pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Royalty Declines At Shutterstock  (Read 9582 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« 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
21077 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
1175 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