Author Topic: Shutterstock Hackathon - What is your idea? (Read 12761 times)

klsbear · « **Reply #25 on:** September 05, 2011, 19:19 »

I was under the impression that the brainstorming covered all aspects of their business such as new ideas on analytic tools, innovative marketing, maybe a killer search methodology that none of us have even dreamed of, but some programmer is envisioning based on his knowledge of new database technology. Did anyone see what the winning idea was that was supposed to be posted on the giant NASDAQ screen in Times Square?

gostwyck · « **Reply #26 on:** September 05, 2011, 20:01 »

Quote from: cthoman on September 05, 2011, 15:38

I'm not sure there is really much they can do to improve.

Exactly. They've become as successful as they have just by keeping it simple and sticking to the original principles of microstock. All images are priced the same, the site works flawlessly with just the right amount of functionality and they've never tried to shaft their contributors. Slowly, slowly catchee monkey.

I've run my own figures backwards again and, if my portfolio is still as average in performance as it ever was relative to the greater library, they suggest that Shutterstock now has annual sales in the region of $150M. That doesn't include Bigstock either.

cthoman · « **Reply #27 on:** September 05, 2011, 20:25 »

Quote from: gostwyck on September 05, 2011, 20:01

Quote from: cthoman on September 05, 2011, 15:38
I'm not sure there is really much they can do to improve.

Exactly. They've become as successful as they have just by keeping it simple and sticking to the original principles of microstock. All images are priced the same, the site works flawlessly with just the right amount of functionality and they've never tried to shaft their contributors. Slowly, slowly catchee monkey.

I've run my own figures backwards again and, if my portfolio is still as average in performance as it ever was relative to the greater library, they suggest that Shutterstock now has annual sales in the region of $150M. That doesn't include Bigstock either.

hmm... not exactly the context I meant it in.

SS is a great company, now, but I have concerns about the long term viability of their model as a contributor. I'm just not sure it's feasible to maintain the download volume from a purely subs site. On Demand has helped, but I just wonder if 5 years from now, the raging river of downloads will be divided into so many tributaries that it will be just a a slow trickle for me. And, I'm not sure what they can do to improve or prevent that.

gostwyck · « **Reply #28 on:** September 05, 2011, 20:49 »

Quote from: cthoman on September 05, 2011, 20:25

SS is a great company, now, but I have concerns about the long term viability of their model as a contributor. I'm just not sure it's feasible to maintain the download volume from a purely subs site. On Demand has helped, but I just wonder if 5 years from now, the raging river of downloads will be divided into so many tributaries that it will be just a a slow trickle for me. And, I'm not sure what they can do to improve or prevent that.

Unfortunately that's your job not theirs! All they can do is provide a fair platform for the content they receive, which I think they do admirably. I think 'the cream' has a fairer chance of rising to the top on SS than any other site, helped enormously by the sheer volume of sales. I think my monthly sales on SS nowadays are usually higher than my sales on IS, FT, DT and BigStock combined.

nruboc · « **Reply #29 on:** September 05, 2011, 21:02 »

Quote from: gostwyck on September 05, 2011, 20:49

Quote from: cthoman on September 05, 2011, 20:25
SS is a great company, now, but I have concerns about the long term viability of their model as a contributor. I'm just not sure it's feasible to maintain the download volume from a purely subs site. On Demand has helped, but I just wonder if 5 years from now, the raging river of downloads will be divided into so many tributaries that it will be just a a slow trickle for me. And, I'm not sure what they can do to improve or prevent that.

Unfortunately that's your job not theirs! All they can do is provide a fair platform for the content they receive, which I think they do admirably. I think 'the cream' has a fairer chance of rising to the top on SS than any other site, helped enormously by the sheer volume of sales. I think my monthly sales on SS nowadays are usually higher than my sales on IS, FT, DT and BigStock combined.

Agree 100%

cthoman · « **Reply #30 on:** September 05, 2011, 22:12 »

Quote from: gostwyck on September 05, 2011, 20:49

All they can do is provide a fair platform for the content they receive, which I think they do admirably.

I guess that's my point. I'm just not sure the sub platform is fair or sustainable to the contributor. I'd much rather sell 10 times less and get 20 times more.

disorderly · « **Reply #31 on:** September 05, 2011, 23:59 »

Quote from: cthoman on September 05, 2011, 22:12

Quote from: gostwyck on September 05, 2011, 20:49
All they can do is provide a fair platform for the content they receive, which I think they do admirably.

I guess that's my point. I'm just not sure the sub platform is fair or sustainable to the contributor. I'd much rather sell 10 times less and get 20 times more.

More power to you if you can do that. I've adapted to the needs or desires of the subscription buyer, uploading as many shots from the same session as the reviewers will allow. Subscription buyers download a bunch of similar or related shots, at least a lot of the time, which brings in more revenue for me. They don't do that nearly as often when they're using credits, although that does happen from time to time. But I see it all the time at Shutterstock and other subscription sites: four or eight or a dozen shots of the same model in the same outfit in different poses. My RPI may be awful, but that's why I don't use that as a metric. Of course, it works much better at sites with high or nonexistent upload quotas. Dreamstime's a problem, for example, both because of their relatively low quotas and their hostility toward similars.

RacePhoto · « **Reply #32 on:** September 06, 2011, 11:57 »

Quote from: cthoman on September 05, 2011, 22:12

Quote from: gostwyck on September 05, 2011, 20:49
All they can do is provide a fair platform for the content they receive, which I think they do admirably.

I guess that's my point. I'm just not sure the sub platform is fair or sustainable to the contributor. I'd much rather sell 10 times less and get 20 times more.

Me too, but I'd rather sell one picture for one million and then just shoot what I like for the rest of my life.

Alamy still pays best for me, but it's not micro, so for people who shoot micro style and subjects, it's not going to work. On the other hand, since I don't shoot apropos Micro stuff, I'm the other side and I get piddly downloads. I will say that after some brief burp this Spring SS suddenly jumped back to life and IS went to sleep. I think it may be a matter of IS not just smelling bad, it's decaying and dead.

So with that, I'll say - SS Exclusive for a small pay increase or search bonus. I'd drop all the rest of the RF sites and go sub on SS. Only one place to upload, on place to play the ED caption game, keywords are only for one site, not multiple versions depending on what they like or don't like. Yes, One Micro Site that's for me. (I might do it anyway)

They make the most income/sales and somehow (except for support tickets) are the most in tune with users. And speaking of support tickets. One of the complainers who was pounding the keyboard every three days, listed his ticket numbers, it shows something interesting. His ticket numbers are in the thousands per day, one day 9,000, another over 10,000. You know what that means? Someone has to read those 10,000 support tickets? 70,000 a week! Small wonder with people writing over and over about the same thing, it brings the whole system to it's knees.

Anyway, SS Content Exclusive or better yet for me, RF contributor exclusive. I'm In!

cthoman · « **Reply #33 on:** September 06, 2011, 12:35 »

I did think of something they could improve. A nice artist info page would helpful. I get a lot of walk-in freelance traffic from the micros, but it's rare that I get it from Shutterstock.

disorderly · « **Reply #34 on:** September 06, 2011, 12:43 »

Quote from: cthoman on September 06, 2011, 12:35

I did think of something they could improve. A nice artist info page would helpful. I get a lot of walk-in freelance traffic from the micros, but it's rare that I get it from Shutterstock.

Great idea. I've had customer comments and requests from iStock, Dreamstime and Deposit, but not Shutterstock. Have you made the suggestion there?

cthoman · « **Reply #35 on:** September 06, 2011, 13:21 »

Quote from: disorderly on September 06, 2011, 12:43

Quote from: cthoman on September 06, 2011, 12:35
I did think of something they could improve. A nice artist info page would helpful. I get a lot of walk-in freelance traffic from the micros, but it's rare that I get it from Shutterstock.

Great idea. I've had customer comments and requests from iStock, Dreamstime and Deposit, but not Shutterstock. Have you made the suggestion there?

I haven't. Feel free to.

Tabimura · « **Reply #36 on:** September 06, 2011, 14:32 »

possibility to create a "favorites" collection like 123RF has, with effect on search positioning. Also possibility to display this collection on the above mentioned contributor info page.