pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Royalty Declines At Shutterstock  (Read 9581 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: May 14, 2015, 14:24 »
+9
Shutterstock contributors may be interested in a long analysis Ive posted on why individual contributor royalties have been declining on average over the last couple of years. Based on the numbers it seems likely that the decline will continue. You can find the story here (http://www.selling-stock.com/Article/declines-in-average-royalties-at-shutterstock) and Ive made it FREE for anyone to read. If you disagree with my analysis I would be interested in hearing your arguments.

My analysis is based on averages. It may be interesting for individual contributors to compare their results with the averages to see how much better or worse their personal experience has been.


Semmick Photo

« Reply #1 on: May 14, 2015, 14:27 »
+11
Let me guess. More images and more contributors dilutes earnings per  head and library growth outpacing demand.

Also free for everyone to read.

Semmick Photo

« Reply #2 on: May 14, 2015, 14:28 »
+1
Yep I was right.  And one free click from me  ;)

« Reply #3 on: May 14, 2015, 14:35 »
0
yep, that pretty much hits the nail on the head. Number of images going up faster than number of sales.

Under "Contributors" PP 6-7 or so it is unclear when you are talking about images licensed per year and images licensed per quarter.


Shelma1

« Reply #4 on: May 14, 2015, 15:39 »
+1
One reason for the increase in rejections might be the cost of additional servers to store all the data and the cost of additional reviewers vs. a slower increase in sales.  There was an article yesterday about how SS is handling the storage of the huge influx of increasingly larger files. I'm sure investors are looking for cost-cutting measures.

« Reply #5 on: May 14, 2015, 15:42 »
+3
Nicely written.  From my observations the article seems completely accurate. 

« Reply #6 on: May 14, 2015, 16:08 »
0
last year i have 1300 images and 50 sales per day, this year i have 1900 and 140 per day, last year images with +100dl are still selling this year every day mostly

« Reply #7 on: May 14, 2015, 18:37 »
+6
last year i have 1300 images and 50 sales per day, this year i have 1900 and 140 per day, last year images with +100dl are still selling this year every day mostly

140 dls per day with only 1900 images? That must be a very special port, congrats. I envy you.

« Reply #8 on: May 14, 2015, 21:15 »
+4
that must be a super special port that has 140 downloads a DAY! Never heard of anyone getting even close to that number. Not even with much larger ports. Congratulations!

personally, i have great success with video on SS, but  I find the returns from images in exclusive collections much higher, so I try those agencies  first, especially if it is a more time intensive shoot and only ultrageneric content  goes to the Micros.
« Last Edit: May 14, 2015, 21:23 by cobalt »

Rinderart

« Reply #9 on: May 14, 2015, 23:28 »
0
Thanks Jim. My thoughts exactly. Some one should post this link in a new thread on SS. With Jims permission Only.

« Reply #10 on: May 14, 2015, 23:37 »
0
Good article.  Explains a lot about what's happening and why this is becoming unsustainable for contributors. 

« Reply #11 on: May 15, 2015, 03:14 »
+1
nothing special, i am below average photografer, only thing is important to figure out what to shoot, you  must extremly focus on story on image.
if u shoot technician on work, you realy must find scene or make scene, sometime i set up furniture at home two hours or more, but image is downloaded at least 100 times, SS is very good , almost 0% chance is, that your image will be lost in search, if it  is good, maybe 10 images  that are sell well on other agency and on ss dont

buyers need authentic scenes. i dont make instagram,landscape,food





last year i have 1300 images and 50 sales per day, this year i have 1900 and 140 per day, last year images with +100dl are still selling this year every day mostly

140 dls per day with only 1900 images? That must be a very special port, congrats. I envy you.

« Reply #12 on: May 15, 2015, 03:29 »
+1
i am glad it is working so well for you, unfortunetely  i don't have that experience. i have started to deactivate some files and am moving them upstream for better returns. Generic content, especially stuff on white is doing well there, so I'll upload more. everybodies journey is different. But for video I am berimpressed what they are getting out of my files.

stock-will-eat-itself

« Reply #13 on: May 15, 2015, 03:57 »
+1
I guess the speed of the decline for returns will be as fast as the ascension.

Hobostocker

    This user is banned.
« Reply #14 on: May 15, 2015, 04:11 »
-6
the Next Big Thing for stock agencies could be allowing contributors to advertise their images on top of search results, just like Google/Yahoo/Bing .. sort of a poorman's Adsense, this would weed out the amateurs and allow Pros to stand out from the crowd.






« Reply #15 on: May 15, 2015, 04:31 »
+1
all agencies need to subdivide their content and create micromarkets within their bermarketplace.

they all know it, it is the challenge of the coming years.

« Reply #16 on: May 15, 2015, 04:34 »
+3
One reason for the increase in rejections might be the cost of additional servers to store all the data

Nah, storage space is cheap. Let's say they have 50 million images, 10 megabytes each. It's just 500 Terabytes. Of course the handling of these files need computing power, but let's not forget they are mostly dealing with tiny preview images.


« Reply #17 on: May 15, 2015, 04:38 »
+9
Someone should take a look at Shutterstock's profits, and look how their

1) profit per image
2) profit per contributor (do we know the total number of contributors?)

have developed... If those numbers are going up and our earnings down, they are screwing us.

« Reply #18 on: May 15, 2015, 06:28 »
-8
your images have mostly zero action, that is not selling. you have kid and father, that is good one!  i like it.


you are not active contributor, you have maybe 80 last half year, common, on ss is stuff hot first 2   two months, you have to upload every day something new, you dont have 666, you have 50 images online, one year old image is dead.

economy  of SS is your  weak point.


that must be a super special port that has 140 downloads a DAY! Never heard of anyone getting even close to that number. Not even with much larger ports. Congratulations!

personally, i have great success with video on SS, but  I find the returns from images in exclusive collections much higher, so I try those agencies  first, especially if it is a more time intensive shoot and only ultrageneric content  goes to the Micros.
« Last Edit: May 15, 2015, 06:33 by Cesar »

Rinderart

« Reply #19 on: May 15, 2015, 10:55 »
+5
your images have mostly zero action, that is not selling. you have kid and father, that is good one!  i like it.


you are not active contributor, you have maybe 80 last half year, common, on ss is stuff hot first 2   two months, you have to upload every day something new, you dont have 666, you have 50 images online, one year old image is dead.

economy  of SS is your  weak point.


that must be a super special port that has 140 downloads a DAY! Never heard of anyone getting even close to that number. Not even with much larger ports. Congratulations!

personally, i have great success with video on SS, but  I find the returns from images in exclusive collections much higher, so I try those agencies  first, especially if it is a more time intensive shoot and only ultrageneric content  goes to the Micros.

would love to see your port.

« Reply #20 on: May 15, 2015, 11:10 »
+5
i agree with many Thinges you say cesar, but i am not as new to stock as my portfolio looks. The image with father and son will be deactivated, i made around 10 dollars so far, and it is only available at SS at the moment. some of the static images around it made over 200. These are files created in 2005-2008 uploaded in 2013/14 to SS.

But the video of father and son makes very good money.

So for me the active people shots will go upstream where I earn more money.

And that i have to upload every day to push my portfolio is a big negative, at other agencies good files keep moving up, even if you don't upload daily.

I want a reliable income stream, not a two month spike and then neverland. Good files can earn money for many, many years .



« Last Edit: May 15, 2015, 11:20 by cobalt »

« Reply #21 on: May 15, 2015, 11:16 »
+9
... one year old image is dead.

That's just rubbish.

Perhaps if your port is only a year or two old you haven't any experience in how this works?

Or by "dead" do you mean something other than "is no longer selling"?

« Reply #22 on: May 15, 2015, 11:19 »
+4
Good files can earn money for many, many years .

That certainly has been my experience. Some of my current best-sellers have been on SS for several years.

Actually, I'm grateful that I uploaded as many images as I did in the last 2-3 years, to make up for the increasing difficulty in getting them approved now.

« Reply #23 on: May 15, 2015, 12:40 »
+2
im very afraid to post my portfolio it is very easy to copy and there are some niche series i woold realy not see by other, like i said i am below average photografer, quality is my problem, so i  try made images with " story"

a lot of thinking and time was spend for small ideas, i spend mostly time how to make scene at home, this is priceless, not for  shooting and editing.

im contributor from mid 2012 and my first 300 images sux.

dead, i meant not selling any more

 i earn a lot of money, more then my regular salary, please understand me.

but in $ i have earnings about  the same last 20 weeks on SS

Rinderart

« Reply #24 on: May 15, 2015, 13:03 »
+1
im very afraid to post my portfolio it is very easy to copy and there are some niche series i woold realy not see by other, like i said i am below average photografer, quality is my problem, so i  try made images with " story"

a lot of thinking and time was spend for small ideas, i spend mostly time how to make scene at home, this is priceless, not for  shooting and editing.

im contributor from mid 2012 and my first 300 images sux.

dead, i meant not selling any more

 i earn a lot of money, more then my regular salary, please understand me.

but in $ i have earnings about  the same last 20 weeks on SS

I understand.

« Reply #25 on: May 15, 2015, 13:23 »
+1
thank you.

 i realy like your presence on this forum,  it think  forum is reacher. i miss some "old" like lisafx


I understand.

« Reply #26 on: May 15, 2015, 13:42 »
-1
Cesar, if your numbers are not just provocation or simply lye, then respect.
But, do you want to hear my modest opinion?

No chance to make 140 sales/day with so small portfolio and whatever your nitche is.


« Reply #27 on: May 15, 2015, 13:57 »
0
this week will be average  cca. 125 (monday-friday)( yesterday , today is sucky )

i lied, a i have little less images ,  i shoot only business and technology, no other category

i have 3 images  that sell 5/day ( 15 )
i have about 20-30 images about 2/day ( 50 ) every day
other is about 60-70  but mostly new ( from june 0214 )

maybe i have luck...

« Reply #28 on: May 15, 2015, 14:08 »
+3

. i miss some "old" like lisafx


agree. there is a great lack of credibility these days here without many of the old regulars like lisafx
who was straight arrow not afraid to tell it like it is. not to say we don't appreciate joanne, paulie .
what did happen to lisafx anyway???

« Reply #29 on: May 15, 2015, 14:46 »
0
Cesar..
Very impressive...you must be on the top of the searches....
are you exclusively on Shutterstock or on other agencies as well??? would you mind telling us if your experience with other agencies in terms of downloads is good as well???



this week will be average  cca. 125 (monday-friday)( yesterday , today is sucky )

i lied, a i have little less images ,  i shoot only business and technology, no other category

i have 3 images  that sell 5/day ( 15 )
i have about 20-30 images about 2/day ( 50 ) every day
other is about 60-70  but mostly new ( from june 0214 )

maybe i have luck...

splitimage

« Reply #30 on: May 15, 2015, 15:01 »
+5

. i miss some "old" like lisafx


agree. there is a great lack of credibility these days here without many of the old regulars like lisafx
who was straight arrow not afraid to tell it like it is. not to say we don't appreciate joanne, paulie .
what did happen to lisafx anyway???

She left due to receiving hostility on the forum over DPC

« Reply #31 on: May 15, 2015, 15:24 »
0
SS is 2.5x more more than istock
5x more then fotolia
3x more fotolia
10x more dreamstime
12x more 123rf
12x more then bigsotck
20x more envato

i stoped to deposit ( criminals ),  i dont upload to alamy, pond5, i dont why, i dont have time, i really hate uploading

i didnt try to stocksy, i dont have single image for acceptance, believe or not.

keywords are not so important on SS, a lot of sales is by category

i dont use any keyword tool, every image i keyword manually from my head, it takes more time, but i use much more words and every time diffrent,
maybe i use google for keyword, financial images i keyword from articles for examples.  to many images have the same keywords. ( that is another secret i posted)

i hit the wall in march, march was so strong, april was down 400$.
Buyers want concept, they dont look if corner is dark or not.

im tired after shooting , because i shoot a lot of myself or 2 persons, difficult to focus  manual myself with timer

theme is most important

Shutter also hiding some images from popular  and offering  them by search statistics  to others buyers












Cesar..
Very impressive...you must be on the top of the searches....
are you exclusively on Shutterstock or on other agencies as well??? would you mind telling us if your experience with other agencies in terms of downloads is good as well???



this week will be average  cca. 125 (monday-friday)( yesterday , today is sucky )

i lied, a i have little less images ,  i shoot only business and technology, no other category

i have 3 images  that sell 5/day ( 15 )
i have about 20-30 images about 2/day ( 50 ) every day
other is about 60-70  but mostly new ( from june 0214 )

maybe i have luck...
« Last Edit: May 15, 2015, 15:35 by Cesar »

« Reply #32 on: May 15, 2015, 17:52 »
+3
I Understand as well, if you have hit a goldmine niche and fear copycats. On the other hand, my portfolio is visible and can be copied, but it can also be discussed.

The number of possible daily downloads is important so that people can get an idea of how much to invest in a shoot.

Since yuris dad disclosed somewhere that yuri was getting around 600 downloads a day, it has served as an upper level that probably no single artist will break.


How much i make of course depend  on the mix of license types. Obviously downloads over 100 dollars are preferred to 36 cent downloads. So downloads alone don't give you the real picture.

And every experience is different.

So if things are working well for you, good luck.

I am not unhappy with my SS experience, there is a lot to like about the place and the great people they have.

But after 2 years of being Indie I am now putting  my experiences at different places together and for SS the major focus will be video. Fotolia will get more exclusive files etc...

Of course I will still send photos, I'll just adjust the mix of files to the returns i expect.

ETA: That picture of father and son was uploaded last October and had 13 downloads. It earned 6 dollars. I am not impressed.

Obviously I could upload more from the series and wait and wait and hope to get lucky, or take it out and put it into a better environment for the file.

It s the same for many other files, also on Fotolia. I am taking stuff down, making other files exclusive. And then I will send them content on what they sell best.
« Last Edit: May 16, 2015, 06:23 by cobalt »

« Reply #33 on: May 16, 2015, 08:57 »
0
Not that I like DPC.
What is DPC??

« Reply #34 on: May 16, 2015, 09:04 »
0

« Reply #35 on: May 16, 2015, 09:05 »
0
OK thanks.  Not sure if I am part of it or not as I haven't heard of it.

ShadySue

« Reply #36 on: May 16, 2015, 09:08 »
+2
OK thanks.  Not sure if I am part of it or not as I haven't heard of it.

IIRC, if you're in Fotolia, you're likely to be in it. I think you were 'in' by default, but part of the campaign was only to be 'opt in'. You'd need to check.

http://www.microstockgroup.com/fotolia-com/fotolia-launches-dollar-photo-club

http://www.microstockgroup.com/general-stock-discussion/dollar-photo-club-pros-and-cons/msg389036/#msg389036

http://www.microstockgroup.com/general-stock-discussion/is-dollar-photo-club-the-new-bottom/msg407516/#msg407516

« Last Edit: May 16, 2015, 09:12 by ShadySue »


« Reply #37 on: May 16, 2015, 09:12 »
0
OK thanks.  Not sure if I am part of it or not as I haven't heard of it.
IIRC, if you're in Fotolia, you're likely to be in it. I think you were 'in' by default, but part of the campaign was only to be 'opt in'. You'd need to check.
Thank you.  I will check it out.

ShadySue

« Reply #38 on: May 16, 2015, 09:13 »
+1
OK thanks.  Not sure if I am part of it or not as I haven't heard of it.
IIRC, if you're in Fotolia, you're likely to be in it. I think you were 'in' by default, but part of the campaign was only to be 'opt in'. You'd need to check.
Thank you.  I will check it out.

In case you miss it, I've added the msg links to my earlier post.

« Reply #39 on: May 16, 2015, 09:37 »
+15
several posts removed and one member banned for outright insults ... let's keep this place a tad friendlier shall we!

« Reply #40 on: May 16, 2015, 10:03 »
0
Dollar Photo Club

This outfit is advertising aggressively. We had marketing from them.

I don't see how anyone can compete against their $99 annual subscription - and unused downloads roll-over.

« Reply #41 on: May 16, 2015, 10:44 »
0
OK thanks.  Not sure if I am part of it or not as I haven't heard of it.
IIRC, if you're in Fotolia, you're likely to be in it. I think you were 'in' by default, but part of the campaign was only to be 'opt in'. You'd need to check.
Thank you.  I will check it out.


In case you miss it, I've added the msg links to my earlier post.
,
Thank you.  I've checked it out and my images are there.  I make between 31c and 42c for sub images at Fot.   I might be missing something but why is this any worse than any other site that does subs?
« Last Edit: May 16, 2015, 10:51 by fotografer »

Noedelhap

  • www.colincramm.com

« Reply #42 on: May 16, 2015, 11:13 »
+6
OK thanks.  Not sure if I am part of it or not as I haven't heard of it.
IIRC, if you're in Fotolia, you're likely to be in it. I think you were 'in' by default, but part of the campaign was only to be 'opt in'. You'd need to check.
Thank you.  I will check it out.


In case you miss it, I've added the msg links to my earlier post.
,
Thank you.  I've checked it out and my images are there.  I make between 31c and 42c for sub images at Fot.   I might be missing something but why is this any worse than any other site that does subs?

Because a basic subscription image pack at DPC starts at only $10.
Subscription profits mainly come from higher pricing points (say $100 for a subscription), buyers not using all of their allotted downloads and expiring downloads after the end of the month.

DPC's doesn't have any of those limits, so a subscription package is basically a disguised credit pack for cheap, for which you'll receive subscription royalties. It will in the end erode your credit sales if buyers would walk over to DPC. That's why DPC is good for Fotolio (more market share), but bad news for us contributors.

« Reply #43 on: May 16, 2015, 11:18 »
0
OK thanks.  Not sure if I am part of it or not as I haven't heard of it.
IIRC, if you're in Fotolia, you're likely to be in it. I think you were 'in' by default, but part of the campaign was only to be 'opt in'. You'd need to check.
Thank you.  I will check it out.


In case you miss it, I've added the msg links to my earlier post.
,
Thank you.  I've checked it out and my images are there.  I make between 31c and 42c for sub images at Fot.   I might be missing something but why is this any worse than any other site that does subs?

Because a basic subscription image pack at DPC starts at only $10.
Subscription profits mainly come from higher pricing points (say $100 for a subscription), buyers not using all of their allotted downloads and expiring downloads after the end of the month.

DPC's doesn't have any of those limits, so a subscription package is basically a disguised credit pack for cheap, for which you'll receive subscription royalties. It will in the end erode your credit sales if buyers would walk over to DPC. That's why DPC is good for Fotolio (more market share), but bad news for us contributors.
Thank you for the explanation.

« Reply #44 on: May 16, 2015, 11:20 »
+1
Subscription profits mainly come from higher pricing points (say $100 for a subscription), buyers not using all of their allotted downloads and expiring downloads after the end of the month.

DPC's doesn't have any of those limits, so a subscription package is basically a disguised credit pack for cheap

Yep. It's $99 for a year. And if you don't use your credits they carry forward. But if you use all your credits additional images are only $1 each. And it's good quality content.

How can anyone compete with that ?

I can only assume that Adobe will not be planning to charge more than this once Fotolia is incorporated into CC. It seems more likely to me that stock content will come bundled free with CC sooner or later.

« Reply #45 on: May 16, 2015, 12:19 »
+3
Good files can earn money for many, many years .

That certainly has been my experience. Some of my current best-sellers have been on SS for several years.


Cobalt & Martha, that's my experience too - they sell for years. My best sellers, backgrounds and travel images of places that haven't changed, consistently sell for me. I don't have the traditional stock photo portfolio with people (I have nearly all my people photos as RM elsewhere) and don't have stuff shot on white, so I don't get the same returns those would, but the types of images I have uploaded keep selling. My only "dead" images are those that didn't sell right away, and even some of them have sold years after I uploaded them.

I think my record for images sold in one day on SS is 9 and if I sell 5-6 in a day that's a "good" day - but I have 292 images and most of them are my "seconds" so I can't expect more than that. I do have a handful of better travel images and some trendy vintage-processed images that could easily sell on traditional sites and they are among my top-sellers on SS.  I am floored by Cesar's 50-140 image DLs a day with only 1500 -1900 images. Would love to see your portfolio Cesar but understand your reticence to share.

Microstock isn't my main photography focus so I don't upload regularly but when I do upload a bunch I rarely get a rejection and I see a modest spike in sales. I like being on shutterstock, however, because it gives me a good sense of what's popular thanks to the volume of sales and I've learned so much about stock from being there and from being part of this group. So, despite my traditional stock focus, I'm not a micro-basher, though I'm bound to complain when my modest sales tank-can't help it!   8)
« Last Edit: May 16, 2015, 12:35 by wordplanet »

« Reply #46 on: May 16, 2015, 13:28 »
+3
thank you for sharing your experience.

The thing about Caesars very impressive success (basically one fifth as successful as yuri with a lot less files than him) is that the niche seems to be so small that if just a few people discover it, he knows his income is dead.

So how sustainable is it?

I am sure every year there is a new trendy theme and the first people that get into it, can make a real killing.

Just think of the foot selfies, the first people who had a lightbox with one thousand foot selfies with all kinds of feet, shoes, locations probably earned enough to buy an apartment.

But if you get into that trend now, how much will you make?

So, i stick to boring and reliable and everything that has a very long shelf life.


« Reply #47 on: May 16, 2015, 13:44 »
+1
thank you for sharing your experience.

The thing about Caesars very impressive success (basically one fifth as successful as yuri with a lot less files than him) is that the niche seems to be so small that if just a few people discover it, he knows his income is dead.
I'm not sure what Yuri has to do with this but from what I remember Yuri had 3,000 or 4,000 downloads per day.

« Reply #48 on: May 16, 2015, 14:08 »
+1
i m angry now

1. first make every day 2-3 images and mix themes, you dont know how it is difficult.
2. every week you have to upload 15 images, no matter what, vacation  or not,
3. every day thinking in car and and at home situations what to shoot
4. find places
5. do this 2 years non stop, then reply to this theme

i will never post dls on this forum, ask leaf how much he is making, he is making a looot more then me. ask him how strong was march. does his shoot bricks or walls?
no he dont.  he  thinks was business need! he is making not talking.








Good files can earn money for many, many years .

That certainly has been my experience. Some of my current best-sellers have been on SS for several years.


Cobalt & Martha, that's my experience too - they sell for years. My best sellers, backgrounds and travel images of places that haven't changed, consistently sell for me. I don't have the traditional stock photo portfolio with people (I have nearly all my people photos as RM elsewhere) and don't have stuff shot on white, so I don't get the same returns those would, but the types of images I have uploaded keep selling. My only "dead" images are those that didn't sell right away, and even some of them have sold years after I uploaded them.

I think my record for images sold in one day on SS is 9 and if I sell 5-6 in a day that's a "good" day - but I have 292 images and most of them are my "seconds" so I can't expect more than that. I do have a handful of better travel images and some trendy vintage-processed images that could easily sell on traditional sites and they are among my top-sellers on SS.  I am floored by Cesar's 50-140 image DLs a day with only 1500 -1900 images. Would love to see your portfolio Cesar but understand your reticence to share.

Microstock isn't my main photography focus so I don't upload regularly but when I do upload a bunch I rarely get a rejection and I see a modest spike in sales. I like being on shutterstock, however, because it gives me a good sense of what's popular thanks to the volume of sales and I've learned so much about stock from being there and from being part of this group. So, despite my traditional stock focus, I'm not a micro-basher, though I'm bound to complain when my modest sales tank-can't help it!   8)

« Reply #49 on: May 16, 2015, 14:15 »
+3
i m angry now

1. first make every day 2-3 images and mix themes, you dont know how it is difficult.
2. every week you have to upload 15 images, no matter what, vacation  or not,
3. every day thinking in car and and at home situations what to shoot
4. find places
5. do this 2 years non stop, then reply to this theme

i will never post dls on this forum, ask leaf how much he is making, he is making a looot more then me. ask him how strong was march. does his shoot bricks or walls?
no he dont.  he  thinks was business need! he is making not talking.








Good files can earn money for many, many years .

That certainly has been my experience. Some of my current best-sellers have been on SS for several years.


Cobalt & Martha, that's my experience too - they sell for years. My best sellers, backgrounds and travel images of places that haven't changed, consistently sell for me. I don't have the traditional stock photo portfolio with people (I have nearly all my people photos as RM elsewhere) and don't have stuff shot on white, so I don't get the same returns those would, but the types of images I have uploaded keep selling. My only "dead" images are those that didn't sell right away, and even some of them have sold years after I uploaded them.

I think my record for images sold in one day on SS is 9 and if I sell 5-6 in a day that's a "good" day - but I have 292 images and most of them are my "seconds" so I can't expect more than that. I do have a handful of better travel images and some trendy vintage-processed images that could easily sell on traditional sites and they are among my top-sellers on SS.  I am floored by Cesar's 50-140 image DLs a day with only 1500 -1900 images. Would love to see your portfolio Cesar but understand your reticence to share.

Microstock isn't my main photography focus so I don't upload regularly but when I do upload a bunch I rarely get a rejection and I see a modest spike in sales. I like being on shutterstock, however, because it gives me a good sense of what's popular thanks to the volume of sales and I've learned so much about stock from being there and from being part of this group. So, despite my traditional stock focus, I'm not a micro-basher, though I'm bound to complain when my modest sales tank-can't help it!   8)

Don't be angry.   Sounds like you have found a smart formula and workflow that are bringing you success.  Don't worry what anyone else thinks.  Just be happy with what you are doing.  I envy your enthusiasm and discipline.   Been long time since I had the same.

« Reply #50 on: May 16, 2015, 14:24 »
+1
thanks. it is already difficult to find new, now im trying to improve some old sellers, mostly efect is lower. after one more year ill have to take  six months brake. im tired already.

« Reply #51 on: May 16, 2015, 14:33 »
+2
There is no reason to be angry, you have done really well and should be very proud. I hope you continue to be successful.

It would be great if we could maybe get a general idea of how many downloads top portfolios have, if yuri had 3000 a day, instead of 600, that would bring a different perspective. Or maybe his fathers post was a very old one and is getting quoted again and again over the years.

I really like the fotolia system where they give you a total rank and a weekly rank based on your downloads. Makes it easy to see where you stand and how far you can still  go. And the number is private, so just by looking at your port people don know where you stand.

The question how we can best make money is complicated, some will go for the trendy stuff and do well, others will plod along with boring things and also achieve whatever goal they have.

For me the biggest challenge was to figure out what type of contents sells best at a specific agency. I hope I now have a system that will work for me.
« Last Edit: May 17, 2015, 11:58 by cobalt »

« Reply #52 on: May 16, 2015, 14:40 »
+2
It would be great if we could maybe get a general idea of how many downloads top portfolios have, if yuri had 3000 a day, instead of 600, that would bring a different perspective. Or maybe his fathers post was a very old one and is getting quoted again and again over the years.

"It is a long time ago since Yuri only had 1000 downloads a day at SS. A typical day at SS had between 3000-4000 downloads!!"
http://submit.shutterstock.com/forum/abt130434-0-asc-45.html

« Reply #53 on: May 16, 2015, 14:49 »
+1
Thank you! Wonder how many he would have had now, if he had stayed.

« Reply #54 on: May 16, 2015, 14:56 »
+3
3000 is 20x more then me, but that was in 2012, now it woult be about 10.000-15.000, here are costs

im sure pressmaster is making 50.000$ per month, leaf  also have 100% 5 digit earning.

we are small fish, first 50 contributors take 50% all income and boss 28mil :)

russians made a lot of money, look what they shoot and how much they make.

there is no lazy successful  contributor  on SS, not single one, what sell on one agency and other not in  nonsense
« Last Edit: May 16, 2015, 15:01 by Cesar »

« Reply #55 on: May 16, 2015, 15:08 »
0
Well, what the large studios with 50 people make, just gives you an upper level.

I need to compare my ambitions with those of other single artists.  I dont mind working slowly over many years, I just need a realistic goal.

If I believe that I need 10 000 files to make 2000 dollars a month just on SS with photos, then I have no problem with that. I also dont care if someone else can achieve that with 500. I just need a realistic perspective for myself.

So for me, I will try to become better in video and plod along slowly with normal photos. For faster returns with photos, I can send other content elsewhere.

Its ok, its not a problem.

Reliable income streams, SS and many others, it all adds up.


« Reply #56 on: May 17, 2015, 05:09 »
+15
If I believe that I need 10 000 files to make 2000 dollars a month just on SS with photos, then I have no problem with that. I also dont care if someone else can achieve that with 500. I just need a realistic perspective for myself.

When you get to 10,000 you will find that the horizon has moved to 100,000.


« Reply #57 on: May 17, 2015, 05:46 »
+1
If I believe that I need 10 000 files to make 2000 dollars a month just on SS with photos, then I have no problem with that. I also dont care if someone else can achieve that with 500. I just need a realistic perspective for myself.

When you get to 10,000 you will find that the horizon has moved to 100,000.

Probably ...;)

« Reply #58 on: May 17, 2015, 05:53 »
+2
It would be great if we could maybe get a general idea of how many downloads top portfolios have, if yuri had 3000 a day, instead of 600, that would bring a different perspective. Or maybe his fathers post was a very old one and is getting quoted again and again over the years.

"It is a long time ago since Yuri only had 1000 downloads a day at SS. A typical day at SS had between 3000-4000 downloads!!"
http://submit.shutterstock.com/forum/abt130434-0-asc-45.html


Hmm very interesting, Yuri's dad announced he's leaving SS but his portfolio is still active. Maybe he changed his mind at later point.

« Reply #59 on: May 17, 2015, 09:47 »
0
It would be great if we could maybe get a general idea of how many downloads top portfolios have, if yuri had 3000 a day, instead of 600, that would bring a different perspective. Or maybe his fathers post was a very old one and is getting quoted again and again over the years.

"It is a long time ago since Yuri only had 1000 downloads a day at SS. A typical day at SS had between 3000-4000 downloads!!"
http://submit.shutterstock.com/forum/abt130434-0-asc-45.html


Hmm very interesting, Yuri's dad announced he's leaving SS but his portfolio is still active. Maybe he changed his mind at later point.

Saw that too but it does look like he hasn't uploaded in 2 years or more. 

« Reply #60 on: May 17, 2015, 14:06 »
+3
Reliable income stream is the important thing here, unfortunately for many of us at some point we are running to move backwards - or in my case walking...

shudderstok

« Reply #61 on: May 17, 2015, 14:18 »
+2
I have been suggesting very much what this article is saying for years now, not just towards SS, but all  microstock agencies. The writing was on the wall years ago. This feeding frenzy of accepting almost every image from photographer's of varying skill levels is pure nonsense and ultimately only benefits the site proprietors and/or shareholders.

It is hard to conceive of a way to solve this problem other than non-biased human editing, but such editing costs money.

as quoted from the article second to last paragraph, this is the kiss of death combined with the very destructive subscription model. call me old school, but editing is a healthy process and certainly makes one improve their skill, but this accept it all is just plain and pure nonsense, and the amount of whining I see on this forum alone about the scratchy and hurt bozo feelings over rejection is sad.

« Reply #62 on: May 17, 2015, 16:06 »
+1
The agencies can crowdsource the editing, it will cost them in IT and brainpower to find a clever solution, but one of them will come up with a successful system.

And whoever comes up with a smart way first, will win the next round in this game.

Ill keep shooting and uploading...and thinking...I am really not that worried.

objowl

« Reply #63 on: May 17, 2015, 17:36 »
+2
Seems to me if you want to keep ahead of the game with 3 to 4 times the number of images every year you will need to be your own editor and a tough one at that, but if you are that good why microstock?  No matter how many images are added every year there will only ever be one first page of the search.  Unless you are one of the chosen ones for Premier Select you will always be swimming against the tide.

« Reply #64 on: May 17, 2015, 17:41 »
+4
I think there is a place for everything, microstock is just as interesting and fascinating as macrostock or niche content for me. And it is not a clear division, macro agencies also sell your files for less than a dollar, while micro agencies suddenly drop a 120 dollar license into your bag.

« Last Edit: May 17, 2015, 17:48 by cobalt »

w7lwi

  • Those that don't stand up to evil enable evil.
« Reply #65 on: May 17, 2015, 20:25 »
+6
Reliable income stream is the important thing here, unfortunately for many of us at some point we are running to move backwards - or in my case walking...

SS is definitely turning into Wonderland or Through the Looking Glass (I don't remember which).  As the Red Queen said to Alice, "If you want to stay where you are, you must run as fast as you can.  If you actually want to get anywhere, you must run twice as fast."

Or to put it in SS terms:  as Jon said to all the contributors, if you want to keep the same royalties, you must shoot and upload as fast as you can.  If you actually want to increase income, you must shoot and upload twice as fast.   :o  :'(

« Reply #66 on: May 17, 2015, 21:05 »
+6
Or to put it in SS terms:  as Jon said to all the contributors, if you want to keep the same royalties, you must shoot and upload as fast as you can.  If you actually want to increase income, you must shoot and upload twice as fast.   :o  :'(

Your version of this tale has a ring of truth.

But Jon forgot to mention that he was, simultaneously, instituting a system where SS reviewers (humans or robots) would only accept 1/Nth the number of uploads that SS had accepted in the remote past (ie, 2 months ago).

So, therefore, in order merely to maintain your income, you contributors must shoot and upload 5-6 times as many images as you did before. And if you're crazy enough to want to actually increase your income, you must shoot and upload 10-12 times more than you did 2 months ago.

And thus it came to pass.
« Last Edit: May 18, 2015, 08:13 by marthamarks »


« Reply #67 on: May 18, 2015, 07:41 »
+4
Or to put it in SS terms:  as Jon said to all the contributors, if you want to keep the same royalties, you must shoot and upload as fast as you can.  If you actually want to increase income, you must shoot and upload twice as fast.   :o  :'(

Your version of this tale has a ring of truth.

But what Jon forgot to mention was that he was, simultaneously, instituting a system where SS reviewers (be they humans or robots) would only accept 1/Nth of the number of uploads that SS had accepted in the remote past (ie, 2 months ago).

So, therefore, in order merely to maintain your income, you contributors must shoot and upload 5-6 times as many images as you did before. And if you're crazy enough to want to actually increase your income, you must shoot and upload 10-12 times more than you did 2 months ago.

And thus it came to pass.

True. And the only ones who might survive are the production mills. But I bet even they have to up their game.

« Reply #68 on: May 18, 2015, 13:40 »
+6
Eventually the production mills will lose too.  They make more money but it is divided between so many shooters, post processors,  uploaders, etc. That they gonna find it worse than us one man operations soon. 

I don't have to pay anybody but me, and sometimes models.  Lately I am thinking might be worth going back to TFP and stop paying models, like in the beginning. Pro models are great, but not cheap.

« Reply #69 on: May 18, 2015, 14:46 »
+6
I dont really give a * at this point about the major players.I dont consider them,neither friend nor enemies and certainly not rivals or worse yet people that i aspire to become like one.

Of course that doesn't mean that i will be happy when or if they go down,but in the meanwhile the vast majority of people in this business are freelancers,
people who range from barely affording to buy their stuff, cover insurance,bills,expenses etc, and live a lifestyle that usually ranges from "im barely making it" to "i'm relatively comfortable with maybe a few grand in the bank but i still work hard".

So most of them/us can hardly claim that we've got a few hundred k's in the bank to sustain ourselves if everything suddenly collapses.At least i will not have to lay off people
and i consider that an achievent in life in a weird sort of way.
Depends on your philosophy in life i guess.

« Reply #70 on: May 20, 2015, 17:06 »
+3
Thanks Jim. My thoughts exactly. Some one should post this link in a new thread on SS. With Jims permission Only.

You have my permission to post the link on the SS blog. I'm happy to have as many people as possible read the article.

Rinderart

« Reply #71 on: May 22, 2015, 20:04 »
0
Thanks Jim. someone else did. Good piece.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
2 Replies
2668 Views
Last post June 26, 2006, 08:20
by leaf
0% Royalty!

Started by robggs « 1 2  All » iStockPhoto.com

37 Replies
21074 Views
Last post February 13, 2011, 05:31
by robggs
6 Replies
1781 Views
Last post March 04, 2015, 16:14
by BD
0 Replies
1173 Views
Last post August 28, 2015, 07:28
by helloitsme
12 Replies
2909 Views
Last post March 02, 2017, 16:49
by JimP

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results