MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Shutterstock just became iStock 2.0  (Read 68307 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Shelma1

« Reply #275 on: May 27, 2020, 10:52 »
+12
There will always be scabs and naysayers in any fight for workers' rights. Yet time and again people have protested, taken action and won. Just sayin'.


« Reply #276 on: May 27, 2020, 10:53 »
+3
This sounds like bad news, but we all need to keep our cool. Personally, I've been waiting for something like this since video subs were implemented, but that didn't cause such a reaction.  If there was ever a time for a coordinated effort by contributors, it's now. Just my portfolio is around 50k assets, and I'm sure that, if needed, we can create a coordinated strong strike. But we need to see how will this affect us, using data, not emotions.

First of all, in the last 4 months, the average earnings by subs was 27% of all monthly earnings (for my portfolio). So, percentage wise, the segment of sales that will be hit the hardest isn't as drastic as I imagined.
Secondly, the idea of resetting the contributor's progress to level 1 at the beginning of each year is absolutely bonkers.
Lastly - the idea of using levels for subs is unacceptable.

So, this is what I suggest our demands should be:

1. Apply the levels structure to on-demand content, but leave subs alone. 10 cents for an image is unacceptable.
2. End the video sub program, just like fotolia ended DollarPhotoClub back in the day. We can do it.
3. Levels must be calculated on a 12-month window, and not be reset at the beginning of each year.


Now, demands don't make sense if there is no threat of penalty.

Again, my suggestions in regards what to do if shutterstock doesn't agree with our demands:

1. Stop uploading for 30 days. Not a single piece of content.
2. If no change - start pulling our portfolios. This needs to be a coordinated effort, like it was with DPC.
3. Reach out - to buyers, people holding their stock. Tweet. Be loud on social media. Make their stock tank. Without contributors like us, they are nothing.


We can create a website (like in the DPC days) and organize ourselves quickly, we've shown strength and solidarity when it was needed. Are you ready to come together now? That's up to you. The response to this post will give us the answer.

Seems that there is interest for this idea.

If anyone has web dev skills, hit me up and let's set up a website. I'll pay for the domain name and hosting, that's no issue.

There would be a form on the website to enter some basic details like the amount of assets in your portfolio - the portfolio you're willing to deactivate after 30 days if our demands won't be met. Then we sum up all the contributors that have signed up and see how much bargaining power we actually have.

Sure - they have 325 million images in the library. But let's not kid ourselves - most of that is spam.

You know how they always write in articles to produce unique and local content. Guess why? Because the image factories don't do that. Image factories make generic content, and that's our strength. That same generic content will probably stay, along with 1040337474 variations of waving flags of all countries, but the real content, the unique and local content? On other stock agencies.

Shutterstock knows how valuable this is. We should too.

Let's organize. Hit me up.
« Last Edit: May 27, 2020, 11:05 by spike »

« Reply #277 on: May 27, 2020, 11:02 »
0
Just a small suggestion...
I've seen rants appearing under their Facebook post, which is good. But probably they will start cleaning up, and banning users. So maybe when a post from is already full of complaints in a very visible way, you should hold back on adding more to that one, so if they start paning prosting users from their Facebook page there will be still some of us left to keep the rants appearing under new posts they share!

« Reply #278 on: May 27, 2020, 11:06 »
+6
There is one and only one reason to not base January rates on December earnings, and it's simply a cash grab.

That's what is so disappointing about this, that it's not a decision based on anything other than an easy opportunity to cut all contributors off at the knees for at least a month. High-earning contributors will bounce back to their regular rate by February, but not before handing over a huge chunk of earnings to the company in January.

And it's so easily changed, just set the system to calculate January rates based on December numbers. But nope, they won't do that.

Unbelievable.

I've struggled for years to hang on, to try and keep this thing going in some way. But it's over. Time to truly move on.

« Reply #279 on: May 27, 2020, 11:14 »
0
There will always be scabs and naysayers in any fight for workers' rights. Yet time and again people have protested, taken action and won. Just sayin'.
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.

Yes agreed to both of these, and it doesn't matter how many times we are successful or how recent the examples are some people will stick to their talking points.

FL and and Pond5 sank a lot of resources in to those endeavours and backed down as soon as we actually stood together, yes across borders, yet people are still ready to jump in and p**s all over any efforts. They would rather loose and be able to say I told you so then improve their own conditions and admit they were wrong.

« Reply #280 on: May 27, 2020, 11:18 »
+8
It's only through port deletion that contributors can 'fight back'.
...

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

No, we won't win the battle with Shutterstock, but we will preserve our dignity and sanity.

I, as part of the disgusted, disgrunted pack, will be outta SS on June 1.

I did that with iS in 2011, for exactly the same reason, and never regretted it. Don't expect to regret dumping SS either.

« Last Edit: May 27, 2020, 11:21 by marthamarks »

« Reply #281 on: May 27, 2020, 11:22 »
+2
Long time lurker, first time poster.

While I am as PISSED at everyone else at how this came across, I'm surprised that no one is talking about the real enemy.

For years, photographers have been dumping all kinds of microstock onto free sites like Pexels, Unsplash, and Pixabay all either to stroke their gigantic egos or to enter the lottery that someone will miraculously come across their portfolio and hire them for a professional gig (which happens 0.000001% of the time).

I know a ton of small business owners. NO ONE goes to Shutterstock or Adobe or iStock anymore. They all go to these sites and download "free images".

Adding insult to injury, Canva has bought up Pixabay and Pexels and is now SELLING the images those photographers gave them for FREE. Contributors don't get 10 cents, they get jack sh*t.

Again, I'm not absolving Shutterstock (or iStock before it) from blame here nor making apologies for them. But if you know someone who's contributing to one of those free sites, tell them to STOP. They are taking money out of our pockets just as bad as Shutterstock is, maybe worse.


« Reply #282 on: May 27, 2020, 11:26 »
+2
You know how they always write in articles to produce unique and local content. Guess why? Because the image factories don't do that. Image factories make generic content, and that's our strength. That same generic content will probably stay, along with 1040337474 variations of waving flags of all countries, but the real content, the unique and local content? On other stock agencies.

Shutterstock knows how valuable this is. We should too.

This is so true, and it's one thing that makes me care less about departing from SS.

Everything I produce is hyper-local. American (mostly Southwestern) birds and other creatures, unique plants and places, etc.

No image factory in India or Russia is going to be able to recreate those.

But I will continue producing them and sending them to agencies other than SS.

Horizon

    This user is banned.
« Reply #283 on: May 27, 2020, 11:28 »
+1
It's only through port deletion that contributors can 'fight back'.
...

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

No, we won't win the battle with Shutterstock, but we will preserve our dignity and sanity.

I, as part of the disgusted, disgrunted pack, will be outta SS on June 1.

I did that with iS in 2011, for exactly the same reason, and never regretted it. Don't expect to regret dumping SS either.


Amen to all that!

« Reply #284 on: May 27, 2020, 11:32 »
0
Подписываем петиции newbielink:https://www.change.org/p/shutterstock-object-to-the-decline-in-shutterstock-s-contributor-earnings [nonactive]

« Reply #285 on: May 27, 2020, 11:34 »
+3
Long time lurker, first time poster.

While I am as PISSED at everyone else at how this came across, I'm surprised that no one is talking about the real enemy.

For years, photographers have been dumping all kinds of microstock onto free sites like Pexels, Unsplash, and Pixabay all either to stroke their gigantic egos or to enter the lottery that someone will miraculously come across their portfolio and hire them for a professional gig (which happens 0.000001% of the time).

I know a ton of small business owners. NO ONE goes to Shutterstock or Adobe or iStock anymore. They all go to these sites and download "free images".

Adding insult to injury, Canva has bought up Pixabay and Pexels and is now SELLING the images those photographers gave them for FREE. Contributors don't get 10 cents, they get jack sh*t.

Again, I'm not absolving Shutterstock (or iStock before it) from blame here nor making apologies for them. But if you know someone who's contributing to one of those free sites, tell them to STOP. They are taking money out of our pockets just as bad as Shutterstock is, maybe worse.

Flickr has had free images since their existence. It is called the creative commons license.

If you look at unsplash etc...and do a search for business team or anything good with people and releases try finding more than 3 pages of serious, good quality content. These agencies do a lot of window dressing with content that is gifted by their own employees and editors, i.e. these people are paidwith their jobs.

Nobody hires models, make up,location and then uploads for free to unsplash.

If you only do grass, sunsets, flowers, you have always been competing with the creative commons and flickr.

It is your decision to work in a niche the freebie sharers donˋt do.

Maybe if you want a wood background, you can get it there, but a professional buyer needs real content with a checked model release, no logos etc...the free sites donˋt have that.

Here is a search for business woman sorted by newest on Unsplash.

https://unsplash.com/s/photos/business-woman?order_by=latest
« Last Edit: May 27, 2020, 11:38 by cobalt »

« Reply #286 on: May 27, 2020, 11:36 »
0
I offer STOP uploads to Shutterstock from 1st of June 2020 until they reconsider their decision on a new calculation of royalties so that the authors do not lose their income, but save it and could potentially increase it. At the moment, they simply cut off the income of the authors in their favor unilaterally.

« Reply #287 on: May 27, 2020, 11:38 »
+2
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

Illegal, discriminatory? Nope.

Despicable, shameless, greedy, heartless, disgusting? Yup.

PaulieWalnuts

  • We Have Exciting News For You
« Reply #288 on: May 27, 2020, 11:46 »
+2
Long time lurker, first time poster.

While I am as PISSED at everyone else at how this came across, I'm surprised that no one is talking about the real enemy.

For years, photographers have been dumping all kinds of microstock onto free sites like Pexels, Unsplash, and Pixabay all either to stroke their gigantic egos or to enter the lottery that someone will miraculously come across their portfolio and hire them for a professional gig (which happens 0.000001% of the time).

I know a ton of small business owners. NO ONE goes to Shutterstock or Adobe or iStock anymore. They all go to these sites and download "free images".

Adding insult to injury, Canva has bought up Pixabay and Pexels and is now SELLING the images those photographers gave them for FREE. Contributors don't get 10 cents, they get jack sh*t.

Again, I'm not absolving Shutterstock (or iStock before it) from blame here nor making apologies for them. But if you know someone who's contributing to one of those free sites, tell them to STOP. They are taking money out of our pockets just as bad as Shutterstock is, maybe worse.

It's a valid point. These sites are contributing downward pressure on pricing. I've seen tons of posts online saying stuff like "Why buy from places like Shutterstock? It's expensive. Here's a list of dozens of free sites". It doesn't matter if the images aren't good quality or have copyright issues. There are a lot of people who dont know or dont care. And they know nobody is going to sue them for saving $2 and putting the image on a blog.

In many cases, photographers and other creatives are our own worst enemies. And there is never a shortage of people to take advantage of it.

« Reply #289 on: May 27, 2020, 11:53 »
+4
Someone on Twitter posted this..Not me...It is very creative..

Dear Hackers,
we, Shutterstock contributors, are forced to fight against corporate greed. Our lifelong work is going to be reduced to 10 cents. We have creativity, you have IT knowledge. Please help us to Shut down Shutterstock!

« Reply #290 on: May 27, 2020, 11:59 »
0
Question.  Since it's "percentage of price paid", say you have a 100 image sub for $100.  If the buyer only downloads the one image, did he pay $1 for that image, or $100.  Because if it's the latter, then there go immediate sales reports.

« Reply #291 on: May 27, 2020, 12:02 »
+5
Question.  Since it's "percentage of price paid", say you have a 100 image sub for $100.  If the buyer only downloads the one image, did he pay $1 for that image, or $100.  Because if it's the latter, then there go immediate sales reports.

They've clarified that on the monster thread.  Its going to be what you expect.

You get the share as if they used all their images.  So the smallest amount.  SS keep the change.


« Reply #292 on: May 27, 2020, 12:35 »
+1
Question.  Since it's "percentage of price paid", say you have a 100 image sub for $100.  If the buyer only downloads the one image, did he pay $1 for that image, or $100.  Because if it's the latter, then there go immediate sales reports.
He paid $1 as far as we're concerned. So all these percentages are smoke and mirrors or a bait and switch anyway. What we will be getting as a percentage on a sub is going to be maximum that on the chart but in reality less, and possibly much much less in any meaningful sense.

The 35% is 35% of some sort of mythical ideal world sub where the buyers always use every sub download even on the big packs major corporations pay for (where it is actually just a cap on a practically unlimited plan). This for me is why this is so dirty.

« Reply #293 on: May 27, 2020, 12:48 »
+2
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..


I am with you 100%. Enough is enough.

« Reply #294 on: May 27, 2020, 12:56 »
+8
Comments on Instagram have been turned off.

I consider this to be a small victory, which basically means that a lot of us actually can do something!

Keep spamming SS on all media, social networks. Spam them with truth, nothing more. And the truth is that they are corporate greed dictatorship living on contributor backs.

Second thing is stop uploading.

Do this things and lets see what happens.

« Reply #295 on: May 27, 2020, 13:07 »
+1
People, sign the petition:

http://chng.it/WgMFwWgRdt

fritz

  • I love Tom and Jerry music


Tenebroso

« Reply #297 on: May 27, 2020, 13:13 »
0
Better motivating news will follow shortly. sure.

Not being understood by the new rules by some collaborators, we have decided to modify the percentage that we give you for your effort and work. We will continue with absurd rejections, this will not change, since we know that it keeps them in constant tension. However, we do change the commissions.


From now on, in the mail, any day, we will receive the correction of the mail. They will explain to us that due to the success of the new plan, the new percentage is canceled. Starting in January, for the benefit of all parties, the percentage will not be quarterly, but, for its greatest success, the percentage will be monthly. This will motivate everyone to improve.


We are the agency that sells the most, and we will continue to be number one. Whatever we do, we will always be number one.


Thanks for your understanding and effort.

PaulieWalnuts

  • We Have Exciting News For You
« Reply #298 on: May 27, 2020, 13:17 »
+1
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/shutterstock-appoints-stan-pavlovsky-chief-120200966.html

And I think this says it all. The new CEO's focus is on customers and technology. No mention of contributors. Oringer does mention contributors but only in passing.

Quote
"Shutterstock is one of those rare companies which has truly disrupted its industry through technology, and I couldn't be more honored to be its next CEO," Pavlovsky said. "We have a lot of opportunities ahead and a big part of my job is to start to deliver on the next chapter of our platform strategy. As we work to execute on our strategy, we will focus on providing adjacent services that our enterprise customers require to enhance their workflow, more fully leveraging our vast pool of first-party data, and continuing to develop industry-leading proprietary technology to help our customers drive top and bottom-line improvements to their businesses. I look forward to continuing to work closely with our excellent senior leadership team, along with Jon and our entire Board."

« Reply #299 on: May 27, 2020, 13:25 »
0
As for spamming them with complaints... they also have a Youtube account:
https://www.youtube.com/user/ShutterstockInc/videos



 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
87 Replies
33278 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