MicrostockGroup
Agency Based Discussion => Shutterstock.com => Topic started by: gostwyck on January 09, 2014, 14:42
-
Well this was a surprise. Our learned friend Sean has finally uploaded an exploratory selection of his images to Shutterstock. Read all about it here;
http://www.seanlockephotography.com/2014/01/08/now-licensing-shutterstock/ (http://www.seanlockephotography.com/2014/01/08/now-licensing-shutterstock/)
Portfolio on SS;
http://www.shutterstock.com/gallery-2084267p1.html (http://www.shutterstock.com/gallery-2084267p1.html)
Good luck with it!
-
That's a surprise - but it does make sense. Trying to get a decent return must be almost impossible if you refuse to go on subscription sites.
-
That's a surprise - but it does make sense. Trying to get a decent return must be almost impossible if you refuse to go on subscription sites.
I didn't want to start a whole post about me here, so I put it on my blog, but I knew I'd be "outed" eventually, lol.
Like I said, it's hard to talk intelligently about it if I have no experience, so it seems like a good idea to give it a try, as "unprofessional" as it might be ;) .
-
This explains why I've seen a big drop in my sales! Sean is getting them all lol! ;)
-
That's a surprise - but it does make sense. Trying to get a decent return must be almost impossible if you refuse to go on subscription sites.
I didn't want to start a whole post about me here, so I put it on my blog, but I knew I'd be "outed" eventually, lol.
Like I said, it's hard to talk intelligently about it if I have no experience, so it seems like a good idea to give it a try, as "unprofessional" as it might be ;) .
It would be interesting to see how it goes... Or is that against the terms of service? I have to say, I've been tempted to upload a batch or two there just to see if it would jump start my declining sales there.
-
How did you get past the captcha?
-
Captcha is nothing
How did he get images of a clearly visible GM SUV accepted as non editorial????
And how did he get people accepted with no model release????
-
What image doesn't have a release?
-
best of luck Sean
-
What image doesn't have a release?
My bad I see they do have releases.
-
never say never
-
never say never
Ever?
-
Another lost battle against the subs system.
Anyway, good luck.
-
the sub system is fine.
The problem is that the agencies cheat in their end, and take endless amounts of new photographers in, so that the images cannot earn enough downloads per image.
-
Another lost battle against the subs system.
Anyway, good luck.
As you well know, the circumstances are not of Sean's choosing. As we all do, you play the hand you're dealt - unless you cheat in some fashion (the non-exclusive exclusives, for example).
If iStock hadn't behaved so abominably, I'd still be an exclusive and would never have put anything in the partner program, and...
Even Getty contributors got stuck with forced subscription sales if Getty chose it as the "best" place to market their work.
As a seller, I think subscriptions suck, but I can live with the SS bargain because (a) their volume is high and (b) only about 40% of my sales there are subscription and the percentage has been steadily dropping as SS goes after Getty's business.
-
In the digital age on the world market it does not matter if you sell your image 1000 times for 1 dollar or 1 time for 1000 dollars.
For me it is fine if the customer gets the images cheaply, as long as I sell them often enough.
-
well I wouldn't have put money on this 2 years ago. I can more than understand when SS is polling at more than the next top 3 combined.
-
well I wouldn't have put money on this 2 years ago. I can more than understand when SS is polling at more than the next top 3 combined.
Two year ago, Sean's circumstances were vastly different.
iStock chose to deliver his port to the opposition on a plate.
-
Fascinating! Very brave to reevaluate your opinion of subs and Shutterstock and to just go and test it directly! Personally I think Videos are more interesting than photos, but my portfolio for photos is still too small and I am not uploading enough. SS needs very regular uploads, preferably in larger batches. At least for me the results were better if I combined my weekly uploads into one large lot instead of sending a few images every day.
Feels like spinning a wheel and a very large batch, gives a very visible push to the whole portfolio. Then things slowly drop down again and settle at a higher level than before. The lower level is remarkably stable, even if you don´t upload for 2 months. I can see why the community likes SS.
Plus the upload system is superb and SS has managed to keep their business running with a lot less emotional drama than all the other agencies. It means they have very good peopleskills and know how to respect the community as a group of independent entrepreneurs that they meet at eye level.
I need to get used to producing in much higher volume, not just for SS. But I am happy to do this if supplying several agencies keeps me free and my income balanced.
-
Its quite a shift in the industry. Yuri and Andresr leave SS for IS, and Sean is no longer on IS and submitting to SS.
-
Like I said, it's hard to talk intelligently about it if I have no experience, so it seems like a good idea to give it a try, as "unprofessional" as it might be ;)
Good luck with it! I hope you made a good choice and you'll see profit fast :) Let us know how it goes! :)
-
In my eyes your integrity is still immaculate.
Your are still my hero.
Good luck.
@ Ron, pls don't compare Sean with "iStock's professionals", it is insulting ;)
-
I think this is a good decision. And it will benefit everyone, because Sean's good imagery will draw more customers to Shutterstock. I wish you good luck!
-
So, Sean, is it living up to its billing so far?
-
Sean,
Could you please prepare Greasemonkey scripts which:
- remove Captcha
- put date and city automatically in caption for editorial files
Thank you
-
Is now the time to buy SS shares? I mean Yuri showed us how they dropped when he left, so now with Sean testing the waters it must mean they will go up right?
;)
-
Is now the time to buy SS shares? I mean Yuri showed us how they dropped when he left, so now with Sean testing the waters it must mean they will go up right?
;)
As always, Jasmin, by the time the man in the street realises it's time to buy the opportunity has passed. The Sean rally has already happened. Here's the news from Jan 8th:
SSTK has traded 145,933 shares today.
SSTK is trading at a new lifetime high.
(Currently about $83, up from $27 a year ago.... if only I'd been taking my earnings as share options!)
-
So, Sean, is it living up to its billing so far?
11 sub sales yesterday, don't know if that is good or bad. I like the map interface on the home page for sales. Not crazy about using description meta as the title because I have to retype all my titles. The model release manager would be more useful if you could do multiple releases for people. I have to add the date of the release to the name to tell the difference.
-
So, Sean, is it living up to its billing so far?
11 sub sales yesterday, don't know if that is good or bad. I like the map interface on the home page for sales. Not crazy about using description meta as the title because I have to retype all my titles. The model release manager would be more useful if you could do multiple releases for people. I have to add the date of the release to the name to tell the difference.
You only need one release per person for all images of that person. 11 subs on a new portfolio of 200 images is ok. It needs time to settle and get traction. Soon ODDs, ELs and SODs will come in and then your income will increase nicely over the year. Roughly you get one EL on every 500 DLs, thats seems to a reliable average.
-
So, Sean, is it living up to its billing so far?
11 sub sales yesterday, don't know if that is good or bad. I like the map interface on the home page for sales. Not crazy about using description meta as the title because I have to retype all my titles. The model release manager would be more useful if you could do multiple releases for people. I have to add the date of the release to the name to tell the difference.
You only need one release per person for all images of that person. 11 subs on a new portfolio of 200 images is ok. It needs time to settle and get traction. Soon ODDs, ELs and SODs will come in and then your income will increase nicely over the year. Roughly you get one EL on every 500 DLs, thats seems to a reliable average.
Most of my releases are for a specific date. I would think they would want the right one attached, no? That would make it easier if they didn't.
-
So, Sean, is it living up to its billing so far?
11 sub sales yesterday, don't know if that is good or bad. I like the map interface on the home page for sales. Not crazy about using description meta as the title because I have to retype all my titles. The model release manager would be more useful if you could do multiple releases for people. I have to add the date of the release to the name to tell the difference.
You only need one release per person for all images of that person. 11 subs on a new portfolio of 200 images is ok. It needs time to settle and get traction. Soon ODDs, ELs and SODs will come in and then your income will increase nicely over the year. Roughly you get one EL on every 500 DLs, thats seems to a reliable average.
Most of my releases are for a specific date. I would think they would want the right one attached, no? That would make it easier if they didn't.
You need only one release per person.... they didn't care when or at what specific photo shoot was signed.
-
Really? Last year, they demanded even a location for each shooting on the releases!
-
So, Sean, is it living up to its billing so far?
11 sub sales yesterday, don't know if that is good or bad. I like the map interface on the home page for sales. Not crazy about using description meta as the title because I have to retype all my titles. The model release manager would be more useful if you could do multiple releases for people. I have to add the date of the release to the name to tell the difference.
I don't know if you can really ever say it is good or bad: it is what it is. For me, sales equalling about 10% of my portfolio in a day would leave me overjoyed, 1% is a pretty good day for me. But then you outsold me more than tenfold on iS.
It's a ridiculously limited data set to try to draw any conclusions from but selling at a rate of 10 to 15 times what I do actually does seem reasonable, so my guess is that if you assume you will continue to sell 10% of your online portfolio per day and multiply the available portfolio size by the reported average sale value - which is about 85c, if I recall correctly - then you will have some kind of ballpark figure of what you can expect to earn.
-
Really? Last year, they demanded even a location for each shooting on the releases!
Not on SS no. IS yes.
-
11 sub sales yesterday, don't know if that is good or bad. I like the map interface on the home page for sales. Not crazy about using description meta as the title because I have to retype all my titles. The model release manager would be more useful if you could do multiple releases for people. I have to add the date of the release to the name to tell the difference.
Downloads at SS are not yet up to full speed after the festive season __ I'd say they are only about 75% of what I'd consider 'normal'. On a normal weekday I'd expect about 2% of my portfolio to be downloaded. I seem to remember you out-selling me on IS by about 5x so I'd expect you to sell up to 10% of your portfolio on a given day when things are busy.
Early sales on new images are to be expected although not as much as they once were. I'm sure long-term subscribers regularly trawl for new images in the subjects that they have an interest in. Generally speaking however it can take an image up to 6 months to attain its optimum sort-order position.
Sort order position is entirely driven by the keywords actually used when an image is downloaded. Therefore similar images from the same series often prove popular in different keyword searches. For example a series of a family camping might have one image popular on a search using 'camping', another image popular with 'outdoors' and another with 'family vacation'.
I'm sure you have a made a good move with Shutterstock. Stock images by their nature are a depreciating asset and you might as well have them earning you good money whilst they are depreciating rather than hidden away on a hard drive somewhere.
I'd recommend DT for further exploration next. Earnings at DT, for a given portfolio, might be expected to earn at roughly 20-25% of the same portfolio at SS. However earnings tend to be particularly stable at DT because RPD increases as images ascend Levels. Don't forget to stuff titles and descriptions at DT with the most important keywords (NB: they don't have to make perfect grammatical sense).
Btw __ have you tried the SS Contributors' App on your iPad yet? If you like the map you'll love the app! It's brilliant for quickly checking daily/weekly sales, total earnings for each image and the keywords used by buyers.
-
Well said Gostwyck!
-
Sort order position is entirely driven by the keywords actually used when an image is downloaded. Therefore similar images from the same series often prove popular in different keyword searches. For example a series of a family camping might have one image popular on a search using 'camping', another image popular with 'outdoors' and another with 'family vacation'.
Thats not entirely correct. It totally depends on which sort order you are using, New, Popular or Relevant. And the Popular search is using a lot more factors to determine sort order.
The speed of sales, the number of sales, how quick an images sells after coming online, views, downloads, geo-location of the buyer, etc, all are factored into the algorithm.
-
Btw __ have you tried the SS Contributors' App on your iPad yet? If you like the map you'll love the app! It's brilliant for quickly checking daily/weekly sales, total earnings for each image and the keywords used by buyers.
I couldn't find it in the app store. All I found was the buyers app. What's it called?
-
Btw __ have you tried the SS Contributors' App on your iPad yet? If you like the map you'll love the app! It's brilliant for quickly checking daily/weekly sales, total earnings for each image and the keywords used by buyers.
I couldn't find it in the app store. All I found was the buyers app. What's it called?
Not sure if its an app, just click http://submit.shutterstock.com/mobile (http://submit.shutterstock.com/mobile) and login
-
What Ron said :) Read the blog post about it here
http://www.shutterstock.com/buzz/contributor-mobile-app (http://www.shutterstock.com/buzz/contributor-mobile-app)
-
That's a surprise - but it does make sense. Trying to get a decent return must be almost impossible if you refuse to go on subscription sites.
It tells of the low sales on Stocksy and the lack of hope for it coming close to istock's income.
-
Good luck Sean, I'm sure you will be pleasantly surprised at your returns on SS with the rep you have and your port. I'm only a small fish but compared to what IS does and is doing, real professionalism is plain to see. Enjoy your success. SS is really not a bad company.
-
never say never
Sean was inspired to upload to SS while listening to Romeo Void?
-
That's a surprise - but it does make sense. Trying to get a decent return must be almost impossible if you refuse to go on subscription sites.
It tells of the low sales on Stocksy and the lack of hope for it coming close to istock's income.
Actually, it's more about the low sales on Pond, DP, etc. It's nice to see 7 year old files come back to life.
-
So, Sean, is it living up to its billing so far?
11 sub sales yesterday, don't know if that is good or bad.
That's the tip of the iceberg. I got about the same amount of sales yesterday, and I am sure you outsell me by a few orders of magnitude. Your future daily numbers will dwarf those 11 sales.
-
Happy to see your white background images found a well deserved home. I'm sure these images will do best over there!
Wish you success and many extended licenses! :)
-
It means they have very good peopleskills and know how to respect the community as a group of independent entrepreneurs that they meet at eye level.
Sorry but for me, 35 cents isn't "eye level."
-
Good luck Sean, I'm sure you will be pleasantly surprised at your returns on SS with the rep you have and your port. I'm only a small fish but compared to what IS does and is doing, real professionalism is plain to see. Enjoy your success. SS is really not a bad company.
7 year old images also show 7 year old clothing, hairstyles and interiors. Lifestyle is the toughest category, and Seans 7 year old images will be competing against new fresh up to date content, and millions of it. Its not going to be an easy ride, but I am sure with more and new content he will make a decent return.
-
It means they have very good peopleskills and know how to respect the community as a group of independent entrepreneurs that they meet at eye level.
Sorry but for me, 35 cents isn't "eye level."
The only place I get 35 cents (or less) is iStock or dreamstime - if you're going to criticize SS, at least keep up with where things actually are versus some straw horse that's convenient but incorrect.
-
My lowest was 6 cents. From Gettyimages.
I feel comfortable buying iphone apps for 99 cents that were programmed by over 100 people and took 18 months to develop. I don´t feel bad if people pay 35 cents as long as there are enough sales.
You just need to offer the right files for the high volume market and the specialised content for the low volume market.
Business is business. Only the money in my bank account is what is important.
-
Good luck Sean, I'm sure you will be pleasantly surprised at your returns on SS with the rep you have and your port. I'm only a small fish but compared to what IS does and is doing, real professionalism is plain to see. Enjoy your success. SS is really not a bad company.
7 year old images also show 7 year old clothing, hairstyles and interiors. Lifestyle is the toughest category, and Seans 7 year old images will be competing against new fresh up to date content, and millions of it. Its not going to be an easy ride, but I am sure with more and new content he will make a decent return.
A lot of it is more concept then lifestyle, which should help. The really dated stuff, I'm avoiding.
-
It means they have very good peopleskills and know how to respect the community as a group of independent entrepreneurs that they meet at eye level.
Sorry but for me, 35 cents isn't "eye level."
The only place I get 35 cents (or less) is iStock or dreamstime - if you're going to criticize SS, at least keep up with where things actually are versus some straw horse that's convenient but incorrect.
Deleted because posted as a reply towrong post.
-
Good luck Sean ;) not that I think you'll need it with your port! ;D
-
Good luck Sean, I'm sure you will be pleasantly surprised at your returns on SS with the rep you have and your port. I'm only a small fish but compared to what IS does and is doing, real professionalism is plain to see. Enjoy your success. SS is really not a bad company.
7 year old images also show 7 year old clothing, hairstyles and interiors. Lifestyle is the toughest category, and Seans 7 year old images will be competing against new fresh up to date content, and millions of it. Its not going to be an easy ride, but I am sure with more and new content he will make a decent return.
Do now mechanics wear fucsia overalls and page haircuts? I don't see great differences with Sean's images on SS: most could have been shot last year. With his backlog I don't see any need to shoot new stuff just for SS; as I understand (maybe wrongly) Sean's new and far better stuff goes to Stocksy.
-
Good luck Sean, I'm sure you will be pleasantly surprised at your returns on SS with the rep you have and your port. I'm only a small fish but compared to what IS does and is doing, real professionalism is plain to see. Enjoy your success. SS is really not a bad company.
7 year old images also show 7 year old clothing, hairstyles and interiors. Lifestyle is the toughest category, and Seans 7 year old images will be competing against new fresh up to date content, and millions of it. Its not going to be an easy ride, but I am sure with more and new content he will make a decent return.
Do now mechanics wear fucsia overalls and page haircuts? I don't see great differences with Sean's images on SS: most could have been shot last year. With his backlog I don't see any need to shoot new stuff just for SS; as I understand (maybe wrongly) Sean's new and far better stuff goes to Stocksy.
Exactly. My older images still sell regularly on all agencies that they appear on. Of my last 20 downloads at IS for example, 12 of them were uploaded between 2005-8.
-
It means they have very good peopleskills and know how to respect the community as a group of independent entrepreneurs that they meet at eye level.
Sorry but for me, 35 cents isn't "eye level."
The only place I get 35 cents (or less) is iStock or dreamstime - if you're going to criticize SS, at least keep up with where things actually are versus some straw horse that's convenient but incorrect.
I apologize for that misrepresentation - I am actually getting only 33 cents per subscription download.
-
It means they have very good peopleskills and know how to respect the community as a group of independent entrepreneurs that they meet at eye level.
Sorry but for me, 35 cents isn't "eye level."
The only place I get 35 cents (or less) is iStock or dreamstime - if you're going to criticize SS, at least keep up with where things actually are versus some straw horse that's convenient but incorrect.
I apologize for that misrepresentation - I am actually only getting 33 cents per subscription download.
Well, then there is still a 15% raise to be earned. Try that on IS. lol
-
At least with Shutterstock you get a "raise" after you sell a certain number of images (though I do wish there were more/higher tiers for those of us who reach new levels).
On iStock I'm at the one and only vector rate (recently raised to 20%), and my earnings per DL are dropping each month, as more non-exclusive images are shifted to PP purchases rather than iStock purchases. It's sort of the opposite at Shutterstock, where my earnings per DL are rising thanks to ELs, etc. They're close to neck and neck now, but SS will soon outpace iS.
So my earnings stay pretty much level (except for Amazing Mistaken October) at iStock despite adding new files, while they continue to rise at SS.
Keeping all my fingers and toes crossed for Symbiostock.
-
I'm late to the party, but wanted to say Welcome to Sean. I would say "good luck" too, but you won't need it. Your images, even older ones, are of a quality where you don't need luck to sell them.
I think you will see in a very short time that you made a good decision. Your earnings will most likely be in the (high) double and triple digits per day there by the end of this year, assuming you upload a large quantity of images.
I also think you are smart to use this opportunity (unasked for though it was) to do different things with different segments of your portfolio. Lots of us who have been indie for a long time have everything pretty much everywhere. If I were to start as an indie today it would make a lot more sense to do as you are doing and keep the better or more unusual stuff for boutique sites and spread around the more common subjects.
-
Roughly you get one EL on every 500 DLs, thats seems to a reliable average.
Interesting. I checked mine and in the years 2008-2013 I had 1 EL per 250.21 downloads (including footage sales).
However, in 2013 I had only 1 EL per 361.08 downloads.
4 of my best-selling photos had very frequent ELs before 2013, then the new most-popular sort hurt them, which may explain the drop.
Anyway, I think SS is currently the best place for the type of images that Sean decided to upload there.
The real fun at SS begins when the images reach high positions in the most-popular sort of popular searches. Unfortunately it seems to be more difficult than 2-3 years ago.
-
Started March 2012, 641 DLs per EL.
-
Good luck Sean
On a normal weekday I'd expect about 10% to 15% of my portfolio to be downloaded. I have been a submitter since 2004 and until last March my daily percentage was higher. As a new submitter I would expect your % to be higher than mine.
I would also encourage you to explore DT, in recent months my port there exceeds earnings at SS.
-
Good luck Sean, I'm sure you will be pleasantly surprised at your returns on SS with the rep you have and your port. I'm only a small fish but compared to what IS does and is doing, real professionalism is plain to see. Enjoy your success. SS is really not a bad company.
7 year old images also show 7 year old clothing, hairstyles and interiors. Lifestyle is the toughest category, and Seans 7 year old images will be competing against new fresh up to date content, and millions of it. Its not going to be an easy ride, but I am sure with more and new content he will make a decent return.
Do now mechanics wear fucsia overalls and page haircuts?
Yes, of course, but in real life, probably not on stock:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2338905/Britain-s-girl-garage-Women-flock-cars-serviced-female-mechanics-men-arent-far-.html (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2338905/Britain-s-girl-garage-Women-flock-cars-serviced-female-mechanics-men-arent-far-.html)
-
Good luck Sean, I'm sure you will be pleasantly surprised at your returns on SS with the rep you have and your port. I'm only a small fish but compared to what IS does and is doing, real professionalism is plain to see. Enjoy your success. SS is really not a bad company.
7 year old images also show 7 year old clothing, hairstyles and interiors. Lifestyle is the toughest category, and Seans 7 year old images will be competing against new fresh up to date content, and millions of it. Its not going to be an easy ride, but I am sure with more and new content he will make a decent return.
Do now mechanics wear fucsia overalls and page haircuts? I don't see great differences with Sean's images on SS: most could have been shot last year. With his backlog I don't see any need to shoot new stuff just for SS; as I understand (maybe wrongly) Sean's new and far better stuff goes to Stocksy.
Exactly. My older images still sell regularly on all agencies that they appear on. Of my last 20 downloads at IS for example, 12 of them were uploaded between 2005-8.
Sure, they've earned their search position over time. Dont you shoot food and landscapes? Quite timeless, no?
-
No Mechanics do not wear coveralls of any type and haven't since back in the 70's!
Trust me on this I am an Auto Tech and have been for more then 30 years and I myself never wore coveralls but the Man who taught me did and he was what we could call an old timer.
In today's world Mechanics dress in nice uniforms with nothing on them to scratch the cars paint when leaning over them and they must wear safety shoes of some type.
They have also been getting relaxed in lots of shops and are allowing techs to wear T-shirts and shorts!
So forget the coveralls that is a thing of the past and can actually be very dangerous because you have more clothing on for moving parts to grab onto and pull you into harms way!!!!
Good luck Sean, I'm sure you will be pleasantly surprised at your returns on SS with the rep you have and your port. I'm only a small fish but compared to what IS does and is doing, real professionalism is plain to see. Enjoy your success. SS is really not a bad company.
7 year old images also show 7 year old clothing, hairstyles and interiors. Lifestyle is the toughest category, and Seans 7 year old images will be competing against new fresh up to date content, and millions of it. Its not going to be an easy ride, but I am sure with more and new content he will make a decent return.
Do now mechanics wear fucsia overalls and page haircuts?
Yes, of course, but in real life, probably not on stock:
[url]http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2338905/Britain-s-girl-garage-Women-flock-cars-serviced-female-mechanics-men-arent-far-.html[/url] ([url]http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2338905/Britain-s-girl-garage-Women-flock-cars-serviced-female-mechanics-men-arent-far-.html[/url])
-
11 sub sales yesterday, don't know if that is good or bad. I like the map interface on the home page for sales. Not crazy about using description meta as the title because I have to retype all my titles. The model release manager would be more useful if you could do multiple releases for people. I have to add the date of the release to the name to tell the difference.
Downloads at SS are not yet up to full speed after the festive season __ I'd say they are only about 75% of what I'd consider 'normal'. On a normal weekday I'd expect about 2% of my portfolio to be downloaded. I seem to remember you out-selling me on IS by about 5x so I'd expect you to sell up to 10% of your portfolio on a given day when things are busy.
Early sales on new images are to be expected although not as much as they once were. I'm sure long-term subscribers regularly trawl for new images in the subjects that they have an interest in. Generally speaking however it can take an image up to 6 months to attain its optimum sort-order position.
Sort order position is entirely driven by the keywords actually used when an image is downloaded. Therefore similar images from the same series often prove popular in different keyword searches. For example a series of a family camping might have one image popular on a search using 'camping', another image popular with 'outdoors' and another with 'family vacation'.
I'm sure you have a made a good move with Shutterstock. Stock images by their nature are a depreciating asset and you might as well have them earning you good money whilst they are depreciating rather than hidden away on a hard drive somewhere.
I'd recommend DT for further exploration next. Earnings at DT, for a given portfolio, might be expected to earn at roughly 20-25% of the same portfolio at SS. However earnings tend to be particularly stable at DT because RPD increases as images ascend Levels. Don't forget to stuff titles and descriptions at DT with the most important keywords (NB: they don't have to make perfect grammatical sense).
Btw __ have you tried the SS Contributors' App on your iPad yet? If you like the map you'll love the app! It's brilliant for quickly checking daily/weekly sales, total earnings for each image and the keywords used by buyers.
I am glad to see it's not just me. My sales, while up since xmas, are still a good bit eroded.
-
ruxpriencdiam Location. Third stone from the sun
" Mechanics do not wear coveralls of any type and haven't since back in the 70's!"
Here on planet Earth, my car mechanic wears traditional blue overalls. The other one in my town wears tan overalls.
-
Sean, always admired your dedicated and professional approach on the industry and the microstock community, and I still do. This might sound odd, but personally, I find your decision to give it a try on SS a bit reassuring. Somehow, if you are trying it, SS might not be such a bad place to do business. Good luck!
-
ruxpriencdiam Location. Third stone from the sun
" Mechanics do not wear coveralls of any type and haven't since back in the 70's!"
Here on planet Earth, my car mechanic wears traditional blue overalls. The other one in my town wears tan overalls.
Exactly. I know two mechanics, one works for the police and wears a uniform, the other has his own shop and wears green coveralls. Rux has a tendency to look in the mirror and call it the world.
-
The garage I go to the guy guy wears a sweater and jeans. By the way rux is right. The chain garages have some sort of uniform.
-
Sean was inspired to upload to SS while listening to Romeo Void?
Wow, hat's a blast from the past! I used to love that song! I had to go to YouTube to listen to it again.
For those of you that have never heard it, or just want to hear it again, here you go:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ePIImGMjn_8 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ePIImGMjn_8)
-
My lowest sale since I became exclusive at IS was 20c -- from Getty Images' Partner Portal.
But happily the sale was refunded 3 months later, (without notice). :o ::) So it's like it never happened, and now my lowest sale was whatever it was on IS (recently probably about $0.40 or $0.50).
-
My lowest sale since I became exclusive at IS was 20c -- from Getty Images' Partner Portal.
But happily the sale was refunded 3 months later, (without notice). :o ::) So it's like it never happened, and now my lowest sale was whatever it was on IS (recently probably about $0.40 or $0.50).
LOL. Hard to say if this is an endorsement or indictment of Getty.
At least it show's you're an optimist. A pessimist might conclude that the download had gone from paying .20 in royalties to paying .00. ;)
-
One release per model is all they need really. That is the key Shutterstock uses to show "Same Model | See All" underneath a picture. If you upload multiple releases per model customers wouldn't be able to get to all photos of the same model with one click.
-
Good luck Sean, I'm sure you will be pleasantly surprised at your returns on SS with the rep you have and your port. I'm only a small fish but compared to what IS does and is doing, real professionalism is plain to see. Enjoy your success. SS is really not a bad company.
7 year old images also show 7 year old clothing, hairstyles and interiors. Lifestyle is the toughest category, and Seans 7 year old images will be competing against new fresh up to date content, and millions of it. Its not going to be an easy ride, but I am sure with more and new content he will make a decent return.
A lot of it is more concept then lifestyle, which should help. The really dated stuff, I'm avoiding.
Good thing monkey business did not take this advice. Most of the images theyt put on istock were taken with an outdated camera and lifestyle shots of 7 years old or more. It did not seem to hurt their sales. Generic clothing and looks don't change much even after ten years. I have a photo from 1997 of me with friends that looks like it could have been from 2 years ago. Only change is every one would look older now.
Same with the getty junk they sold as agency on IS. That stuff was from the 1990s. No one seem to notice. The only dated item was the file size.
-
Good luck Sean, I'm sure you will be pleasantly surprised at your returns on SS with the rep you have and your port. I'm only a small fish but compared to what IS does and is doing, real professionalism is plain to see. Enjoy your success. SS is really not a bad company.
7 year old images also show 7 year old clothing, hairstyles and interiors. Lifestyle is the toughest category, and Seans 7 year old images will be competing against new fresh up to date content, and millions of it. Its not going to be an easy ride, but I am sure with more and new content he will make a decent return.
A lot of it is more concept then lifestyle, which should help. The really dated stuff, I'm avoiding.
Good thing monkey business did not take this advice. Most of the images theyt put on istock were taken with an outdated camera and lifestyle shots of 7 years old or more. It did not seem to hurt their sales. Generic clothing and looks don't change much even after ten years. I have a photo from 1997 of me with friends that looks like it could have been from 2 years ago. Only change is every one would look older now.
Same with the getty junk they sold as agency on IS. That stuff was from the 1990s. No one seem to notice. The only dated item was the file size.
No one gave any advice not to upload older images.
-
Just wanted to say that I agree that dreamstime is a very interesting and friendly site as well. Since istock removed the artist page and our blogs, Dreamstime has been sending out some very charming newsletter highlighting individual blogs and I think they even ran a small competition? They are certainly encouraging the artists to use their pages for self marketing, so i am not surprised that their revenue is rising.
Happy artists that feel comfortable in their community and forum and enthusiastically support a site can have a good influence. It creates the warm fuzzy background chit chatter that the real marketing of the salesteam can build on.
-
Is there no way to get a list of downloads sorted by "last download"?
-
I don't think so, though they seem to appear in order as they flash up on the map of the world
-
Is there no way to get a list of downloads sorted by "last download"?
Not as far as I'm aware of. Just the daily sales sorted by age. The map is the only thing that allows you to see the last 10 downloads as and where they happened.
-
stock performer is your friend Sean. I would´t know what to do without them.
The stats on SS are useless with the exception of the world map, but that just shows you the last 10 files, so you don´t get country specific data you can analyse for targeting your shootings. It is more of a gimmick, but a lot of fun.
-
stock performer is your friend Sean. I would´t know what to do without them.
The stats on SS are useless with the exception of the world map, but that just shows you the last 10 files, so you don´t get country specific data you can analyse for targeting your shootings. It is more of a gimmick, but a lot of fun.
Does SP show you a "last upload" list?
Is there any way to see the keywords used on the site, or do you have to use the mobile app.
Thought this was interesting. Uploaded this on early this morning, got approved in a batch, and sold already. It's from way back in '06. http://www.shutterstock.com/pic.mhtml?id=171415634 (http://www.shutterstock.com/pic.mhtml?id=171415634) .
-
stock performer is your friend Sean. I would´t know what to do without them.
The stats on SS are useless with the exception of the world map, but that just shows you the last 10 files, so you don´t get country specific data you can analyse for targeting your shootings. It is more of a gimmick, but a lot of fun.
Does SP show you a "last upload" list?
Is there any way to see the keywords used on the site, or do you have to use the mobile app.
Thought this was interesting. Uploaded this on early this morning, got approved in a batch, and sold already. It's from way back in '06. [url]http://www.shutterstock.com/pic.mhtml?id=171415634[/url] ([url]http://www.shutterstock.com/pic.mhtml?id=171415634[/url]) .
http://submit.shutterstock.com/darkroom/gallery.mhtml (http://submit.shutterstock.com/darkroom/gallery.mhtml)
-
stock performer is your friend Sean. I would´t know what to do without them.
The stats on SS are useless with the exception of the world map, but that just shows you the last 10 files, so you don´t get country specific data you can analyse for targeting your shootings. It is more of a gimmick, but a lot of fun.
Does SP show you a "last upload" list?
Is there any way to see the keywords used on the site, or do you have to use the mobile app.
Thought this was interesting. Uploaded this on early this morning, got approved in a batch, and sold already. It's from way back in '06. [url]http://www.shutterstock.com/pic.mhtml?id=171415634[/url] ([url]http://www.shutterstock.com/pic.mhtml?id=171415634[/url]) .
What does 'couple' refer to? (Some American sports reference, I'm guessing)
-
You get to that list Ron linked to from the submitter interface Insights -> Image Gallery Stats. Unfortunately only some columns are sortable - number of downloads or date uploaded
-
stock performer is your friend Sean. I would´t know what to do without them.
The stats on SS are useless with the exception of the world map, but that just shows you the last 10 files, so you don´t get country specific data you can analyse for targeting your shootings. It is more of a gimmick, but a lot of fun.
Does SP show you a "last upload" list?
Is there any way to see the keywords used on the site, or do you have to use the mobile app.
Thought this was interesting. Uploaded this on early this morning, got approved in a batch, and sold already. It's from way back in '06. [url]http://www.shutterstock.com/pic.mhtml?id=171415634[/url] ([url]http://www.shutterstock.com/pic.mhtml?id=171415634[/url]) .
What does 'couple' refer to? (Some American sports reference, I'm guessing)
That's just my way of indicating an image is a part of a series - the rest with him is him and a "girlfriend".
-
stock performer is your friend Sean. I would´t know what to do without them.
The stats on SS are useless with the exception of the world map, but that just shows you the last 10 files, so you don´t get country specific data you can analyse for targeting your shootings. It is more of a gimmick, but a lot of fun.
Does SP show you a "last upload" list?
Is there any way to see the keywords used on the site, or do you have to use the mobile app.
Thought this was interesting. Uploaded this on early this morning, got approved in a batch, and sold already. It's from way back in '06. [url]http://www.shutterstock.com/pic.mhtml?id=171415634[/url] ([url]http://www.shutterstock.com/pic.mhtml?id=171415634[/url]) .
What does 'couple' refer to? (Some American sports reference, I'm guessing)
That's just my way of indicating an image is a part of a series - the rest with him is him and a "girlfriend".
Ah. OK.
-
Just wanted to say that I agree that dreamstime is a very interesting and friendly site as well. Since istock removed the artist page and our blogs, Dreamstime has been sending out some very charming newsletter highlighting individual blogs and I think they even ran a small competition? They are certainly encouraging the artists to use their pages for self marketing, so i am not surprised that their revenue is rising.
I agree with Cobalt. Definitely give your work to Dreamstime. Your portfolio would fit in very well, and probably fill a few gaps for them.
-
For every month stockperformer shows you the uploads to any agency for that month. And if you have downloads, you will see them next to the files.
It doesn´t work exactly like the lists on istock, but it is the same for all agencies, so you can go and look at your monthly uploads and results quite easily.
You can ask them any question you have, they will reply really fast.
It is worth trying them.
-
Well, it took me 12 days, but I broke $100. Reminds me of iStock in 2005. :) Just Fyi...
-
This will probably be one of my favourite Popcorn threads ;)
Yuri was known to have 3-4000 downloads a day Sean...we have great expectations!!
Looking forward to your first 1000 Dollars...
-
This will probably be one of my favourite Popcorn threads ;)
Yuri was known to have 3-4000 downloads a day Sean...we have great expectations!!
Looking forward to your first 1000 Dollars...
I don't think I'm professional enough to break that.
-
LOL! ;D
-
Well, it took me 12 days, but I broke $100. Reminds me of iStock in 2005. :) Just Fyi...
Thats sick. Man. Took me 3 months. Shows that good stock still sells. You'll hit 33 cent within the next 4 weeks and then things accelerate.
-
But at iStock in 2005 there was no option for a single sale that would net you $114 in royalties (that's the largest single SOD sale I've had so far at SS). Just sayin' :)
-
I hope there are a lot more of those in our future. I had a $70 one yesterday. :)
-
stock performer is your friend Sean. I would´t know what to do without them.
The stats on SS are useless with the exception of the world map, but that just shows you the last 10 files, so you don´t get country specific data you can analyse for targeting your shootings. It is more of a gimmick, but a lot of fun.
Does SP show you a "last upload" list?
Is there any way to see the keywords used on the site, or do you have to use the mobile app.
Thought this was interesting. Uploaded this on early this morning, got approved in a batch, and sold already. It's from way back in '06. [url]http://www.shutterstock.com/pic.mhtml?id=171415634[/url] ([url]http://www.shutterstock.com/pic.mhtml?id=171415634[/url]) .
What does 'couple' refer to? (Some American sports reference, I'm guessing)
That's just my way of indicating an image is a part of a series - the rest with him is him and a "girlfriend".
Ah. OK.
You might consider adding the keyword “American” to your football images as people outside the U.S. call it “American Football.” This is just a suggestion based on personal experience. You are always helping other people on this forum (:
-
You might consider adding the keyword “American” to your football images as people outside the U.S. call it “American Football.” This is just a suggestion based on personal experience. You are always helping other people on this forum (:
I think I have added that in the past. I'll check it. thx!
-
Best of luck Sean!
-
Well, it took me 12 days, but I broke $100. Reminds me of iStock in 2005. :) Just Fyi...
Thats sick. Man. Took me 3 months. Shows that good stock still sells. You'll hit 33 cent within the next 4 weeks and then things accelerate.
You're right it is sick, SS dragging everyone back to 2005 iS income levels.
If they could bring it back to iS 2010 exclusive levels I'd be impressed but SS have f$%^&ed any chance of that ever happening again.
-
Well, it took me 12 days, but I broke $100. Reminds me of iStock in 2005. :) Just Fyi...
Thats sick. Man. Took me 3 months. Shows that good stock still sells. You'll hit 33 cent within the next 4 weeks and then things accelerate.
You're right it is sick, SS dragging everyone back to 2005 iS income levels.
If they could bring it back to iS 2010 exclusive levels I'd be impressed but SS have f$%^&ed any chance of that ever happening again.
looking at 17$ this month I believe its the other way ;D
-
But at iStock in 2005 there was no option for a single sale that would net you $114 in royalties (that's the largest single SOD sale I've had so far at SS). Just sayin' :)
Is that for 'sensitive' use?
-
I´ve sold easter eggs and flip flops with that license. I don´t really know what it is, but I doubt it is a sensitive use clause.
-
I´ve sold easter eggs and flip flops with that license. I don´t really know what it is, but I doubt it is a sensitive use clause.
OK, Thanks.
I thought I read here that any file used for 'sensitive purposes' had to be released allowed and sold as such, not just people pics (?)
-
It is sensitive use
-
It is sensitive use
Am I also correct in my memory that as a contributor, either all your pics are 'in' for sensitive use, or all are 'out', i.e. you can't protect your models but allow your flip-flops and easter eggs to be used sensitively?
-
Its also negotiated sales. Its not 100% sensitive use.
If you opt out for sensitive use you wont get SODs, if you opt in you do, but also the risk of sensitive use.
-
Its also negotiated sales. Its not 100% sensitive use.
If you opt out for sensitive use you wont get SODs, if you opt in you do, but also the risk of sensitive use.
It cant be, I once sold a picture of a golden retriver, and I cant imagine what sensitive usage that would be?
-
But at iStock in 2005 there was no option for a single sale that would net you $114 in royalties (that's the largest single SOD sale I've had so far at SS). Just sayin' :)
Is that for 'sensitive' use?
I don't think so given the subjects. Here's a sample - $72 house in snow (http://www.shutterstock.com/pic.mhtml?id=78866107), $102 lunch sack (http://www.shutterstock.com/pic.mhtml?id=77543950) $111.47 christmas candles (http://www.shutterstock.com/pic.mhtml?id=78929095) $90 front door (http://www.shutterstock.com/pic.mhtml?id=77986873) $82.50 house after snow (http://www.shutterstock.com/pic.mhtml?id=93938941)
-
I've had legal ELs on iStock on an open countryside and a closeup flower, so who knows what goes on.
The point is that as Ron says, you can't get these SODs if you don't opt all of your images for sensitive use. The could be difficult for someone with a back-catalogue of models who have signed a release with different terms.
I'm really curious about whey they don't allow opt-in/out on an image by image basis.
-
Ok, dont believe me, believe Scott Braut then.
scottbraut wrote:
Hi All,
When you receive a high royalty for a single image, it is because the image was sold under a license that offers the option for sensitive use. That does not mean that the use was a sensitive one. The majority of these images will not be used in a sensitive manner. However, such use is a possibility. Unlike some competitors, we give you the ability to opt-out.
High royalties are often the result of a prenegotiated agreement with volume buyers such as large advertising agencies. These volume buyers may require additional license or workflow features, such as the option for sensitive use, indemnification, multi-user accounts, prenegotiated pricing, and special billing and workflow features.
By opting-in to sensitive use, you get access to all sales made to these buyers. By opting out, your images aren't available to buyers who require the option of sensitive use.
Overall, these sales are a great opportunity to drive additional revenue to you and we're excited to make them available. Smiley
Best,
Scott
VP of Content
Shutterstock
-
Its also negotiated sales. Its not 100% sensitive use.
If you opt out for sensitive use you wont get SODs, if you opt in you do, but also the risk of sensitive use.
It cant be, I once sold a picture of a golden retriver, and I cant imagine what sensitive usage that would be?
pretty much they can now chop him a leg and place him on a political/medical campaign, then you can't complain because you have opted in and receive the license royalties according
-
@Ron I believed you 100%. Seemed very odd then, and I still can't see any logic in 'all-in, all-out'.
-
Its also negotiated sales. Its not 100% sensitive use.
If you opt out for sensitive use you wont get SODs, if you opt in you do, but also the risk of sensitive use.
It cant be, I once sold a picture of a golden retriver, and I cant imagine what sensitive usage that would be?
pretty much they can now chop him a leg and place him on a political/medical campaign, then you can't complain because you have opted in and receive the license royalties according
Thats ok, if the dog begins to complain, i remind him who pays the food, and that there are no problems with dogs, that cannot be solved for 25 cents.
-
Hey, if anyone wants slightly larger images on your home page world map, load up this script:
http://www.digitalplanetdesign.com/scripts/shutterstock_homePage.user.js (http://www.digitalplanetdesign.com/scripts/shutterstock_homePage.user.js)
-
Hey, if anyone wants slightly larger images on your home page world map, load up this script:
[url]http://www.digitalplanetdesign.com/shutterstock_homPage.user.js[/url] ([url]http://www.digitalplanetdesign.com/shutterstock_homPage.user.js[/url])
lol just in and already starting the revolution on Shutterstock ;)
-
I am getting an error, no file. Could be my bitdefender going off
-
Already $100 Sean? You will be getting that first raise by next month this time! Whoohoo!
-
I am getting an error, no file. Could be my bitdefender going off
Try again, I had a typo in the post at first.
-
I am getting an error, no file. Could be my bitdefender going off
Try again, I had a typo in the post at first.
Its working, looks cool. Thanks. Just need to find a way to run it on Chrome.
-
I used tampermonkey and C/P the script, working on Chrome now. Cool
-
Thanks Sean, works fine on firefox.
-
But at iStock in 2005 there was no option for a single sale that would net you $114 in royalties (that's the largest single SOD sale I've had so far at SS). Just sayin' :)
Wrong. I had an EL more or less at this time for more than that. Not automated, not a direct download option, but negotiated on the phone.
-
But at iStock in 2005 there was no option for a single sale that would net you $114 in royalties (that's the largest single SOD sale I've had so far at SS). Just sayin' :)
Wrong. I had an EL more or less at this time for more than that. Not automated, not a direct download option, but negotiated on the phone.
There are always special people with special options
I'm a peasant and even at Shutterstock, even a peasant can earn royalties over $75 or over $100 multiple times and although very happy to see something substantial, not have it be a one-off or just for them.
I don't think lots of people, lots of the time were earning $100+ royalties at iStock in 2005.
But if it makes you feel I've more accurately represented what was going on in 2005 at istock, I'll rephrase:
But at iStock in 2005 most people weren't seeing sales that would net you $114 in royalties (that's the largest single SOD sale I've had so far at SS). Just sayin'
-
But at iStock in 2005 there was no option for a single sale that would net you $114 in royalties (that's the largest single SOD sale I've had so far at SS). Just sayin' :)
Wrong. I had an EL more or less at this time for more than that. Not automated, not a direct download option, but negotiated on the phone.
There are always special people with special options
I'm a peasant and even at Shutterstock, even a peasant can earn royalties over $75 or over $100 multiple times and although very happy to see something substantial, not have it be a one-off or just for them.
I don't think lots of people, lots of the time were earning $100+ royalties at iStock in 2005.
But if it makes you feel I've more accurately represented what was going on in 2005 at istock, I'll rephrase:
But at iStock in 2005 most people weren't seeing sales that would net you $114 in royalties (that's the largest single SOD sale I've had so far at SS). Just sayin'
Exactly. I once had a 'special EL' at Istock which netted me $60 back in 2005/6 (it was before they automated the process). My highest SOD royalty at SS was $180 and I often get SOD's of $75 or higher multiple times per month.
-
Once sold 5 ELs in one day at IS, for over $500 total, back in the good old days...BDE.
-
Once sold 5 ELs in one day at IS, for over $500 total, back in the good old days...BDE.
Used to get regular $300 days at iS in 2010 with no EL's.
Anyway back on topic Woo Yay for 38c sales.
-
Once sold 5 ELs in one day at IS, for over $500 total, back in the good old days...BDE.
Used to get regular $300 days at iS in 2010 with no EL's.
Anyway back on topic Woo Yay for 38c sales.
Where have they gone then? Why blame SS for poor sales over at IS. According to Bunhill IS is cheaper then SS.
-
iStock's woes are an own goal.
SS has been out there since 2004 and iStock did just great for a long time in spite of them (and other competitors).
Can't blame other businesses for picking up the pieces when Getty and two private equity vultures companies ruined iStock
-
Once sold 5 ELs in one day at IS, for over $500 total, back in the good old days...BDE.
Used to get regular $300 days at iS in 2010 with no EL's.
Anyway back on topic Woo Yay for 38c sales.
It's hardly an 'apples and apples' comparison when you were exclusive with Istock. I've had $300 days with SS too ... whilst also earning at all the other agencies.
Anyway, Istock is pretty much history now. They screwed it up, all by themselves. The only certainty, like death and taxes, is that they will continue to do so.
-
For all of Getty's faults (and there are many) they did try to raise the value of our assets while SS went in the opposite direction.
Subs only work in high volume, in a few years it will be low volume and low sales value when the remaining exclusives are forced to move in the opposite direction, I don't hold out much hope for anyone doing this full time in the next decade.
Oringer will be able to buy another helicopter though, so its not all bad.
-
Once sold 5 ELs in one day at IS, for over $500 total, back in the good old days...BDE.
Used to get regular $300 days at iS in 2010 with no EL's.
Anyway back on topic Woo Yay for 38c sales.
Where have they gone then? Why blame SS for poor sales over at IS. According to Bunhill IS is cheaper then SS.
Straight from the SS founders mouth "If you look at us compared to other stock marketplaces like an iStock or others, it's two or three or four times more expensive to not use Shutterstock. "
Snip
Duck Swartz
Talking about your present strategy longer term?
Timothy E. Bixby - CFO
We think we can raise the prices over the long term but we’re primary in the growth mode right now and we would like to continue to cover as much of the world as possible and take as much as growth in the business that we can before we play with the pricing level. We haven’t raised prices in many years and then been a great strategy so far to grow.
Snip
Jonathan Oringer - Founder, CEO & Chairman of the Board
It still multiples. So it's order of magnitude whether it's if you look at us compared to other stock marketplaces like an iStock or others, it's two or three or four times more expensive to not use Shutterstock. If you look at the higher end sort of more traditional marketed might be 6 or 8 or 10 times more expensive.
http://seekingalpha.com/article/1841072-shutterstocks-management-presents-at-the-goldman-sachs-us-emerging-smid-cap-growth-conference-transcript?page=2&p=qanda&l=last (http://seekingalpha.com/article/1841072-shutterstocks-management-presents-at-the-goldman-sachs-us-emerging-smid-cap-growth-conference-transcript?page=2&p=qanda&l=last)
-
Once sold 5 ELs in one day at IS, for over $500 total, back in the good old days...BDE.
Used to get regular $300 days at iS in 2010 with no EL's.
Anyway back on topic Woo Yay for 38c sales.
What are you making now, if you don't mind saying? Send a site mail if you like.
-
As an indy a very sketchy levelling off of the dramatic drops experienced in 2012 with the same port, no where near the highs of 2010.
I would have stayed as an exclusive but it became impossible to dig out of the decline with new work as no one ever viewed it or bought it. Don't see it changing over there either with the massive ingestion of new files.
Now I'm part of the problem selling my work for chump change and increasing pressure on the remaining exclusives.
The future is in Oringer's hands, unless he raises the prices or tiers the collection he'll break the business model for many full time photographers.
-
As an indy a very sketchy levelling off of the dramatic drops experienced in 2012 with the same port, no where near the highs of 2010.
I would have stayed as an exclusive but it became impossible to dig out of the decline with new work as no one ever viewed it or bought it. Don't see it changing over there either with the massive ingestion of new files.
Now I'm part of the problem selling my work for chump change and increasing pressure on the remaining exclusives.
The future is in Oringer's hands, unless he raises the prices or tiers the collection he'll break the business model for many full time photographers.
Thanks for the comments. I have to agree.
-
For all of Getty's faults (and there are many) they did try to raise the value of our assets while SS went in the opposite direction.
That's utter bollocks. SS never 'went in the opposite direction' on the value of our assets, as you put it. They have never decreased prices and they have never decreased contributors' royalties either ... unlike Istock and Getty. They just weren't so stupidly greedy and short-term as Istock/Getty and therefore have allowed their contributors to build a stable and sustainable income. I've been with SS for over 9 years and I am absolutely delighted with the growth and the relative stability of my income from them. Their website actually works too and I have never had a 'customer refund' or 'clawback' of income from them either. Your exalting of Istock/Getty has to be a joke, isn't it?.
Anyway, more fool you for believing in the Istock/Getty hype and thinking that prices could just double every year to make up for the painfully obvious fall in the volume of sales that resulted. You think that you and your precious images are worth far more than you are getting ... but you are wrong. They are worth what the market decides they are worth and Istock/Getty cannot actually change that, whatever pricing architecture they choose to employ. The market will always 'out', especially one in which supply so obviously exceeds demand.
-
Gostwyck, in this case the market hasn't decided - SS has, and they admit it. Haven't you read the comments which GBAlex has posted so many times? They have chosen to price our images low to win market share.
No one is defending IS, and no one thinks their are images are precious. We all know the market is saturated. Our images are nothing more than the Pawns being swept around and off the board as the Kings slug it out.
-
Gostwyck, in this case the market hasn't decided - SS has, and they admit it. Haven't you read the comments which GBAlex has posted so many times? They have chosen to price our images low to win market share.
No one is defending IS, and no one thinks their are images are precious. We all know the market is saturated. Our images are nothing more than the Pawns being swept around and off the board as the Kings slug it out.
No, again you're off the mark. SS haven't decreased prices (unlike Istock). They simply haven't increased prices of subscriptions for a few years (and neither have FT or DT). That's fair enough. A business will always choose to operate either for growth or for profit ... according to market conditions. SS know that they already have their foot on the windpipe of most of their competitors. Why on earth would they choose to release it now? Would you if you were in their position?
Gbalex always 'quotes' minuscule segments, usually so out of context that they lose their meaning anyway. If only Istock/Getty were so open in their financial reporting then we could also judge them by the same standards as Gbalex pretends to do with SS.
I know you and many others mourn for the heady days of 2010 when, as Istock exclusives, you earned far more than you had previously believed was possible (and then began to believe it was you birth-right to do so for ever more) but unfortunately it was simply unsustainable. Now where have you heard that word before?
-
For all of Getty's faults (and there are many) they did try to raise the value of our assets while SS went in the opposite direction.
That's utter bollocks. SS never 'went in the opposite direction' on the value of our assets, as you put it. They have never decreased prices and they have never decreased contributors' royalties either ... unlike Istock and Getty. They just weren't so stupidly greedy and short-term as Istock/Getty and therefore have allowed their contributors to build a stable and sustainable income. I've been with SS for over 9 years and I am absolutely delighted with the growth and the relative stability of my income from them. Their website actually works too and I have never had a 'customer refund' or 'clawback' of income from them either. Your exalting of Istock/Getty has to be a joke, isn't it?.
Anyway, more fool you for believing in the Istock/Getty hype and thinking that prices could just double every year to make up for the painfully obvious fall in the volume of sales that resulted. You think that you and your precious images are worth far more than you are getting ... but you are wrong. They are worth what the market decides they are worth and Istock/Getty cannot actually change that, whatever pricing architecture they choose to employ. The market will always 'out', especially one in which supply so obviously exceeds demand.
They used to pay 40% and they now pay "around" 30%. Economical with the truth Gostwyck?
-
For all of Getty's faults (and there are many) they did try to raise the value of our assets while SS went in the opposite direction.
That's utter bollocks. SS never 'went in the opposite direction' on the value of our assets, as you put it. They have never decreased prices and they have never decreased contributors' royalties either ... unlike Istock and Getty. They just weren't so stupidly greedy and short-term as Istock/Getty and therefore have allowed their contributors to build a stable and sustainable income. I've been with SS for over 9 years and I am absolutely delighted with the growth and the relative stability of my income from them. Their website actually works too and I have never had a 'customer refund' or 'clawback' of income from them either. Your exalting of Istock/Getty has to be a joke, isn't it?.
Anyway, more fool you for believing in the Istock/Getty hype and thinking that prices could just double every year to make up for the painfully obvious fall in the volume of sales that resulted. You think that you and your precious images are worth far more than you are getting ... but you are wrong. They are worth what the market decides they are worth and Istock/Getty cannot actually change that, whatever pricing architecture they choose to employ. The market will always 'out', especially one in which supply so obviously exceeds demand.
They used to pay 40% and they now pay "around" 30%. Economical with the truth Gostwyck?
Who did? Can you substantiate your statement with links to prove your point?
-
For all of Getty's faults (and there are many) they did try to raise the value of our assets while SS went in the opposite direction.
That's utter bollocks. SS never 'went in the opposite direction' on the value of our assets, as you put it. They have never decreased prices and they have never decreased contributors' royalties either ... unlike Istock and Getty. They just weren't so stupidly greedy and short-term as Istock/Getty and therefore have allowed their contributors to build a stable and sustainable income. I've been with SS for over 9 years and I am absolutely delighted with the growth and the relative stability of my income from them. Their website actually works too and I have never had a 'customer refund' or 'clawback' of income from them either. Your exalting of Istock/Getty has to be a joke, isn't it?.
Anyway, more fool you for believing in the Istock/Getty hype and thinking that prices could just double every year to make up for the painfully obvious fall in the volume of sales that resulted. You think that you and your precious images are worth far more than you are getting ... but you are wrong. They are worth what the market decides they are worth and Istock/Getty cannot actually change that, whatever pricing architecture they choose to employ. The market will always 'out', especially one in which supply so obviously exceeds demand.
They used to pay 40% and they now pay "around" 30%. Economical with the truth Gostwyck?
Who did? Can you substantiate your statement with links to prove your point?
SS of course. I have it somewhere, I know that for sure because you sent it to me. I'll have a look.
There's another one too - a post from you where you praised IS for raising prices - "going in the right direction" if I remember rightly. It's in the forum somewhere, maybe Luis can find it for us.
Just call me Jumbo :)
-
For all of Getty's faults (and there are many) they did try to raise the value of our assets while SS went in the opposite direction.
That's utter bollocks. SS never 'went in the opposite direction' on the value of our assets, as you put it. They have never decreased prices and they have never decreased contributors' royalties either ... unlike Istock and Getty. They just weren't so stupidly greedy and short-term as Istock/Getty and therefore have allowed their contributors to build a stable and sustainable income. I've been with SS for over 9 years and I am absolutely delighted with the growth and the relative stability of my income from them. Their website actually works too and I have never had a 'customer refund' or 'clawback' of income from them either. Your exalting of Istock/Getty has to be a joke, isn't it?.
Anyway, more fool you for believing in the Istock/Getty hype and thinking that prices could just double every year to make up for the painfully obvious fall in the volume of sales that resulted. You think that you and your precious images are worth far more than you are getting ... but you are wrong. They are worth what the market decides they are worth and Istock/Getty cannot actually change that, whatever pricing architecture they choose to employ. The market will always 'out', especially one in which supply so obviously exceeds demand.
They used to pay 40% and they now pay "around" 30%. Economical with the truth Gostwyck?
Who did? Can you substantiate your statement with links to prove your point?
SS of course. I have it somewhere, I know that for sure because you sent it to me. I'll have a look.
There's another one too - a post from you where you praised IS for raising prices - "going in the right direction" if I remember rightly. It's in the forum somewhere, maybe Luis can find it for us.
Just call me Jumbo :)
I'll call you 'Jumbo' when you produce the evidence. Good luck with that!
-
Gostwyck, in this case the market hasn't decided - SS has, and they admit it. Haven't you read the comments which GBAlex has posted so many times? They have chosen to price our images low to win market share.
No one is defending IS, and no one thinks their are images are precious. We all know the market is saturated. Our images are nothing more than the Pawns being swept around and off the board as the Kings slug it out.
No, again you're off the mark. SS haven't decreased prices (unlike Istock). They simply haven't increased prices of subscriptions for a few years (and neither have FT or DT). That's fair enough. A business will always choose to operate either for growth or for profit ... according to market conditions. SS know that they already have their foot on the windpipe of most of their competitors. Why on earth would they choose to release it now? Would you if you were in their position?
Gbalex always 'quotes' minuscule segments, usually so out of context that they lose their meaning anyway. If only Istock/Getty were so open in their financial reporting then we could also judge them by the same standards as Gbalex pretends to do with SS.
I know you and many others mourn for the heady days of 2010 when, as Istock exclusives, you earned far more than you had previously believed was possible (and then began to believe it was you birth-right to do so for ever more) but unfortunately it was simply unsustainable. Now where have you heard that word before?
No worries mate it has become clear you permanently have your SS blinders on. I would expect that harsh facts will either be ignored or go right over your head. Cause and effect seem to be beyond your comprehension.
Carry on with the insults and ostrich routine
-
Gostwyck, in this case the market hasn't decided - SS has, and they admit it. Haven't you read the comments which GBAlex has posted so many times? They have chosen to price our images low to win market share.
No one is defending IS, and no one thinks their are images are precious. We all know the market is saturated. Our images are nothing more than the Pawns being swept around and off the board as the Kings slug it out.
No, again you're off the mark. SS haven't decreased prices (unlike Istock). They simply haven't increased prices of subscriptions for a few years (and neither have FT or DT). That's fair enough. A business will always choose to operate either for growth or for profit ... according to market conditions. SS know that they already have their foot on the windpipe of most of their competitors. Why on earth would they choose to release it now? Would you if you were in their position?
Gbalex always 'quotes' minuscule segments, usually so out of context that they lose their meaning anyway. If only Istock/Getty were so open in their financial reporting then we could also judge them by the same standards as Gbalex pretends to do with SS.
I know you and many others mourn for the heady days of 2010 when, as Istock exclusives, you earned far more than you had previously believed was possible (and then began to believe it was you birth-right to do so for ever more) but unfortunately it was simply unsustainable. Now where have you heard that word before?
I don't know how you extrapolate your numbers. Maybe things are going really bad for non exc at IS, I don't know.
About my folder: Number of downloads has decreased, from sure, from 2010. And earnings. But, regarding earnings what I got last year (2013) isn't so far from what I got at back 2010 (and better than 2012). RPD has skyrocked (about 17 dollars, compare that with subs downloads, even with EL, SOD and all the acronyms).
Ok, with more files (40% more) I should get more. We all are hoping for some kind of improvement but, at this point, although things not being shiny I would't
t characterize that as a disaster. If it was, I would had left exclusivity. I will should things worsen until a certain point.
Regarding SS, DT, FT etc... they are selling a 300% much better product than in 2006 at the same tiny price.
-
That's utter bollocks. SS never 'went in the opposite direction' on the value of our assets, as you put it.
It's 38c a file however you cut the cloth, that is the asset value as Oringer decided way back.
Either way we are sat next to each other at SS now diluting each others sales.
-
One thing is for sure. I joined in 2008 and you had to look real hard to find any negative postings about SS, anywhere. Nowadays they are everywhere. Among them an SS doom thread 145 page long and not just by anybody but with some serious people. Something must be up.
-
Sooooo, I hear that S J Locke is uploading to shutterstock...
I think we were discussing that earlier. Maybe not.
-
One thing is for sure. I joined in 2008 and you had to look real hard to find any negative postings about SS, anywhere. Nowadays they are everywhere. Among them an SS doom thread 145 page long and not just by anybody but with some serious people. Something must be up.
Some people with big portfolios, and 3 of the same people who probably were good for 140 of the 145 pages. Lately that doom and gloom is only about people not having downloads for a few hours. Come on. Or having a bad Saturday when the whole world is BBQing or Skiing.
I am not denying there are some weird drops and there are portfolios that shouldnt see such a drop, but doom and gloom to me is not having a poor Saturday. Sorry.
-
One thing is for sure. I joined in 2008 and you had to look real hard to find any negative postings about SS, anywhere. Nowadays they are everywhere. Among them an SS doom thread 145 page long and not just by anybody but with some serious people. Something must be up.
Some people with big portfolios, and 3 of the same people who probably were good for 140 of the 145 pages. Lately that doom and gloom is only about people not having downloads for a few hours. Come on. Or having a bad Saturday when the whole world is BBQing or Skiing.
I am not denying there are some weird drops and there are portfolios that shouldnt see such a drop, but doom and gloom to me is not having a poor Saturday. Sorry.
You seem to have selective reading and serious contributors are posting in various threads.
One recent short thread on SS http://tinyurl.com/kb3e9f4 (http://tinyurl.com/kb3e9f4)
Snip
Joined: 15 Jun 2007 Worst January since 2010 for me. And on top of that I have added 300 images over the last 2 and half months. Sales keep going down for me..... It is a bit depressing though - new equipment (5D MkIII) and many hours of work only to see sales go DOWN!
Joined: 12 Jul 2005 I added a LOT of new Images. We all know the time it takes to do this, I wasted a LOT of time and got a backwards return for my investment. Im selling Mostly Very Old stuff due to search. What a waste of time
Joined: 29 Jan 2006 Last month and this month are about 40% less than the year before. I've been uploading new images but they rarely sell so that doesn't help much.
Joined: 29 Jan 2006 It's just crazy how sales could drop that much. My DLs were consistent from Jan-Oct. then they came tumbling down fast in Nov-Current. Is the Apocalypse coming? It makes me want to scream!
Joined: 03 Oct 2007 But there does seem to be a trend towards the people who have been here the longest (often also the people on the highest rate) who are reporting the falling figures and the much newer people reporting the increases. Obviously if you are constantly adding to your portfolio you would expect to see an increase year on year, but that's no longer the case for some of us on SS.
Joined: 20 Jun 2006 I think quite a few people have noticed that. I can only go by what I see here on the forums but so many of us who have been here for a long time are showing definite downward trends. I used to see more downloads at the time I got up early in the morning than I am seeing now at 3 in the afternoon. I have never seen it this bad.
Joined: 08 Mar 2008 Awful slow 2 weeks for me, 50% down if compared to Jan 2013. I do not know what is going on???
Joined: 11 May 2006 For me so far, the slowest month ever.
Joined: 12 Jul 2008 I'm also very disappointing with the actual policy. Everytime they made a change (and of course I'm talking about the searching rules and alghorithm) our downloads fall down. I have a big portfolio and I used to sell several thousands of images on monthly basis... When I see 20 0r 30% down in dls... from a week to another I'm always worried... in the past those kind of changes has never pickup completely.. and good old dls days of 2011 are simply gone!!
Joined: 26 Jan 2007 Very slow month so far. Just checked my sales from January 2012 and 2011 and they were higher than right now. What's up with that?
Joined: 03 Mar 2008 Very, very slow for me. Totally different than last year...:(
Joined: 07 Aug 2007 very slow week for me too... uncommonly so even for this time of year :(
-
One thing is for sure. I joined in 2008 and you had to look real hard to find any negative postings about SS, anywhere. Nowadays they are everywhere. Among them an SS doom thread 145 page long and not just by anybody but with some serious people. Something must be up.
Some people with big portfolios, and 3 of the same people who probably were good for 140 of the 145 pages. Lately that doom and gloom is only about people not having downloads for a few hours. Come on. Or having a bad Saturday when the whole world is BBQing or Skiing.
I am not denying there are some weird drops and there are portfolios that shouldnt see such a drop, but doom and gloom to me is not having a poor Saturday. Sorry.
You seem to have selective reading and serious contributors are posting in various threads.
One recent short thread on SS [url]http://tinyurl.com/kb3e9f4[/url] ([url]http://tinyurl.com/kb3e9f4[/url])
Snip
Joined: 15 Jun 2007 Worst January since 2010 for me. And on top of that I have added 300 images over the last 2 and half months. Sales keep going down for me..... It is a bit depressing though - new equipment (5D MkIII) and many hours of work only to see sales go DOWN!
Joined: 12 Jul 2005 I added a LOT of new Images. We all know the time it takes to do this, I wasted a LOT of time and got a backwards return for my investment. Im selling Mostly Very Old stuff due to search. What a waste of time
Joined: 29 Jan 2006 Last month and this month are about 40% less than the year before. I've been uploading new images but they rarely sell so that doesn't help much.
Joined: 29 Jan 2006 It's just crazy how sales could drop that much. My DLs were consistent from Jan-Oct. then they came tumbling down fast in Nov-Current. Is the Apocalypse coming? It makes me want to scream!
Joined: 03 Oct 2007 But there does seem to be a trend towards the people who have been here the longest (often also the people on the highest rate) who are reporting the falling figures and the much newer people reporting the increases. Obviously if you are constantly adding to your portfolio you would expect to see an increase year on year, but that's no longer the case for some of us on SS.
Joined: 20 Jun 2006 I think quite a few people have noticed that. I can only go by what I see here on the forums but so many of us who have been here for a long time are showing definite downward trends. I used to see more downloads at the time I got up early in the morning than I am seeing now at 3 in the afternoon. I have never seen it this bad.
Joined: 08 Mar 2008 Awful slow 2 weeks for me, 50% down if compared to Jan 2013. I do not know what is going on???
Joined: 11 May 2006 For me so far, the slowest month ever.
Joined: 12 Jul 2008 I'm also very disappointing with the actual policy. Everytime they made a change (and of course I'm talking about the searching rules and alghorithm) our downloads fall down. I have a big portfolio and I used to sell several thousands of images on monthly basis... When I see 20 0r 30% down in dls... from a week to another I'm always worried... in the past those kind of changes has never pickup completely.. and good old dls days of 2011 are simply gone!!
Joined: 26 Jan 2007 Very slow month so far. Just checked my sales from January 2012 and 2011 and they were higher than right now. What's up with that?
Joined: 03 Mar 2008 Very, very slow for me. Totally different than last year...:(
Joined: 07 Aug 2007 very slow week for me too... uncommonly so even for this time of year :(
[email protected]
-
Well, it took me 12 days, but I broke $100. Reminds me of iStock in 2005. :) Just Fyi...
Took 7 days for the next $100. So, things are going ok, I think.
-
we might have a new believer in our midst?
-
Well, it took me 12 days, but I broke $100. Reminds me of iStock in 2005. :) Just Fyi...
Took 7 days for the next $100. So, things are going ok, I think.
Good to hear, SS rocks with sales. I would love to rise my portfolio from 0 to 1130 also in one month :D ^^
-
Well, it took me 12 days, but I broke $100. Reminds me of iStock in 2005. :) Just Fyi...
Took 7 days for the next $100. So, things are going ok, I think.
Amazing.
How many images of your port are you planning on submitting to SS? And what is your cut off production year? Just out of interest.
-
How many images of your port are you planning on submitting to SS? And what is your cut off production year? Just out of interest.
I don't know. I'm still going through stuff from 2006!
-
How many images of your port are you planning on submitting to SS? And what is your cut off production year? Just out of interest.
I don't know. I'm still going through stuff from 2006!
Wow, so at least another 4 years to add is my guess. Man, that is going to rock. I am happy you found a new outlet to get you an additional significant income.
-
One question, Sean.
The annoy factor?:
Compared, does ss not feel smoother, more contributer friendly, less alien, more straight foreward and more decent.
Do you have that heavy feeling of what is the next thing they can invent that can bother me? or benefit on me, kind of feeling?
Like coming out of a dungeon maze (complete with skeletons and monsters) and into a land with the rule of law.
just a question, I might express myself badly.
but can you recognize any of it?
-
How many images of your port are you planning on submitting to SS? And what is your cut off production year? Just out of interest.
I don't know. I'm still going through stuff from 2006!
I would say, that is unwise.
Do the opposite.
Take the newest and best first, get them up and earning. Find out the trends and then leave those out that are not worth their upload time.
It also has to do with how you present your work. You have two pages: Newest first, how the customers sees that, and the most popular. All the other pages are burried, and is only fill for the search machine.
Make sure you get a grip in the customers at once, and dont leave them to wade trough old pictures.
-
"I don't know. I'm still going through stuff from 2006!"
Your 2006 is better than my 2013 stuff! I will be in major trouble once you start uploading your newest stuff ;)
-
I would say, that is unwise.
Do the opposite.
Take the newest and best first, get them up and earning. Find out the trends and then leave those out that are not worth their upload time.
I may have misunderstood, but I thought Sean was putting his newest and best on Stocksy. I was under the impression his intent was to put the leftovers on subscription sites.
-
How many images of your port are you planning on submitting to SS? And what is your cut off production year? Just out of interest.
I don't know. I'm still going through stuff from 2006!
I would say, that is unwise.
Do the opposite.
Take the newest and best first, get them up and earning. Find out the trends and then leave those out that are not worth their upload time.
It also has to do with how you present your work. You have two pages: Newest first, how the customers sees that, and the most popular. All the other pages are burried, and is only fill for the search machine.
Make sure you get a grip in the customers at once, and dont leave them to wade trough old pictures.
Everything I've uploaded has been selling so far. Pretty much.
-
Well, it took me 12 days, but I broke $100. Reminds me of iStock in 2005. :) Just Fyi...
Took 7 days for the next $100. So, things are going ok, I think.
impressive numbers! 19 days and 200$! over 300$ on the 1st month is quite something... and easily 500-600$ on February ;)
looks like Sean is taking gbalex sales, oooh! ;D
-
Now I know why my sales have tanked this week :-[
-
Well, it took me 12 days, but I broke $100. Reminds me of iStock in 2005. :) Just Fyi...
Took 7 days for the next $100. So, things are going ok, I think.
impressive numbers! 19 days and 200$! over 300$ on the 1st month is quite something... and easily 500-600$ on February ;)
looks like Sean is taking gbalex sales, oooh! ;D
He should get the first significant raise in a couple more weeks too!
-
I am not shooting any subjects same as Sean, so it wont have a great effect on my sales, if any. But his images will surely take some sales from some people. He sure hit the ground running. Dang.
-
It's a good day to be a vector artist. ;)
-
S J won't be competing with me either because my stuff is cr*p in comparison.
-
It's a good day to be a vector artist. ;)
Sean produces vectors and various other media.
-
It's a good day to be a vector artist. ;)
Sean produces vectors and various other media.
And tee shirts with his face on the front.
-
I would say, that is unwise.
Do the opposite.
Take the newest and best first, get them up and earning. Find out the trends and then leave those out that are not worth their upload time.
I may have misunderstood, but I thought Sean was putting his newest and best on Stocksy. I was under the impression his intent was to put the leftovers on subscription sites.
OK, then its wise enough.
-
Well, it took me 12 days, but I broke $100. Reminds me of iStock in 2005. :) Just Fyi...
Took 7 days for the next $100. So, things are going ok, I think.
impressive numbers! 19 days and 200$! over 300$ on the 1st month is quite something... and easily 500-600$ on February ;)
looks like Sean is taking gbalex sales, oooh! ;D
Are you three Luis. We produce different content, however if someone was going to take my sales; I can not think of anyone I would rather see receive them. Sean showed real integrity during the IS debacle and he has worked for every sale and more that he will receive on SS.
Lets just hope that the new comer bump will last for more than a few years.
-
It's a good day to be a vector artist. ;)
Sean produces vectors and various other media.
Darn!
-
Well, it took me 12 days, but I broke $100. Reminds me of iStock in 2005. :) Just Fyi...
Took 7 days for the next $100. So, things are going ok, I think.
impressive numbers! 19 days and 200$! over 300$ on the 1st month is quite something... and easily 500-600$ on February ;)
looks like Sean is taking gbalex sales, oooh! ;D
Are you three Luis. We produce different content, however if someone was going to take my sales; I can not think of anyone I would rather see receive them. Sean showed real integrity during the IS debacle and he has worked for every sale and more that he will receive on SS.
Lets just hope that the new comer bump will last for more than a few years.
are we agreeing? just don't understand the "are you three Luis"
-
... if someone was going to take my sales; I can not think of anyone I would rather see receive them. Sean showed real integrity during the IS debacle and he has worked for every sale and more that he will receive on SS.
I could not agree more. I am delighted, but not surprised, to hear Sean's doing well on Shutterstock. Couldn't happen to a more deserving guy. However I do hope he leaves me some sales ;)
-
... if someone was going to take my sales; I can not think of anyone I would rather see receive them. Sean showed real integrity during the IS debacle and he has worked for every sale and more that he will receive on SS.
I could not agree more. I am delighted, but not surprised, to hear Sean's doing well on Shutterstock. Couldn't happen to a more deserving guy. However I do hope he leaves me some sales ;)
When your hunky everyman husband starts modeling for Sean, you're in trouble :)
Otherwise I expect you two can happily share the wealth on SS!
-
Heh heh. ;)
-
never thought i would see the day that SL might promote shutter :)
-
When your hunky everyman husband starts modeling for Sean, you're in trouble :)
LOL! I seriously doubt Sean is prepared to offer the same fringe benefits to him that I do. ;D
-
"LOL! I seriously doubt Sean is prepared to offer the same fringe benefits to him that I do"
Now, now let's keep it PG-13 level on this site ;)
-
When your hunky everyman husband starts modeling for Sean, you're in trouble :)
LOL! I seriously doubt Sean is prepared to offer the same fringe benefits to him that I do. ;D
made me laugh Lisa :-)
-
When your hunky everyman husband starts modeling for Sean, you're in trouble :)
LOL! I seriously doubt Sean is prepared to offer the same fringe benefits to him that I do. ;D
made me laugh Lisa :-)
Hi Stacy! Glad to see you are still around :)
-
Ok, my balance got reset to zero, which I assume is because of this:
"When you reach your minimum payout level on the last day of the month, a payment will be processed and your Gross Earnings will be reset to zero to start a new earnings period. At that time you will also receive an email from us notifying you of the pending payment. Once your payment has been processed around the 15th of the month, your earnings will be shown in your payment history, which can be accessed under "Stats" on your contributor home page."
A: I didn't get an email about it - is that broken or anything
B: Is there any place you can see your historical total balance, or what that payment amount will be, or anything?
-
On Monday you'll get mail
Dear xxxxxxx,
Just thought you would like to know that your Shutterstock earnings have been computed - and will be sent out by the 15th of the month.
By the end of the week (guess Friday) we'll get the money and than you'll be able to see total payment balance.
Don't worry everything is fine ;)
-
Yup, if you reach your payout amount Shutterstock pays you automatically. I don't recall ever getting an email about it, but I could be wrong.
If you go to your contributor page and click on "earnings" at the upper left, you can see payments, earnings summary, tax center, etc.
-
Yup, if you reach your payout amount Shutterstock pays you automatically. I don't recall ever getting an email about it, but I could be wrong.
If you go to your contributor page and click on "earnings" at the upper left, you can see payments, earnings summary, tax center, etc.
you are always supposed to get an email about your monthly payment getting calculated +some more emails about payment arriving coz they break it up into 999s.
-
Your all time totals are at the bottom of the current month's chart - click on 0 or whatever it now says for your account balance. You'll see the current month's sales and at the bottom your all time totals
-
Your all time totals are at the bottom of the current month's chart - click on 0 or whatever it now says for your account balance. You'll see the current month's sales and at the bottom your all time totals
You can see previous months/years by using the drop down menu at the top of the stats page, the drop down is located just under the page tab navigation options.
-
I find it usually takes up to a week to get the e-mail, and a few days later (always before the 15th) you get the money. Shutterstock is absolutely consistent in paying on time.
-
Thanks all. I just thought it was weird that, boom, the money just seemed to disappear with no record of it being "removed" from the balance.
-
I find it usually takes up to a week to get the e-mail, and a few days later (always before the 15th) you get the money. Shutterstock is absolutely consistent in paying on time.
I agree I receive mine the same day of every month like clockwork.
-
I find it usually takes up to a week to get the e-mail, and a few days later (always before the 15th) you get the money. Shutterstock is absolutely consistent in paying on time.
I agree I receive mine the same day of every month like clockwork.
My payment almost always comes on the 7th of the month, otherwise on the 6th. Only a few times over the last 3-4 years has it ever arrived on different days (as early as the 3rd and as late as the 8th).
Oddly, the email used to always come on the 1st of the month. But the last 6-12 months, it's arrival hasn't been consistent at all. It's just as likely to come on the 2nd or 3rd as it is on the 1st. It has yet to come this month.
-
Yep payments have been coming right around the 7th for the last few months.
-
Got my email Monday (Feb 3). As the others have noted, payment arrives in your account well before the 15th. Could be there by the end of the week.
-
Yep, got my email - thanks!
-
Yep, got my email - thanks!
And got my payment. The circle of life is complete.
-
Yep, got my email - thanks!
And got my payment. The circle of life is complete.
SS works like clockwork, doesnt it? :)
-
Yep, got my email - thanks!
And got my payment. The circle of life is complete.
the cycle isn't quite over yet- you forgot now you can pay the bills ;)
-
Yep, got my email - thanks!
And got my payment. The circle of life is complete.
the cycle isn't quite over yet- you forgot now you can pay the bills ;)
I already spent it on my Stocksy models last week.
-
I hadn't seen this thread until now. Good for you, Sean. Best wishes man 8)
Keep steadily uploading your port in chunks with momentum, I would think you'd get more exposure and sales out of your portfolio that way, rather than uploading everything in one huge lump.
-
Passed the $500 mark. I do see quite a few non sub sales. No ELs yet tho.
-
Congrats Sean! This is their biggest pay raise like around 33% except the EL's which stay the same...
T
-
now look carefully, Sean.
the EL/ sub ratio is indicative of the image´ or the ports quality.
meaning, 70 % of your ELs come from high value content.
BTW, how many pictures do you have online on ss by now?
-
now look carefully, Sean.
the EL/ sub ratio is indicative of the image´ or the ports quality.
meaning, 70 % of your ELs come from high value content.
BTW, how many pictures do you have online on ss by now?
;D
-
Passed the $500 mark. I do see quite a few non sub sales. No ELs yet tho.
12 days for 1st 100$
7 days for 2nd 100$
14 days for the next 300$
500$ for the first 33 days!
no other agency can beat these numbers...
-
Passed the $500 mark. I do see quite a few non sub sales. No ELs yet tho.
12 days for 1st 100$
7 days for 2nd 100$
14 days for the next 300$
500$ for the first 33 days!
no other agency can beat these numbers...
Probably, but most new contributors wouldn't get anywhere near that.
-
Passed the $500 mark. I do see quite a few non sub sales. No ELs yet tho.
12 days for 1st 100$
7 days for 2nd 100$
14 days for the next 300$
500$ for the first 33 days!
no other agency can beat these numbers...
I tend to agree with Liz - it says more about the contributor and quality of the images than anything else. The average newbie to SS wouldn't come close to those numbers in so short a time.
-
Passed the $500 mark. I do see quite a few non sub sales. No ELs yet tho.
12 days for 1st 100$
7 days for 2nd 100$
14 days for the next 300$
500$ for the first 33 days!
no other agency can beat these numbers...
Probably, but most new contributors wouldn't get anywhere near that.
sure but new is relative, Sean is new at SS but "old" since he started, same applies to all iStock exclusives with nice sales history that eventually decide to leave and venture SS and other, I believe most will/would do well as well, lifestyle is a very good subject despite massive competition, maybe the so much talked SS algorithm is helping Sean too
we can't also forget that Sean is working/uploading pictures from 2007 and not Stocksy content that would for sure sell a ton more
-
Passed the $500 mark. I do see quite a few non sub sales. No ELs yet tho.
Keep trying Sean. If you need any advice just let me know. ;)
-
Passed the $500 mark. I do see quite a few non sub sales. No ELs yet tho.
12 days for 1st 100$
7 days for 2nd 100$
14 days for the next 300$
500$ for the first 33 days!
no other agency can beat these numbers...
Probably, but most new contributors wouldn't get anywhere near that.
sure but new is relative, Sean is new at SS but "old" since he started, same applies to all iStock exclusives with nice sales history that eventually decide to leave and venture SS and other, I believe most will/would do well as well, lifestyle is a very good subject despite massive competition, maybe the so much talked SS algorithm is helping Sean too
we can't also forget that Sean is working/uploading pictures from 2007 and not Stocksy content that would for sure sell a ton more
exactly, and there's the other agency that beats SS for earnings.
-
Come on man, leave some scraps for the little guys.
-
I just got $67 under "single and other downloads". Is that where ELs show up, or are they "enhanced downloads"?
-
Enhanced Downloads
-
I just got $67 under "single and other downloads". Is that where ELs show up, or are they "enhanced downloads"?
Enhanced Downloads section Sean but as you can see- SOD can pay a lot more! Soon you will be King of Shutter ;)
-
EL's are a fixed amount (unsure whether dependent on your lifetime earnings status?) but are around $28 for the contributor.
ODD's are non-sub regular sales @ $2.48 or $1.07 (smaller size)
SOD's can be anything from the same as a sub sale (33, 36 or38 cents...Facebook deal) up to $100+. There's always been mention of SOD's for 'sensitive' use but I've had a few @ >$50 and they didn't have people in them. Dunno how a picture frame can be 'sensitively' used!
Baffled but not complainin'.
-
EL's are a fixed amount (unsure whether dependent on your lifetime earnings status?) but are around $28 for the contributor.
ODD's are non-sub regular sales @ $2.48 or $1.07 (smaller size)
ELs are $28 for everyone. OODs are $2.85 or $1.24 at the current top rate (which Sean will be at next week :) )
I don't like the fact that we don't know the license terms for the SOD sales, but having complained about it and they won't change, it's accept it as is or walk. I have yet to hear of anything unfair or wrong with an SOD, so for the moment I'm taking the money and trying not to fret about not knowing what's been sold for those $75 or $90 or $114 licenses
-
http://submit.shutterstock.com/earnings_schedule.mhtml (http://submit.shutterstock.com/earnings_schedule.mhtml)
-
[url]http://submit.shutterstock.com/earnings_schedule.mhtml[/url] ([url]http://submit.shutterstock.com/earnings_schedule.mhtml[/url])
Thanks.
-
I just got $67 under "single and other downloads". Is that where ELs show up, or are they "enhanced downloads"?
You are '' OPT IN '' for sensitive use license ???
-
Made it to the $.36 level if anyone cares. Honestly, from some of the posts here, I would have thought I'd make it faster that this.
-
Made it to the $.36 level if anyone cares. Honestly, from some of the posts here, I would have thought I'd make it faster that this.
As your correction officer you're still under probation this we have slowed you down a bit ;D
-
Congratulations! :)
I am still at 33 cents.
-
5 months to 3000$. Took me 7 1/2 months to get to 500$ ;D Congrats
-
Shutterstock should introduce a few more higher levels. After 38 cents, what goals are there left for you?
-
Made it to the $.36 level if anyone cares. Honestly, from some of the posts here, I would have thought I'd make it faster that this.
Just wondering, you made 2500 dollar in 2 months and 10 days, just 5 months in. Thats freaken insane. So it is still possible with the right images.
-
With all the negative posts at IS, I wonder if I would be dropping toward that number these days if still there.
-
so you are taking away all my SS sales then... knew it. ;) ;).
Congrats Sean!!!
-
Made it to the $.36 level if anyone cares. Honestly, from some of the posts here, I would have thought I'd make it faster that this.
once again impressive, how is it compared to Stocksy?
-
Made it to the $.36 level if anyone cares. Honestly, from some of the posts here, I would have thought I'd make it faster that this.
So would I a few months ago (mind you, I'd also have thought you would have had 10K images on SS by now!). In my experience it has become much more difficult to get new images to take off this year. Some still do but many more fall by the wayside than before.
I guess it has something to do with the 1M new images added each month nowadays. Most of them are crap and full of wrong keywords but they still have the effect of quickly burying quality images in the 'Newest' sort-order.
Hopefully it will only cause a temporary 'lag' in the ability of decent images to climb the default sort-order. The cream should still rise to the top, it's just going to take a bit longer to do so.
-
Made it to the $.36 level if anyone cares. Honestly, from some of the posts here, I would have thought I'd make it faster that this.
Three things:
1) Given the split between subs/other, your higher payments for the OD/SOD will increase your speed to the next earning threshold
2) It takes time to get good search placement for a good chunk of images, again meaning you should see an improved rate of increase
3) You only have 2450 images uploaded - I"m assuming you have more that aren't exclusive elsewhere? Upload them
4) No whining! I know I said three, but this is just a reminder that you're doing well - it's microstock not alchemy :)
-
Shutterstock should introduce a few more higher levels. After 38 cents, what goals are there left for you?
Totally agree. I've been saying the same for about 5 years. Still hoping it might happen, but not holding my breath ;)
-
3) You only have 2450 images uploaded - I"m assuming you have more that aren't exclusive elsewhere? Upload them
Trying to pace myself, so I can feed the beast. Also waiting on Xmas images.
-
Shutterstock should introduce a few more higher levels. After 38 cents, what goals are there left for you?
Agreed, it would be great to have some lofty high goals to shoot for. Even if it was a penny more per download.
-
Shutterstock should introduce a few more higher levels. After 38 cents, what goals are there left for you?
Actually I prefer an agency that puts up levels that are actually achievable for "regular people" as well. Rather than setting a new level of $0.40 if you reach $10 million lifetime earnings.
-
Shutterstock should introduce a few more higher levels. After 38 cents, what goals are there left for you?
Actually I prefer an agency that puts up levels that are actually achievable for "regular people" as well. Rather than setting a new level of $0.40 if you reach $10 million lifetime earnings.
They have the goals already set for 'regular people' though. It would be fun / nice to have a few more goals for the full time stock photographers. I'm guessing the top 100 or so photographers on Shutterstock make the top goal requirements every month. A goal in the $100,000 or $200,000 lifetime earnings range wouldn't be so ridiculous.
-
People who make that kind of money on SS, would they care about or need a 2 cent raise? Seems a bit underwhelming. Say you make $5000 on SS per month, and RPD of 1$, that means you have 5000 downloads, get a 2 cent raise, and you make 5100$ per month. Make that 5200$ including the ODDs which would go up as well.
Edit: I was asking a question if people would care or need a raise when they make $5000 from Shutterstock, then 2 cents sounds underwhelming I can imagine. Why not just answer me instead of dropping the down votes? I am thinking they would need more of a raise then 2 cents to feel enticed, no?
-
People who make that kind of money on SS, would they care about or need a 2 cent raise? Seems a bit underwhelming. Say you make $5000 on SS per month, and RPD of 1$, that means you have 5000 downloads, get a 2 cent raise, and you make 5100$ per month. Make that 5200$ including the ODDs which would go up as well.
yep but if we think that way we would be happy getting 36 instead of 38 ;D
-
They have the goals already set for 'regular people' though. It would be fun / nice to have a few more goals for the full time stock photographers. I'm guessing the top 100 or so photographers on Shutterstock make the top goal requirements every month. A goal in the $100,000 or $200,000 lifetime earnings range wouldn't be so ridiculous.
Well, hypothetical, yes, fine, great.
The backside of asking too loud for it is that my feeling is that any "new chance to make more money" goes hand in hand with an overall change in royalty structures that will reduce payments to more photographers than those actually making it to the new levels.
Or how many people have actually made that 45% target on iStock after it was introduced? Maybe 5? And how many contributors paid for those top 5 getting a raise?
Is there actually anyone within the top 3 levels at 123RF? How many are in the top ranks at Fotolia?
In this context I think "preserving the status quo" is more preferable than anyone doing any changes to any royalty structures. 8)
-
I'd like something beyond .38 but as I've said before, my revenue through SS is increasing and they have created new revenue streams via the SOD licence and the FB deal that actually put folding money into my bank account - as opposed to vague promises of future growth and prosperity on the back of knee-jerk initiatives from others which thus far, haven't even added up to a handful of magic beans.
-
They have the goals already set for 'regular people' though. It would be fun / nice to have a few more goals for the full time stock photographers. I'm guessing the top 100 or so photographers on Shutterstock make the top goal requirements every month. A goal in the $100,000 or $200,000 lifetime earnings range wouldn't be so ridiculous.
I'd definitely vote for a rate increase at $100K ... because I passed that milestone last month!
-
People who make that kind of money on SS, would they care about or need a 2 cent raise? Seems a bit underwhelming. Say you make $5000 on SS per month, and RPD of 1$, that means you have 5000 downloads, get a 2 cent raise, and you make 5100$ per month. Make that 5200$ including the ODDs which would go up as well.
yep but if we think that way we would be happy getting 36 instead of 38 ;D
My comment was not pointed at us mortals. For me a 2 cent raise makes a difference indeed. I was merely referring to people that make 5000 dollar per month and wondering if a 2 cent raise wouldn't be underwhelming for them. I am thinking they would need a bigger raise to keep them motivated.
-
I am at 0.38 level and I wouldn't mind getting 2 cents extra. Would you leave $100-$200 laying on the ground if you made $5000? Or $10.000? Not me. :)
-
The thing about differential rates is that it creates a temptation to favor work from artists on the lower rates. If an agency, any agency, pays some contributors a higher rate than others - then that is going to be an obvious area of focus when, inevitably, there is pressure to increase profits or cut costs.
Ultimately IMO a flat percentage is the best thing for people who are not salaried.
(And given the huge quantity of high quality work uploaded every day I do not believe that any of the significant agencies have any need to create incentives.)
-
The thing about differential rates is that it creates a temptation to favor work from artists on the lower rates. If an agency, any agency, pays some contributors a higher rate than others - then that is going to be an obvious area of focus when, inevitably, there is pressure to increase profits or cut costs.
Yes. You make a very good point here! With this economy even Shutterstock could need to cut on costs.
-
I've suggested a new 40¢ subs tier through their "feedback" button. I wouldn't mind a 5% raise on sub sales.
-
... Also waiting on Xmas images.
I sell Christmas images year round - daily, for the most part, even at this time of year. It isn't the same volume as Sept-Dec, but I think I uploaded lots of the ones now selling well in June 2011 (when I quit exclusivity) and it hasn't seemed to hamper them.
YMMV - I have no clue as to whether you'd do better building up some exposure ahead of the rush versus trying to hit the peak season and build up more exposure in a short period (but when you're competing with the established best sellers)
-
People who make that kind of money on SS, would they care about or need a 2 cent raise? Seems a bit underwhelming. Say you make $5000 on SS per month, and RPD of 1$, that means you have 5000 downloads, get a 2 cent raise, and you make 5100$ per month. Make that 5200$ including the ODDs which would go up as well.
Edit: I was asking a question if people would care or need a raise when they make $5000 from Shutterstock, then 2 cents sounds underwhelming I can imagine. Why not just answer me instead of dropping the down votes? I am thinking they would need more of a raise then 2 cents to feel enticed, no?
I'm guessing the down arrows are because this is microstock. It's all about micro payments, as we all know. If you are selling thousands of images a month, .02 additional per sale adds up. Also, if there were a higher tier, it might mean higher rates on OD sales too. Not to mention putting pressure on other sites to raise their sub rates.
On Bunhill's suggestion that it would create an incentive to push more expensive content down in the search, that incentive already exists with the current levels. There was much debate about whether or not that's happened (I thought it had), but enough .38 people haven't seen drops to suggest that isn't happening after all.
-
I'd definitely vote for a rate increase at $100K ... because I passed that milestone last month!
Congrats!
-
They have the goals already set for 'regular people' though. It would be fun / nice to have a few more goals for the full time stock photographers. I'm guessing the top 100 or so photographers on Shutterstock make the top goal requirements every month. A goal in the $100,000 or $200,000 lifetime earnings range wouldn't be so ridiculous.
I'd definitely vote for a rate increase at $100K ... because I passed that milestone last month!
Good job. I hearted you for that milestone. And congrats to Sean, Too.
-
They have the goals already set for 'regular people' though. It would be fun / nice to have a few more goals for the full time stock photographers. I'm guessing the top 100 or so photographers on Shutterstock make the top goal requirements every month. A goal in the $100,000 or $200,000 lifetime earnings range wouldn't be so ridiculous.
I'd definitely vote for a rate increase at $100K ... because I passed that milestone last month!
Good job. I hearted you for that milestone. And congrats to Sean, Too.
Thanks! To be honest I think a good deal of the credit is probably due to SS themselves. Amazing that they've managed to shift such a volume of my images, most of which are just photos of my dinner before I eat it!
It's always a bit bizarre being constantly reminded, through daily image sales, of the meals that I eat
several years ago.
-
They have the goals already set for 'regular people' though. It would be fun / nice to have a few more goals for the full time stock photographers. I'm guessing the top 100 or so photographers on Shutterstock make the top goal requirements every month. A goal in the $100,000 or $200,000 lifetime earnings range wouldn't be so ridiculous.
I'd definitely vote for a rate increase at $100K ... because I passed that milestone last month!
that is curious because I believe IS paid you a lot more, am I wrong?
-
People who make that kind of money on SS, would they care about or need a 2 cent raise? Seems a bit underwhelming. Say you make $5000 on SS per month, and RPD of 1$, that means you have 5000 downloads, get a 2 cent raise, and you make 5100$ per month. Make that 5200$ including the ODDs which would go up as well.
yep but if we think that way we would be happy getting 36 instead of 38 ;D
My comment was not pointed at us mortals. For me a 2 cent raise makes a difference indeed. I was merely referring to people that make 5000 dollar per month and wondering if a 2 cent raise wouldn't be underwhelming for them. I am thinking they would need a bigger raise to keep them motivated.
how can it make a difference to you when you have said a few days ago that you make 60k a year, if I had that type of income outside microstock I would leave, like 5 years ago ;)
-
"better in our pocket than theirs"
-
"better in our pocket than theirs"
no doubt!
a raise in any agency would be a major move but it looks like they don't really want to do such or don't need to motivate us even further
actually if we think closely the agencies doing poorly should be the ones giving incentives, the others like SS we are already "happy"
-
actually if we think closely the agencies doing poorly should be the ones giving incentives, the others like SS we are already "happy"
Indeed, so they hve no incentive to improve their incentives.
Wonder what would happen if they became a monopoly, as many people seem to desire.
Another cliché: "Be careful what you wish for".
(not meaning 'you' in particular)
-
I don't really wish that once I don't really trust 100% all agencies I contribute too, sometimes I wonder if I trust any of them, in the end the totals speak for themselves but it doesn't mean its all good...
-
actually if we think closely the agencies doing poorly should be the ones giving incentives, the others like SS we are already "happy"
Indeed, so they hve no incentive to improve their incentives.
Wonder what would happen if they became a monopoly, as many people seem to desire.
Another cliché: "Be careful what you wish for".
(not meaning 'you' in particular)
Good points
-
Agree
-
Whoop Dee Doo. Passed the $10k mark. End of leveling up updates. Carry on. :)
-
You slacker, that took 8 months, what is wrong with you????
Seriously - WOW - glad to see an indie "newbie" can be so successful.
-
Some newbie!! :)
Depending on the ratio of subscriptions to everything else, you should see some nice income increases - it's impossible to tell with the SODs but I'm guessing that they, like the ODs pay out at a higher rate.
It's time to get more of your older Christmas stuff up there :)
-
Whoop Dee Doo. Passed the $10k mark. End of leveling up updates. Carry on. :)
congrats.
must be a nice feeling giving IS a kick in u know where ;)
although i would dare say (10K in 8mths ) it's going to be a while before u make the kind of real dough
as u did with IS that made you superISman, huh? .