MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Shutterstock just became iStock 2.0  (Read 68297 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #250 on: May 27, 2020, 07:51 »
+3
So, pressmaster or Arcurs earnings per-year and mine, in January, are the same  ::). This is how SS will mistreat contributor big-players at the start of the year. Of course their license number will quickly increase but not so fast except for a very well , and little, considered number of contributors. Not so relevant for SS.

Mistreating the vast majority of contributors is how SS takes advantage of us all: thats why is a good idea to have trillions of facile images, not-so-crappy but not even very good. Thats not a problem: these image means good money for SS: and these images are a very very big number. They SELL EVERYTHING and its their win if they sell an image from a contributor with a low per-year number of sales. Thats great for them: we are a huge number. So from their point of view the sales-mumber is high anyway, and their percentage is higher anyway.

In January we all will earn less and SS will earn more. Then they will earn a little less from some great studios and keep on earning a lot from the masses things will be normal in the end of the year and then restart.

You are never finally rewarded with SS.

This is how to impoverish copyright at the very best level.
After all microstock is commoditization of intellectual property. We are simply saying oh yeah, let F*** us HARDER!.

Leaving in SS our portfolio if we are not earning in a satisfactory way, is rewarding for them anyway: this give the message that we dont care if we are mistreated.

They dont feel any after effects if we leave images in agencies that dont pay us the right. More poor is the contributor, and more they f*** it!

Struggle in microstock has become harder than struggle in real life photography if you are a good photographer, but not excellent in general ADV, and Enterprise-like organized.


« Reply #251 on: May 27, 2020, 07:56 »
+8
Reposting, PLEASE DO THIS NOW

One quick thing, give SS and SS contributor app a 1 star review, lets send their rating to hell.

Do leave a review mentioning

On May 26th Shutterstock suddenly gave its contributors a 6 day notice that they would cut their earning by 60%. They sent an unclear, haphazard communication (with one correction mail hours later) on how they would screw over the very people who make the content you love.

Buyers : Please take your business to Adobestock, their fair payouts mean you'll always have beautiful up to date images

Contributors : Disable your portfolio on 1st Jun and send a mail to Adobe telling that you've done so. Ensure you spread the word.

Lets hit this first. Starting now.

Sent from my HD1901 using Tapatalk


memakephoto

« Reply #252 on: May 27, 2020, 08:13 »
+2
What is most infuriating is the intentionally skewed logic. Contributors invest upfront in their equipment, expertise and time to create, do all the titling and keywording and are even asked to promote. Stock companies then get their product for free, 99% of the work done, and all they have to do is sell, calculate payments and take care of their contributors with minimal respect.  As insultingly low as we were already getting paid, it was at least based on SOME kind of logical system that rewards loyalty and past performance. But now, Shutterstock is punishing/rewarding contributors based on THEIR own performance, not ours. Once we submit a file, it's in their court and it's on them to sell the product. If your files start dropping in sales because they are favoring Euro/Russian/Employee stock warehouses, bury your files in search results through incompetent tinkering, SS wins and you lose. If the company fails in their job and everyone's sales go down, every single contributor loses and SS still wins.

We are being rated/punished/rewarded based on Shutterstock's performance and handling of our files. We have zero control over this, and that's the crux of the BS here, IMO. The timing is particularly shameless and proves they are incapable of pulling their heads out of their own greedy orifices for even a second.

However, it's great to FINALLY see more contributors speak up about forming unions, coalitions, any form of activism or coming together to fight for our future. PLEASE continue that and do not be swayed by the same naysayers that immediately and repeatedly argue against it. Remember that most of them are either directly employed by a stock company or are in bed deep with one in some way or another, so their motivations are personal and not in the larger group of contributors best interest. Also, don't be surprised how many will stay complacent and just drop their trousers and smile while the companies take more and give less. Hell, look how many lemmings STILL contribute to and defend iStock. THAT is at least partly WHY SS believes they can (and likely will) get away with what they are doing.

I agree with your first paragraph but not your third paragraph. People here don't argue against a union because they're shills for SS it's just that most sensible people understand it's logistically impossible.

If you wanted to get a job in construction and the company is unionized they won't let you pick up a hammer unless you're a member of the union. That's what gives them power. But this is microstock and it's crowd sourced. The criteria for entry is access to a camera and an internet connection. That only leaves it open to hundreds of millions of people around the world. How do you hope to make joining a union mandatory? Mandatory membership is why it's called a "union". Without it you're an activist group and SS will ignore you. The people that come to this site regularly represent maybe 1-3% of all contributors.

Anyone who joins SS after June 1st will probably not be aware of the earnings structure before and will simply sign on.

Having said that, good luck. All everyone else can do is decide for themselves if they'll "drop their trousers". I'll bite the bullet and opt out of all sales at the end of the month. It's been a good ride.

« Reply #253 on: May 27, 2020, 08:15 »
+3
Shutterstock have always been big on market share, which appears to be diminishing. This new payment system gives them the ability to discount heavily, as it did for Istock when they introduced percentage based subs. If they manage to get it right and they do increase their market share it will be at the expense of other agencies, we will be cannibalising those sales for increased sales, but less income at Shutterstock.

« Reply #254 on: May 27, 2020, 08:24 »
+8
Im in the UK and have had enough with what's going on in the real world with Covid19. I can not explain how angry this has made me.

Too angry and sad to say anymore..

« Reply #255 on: May 27, 2020, 08:28 »
+3

I agree with your first paragraph but not your third paragraph. People here don't argue against a union because they're shills for SS it's just that most sensible people understand it's logistically impossible.

If you wanted to get a job in construction and the company is unionized they won't let you pick up a hammer unless you're a member of the union. That's what gives them power. But this is microstock and it's crowd sourced. The criteria for entry is access to a camera and an internet connection. That only leaves it open to hundreds of millions of people around the world. How do you hope to make joining a union mandatory? Mandatory membership is why it's called a "union". Without it you're an activist group and SS will ignore you. The people that come to this site regularly represent maybe 1-3% of all contributors.

Anyone who joins SS after June 1st will probably not be aware of the earnings structure before and will simply sign on.

Having said that, good luck. All everyone else can do is decide for themselves if they'll "drop their trousers". I'll bite the bullet and opt out of all sales at the end of the month. It's been a good ride.

A union absolutely doesn't have to be exclusive.  There are lots of workplaces that have both union and non union workers (I've worked in several).

We don't even need an official Union, all we need is a bit of solidarity and acknowledging that we need to stand together to perform any kind of push-back against this sort of thing.

It's the only way conditions ever improve, and has worked brilliantly for us in this industry in the recent past. It got DPC shut down fast after FL spent a lot of time and effort setting it up.

Everyone doesn't have to be on board, but enough people have to have the b***s to stand up to make a difference.

« Reply #256 on: May 27, 2020, 08:35 »
+4
What is most infuriating is the intentionally skewed logic. Contributors invest upfront in their equipment, expertise and time to create, do all the titling and keywording and are even asked to promote. Stock companies then get their product for free, 99% of the work done, and all they have to do is sell, calculate payments and take care of their contributors with minimal respect.  As insultingly low as we were already getting paid, it was at least based on SOME kind of logical system that rewards loyalty and past performance. But now, Shutterstock is punishing/rewarding contributors based on THEIR own performance, not ours. Once we submit a file, it's in their court and it's on them to sell the product. If your files start dropping in sales because they are favoring Euro/Russian/Employee stock warehouses, bury your files in search results through incompetent tinkering, SS wins and you lose. If the company fails in their job and everyone's sales go down, every single contributor loses and SS still wins.

We are being rated/punished/rewarded based on Shutterstock's performance and handling of our files. We have zero control over this, and that's the crux of the BS here, IMO. The timing is particularly shameless and proves they are incapable of pulling their heads out of their own greedy orifices for even a second.

However, it's great to FINALLY see more contributors speak up about forming unions, coalitions, any form of activism or coming together to fight for our future. PLEASE continue that and do not be swayed by the same naysayers that immediately and repeatedly argue against it. Remember that most of them are either directly employed by a stock company or are in bed deep with one in some way or another, so their motivations are personal and not in the larger group of contributors best interest. Also, don't be surprised how many will stay complacent and just drop their trousers and smile while the companies take more and give less. Hell, look how many lemmings STILL contribute to and defend iStock. THAT is at least partly WHY SS believes they can (and likely will) get away with what they are doing.

I agree with your first paragraph but not your third paragraph. People here don't argue against a union because they're shills for SS it's just that most sensible people understand it's logistically impossible.

If you wanted to get a job in construction and the company is unionized they won't let you pick up a hammer unless you're a member of the union. That's what gives them power. But this is microstock and it's crowd sourced. The criteria for entry is access to a camera and an internet connection. That only leaves it open to hundreds of millions of people around the world. How do you hope to make joining a union mandatory? Mandatory membership is why it's called a "union". Without it you're an activist group and SS will ignore you. The people that come to this site regularly represent maybe 1-3% of all contributors.

Anyone who joins SS after June 1st will probably not be aware of the earnings structure before and will simply sign on.

Having said that, good luck. All everyone else can do is decide for themselves if they'll "drop their trousers". I'll bite the bullet and opt out of all sales at the end of the month. It's been a good ride.

As is always misunderstood by the naysayers, we don't need a "union" specifically, not in the way you mention. It doesn't need to be "mandatory". What we need is some type of coalition, (definition: "a group formed when two or more people, factions, states, political parties, militaries etc. agree to work together temporarily in a partnership to achieve a common goal. The word coalition connotes a coming together to achieve a goal.")

It just needs to be a group with enough content represented that the stock companies are forced to negotiate or risk a real palatable backlash. It should involve information campaigns, social media blitzes, etc. Most importantly, it should introduce consequences to greedy actions by the companies. Will it work? Who * knows. But the continued refusal to even entertain the concept didn't stop Shutterstock from screwing us, did it?


« Reply #257 on: May 27, 2020, 08:40 »
0
Regarding to subscription sales, that always was main sale; we never was paid based on the subscription package that buyer buy. There are 4 subscrption packetes:

10 images for 49usd (Packet 1 or P1)
50 images for 125usd (Packet 2 or P2)
350 images for 199usd (Packet 3 or P3)
750 images for 249usd (Packet 4 or P4)

Based on this and the % presented for SS the earnings per sale under new criteria is:

Level 1   0,74 usd(P1) ---- 0,38 usd(P2) ---- 0,09 usd(P3) ---- 0,05 usd(P4)
Level 2   0,98 usd(P1) ---- 0,50 usd(P2) ---- 0,11 usd(P3) ---- 0,07 usd(P4)
Level 3   1,23 usd(P1) ---- 0,63 usd(P2) ---- 0,14 usd(P3) ---- 0,08 usd(P4)
Level 4   1,47 usd(P1) ---- 0,75 usd(P2) ---- 0,17 usd(P3) ---- 0,10 usd(P4)
Level 5   1,72 usd(P1) ---- 0,88 usd(P2) ---- 0,20 usd(P3) ---- 0,12 usd(P4)
Level 6   1,96 usd(P1) ---- 1,00 usd(P2) ---- 0,23 usd(P3) ---- 0,13 usd(P4)

Thanks for calculating that out.  it looks like the left two columns will be more than our current rates and the right two less than our current rate.  Now we just need to know what % of sales are the right two columns 🤔

I feel the least they could do is have a rolling 12 month level system - nothing like demotivating people by taking away rewards / levels they've worked hard to achieve over the previous years.

With all the upset people, this is the perfect storm for Adobe to swoop in with a sweat exclusive offering.

Discounting 50% in January would make them figures look optimistic.  Would a prepaided yearly pack sold in January at a heavily discounted price give you 15% for those sales throughout the year?

« Reply #258 on: May 27, 2020, 08:50 »
+3
What is most infuriating is the intentionally skewed logic. Contributors invest upfront in their equipment, expertise and time to create, do all the titling and keywording and are even asked to promote. Stock companies then get their product for free, 99% of the work done, and all they have to do is sell, calculate payments and take care of their contributors with minimal respect.  As insultingly low as we were already getting paid, it was at least based on SOME kind of logical system that rewards loyalty and past performance. But now, Shutterstock is punishing/rewarding contributors based on THEIR own performance, not ours. Once we submit a file, it's in their court and it's on them to sell the product. If your files start dropping in sales because they are favoring Euro/Russian/Employee stock warehouses, bury your files in search results through incompetent tinkering, SS wins and you lose. If the company fails in their job and everyone's sales go down, every single contributor loses and SS still wins.

We are being rated/punished/rewarded based on Shutterstock's performance and handling of our files. We have zero control over this, and that's the crux of the BS here, IMO. The timing is particularly shameless and proves they are incapable of pulling their heads out of their own greedy orifices for even a second.

However, it's great to FINALLY see more contributors speak up about forming unions, coalitions, any form of activism or coming together to fight for our future. PLEASE continue that and do not be swayed by the same naysayers that immediately and repeatedly argue against it. Remember that most of them are either directly employed by a stock company or are in bed deep with one in some way or another, so their motivations are personal and not in the larger group of contributors best interest. Also, don't be surprised how many will stay complacent and just drop their trousers and smile while the companies take more and give less. Hell, look how many lemmings STILL contribute to and defend iStock. THAT is at least partly WHY SS believes they can (and likely will) get away with what they are doing.

I agree with your first paragraph but not your third paragraph. People here don't argue against a union because they're shills for SS it's just that most sensible people understand it's logistically impossible.

If you wanted to get a job in construction and the company is unionized they won't let you pick up a hammer unless you're a member of the union. That's what gives them power. But this is microstock and it's crowd sourced. The criteria for entry is access to a camera and an internet connection. That only leaves it open to hundreds of millions of people around the world. How do you hope to make joining a union mandatory? Mandatory membership is why it's called a "union". Without it you're an activist group and SS will ignore you. The people that come to this site regularly represent maybe 1-3% of all contributors.

Anyone who joins SS after June 1st will probably not be aware of the earnings structure before and will simply sign on.

Having said that, good luck. All everyone else can do is decide for themselves if they'll "drop their trousers". I'll bite the bullet and opt out of all sales at the end of the month. It's been a good ride.

As is always misunderstood by the naysayers, we don't need a "union" specifically, not in the way you mention. It doesn't need to be "mandatory". What we need is some type of coalition, (definition: "a group formed when two or more people, factions, states, political parties, militaries etc. agree to work together temporarily in a partnership to achieve a common goal. The word coalition connotes a coming together to achieve a goal.")

It just needs to be a group with enough content represented that the stock companies are forced to negotiate or risk a real palatable backlash. It should involve information campaigns, social media blitzes, etc. Most importantly, it should introduce consequences to greedy actions by the companies. Will it work? Who * knows. But the continued refusal to even entertain the concept didn't stop Shutterstock from screwing us, did it?

Agree with the urgent need of some type of association. I was thinking also about some kind of association label given to agencies and promoted in social media - like Fair Trade for microstock

jav

« Reply #259 on: May 27, 2020, 08:58 »
0
And the magic word "lawsuit"? ... massive lawsuit? and the much feared word "discrimination" so feared by companies in times of political correctness. Could it be possible to use any of that?

« Reply #260 on: May 27, 2020, 09:20 »
+3
Anyone considered seeing if Petapixel want to write something ? ( https://petapixel.com/contact/ )

They've had prior articles covering Shutterstock and others.
This would be a good idea. The more news the better

Sent from my HD1901 using Tapatalk

I just submitted.  Maybe if others did the same they might realise theres a potential story here to publish.


« Reply #261 on: May 27, 2020, 09:22 »
+1
did anyone experience sale increase after yesterday announcement?

Nope. Nada. Zip. No SS sales yesterday.

« Reply #262 on: May 27, 2020, 09:26 »
+1
No sales at SS for 2 days now... maybe sales are "collected" and will be shown after 1st of June  >:(
« Last Edit: May 27, 2020, 09:29 by JustAnImage »

« Reply #263 on: May 27, 2020, 09:52 »
+1
I'll bite the bullet and opt out of all sales at the end of the month. It's been a good ride.

Same here. Seems like many others are prepared to do the same.

God bless us all!

« Reply #264 on: May 27, 2020, 10:00 »
+1

« Reply #265 on: May 27, 2020, 10:09 »
+1
Just found petition this on another site:
-> https://www.change.org/p/shutterstock-object-to-the-decline-in-shutterstock-s-contributor-earnings

Thanks for posting this link! I just signed it.

This is an EXCELLENT way to draw attention to the problem, so thanks to you or whoever did it, for launching the petition.

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #266 on: May 27, 2020, 10:12 »
+2
Well, I can't make any sense of this. Will everyone zero at the beginning of each year (start on 15% and have to rise up the ranks fresh)? that seems insane.

If not, why is my level on the email tied to my downloads so far since January, and not based on my total for last year, which would place me well into the next tier.

Haven't read the whole long thread yet, just time for a short informational answer in case others are asking the same?

All contributors reset to level 1 for both images and videos every year on January 1st.

Level 1, <= 100 = 15%

Level 2, 101 - 250 = 20%
 
Level 3, 251 - 500 = 25%
 
Level 4, 501 - 2,500 = 30%
 
Level 5, 2,501 - 25,000 = 35%
 
Level 6, > 25,000 = 40%

I'm trying to figure out what this applies to, subs don't seem to fit with percentages, OD, EL, S&O for sure do.

Now everyone can go back to association or union absurd arguments. How do you hold any power or control over the agency, you need negotiating power. If your product is a world commodity, you have no leverage. Yeah, start a petition, that's another waste of time. But if that makes you feel good.  ::)
« Last Edit: May 27, 2020, 10:16 by Uncle Pete »


Noedelhap

  • www.colincramm.com

« Reply #267 on: May 27, 2020, 10:23 »
+4
Petitions asking to revert the decision are useless. No customer sees those petitions, the demands are unrealistic (canceling this decision would cost SS millions) and even with a million signatures you have no leveraging power. It's only through port deletion that contributors can 'fight back'. Although someone more gullible or ignorant would instantly fill the empty spot you leave behind. SS don't care, neither do (most) customers.

It's a battle you can't win, except maybe preserve your dignity and sanity by leaving SS.

« Reply #268 on: May 27, 2020, 10:26 »
+1
Flood social their social media with truth about their greed.

Negative rating on their app, and truth in comments.

Stop uploading on SS

1st June STRIKE!

https://twitter.com/joannsnover/status/1265443289441824768

https://twitter.com/joannsnover/status/1265662462122065922

Use the hashtags #Shutterstock and #boycottShutterstock in whatever you tweet. Do a search and you'll see others are tweeting about this. The more the merrier...

« Reply #269 on: May 27, 2020, 10:28 »
0
Taken from one article. Hope it helps.
https://ibb.co/Sntgh5W

« Reply #270 on: May 27, 2020, 10:30 »
+1
did anyone experience sale increase after yesterday announcement?

Nope. Nada. Zip. No SS sales yesterday.

Ironically it was a great (by current standards) day, including a $54 SOD royalty :)

« Reply #271 on: May 27, 2020, 10:31 »
+1
Don't worry. They will backtrack on this. They already know our reaction and in a few days they will say that in consideration to contributoros they will honor the percentage finished at the years end to roll over to january. All very studied.

They are aware that as it stands now many people will stop submitting content and competition will benefit great from this. Calculations have been made a long time ago. Getty deja vu repeated again. Welcome to the matrix.


if you want to raise tax for 5%, you go into public with information that you are going to raise tax for 8%, then all the people go on rage frenzy, after 2-3 weeks of this, and some kind of negotiations, they come to conclusion that 5% increase is a win-win situation. Remember that 5% increase was initial idea.


It is possible that something like this can happen. Its actually very old trick.

I`ve thought something like this. it's quite likely, knowing how the big corps behave.

« Reply #272 on: May 27, 2020, 10:33 »
+3
Agencies have reversed many absurd announcements after protests by artists.

Just look at what was achieved with the protest against Hyperstock this year.

We also got rid of the dollar photo store by fotolia etc...

But it will mostly depend on how the income changes and we need at least all of June to see results.

But people will not upload blindly if the results are bad. Upload streams react quickly, it doesnt have to be deactivations, people will just leave their ports as is and focus their attention elsewhere.

The market is self regulating, nobody uploads for the occasional 10 cent sale.

« Reply #273 on: May 27, 2020, 10:34 »
+3
And the magic word "lawsuit"? ... massive lawsuit? and the much feared word "discrimination" so feared by companies in times of political correctness. Could it be possible to use any of that?

I'm not a lawyer, but I don't think, given the terms of our contributor agreement can be altered at any time to anything and without notice, there's any legal issue to bring up.

The slashing of earnings for every contributor isn't discrimination against any group, so I don't see how that applies

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #274 on: May 27, 2020, 10:48 »
+1
Petitions asking to revert the decision are useless. No customer sees those petitions, the demands are unrealistic (canceling this decision would cost SS millions) and even with a million signatures you have no leveraging power. It's only through port deletion that contributors can 'fight back'. Although someone more gullible or ignorant would instantly fill the empty spot you leave behind. SS don't care, neither do (most) customers.

It's a battle you can't win, except maybe preserve your dignity and sanity by leaving SS.

Good points. While I look at the discouraging new system, I'm also reminded that my earnings have already dropped over the past two years. This is just making everything worse.

I hope the new people stop uploading and new dreamy eyed contributors are so turned off that they stop joining. Then I'm also in favor of anyone who wants to protest and close their account, especially if you do anything that's similar to mine.  ;D You have my full support and encouragement. Less competition can only help me. Thanks!

When I first joined I saw the Microstock likeness to a MLM and was told how wrong I was, as this isn't anything like that. Well, yes it is. Maybe not a structural pyramid, but basically, the people who make referrals, make money in the start. Then that becomes so difficult that just about everyone has already joined and quit. In the case of Microstock, the agencies saw the new contributors declining, and the quality wasn't there, so they ended the programs.

The people on top are pointed out as "you can do this too", and then the hucksters will write books, blogs, and teach classes on how to make money at Microstock. That's where the real money was. Just like the gold rush, the people who sold tools, whiskey and food, made the best money. Hardly a miner went away with any riches. Microstock is the same.

Every agency except SS has been consolidating and restructuring levels, then lowering commissions as well. They are the last. I will say that Adobe actually improved the structure when they adjusted things. But everyone else, cut our commissions, continues to cut, and found ways to make more for themselves and less for us. SS just got on the runaway train, no brakes, headed downhill into a sharp curve on the edge of the cliff, with the rest of them.

The race to the bottom just added another causality.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
87 Replies
33277 Views
Last post July 24, 2006, 06:01
by GeoPappas
21 Replies
7254 Views
Last post May 04, 2006, 08:28
by leaf
14 Replies
6657 Views
Last post March 19, 2008, 14:47
by vonkara
106 Replies
26384 Views
Last post October 04, 2014, 07:33
by Hobostocker
19 Replies
9775 Views
Last post July 22, 2015, 23:08
by hatman12

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle