Author Topic: New flexible plans, no daily limits. Shutterstock? (Read 12185 times)

Artist · « **on:** May 05, 2015, 06:47 »

I got this email from Shutterstock.. Lets see if this benefits us or looses us more..

Noedelhap · « **Reply #1 on:** May 05, 2015, 07:25 »

They're giving away more rights for the same price. I'd say we lose more.

Mantis · « **Reply #2 on:** May 05, 2015, 07:32 »

Quote from: Noedelhap on May 05, 2015, 07:25

They're giving away more rights for the same price. I'd say we lose more.

I was just about to write the same thing. How can this possibly be good? I will give one concrete example. Once they gave away print runs (I think up to 500k) to regular licenses I have not gotten a single $28 EL commission in three months. That tells me that most buyers do not need more than 500k print runs and SS has thus given up the rooster on EL's in exchange for more revenue in subscription non-uses. Their math, their magic, our loss.

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #3 on:** May 05, 2015, 07:53 »

I'm sorry, what is that about "digital templates"?

The license states:
"AN ENHANCED IMAGE LICENSE grants you the right to use Images:
...
Incorporated as elements of digital templates for sale or distribution."

That is not a "standard license". According to the submitter TOS, they are not allowed to change those terms without 90 day notice.

etudiante_rapide · « **Reply #4 on:** May 05, 2015, 08:06 »

Quote from: Sean Locke Photography on May 05, 2015, 07:53

I'm sorry, what is that about "digital templates"?

The license states:
"AN ENHANCED IMAGE LICENSE grants you the right to use Images:
...
Incorporated as elements of digital templates for sale or distribution."

That is not a "standard license". According to the submitter TOS, they are not allowed to change those terms without 90 day notice.

sean is right, we should all for sure question this . should be an opt in , right???
time to twitter oringer for sure ppl

ultimagina · « **Reply #5 on:** May 05, 2015, 09:05 »

Quote from: Mantis on May 05, 2015, 07:32

I have not gotten a single $28 EL commission in three months.

April ~1 EL for every 100 photos in my port
March ~1 EL/100
Feb ~1 EL/250
Jan ~1 EL/250
Dec ~1 EL/100
Nov ~1 EL/500
Oct ~1 EL/100

As you can see, I don't share your doom and gloom. I don't see a drop in my EL sales. Maybe not yet.

objowl · « **Reply #6 on:** May 05, 2015, 09:06 »

Another flexible plan to see how far we bend before we snap.

Mantis · « **Reply #7 on:** May 05, 2015, 10:51 »

Quote from: ultimagaina on May 05, 2015, 09:05

Quote from: Mantis on May 05, 2015, 07:32
I have not gotten a single $28 EL commission in three months.

April ~1 EL for every 100 photos in my port
March ~1 EL/100
Feb ~1 EL/250
Jan ~1 EL/250
Dec ~1 EL/100
Nov ~1 EL/500
Oct ~1 EL/100

As you can see, I don't share your doom and gloom. I don't see a drop in my EL sales. Maybe not yet.

Obviously mileage varies. When i speak about issues its based on my personal experience. I do not speak for you. And for the record i am pleased someone is still getting them. Congrats.

Semmick Photo · « **Reply #8 on:** May 05, 2015, 10:51 »

Its all going to shits

gbalex · « **Reply #9 on:** May 05, 2015, 11:25 »

Anything to gain market share, ever downward for the benefit of the chosen golden few!

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #10 on:** May 05, 2015, 12:56 »

If you look at the current license comparison page, it appears to exclude templates from a standard license, although the wording differs slightly

http://www.shutterstock.com/license_comparison.mhtml?hsb=1

(I kept a screen shot in case it changes without notice)

The fact that they're telling buyers about license changes and not even putting something on their blog for contributors is pretty cavalier, IMO. Isn't there some VP with the title of Contributor Success? Does this person realize that includes our long term financial well being as SS suppliers?

More rights for the same money is a royalty decrease, masked the same way boxed products do it - same price as before, but now there are only 80 tissues instead of 105 in the box...

stockastic · « **Reply #11 on:** May 05, 2015, 14:18 »

Quote from: Jo Ann Snover on May 05, 2015, 12:56

Isn't there some VP with the title of Contributor Success?

Hilarious. This could be a skit at their Christmas party.

luissantos84 · « **Reply #12 on:** May 05, 2015, 14:18 »

I haven't received any email

M*****F******

Ava Glass · « **Reply #13 on:** May 05, 2015, 20:54 »

Quote from: Sean Locke Photography on May 05, 2015, 07:53

I'm sorry, what is that about "digital templates"?

Maybe the person making the email messed up. Digital templates are still ELs according to SS's latest (3/30) terms.

skyfish · « **Reply #14 on:** May 06, 2015, 00:52 »

Aren't any confusions in favour of agencies?

r2d2 · « **Reply #15 on:** May 06, 2015, 01:24 »

We just have to get rid of the greedy agencies...

Artist · « **Reply #16 on:** May 06, 2015, 02:15 »

Quote from: r2d2 on May 06, 2015, 01:24

We just have to get rid of the greedy agencies...

You are very right..

We do whatever, agencies have highest priority for buyers and lowest priority for contributors.

If we get rid of them, agencies will not be affected.. Instead we will surely be..

I sometimes feel trapped.. $:-\$

r2d2 · « **Reply #17 on:** May 06, 2015, 03:13 »

Quote from: cgartist on May 06, 2015, 02:15

Quote from: r2d2 on May 06, 2015, 01:24
We just have to get rid of the greedy agencies...

You are very right..

We do whatever, agencies have highest priority for buyers and lowest priority for contributors.

If we get rid of them, agencies will not be affected.. Instead we will surely be..

I sometimes feel trapped.. $:-\$

I think in the future is some hope ...

Self hosting is always easier for example Wordpress+WooCommerce+Digital media plug in.
The next step is only a global Search Engine. Maybe it's already the google image search.
Then no more agencies are needed

Semmick Photo · « **Reply #18 on:** May 06, 2015, 03:28 »

Quote from: luissantos84 on May 05, 2015, 14:18

I haven't received any email

Me neither. And I do have a buyers account. Maybe its region related as we both are in Europe.

Semmick Photo · « **Reply #19 on:** May 06, 2015, 03:33 »

Quote from: r2d2 on May 06, 2015, 03:13

Quote from: cgartist on May 06, 2015, 02:15
Quote from: r2d2 on May 06, 2015, 01:24
We just have to get rid of the greedy agencies...

You are very right..

We do whatever, agencies have highest priority for buyers and lowest priority for contributors.

If we get rid of them, agencies will not be affected.. Instead we will surely be..

I sometimes feel trapped.. $:-\$

I think in the future is some hope ...

Self hosting is always easier for example Wordpress+WooCommerce+Digital media plug in.
The next step is only a global Search Engine. Maybe it's already the google image search.
Then no more agencies are needed

Yesterday I was searching for some images on Google, the first 200-300 images were mostly from agencies. Its hard to get your images between those images.

Plus a buyer needs to know that they can purchase a single image and dont have to subscribe etc. When I purchase an image its always from CanStockPhoto or Symbio sites as they offer me a single image and credit card / PayPal checkout. I dont want to subscribe, I dont want to buy credits, I dont want to by 5 images. Thats why I purchase from CanStockPhoto or Symbio and I would consider it a USP these days.

skyfish · « **Reply #20 on:** May 06, 2015, 03:36 »

Company which supports search engine is acting like an agency. There are expenses, knowledge, time invested. The only difference that problem of give away for free or removing of photos will go away. We are working on one kind of solution and it is not just a search engine, otherwise it is no hope project. Many things will go in offline mode because of sales work. I think in case of traditional agencies this offline work is not visible for many people too. Feedbacks from potential customers are often contradicting with interests of photographers. Yes i see that buyers side tries to press and always referencing examples of agencies like yay, ft etc. These people cannot be our clients because they actually want to receive for free but with legal protection. In the same time we discovered many niches and future of stock imagery exists.

r2d2 · « **Reply #21 on:** May 06, 2015, 04:19 »

Quote from: Semmick Photo on May 06, 2015, 03:33

Quote from: r2d2 on May 06, 2015, 03:13
Quote from: cgartist on May 06, 2015, 02:15
Quote from: r2d2 on May 06, 2015, 01:24
We just have to get rid of the greedy agencies...

You are very right..

We do whatever, agencies have highest priority for buyers and lowest priority for contributors.

If we get rid of them, agencies will not be affected.. Instead we will surely be..

I sometimes feel trapped.. $:-\$

I think in the future is some hope ...

Self hosting is always easier for example Wordpress+WooCommerce+Digital media plug in.
The next step is only a global Search Engine. Maybe it's already the google image search.
Then no more agencies are needed
Yesterday I was searching for some images on Google, the first 200-300 images were mostly from agencies. Its hard to get your images between those images.

Plus a buyer needs to know that they can purchase a single image and dont have to subscribe etc. When I purchase an image its always from CanStockPhoto or Symbio sites as they offer me a single image and credit card / PayPal checkout. I dont want to subscribe, I dont want to buy credits, I dont want to by 5 images. Thats why I purchase from CanStockPhoto or Symbio and I would consider it a USP these days.

The agency monopolies will fall in the future because they are simply unnecessary and too expensive for buyers and sellers.

For example if I want to buy a monitor I do not buy through an agency but I'll find a good deal through google. Maybe ebay or amazon but they take about 10%.
Why should it not also go for digital goods?
Of course, Google, eBay, Amazon, etc. are also monopolists but cheaper than microstock agencies.

Semmick Photo · « **Reply #22 on:** May 06, 2015, 04:57 »

Too expensive ?!?!?! You think selling an image for 20-30 cent is too expensive??

r2d2 · « **Reply #23 on:** May 06, 2015, 05:05 »

Quote from: Semmick Photo on May 06, 2015, 04:57

Too expensive ?!?!?! You think selling an image for 20-30 cent is too expensive??

No! do not get me wrong

Between buyer and seller is sitting the agency who gets the majority of the purchase price.
Is the agency away there is a win win situation.

ok, the biggest winner would be the contributor!

luissantos84 · « **Reply #24 on:** May 08, 2015, 07:45 »

is that all MSG members?

gbalex · « **Reply #25 on:** May 08, 2015, 08:25 »

Quote from: luissantos84 on May 08, 2015, 07:45

is that all MSG members?

The response or lack of, tell us everything we need to know about the future of micro.

shudderstok · « **Reply #26 on:** May 08, 2015, 11:24 »

Quote from: gbalex on May 08, 2015, 08:25

Quote from: luissantos84 on May 08, 2015, 07:45
is that all MSG members?

The response or lack of, tell us everything we need to know about the future of micro.

or perhaps some of us are giving up on this forum cause anything against this particular agency and what it stands for always leads to a pack mentality.

shudderstok · « **Reply #27 on:** May 08, 2015, 11:30 »

Quote from: Semmick Photo on May 06, 2015, 04:57

Too expensive ?!?!?! You think selling an image for 20-30 cent is too expensive??

with all due respect, SS has been selling your images for these prices for years - give or take a few pennies. you act surprised by this travesty.

Semmick Photo · « **Reply #28 on:** May 08, 2015, 11:47 »

Quote from: shudderstok on May 08, 2015, 11:30

Quote from: Semmick Photo on May 06, 2015, 04:57
Too expensive ?!?!?! You think selling an image for 20-30 cent is too expensive??

with all due respect, SS has been selling your images for these prices for years - give or take a few pennies. you act surprised by this travesty.

You got it wrong my friend. I am not surprised at all by the selling price of an image, I was surprised by his comment. Two entirely different things.

Carry on.

farbled · « **Reply #29 on:** May 08, 2015, 12:27 »

Quote from: shudderstok on May 08, 2015, 11:24

or perhaps some of us are giving up on this forum cause anything against this particular agency and what it stands for always leads to a pack mentality.

100% correct. But I suspect not in the way that you mean it.

Cesar · « **Reply #30 on:** May 10, 2015, 13:51 »

Range of sales changed on SS, i have extreme sales in tuesday,wednesday, thursday and lower other days. i dont like it.

Do you have the same?

Hobostocker · « **Reply #31 on:** May 11, 2015, 07:49 »

so, once again the trend is heading to "get more for less" ?
exactly as we were expecting from SS and now by domino effect the other agencies will fellow.

where will they draw the line ? these new subs are already so cheap the next step can only be a coupon for free monthly unlimited downloads.

one day they will ask ME to pay them for storing my images on their site ... just like on POD sites.

stockastic · « **Reply #32 on:** May 11, 2015, 10:08 »

Quote from: Hobostocker on May 11, 2015, 07:49

one day they will ask ME to pay them for storing my images on their site ... just like on POD sites.

I really hope no one at SS reads your post. Because they could easily do that, and the vast majority of their contributors would pay. No question.

Actually, I hope that happens. It would finally get me to close my account and not think about these schmucks again for the rest of my life

Hobostocker · « **Reply #33 on:** May 11, 2015, 13:03 »

Quote from: stockastic on May 11, 2015, 10:08

I really hope no one at SS reads your post. Because they could easily do that, and the vast majority of their contributors would pay. No question.

hahaha they could claim they're giving us free exposure and free storage and that we should be grateful and thank them ...

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #34 on:** May 15, 2015, 12:21 »

Response was that the inclusion of digital templates in the image was an error.

gbalex · « **Reply #35 on:** May 15, 2015, 12:42 »

Lets see if I get this right, you originally asked the question on Tue May 05, 2015 and it took 10 days for Shutterstock to state that the ad shutterstock sent out to millions of customers contained a serious error.

? How many of shutterstocks customers will now believe that they can use our assets in templates under a standard license, based solely on the legitimate ad which shutterstock emailed to them? How does shutterstock plan to rectify the costly issue they created?

Sounds like they are doing a great job of representing our assets and educating customers in regard to their use.

Sean Locke Photography wrote:
The promotional image from the email says "standard license - ... no limitation on ... digital templates".

Digital templates are not included in the standard license. Why does the image indicate they are?

Thu May 14, 2015 12:06 pm

Sean,
I'm not as familiar with the customer licenses or emails as with all things contributor, so let me first educate myself and I'll get back to you with an answer.

Vincent

Posted: Fri May 15, 2015 1:14 pm

Hi Sean,

I can confirm that there was an error in the email message and that digital templates are not included in the Standard License but are only allowed under the Enhanced License.

The complete published online customer license is published here: http://www.shutterstock.com/license and will always be the document of record.

We apologize for the inconvenience,

Vincent

Shelma1 · « **Reply #36 on:** May 15, 2015, 13:32 »

They need to send out a correction via email. Otherwise anyone can license an image for templates under the standard license and point to the original email if challenged legally.

gbalex · « **Reply #37 on:** May 15, 2015, 16:22 »

Quote from: Shelma1 on May 15, 2015, 13:32

They need to send out a correction via email. Otherwise anyone can license an image for templates under the standard license and point to the original email if challenged legally.

The department that created this add has had 11 days to correct their error. I am a buyer and have not received an email to correct or clarify the faulty information they sent to buyers.

As always, actions convey intent and reality