It's nice to be talking somewhere where you're not likely to be told off like a naughty school child if you criticise.
Oh, there are plenty here who will jump down your throat if you say something they disapprove of. But still… you're free to say it and also relatively safe from reprisal.
Thank you too whoever first created this forum. Great idea to be independent.
We owe it all to our fearless leader, Leaf.
-
Thank you. It's nice to be talking somewhere where you're not likely to be told off like a naughty school child if you criticise.
Thank you too whoever first created this forum. Great idea to be independent.
Just wait for it. If you critisize Shuttertock while being a contributor, eventually you will have some people on your throat blaming you for the downfall of the industry, because you have not left SS.
No place is without its downsides. But at least you won't get banned here for speaking against any agency.
-
Thank you. It's nice to be talking somewhere where you're not likely to be told off like a naughty school child if you criticise.
Thank you too whoever first created this forum. Great idea to be independent.
Well said above: wait for it! Besides those who can't stand being contradicted, there are the yeasayers who drive you crazy with their constant flattery.
-
Typical corporate behavior. They don't see any profit in the forum.
-
Typical corporate behavior. They don't see any profit in the forum.
Its more the opposite - they likely view the forum as harming profit as contributors can openly discuss and criticise SS policies such as pay cuts, dodgy reviews, stolen profiles and so on.
They're most likely worried discussion like that would hurt the corporate image they seek to project. Im just amazed it didnt go sooner.
-
Someday there will be company run by us (the artist) where the commission is 70% plus for the us and our voices are heard and changes are made to benefit us. Someday...
-
Someday there will be company run by us (the artist) where the commission is 70% plus for the us and our voices are heard and changes are made to benefit us. Someday...
I think that was around 2005....
-
Hardly anyone uses the SS forum. It's the same few posters all the time so I can understand why SS doesn't want to spend money on it. If SS was upset by criticism they would have closed it down long ago.
Anyway, we always have this forum to fall back on. Maybe the demise of the SS one will breathe some life into this.
-
Someday there will be company run by us (the artist) where the commission is 70% plus for the us and our voices are heard and changes are made to benefit us. Someday...
We talked about that with the pay cut last year. But then you have to compete against Istock, Shutterstck, sites with free photos, etc.
Only the very good professionals can do without stock sites and sell through their own site.
-
Typical corporate behavior. They don't see any profit in the forum.
Amateur behavior, not corporate.
The suppliers are also designers and buyers, if you piss us off you piss of the buying community.
Adobe understands that relationship very well and just look at how successful they are.
Shutterstock took on a new CEO with zero history in the media business.
What works for restaurants or food is not the same as for a media house.
-
Someday there will be company run by us (the artist) where the commission is 70% plus for the us and our voices are heard and changes are made to benefit us. Someday...
We talked about that with the pay cut last year. But then you have to compete against Istock, Shutterstck, sites with free photos, etc.
Only the very good professionals can do without stock sites and sell through their own site.
Of course an agency that has higher prices than all the other agencies will have a hard time competing with them and being sucessfull, but the idea was not to make prices higher, but commissions - so instead of, for example, a 10% 0.10$ commission the artist would get a 70% 0.70$ commission, which would make quite the difference already at low sub sales, but of course even more with extended licences.
Btw - I think Stocksy is kind of an agency like this, isn't it? I am not exactly sure about the details, as apparently I am not good enough for them, but I've heard they are basically artist-run and pay very high commissions compared to other agencies?
-
After passing the intelligence test for registration and my first posting ;), I am joining the Shutter- refugees here.
-
Someday there will be company run by us (the artist) where the commission is 70% plus for the us and our voices are heard and changes are made to benefit us. Someday...
We talked about that with the pay cut last year. But then you have to compete against Istock, Shutterstck, sites with free photos, etc.
Only the very good professionals can do without stock sites and sell through their own site.
Of course an agency that has higher prices than all the other agencies will have a hard time competing with them and being sucessfull, but the idea was not to make prices higher, but commissions - so instead of, for example, a 10% 0.10$ commission the artist would get a 70% 0.70$ commission, which would make quite the difference already at low sub sales, but of course even more with extended licences.
Btw - I think Stocksy is kind of an agency like this, isn't it? I am not exactly sure about the details, as apparently I am not good enough for them, but I've heard they are basically artist-run and pay very high commissions compared to other agencies?
I know too little about that Firn. I think, as I wrote, it is possible for very professional illustrators, photographers.
But I'm not good enough for that either. And to compete with all those stock sites with a huge, still increasing amount of photos, illustrations, with regular customers seems difficult to me. There is only a chance if they also chase the customers away through their behavior.
If it works, the site will be sold, new top people will come and the misery will start again. :)
We had a little bit (luckily) invested in teak trees. They started full of good plans, environmentally friendly, attention, work for the local residents. That went well in the beginning, then a new leadership came in, we were called whether we wanted to put more money into it, and we received beautiful brochures. In the end it went bankrupt. Some probably made a lot of money from it. But it wasn't us.
That's what comes to mind when I read Shutterstock's sweet talk.
-
'Murdered' is the appropriate description of the actions of the executive leadership of that place. The top dog is a callous, cunning, narcissistic hypocrit.
-
'Murdered' is the appropriate description of the actions of the executive leadership of that place. The top dog is a callous, cunning, narcissistic hypocrit.
And yet, under his leadership, SS is doing better than ever. See the graph.
If your money would be at stake, you would want someone like him as the boss of your company ;)
But since it's not, it costs you nothing to call him names :P
-
Hardly anyone uses the SS forum..... Maybe the demise of the SS one will breathe some life into this.
logic alert
nobody goes there anymore; it's too crowded! - yogi berra
-
But since it's not, it costs you nothing to call him names :P
Oh goodness no, I wouldn't calll anyone names. I was just describing said person in a manner that is kind, generous, supportive and inclusive.
-
'Murdered' is the appropriate description of the actions of the executive leadership of that place. The top dog is a callous, cunning, narcissistic hypocrit.
And yet, under his leadership, SS is doing better than ever. See the graph.
If your money would be at stake, you would want someone like him as the boss of your company ;)
But since it's not, it costs you nothing to call him names :P
Mihai, contributors money is at stake, as contributors earnings are directly affected by Shutterstock leadership decisions/governance/style/culture.
-
But since it's not, it costs you nothing to call him names :P
Oh goodness no, I wouldn't calll anyone names. I was just describing said person in a manner that is kind, generous, supportive and inclusive.
The bottom line is that this CEO is doing a great job for the stakeholders (so far).
His job is not to be liked, his job is to maximize the return for his investors.
Yeah, some may call him names, but that means nothing.
I am certain he is fully aware of it. It means very little when hundreds of thousand contributors are still considering submitting or keeping their ports alive on the site. This vocal discontent of a few dozens of forum members means nothing. It's just a small collateral loss in the grand scheme of things. Noise.
If you would be a stakeholder, he would be your hero. :P
-
Since it went public, SS sole and only goal is to the shareholders.
To that extent the CEO is delivering. They'll be happy with that.
Whether its sustainable long term or slash and burn now will come back to haunt them medium term remains to be seen but im sure the shareholders are very happy with the CEO at present.
They've gambled, possibly correctly, that even slashing commissions they'll have more than enough content being supplied to keep going.
-
Since it went public, SS sole and only goal is to the shareholders.
To that extent the CEO is delivering. They'll be happy with that.
Whether its sustainable long term or slash and burn now will come back to haunt them medium term remains to be seen but im sure the shareholders are very happy with the CEO at present.
They've gambled, possibly correctly, that even slashing commissions they'll have more than enough content being supplied to keep going.
Exactly! Only future will tell if these decisions will be sustainable long term.
Like it or not, everything is working very well for the company, so far!
-
"That's what comes to mind when I read Shutterstock's sweet talk."
Shutter can use some work on its pillow talk...
-
I'm another SS refugee pitching my tent on the lawn and hoping I don't get detention or lines from now on.
-
I've read so much about how contributors are being overlooked to make stakeholders happy. And how we can shout and scream and we're not being heard.
So here's my cunning plan:
Why don't we contributors ALL become stakeholders, massively buying SSTK stocks. And then dump 'em all at once. A classic pump 'n dump. They'll never know what hit 'em!
Or just become a stakeholder for profit and stop contributing. If you can't beat them, join them.
-
Since Stan started, the stock price has tripled but I have to wonder how long the company can keep going on existing 'stock'. I just cannot imagine that the image factories will still be submitting large volumes of model-released/property-released work that costs real money to produce when the rewards to those contributors have also been cut back so much (even at Level 5/6 they can sometimes only get 10 or teen cents for a sub that was previously $0.38).
I don't doubt that all the insiders have made tons of money since 1st April 2020 with all those stock and options grants that they get to pump up their poverty-stricken salaries (joke 8)) and everything looks hunky-dory for the time being but how long can it last without quality commercial input from contributors? Only they know whether their business model (screw the suppliers and make the shareholders rich) is sustainable and if it's not, how long they've got before cashing out.
Perhaps SSTK is already being 'groomed' for sale to a 'financial investment' group.
-
I've read so much about how contributors are being overlooked to make stakeholders happy. And how we can shout and scream and we're not being heard.
So here's my cunning plan:
Why don't we contributors ALL become stakeholders, massively buying SSTK stocks. And then dump 'em all at once. A classic pump 'n dump. They'll never know what hit 'em!
Or just become a stakeholder for profit and stop contributing. If you can't beat them, join them.
I think that pump and dump is illegal if you get caught!! ;D
Even if a load of contributors got together and bought stock with the intention of making money/hurting SS, I can almost guarantee that the amount of stock owned by all the contributors would be insignificant compared to the volumes owned by or pledged to insiders and would therefore be insufficient to affect the price (even if you could get every contributor's nose pointed in the same direction at once).
-
Hello everyone, guess we'll have to meet here. Studio2, are you there?
-
It would be interesting to know quantitatively how much the top stock producers earn for a given agency. For example, say the top 100 contributors earned the agency 50% of their revenue. In that example, they could form a united coalition that could actually have a say on pricing and royalty percentages. The question is how many of the "top earners" would it take to combine and form the beginnings of a stock producer coalition who would be able to yield power over the agency?
-
It would be interesting to know quantitatively how much the top stock producers earn for a given agency. For example, say the top 100 contributors earned the agency 50% of their revenue. In that example, they could form a united coalition that could actually have a say on pricing and royalty percentages. The question is how many of the "top earners" would it take to combine and form the beginnings of a stock producer coalition who would be able to yield power over the agency?
There is this one.
I don't know how successful they have been ....
https://www.microstockgroup.com/general-stock-discussion/documents-filed-for-official-stock-coalition-organization/msg555660/#msg555660 (https://www.microstockgroup.com/general-stock-discussion/documents-filed-for-official-stock-coalition-organization/msg555660/#msg555660)
-
I'm another SS refugee pitching my tent on the lawn and hoping I don't get detention or lines from now on.
Welcome, NuttyMoo!
You won't get detention here. You don't have to color inside the lines. As long as you have a relative tough hide, you'll get along just fine.
-
I've read so much about how contributors are being overlooked to make stakeholders happy. And how we can shout and scream and we're not being heard.
So here's my cunning plan:
Why don't we contributors ALL become stakeholders, massively buying SSTK stocks. And then dump 'em all at once. A classic pump 'n dump. They'll never know what hit 'em!
Or just become a stakeholder for profit and stop contributing. If you can't beat them, join them.
OM has it right above, methinks.
I'd already given some thought to your second strategy, above. That's entirely do-able.
Your first strategy would be a lot more fun, except it could hurt us too in the end. Of course, if each of us just buys 1 share of stock, the damage would be minimal.
-
It would be interesting to know quantitatively how much the top stock producers earn for a given agency. For example, say the top 100 contributors earned the agency 50% of their revenue. In that example, they could form a united coalition that could actually have a say on pricing and royalty percentages. The question is how many of the "top earners" would it take to combine and form the beginnings of a stock producer coalition who would be able to yield power over the agency?
There is this one.
I don't know how successful they have been ....
https://www.microstockgroup.com/general-stock-discussion/documents-filed-for-official-stock-coalition-organization/msg555660/#msg555660 (https://www.microstockgroup.com/general-stock-discussion/documents-filed-for-official-stock-coalition-organization/msg555660/#msg555660)
I guess my point or question was how many "top tier" contributors would it take to apply pressure to the agencies.
-
...
I guess my point or question was how many "top tier" contributors would it take to apply pressure to the agencies.
more than would ever agree to participate
-
...
I guess my point or question was how many "top tier" contributors would it take to apply pressure to the agencies.
more than would ever agree to participate
Righto. The top-tier contributors have seldom (never?) been willing to sacrifice for the good of the entire collection of contributors. And really, who can blame them???
-
...
I guess my point or question was how many "top tier" contributors would it take to apply pressure to the agencies.
more than would ever agree to participate
Righto. The top-tier contributors have seldom (never?) been willing to sacrifice for the good of the entire collection of contributors. And really, who can blame them???
They probably have independent agreements with the agency with more favorable terms for the top-tier contributor than the mainstream contributor.
-
...
I guess my point or question was how many "top tier" contributors would it take to apply pressure to the agencies.
more than would ever agree to participate
Righto. The top-tier contributors have seldom (never?) been willing to sacrifice for the good of the entire collection of contributors. And really, who can blame them???
They probably have independent agreements with the agency with more favorable terms for the top-tier contributor than the mainstream contributor.
Not necessarily.
Top tier contributors might have naturally reached, many months ago, higher levels granting them higher percentages than what they had "before". So top tier contributors might make more money than "before" and they have no reasons ask for a change.
-
Methinks it's possible that both Zero Talent and Pacesetter are correct.
There may well be many more kinds of deals out there for the big image factories and super-shooters/videographers/illustrators than any of we ordinary mortals are aware of.
-
Someday there will be company run by us (the artist) where the commission is 70% plus for the us and our voices are heard and changes are made to benefit us. Someday...
This kind of projects are not a new invention, there were many. Some of them even started here, between this forum members. None of them gained a visible place on the market. Ideas were different: from an agency run by the artists to the network of standardized websites with a common search and interlinking. Lifecycle of these projects is usually very short and they fell because of limiting factors like investments, time, human psychology (and especially artists specific) etc etc.
And there will be people which will start again. Wishing them good luck, even with the references to the failed before projects. A neutral to artists agency was the mostly competitive type in microstock, but this neutrality also does not live long. How this model works and evolves everybody sees in the income digits, very different for an agency and an artist.
-
...
I guess my point or question was how many "top tier" contributors would it take to apply pressure to the agencies.
more than would ever agree to participate
Righto. The top-tier contributors have seldom (never?) been willing to sacrifice for the good of the entire collection of contributors. And really, who can blame them???
They probably have independent agreements with the agency with more favorable terms for the top-tier contributor than the mainstream contributor.
Not necessarily.
Top tier contributors might have naturally reached, many months ago, higher levels granting them higher percentages than what they had "before". So top tier contributors might make more money than "before" and they have no reasons ask for a change.
So, the experience of a lot of contributors of getting a vast majority of 10 cent + sub sales, and that the only way the increasing percentages work in their favour is when they are applied to 'special' sales such as large ODs, SODs etc, isn't true of you?
Have you found then that since the change in payment method last June, your earnings have actually increased under the 'not so new' system?
It would be great to see comparison figures from your port. I know you were always happy to share these on the Shutterstock forum.
-
Hardly anyone uses the SS forum. It's the same few posters all the time so I can understand why SS doesn't want to spend money on it. If SS was upset by criticism they would have closed it down long ago.
Anyway, we always have this forum to fall back on. Maybe the demise of the SS one will breathe some life into this.
The SS forum is quiet because they purged all the active and experienced members a while back. They cut the heart out so it was bound to die. I'm surprised it didn't happen sooner though.
I'm guessing a lot will migrate over here, me being one of them! Been a member for years but not really used it. May be that will change now :D
-
The SS forum is quiet because
Hey LB nice to see you here. The forum is actually amazingly quiet now. With only 2 pages of replies to the announcement thread about sunsetting, il looks basically dead already. The same announcement say 1-2- years ago would have started a tsunami.
-
The SS forum is quiet because
Hey LB nice to see you here. The forum is actually amazingly quiet now. With only 2 pages of replies to the announcement thread about sunsetting, il looks basically dead already. The same announcement say 1-2- years ago would have started a tsunami.
Hi! Yeh, your right, a few years ago there would be 43 pages by now LOL.
-
I think the last true monster thread was the paycut announcement thread. That ran to 200+ pages.
Then they culled a lot of people from it and since then forum usage has been very low.
-
finally, what a beautiful day
-
Just wait for it. If you critisize Shuttertock while being a contributor, eventually you will have some people on your throat blaming you for the downfall of the industry, because you have not left SS.
No place is without its downsides. But at least you won't get banned here for speaking against any agency.
you will find that you will get your account suspended instead. agencies have lurkers on here and they just kill your port if they have the slightest idea who you are. ask a few on here, fotolia was notorious for that, in particular matt, who now works for adobe. istock does the same. rinder had his istock account deleted when they found him boasting on here. jo ann and others were banned from fotolia. i am sure there are more examples, people who were rioting against istock with the google deal, fotolia with dollar club. etc. best take this as advice or a warning
-
rinder had his istock account deleted when they found him boasting on here.
Not really. If I remember well, Rinder got caught breaking the ToS by cross-buying his own work, together with some other dude, in an attempt to prove that iStock was cheating, or something.
But you are right about retaliation, in general.
For the newcomers: it is advisable to stay as anonymous as possible, if you intend to criticize some agencies. Don't link your port to your profile, unless you only plan to kiss their a@@. 😉
-
no rinder didnt buy his own photos, i think rinder submitted photos from someone else to prove that his photos would be rejected for no good reason
-
no rinder didnt buy his own photos, i think rinder submitted photos from someone else to prove that his photos would be rejected for no good reason
Yes, you are right. This was it. Copyright infringement in an attempt to prove some conspiracy. I remember now.
-
https://www.microstockgroup.com/general-stock-discussion/did-a-test-a-istock/ (https://www.microstockgroup.com/general-stock-discussion/did-a-test-a-istock/)
actually he let someone else submit his images that were rejected for him and then they got approved lol
-
thats not copyright infringment by the way, i dont think its legally wrong, it just pissed off istock, just be careful what you post here under your real name
-
thats not copyright infringment by the way, i dont think its legally wrong, it just pissed off istock, just be careful what you post here under your real name
I'm afraid it is. You can't upload someone else's work. That's clearly copyright infringement. That was really stupid. iStock's decision was perfectly justified.
-
huh? if the creator gives you the right to upload, how can it be infringement?
-
huh? if the creator gives you the right to upload, how can it be infringement?
I strongly doubt that the rinder and the other dude signed legal papers relinquishing their rights. He got caught and paid the price. Rinder said it was "political". No, it was simply stupid.
Otherwise I agree with you that retaliation is a thing, even on this forum.
-
As for members of SS forum leaving, I wasn't aware so many were banned, which probably explains much of it. I thought that perhaps many left due to low morale and feeling discouraged by declining earnings and diminished returns on their work and investment to produce content.
But alas, either way, this would suggest that microstock agencies and perhaps the industry more broadly, is the reason for low contributor participation. And how dare I make such a criticism. How dare I!
But thanks to a very Talented colleague on the MCG forum, I have now seen the error of my ways. So with my new enlightened perspective I have looked again at why contributors departed the SS board en masse and can see they left simply due to them no longer needing the forums. All are making so much more commission earnings now than they use to under the old stagnant payments structure and are fully content and satisfied. Thank you Shutterstock!
-
Rinder said it was "political". No, it was simply stupid.
aye, defo
-
Typical corporate behavior. They don't see any profit in the forum.
And tons of negative publicity as people expose the way artists are ignored when our work is stolen. There's no benefit to trying to draw in new victims by the hooray and positive drone on the forums. Now it's mostly negative. I wonder why anyone new is joining any of the agencies?
I suppose this means I have to take one last look. I don't think I've logged in there in at least half a year.
-
https://www.microstockgroup.com/general-stock-discussion/did-a-test-a-istock/ (https://www.microstockgroup.com/general-stock-discussion/did-a-test-a-istock/)
actually he let someone else submit his images that were rejected for him and then they got approved lol
He claimed...
OK, well I've been with them since the beginning, Im sick of the silly ignorant rejections. I sent a friend of mine 10 Images that were rejected for You know "Over filtered" the only thing I think they teach them. i dont use filters so It's always funny. Anyway He's Exclusive and has all the little BS hats, crowns and stuff they give you. He submitted them and Bingo all 10 approved. there ya go. Your Mileage may vary. I'll just submit through Him from now on. for what they pay, Who in . are they Kidding?
Then after that he said he made the whole thing up and someone turned him in, (and he has written to me a few times, "I know who it was" but never said who he suspected) that's why iStock banned him. According to Rinder because of a made up post on a forum.
I never asked, but what happened to his Exclusive Friend, did he get banned too? ???
-
The SS forum is quiet because they purged all the active and experienced members a while back.
Because those people complained about the new dime program and how SS was screwing artists. That and some the no dime logo and some multiple accounts. One guy was asked to tone it down and he told them off, account locked on the forum, but he's still selling. Much of the "purge" rumors like 50 people banned in one clean swipe, for supporting Rinder against a moderator was BS. But then, people wanted to believe that SS was that nasty, so they believed and quoted the myth.
Anyway, yes, lots of people got banned when SS said stop the constant complaining, protests and boycotts. Some left on their own and right, the forum died at the same time, because most of those people were active and interesting.
I self banned myself just because I'm boring... ;) OK not really. Because like you say, the forum just because a boring drone of the same posts, very little new or interesting. Then someone says a massive, never ending spam attack, that SS didn't stop or prevent.
-
After our pay cut there was of course a lot of complaining, which I also participated in. But there was also a lot of fun. Even after the announcement of the closing of the forum. Like this topic of Alexandre: https://forums.submit.shutterstock.com/topic/124125-post-your-favourite-%E2%80%9Cgoodbye%E2%80%9D-stock-pic/ (https://forums.submit.shutterstock.com/topic/124125-post-your-favourite-%E2%80%9Cgoodbye%E2%80%9D-stock-pic/) Look quickly, because in two weeks it will no longer be visible. :)
-
Hey I just want chime and wonder if those dudes from the shutter forum that claimed to be swimming in the riches and that we should keep the faith are gonna be around here also?
-
Hey I just want chime and wonder if those dudes from the shutter forum that claimed to be swimming in the riches and that we should keep the faith are gonna be around here also?
Who are you talking about? The really "big players" in this game like picture farms never took part in the forum.
I only know of only few regulars that really made big money, like Doug Jensen who made videos and never told us to "keep faith", but rather the opposite - to change our tactics and that we were doing it all wrong. Other people who made decent money there like Milleflore also rather gave tips on how to improve. I can't remember anyone telling us to "keep faith" and that alone would bring in the money. Everyone who has any decent income on SS and took part in the forum encouraged us to work differently if we wanted to earn money there.
The only yay-sayers that just told everyone to "keep doing what you were doing" and that they were on the right path were the ones who never made big money themselves, but encouraged every single person who whined about having a picture rejected for focus or noise claiming that everything was perfectly fine with their pictures and that it was just the bad evil reviewers - while the pictures were in fact out of focus or full of noise. Or that told people who wanted feedback on their ports full of mediocre snapshots of flowers and forests that their pictures were "great" when in fact they were close to useless. Neither one nor the other was really helpful. Sometimes harsh critisism and truth might hurt or seem not polite, but it's not helping contributors solving the problems to many rejections or poor sales if people keep telling them that everything was fine with their images. But I never saw people who have decent income do that.
-
Hey I just want chime and wonder if those dudes from the shutter forum that claimed to be swimming in the riches and that we should keep the faith are gonna be around here also?
Who are you talking about? The really "big players" in this game like picture farms never took part in the forum.
I only know of only few regulars that really made big money, like Doug Jensen who made videos and never told us to "keep faith", but rather the opposite - to change our tactics and that we were doing it all wrong. Other people who made decent money there like Milleflore also rather gave tips on how to improve. I can't remember anyone telling us to "keep faith" and that alone would bring in the money. Everyone who has any decent income on SS and took part in the forum encouraged us to work differently if we wanted to earn money there.
The only yay-sayers that just told everyone to "keep doing what you were doing" and that they were on the right path were the ones who never made big money themselves, but encouraged every single person who whined about having a picture rejected for focus or noise claiming that everything was perfectly fine with their pictures and that it was just the bad evil reviewers - while the pictures were in fact out of focus or full of noise. Or that told people who wanted feedback on their ports full of mediocre snapshots of flowers and forests that their pictures were "great" when in fact they were close to useless.
I totally agree with Firn. But I often am.
-
Hey I just want chime and wonder if those dudes from the shutter forum that claimed to be swimming in the riches and that we should keep the faith are gonna be around here also?
The Shutterstock forum member who did that the most left the forum a couple of years ago and is in fact a regular poster on this forum. So you get the chance to swim in his success here...
-
Hey I just want chime and wonder if those dudes from the shutter forum that claimed to be swimming in the riches and that we should keep the faith are gonna be around here also?
The Shutterstock forum member who did that the most left the forum a couple of years ago and is in fact a regular poster on this forum. So you get the chance to swim in his success here...
You mean that one contributor who frequently boosted about being a world known successfull photographer and that he knew the secret to sucess (and would share it for money), but on the other hand complained about poor earnings on microstock...?
-
Hey I just want chime and wonder if those dudes from the shutter forum that claimed to be swimming in the riches and that we should keep the faith are gonna be around here also?
The Shutterstock forum member who did that the most left the forum a couple of years ago and is in fact a regular poster on this forum. So you get the chance to swim in his success here...
You mean that one contributor who frequently boosted about being a world known successfull photographer and that he knew the secret to sucess (and would share it for money), but on the other hand complained about poor earnings on microstock...?
Nope. The one who is actually exceptionally talented and often showed his earnings to prove it :)
-
Hey I just want chime and wonder if those dudes from the shutter forum that claimed to be swimming in the riches and that we should keep the faith are gonna be around here also?
The Shutterstock forum member who did that the most left the forum a couple of years ago and is in fact a regular poster on this forum. So you get the chance to swim in his success here...
You mean that one contributor who frequently boosted about being a world known successfull photographer and that he knew the secret to sucess (and would share it for money), but on the other hand complained about poor earnings on microstock...?
Nope. The one who is actually exceptionally talented and often showed his earnings to prove it :)
Ah, then I either don't know who you are talking about or it was before my time.
-
I'm pitching my tent here where they can't get me.
8)
Still trying to figure out what was meant by ‘when one door shuts, another one opens’, because there is no open door at ss.. :o
So, I am joining the refugees and hopefully we can stay connected here (and have fun ofcourse ! ;D
-
Hey I just want chime and wonder if those dudes from the shutter forum that claimed to be swimming in the riches and that we should keep the faith are gonna be around here also?
The Shutterstock forum member who did that the most left the forum a couple of years ago and is in fact a regular poster on this forum. So you get the chance to swim in his success here...
You mean that one contributor who frequently boosted about being a world known successfull photographer and that he knew the secret to sucess (and would share it for money), but on the other hand complained about poor earnings on microstock...?
Nope. The one who is actually exceptionally talented and often showed his earnings to prove it :)
Yes, was a big inspiration to me starting out but wouldn't of known it cos I wasn't posting at the time, just lurking. Beautiful content in a photography niche that I'm most interested in.
-
I'm pitching my tent here where they can't get me.
8)
Still trying to figure out what was meant by ‘when one door shuts, another one opens’, because there is no open door at ss.. :o
So, I am joining the refugees and hopefully we can stay connected here (and have fun ofcourse ! ;D
When the door shuts at SS the door opens at Adobe? That's what I see.
I think they did the right thing killing that useless forum. Oh and it's their own fault it became useless. No moderation, no blocking spam, no encouraging people to actually discuss real issues, like the dime downloads.
Someone else said it first, if it costs money, instead of making money, why have a forum. That and I see the negative outweighing anything positive, how members who expose the truth about stolen images, or people who pointed out negatives of being a contributor, were banned.
Euthanasia is fine when the animal needs to be put out of it's pain and misery.
(https://i.postimg.cc/jddXZ56d/microdummywave.gif)
Bye Bye SS forum
-
I also consider if closing the forum is a measure of disarming the collective voice and discontent of contributors to soon thereafter, announce another restructuring of the payments structure and further contributor commission cuts. Keeping true to my newly enlightened favourable perspective of the agency and their management team, this move would be the logical next step in generating profits for the company and its shareholders while reducing the potential for bad publicity. It would be a highly effective and profitable business strategy going forward.
-
I also consider if closing the forum is a measure of disarming the collective voice and discontent of contributors to soon thereafter, announce another restructuring of the payments structure and further contributor commission cuts. Keeping true to my newly enlightened favourable perspective of the agency and their management team, this move would be the logical next step in generating profits for the company and its shareholders while reducing the potential for bad publicity. It would be a highly effective and profitable business strategy going forward.
Oh good, something to look forward to at last 8)
-
I quit the Shutterstock forum almost two years ago.
I admit it, I never missed it.
Now, I want to make clear I like uploading to Shutterstock.
I like their system, I like their many, many, more sales than any other stock agency.
For me at least.
For most stock photography Shutterstock is the agency to work with.
I never, not from day one liked the forum. Way too many attack dogs with nothing to say.
Lousy moderators who took care of their friends. I hope they are out looking for work in the
fast food industry.
Since then I have backed away from forums and concentrate on my photography and stock biz.
I started on the SS forum with the declaration that I would have over 10,000 images plus video before the year is out.
Since I started early in January I thought that was a reasonable goal.
The attacks from then on never stopped.
Yep I attained my goal. Took me about 11 months.
I'm glad I did it. I learned a lot and made some money on the way.
I still have the same advice I gave way back on January 2019.
Upload, upload, upload. Constantly, unceasingly. Never stop.
However you also need to constantly evaluate your results, photograph more of what sells
and drop the stuff that does not.
Good luck and happy sales.
-
Hello! I'm from the SunSetting Forum too ^_^
-
I quit the Shutterstock forum almost two years ago.
I admit it, I never missed it.
Now, I want to make clear I like uploading to Shutterstock.
I like their system, I like their many, many, more sales than any other stock agency.
For me at least.
For most stock photography Shutterstock is the agency to work with.
I never, not from day one liked the forum. Way too many attack dogs with nothing to say.
Lousy moderators who took care of their friends. I hope they are out looking for work in the
fast food industry.
Since then I have backed away from forums and concentrate on my photography and stock biz.
I started on the SS forum with the declaration that I would have over 10,000 images plus video before the year is out.
Since I started early in January I thought that was a reasonable goal.
The attacks from then on never stopped.
Yep I attained my goal. Took me about 11 months.
I'm glad I did it. I learned a lot and made some money on the way.
I still have the same advice I gave way back on January 2019.
Upload, upload, upload. Constantly, unceasingly. Never stop.
However you also need to constantly evaluate your results, photograph more of what sells
and drop the stuff that does not.
Good luck and happy sales.
I was just on the forum at the time. I was only surprised then as I wrote in the other topic that you had no rejections because of similars.
They are now even stricter. If I upload some photos at the same time, I'm sure that one of the two will be rejected for that reason. But I don't take pictures of people, maybe there is less problems.
There were plenty of people who liked your goal.
New members, who ask why they sell little, still get the advice of uploading, uploading (And pay attention to quality, see what customers need, ensure visibility through the right keywords).
I didn't realize then that you were so annoyed by criticism.
Nice to see you here again.
-
Not a surprise. They have not listened or responded to the contributers for a long time. They were regarded as a pain, who might want to challenge their perceived wisdom. Who wants to listen to the truth when you are trying to rule the world. It's comparable to a country banning independent media.
-
New members, who ask why they sell little, still get the advice of uploading, uploading (And pay attention to quality, see what customers need, ensure visibility through the right keywords).
I didn't realize then that you were so annoyed by criticism.
Nice to see you here again.
Yep, that is how I remember it. The matter of similars. I have changed my thinking on that and agree with Shutterstock reviewers.
A little can be a good thing, so I try hard not to do similars. I've actually come to appreciate the reviewers, for the most part they do a good job.
I hope you are doing well.
-
Not a surprise. They have not listened or responded to the contributers for a long time. They were regarded as a pain, who might want to challenge their perceived wisdom. Who wants to listen to the truth when you are trying to rule the world. It's comparable to a country banning independent media.
They have a plan, believe me. Contributors will see 5 cent royalties, then penny royalties and fraction royalties replacing the 10 cent royalties that used to be 38 cent royalties. I'm not talking about the one-offs that happen now. I am stating outright that the volume downloads, like we used to see with the 38 cent ones will evolve into fractions of a penny. This last major move was only step one. They will let the dust settle, then drop another bomb.
-
Welcome, new SS forum refugees!
-
Hey Alexandre - Thanks!
Hope you are doing well. I enjoy your newsletters.
Very interesting.
Joe Grossinger
-
Welcome, new SS forum refugees!
Good to see you here Alexandre
-
Not a surprise. They have not listened or responded to the contributers for a long time. They were regarded as a pain, who might want to challenge their perceived wisdom. Who wants to listen to the truth when you are trying to rule the world. It's comparable to a country banning independent media.
They have a plan, believe me. Contributors will see 5 cent royalties, then penny royalties and fraction royalties replacing the 10 cent royalties that used to be 38 cent royalties. I'm not talking about the one-offs that happen now. I am stating outright that the volume downloads, like we used to see with the 38 cent ones will evolve into fractions of a penny. This last major move was only step one. They will let the dust settle, then drop another bomb.
Yes, from their viewpoint there is no reason not to keep reducing payouts :(
-
from their viewpoint there is no reason not to keep reducing payouts :(
Technically SS already have all photos they need. Why would they need a few more photos of sunset or sunrise? I bet they survive even they stop all news uploads.
-
Welcome, new SS forum refugees!
So, I am joining the refugees and hopefully we can stay connected here (and have fun ofcourse ! ;D
Alexandre, Repelsteeltjece, great to see you here guys!
-
Welcome, new SS forum refugees!
So, I am joining the refugees and hopefully we can stay connected here (and have fun ofcourse ! ;D
Alexandre, Repelsteeltjece, great to see you here guys!
Are we MSG old-timers living through the "Invasion of the Shutterstockers"? ???
-
Welcome, new SS forum refugees!
So, I am joining the refugees and hopefully we can stay connected here (and have fun ofcourse ! ;D
Alexandre, Repelsteeltjece, great to see you here guys!
Are we MSG old-timers living through the "Invasion of the Shutterstockers"? ???
You are indeed 8)
Thanks to 'Leaf'. Incidentally, does 'Leaf' post on the forum?
-
Are we MSG old-timers living through the "Invasion of the Shutterstockers"? ???
I don't think there will be an invasion as most old "Shutterstockers" are MSG old-timers too, usually under another name.
-
Welcome, new SS forum refugees!
So, I am joining the refugees and hopefully we can stay connected here (and have fun ofcourse ! ;D
Alexandre, Repelsteeltjece, great to see you here guys!
Are we MSG old-timers living through the "Invasion of the Shutterstockers"? ???
You are indeed 8)
Thanks to 'Leaf'. Incidentally, does 'Leaf' post on the forum?
When 'Leaf' has something to say, 'Leaf' does indeed post on the forum.
-
Welcome, new SS forum refugees!
So, I am joining the refugees and hopefully we can stay connected here (and have fun ofcourse ! ;D
Alexandre, Repelsteeltjece, great to see you here guys!
Are we MSG old-timers living through the "Invasion of the Shutterstockers"? ???
You are indeed 8)
Thanks to 'Leaf'. Incidentally, does 'Leaf' post on the forum?
When 'Leaf' has something to say, 'Leaf' does indeed post on the forum.
Thanks Martha. I just found him via the search facility.
I have been reading his (assumption there, 'he' could be a 'she') posts.
Interesting ... a lot of foresight was required I think to have set up this forum so long ago ...
-
Welcome, new SS forum refugees!
So, I am joining the refugees and hopefully we can stay connected here (and have fun ofcourse ! ;D
Alexandre, Repelsteeltjece, great to see you here guys!
Are we MSG old-timers living through the "Invasion of the Shutterstockers"? ???
You are indeed 8)
Thanks to 'Leaf'. Incidentally, does 'Leaf' post on the forum?
When 'Leaf' has something to say, 'Leaf' does indeed post on the forum.
Thanks Martha. I just found him via the search facility.
I have been reading his (assumption there, 'he' could be a 'she') posts.
Interesting ... a lot of foresight was required I think to have set up this forum so long ago ...
I've never met 'Leaf,' but based on intuitive hunches gleaned from reading posts that referenced *he* and *him* and *his*, I assume that 'Leaf' is a person of the male persuasion.
I might be wrong about that, of course. One actually never can be 100% sure about such things today. :-\
-
Welcome, new SS forum refugees!
So, I am joining the refugees and hopefully we can stay connected here (and have fun ofcourse ! ;D
Alexandre, Repelsteeltjece, great to see you here guys!
Are we MSG old-timers living through the "Invasion of the Shutterstockers"? ???
Yes, we apply and plead for refugee status on the grounds of compassion having just escaped a brutal dictatorship who persecuted his own people. Many of us have risked our lives to travel across open rough cyber seas in leaky digital boats to arrive at this beautiful and prosperous land called MSG. If MSG choose to deport us, we have nowhere to go.
-
This thread is starting to show all that was wrong with the SS forums.
People running other people and organizations down for no purpose other than to
build themselves up.
If the SS refugees are coming here to repeat what they did on SS forums then
I'm outta here.
The SS forums are dead and gone. Leave them that way.
It's a good time to start out on a positive note and go on from there.
-
Welcome, new SS forum refugees!
So, I am joining the refugees and hopefully we can stay connected here (and have fun ofcourse ! ;D
Alexandre, Repelsteeltjece, great to see you here guys!
Are we MSG old-timers living through the "Invasion of the Shutterstockers"? ???
Yes, we apply and plead for refugee status on the grounds of compassion having just escaped a brutal dictatorship who persecuted his own people. Many of us have risked our lives to travel across open rough cyber seas in leaky digital boats to arrive at this beautiful and prosperous land called MSG. If MSG choose to deport us, we have nowhere to go.
You'll get no argument from most of us here. Many of us bailed out of SS 1.5 years ago… and we gave the company an appropriate new name: SHITTERSTOCK.
I see no good reason to change that name now.
So, welcome, Shitterstockers!
-
You'll get in argument from most of us here. Many of us bailed out of SS 1.5 years ago… and we gave the company an appropriate new name: SHITTERSTOCK.
I see no good reason to change that name now.
So, welcome, Shitterstockers!
To each his or her own.
I joined the Shutterstock forum on the 5th of January 2019 and quit the forum on December 2019.
So I don't consider myself a refugee.
Secondly, although I agree the SS forums were really sorry, and I mean really sorry you have to ask yourself
"who made them that way"?
Yes, I quit the SS forums but I have never quit on SS. It's still the finest (for me and a lot of stockers) stock agency around.
To each his or her own.
Good luck to yah and much success.
-
You'll get in argument from most of us here. Many of us bailed out of SS 1.5 years ago… and we gave the company an appropriate new name: SHITTERSTOCK.
I see no good reason to change that name now.
So, welcome, Shitterstockers!
To each his or her own.
I joined the Shutterstock forum on the 5th of January 2019 and quit the forum on December 2019.
So I don't consider myself a refugee.
Secondly, although I agree the SS forums were really sorry, and I mean really sorry you have to ask yourself
"who made them that way"?
Yes, I quit the SS forums but I have never quit on SS. It's still the finest (for me and a lot of stockers) stock agency around.
To each his or her own.
Good luck to yah and much success.
Looks like we're talking about two different things:
1. the Shutterstock/Shitterstock site as a place to do business and
2. the Shutterstock/Shitterstock forum as a place to bitch and moan about the terrible conditions there for contributors.
Some of us preferred not to put up with either. To each their own!
-
This thread is starting to show all that was wrong with the SS forums.
People running other people and organizations down for no purpose other than to
build themselves up.
If the SS refugees are coming here to repeat what they did on SS forums then
I'm outta here.
The SS forums are dead and gone. Leave them that way.
It's a good time to start out on a positive note and go on from there.
Calm down old fella. I was kind of joking and having a bit of fun in my post above playing on the description that we are refugees which is quite funny in itself.
Cheers
Pacesetter
-
This thread is starting to show all that was wrong with the SS forums.
People running other people and organizations down for no purpose other than to
build themselves up.
If the SS refugees are coming here to repeat what they did on SS forums then
I'm outta here.
The SS forums are dead and gone. Leave them that way.
It's a good time to start out on a positive note and go on from there.
Calm down old fella. I was kind of joking and having a bit of fun in my post above playing on the description that we are refugees which is quite funny in itself.
Cheers
Pacesetter
This forum has its own defectors. There used to be some really good artists here and they have since left, some of whom got in heated arguments, accusations flung at them, etc. Lisa FX is a perfect example. I had a couple of private message exchanges with her and she was/is quite a nice person. But she got crapped on here and left. It happens.
-
This thread is starting to show all that was wrong with the SS forums.
People running other people and organizations down for no purpose other than to
build themselves up.
If the SS refugees are coming here to repeat what they did on SS forums then
I'm outta here.
The SS forums are dead and gone. Leave them that way.
It's a good time to start out on a positive note and go on from there.
%100 Agree With This
-
This thread is starting to show all that was wrong with the SS forums.
People running other people and organizations down for no purpose other than to
build themselves up.
If the SS refugees are coming here to repeat what they did on SS forums then
I'm outta here.
The SS forums are dead and gone. Leave them that way.
It's a good time to start out on a positive note and go on from there.
%100 Agree With This
Then why is your username still active? I will say, the one big difference here is that you don't have an administrator censoring your posts like over at SS. You can pretty much say what you want, but don't expect some posts to go unchallenged. And every forum, this one, a drone forum, etc. all have varying personalities and the vast majority of people react to posts in different ways. You will not get a forum where everyone agrees with you and it's kumbaya all day long. If you don't like the human element of a forum you are free to leave, but nobody is going to silence you like over at SS unless you cross the line with forum rules, which are pretty lax here.
-
This thread is starting to show all that was wrong with the SS forums.
People running other people and organizations down for no purpose other than to
build themselves up.
If the SS refugees are coming here to repeat what they did on SS forums then
I'm outta here.
The SS forums are dead and gone. Leave them that way.
It's a good time to start out on a positive note and go on from there.
You need to stay, it could be like Rome burning down and you could be a spectator?
Although that means, I'll have to revive the Duck Thread over here? That was one of the all time classics.
(https://i.postimg.cc/zBJ5b7Ph/duck.png)
-
This thread is starting to show all that was wrong with the SS forums.
People running other people and organizations down for no purpose other than to
build themselves up.
If the SS refugees are coming here to repeat what they did on SS forums then
I'm outta here.
The SS forums are dead and gone. Leave them that way.
It's a good time to start out on a positive note and go on from there.
%100 Agree With This
This is too negative. Think of the extensive fun topics such as Best SS friends and mates Club, The Hummer Thread Vol.2!!!, already metioned Duckphoto. Instructive topics like Photo Examples or Good Rule or Technique Application, Help for the New Contributor
And... unjustified complaints like about focus also receive an explanation of what is wrong with the photo and how it can be improved.
I just avoided one topic. That was about Corona. That didn't get any better at some point. But I never encountered any problems.
Well on the neat Alamy forum, as I wrote in another topic. I never went there again after a few visits.
-
This thread is starting to show all that was wrong with the SS forums.
People running other people and organizations down for no purpose other than to
build themselves up.
If the SS refugees are coming here to repeat what they did on SS forums then
I'm outta here.
The SS forums are dead and gone. Leave them that way.
It's a good time to start out on a positive note and go on from there.
Before 7th Oct there was no aggression whatsoever on this thread.
It is at this point exactly that the 'running other people and organizations down' starts.
Hopefully now the thread can be continued in the calm, polite manner it followed before that.
-
How are sales going on SS for you?
Rubbish for me :(
I don't, however, blame SS for that as I don't have enough downloads for the old payment scheme to have made much of a difference.
It's numbers that are very low for me.
-
How are sales going on SS for you?
Rubbish for me :(
I don't, however, blame SS for that as I don't have enough downloads for the old payment scheme to have made much of a difference.
It's numbers that are very low for me.
I can't complain. With 500-600 DLs a month, Shutter is still first for me in terms of revenue, followed by Adobe and Alamy.
-
This thread is starting to show all that was wrong with the SS forums.
People running other people and organizations down for no purpose other than to
build themselves up.
If the SS refugees are coming here to repeat what they did on SS forums then
I'm outta here.
The SS forums are dead and gone. Leave them that way.
It's a good time to start out on a positive note and go on from there.
Before 7th Oct there was no aggression whatsoever on this thread.
It is at this point exactly that the 'running other people and organizations down' starts.
Hopefully now the thread can be continued in the calm, polite manner it followed before that.
LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
:D ;D ;) :) ;) 8) :( :-*
-
Hello everyone, glad to see you here!
-
Hello everyone, glad to see you here!
Welcome!
PS to newer arrivals: Note the non-aggressive welcome.
-
Hello everyone, glad to see you here!
Welcome!
PS to newer arrivals: Note the non-aggressive welcome.
Is appreciated Martha. We are not aggressive either, just a little sad. Forum just disappeared completely. :'(
-
Hello everyone, glad to see you here!
Welcome!
PS to newer arrivals: Note the non-aggressive welcome.
Is appreciated Martha. We are not aggressive either, just a little sad. Forum just disappeared completely. :'(
Yep. Dead, gone, kaput.
-
Hello everyone, glad to see you here!
Welcome!
PS to newer arrivals: Note the non-aggressive welcome.
Is appreciated Martha. We are not aggressive either, just a little sad. Forum just disappeared completely. :'(
Yep. Dead, gone, kaput.
When I log in now on the forum I end up on my own Shutterstock site. :)
-
With apologies to Monty Python
The SS forum is no more! It has ceased to be! It's expired and gone to meet its maker! Bereft of life, it rests in peace! It's kicked the bucket, shuffled off its mortal coil, run down the curtain and joined the bleedin' choir invisible!! It is an ex-forum!!
-
With apologies to Monty Python
The SS forum is no more! It has ceased to be! It's expired and gone to meet its maker!
I hope not for it's maker Jon Oringer. ;D Because he's still alive. But other than that it's a nice eulogy. I'm a Monty Python fan
I had a link to Shutterstockforum on my website in the Shutterstock section. ( http://www.tuin-thijs.com/indexengels.htm (http://www.tuin-thijs.com/indexengels.htm) ) I just changed it now with a link to Microstock. Hopefully it will last longer.
-
Another SS refugee right here! ;D
-
Another SS refugee right here! ;D
You are welcome here, too!
(Note the relentlessly upbeat and welcoming tone. :D :D :D )
-
I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced.
I think it was SS closing down the forums.
-
Another SS refugee right here! ;D
You are welcome here, too!
(Note the relentlessly upbeat and welcoming tone. :D :D :D )
Thank you Martha. I hope that's a smile and not a grimace :)
We are mainly keeping to this camp (thread) but do occasionally venture out into others (under cover of darkness)..
-
I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced.
I think it was SS closing down the forums.
Love that 8)
-
I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced.
I think it was SS closing down the forums.
You are right. ;D
Still strange. In the morning I would open my Shutterstock page to see if photos have been accepted, if anything has been sold, and I always clicked the link to the forum to see if there was any news.
Now i open and still want to look at the link, which is no longer there. A bit addicted, still need to quit. :-\
-
I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced.
I think it was SS closing down the forums.
You are right. ;D
Still strange. In the morning I would open my Shutterstock page to see if photos have been accepted, if anything has been sold, and I always clicked the link to the forum to see if there was any news.
Now i open and still want to look at the link, which is no longer there. A bit addicted, still need to quit. :-\
Maybe we could sue SS for creating an addictive forum (= addiction) and then withdrawing it from us (= trauma) ?
I have had to remove the browser on my phone I used for the forum to stop my finger automatically going for it.
Anyone know a good lawyer?
-
Another SS refugee right here! ;D
You are welcome here, too!
(Note the relentlessly upbeat and welcoming tone. :D :D :D )
Thank you Martha. I hope that's a smile and not a grimace :)
We are mainly keeping to this camp (thread) but do occasionally venture out into others (under cover of darkness)..
Consider it a big, fat grin! :D :D :D :D :D
-
Now i open and still want to look at the link, which is no longer there. A bit addicted, still need to quit. :-\
This too shall pass.
There is life beyond Shitterstock.
Believe. Have faith. Upload elsewhere.
-
Now i open and still want to look at the link, which is no longer there. A bit addicted, still need to quit. :-\
Believe. Have faith. Upload elsewhere.
As a hobby I have been doing stock for 2 years now (before that I mainly photographed insects to identify and for my website). Istock was not recommended at the time, so I chose Shutterstock. After the pay cut in June of last year, I didn't upload for three months and during that time I joined Adobe and Alamy.
My earnings are not so much compared to others. My photos are not commercial enough for that, although I do my best. But it's fun to do.
Alamy now also has sales of 0.10, sells less and drops to 20% for my group next year.
It will take at least a month before I can upload more types of photos at Adobe. Until then, I'll have fewer photos there and less yield. Adobe is in my opinion the clearest and most honest to us of these three stock sites. Because they are not dependent on Stock, they also keep up when the market collapses due to too many (free) photos.
But again I'm just a novice in Stock Photography. For now I will also keep uploading to Shutter
-
Istock was not recommended at the time, so I chose Shutterstock. After the pay cut in June of last year, I didn't upload for three months and during that time I joined Adobe and Alamy.
My earnings are not so much compared to others. My photos are not commercial enough for that, although I do my best. But it's fun to do.
Maybe you'd like to reconsider iStock. I know it has a horrible reputation and, yes, $0,01 sales are a real thing and really annoying (After a while I stopped looking at my earning report each month, because these 0.01 sales are so upsetting. I only look at the final number of money I'll get.), but like with Shutterstock it's more a volume and chance game - you sell more images there than on Adobe and Alamy and of course you can also get higher amounts for your images. Most months iSTock is my second best earner next to Shutterstock. It's usually better than Adobe for me and much better than Alamy for sure.
-
The good part about Adobe, Alamy and iStock that they usually accept the photos rejected by focus on SS.
-
Istock was not recommended at the time, so I chose Shutterstock. After the pay cut in June of last year, I didn't upload for three months and during that time I joined Adobe and Alamy.
My earnings are not so much compared to others. My photos are not commercial enough for that, although I do my best. But it's fun to do.
Maybe you'd like to reconsider iStock. I know it has a horrible reputation and, yes, $0,01 sales are a real thing and really annoying (After a while I stopped looking at my earning report each month, because these 0.01 sales are so upsetting. I only look at the final number of money I'll get.), but like with Shutterstock it's more a volume and chance game - you sell more images there than on Adobe and Alamy and of course you can also get higher amounts for your images. Most months iSTock is my second best earner next to Shutterstock. It's usually better than Adobe for me and much better than Alamy for sure.
Thanks Firn. I may have to give it a try this winter when there isn't much to shoot.
-
Hi thijs may not be anything spectacular insect wise to shoot but I had to leave our dogs poop on the lawn because we were in a rush. Picked it up the next morning in a poo bag. But when I turned it through there was what I can only describe as a fluttering against my hand. I wondered what on earth it was but our dogs poop had been completely taken over by little dusky green and dusky copper beatles. Hundreds of them. I almost freaked and flung my hand away but if you have a dog it might create an interesting photo.
-
The good part about Adobe, Alamy and iStock that they usually accept the photos rejected by focus on SS.
At Alamy everything is indeed accepted
That was also said on the Shutterstock forum. However, especially with macro photos, I have about as many rejections with Shutter as with Adobe. It is striking that many photos accepted at Shutterstock were rejected at Adobe and vice versa.
-
Hi thijs may not be anything spectacular insect wise to shoot but I had to leave our dogs poop on the lawn because we were in a rush. Picked it up the next morning in a poo bag. But when I turned it through there was what I can only describe as a fluttering against my hand. I wondered what on earth it was but our dogs poop had been completely taken over by little dusky green and dusky copper beatles. Hundreds of them. I almost freaked and flung my hand away but if you have a dog it might create an interesting photo.
No not a dog. Dog poop at my gate on the street, but no beetles. ;D They were probably dung beetles (Onthophagus). I also have them on my website. http://www.tuin-thijs.com/keversengels.htm (http://www.tuin-thijs.com/keversengels.htm) Main page with subpages beetles
-
I did something wrong, but I can't delete my answer. Isn't that possible on Microstock?
:-[ Make it an extension of my last answer: I've read Onthophagus coenobita and Onthophagus similis can also be found on dog poop
-
Istock was not recommended at the time, so I chose Shutterstock. After the pay cut in June of last year, I didn't upload for three months and during that time I joined Adobe and Alamy.
My earnings are not so much compared to others. My photos are not commercial enough for that, although I do my best. But it's fun to do.
Maybe you'd like to reconsider iStock. I know it has a horrible reputation and, yes, $0,01 sales are a real thing and really annoying (After a while I stopped looking at my earning report each month, because these 0.01 sales are so upsetting. I only look at the final number of money I'll get.), but like with Shutterstock it's more a volume and chance game - you sell more images there than on Adobe and Alamy and of course you can also get higher amounts for your images. Most months iSTock is my second best earner next to Shutterstock. It's usually better than Adobe for me and much better than Alamy for sure.
I had my best month at iStock last month though it took well over a year to see this result. I had one image sell for over $40. The problem generally is as you said, lots of very low commissions. I think the place has potential though as my port always has sales and I only have a tiny port of several hundred assets in all.
-
...y finger automatically going for it.
Anyone know a good lawyer?
oxymoron alert
-
...y finger automatically going for it.
Anyone know a good lawyer?
oxymoron alert
:D
-
Maybe you'd like to reconsider iStock. I know it has a horrible reputation and, yes, $0,01 sales are a real thing and really annoying (After a while I stopped looking at my earning report each month, because these 0.01 sales are so upsetting. I only look at the final number of money I'll get.), but like with Shutterstock it's more a volume and chance game - you sell more images there than on Adobe and Alamy and of course you can also get higher amounts for your images. Most months iSTock is my second best earner next to Shutterstock. It's usually better than Adobe for me and much better than Alamy for sure.
[/quote]
I can't see how you join istock. I think I tried to get photos accepted in 2012 but were rejected as I only had a P&S camera at the time and knew nothing about editing. I may still have an account there but doubt it. As for SS I'm nearly at min payout amount (I only have a few 100 photos) because there's been more $1+ DLs lately and only a few dime DLs.
-
I can't see how you join istock. I think I tried to get photos accepted in 2012 but were rejected as I only had a P&S camera at the time and knew nothing about editing. I may still have an account there but doubt it. As for SS I'm nearly at min payout amount (I only have a few 100 photos) because there's been more $1+ DLs lately and only a few dime DLs.
If it has been that long you might want to try again. IStock doesn't seem to have any real quality standards at all these days. I don't know how it used to be in 2012. They tend to reject photos for reasons other agencies don't reject photos for, like, for example, you can't submit editorial content of any news-worthy event like demonstrations or product photos, but they never reject my photos for quality reasons.
-
For me, iStock was a bit of a bust.
After my RPD was in the single digits several times, I stopped uploading there. In addition, the upload process there was a pain in the ass for me ;).
On the other hand, I know many other contributors for whom the mixed calculation works out and the agency runs quite successfully.
In the end, you can't avoid trying out whether the agency fits your own portfolio or not.
-
I can't see how you join istock. I think I tried to get photos accepted in 2012 but were rejected as I only had a P&S camera at the time and knew nothing about editing. I may still have an account there but doubt it. As for SS I'm nearly at min payout amount (I only have a few 100 photos) because there's been more $1+ DLs lately and only a few dime DLs.
If it has been that long you might want to try again. IStock doesn't seem to have any real quality standards at all these days. I don't know how it used to be in 2012. They tend to reject photos for reasons other agencies don't reject photos for, like, for example, you can't submit editorial content of any news-worthy event like demonstrations or product photos, but they never reject my photos for quality reasons.
And they seem to have also started a house cleaning for offensive words like Alcoholic, or modern politically driven, offensive terms that are insensitive. Keep in mind, you can't escape. You aren't allowed to edit keywords on iStock. :o
Back in the early days (Sound of violins and a cello) iStock had the strictest reviews not only for quality but subjects, SS was right there, slightly behind them. Alamy required huge TIFs larger than made any sense, and was pretty careful on reviews, but you could submit a brown rock on a tan sandy beach, as long as it was sharp and without quality flaws.
Alamy would accept all kinds of things that SS and IS wouldn't, for rights. But then, if you have a foot, you have "people" in an image? But the question was reviews, wasn't it.
Personally that was about it for agencies that had higher standards. While things were changing from LCV and crooked horizon, the reviews actually got less critical and less detailed. Of course with the dumb AI at SS, things got more strange, like sand, fog or water, being rejected for focus? IS lowered their standards around the time of Stinkystock... oops, ThinkStock, as the price war waged and evolved into "we have more images".
I don't send much to IS anymore, but from what I did when I was bored last Winter, reviews are still hit and miss, where one person might pass an image and another will reject the similar. The reasons are when the refusal is subjective, not just image quality. SS is always a crapshoot and a mystery. I haven't tried, but someone said he just submitted the same image, six times, until it passed. OK brute force submissions?
After all that, yes, "IStock doesn't seem to have any real quality standards at all these days." but does for any nit picking side issues, and they are inconsistent too.
I think the standards are lower, while equipment and editing have become better. Well for a dime, or 2 cents, how much can any agency expect?
-
Stinkystock... oops, ThinkStock
Hey, Pete, that was clever. I don't remember seeing it back then, but my aging brain is increasingly fuzzy these days.
Somebody (don't recall who) also came up with Crapstock. Was that you too?
Way, waaaaay back in the early-pandemic days (ie spring 2020), we thought Shitterstock was clever. But you were so far ahead in the renaming game.
-
Well for a dime, or 2 cents, how much can any agency expect?
That's true.
-
Well for a dime, or 2 cents, how much can any agency expect?
That's true.
Yes, that's true, and it's because all such agencies care about now is numbers of images. Quantity over quality is the rule.
I'm actually glad when the sites I currently upload to reject an occasional image I've offered them, whether for LCV or quality issues. It means that at least there's some integrity remaining there.
-
Stinkystock... oops, ThinkStock
Hey, Pete, that was clever. I don't remember seeing it back then, but my aging brain is increasingly fuzzy these days.
Somebody (don't recall who) also came up with Crapstock. Was that you too?
Way, waaaaay back in the early-pandemic days (ie spring 2020), we thought Shitterstock was clever. But you were so far ahead in the renaming game.
Crapstock was a name for my own junk images, never started out to be about anyone else or their efforts. Maybe sideways about what the agencies took sometimes. ;) Kind of like, accepted fillers to make bigger numbers, but of no interest to buyers and probably would never sell. A game that I played sometimes, "I wonder if I can get this to pass?" Or, I can't believe I actually uploaded this image, but worse, it was accepted.
Getty bought up agencies, little ones, big ones, special ones, the obscure, the old dormant places, all kinds. Near the end they bought Stockxpert, and the whole thing was a mess. "StockXpert still acts as an archive for original contributors who did not remove their images or terminate their accounts. Images are migrated over to Thinkstock from StockXpert and earnings are reported back at StockXpert." People could keep an account if they had one, but new people were directed to Thinkstock. You couldn't upload, but the agency still had contracts and sales reporting.
Eventually Stockxpert was retired and then Thinkstock was ported over to iStock, along with all those agencies that Getty bought and had slid into Thinkstock. One of the reasons for ESP and all our files getting new IDs, with changes in the data fields, was to make the iStock collection, match the fields of the Getty system. Then everything was merged into Getty servers.
A very long and convoluted journey to the current situation of 15%, no levels, for everyone except the exclusive. Meanwhile, Getty owns all that other content and makes 100% on their investments into owning their own massive collection, accumulated from buying agencies.
The idea and usefulness of a forum has become outdated.
-
from their viewpoint there is no reason not to keep reducing payouts :(
Technically SS already have all photos they need. Why would they need a few more photos of sunset or sunrise? I bet they survive even they stop all news uploads.
I am a client an contrbutor, they lack photos from around the world. They haver a lot of the same content and many are just editorial nothing you can use in an ad or post. So if that is what they think then they have no clue as to why its going down hill.
-
from their viewpoint there is no reason not to keep reducing payouts :(
Technically SS already have all photos they need. Why would they need a few more photos of sunset or sunrise? I bet they survive even they stop all news uploads.
I am a client an contrbutor, they lack photos from around the world. They haver a lot of the same content and many are just editorial nothing you can use in an ad or post. So if that is what they think then they have no clue as to why its going down hill.
I think that's a good point.
To my surprise, I sell a lot of pictures from my area, and significantly more than of well-known landmarks.
Our area is not world famous, but there is tourism here and obviously the demand for pictures is there.
To cover the demand for comparable places worldwide, you need a lot of amateur photographers - and they are especially discouraged by Shutterstock.
-
To my surprise, I sell a lot of pictures from my area, and significantly more than of well-known landmarks.
Recently I went to Yellowstone National Park and there is already 106,098 photos from there on SS. What's the point for me to shoot, process, keyword and upload one more photo that no one would able to find.
-
Recently I went to Yellowstone National Park and there is already 106,098 photos from there on SS. What's the point for me to shoot, process, keyword and upload one more photo that no one would able to find.
Well, you never know what will sell. I myself have 1-2 pictures of Antelope canyon and Arches NP, which I sell from time to time. And Route 66 topics - although quite worn out - run actually pretty good. So if I were already there, I would try my luck with Yellowstone Park. For me, that would be more adventure, as the German Lower Rhine area ;)
-
I thought I had a nice shot of Grad Predjama Castle ( http://www.tuin-thijs.com/images/vakantie_slovenia/predjama-castle-2-20-9-2019.jpg (http://www.tuin-thijs.com/images/vakantie_slovenia/predjama-castle-2-20-9-2019.jpg) ) until I looked on Shutterstock https://www.shutterstock.com/nl/search/Grad+Predjama (https://www.shutterstock.com/nl/search/Grad+Predjama) . Then I left it as a holiday photo on my website and did not put it on Shuttestock.
Now it is of course much worse at sunsets photos.
-
i consistently sell images from Mt Rainier & Acadia NP - 2 of the most visited USNP. there's always something new if you look & explore
https://www.shutterstock.com/image-illustration/mount-rainier-fresh-snow-low-clouds-375418753 (https://www.shutterstock.com/image-illustration/mount-rainier-fresh-snow-low-clouds-375418753)
https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/south-face-glaciers-mt-rainier-conifer-315633476 (https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/south-face-glaciers-mt-rainier-conifer-315633476)
https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/purple-lupines-along-rail-fence-on-83265700 (https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/purple-lupines-along-rail-fence-on-83265700)
https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/new-england-red-barn-fence-against-52388620 (https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/new-england-red-barn-fence-against-52388620)
https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/brightly-colored-lobster-traps-harbor-viewmount-12908407 (https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/brightly-colored-lobster-traps-harbor-viewmount-12908407)
and even the most cliched
https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/herring-gull-on-granite-boulderlarus-argentatusschoodic-15111997 (https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/herring-gull-on-granite-boulderlarus-argentatusschoodic-15111997)
-
I thought I had a nice shot of Grad Predjama Castle ( [url]http://www.tuin-thijs.com/images/vakantie_slovenia/predjama-castle-2-20-9-2019.jpg[/url] ([url]http://www.tuin-thijs.com/images/vakantie_slovenia/predjama-castle-2-20-9-2019.jpg[/url]) ) until I looked on Shutterstock [url]https://www.shutterstock.com/nl/search/Grad+Predjama[/url] ([url]https://www.shutterstock.com/nl/search/Grad+Predjama[/url]) . Then I left it as a holiday photo on my website and did not put it on Shuttestock.
Now it is of course much worse at sunsets photos.
Thijs, your picture is perfectly ok. I wouldn't be intimidated by the competition and submit the image - maybe boost the contrast and colors a bit. And stop thinking ;) And sunsets also do not sell badly with me.
https://www.shutterstock.com/de/image-photo/view-on-spectacular-tropical-sunset-vibrant-1842845938 (https://www.shutterstock.com/de/image-photo/view-on-spectacular-tropical-sunset-vibrant-1842845938)
https://www.shutterstock.com/de/image-photo/burning-sky-sea-during-sunset-vibrant-1469193266 (https://www.shutterstock.com/de/image-photo/burning-sky-sea-during-sunset-vibrant-1469193266)
-
I thought I had a nice shot of Grad Predjama Castle ( [url]http://www.tuin-thijs.com/images/vakantie_slovenia/predjama-castle-2-20-9-2019.jpg[/url] ([url]http://www.tuin-thijs.com/images/vakantie_slovenia/predjama-castle-2-20-9-2019.jpg[/url]) ) until I looked on Shutterstock [url]https://www.shutterstock.com/nl/search/Grad+Predjama[/url] ([url]https://www.shutterstock.com/nl/search/Grad+Predjama[/url]) . Then I left it as a holiday photo on my website and did not put it on Shuttestock.
Now it is of course much worse at sunsets photos.
Thijs, your picture is perfectly ok. I wouldn't be intimidated by the competition and submit the image - maybe boost the contrast and colors a bit. And stop thinking ;) And sunsets also do not sell badly with me.
[url]https://www.shutterstock.com/de/image-photo/view-on-spectacular-tropical-sunset-vibrant-1842845938[/url] ([url]https://www.shutterstock.com/de/image-photo/view-on-spectacular-tropical-sunset-vibrant-1842845938[/url])
[url]https://www.shutterstock.com/de/image-photo/burning-sky-sea-during-sunset-vibrant-1469193266[/url] ([url]https://www.shutterstock.com/de/image-photo/burning-sky-sea-during-sunset-vibrant-1469193266[/url])
They are very beautiful sunsets Ralf. Maybe I'll add the castle, although I'm still not expecting too much from it. ;)
-
I left it as a holiday photo on my website and did not put it on Shuttestock.
Now it is of course much worse at sunsets photos.
Keep in mind that you could win the competitors with the correct keywords.
-
I left it as a holiday photo on my website and did not put it on Shuttestock.
Now it is of course much worse at sunsets photos.
Keep in mind that you could win the competitors with the correct keywords.
I know. Doug Jensen used to say that on the Shutterstock forum. :-)
I'm trying my best.
-
I left it as a holiday photo on my website and did not put it on Shuttestock.
Now it is of course much worse at sunsets photos.
Keep in mind that you could win the competitors with the correct keywords.
I don't think the lottery has much to do with the correct keywords - but with luck. Most people tend to use rather too many irrelevant keywords than not enough relevant ones. And, with for example a sunset photo - what would be the "correct" keywords there? What would a customer search for besides "sunset" ? He would possibly narrow it down to "sunset at beach", "sunset at forest", etc... but other than that? I think 95% will just enter "sunset" and go for one of the frst search results.
Now, I think the main factor is really luck - you need to upload an image just at the right time and be lucky that one or preferable more customers are looking for it at the right time and look at the "new" tab before your image gets burried among thousands of newer images with the same keyword. Then it rises to the top of the serach results and newer photos get an additional boost on SS - Some get mixed in with the "most relevant" search for a short amount of time (not sure it's at random, or has something to do with downloads or views as well. Could not figure that one out)
It's not the "right" keywords that get you to the top (or, better said, not "the right keywors alone". Of course, of your image is missing the most obvious keywords, like you only wrote "sun going down" instead of "sunset", you will not raise to the top for the "sunset" keyword), but mostly luck.
I can try to illustrate this with an example of mine: I do many dog costume photos and am doing quite well with them. Last year I wanted to do some photos with my dogs before Christmas in two specific costumes, but it wasn't snowing and didn't really look very Christmasy outsides. So I did these photos somewhere on our walk on the field with some shrubbery in the background. Strangely that image made it to the top of the serach results for "Christmas dog" and is doing really well for me. Later I had the chance to recreate the photo under better circumstances. I actually got to photography my dogs with the same costumes once in snow and once in a Cristmas studio setting. Both are much "better" photos in the sense that they fit the Christmas theme much better than two dogs in front of some green shrubbery. (Technical quality wise they should all be about the same) I used the exact same keywords for these photos, just copying them over. I probably added "snow" to the one and "studio" to the other, but no keywords were removed. If the sucess of the photos depended on the keywords alone, these images should have been found and bought by the customers just as well, or actually better, yet they never did. They might have had 2-3 sales maybe, while the first one literally has hundreds of sales. It was just luck with timing that lead the first photo to be successfull.
It's actually one of the things I find so extremely frustrating about microstock - Luck is too big of a factor, so you can spend lots of time, effort and even money creating a really great photo, but a much worse one (and usually not yours), will get all the downloads because of sheer luck.
-
I left it as a holiday photo on my website and did not put it on Shuttestock.
Now it is of course much worse at sunsets photos.
Keep in mind that you could win the competitors with the correct keywords.
I don't think the lottery has much to do with the correct keywords - but with luck. Most people tend to use rather too many irrelevant keywords than not enough relevant ones. And, with for example a sunset photo - what would be the "correct" keywords there? What would a customer search for besides "sunset" ? He would possibly narrow it down to "sunset at beach", "sunset at forest", etc... but other than that? I think 95% will just enter "sunset" and go for one of the frst search results.
Now, I think the main factor is really luck - you need to upload an image just at the right time and be lucky that one or preferable more customers are looking for it at the right time and look at the "new" tab before your image gets burried among thousands of newer images with the same keyword. Then it rises to the top of the serach results and newer photos get an additional boost on SS - Some get mixed in with the "most relevant" search for a short amount of time (not sure it's at random, or has something to do with downloads or views as well. Could not figure that one out)
It's not the "right" keywords that get you to the top (or, better said, not "the right keywors alone". Of course, of your image is missing the most obvious keywords, like you only wrote "sun going down" instead of "sunset", you will not raise to the top for the "sunset" keyword), but mostly luck.
I can try to illustrate this with an example of mine: I do many dog costume photos and am doing quite well with them. Last year I wanted to do some photos with my dogs before Christmas in two specific costumes, but it wasn't snowing and didn't really look very Christmasy outsides. So I did these photos somewhere on our walk on the field with some shrubbery in the background. Strangely that image made it to the top of the serach results for "Christmas dog" and is doing really well for me. Later I had the chance to recreate the photo under better circumstances. I actually got to photography my dogs with the same costumes once in snow and once in a Cristmas studio setting. Both are much "better" photos in the sense that they fit the Christmas theme much better than two dogs in front of some green shrubbery. (Technical quality wise they should all be about the same) I used the exact same keywords for these photos, just copying them over. I probably added "snow" to the one and "studio" to the other, but no keywords were removed. If the sucess of the photos depended on the keywords alone, these images should have been found and bought by the customers just as well, or actually better, yet they never did. They might have had 2-3 sales maybe, while the first one literally has hundreds of sales. It was just luck with timing that lead the first photo to be successfull.
It's actually one of the things I find so extremely frustrating about microstock - Luck is too big of a factor, so you can spend lots of time, effort and even money creating a really great photo, but a much worse one (and usually not yours), will get all the downloads because of sheer luck.
You're quite right Firn. On the other hand, there are many examples with too few or wrong words. Some insect photos have a lot of wrong names. Or no scientific name at all. When I photograph a seagull, tree, I find out what species it is. I also look for the name of windmills. A customer might just be looking for that windmill.
But you are right, I think very often it is luck if you are at the top with your photo.
Do you remember the thread on the Shutterstock forum, that we were talking about a man who was at the top with almost all of his photos? Which was impossible. I didn't hear anything about it after that.
-
You're quite right Firn. On the other hand, there are many examples with too few or wrong words. Some insect photos have a lot of wrong names. Or no scientific name at all. When I photograph a seagull, tree, I find out what species it is. I also look for the name of windmills. A customer might just be looking for that windmill.
But you are right, I think very often it is luck if you are at the top with your photo.
Do you remember the thread on the Shutterstock forum, that we were talking about a man who was at the top with almost all of his photos? Which was impossible. I didn't hear anything about it after that.
Yes, of course, there are many topics were specific keywords are very important, mostly with animals, including insects, but also with plants and flowers, same as with places. Of course these things must be described accurately.
But there are also a lot of cases where it will not really matter much wether you have 10 or 50 keywords, as long as you have the most relevant and obvious ones. For the photo of mine I was talking about SS shows me the following as keywords that were used the most to find it: christmas, dog, pet, holiday, funny, clothes. Of course I have many other keywords that describe the picture accurately, but no customer really cares that the dogs are "fawn colored" or "small", etc. As you can see from this example, in fact, people didn't even care about the breed. There are certainly images where the breed of a dog is very important, for example when you want to show health issues that are assoicated with a breed, or a customer might need a photo of a certain breed to illustrate an article about an incident with a certain dog, but in the case of Christmas dog costumes, the breed isn't very important. You should still add it of course, but it's not going to be the keyword that makes the image successfull.
Yes, I remember the thread. There was also one about it here, but people weren't really any wiser about it. Oleg is still at the top for all keywords with his photos, so nothing changed about that. It's abslutely obvious to me that something isn't right about it, there is some kind of cheating involved that goes far beyond just using some clever keywords, but Shutterstock doesn't care, so fretting about it won't get us anywhere.
-
"What can I do if my first submission did not get approved?
Tips for understanding rejection reasons and helpful links for new contributors"
Still showing "While you are preparing your next submission you still have full access to all the tools available in your contributor account and resources such as our Contributor Forum"
https://support.submit.shutterstock.com/s/article/What-can-I-do-if-my-first-submission-did-not-get-approved?language=en_US
How moronic can't even sort their own website out ;D ::)
-
"What can I do if my first submission did not get approved?
Tips for understanding rejection reasons and helpful links for new contributors"
Still showing "While you are preparing your next submission you still have full access to all the tools available in your contributor account and resources such as our Contributor Forum"
https://support.submit.shutterstock.com/s/article/What-can-I-do-if-my-first-submission-did-not-get-approved?language=en_US
How moronic can't even sort their own website out ;D ::)
Yep. I find it hard to figure out with SS, whether these sorts of mistakes stem from the fact that they just don't care, or incompetence.
Maybe it's a combination of the two.
-
I left it as a holiday photo on my website and did not put it on Shuttestock.
Now it is of course much worse at sunsets photos.
Keep in mind that you could win the competitors with the correct keywords.
I don't think the lottery has much to do with the correct keywords - but with luck. It was just luck with timing that lead the first photo to be successfull...........
It's actually one of the things I find so extremely frustrating about microstock - Luck is too big of a factor, so you can spend lots of time, effort and even money creating a really great photo, but a much worse one (and usually not yours), will get all the downloads because of sheer luck.
Agree absolutely.
And the thing about 'luck' is that in the past your image stayed on the first page of 'new' for a few days thereby enhancing the 'luck' of finding a buyer who was looking for something they couldn't find in or didn't want to use from 'popular'.
When SS opened the floodgates to contributors by only requiring one good image instead of 7 out of 10, your images in 'new' stayed on page one for a couple of hours instead of days as contributor numbers multiplied by a factor of 20X or 30X and submitted images multiplied by similar factors. In the past your image had a chance if it was good enough to get noticed and bought but now it's more like winning the lottery or being struck by lightning!
The only improvement in that 'luck' can come from a potential buyer seeing 'similar images from same contributor' but first you have to have a successful image that they click on to view and even when you have similar images in your port but submitted later, there's no guarantee that the SS algorithm will show those newer images (that's my experience at least).
-
With the level system its actually in SS's interest to deprioritise the popular images of higher ranked contributors as they get less profit per sale...
-
With the level system its actually in SS's interest to deprioritise the popular images of higher ranked contributors as they get less profit per sale...
'twould be a poor strategy -- they'll make more from 2 sales of a lvl 5 than 1 of a lvl 1 -- no reason to believe lower lvls will outsell higher
-
With 2 images matching all the required search/metadata SS make a lot more profit if the level 1 image is bought vs the level 5.
Simple tweaks like ranking, display order and so on can easily lead the lower images into a position where they're more likely to be bought.
Especially as there may not always be a quality difference.
-
With 2 images matching all the required search/metadata SS make a lot more profit if the level 1 image is bought vs the level 5.
big assumption!
-
With 2 images matching all the required search/metadata SS make a lot more profit if the level 1 image is bought vs the level 5.
Simple tweaks like ranking, display order and so on can easily lead the lower images into a position where they're more likely to be bought.
Especially as there may not always be a quality difference.
This theory can easily be debunked, because we all start out at level 1 in January. If SS tweaked the search algorithm to sell more images from level 1 contributors, everyone would continously sell less and less images when rising in level-
I had noticable more sales last month at level 5 than I had in January.
(Also, the difference in earnings between level 1 and level 5 is highly overrated. Most of my sales are 0.10-0.15$ sales. You get 0.10$ sales at level 1 just as you get them at level 5 and the 0.11, 0.12, 0.13$ etc. sales make only a difference of a 1-3cents maybe. It's not really noticable. My income definitly did not go up in proportion with higher level and higher sale numbers. )
-
Do you remember the thread on the Shutterstock forum, that we were talking about a man who was at the top with almost all of his photos? Which was impossible. I didn't hear anything about it after that.
Yes and I think one of the reasonable answers was he worked on SEO and links and views. That means many posts on social media. There were other people who had high rank that also manipulated the system the same way. But I think the discussion also came down to, so what? His images aren't as good as many others on page one, so he's still not getting sales.
Contrary to one or two people who keep claiming and repeating, reasons why they think SS manipulates the image ranks, the simple answer is, SS has no reason to do that. Kind of like a casino that has all honest games, because they make a percentage of profit on everything, they don't care who wins or loses, as individuals, they only care about the overall profit.
I'll point out that SS makes less money on the level 1 sales, because the commission rate does not pay us 10c a download, so they have to make up that difference. That's a loss, no matter how you try to twist the numbers. Higher levels, artists make the actual rate.
Also it would be counter productive for any agency to force lower quality images to the front, and possibly lose a sale. Does any agency want to hide their best images from buyers? Sounds illogical.
-
But I think the discussion also came down to, so what? His images aren't as good as many others on page one, so he's still not getting sales.
See, that's what I absolutely don't believe. Yes, he most likely is not getting anywhere near as many sales as the other images on the top of the search results, because there is such a big quality difference between his images and the others. But he will still get more sales than he would if his images were on page 5657. I've seen images of poor quality getting way more sales just because they rank high compared to much better images that don't rank anywhere close to the first page just with my port alone. It happens and quite often. Some customers just don't care much about quality, just want "some" image that somehow fits the topic without having to search.
And even if he is getting much less sales compared to the other higher quality images in the top serach results, considering that he managed this with every singel one of his photos and even with the most essential keywords like "beach, dog, man", etc. I think that the sales accumulate to quite a high amount of sales.
Also - regardless of whether he is having sales or not - he is taking away multiple spots on the top search results from other contributors. Spots someone else of us could have, so sales we could have, but don't get. Instead the sales go to (either him or) any other of the images on the first page of the search results. My image could rank 105 because he is unrightfully taking up space on the first page and most customers will not look past page 1 (just like no one ever looks past page 1 of google search results, unless you absolutely can't find what you are looking for on page 1 - but what's the chance someone looking for a random beach image won't find that on page 1?). So everyone of us could be missing out on sales because of him, so yes, of course it is bothering me.
-
I'm not as worried about other peoples placement or their business.
I don't know that he's "taking away" anything from any of us. If a buyer is that stupid that they will buy what's on the top of page one, and never look at page two, well they are missing their own best interests by being that shallow and in a hurry. But to sit around and complain and worry, doesn't accomplish, change or solve anything. Assuming that buyers are stupid is an insult to their values and needs.
If you haven't watched the search webcast from Adobe, which covered some of the buyers habits, please do that. I don't have my notes handy but I remember something about, top of page two gets better downloads, than bottom of page one. How many pages deep the average buyer goes, would be of interest, if I wanted to know. But simply put, we can't control image rank. Not only that, a good search from a buyer is not one or two words, but should include specifics that we have in our images, which means we have a better match.
Putting the word pumpkin, as in the more words are better myth, won't make a sale if the image is of a watermelon. More appropriate and good related words, will help, but not just the number of words.
If someone believes that rank and 50 keywords is what primarily sells their work, I think they are under estimating their own worth and effort. Good images, that illustrate what a buyer wants and needs is what sells licenses. Not tricks or gaming the system.
Read about Long tail keywords, or specific keyword phrases longer in length. They’re more descriptive and provide more clear ideas than single keywords. You will not have as many matches, but when someone uses a specific phrase search, your images will be ranked higher.
-
You might not be, but I am worried about other people's placement if it can have a negative impact on my placement, which then again can lead to me earning less money.
I did not assume buyers were stupid. These are your words. I just said some buyers will not care about whether their image has the best quality or simply illustrates whatever they need a picture of for an article. And on Shutterstock not the best image will be bought, but the one with the best placement.
Yes, complaining and worrying doesn't acomplish anything, yet we do it all the time, because that's part of what forums are for.
We will just have to agree to disagree on this topic, because we see things differently and I don't see this discussion going anywhere.
-
Putting the word pumpkin, as in the more words are better myth, won't make a sale if the image is of a watermelon.
I hope the wrong keywords is the result of copy/paste. I noticed for myself that sometimes I add wrong keywords when I copy/paste keywords from another image. Another example: right now if you search for Paris France by fresh content, there are at least 20 photos of Peugeot car taken in St Petersburg, Russia. It's kind of relate to France, but I bet most buyers that are searching for Paris France are not searching for cars.
-
There's no sanity checking of SS keywords.
A few times over the years i've accidentally incorrectly tagged entire batches due to CSV or copy/paste messes.
Not a single one has ever been rejected for keywords despite literally not a single word being relevant or in any way related to the content.
-
There's no sanity checking of SS keywords.
A few times over the years i've accidentally incorrectly tagged entire batches due to CSV or copy/paste messes.
Not a single one has ever been rejected for keywords despite literally not a single word being relevant or in any way related to the content.
True except foriegn words that aren't.
-
I'm pitching my tent here where they can't get me.
8)
There goes the neighborhood.
-
You might not be, but I am worried about other people's placement if it can have a negative impact on my placement, which then again can lead to me earning less money.
I did not assume buyers were stupid. These are your words. I just said some buyers will not care about whether their image has the best quality or simply illustrates whatever they need a picture of for an article. And on Shutterstock not the best image will be bought, but the one with the best placement.
Yes, complaining and worrying doesn't acomplish anything, yet we do it all the time, because that's part of what forums are for.
We will just have to agree to disagree on this topic, because we see things differently and I don't see this discussion going anywhere.
You worry too much about others and placement while you are insulting buyers saying not the best image will be bought. Write all you want on a forum, that changes nothing but feeding your worry. Is the best image yours or do you get your sales because of placement?
-
You might not be, but I am worried about other people's placement if it can have a negative impact on my placement, which then again can lead to me earning less money.
I did not assume buyers were stupid. These are your words. I just said some buyers will not care about whether their image has the best quality or simply illustrates whatever they need a picture of for an article. And on Shutterstock not the best image will be bought, but the one with the best placement.
Yes, complaining and worrying doesn't acomplish anything, yet we do it all the time, because that's part of what forums are for.
We will just have to agree to disagree on this topic, because we see things differently and I don't see this discussion going anywhere.
You worry too much about others and placement while you are insulting buyers saying not the best image will be bought. Write all you want on a forum, that changes nothing but feeding your worry. Is the best image yours or do you get your sales because of placement?
Not sure where you see me insulting buyers - that's your wrong interpretation, not what I said and certainly not what I meant. I can only repeat what I already wrote 2 times before: Some buyers will not care about whether their image has the best quality, but simply want something that illustrates whatever they need a picture of for an article. That has nothing to do with "stupid". These are your words, not mine.
If I write, for example, an article about puppies being in demand during Corona for a local newspaper, I will just need "a" picture of a puppy. It doesn't have to be a photo with a perfect artistic composition, beautiful atmospheric light, a perfect pose. It just needs to be a freaking puppy. It's time efficiency. Searching for the best quality image of a puppy among hundred thousands of search results when you just need a random puppy image and could just take the first search result, that would be stupid.
I don't get the last question. Yes, I get my sales because of placement. Images that are on the first page of serach results for certain keywords of mine get frequent sales, images of better quality of mine with no placement on the first page get no or rare sales. Some images that have great placement on some agencies get sold hundreds of times, but never sold on other agencies where they don't have a good placement. Selling images on microstock is 90% about good placement. Having images placed on the first page of search results for relevant often searched keywords makes a huge difference in sales.
And, I can say the exact same thing to you: "Write all you want on a forum, that changes nothing." So, why did you make that post, if it "changes nothing"? You don't have any right to tell me what I am allowed to worry about or not. Worry about what worries you, I worry about what worries me and I have the right to express these worries. You are not in a position where you have to worry about scammers and cheaters having an impact on what you earn a living with? Good for you!
-
You might not be, but I am worried about other people's placement if it can have a negative impact on my placement, which then again can lead to me earning less money.
I did not assume buyers were stupid. These are your words. I just said some buyers will not care about whether their image has the best quality or simply illustrates whatever they need a picture of for an article. And on Shutterstock not the best image will be bought, but the one with the best placement.
Yes, complaining and worrying doesn't acomplish anything, yet we do it all the time, because that's part of what forums are for.
We will just have to agree to disagree on this topic, because we see things differently and I don't see this discussion going anywhere.
You worry too much about others and placement while you are insulting buyers saying not the best image will be bought. Write all you want on a forum, that changes nothing but feeding your worry. Is the best image yours or do you get your sales because of placement?
Not sure where you see me insulting buyers - that's your wrong interpretation, not what I said and certainly not what I meant. I can only repeat what I already wrote 2 times before: Some buyers will not care about whether their image has the best quality, but simply want something that illustrates whatever they need a picture of for an article. That has nothing to do with "stupid". These are your words, not mine.
If I write, for example, an article about puppies being in demand during Corona for a local newspaper, I will just need "a" picture of a puppy. It doesn't have to be a photo with a perfect artistic composition, beautiful atmospheric light, a perfect pose. It just needs to be a freaking puppy. It's time efficiency. Searching for the best quality image of a puppy among hundred thousands of search results when you just need a random puppy image and could just take the first search result, that would be stupid.
I don't get the last question. Yes, I get my sales because of placement. Images that are on the first page of serach results for certain keywords of mine get frequent sales, images of better quality of mine with no placement on the first page get no or rare sales. Some images that have great placement on some agencies get sold hundreds of times, but never sold on other agencies where they don't have a good placement. Selling images on microstock is 90% about good placement. Having images placed on the first page of search results for relevant often searched keywords makes a huge difference in sales.
And, I can say the exact same thing to you: "Write all you want on a forum, that changes nothing." So, why did you make that post, if it "changes nothing"? You don't have any right to tell me what I am allowed to worry about or not. Worry about what worries you, I worry about what worries me and I have the right to express these worries. You are not in a position where you have to worry about scammers and cheaters having an impact on what you earn a living with? Good for you!
The whole discussion is my fault because I started it. :) I thought of Olegh because it matched the subject we were talking about.
I couldn't help but search for a few words. Sunset: Who's in the front? Car: Who's in the front? Indeed Olegh. Both photos indicated as high. I didn't look any further this time, but nothing has changed after all these months.
I agree with Firn.
. There's no way you're playing this fair. Then you harm others. Not much if he's the only one using this trick. If there are more that will change.
. Frustrating that Shutterstock isn't doing anything about it. Especially since it's no different with stolen photos.
. If you are in the front and your photo is not very bad, you still have a better chance than someone on page 4 or page 100. (There are also beautiful sunset photos on page 100).
Helps if we talk about it? No, but then you can indeed say nothing about anything and only use the forum for questions. A bit boring.
-
I'm looking on Oleg's sunset photos and he occupies almost all first page by most relevant for sunset. Anyway his photos do not sell where well "Rare gem There’s a lot of interest in this image but it hasn’t been licensed much. Be among the first and start a trend!"
-
You might not be, but I am worried about other people's placement if it can have a negative impact on my placement, which then again can lead to me earning less money.
I did not assume buyers were stupid. These are your words. I just said some buyers will not care about whether their image has the best quality or simply illustrates whatever they need a picture of for an article. And on Shutterstock not the best image will be bought, but the one with the best placement.
Yes, complaining and worrying doesn't acomplish anything, yet we do it all the time, because that's part of what forums are for.
We will just have to agree to disagree on this topic, because we see things differently and I don't see this discussion going anywhere.
You worry too much about others and placement while you are insulting buyers saying not the best image will be bought. Write all you want on a forum, that changes nothing but feeding your worry. Is the best image yours or do you get your sales because of placement?
Not sure where you see me insulting buyers - that's your wrong interpretation, not what I said and certainly not what I meant. I can only repeat what I already wrote 2 times before: Some buyers will not care about whether their image has the best quality, but simply want something that illustrates whatever they need a picture of for an article. That has nothing to do with "stupid". These are your words, not mine.
If I write, for example, an article about puppies being in demand during Corona for a local newspaper, I will just need "a" picture of a puppy. It doesn't have to be a photo with a perfect artistic composition, beautiful atmospheric light, a perfect pose. It just needs to be a freaking puppy. It's time efficiency. Searching for the best quality image of a puppy among hundred thousands of search results when you just need a random puppy image and could just take the first search result, that would be stupid.
I don't get the last question. Yes, I get my sales because of placement. Images that are on the first page of serach results for certain keywords of mine get frequent sales, images of better quality of mine with no placement on the first page get no or rare sales. Some images that have great placement on some agencies get sold hundreds of times, but never sold on other agencies where they don't have a good placement. Selling images on microstock is 90% about good placement. Having images placed on the first page of search results for relevant often searched keywords makes a huge difference in sales.
And, I can say the exact same thing to you: "Write all you want on a forum, that changes nothing." So, why did you make that post, if it "changes nothing"? You don't have any right to tell me what I am allowed to worry about or not. Worry about what worries you, I worry about what worries me and I have the right to express these worries. You are not in a position where you have to worry about scammers and cheaters having an impact on what you earn a living with? Good for you!
The whole discussion is my fault because I started it. :) I thought of Olegh because it matched the subject we were talking about.
I couldn't help but search for a few words. Sunset: Who's in the front? Car: Who's in the front? Indeed Olegh. Both photos indicated as high. I didn't look any further this time, but nothing has changed after all these months.
I agree with Firn.
. There's no way you're playing this fair. Then you harm others. Not much if he's the only one using this trick. If there are more that will change.
. Frustrating that Shutterstock isn't doing anything about it. Especially since it's no different with stolen photos.
. If you are in the front and your photo is not very bad, you still have a better chance than someone on page 4 or page 100. (There are also beautiful sunset photos on page 100).
Helps if we talk about it? No, but then you can indeed say nothing about anything and only use the forum for questions. A bit boring.
If my wife says something, I'll also say: ,,Does it help if you talk about it?" ,,No, keep your mouth shut." I'm afraid I'll get in trouble then. :(
There are a number of people, playing the same tricks as Olegh, maybe you can find a few more? Nope, Microstock and agencies are not fair.
Funny older threads when "Shutterstock changed the search" they get accused of that often, but they have done that in a big way, years ago, was people who ranked on top, King of The Hill style, for years, because they were older, had more downloads or some unfair reason, suddenly got moved back. Boy was there complaining about that. And crying and hand wringing, that it wasn't fair. Of course the people who got moved up, were not the ones complaining? ;D
Or since they changed the search, everyone's images are on higher page numbers. Logically impossible, as for mine to go down a page, someone else has to move up? Right? Some people who dropped, were getting an unfair boost. So maybe us little people should be happy that SS changed the search to make the results more variable and not stagnant. Buyers don't want to see the same images on the first page, every time they look for the same subjects.
Maybe this is all correct and SS doesn't care if Olegh is cheating the system. Or maybe they haven't figured a way to defeat his methods? Google is always a cat and mouse, with SEO and getting a higher placement. G has dropped the page rank, because it just didn't work anymore and was a false indication. People played the system and still do, and G has altered the search to defeat them. Then the same people cry "unfair". ::) Because they can't cheat and get an unfair advantage.
If I knew what Olegh was doing, I'd do it too. So would everyone here, or most of us. And then no one would have an advantage and we'd all be equal again, according to whatever measures SS uses to rank images. I'd be fine with that. Until then, crying about the search for years, is a waste of time. Although if you are right and talking about it, makes someone feel better, OK with me. How many more years do we need to discuss that the search on the agency sites, are not fair? To feel better?
I think everyone agrees this is beyond our control, except titles and keywords, and they just aren't "fair", because we aren't on top, and someone else is. ::)
Is the name actually OlegRi ? I'm not going to help him with a link.
-
I'm looking on Oleg's sunset photos and he occupies almost all first page by most relevant for sunset. Anyway his photos do not sell where well "Rare gem There’s a lot of interest in this image but it hasn’t been licensed much. Be among the first and start a trend!"
I'd really like to see how much he actually sells for a fact. I don't think we do, so it's all a guess. I still contend that being first and worst, isn't as good as being the best and a little down or on page 2. Some of mine are so far down, I don't know how anyone ever found them to download them? And I mean some Sunsets too.
Oh someone did, way back in April:
He has 53 sales on Dreamstime, which is on the normal or even lower side for a portfolio of that.
Now seven months later: 4,256 files and 73 sales
-
You might not be, but I am worried about other people's placement if it can have a negative impact on my placement, which then again can lead to me earning less money.
I did not assume buyers were stupid. These are your words. I just said some buyers will not care about whether their image has the best quality or simply illustrates whatever they need a picture of for an article. And on Shutterstock not the best image will be bought, but the one with the best placement.
Yes, complaining and worrying doesn't acomplish anything, yet we do it all the time, because that's part of what forums are for.
We will just have to agree to disagree on this topic, because we see things differently and I don't see this discussion going anywhere.
You worry too much about others and placement while you are insulting buyers saying not the best image will be bought. Write all you want on a forum, that changes nothing but feeding your worry. Is the best image yours or do you get your sales because of placement?
Not sure where you see me insulting buyers - that's your wrong interpretation, not what I said and certainly not what I meant. I can only repeat what I already wrote 2 times before: Some buyers will not care about whether their image has the best quality, but simply want something that illustrates whatever they need a picture of for an article. That has nothing to do with "stupid". These are your words, not mine.
If I write, for example, an article about puppies being in demand during Corona for a local newspaper, I will just need "a" picture of a puppy. It doesn't have to be a photo with a perfect artistic composition, beautiful atmospheric light, a perfect pose. It just needs to be a freaking puppy. It's time efficiency. Searching for the best quality image of a puppy among hundred thousands of search results when you just need a random puppy image and could just take the first search result, that would be stupid.
I don't get the last question. Yes, I get my sales because of placement. Images that are on the first page of serach results for certain keywords of mine get frequent sales, images of better quality of mine with no placement on the first page get no or rare sales. Some images that have great placement on some agencies get sold hundreds of times, but never sold on other agencies where they don't have a good placement. Selling images on microstock is 90% about good placement. Having images placed on the first page of search results for relevant often searched keywords makes a huge difference in sales.
And, I can say the exact same thing to you: "Write all you want on a forum, that changes nothing." So, why did you make that post, if it "changes nothing"? You don't have any right to tell me what I am allowed to worry about or not. Worry about what worries you, I worry about what worries me and I have the right to express these worries. You are not in a position where you have to worry about scammers and cheaters having an impact on what you earn a living with? Good for you!
The whole discussion is my fault because I started it. :) I thought of Olegh because it matched the subject we were talking about.
I couldn't help but search for a few words. Sunset: Who's in the front? Car: Who's in the front? Indeed Olegh. Both photos indicated as high. I didn't look any further this time, but nothing has changed after all these months.
I agree with Firn.
. There's no way you're playing this fair. Then you harm others. Not much if he's the only one using this trick. If there are more that will change.
. Frustrating that Shutterstock isn't doing anything about it. Especially since it's no different with stolen photos.
. If you are in the front and your photo is not very bad, you still have a better chance than someone on page 4 or page 100. (There are also beautiful sunset photos on page 100).
Helps if we talk about it? No, but then you can indeed say nothing about anything and only use the forum for questions. A bit boring.
If my wife says something, I'll also say: ,,Does it help if you talk about it?" ,,No, keep your mouth shut." I'm afraid I'll get in trouble then. :(
There are a number of people, playing the same tricks as Olegh, maybe you can find a few more? Nope, Microstock and agencies are not fair.
Funny older threads when "Shutterstock changed the search" they get accused of that often, but they have done that in a big way, years ago, was people who ranked on top, King of The Hill style, for years, because they were older, had more downloads or some unfair reason, suddenly got moved back. Boy was there complaining about that. And crying and hand wringing, that it wasn't fair. Of course the people who got moved up, were not the ones complaining? ;D
Or since they changed the search, everyone's images are on higher page numbers. Logically impossible, as for mine to go down a page, someone else has to move up? Right? Some people who dropped, were getting an unfair boost. So maybe us little people should be happy that SS changed the search to make the results more variable and not stagnant. Buyers don't want to see the same images on the first page, every time they look for the same subjects.
Maybe this is all correct and SS doesn't care if Olegh is cheating the system. Or maybe they haven't figured a way to defeat his methods? Google is always a cat and mouse, with SEO and getting a higher placement. G has dropped the page rank, because it just didn't work anymore and was a false indication. People played the system and still do, and G has altered the search to defeat them. Then the same people cry "unfair". ::) Because they can't cheat and get an unfair advantage.
If I knew what Olegh was doing, I'd do it too. So would everyone here, or most of us. And then no one would have an advantage and we'd all be equal again, according to whatever measures SS uses to rank images. I'd be fine with that. Until then, crying about the search for years, is a waste of time. Although if you are right and talking about it, makes someone feel better, OK with me. How many more years do we need to discuss that the search on the agency sites, are not fair? To feel better?
I think everyone agrees this is beyond our control, except titles and keywords, and they just aren't "fair", because we aren't on top, and someone else is. ::)
Is the name actually OlegRi ? I'm not going to help him with a link.
I think you waste more time on this topic than I do Pete. ;D
I'm not talking about the unfairness of Microsfock's system. It is impossible to invent a system that is completely fair to everyone. I have no problem with that.
I'm talking about Olegh's dishonesty. If I knew how he does it, I wouldn't imitate it. I don't really like cheating.
But I'll stop, otherwise I'll repeat myself and that is indeed a waste of my/your time. :)
-
I think you waste more time on this topic than I do Pete. ;D
I'm not talking about the unfairness of Microsfock's system. It is impossible to invent a system that is completely fair to everyone. I have no problem with that.
I'm talking about Olegh's dishonesty. If I knew how he does it, I wouldn't imitate it. I don't really like cheating.
But I'll stop, otherwise I'll repeat myself and that is indeed a waste of my/your time. :)
Because I'm a professional time waster? ;)
Just one note, before anyone else gets led down the name game, He's actually Olegs Petuhovs from Riga, Latvia
-
I don't understand why people waste their time with this stuff.
It's not like we have any power to change things.
God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, Courage to change the things I can, and Wisdom to know the difference.
Just upload some files, you will feel better in the morning.
-
Putting the word pumpkin, as in the more words are better myth, won't make a sale if the image is of a watermelon.
I hope the wrong keywords is the result of copy/paste. I noticed for myself that sometimes I add wrong keywords when I copy/paste keywords from another image. Another example: right now if you search for Paris France by fresh content, there are at least 20 photos of Peugeot car taken in St Petersburg, Russia. It's kind of relate to France, but I bet most buyers that are searching for Paris France are not searching for cars.
That wasn't the point. Some people intentionally add words that don't apply or are not the main subject or content, because they think a buyer (once again) is stupid, and will come to buy a pumpkin but after seeing a watermelon will change their mind and download the spammed image.
Yes of course, I just had to correct some of mine that I did six various images, one had a man in it, the rest did not, and the word man and gentleman, were in all of them. Yes sometimes copy and paste, an errant word will get included. I'm speaking of the "Must have 50 works" club and the "More words = more sales" myth.
More good words, means more sales. More appropriate and related words, means more sales.
God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, Courage to change the things I can, and Wisdom to know the difference.
I think I've posted that far too many times and on the old SS forum. ;D
Like where are my images used? Well I lost that worry years ago. We don't have control after the fact. I got a slew of uploads yesterday, all the same subject, and I figure someone is collecting to re-use them. What can I do? I probably won't know and how much time do I waste looking for them? None anymore. We take a photo, we upload and it's off on it's own, into the wild.
Six months of people worrying about a guy named Oleg? I know, lets have a moratorium and in January we can start again. Right along with the reset betrayal, 10c downloads and crappy AI rejections that make no sense.
(https://i.postimg.cc/CLxs22Vg/beatdeadhorse.gif)
Of course, during that time, some other agencies will do something stupid enough that we'll have no lack of things to discuss that are more current. Hey maybe SS will join the shared revenue festival of popular ways to pay contributors less.
-
Just upload some files, you will feel better in the morning.
and in the morning they will be rejected :(
-
I don't understand why people waste their time with this stuff.
It's not like we have any power to change things.
God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, Courage to change the things I can, and Wisdom to know the difference.
Just upload some files, you will feel better in the morning.
Each time the topic seems closed.
Then someone comes with the comment that he doesn't understand what someone is worried about. After which there will be of course an explanation as to why you can still worry about it.
The never ending story. ;D
-
I don't understand why people waste their time with this stuff.
It's not like we have any power to change things.
God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, Courage to change the things I can, and Wisdom to know the difference.
Just upload some files, you will feel better in the morning.
Each time the topic seems closed.
Then someone comes with the comment that he doesn't understand what someone is worried about. After which there will be of course an explanation as to why you can still worry about it.
The never ending story. ;D
I am pretty certain that someone wisely advised you to pray for wisdom and be worried only about things it's worth being worried about. :P
-
I don't understand why people waste their time with this stuff.
It's not like we have any power to change things.
God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, Courage to change the things I can, and Wisdom to know the difference.
Just upload some files, you will feel better in the morning.
Love the new name! And one of my favourite quotes too.
-
Thank you Annie. I thought it appropriate for the Shutterstock Refugee thread.
I've actually gone back to upload, upload, upload but with some real adjustments.
I have a new goal and commitment but I'm not making it public because I don't want
people's heads to explode, like last time.
-
Each time the topic seems closed.
Then someone comes with the comment that he doesn't understand what someone is worried about. After which there will be of course an explanation as to why you can still worry about it.
The never ending story. ;D
Yeah, that happens in the larger forums.
-
Thank you Annie. I thought it appropriate for the Shutterstock Refugee thread.
I've actually gone back to upload, upload, upload but with some real adjustments.
I have a new goal and commitment but I'm not making it public because I don't want
people's heads to explode, like last time.
LOL
I am also laughing at the fact that everyone's here now! All together again in one spot. They thought they got rid of some - but they're baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaack!
;D
Maybe we should start another best mates club. (just kidding) You know the 'best mates' part was supposed to be a joke - Mirco trying to get opposing sides to reconcile. Or maybe to just provide some entertainment. lol)
-
Yeah, Mirco is a nice guy. He was always trying to bring peace to the valley.
One of the truly nice carry overs from SS.
I'm in low profile mode, I have no intention of having round two with the SS forum denizens of the past.
I'd rather start a "This is what makes me money thread" but I really don't have the time.
Take care,
Upload, upload, upload!
-
Thank you Annie. I thought it appropriate for the Shutterstock Refugee thread.
I've actually gone back to upload, upload, upload but with some real adjustments.
I have a new goal and commitment but I'm not making it public because I don't want
people's heads to explode, like last time.
(https://i.postimg.cc/gkvGPgbk/brain-exploding-300-web.jpg) (https://i.postimg.cc/tRFt4dt9/thumb_up_40_color.gif)
-
(https://i.postimg.cc/257BVtNK/48897152-s.jpg)
KABOOM!
Hahahahah! Yeah, good one.
-
Just upload some files, you will feel better in the morning.
and in the morning they will be rejected :(
Yep, and you will feel even worse than yesterday... :D :-\
-
Very late to the party here but please count me in as another refugee. SS is a shell of what it once was. Long, long ago I was actually proud to be associated with them. I haven't felt that way in years. They foist more and more nonsense on us and continuously insult our intelligence. The forum announcement is just one prime example.
In any case, stay strong and best wishes to all.
-
Very late to the party here but please count me in as another refugee. SS is a shell of what it once was. Long, long ago I was actually proud to be associated with them. I haven't felt that way in years. They foist more and more nonsense on us and continuously insult our intelligence. The forum announcement is just one prime example.
In any case, stay strong and best wishes to all.
You are welcome here too!
-
Very late to the party here but please count me in as another refugee. SS is a shell of what it once was. Long, long ago I was actually proud to be associated with them. I haven't felt that way in years. They foist more and more nonsense on us and continuously insult our intelligence. The forum announcement is just one prime example.
In any case, stay strong and best wishes to all.
Yep. Sstock could run a master class in how to alienate your suppliers.
-
Very late to the party here but please count me in as another refugee. SS is a shell of what it once was. Long, long ago I was actually proud to be associated with them. I haven't felt that way in years. They foist more and more nonsense on us and continuously insult our intelligence. The forum announcement is just one prime example.
In any case, stay strong and best wishes to all.
Welcome (said the newbe to the even newer newbe ;D )
Getting used to missing the Shutterstock forum. I notice that I am no longer mindlessly looking for the link to the forum, as in the beginning.
-
Very late to the party here but please count me in as another refugee. SS is a shell of what it once was. Long, long ago I was actually proud to be associated with them. I haven't felt that way in years. They foist more and more nonsense on us and continuously insult our intelligence. The forum announcement is just one prime example.
In any case, stay strong and best wishes to all.
Yep. Sstock could run a master class in how to alienate your suppliers.
They've managed to alienate a great many participants on this forum, some of us a lot earlier than others.
Inevitably, it seems to happen… except perhaps to the factory-production outfits who get most-favored-contributor treatment.
-
Getting used to missing the Shutterstock forum. I notice that I am no longer mindlessly looking for the link to the forum, as in the beginning.
Hey, celebrate that measurable progress. :D
-
Very late to the party here but please count me in as another refugee. SS is a shell of what it once was. Long, long ago I was actually proud to be associated with them. I haven't felt that way in years. They foist more and more nonsense on us and continuously insult our intelligence. The forum announcement is just one prime example.
In any case, stay strong and best wishes to all.
Yep. Sstock could run a master class in how to alienate your suppliers.
They've managed to alienate a great many participants on this forum, some of us a lot earlier than others.
Inevitably, it seems to happen… except perhaps to the factory-production outfits who get most-favored-contributor treatment.
Yes, I was reading this forum all through the 'boycott Shutterstock' campaign, including on Twitter.
I did/do really admire everyone here who 'voted with their feet'...
-
Very late to the party here but please count me in as another refugee. SS is a shell of what it once was. Long, long ago I was actually proud to be associated with them. I haven't felt that way in years. They foist more and more nonsense on us and continuously insult our intelligence. The forum announcement is just one prime example.
In any case, stay strong and best wishes to all.
Yep. Sstock could run a master class in how to alienate your suppliers.
They've managed to alienate a great many participants on this forum, some of us a lot earlier than others.
Inevitably, it seems to happen… except perhaps to the factory-production outfits who get most-favored-contributor treatment.
They will also get hit, factories need more money to run than most of people... Revenues are going down for them too.
-
Very late to the party here but please count me in as another refugee. SS is a shell of what it once was. Long, long ago I was actually proud to be associated with them. I haven't felt that way in years. They foist more and more nonsense on us and continuously insult our intelligence. The forum announcement is just one prime example.
In any case, stay strong and best wishes to all.
Yep. Sstock could run a master class in how to alienate your suppliers.
They've managed to alienate a great many participants on this forum, some of us a lot earlier than others.
Inevitably, it seems to happen… except perhaps to the factory-production outfits who get most-favored-contributor treatment.
They will also get hit, factories need more money to run than most of people... Revenues are going down for them too.
Hard to know whether to laugh or cry! ;D :'(
-
shutterstock no longer has the capacity to maintain the forum. It's all the more amazing how often they ask me to participate in the contributor survey. I get it at least once a week.
After months I uploaded an image again. It was rejected because of noise. With all other agencies the problem did not exist. But I don't care. If they don't want it, they don't want it. I do not make a second attempt.
-
shutterstock no longer has the capacity to maintain the forum. It's all the more amazing how often they ask me to participate in the contributor survey. I get it at least once a week.
After months I uploaded an image again. It was rejected because of noise. With all other agencies the problem did not exist. But I don't care. If they don't want it, they don't want it. I do not make a second attempt.
The image has just sold at Adobe Stock. Fine!
-
I noticed that SS's last '5 Tips for creating stock photography that sells' showed (exclusively) examples from 'Image Source' on Offset.
Is this some re-branding of Offset because I've not seen them use 'Image Source' on Offset before? I have to say that I don't usually pay attention to these 'How to create' messages from SS. I wonder how many contributors they can fool into submitting 'Offset-type' photos including model/property releases for 10 cent dls in (non-Offset)SS?
-
The image has just sold at Adobe Stock. Fine!
Congratulations! I'm not at all surprised that your image sold on AS. It happens!
To me, iStock seemed "essential," until it wasn't. I left there in 2011 and never regretted it.
Then SS seemed "essential," but I left there in 2020. No regrets to this day.
Right now, AS seems like my "essential" agency — the one that regularly sells my work and treats its contributors well — and I hope that situation never changes. But if the time ever comes when it starts screwing contributors the way iS and SS have done, I will leave there too.
-
Wow! I had not been on the SS forum for a while, but still had it bookmarked. I just tried to follow that bookmark and found it was gone. I am not really surprised it is gone. There was really nothing left to be said. Everyone knew that SS had decided to screw its contributors, so it was just a pitty party of people sitting around and talking about how bad it was to be screwed. I was right in the with the rest. I have not uploaded to SS since the day they implemented the new stair step policy level base commission ratios. I have been uploading exclusively to AS. But, due to SS undercutting the prices, I only sell very little on AS.
Oh well. Happy selling everyone.
-
Wow! I had not been on the SS forum for a while, but still had it bookmarked. I just tried to follow that bookmark and found it was gone. I am not really surprised it is gone. There was really nothing left to be said. Everyone knew that SS had decided to screw its contributors, so it was just a pitty party of people sitting around and talking about how bad it was to be screwed. I was right in the with the rest. I have not uploaded to SS since the day they implemented the new stair step policy level base commission ratios. I have been uploading exclusively to AS. But, due to SS undercutting the prices, I only sell very little on AS.
Oh well. Happy selling everyone.
As you missed it, here's a screenshot of the apparent 'reason' why they deleted the forum.
Happy reading ;D
-
Just in time since the cliff dive at the year end is almost here
-
shutterstock no longer has the capacity to maintain the forum. It's all the more amazing how often they ask me to participate in the contributor survey. I get it at least once a week.
After months I uploaded an image again. It was rejected because of noise. With all other agencies the problem did not exist. But I don't care. If they don't want it, they don't want it. I do not make a second attempt.
I saw an ss blog and an example for noise they gave in a photo was the factory ceiling at 100% but I can't see it. https://www.shutterstock.com/blog/how-to-avoid-a-visual-noise-rejection (https://www.shutterstock.com/blog/how-to-avoid-a-visual-noise-rejection)
There may be color noise but I'm not sure. The other examples are easy to see though. I had to start shooting in RAW to get rid of this color noise but SS still rejected some of my pics for another type of noise or grain especially ones with trees or foliage. The same pics were accepted on adobe and they are pretty strict in what they accept.
-
shutterstock no longer has the capacity to maintain the forum. It's all the more amazing how often they ask me to participate in the contributor survey. I get it at least once a week.
After months I uploaded an image again. It was rejected because of noise. With all other agencies the problem did not exist. But I don't care. If they don't want it, they don't want it. I do not make a second attempt.
I saw an ss blog and an example for noise they gave in a photo was the factory ceiling at 100% but I can't see it. https://www.shutterstock.com/blog/how-to-avoid-a-visual-noise-rejection (https://www.shutterstock.com/blog/how-to-avoid-a-visual-noise-rejection)
There may be color noise but I'm not sure. The other examples are easy to see though. I had to start shooting in RAW to get rid of this color noise but SS still rejected some of my pics for another type of noise or grain especially ones with trees or foliage. The same pics were accepted on adobe and they are pretty strict in what they accept.
They should be so fussy for 10 cents ;D what a joke.
Their quality rules are really all over the place judging by most of the poorly lit and poorly framed junk they take these days.
-
I saw an ss blog and an example for noise they gave in a photo was the factory ceiling at 100% but I can't see it. https://www.shutterstock.com/blog/how-to-avoid-a-visual-noise-rejection (https://www.shutterstock.com/blog/how-to-avoid-a-visual-noise-rejection)
There may be color noise but I'm not sure. The other examples are easy to see though. I had to start shooting in RAW to get rid of this color noise but SS still rejected some of my pics for another type of noise or grain especially ones with trees or foliage. The same pics were accepted on adobe and they are pretty strict in what they accept.
They should be so fussy for 10 cents ;D what a joke.
Their quality rules are really all over the place judging by most of the poorly lit and poorly framed junk they take these days.
+ + + + + + + + + +
I don't care much when they reject an image, that Adobe and DT both accepted. For a dime? And I couldn't understand the blurred random backgrounds that get through for years, which are just random noise? But then they do reject a blurred background that has composition and a subject and copy space! ::)
I couldn't care less, or is it I could care less? ;) (for those who care more about which way someone says it) Merriam-Webster treats the phrases couldn't care less and could care less as synonymous Like when I make toast that has sugar and synonymous sprinkled on it.
-
....
I couldn't care less, or is it I could care less? ;) (for those who care more about which way someone says it) Merriam-Webster treats the phrases couldn't care less and could care less as synonymous Like when I make toast that has sugar and synonymous sprinkled on it.
flammable vs inflammable
regardless vs Irregardless
-
shutterstock no longer has the capacity to maintain the forum. It's all the more amazing how often they ask me to participate in the contributor survey. I get it at least once a week.
After months I uploaded an image again. It was rejected because of noise. With all other agencies the problem did not exist. But I don't care. If they don't want it, they don't want it. I do not make a second attempt.
I saw an ss blog and an example for noise they gave in a photo was the factory ceiling at 100% but I can't see it. https://www.shutterstock.com/blog/how-to-avoid-a-visual-noise-rejection (https://www.shutterstock.com/blog/how-to-avoid-a-visual-noise-rejection)
There may be color noise but I'm not sure. The other examples are easy to see though. I had to start shooting in RAW to get rid of this color noise but SS still rejected some of my pics for another type of noise or grain especially ones with trees or foliage. The same pics were accepted on adobe and they are pretty strict in what they accept.
I shoot RAW exclusively.
And again, I don't care if shutterstock wants the image or not. I don't invest More time for 10 cents. Not even the minute I need for a new upload.
In the short term, that may be wrong. In the medium term, shutterstock only harms itself with its new revenue structure and great AI for selection. My motivation regarding shutterstock is meanwhile - unfortunately - at zero. Just a few years ago I would never have written this.
-
....
I couldn't care less, or is it I could care less? ;) (for those who care more about which way someone says it) Merriam-Webster treats the phrases couldn't care less and could care less as synonymous Like when I make toast that has sugar and synonymous sprinkled on it.
flammable vs inflammable
regardless vs Irregardless
As aggravating as it can be, the dictionary doesn't act as authority to define words, and correct spellings, it only reflects the usage and accepted spellings that are common.
Since some people are extremely limited (I'm trying to be nice?) so definitions change and words acquire lateral, limited or new meanings. Take for example the word NICE?
"From the Anglo-Norman language to classical Latin to English, the word ”nice” used to refer to someone ”ignorant” from the Latin word ”nescius.” Starting from the 1300s up to the 1600s the meaning was the same – ignorant, foolish or silly. But during the same period, nice took on different meanings, from being dissolute, wanton, cowardly, effeminate, lazy, intricate, sluggish, refined to elegant.
In the 16th century the meanings changed to sharp, attentive, meticulous. When the 18th century arrived, the meanings lost much of its prestige; it gained the meaning we use today, such as pleasant or agreeable."
Which nice and I trying to be?
-
....
I couldn't care less, or is it I could care less? ;) (for those who care more about which way someone says it) Merriam-Webster treats the phrases couldn't care less and could care less as synonymous Like when I make toast that has sugar and synonymous sprinkled on it.
flammable vs inflammable
regardless vs Irregardless
As aggravating as it can be, the dictionary doesn't act as authority to define words, and correct spellings, it only reflects the usage and accepted spellings that are common.
Since some people are extremely limited (I'm trying to be nice?) so definitions change and words acquire lateral, limited or new meanings. Take for example the word NICE?
"From the Anglo-Norman language to classical Latin to English, the word ”nice” used to refer to someone ”ignorant” from the Latin word ”nescius.” Starting from the 1300s up to the 1600s the meaning was the same – ignorant, foolish or silly. But during the same period, nice took on different meanings, from being dissolute, wanton, cowardly, effeminate, lazy, intricate, sluggish, refined to elegant.
In the 16th century the meanings changed to sharp, attentive, meticulous. When the 18th century arrived, the meanings lost much of its prestige; it gained the meaning we use today, such as pleasant or agreeable."
Which nice and I trying to be?
i've been reading books by John McWhorter & his NYTimes column and he often delves into origins - some fascinating journeys - esp'ly 'words on the move', '9 nasty words' & 'talking back / talking black'
-
....
I couldn't care less, or is it I could care less? ;) (for those who care more about which way someone says it) Merriam-Webster treats the phrases couldn't care less and could care less as synonymous Like when I make toast that has sugar and synonymous sprinkled on it.
flammable vs inflammable
regardless vs Irregardless
As aggravating as it can be, the dictionary doesn't act as authority to define words, and correct spellings, it only reflects the usage and accepted spellings that are common.
Since some people are extremely limited (I'm trying to be nice?) so definitions change and words acquire lateral, limited or new meanings. Take for example the word NICE?
"From the Anglo-Norman language to classical Latin to English, the word ”nice” used to refer to someone ”ignorant” from the Latin word ”nescius.” Starting from the 1300s up to the 1600s the meaning was the same – ignorant, foolish or silly. But during the same period, nice took on different meanings, from being dissolute, wanton, cowardly, effeminate, lazy, intricate, sluggish, refined to elegant.
In the 16th century the meanings changed to sharp, attentive, meticulous. When the 18th century arrived, the meanings lost much of its prestige; it gained the meaning we use today, such as pleasant or agreeable."
Which nice and I trying to be?
Don't be "silly", Pete. ;)
"Silly" meant "holly" or "blessed", in old germanic.
Then silly became synonym with happy (meaning preserved by its equivalent in today's German and Dutch)
Then silly became a synonym for innocent or harmless.
Then silly became an adjective for something or someone worthy of sympathy.
But something we feel sympathy for is something that’s weak.
From weak it became naive.
Then finally, from naive it went on to become ignorant and lacking sense.
So "silly" had a different meaning, when "nice" had a different meaning. ;)
-
....
I couldn't care less, or is it I could care less? ;) (for those who care more about which way someone says it) Merriam-Webster treats the phrases couldn't care less and could care less as synonymous Like when I make toast that has sugar and synonymous sprinkled on it.
flammable vs inflammable
regardless vs Irregardless
As aggravating as it can be, the dictionary doesn't act as authority to define words, and correct spellings, it only reflects the usage and accepted spellings that are common.
Since some people are extremely limited (I'm trying to be nice?) so definitions change and words acquire lateral, limited or new meanings. Take for example the word NICE?
"From the Anglo-Norman language to classical Latin to English, the word ”nice” used to refer to someone ”ignorant” from the Latin word ”nescius.” Starting from the 1300s up to the 1600s the meaning was the same – ignorant, foolish or silly. But during the same period, nice took on different meanings, from being dissolute, wanton, cowardly, effeminate, lazy, intricate, sluggish, refined to elegant.
In the 16th century the meanings changed to sharp, attentive, meticulous. When the 18th century arrived, the meanings lost much of its prestige; it gained the meaning we use today, such as pleasant or agreeable."
Which nice and I trying to be?
'Nice' actually still has two meanings.
The second meaning is 'slight, subtle' as in 'a nice distinction'.
Do languages other than English have as many single words with different meanings, I wonder?
-
....
I couldn't care less, or is it I could care less? ;) (for those who care more about which way someone says it) Merriam-Webster treats the phrases couldn't care less and could care less as synonymous Like when I make toast that has sugar and synonymous sprinkled on it.
flammable vs inflammable
regardless vs Irregardless
As aggravating as it can be, the dictionary doesn't act as authority to define words, and correct spellings, it only reflects the usage and accepted spellings that are common.
Since some people are extremely limited (I'm trying to be nice?) so definitions change and words acquire lateral, limited or new meanings. Take for example the word NICE?
"From the Anglo-Norman language to classical Latin to English, the word ”nice” used to refer to someone ”ignorant” from the Latin word ”nescius.” Starting from the 1300s up to the 1600s the meaning was the same – ignorant, foolish or silly. But during the same period, nice took on different meanings, from being dissolute, wanton, cowardly, effeminate, lazy, intricate, sluggish, refined to elegant.
In the 16th century the meanings changed to sharp, attentive, meticulous. When the 18th century arrived, the meanings lost much of its prestige; it gained the meaning we use today, such as pleasant or agreeable."
Which nice and I trying to be?
'Nice' actually still has two meanings.
The second meaning is 'slight, subtle' as in 'a nice distinction'.
Do languages other than English have as many single words with different meanings, I wonder?
Dutch:
Two examples with a changed meaning and an example where the meaning of the past is still used in a part of the country.
There are many Dutch words with different meanings.
Dutch: Rakker
Rakker: Mischievous person, someone who allows himself to be bold.
250 years ago, a 'rakker' was like a police officer.
Leuk.
A 'leuk' person: A nice person.
200 years ago: A 'leuk' person = an indifferent, cold person.
Schoon:
Schoon: beautiful, laudable (especially in Belgium (Flanders and Limburg) This meaning already known in 900
Schoon: neat, clean, clean, environmentally friendly (especially in the Netherlands)
-
French has many
https://www.madbeppo.com/french-language/french-words-of-two-meanings (https://www.madbeppo.com/french-language/french-words-of-two-meanings)
-
https://ideas.ted.com/20-words-that-once-meant-something-very-different/
PS. They also make that temporal error, saying that "nice" once meant "silly". It was never the case. ;)
-
https://ideas.ted.com/20-words-that-once-meant-something-very-different/
PS. They also make that temporal error, saying that "nice" once meant "silly". It was never the case. ;)
Well isn't this all Terrific? "The root of terrific is terror, and it first meant terror-inducing."
Like how errors on the Internet get repeated until they get copied and taken as facts. I was looking for the secret to McDonald's breakfast sauce. (OK too much time on my hands?) And I started to search. One site after another had some strange version, that had odd ingredients, listed exactly the same way and order. I mean, it was a clear miss!
If you ever had the Breakfast Bagel that's where you would find it, unless you special order it on your egg McMuffin like we did. Breakfast bagels are off the menu, there's no more sauce. Dead issue.
Wasn't all that difficult, I looked on the McDonald's site for ingredients and nutrition and found enough to guess what the real combination was. But back then, any search using Google or Bing would bring up the many wrong answer sites, that all used, the same wrong source, because each of them, didn't do research, they just searched and copied.
Yup, the infinite echo chamber of disinformation.
ps it's nothing but a cheap home made version of Hollandaise sauce. Here's mine.
3 parts Mayonnaise, 1 part Dijon Mustard. Plus these Spices: Add to taste - Dill, Salt, Pepper, Buttermilk Powder, Natural Smoke Flavor.
A ThinkStock of Lemon juice, pinch of Turmeric, pinch of Cayenne Pepper if you like that.
Or just buy some Hollandaise sauce. Not Rocket Science.
-
Interesting:
'Working with its growing community of over 1.9 million contributors, Shutterstock adds hundreds of thousands of images each week, and currently has more than 390 million images and more than 23 million video clips available'.
https://investor.shutterstock.com/news-releases/news-release-details/shutterstock-report-fourth-quarter-2021-earnings-results
-
Interesting:
'Working with its growing community of over 1.9 million contributors, Shutterstock adds hundreds of thousands of images each week, and currently has more than 390 million images and more than 23 million video clips available'.
https://investor.shutterstock.com/news-releases/news-release-details/shutterstock-report-fourth-quarter-2021-earnings-results (https://investor.shutterstock.com/news-releases/news-release-details/shutterstock-report-fourth-quarter-2021-earnings-results)
Fluff. If they have 1.9 million contributors, I'd want to know, how many have at least one file accepted, how many haven't uploaded anything new in eight years. How many closed their accounts since 2020?
There's a long back and forth discussing how many contributors and based on account numbers, back the first days of January. We'll never know. But my view is, having 1.9 million people sign up is a far cry from how many are active or ever did anything past, creating an account.
To me a contributor is someone who has actually contributed. There are not 1.9 million.
Just a bunch of numbers. https://www.microstockgroup.com/shutterstock-com/looking-back-at-ss-a-brief-history/ (https://www.microstockgroup.com/shutterstock-com/looking-back-at-ss-a-brief-history/)
-
This thread's diversion into the "Isn't it interesting how words change their meanings?" topic has reminded me of several that I've seen that happen to in my increasingly long life.
For example, in 1942, a book named "Our Hearts Were Young and Gay" was published in the US. In 1946 (the year I was born), it was made into a movie. By the time I was in high school and old enough to read such books, the word "gay" had taken on an entirely different meaning.
Or take, as another example, the word "queer." I remember with considerable chagrin the week in January 1960 when my family moved from the suburbs of Washington DC to Texas. I had been an avid reader for years and so had a pretty darn good vocabuary for my age.
On my second day in this new-to-me junior high school, the English teacher read aloud a passage from some book that contained the word "peculiar." She paused, peered out over her glasses, and asked: "Class, does anybody know what 'peculiar' means?" Nobody else in the room raised their hand. But I did know what "peculiar" meant so, very timidly, I raised mine. "It means 'odd' or 'queer'," I said.
The best way I can describe what happened next is this: The already-overweight teacher puffed up like an offended toad, pushed her glasses onto the top of her head, and croaked: "Martha!!!! WE don't use WORDS like THAT around HERE!!!!"
I remember thinking, Words like what? But I kept my mouth shut for another whole week, afraid of making some similar mistake again.
Of course, I was right, because words like "gay" and "queer" had completely different — and "straight" — meanings even as recently as the first half of the 20th Century.
-
duplicate
-
in the 60's we used queer as a synonym for freak (itself an adoption from carny-speak) self-describing someone in the counterculture
other 'recent' changes:
'computers' in the 40s were women who worked as analysts in decoding
'ghetto' was expanded to 'urban ghetto' and shortened back to 'ghetto' but with a different population
'ripoff' originally meant to kill someone (usually a 'pig')
'chauvinism' was a relation among countries, so 'male chauvinism' in the 60's originally played on that (we also coined carbon chauvinism to describe a rejection of considering other lifeforms)
'holocaust' went from a generic meaning to a very specific one
-
in the 60's we used queer as a synonym for freak (itself an adoption from carny-speak) self-describing someone in the counterculture
other 'recent' changes:
'computers' in the 40s were women who worked as analysts in decoding
'ghetto' was expanded to 'urban ghetto' and shortened back to 'ghetto' but with a different population
'ripoff' originally meant to kill someone (usually a 'pig')
'chauvinism' was a relation among countries, so 'male chauvinism' in the 60's originally played on that (we also coined carbon chauvinism to describe a rejection of considering other lifeforms)
'holocaust' went from a generic meaning to a very specific one
That's all very interesting, Steve. I just learned a few things from you. Thanks!
-
I am reading Agatha Christie novels at present and your words, Martha, come up time and again, in their original context.
-
I am reading Agatha Christie novels at present and your words, Martha, come up time and again, in their original context.
Yes, they would, because Dame Agatha was writing back in the time when "those words" didn't mean what they do today.
-
in the 60's we used queer as a synonym for freak (itself an adoption from carny-speak) self-describing someone in the counterculture
other 'recent' changes:
'computers' in the 40s were women who worked as analysts in decoding
'ghetto' was expanded to 'urban ghetto' and shortened back to 'ghetto' but with a different population
'ripoff' originally meant to kill someone (usually a 'pig')
'chauvinism' was a relation among countries, so 'male chauvinism' in the 60's originally played on that (we also coined carbon chauvinism to describe a rejection of considering other lifeforms)
'holocaust' went from a generic meaning to a very specific one
That's all very interesting, Steve. I just learned a few things from you. Thanks!
the linguist John McWhorter covers these topics, esp'ly words on the move & the language hoax
-
I had to laugh at Martha's school experience. ;D
Dope was a stupid person. Later it was Heroin. But in the hippie era, it was marijuana. They dope horses to alter their performance. When I was a kid, Dope was paint for cloth sealing on model kits. And I don't know how long, but the straight dope was inside information. Now Dope is something good... I guess if someone was looking for a word with many confusing and different meaning, that might be one?
But of course we can just blame the Dutch. (In any case where we can't blame Canada, an ethnic group or minority group, how do the Dutch get attributed with these odd definitions so often?)
Dope comes from the Dutch doop, meaning “thick sauce” and used for various types of gravy in English in the early 1800s.
Well if that isn't the best gravy, it's really dope! ;)
-
I had to laugh at Martha's school experience. ;D
Dope was a stupid person. Later it was Heroin. But in the hippie era, it was marijuana. They dope horses to alter their performance. When I was a kid, Dope was paint for cloth sealing on model kits. And I don't know how long, but the straight dope was inside information. Now Dope is something good... I guess if someone was looking for a word with many confusing and different meaning, that might be one?
But of course we can just blame the Dutch. (In any case where we can't blame Canada, an ethnic group or minority group, how do the Dutch get attributed with these odd definitions so often?)
Dope comes from the Dutch doop, meaning “thick sauce” and used for various types of gravy in English in the early 1800s.
Well if that isn't the best gravy, it's really dope! ;)
"Disgusting". It actually begins to mean "very good".
"This player is so good, it's disgusting!" ;)
-
'dope' is a contender but there's also 'cool', 'bad' & 'wicked' -- all part of a natural tendency to create a group specific slang & sometimes the slang leaks out to mainstream
then there's 'awful'
-
Hardly anyone uses the SS forum. It's the same few posters all the time so I can understand why SS doesn't want to spend money on it. If SS was upset by criticism they would have closed it down long ago.
Anyway, we always have this forum to fall back on. Maybe the demise of the SS one will breathe some life into this.
The SS forum is quiet because they purged all the active and experienced members a while back. They cut the heart out so it was bound to die. I'm surprised it didn't happen sooner though.
I'm guessing a lot will migrate over here, me being one of them! Been a member for years but not really used it. May be that will change now :D
You saw the future and those who were worried that the SS trolls would ruin this forum, were right. Now we have millionaires and a group that claims to have sources who make $10,000 a month. Friendly and civil discussion has been taken over by the big dogs and high rollers. No wonder the forum here is dying, hardly a new post anymore except to complain or brag. I think I'm done.
-
Hardly anyone uses the SS forum. It's the same few posters all the time so I can understand why SS doesn't want to spend money on it. If SS was upset by criticism they would have closed it down long ago.
Anyway, we always have this forum to fall back on. Maybe the demise of the SS one will breathe some life into this.
The SS forum is quiet because they purged all the active and experienced members a while back. They cut the heart out so it was bound to die. I'm surprised it didn't happen sooner though.
I'm guessing a lot will migrate over here, me being one of them! Been a member for years but not really used it. May be that will change now :D
You saw the future and those who were worried that the SS trolls would ruin this forum, were right. Now we have millionaires and a group that claims to have sources who make $10,000 a month. Friendly and civil discussion has been taken over by the big dogs and high rollers. No wonder the forum here is dying, hardly a new post anymore except to complain or brag. I think I'm done.
I will say that I am not going to leave MSG because I still find good intel here and confirmations of things that happen to me. But, I don't participate much any more, much of the reason is threads that are same thing different day, mainly by new sign ups. There are heated political threads in here that simply drive me away from the group. They are allowed, yes, so I choose to direct my time elsewhere. Overall, for me, the threads do not interest me. Some do, but mainly most don't. There are some posters in here who I really value their input (zero talent, Justanotherphotographer, StaceStockFootage, Uncle Pete are among them), and others who just want an argument. Unlike the old days when I started here in 2007, MSG is now a passer by thought for me, and I check in now and then. But that's it. Probably still a good place for new entrants but I find little value in the platform anymore, except for updates on micro stock sites, new findings, new royalty cuts, things like that...still helpful.
-
Hardly anyone uses the SS forum. It's the same few posters all the time so I can understand why SS doesn't want to spend money on it. If SS was upset by criticism they would have closed it down long ago.
Anyway, we always have this forum to fall back on. Maybe the demise of the SS one will breathe some life into this.
The SS forum is quiet because they purged all the active and experienced members a while back. They cut the heart out so it was bound to die. I'm surprised it didn't happen sooner though.
I'm guessing a lot will migrate over here, me being one of them! Been a member for years but not really used it. May be that will change now :D
You saw the future and those who were worried that the SS trolls would ruin this forum, were right. Now we have millionaires and a group that claims to have sources who make $10,000 a month. Friendly and civil discussion has been taken over by the big dogs and high rollers. No wonder the forum here is dying, hardly a new post anymore except to complain or brag. I think I'm done.
I will say that I am not going to leave MSG because I still find good intel here and confirmations of things that happen to me. But, I don't participate much any more, much of the reason is threads that are same thing different day, mainly by new sign ups. There are heated political threads in here that simply drive me away from the group. They are allowed, yes, so I choose to direct my time elsewhere. Overall, for me, the threads do not interest me. Some do, but mainly most don't. There are some posters in here who I really value their input (zero talent, Justanotherphotographer, StaceStockFootage, Uncle Pete are among them), and others who just want an argument. Unlike the old days when I started here in 2007, MSG is now a passer by thought for me, and I check in now and then. But that's it. Probably still a good place for new entrants but I find little value in the platform anymore, except for updates on micro stock sites, new findings, new royalty cuts, things like that...still helpful.
Right. There's an abundance of places to discuss a niche like Microstock.
I still check in here, but there's also Reddit (to a lesser degree), social media platforms (my impression it's mainly complaining or bragging about sales), and the forums of some agencies, e.g. Dreamstime and Alamy.
Information, if there is any, is scattered around, so you'll have to make your own puzzle.
-
I will say that I am not going to leave MSG because I still find good intel here and confirmations of things that happen to me. But, I don't participate much any more, much of the reason is threads that are same thing different day, mainly by new sign ups. There are heated political threads in here that simply drive me away from the group. They are allowed, yes, so I choose to direct my time elsewhere. Overall, for me, the threads do not interest me. Some do, but mainly most don't. There are some posters in here who I really value their input (zero talent, Justanotherphotographer, StaceStockFootage, Uncle Pete are among them), and others who just want an argument. Unlike the old days when I started here in 2007, MSG is now a passer by thought for me, and I check in now and then. But that's it. Probably still a good place for new entrants but I find little value in the platform anymore, except for updates on micro stock sites, new findings, new royalty cuts, things like that...still helpful.
I was surprised and flattered to see my name here, thanks. I really appreciate it and don’t want a list to go by without mentioning a couple of the real MVPs. Jo Ann Snover’s analysis of industry moves is one of the most underappreciated and valuable things on this forum (or any forum). As a rule much more in-depth and insightful than many who try to monetise their opinions. Also great that Sean has stuck around. Both these people actually put their money where their mouth is and paid the price via agency retaliation.
-
I will say that I am not going to leave MSG because I still find good intel here and confirmations of things that happen to me. But, I don't participate much any more, much of the reason is threads that are same thing different day, mainly by new sign ups. There are heated political threads in here that simply drive me away from the group. They are allowed, yes, so I choose to direct my time elsewhere. Overall, for me, the threads do not interest me. Some do, but mainly most don't. There are some posters in here who I really value their input (zero talent, Justanotherphotographer, StaceStockFootage, Uncle Pete are among them), and others who just want an argument. Unlike the old days when I started here in 2007, MSG is now a passer by thought for me, and I check in now and then. But that's it. Probably still a good place for new entrants but I find little value in the platform anymore, except for updates on micro stock sites, new findings, new royalty cuts, things like that...still helpful.
I was surprised and flattered to see my name here, thanks. I really appreciate it and don’t want a list to go by without mentioning a couple of the real MVPs. Jo Ann Snover’s analysis of industry moves is one of the most underappreciated and valuable things on this forum (or any forum). As a rule much more in-depth and insightful than many who try to monetise their opinions. Also great that Sean has stuck around. Both these people actually put their money where their mouth is and paid the price via agency retaliation.
By all means my post was not all inclusive. Yes, she is a superstar of information and research. I really enjoy her posts and those of a few others not mentioned.