MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Shutterstock hiring cheap work-at-home reviewers  (Read 32477 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Hobostocker

    This user is banned.
« on: March 30, 2015, 04:38 »
+10
Work From Home Vector & Illustration Image Reviewer (Europe)
http://www.shutterstock.com/jobs/listings/2709-work-from-home-vector-illustration-image-reviewer-europe-

so, despite making billions of $ they can't even afford to provide you a cubicle in an office, you're also expected to use your own computer, work during weekend, and pay for your own fast 25Mb+ line ... no mention about salary but you can guess it's on par with grilling burgers at mcdonalds.

this is a new low for photography, skills like image reviewing or  photo editing are basically considered worthless even by the top tier photo agencies like SS.



Semmick Photo

« Reply #1 on: March 30, 2015, 05:01 »
+4
You also need to own the software to review images. You are required to own Adobe Illustrator to review vectors.

« Reply #2 on: March 30, 2015, 05:10 »
+7
Without knowing the income potential this is a blind judgement - but I would have thought anyone with the skills they are advertising for could find a more lucrative and satisfying way to spend 25-30 hours a week?

« Reply #3 on: March 30, 2015, 05:28 »
+13
So I assume that also means that SS has officially absolutely no control over monitors on which images will be reviewed.

Good like with white balance rejections.  ;)

Hobostocker

    This user is banned.
« Reply #4 on: March 30, 2015, 05:38 »
+12
too many red flags :

1 - not a single word is spent about salary, fees, benefits
2 - you're only hired as "freelance", not full time.
3 - no mention about career advancement, bonus packages
4 - no training provided, despite their laundry list of requirements including complex legal things like fraud detection, release, and copyright.




dpimborough

« Reply #5 on: March 30, 2015, 05:41 »
+6
That why the reviews are loopy  ::)

Beppe Grillo

« Reply #6 on: March 30, 2015, 05:59 »
0
Work From Home Vector & Illustration Image Reviewer (Europe)
http://www.shutterstock.com/jobs/listings/2709-work-from-home-vector-illustration-image-reviewer-europe-

so, despite making billions of $ they can't even afford to provide you a cubicle in an office, you're also expected to use your own computer, work during weekend, and pay for your own fast 25Mb+ line ... no mention about salary but you can guess it's on par with grilling burgers at mcdonalds.

this is a new low for photography, skills like image reviewing or  photo editing are basically considered worthless even by the top tier photo agencies like SS.



If their photo reviewers are hired in this way this probably explains most of the rejections for "white balance"
I am not sure that they will all use calibrated Eizo monitors or any calibrated monitor at all O_o

Good move iStock!



« Reply #7 on: March 30, 2015, 06:02 »
+19
Hasn't it always been like this in microstock?  Guess who would be paying for it if the sites had professional reviewers and paid them properly.

Hobostocker

    This user is banned.
« Reply #8 on: March 30, 2015, 06:03 »
+8
That why the reviews are loopy  ::)

sure but that's not the point, what we're seeing now is yet another devalueing of photography jobs, and if that matter i spotted a couple similar job posts by well known RM agencies like Arcangel seeking part time reviewers in UK and this is a bad trend considering agencies put such an emphasys on the idea that their collections are "carefully edited" by super duper professionals .. yeah and then you have random pennyless students working at home on a freelance basis rejecting good images while eating a burger and rubbing their ba-lls ?

if this is the trend, they will reap what they sow, no wonder they treat us like sh-it.


« Reply #9 on: March 30, 2015, 06:09 »
0
Hasn't it always been like this in microstock?  Guess who would be paying for it if the sites had professional reviewers and paid them properly.

Or from another perspective, we are, but they are saving on professional reviews and redirecting that into something more important  ;)

« Reply #10 on: March 30, 2015, 06:24 »
+17
Isnt this the way all agencies work? I know many reviewers from istock and they work from home, pretty sure other agencies also have a large number of reviewers from around the world. It gives them access to international teams and 24/7 review times.

Monitors have to be good quality and calibrated, but that is a normal requirement for a media professional, and most of them have illustrator or photoshop because they use it every day.

I really dont see anything unusual in the ad.

« Reply #11 on: March 30, 2015, 07:08 »
+4
Why would anyone apply when there is zero detail of remuneration? I guess only if you are super desperate, so unlikely to have the skills required!

Beppe Grillo

« Reply #12 on: March 30, 2015, 08:39 »
+1
Hasn't it always been like this in microstock?  Guess who would be paying for it if the sites had professional reviewers and paid them properly.

The sites with no reviewer at all (I mean those accepting anything) are more professional :D

« Reply #13 on: March 30, 2015, 08:56 »
+6
Why would anyone apply when there is zero detail of remuneration? I guess only if you are super desperate, so unlikely to have the skills required!

I think they offer you the chance to be a reviewer - one site asked me if I would like to do it a few years back (I said "no"). I know someone else who did reviewing for a bit and I believe it helped him a lot in recognising errors in his own work. The payment is very low, obviously, so the reviewers have to work through a huge number of images to make anything worthwhile. It astonishes me that their work is as good as it is.

« Reply #14 on: March 30, 2015, 09:03 »
0
I assume this is the way it has always been - most agencies don't have reviewers on site do they?  It is the perfect job for working at home.  It is interesting that they want so many hours per week and with no mention of pay or benefits - I can't imagine it would be attractive to many people.  They also don't require you to be a contributor so they could take people with no understanding at all of the industry from the contributor's side.  OTOH, they won't be competitors with the people they are reviewing so I guess that is a plus.  Also strange that they don't mention training - I assume they would have some sort of extensive training but that is not mentioned.  The other test is just for internet speed - nothing on how good you are at determining image quality, etc.  I suppose if you really want to know more about it you can apply - might be easier hitting "Reject" a few thousand times a day than producing images, and of course it would tell you how to do better yourself as mentioned already.

« Reply #15 on: March 30, 2015, 09:24 »
+2
Payment is per image or per image approved, so earnings will depend on how fast you work, and the sites - at least the major ones - provide training and run assessments on the work of the reviewers to try to maintain a uniform standard. I think that at least one site had some specialised software to help with the evaluation of images - I heard all this a long time ago but I presume it must still be so.

ruxpriencdiam

    This user is banned.
  • Location. Third stone from the sun
« Reply #16 on: March 30, 2015, 09:59 »
0
If I remember right at SS you have to have at least 500 images and an established port?



« Reply #17 on: March 30, 2015, 10:00 »
+5
Sounds like a decent opportunity if you need some extra cash.

ruxpriencdiam

    This user is banned.
  • Location. Third stone from the sun
« Reply #18 on: March 30, 2015, 10:05 »
+1
Current openings.

http://www.shutterstock.com/jobs/listings

Quote
Work From Home Image Reviewer

Headquartered in New York, Shutterstock is an innovative e-commerce company and a leading provider of royalty-free videos, photos, and illustrations. With over 30 million images and videos, Shutterstock sources content from a contributor community of thousands of photographers, videographers, artists and illustrators from around the world. We consider our contributor community, supply chain and operational capability to be among our greatest assets.

We are hiring Image Reviewers located in the USA to evaluate images for their overall quality, technical execution, commercial suitability, and adherence to our image acceptance standards.

This is a freelance work-from-home position using the reviewer's own equipment and based around the reviewers available schedule.
Responsibilities:

    Efficiently evaluate and approve images based on defined acceptance standards.
    Operate as an authority for technical standards, trademark exceptions, fraud detection, copyright and release requirements; review images for adherence to content standards and suitability for inclusion in our commercial image catalog.
    Perform exceptionable and consistent image evaluations in a high volume, fast-paced, and super detail-oriented manner.
    Apply metadata standards, with light metadata editing and a keen eye for keyword and title relevance to drive accurate search engine results.
    Provide consistent, objective, efficient, concise and accurate feedback to contributors.

Requirements:

    Mandatory: Domain expertise and passionate enthusiasm for photography with 2+ years of professional photography experience, preferably as a photographer, contributor to stock agencies, photo editor, or photo researcher.
    Must be available to work 25-30 hours per week including 5-8 hours per weekend.
    Must have high-speed wired broadband Internet access [at least 25mbps download speed to test: http://www.speedtest.net/], own a PC or Mac, and own a sufficient and accurate color display for viewing high-resolution images.
    Adept at photo editing, image resolution, and metadata evaluation, along with a basic foundation of best practices in post-production processes.
    Understanding of evolving image industry trends, styles, and commercial value.
    Comfortable and enthusiastic about making many detailed judgments repetitively.
    Highly organized, super analytical and extremely detail-oriented.
    Strong command of English; ability to read/write and participate in operations and business meetings.

Software: Knowledge of Adobe Photoshop, Google Docs and Microsoft Office Suite.

In addition to applying, please complete the following questionnaire to be considered for this position -- http://goo.gl/YXv868

 Equal Opportunity Employer, M/F/D/V

« Reply #19 on: March 30, 2015, 10:20 »
0
Someone must look over reviewers somehow, otherwise they can just press the "ACEPT IMAGE" button continuously without checking the image and make some "easy" money...

Maybe they have to have a % approved and % disapproved images and this explains why they are sometimes hardest; they must fulfill their % of disapproved images (just a theory)

Beppe Grillo

« Reply #20 on: March 30, 2015, 11:00 »
+1
^ I think that there is not a single button to push to accept the image or one to push to reject it.
It should be, I imagine, a list to check [yes/no] + a corresponding list of errors.

It would be interesting to know, from somebody with experience in reviewing images for microstocks, how it works exactly.


« Reply #21 on: March 30, 2015, 11:19 »
-1
^ I think that there is not a single button to push to accept the image or one to push to reject it.
It should be, I imagine, a list to check [yes/no] + a corresponding list of errors.

It would be interesting to know, from somebody with experience in reviewing images for microstocks, how it works exactly.

Yes, you are right... but i use the "ACEPT Button" as a metaphor of just acept images quickly without real check it...

« Reply #22 on: March 30, 2015, 11:27 »
+1
ALL agency do the same!

Some even offer English lessons to their curators! Go figure!  :o
https://jobs.lever.co/pond5/7bb489f3-7d74-4dfd-929b-7eee8d51131e
Based in Eastern Europe = paid peanuts.

https://www.facebook.com/pond5/photos/a.10152767445834777.1073741835.29824144776/10152767448689777/?type=3&theater

 :-X
« Last Edit: April 01, 2015, 01:55 by KnowYourOnions »

cuppacoffee

« Reply #23 on: March 30, 2015, 11:41 »
0
DT Careers - Image Editor
http://www.dreamstime.com/careers/image-editor

DT Careers - Other Opportunities
http://www.dreamstime.com/careers/

« Reply #24 on: March 30, 2015, 11:43 »
0
DT has the "exclusive" clause though.

« Reply #25 on: March 30, 2015, 12:27 »
+1
Isnt this the way all agencies work? I know many reviewers from istock and they work from home, pretty sure other agencies also have a large number of reviewers from around the world. It gives them access to international teams and 24/7 review times.

Monitors have to be good quality and calibrated, but that is a normal requirement for a media professional, and most of them have illustrator or photoshop because they use it every day.

I really dont see anything unusual in the ad.
I always thought the reviewers at iStock were chosen from contributors, I don't remember seeing them advertise for reviewers from the general public.  Shutterstock used to ask contributors if they wanted to be inspectors I guess that's changed?

« Reply #26 on: March 30, 2015, 12:55 »
+3
Work From Home Vector & Illustration Image Reviewer (Europe)
http://www.shutterstock.com/jobs/listings/2709-work-from-home-vector-illustration-image-reviewer-europe-

so, despite making billions of $ they can't even afford to provide you a cubicle in an office, you're also expected to use your own computer, work during weekend, and pay for your own fast 25Mb+ line ... no mention about salary but you can guess it's on par with grilling burgers at mcdonalds.

this is a new low for photography, skills like image reviewing or  photo editing are basically considered worthless even by the top tier photo agencies like SS.


ha!!! finally the reason is out for why old contributors suddenly forget how to WB, do poor lighting,etc
and as one of our stalwarts here keep saying how her works get rejections for wrong WB for sunset, and the other for off focus / focus is not where it should be .
i am so happy to know it is not that we all get to lose it and forgot how to use our camera. even when we get half-blind i am sure we , like those great jazz musicians, could do a better job with our eyes close.
lastly i would say to ss, ... hey, are you sure your reviewers got their monitors properly calibrated???

especially that super wunderkin(s) who give(s) the most regular rejections (see ss forum for that).


« Reply #27 on: March 30, 2015, 12:59 »
+5
I always thought the reviewers at iStock were chosen from contributors, I don't remember seeing them advertise for reviewers from the general public.  Shutterstock used to ask contributors if they wanted to be inspectors I guess that's changed?

even that is a conflict of interest. reviewers should not be contributors or good buddies of certain contributors.

« Reply #28 on: March 30, 2015, 13:03 »
+1
I always thought the reviewers at iStock were chosen from contributors, I don't remember seeing them advertise for reviewers from the general public.  Shutterstock used to ask contributors if they wanted to be inspectors I guess that's changed?

even that is a conflict of interest. reviewers should not be contributors or good buddies of certain contributors.

Eh, that's only in ideal world....agencies/curators do know very well which contributors are the top sellers and therefore have priority in that looooong queue.
« Last Edit: March 30, 2015, 13:38 by KnowYourOnions »

« Reply #29 on: March 30, 2015, 13:54 »
+4
Hasn't it always been like this in microstock?  Guess who would be paying for it if the sites had professional reviewers and paid them properly.

Agreed, I thought this was common knowledge that all of the sites use at home workers who use their own non standardized equipment.

« Reply #30 on: March 30, 2015, 15:08 »
+5
Honestly, I know few reviewers and they earn between $1000-1500 and usually work about 4 hours a day with some experience. It might be low salary in USA, UK or Germany but it is a hell lot of money for such short hours in 90 % of the world. In my homecountry 2/3 ppl earn less for full time jobs! And it doesnt mean that people in east Europe or Asia are idiots and lazy workers.

There is of course constant problem with absolutely inconsistent rejections, lack of proper training and lack of proper equipment. Also paying reviewers based on volume and not quality is simply built-in rejection machine. How can you argue with crap rejections like "poor light" or "low commercial value"? But as I remember it is like this all the time since 2007 when I started with microstock. One would expect that with all those earned billions agencies should invest into proper review process - but obviously contributors are still the last to think about in this business...

« Reply #31 on: March 30, 2015, 15:56 »
+1
A few years back I inquired when bigstock was looking for reviewers. They hired contributors and I think they were paying about 5 cents per image. I don't remember if they required exclusivity, but I never pursued it because it didn't seem to be worth my while.

« Reply #32 on: March 30, 2015, 15:59 »
0
Honestly, I know few reviewers and they earn between $1000-1500 and usually work about 4 hours a day with some experience. It might be low salary in USA, UK or Germany but it is a hell lot of money for such short hours in 90 % of the world. In my homecountry 2/3 ppl earn less for full time jobs! And it doesnt mean that people in east Europe or Asia are idiots and lazy workers.

wow...please let us know the name of that company that pays 1K-1.5K for 4 hours a day  work?

« Reply #33 on: March 30, 2015, 17:13 »
+3
Hopefully the new ones will earn enough to put aside a few quid for eye tests and decent spectacles.

« Reply #34 on: March 30, 2015, 17:29 »
+3
Honestly, I know few reviewers and they earn between $1000-1500 and usually work about 4 hours a day with some experience. It might be low salary in USA, UK or Germany but it is a hell lot of money for such short hours in 90 % of the world. In my homecountry 2/3 ppl earn less for full time jobs! And it doesnt mean that people in east Europe or Asia are idiots and lazy workers.

wow...please let us know the name of that company that pays 1K-1.5K for 4 hours a day  work?

That works out to about $8-$12 an hour. It's around minimum wage in most states.

« Reply #35 on: March 30, 2015, 18:14 »
+2
Honestly, I know few reviewers and they earn between $1000-1500 and usually work about 4 hours a day with some experience. It might be low salary in USA, UK or Germany but it is a hell lot of money for such short hours in 90 % of the world. In my homecountry 2/3 ppl earn less for full time jobs! And it doesnt mean that people in east Europe or Asia are idiots and lazy workers.

wow...please let us know the name of that company that pays 1K-1.5K for 4 hours a day  work?

That works out to about $8-$12 an hour. It's around minimum wage in most states.
I think you're right. Some years ago I was offered work reviewing images by a friend of mine at one of the agencies. The rate of pay was to be about $10 per our (a lot less than I was making by being a contributor at that time).

« Reply #36 on: March 30, 2015, 21:11 »
0
Honestly, I know few reviewers and they earn between $1000-1500 and usually work about 4 hours a day with some experience. It might be low salary in USA, UK or Germany but it is a hell lot of money for such short hours in 90 % of the world. In my homecountry 2/3 ppl earn less for full time jobs! And it doesnt mean that people in east Europe or Asia are idiots and lazy workers.

wow...please let us know the name of that company that pays 1K-1.5K for 4 hours a day  work?

That works out to about $8-$12 an hour. It's around minimum wage in most states.

No offense to anyone, but that sounds like a job for desperate that agencies most likely  taking advantage from. :-\
« Last Edit: March 31, 2015, 01:21 by KnowYourOnions »


No Free Lunch

« Reply #37 on: March 30, 2015, 21:59 »
-1
Honestly, I know few reviewers and they earn between $1000-1500 and usually work about 4 hours a day with some experience. It might be low salary in USA, UK or Germany but it is a hell lot of money for such short hours in 90 % of the world. In my homecountry 2/3 ppl earn less for full time jobs! And it doesnt mean that people in east Europe or Asia are idiots and lazy workers.

wow...please let us know the name of that company that pays 1K-1.5K for 4 hours a day  work?

That works out to about $8-$12 an hour. It's around minimum wage in most states.

No offense to anyone, but that sounds like a job for desperate that agencies most likely  take advantage from. :-\

You think  8)



No Free Lunch

« Reply #38 on: March 30, 2015, 22:06 »
+1
Maybe having automated software programs doing the reviewing isn't such a bad thing after all   :-\



« Reply #39 on: March 30, 2015, 22:09 »
0
Maybe having automated software programs doing the reviewing isn't such a bad thing after all   :-\

Well, thats difficult today, you really need human criteria, maybe after 50 year with the creation of real AI, but today it is almost imposible

ShadySue

« Reply #40 on: March 31, 2015, 07:14 »
+4
Honestly, I know few reviewers and they earn between $1000-1500 and usually work about 4 hours a day with some experience. It might be low salary in USA, UK or Germany but it is a hell lot of money for such short hours in 90 % of the world. In my homecountry 2/3 ppl earn less for full time jobs! And it doesnt mean that people in east Europe or Asia are idiots and lazy workers.

wow...please let us know the name of that company that pays 1K-1.5K for 4 hours a day  work?

That works out to about $8-$12 an hour. It's around minimum wage in most states.

No offense to anyone, but that sounds like a job for desperate that agencies most likely  taking advantage from. :-\
Still, would  you rather earn minimum wage flipping burgers or cleaning toilets or sitting with your own home comforts around you on flexitime?

Beppe Grillo

« Reply #41 on: March 31, 2015, 07:22 »
+2
Honestly, I know few reviewers and they earn between $1000-1500 and usually work about 4 hours a day with some experience. It might be low salary in USA, UK or Germany but it is a hell lot of money for such short hours in 90 % of the world. In my homecountry 2/3 ppl earn less for full time jobs! And it doesnt mean that people in east Europe or Asia are idiots and lazy workers.

wow...please let us know the name of that company that pays 1K-1.5K for 4 hours a day  work?

That works out to about $8-$12 an hour. It's around minimum wage in most states.

No offense to anyone, but that sounds like a job for desperate that agencies most likely  taking advantage from. :-\
Still, would  you rather earn minimum wage flipping burgers or cleaning toilets or sitting with your own home comforts around you on flexitime?

In a lot of less rich countries you will earn less than 100 $ flipping burgers (or equivalent) and 50$ cleaning toilets
In the country where I live the monthly average salary is around  $150.
Here nobody will spit on 8 or 10 times the average salary

ShadySue

« Reply #42 on: March 31, 2015, 08:21 »
+1
Honestly, I know few reviewers and they earn between $1000-1500 and usually work about 4 hours a day with some experience. It might be low salary in USA, UK or Germany but it is a hell lot of money for such short hours in 90 % of the world. In my homecountry 2/3 ppl earn less for full time jobs! And it doesnt mean that people in east Europe or Asia are idiots and lazy workers.

wow...please let us know the name of that company that pays 1K-1.5K for 4 hours a day  work?

That works out to about $8-$12 an hour. It's around minimum wage in most states.

No offense to anyone, but that sounds like a job for desperate that agencies most likely  taking advantage from. :-\
Still, would  you rather earn minimum wage flipping burgers or cleaning toilets or sitting with your own home comforts around you on flexitime?

In a lot of less rich countries you will earn less than 100 $ flipping burgers (or equivalent) and 50$ cleaning toilets
In the country where I live the monthly average salary is around  $150.
Here nobody will spit on 8 or 10 times the average salary
Well, here in a relatively rich country, I have a download speed of 6.63Mbps according to Speedtest, which I guess complies with the 'up to 15Mbps' my provider claims, but miles below the required 25mbps.

Beppe Grillo

« Reply #43 on: March 31, 2015, 08:53 »
0
Here it is enough fast in d/l but very slow in u/l
http://www.speedtest.net/my-result/4254877280
But I live in the capital where the average salary is around $ 300 - 400.
I don't know how fast (slow) is the speed in little cities, but the fact to be a "poor" country does not mean to be late from the technology point of view. It means to be a country where you have a little part of very rich people (tycoon, oligarchs) exploiting a major part of poor people, but this is another story

« Reply #44 on: March 31, 2015, 11:20 »
0
Outsourcing is modern slavery, imho.
 
Do we get the same reviews quality by doing it, that's the main question here!

Beppe Grillo

« Reply #45 on: March 31, 2015, 11:59 »
+3
I don't see why they should not be able to review the images as well as other people

Some years ago when I arrived in Kiev to work as creative director for a big american managed publishing house I have been very surprised to find so good creative people, illustrators and photographers, with an average level superior to the one I was used to see in France, in Italy where I worked before, or in the rest of the occidental world.
(Some images of my friend Sasha here http://kiki-ua.livejournal.com/ or Igor Sakharov in Saint Petersburg http://igorsakharov.com/)

Here in Ukraine, like in Russia or in Poland, where I worked too, you have incredible people. In fact more and more advertising agencies work with them because they can provide an excellent level of quality at a very lower cost.
If you read the credits of american and european movies you can see more and more Slavic names, and there is a good reason for this: this people work well, never lament and ask less money

About Asia I could not say, but I think that it is not so much different.
« Last Edit: March 31, 2015, 12:02 by Beppe Grillo »

« Reply #46 on: March 31, 2015, 12:39 »
+5
Outsourcing is modern slavery, imho.

Aren't we all outsourced labor in stock art?


« Reply #47 on: March 31, 2015, 12:44 »
-2
In a lot of less rich countries you will earn less than 100 $ flipping burgers (or equivalent) and 50$ cleaning toilets
In the country where I live the monthly average salary is around  $150.
Here nobody will spit on 8 or 10 times the average salary

In many rich countries  you have even more ss contributors working hard with expensive equipment, internet service, electricity payment,etc etc etc
earning maybe as much as  them in less rich countries 100 $ flipping burgers (or equivalent) and 50$ cleaning toilets

« Reply #48 on: March 31, 2015, 13:14 »
+3
In a lot of less rich countries you will earn less than 100 $ flipping burgers (or equivalent) and 50$ cleaning toilets
In the country where I live the monthly average salary is around  $150.
Here nobody will spit on 8 or 10 times the average salary

This thread is turning into international economics issue... In 2005 i was talking with my friend about different countries in the world and average salaries; he told me that in India average salary was 1 dollar per day; so it is a very good business for people in this countries this kind of internet deals/business; and if you live in a country where 100US$ per month is nothing, bad luck for you, because nobody will pay you more if you have a lot of people from India and other countries doing the job for cents.

Golbalizacion also is giving more chances to people from poor countries to work remotely in foreign countries and affecting the work of local people. My brother is computer engineer and now he is competing not only with other local engineers but also with some free lancers from other poor countries, so you must adjust your fees to get the jobs.

Beppe Grillo

« Reply #49 on: March 31, 2015, 13:17 »
0
In a lot of less rich countries you will earn less than 100 $ flipping burgers (or equivalent) and 50$ cleaning toilets
In the country where I live the monthly average salary is around  $150.
Here nobody will spit on 8 or 10 times the average salary

In many rich countries  you have even more ss contributors working hard with expensive equipment, internet service, electricity payment,etc etc etc
earning maybe as much as  them in less rich countries 100 $ flipping burgers (or equivalent) and 50$ cleaning toilets

Yes, of course a Canon or a Nikon costs less because you live in a poor country
The photographers that I know here use Hasselblad, Sinar Profoto and Broncolor, all cheap equipment for cheap people living in cheap countries!

Hobostocker

    This user is banned.
« Reply #50 on: April 01, 2015, 01:58 »
0
ahhh the old "1 dollar a day" myth ....
here's the cheapest jobs i've seen in the last year so far :

- cambodia : female garment workers enslaved in chinese factories for 80-90$/month, they're often on strike asking for 150$/month but in the meantime it's 3$/day including 2 meals and transportation and such a low salary is only possible because they're women so their money adds up to the salary of their husband or their family, men will make 100-120$ even cleaning toilets and an apprentice clerk or shopkeeper makes 150$ in the capital while white collars jobs in office go from 2-300$ up and same for sales jobs + commissions and bonuses.

- vietnam : inflation booming, salaries from 150$ up.

- indonesia : more or less on par with cambodia unless we talk about Bali or Jakarta, in that case you just can't find anyone for less than 5$/day unless you provide meals and accomodation.

- philippines : similar scenario, you may heard of very cheap salaries but they include rooms and food and extras

- thailand : forget it, the minimum salary by law is now 10$/day (300 baht) and even illegal workers won't move a finger for less than 5-7$.

- malaysia : white collars earning easily 500-1000$/month, blue collars 3-400 + extras.

- singapore : salaries as high as in the west, with an army of enslaved immigrants from indonesia and philippines working for 3-400$/month which is really a pittance in Singapore but still 10-13 bucks per day ...


now ... where's this mythological land of "1 dollar per day" ?


Semmick Photo

« Reply #51 on: April 01, 2015, 02:34 »
+3
Did you watch the documentary A Dollar a Day? Its about a Mayan village where they only make a dollar a day. I actually donated to charity to help the people there after seeing the docu. They are happy people, but only make on average a dollar a day.

Hobostocker

    This user is banned.
« Reply #52 on: April 01, 2015, 03:51 »
+7
Did you watch the documentary A Dollar a Day? Its about a Mayan village where they only make a dollar a day. I actually donated to charity to help the people there after seeing the docu. They are happy people, but only make on average a dollar a day.

but some hands-on background is required to understand why in the poorest backyards of the third world people can survive with 1$/day ... i visited such places and the pattern is obvious once you get there and see the small details :

they're farmers, and most of what they need (food but also gasoline, meds, etc) they get by exchanging bags of rice, fruit/vegs, cattle, or doing some work, and this allows them to live "money free" in one way or another ... ask them how much they spend per day and they will say zero or one dollar, but in reality they spend maybe 10 kg of rice per family.

since they live off the land they can pretty much follow a quite spartan lifestyle ...rainwater in big storage tanks, water from wells, electricity from 12V batteries or diesel generators, often no electricity at all  ...

transportation .. battered down old trucks and scooters, i mean i've seen plenty of Honda Super Cub from the 60s, they must have been fixed 100 times ... and ancient chinese trucks that are considered a relic even in china !

healthcare : very basic, and again they can trade a doctor's visit with rice.

schooling : they only get village schools for kids, when they're 12 they go back work in the fields, if they've some money they send the kids in the city to enroll in high school.

i mean it's such an easy and linear life, no taxation, no burocracy, no high tech, but they all looked happy and smiling and relaxed.

the most important factor is that they're not too much impacted by inflation and their whole village is based on family clans that help each other, if one member is in deep sh-it the family will come to rescue or find some money, if somebody goes working in the city and lose his job he just goes back to the village and they know they've a roof on their head and hot meals.

the limit of this model is the scalability, it doesn't scale too well moneywise unless they sell meat or fish that pays better than rice but nobody is starving, it's quite another planet from living in a city and they don't miss anything of what we take for granted, no electricity for instance .. it's a non issue for them ... actually they love setting up a fire by night and eat together outdoors.

unpaved roads, lack of hygiene, same as above .. once you're born in the sh-it that's your natural environment.

« Reply #53 on: April 01, 2015, 04:15 »
-1
No wonder only white background images are accepted lately.

« Reply #54 on: April 01, 2015, 05:14 »
+1
"once you're born in the sh-it that's your natural environment."

That is a pretty patronising first world comment.

« Reply #55 on: April 01, 2015, 05:41 »
0
Couple of people I have known in the past went to India in the 1960s on the "Hippy trail"
They both said you could live for a dollar a day out there back then. . . :)

Dook

« Reply #56 on: April 01, 2015, 06:04 »
+2
Couple of people I have known in the past went to India in the 1960s on the "Hippy trail"
They both said you could live for a dollar a day out there back then. . . :)
I thought hippies don't need money  :)


ShadySue

« Reply #57 on: April 01, 2015, 06:45 »
0
Still, this thread has wandered a bit, as SS specifically want people in Europe for these posts. Wonder why?
And are trialling the all-month subs only in the US and Canada. (Prsumably the vast bulk of their market?)

« Reply #58 on: April 01, 2015, 07:18 »
+2
Still, this thread has wandered a bit, as SS specifically want people in Europe for these posts. Wonder why?
And are trialling the all-month subs only in the US and Canada. (Prsumably the vast bulk of their market?)

Because the reviews are regional. If you live Europe your images are reviewed by someone in your region of Europe.

If you live in the states your images are reviewed by someone in your region. If you notice the job board for shutterstock they are advertising for reviewers in various regions of the US.

« Reply #59 on: April 01, 2015, 07:25 »
+1
I am from Europe. If i received the status at 3-4am, belive me that the reviewer is not from Europe. I don't think someone is working in the night :)
Sometimes i get the status in the evening, sometimes at lunch and sometimes in the night.

ShadySue

« Reply #60 on: April 01, 2015, 07:30 »
+1
Still, this thread has wandered a bit, as SS specifically want people in Europe for these posts. Wonder why?
And are trialling the all-month subs only in the US and Canada. (Prsumably the vast bulk of their market?)

Because the reviews are regional. If you live Europe your images are reviewed by someone in your region of Europe.

If you live in the states your images are reviewed by someone in your region. If you notice the job board for shutterstock they are advertising for reviewers in various regions of the US.

How strange. So if I shot an isolated apple or made images in Tuvalu, my images would be subject to different criteria than if an American or Australian make the same images?  ::)

« Reply #61 on: April 01, 2015, 09:59 »
+2
Couple of people I have known in the past went to India in the 1960s on the "Hippy trail"
They both said you could live for a dollar a day out there back then. . . :)
I thought hippies don't need money  :)
Hey man you must be a capitalist!
Can you lend me some bread? :)

Hobostocker

    This user is banned.
« Reply #62 on: April 01, 2015, 23:20 »
+1
"once you're born in the sh-it that's your natural environment."

That is a pretty patronising first world comment.

i've seen both sides of the world, and even in the first world there's a lot of people living in the sh-it by choice.

there's nothing wrong in living minimal as long as you do it by choice and not out of poverty or desperation ... actually i'm all for minimalistic lifestyle, if i could i would live in a van or RV for some time and become a "digital nomad" (in europe known as "fulltimers"), it seems to be popular among landscape photographers traveling in remote locations.




« Reply #63 on: April 01, 2015, 23:39 »
+2
I am from Europe. If i received the status at 3-4am, belive me that the reviewer is not from Europe. I don't think someone is working in the night :)
Sometimes i get the status in the evening, sometimes at lunch and sometimes in the night.

I will have to let my wife know that she is no longer allowed to work all hours anymore.

;) You might have to wait longer for reviews if she and her friends are relegated back to 9 to 5 work hours.

Reviewers can work when the please.

« Reply #64 on: April 02, 2015, 01:27 »
+4
Work From Home Vector & Illustration Image Reviewer (Europe)
http://www.shutterstock.com/jobs/listings/2709-work-from-home-vector-illustration-image-reviewer-europe-

so, despite making billions of $ they can't even afford to provide you a cubicle in an office, you're also expected to use your own computer, work during weekend, and pay for your own fast 25Mb+ line ... no mention about salary but you can guess it's on par with grilling burgers at mcdonalds.

this is a new low for photography, skills like image reviewing or  photo editing are basically considered worthless even by the top tier photo agencies like SS.


After reading all the entries in this 3 page long thread it looks like this is actually a great opportunity for people who like working from home. The practice that every agency does these days...that in particular can help reviewers who live in much cheaper places...and the quality of reviews is not affected at all. 

Cost cutting that leaves ALL agencies with more money, the extra cash that sadly  contributors will never get.

« Last Edit: April 02, 2015, 14:54 by KnowYourOnions »

« Reply #65 on: April 02, 2015, 10:23 »
+4
Well, we've always suspected that many reviewers are not exactly top-tier or even remotely qualified. I was always willing to give the reviewers a little slack, but today . . .

Rejections for "Editorial Caption--Image requires proper caption and must be tagged as editorial."

After thousands of editorial acceptances I'm pretty sure I have the process down pat. The above reason is simply not true. Where did it come from and what are they thinking?

« Reply #66 on: April 02, 2015, 10:43 »
+1
Well, we've always suspected that many reviewers are not exactly top-tier or even remotely qualified. I was always willing to give the reviewers a little slack, but today . . .

Rejections for "Editorial Caption--Image requires proper caption and must be tagged as editorial."

After thousands of editorial acceptances I'm pretty sure I have the process down pat. The above reason is simply not true. Where did it come from and what are they thinking?

moral case in a nutshell ----
masochist aspires to be microstock contributors
sadist aspires to be ss reviewers

atilla bloodline thrive on giving rejections to experienced types like you  :D
i too am seeking blood lately, so maybe i will apply to be a reviewer 8)



« Reply #67 on: April 02, 2015, 11:44 »
+2
Work From Home Vector & Illustration Image Reviewer (Europe)
http://www.shutterstock.com/jobs/listings/2709-work-from-home-vector-illustration-image-reviewer-europe-

so, despite making billions of $ they can't even afford to provide you a cubicle in an office, you're also expected to use your own computer, work during weekend, and pay for your own fast 25Mb+ line ... no mention about salary but you can guess it's on par with grilling burgers at mcdonalds.

this is a new low for photography, skills like image reviewing or  photo editing are basically considered worthless even by the top tier photo agencies like SS.



Until we know the revenues it's a little bit early to judge them....  ;)

....who knows they ask for alot but MAYBE they offer according.... MAYBE the only one scrwed there are us, contributors.
« Last Edit: April 02, 2015, 13:33 by nicku »

gillian vann

  • *Gillian*
« Reply #68 on: April 02, 2015, 17:00 »
+3
Still, this thread has wandered a bit, as SS specifically want people in Europe for these posts. Wonder why?
And are trialling the all-month subs only in the US and Canada. (Prsumably the vast bulk of their market?)

Because the reviews are regional. If you live Europe your images are reviewed by someone in your region of Europe.

If you live in the states your images are reviewed by someone in your region. If you notice the job board for shutterstock they are advertising for reviewers in various regions of the US.

How strange. So if I shot an isolated apple or made images in Tuvalu, my images would be subject to different criteria than if an American or Australian make the same images?  ::)

this topic has come up elsewhere, but having Aussie images judged by Americans is also annoying, as they don't actually know what is iconic here (eg, a Granny Smith apple is an Aussie variety, and so is the preferred image for say, apple pie, or apple crumble, which is just as popular). I noticed there are no reviewer positions in any country that uses proper British English, which might explain why the SS vocab still flags words like "colour" as incorrect.

ShadySue

« Reply #69 on: April 02, 2015, 17:33 »
+2
Still, this thread has wandered a bit, as SS specifically want people in Europe for these posts. Wonder why?
And are trialling the all-month subs only in the US and Canada. (Prsumably the vast bulk of their market?)


Because the reviews are regional. If you live Europe your images are reviewed by someone in your region of Europe.

If you live in the states your images are reviewed by someone in your region. If you notice the job board for shutterstock they are advertising for reviewers in various regions of the US.


How strange. So if I shot an isolated apple or made images in Tuvalu, my images would be subject to different criteria than if an American or Australian make the same images?  ::)


this topic has come up elsewhere, but having Aussie images judged by Americans is also annoying, as they don't actually know what is iconic here (eg, a Granny Smith apple is an Aussie variety, and so is the preferred image for say, apple pie, or apple crumble, which is just as popular). I noticed there are no reviewer positions in any country that uses proper British English, which might explain why the SS vocab still flags words like "colour" as incorrect.

So an American reviewer would reject a Granny Smith apple, just because it was a variety they might be unfamiliar with? Grief. Thank goodness I'm not there. [1]
Still doesn't address the issue, in the case of localised cultural limitations, what if people submit images from outwith their home area (e.g. I do a lot)?

BTW, we use various forms of British English in the UK and are part of Europe, so I guess Brits are eligible to apply for the positions under discussion here, should they wish to do so.

[1] But after I posted the above, I remembered this discussion:
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=48380
which illustrated the problem of the low pay of reviewers so that they didn't have time to check on terms they weren't familiar with.
« Last Edit: April 02, 2015, 18:35 by ShadySue »

Shelma1

« Reply #70 on: April 02, 2015, 18:09 »
+5
??? Granny Smiths are pretty popular here.

« Reply #71 on: April 02, 2015, 18:32 »
0
ahhh the old "1 dollar a day" myth ....
here's the cheapest jobs i've seen in the last year so far :

- cambodia : female garment workers enslaved in chinese factories for 80-90$/month, they're often on strike asking for 150$/month but in the meantime it's 3$/day including 2 meals and transportation and such a low salary is only possible because they're women so their money adds up to the salary of their husband or their family, men will make 100-120$ even cleaning toilets and an apprentice clerk or shopkeeper makes 150$ in the capital while white collars jobs in office go from 2-300$ up and same for sales jobs + commissions and bonuses.

- vietnam : inflation booming, salaries from 150$ up.

- indonesia : more or less on par with cambodia unless we talk about Bali or Jakarta, in that case you just can't find anyone for less than 5$/day unless you provide meals and accomodation.

- philippines : similar scenario, you may heard of very cheap salaries but they include rooms and food and extras

- thailand : forget it, the minimum salary by law is now 10$/day (300 baht) and even illegal workers won't move a finger for less than 5-7$.

- malaysia : white collars earning easily 500-1000$/month, blue collars 3-400 + extras.

- singapore : salaries as high as in the west, with an army of enslaved immigrants from indonesia and philippines working for 3-400$/month which is really a pittance in Singapore but still 10-13 bucks per day ...


now ... where's this mythological land of "1 dollar per day" ?

Hobostocker, thank you for share your knowledge with us; i may have to travel to Asia in a few months and this info will be very useful to know the context of different countries.

When i say that in India people earn 1US$ per day I based on a personal communication I had with a friend on 2005 (not my personal experience because i never was in Asia before); he told me that people earn about 2 or 3 rupiahs per hour and 25 rupiahs was a dollar, so i calculated 10 hours of work about 1 dollar (1 dollar per day).

Of course as you told this is not the situation of most workers, but maybe of some of them.

By the way, did you know what is the average salary in Taiwan??
« Last Edit: April 02, 2015, 18:34 by Mrblues101 »

« Reply #72 on: April 02, 2015, 18:33 »
0
(sorry double post by accident)

« Reply #73 on: April 03, 2015, 01:07 »
+1
[1] But after I posted the above, I remembered this discussion:
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=48380
which illustrated the problem of the low pay of reviewers so that they didn't have time to check on terms they weren't familiar with.


+10


Hobostocker

    This user is banned.
« Reply #74 on: April 03, 2015, 02:06 »
+2
Until we know the revenues it's a little bit early to judge them....  ;)

....who knows they ask for alot but MAYBE they offer according.... MAYBE the only one scrwed there are us, contributors.

try searching for photography jobs in UK for instance, even for full time studio jobs they offer salaries around 15-20K/year ...  and some as low as 12K pounds, which is basically poverty line in UK and especially in London.




Hobostocker

    This user is banned.
« Reply #75 on: April 03, 2015, 02:43 »
0
When i say that in India people earn 1US$ per day I based on a personal communication I had with a friend on 2005 (not my personal experience because i never was in Asia before); he told me that people earn about 2 or 3 rupiahs per hour and 25 rupiahs was a dollar, so i calculated 10 hours of work about 1 dollar (1 dollar per day).

Of course as you told this is not the situation of most workers, but maybe of some of them.

By the way, did you know what is the average salary in Taiwan??

yeah but we should remember that India and Nepal are a planet apart, they've a caste system still going on strong, the millions of "Dalit" living on the street are not considered an issue by the higher castes, actually they're told they deserve to be poor since they're born Dalit ! nothing is going to change about this anytime soon.

you will see the highest disparity in wealth distribution in Indian cities and the system is totally stacked against the lower classes, once you're born poor you've no way out, no exit, you'll be stuck in a very small perimeter of action and this is true also for the poorest illiterate farmers in south east asia.

but literacy is not the magic solution, even literate white collars aren't making big money.

no solutions, because the ruling elites are pretty happy the way it is now, their entire industrial complex is based on exploiting and underpaying the lower class workers.

« Reply #76 on: April 03, 2015, 05:56 »
0
Work From Home Vector & Illustration Image Reviewer (Europe)
http://www.shutterstock.com/jobs/listings/2709-work-from-home-vector-illustration-image-reviewer-europe-

so, despite making billions of $ they can't even afford to provide you a cubicle in an office, you're also expected to use your own computer, work during weekend, and pay for your own fast 25Mb+ line ... no mention about salary but you can guess it's on par with grilling burgers at mcdonalds.

this is a new low for photography, skills like image reviewing or  photo editing are basically considered worthless even by the top tier photo agencies like SS.


fully agree that this is yet another 'new low' -- though I would DEFINITELY NOT say SS is a 'top tier photo agency'?!? Firstly, they are only a MICROstock agency but secondly, and what's more, they are an absolute low-cost, no-frills, automated HiTech outfit (who happen to also not be very good at that 'HiTech' stuff, just look at their constant inability to implement proper Download counters, View counters, an FTP upload that's actually working without swallowing uploaded files, and the list goes on and on)...

For that very reason (low cost), they have achieved the highest market share and are kind of 'successful' due to their dumping-price approach, free downloads for everyone in exchange for SEO-upping and free-advertising-providing Bylines left, right, and centre. So actually, SS is your average discount-only or, rather, dont-expect-anything penny-joint. (Probably, that's even the way they want it to be, as SS is in the process of 'separating' their increasingly garbage 'mainstream portion' from 'premium' sections that seem to be all the rage now?) This means, SS will increasingly suffer quality-wise as well (there is a ridiculous amount of idiotic photos and video footage up on SS already, so it isn't actually so great even as we speak)...

Now also adding unqualified robots to review one's much-more-qualified submissions, SS performs another step in that series of obvious acts that confirm a general direction for SS and maybe the entire microstock sector -- or rather deals yet another blow on microstock artists!

This can lead to either of two scenarios: (1) a continued decline of microstock into becoming fully obsolete or (2) an isolated crash of hitherto-dominating SS and clearing the playing field for better competitors (like DT or even small contenders like Pond5 and similar); there could also be room for truly innovative concepts to establish themselves like coinstock.info using Bitcoin and other Crypto coins and offering more than three times the payout of most other agencies to artists (namely 81%), for 500px allowing to set your own rates, or even for 'exotic' ones like ImageChina. Obvioulsy,

I would hope that number (2) is how it's going to go down...

« Last Edit: April 03, 2015, 06:22 by marquixHD »


« Reply #77 on: April 03, 2015, 06:31 »
0
too many red flags :

1 - not a single word is spent about salary, fees, benefits
2 - you're only hired as "freelance", not full time.
3 - no mention about career advancement, bonus packages
4 - no training provided, despite their laundry list of requirements including complex legal things like fraud detection, release, and copyright.
+1

Semmick Photo

« Reply #78 on: April 03, 2015, 06:39 »
+4
too many red flags :

1 - not a single word is spent about salary, fees, benefits
2 - you're only hired as "freelance", not full time.
3 - no mention about career advancement, bonus packages
4 - no training provided, despite their laundry list of requirements including complex legal things like fraud detection, release, and copyright.
+1

To be honest, by the looks of all of it, they are just a freelancers, I am not sure if they are full employee. Which would make sense.

Hobostocker

    This user is banned.
« Reply #79 on: April 03, 2015, 10:08 »
0
though I would DEFINITELY NOT say SS is a 'top tier photo agency'?!?

it's a public company at NYSE and among the top 10 agencies worldwide if we talk about sales so i think we can say it's a "top tier agency" at this point.

for anything else i agree 100% SS is the LIDL/ALDI/Walmart of stock and one of the main root causes for the actual devalueing of stock photography in general.

« Reply #80 on: April 03, 2015, 11:26 »
+2
though I would DEFINITELY NOT say SS is a 'top tier photo agency'?!?

it's a public company at NYSE and among the top 10 agencies worldwide if we talk about sales so i think we can say it's a "top tier agency" at this point.

for anything else i agree 100% SS is the LIDL/ALDI/Walmart of stock and one of the main root causes for the actual devalueing of stock photography in general.

+1 Their business strategy of keeping prices ultra low for 10 years with the objective of capturing market share is one of the main reasons we are seeing a massive devaluing of our assets.

The rest of the sites have no option but to follow their lead and it is surprising that more contributors do not see this. Shutterstocks business strategy has taken its toll on microstock as a whole.

« Reply #81 on: April 03, 2015, 11:40 »
-1
though I would DEFINITELY NOT say SS is a 'top tier photo agency'?!?

it's a public company at NYSE and among the top 10 agencies worldwide if we talk about sales so i think we can say it's a "top tier agency" at this point.

for anything else i agree 100% SS is the LIDL/ALDI/Walmart of stock and one of the main root causes for the actual devalueing of stock photography in general.

+1 Their business strategy of keeping prices ultra low for 10 years with the objective of capturing market share is one of the main reasons we are seeing a massive devaluing of our assets.

The rest of the sites have no option but to follow their lead and it is surprising that more contributors do not see this. Shutterstocks business strategy has taken its toll on microstock as a whole.

or the big golden M of microstock . worse still, the bargain store like those dollar mart, etc...
where everyone packs in there to pick up everything for a buck. in ss case , pennies.
would be wonderful if in fact ss gives away our work for a minimum of a buck, though... wouldn't it
???

Shelma1

« Reply #82 on: April 03, 2015, 11:44 »
+9
Subs (Shutterstock) took a toll on microstock -> microstock (iStock) took a toll on macrostock -> macrostock took a toll on custom photography -> photography took a toll on painting

The global marketplace has taken a toll on workers in wealthier nations, as their work is outsourced to countries where workers can get by on lower pay.

Microstock opened up new markets. Before that, small companies and individuals couldn't afford stock, and you had to know someone to get representation as a photographer or illustrator. Microstock allowed unknowns to get their work represented and made their work affordable to a broader market.

I'm not sure what the answer is, except to keep your eye on the ball and change with the times and be flexible and look for new opportunities as they arise. (And if other micro sites have no choice other than following SS's lead, they'd better get cracking and find a way to crack the large enterprise market.)

« Reply #83 on: April 03, 2015, 12:18 »
+1
if other micro sites have no choice other than following SS's lead, they'd better get cracking and find a way to crack the large enterprise market.)

good point... because it's pretty obvious it is not working for the other sites to just follow ss. look to the right, after so many years they are all still in single digit ... and those in the big 4 and middle tier are not doing anything.  it reminds me of all those stores and fast foods  following walmart and mcdonalds.
there has to be something different in stock photography , in the way that high price restaurants and custom stores  survive in spite of mcdonalds and walmart.
i would say exclusive image higher price instead of exclusive contributors would be the way to go.
not the offset stocksy elitist mentality, but something more in line with dreamstime of exclusive image only that dreamstime failed because the exclusive image were just no different from the usual micro images available on ss.
istock tried something like that too before they crashed and burnt with getty killing them. how ironic ... gettysburg  :D

« Reply #84 on: April 03, 2015, 14:26 »
0
if other micro sites have no choice other than following SS's lead, they'd better get cracking and find a way to crack the large enterprise market.)

good point... because it's pretty obvious it is not working for the other sites to just follow ss. look to the right, after so many years they are all still in single digit ... and those in the big 4 and middle tier are not doing anything.  it reminds me of all those stores and fast foods  following walmart and mcdonalds.
there has to be something different in stock photography , in the way that high price restaurants and custom stores  survive in spite of mcdonalds and walmart.
i would say exclusive image higher price instead of exclusive contributors would be the way to go.
not the offset stocksy elitist mentality, but something more in line with dreamstime of exclusive image only that dreamstime failed because the exclusive image were just no different from the usual micro images available on ss.
istock tried something like that too before they crashed and burnt with getty killing them. how ironic ... gettysburg  :D

+1 for coining the term GETTYsburg. ;D

« Reply #85 on: April 04, 2015, 16:02 »
+2
ALL agency do the same!

Some even offer English lessons to their curators! Go figure!  :o
https://jobs.lever.co/pond5/7bb489f3-7d74-4dfd-929b-7eee8d51131e
Based in Eastern Europe = paid peanuts.

https://www.facebook.com/pond5/photos/a.10152767445834777.1073741835.29824144776/10152767448689777/?type=3&theater

 :-X

indeed, doesn't look good :(


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
3 Replies
2603 Views
Last post August 11, 2008, 06:03
by Microbius
17 Replies
5793 Views
Last post November 12, 2008, 17:15
by AVAVA
3 Replies
2909 Views
Last post December 11, 2008, 13:37
by icefront
29 Replies
4703 Views
Last post May 25, 2017, 14:13
by Pauws99
11 Replies
1249 Views
Last post May 07, 2019, 09:19
by BalkanskiMacak

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results