pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Shutterstock just became iStock 2.0  (Read 65138 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #600 on: June 02, 2020, 10:27 »
0
I don't understand people who disable their port at SS because they don't accept to get 10 for a sale while they have a port at IS where they can get as few as 2 for a sale :o

Because the average is 40-70 cents, at least among the people I know and myself. Non exclusive and ignoring connect.



« Reply #601 on: June 02, 2020, 10:38 »
0
0.10 here too.

Shitterstock.com

If you type Shitterstock.com in your browser it takes you directly to the Pavlovsky Agency. Domain registered in 2006


They must have changed it. I just typed it in, and it went to shutterstock.

« Reply #602 on: June 02, 2020, 10:44 »
+3
Obviously they want a crowd of mobile phone newbies to grow their collection, uploading like crazy just to reach that next level all while never passing level 1 and maximizing SS profits. If you read between the lines in their announcement that's exactly what they are saying.
They wanted that for some time now, first they let anyone with mobile phone in - carefully waiting for mobile phone camera tech to mature to decent image quality level, then they advertise for contributors in developing countries and now when they have enough newbie contributors they roll out the system.
We might be mad, but newbies will be swarming facebook groups announcing they just made their first 0.10$ sale or payout and congratulate each other on it, while SS is laughing their *ss off.
SS are betting that from quantity there will be just enough quality not to look like complete trash collection in the eyes of buyers and competition.     

It's a system very well known in any third world or developing country in every single company (especially the foreign western companies that come to exploit minimum wage workforce), you don't need to know your job, you'll learn something (or not, doesn't matter as long as you do what your boss tells you), but you must work for minimum wage or we will replace you in an instant. The quality of product is not that important too.
This might come as shock to westerners, but for us from developing countries it's everyday reality, I expected this exact thing from SS and I'm sure all other microstock companies will follow eventually.

There have been several attempts to run a stock agency mostly on the iphone shooter, eyeem being the last attempt.

The problem: this enthusiastic crowd has zero interest in creating the content customers need: high quality, very modern very fresh content of business teams, great lifestyle of families etc...

Just because people have a phone, it does not make them good photographers. Just look at any social media feed on any site. What people normally shoot is ugly and very low quality.

Eyeem tries to filter a few useful files out of millions and sends them to getty to round out the large getty library. So that customers who want images with taken by amateur with iphone style is something they have available.

Just look at the flickr collection or the eyeem collection on getty, and you will quickly see, that while some of the images are interesting, the majority are useless for the serious buyer.

I interpreted what they said in the opposite way, that they want to get rid of all the small time uploaders and mostly work with teams and stock factories.

They could drastically downsize their editing team and probably streamline quite a few other things internally.

In the last 3 years they blew up the library drastically so that they can go round saying they have a library with over 300 million files.

Now they want to cut it all down to more professional content.

What they didnt think of is that even large stock houses have their pride and will not accept their work sold for 10 cents.

The pros have a lot of options and, just like anyone else, do not appreciate having their income cut in the middle of a pandemic with 6 days notice.

I wouldnt be surprised if it was exactly the top quality shooters they were hoping will stay who walk out first.

eta: the best selling content in eyeem does not come from amateurs with a phone. Many top sellers are normal photographers or professional stock shooters who just produce content with social media vibe specifically for eyeem.

Whatever way you turn it: high quality fresh stock with great vibe and sales value always comes from very experienced people.




« Last Edit: June 02, 2020, 10:50 by cobalt »

« Reply #603 on: June 02, 2020, 10:45 »
+1
I don't understand people who disable their port at SS because they don't accept to get 10 for a sale while they have a port at IS where they can get as few as 2 for a sale :o

Because the average is 40-70 cents, at least among the people I know and myself. Non exclusive and ignoring connect.
OK but we don't know yet SS new RPD

« Reply #604 on: June 02, 2020, 10:52 »
+4
Very likely I'll be disabling my account. I think everyone needs to though or a huge # of contributors to have an impact.

I think it will make a difference if there are noticeable holes in the collection - the image spam can fill up 150 million easily but a lot of that is just not commercially viable. When Shutterstock's bread and butter corporate customers can't find the things that were in their lightbox - when big, noticeable contributors like eyeidea shut off their portfolios - buyers will realize Shutterstock is no longer the great one stop shop it once was.

We don't have to get the numbers down much to make a big difference. Even small potatoes contributors like me had content in the first page of searches

https://twitter.com/joannsnover/status/1266812478647709696

And for more niche subjects, when a buyer goes to find something, their choices have noticeably shrunk

https://twitter.com/joannsnover/status/1266843339673886720

« Reply #605 on: June 02, 2020, 10:53 »
+4
The 10 cent sales have started appearing, and some quick calculations tell me that my average will end at around a third of my previous income from SS. That means that 2-4 other agencies will pass them. There is absolutely no reason to upload images when the commission rate is this low. My camera gear costs money and my time is better spent at the beach with my family than in front of the computer editing photos.

One custom job per year will bring in more money than my 3,500 image portfolio at SS. Easy choice.

To those who think that singles etc. will save the situation; I had a single today which brought in 11 cent.
« Last Edit: June 02, 2020, 10:58 by epixx »

« Reply #606 on: June 02, 2020, 10:55 »
0
For me today a 10 and a 63 cent sub

Makes 36 cent rpd
Beter then 25 cent  :)

« Reply #607 on: June 02, 2020, 10:56 »
+5
I don't understand people who disable their port at SS because they don't accept to get 10 for a sale while they have a port at IS where they can get as few as 2 for a sale :o

Because the average is 40-70 cents, at least among the people I know and myself. Non exclusive and ignoring connect.
OK but we don't know yet SS new RPD

Trust people to make their own decisions. There are plenty of level 6 shooters who see no point in uploading and have closed their shop.

Plus...there is that abusive rate card with a built in yearly reset and the abrupt change of everything with 6 days notice.

Plus zero communication, the company has gone down in their bunker, closed the doors, disconnected the phones and has stopped communicating entirely. Except for every once in a while deleting accounts with no warning.

Does that sound like a brilliant business team with a plan??

Who cannot even check the email with a drastic announcement for te greatest change in 15 years?

Business leaders have to get people to trust them. It is the essence of all business, not money.

Look around the forums, do you see people trusting the new SS business instincts?
« Last Edit: June 02, 2020, 12:45 by cobalt »

« Reply #608 on: June 02, 2020, 11:03 »
+7
I don't understand people who disable their port at SS because they don't accept to get 10 for a sale while they have a port at IS where they can get as few as 2 for a sale :o
When IS lowered to 2 cent a couple of years ago, I deleted my best selling images there, and stopped uploading. Then in september last year, they paid a decent royalty by mistake for some sales, and when they took back the money, I finally terminated my account.

« Reply #609 on: June 02, 2020, 11:05 »
+2
0.10 here too.

Shitterstock.com

If you type Shitterstock.com in your browser it takes you directly to the Pavlovsky Agency. Domain registered in 2006


They must have changed it. I just typed it in, and it went to shutterstock.

The Pavlovsky Agency aka Shutterstock

« Reply #610 on: June 02, 2020, 11:07 »
+2
I wonder if the 0.10$ sales that everybody does lately irrespective of their level is just a mistake at SS end, after all it's a drastic change for their accounting and management systems too (not defending them!). I remember iStock did so many of such accounting mistakes in recent years, sometimes they even apologized and made refunds... :) Its should be more clear in a few days whether the same happened to SS, maybe there will be another "corrigendum" and "apologies" email from SS soon... Or perhaps I'm too naive? :)

P.S. To be on the safe side, I decided to deactivate my account for the time being, just not to be saddened to see 0.10$ sales propagating the sales report...
It's not a mistake. The large subscriptions all come out under 10c and get rounded up.

« Reply #611 on: June 02, 2020, 11:21 »
+1
0.10 here too.

Shitterstock.com

If you type Shitterstock.com in your browser it takes you directly to the Pavlovsky Agency. Domain registered in 2006


They must have changed it. I just typed it in, and it went to shutterstock.

The Pavlovsky Agency aka Shutterstock


Ah. You were making a joke. Funny that they registered it back in 2006. But then a lot of times, companies register a lot of iterations of their name, figuring in typos. This one was a self-fulfilling prophecy! 😀

« Reply #612 on: June 02, 2020, 11:27 »
+2
I don't understand people who disable their port at SS because they don't accept to get 10 for a sale while they have a port at IS where they can get as few as 2 for a sale :o

I can explain this to you, or at least try. For me, what I look at is the ratio of work I put into making the photos and submit them and what I earn from them that is important - "them" as in a collective of all my work in opposite to a single individual image. Since I pretty much upload the same images to multiple agencies, the work and time for the photos is a constant number. What is not is the earning I get from them.

So far I have submitted to IS and will continue doing so for a simple reason: They have been one of my top 3 best earners very similar to Shutterstock in income with a port of similar size and a similar number of downloads each month.

Since it's the same time and effort that goes into every agency, why should I say "I submit to SS for an earning of X$ each month but I am not doing it for the same amount to IS" Why? It's the same time and work that went into it and it's the same money I walk away with at the end of the month. 
Imagine it a bit ike a housekeeper who gets a fixed salery each month. She is happy to do the work for the amount of money she gets, but some day she sees a list where every single task that is involved in her work is listed with an individual price and she says "What? Cleaning windows only gets me 0.50$? I am not doing this job anymore!".  That would be silly if the overall payment per hour was good, right? That's a bit how I see it. Even though IS has this crazy 0.02$ sales, they somehow always manage to pull in enough medium sales to make up for it and the overall sum is right.

If Shutterstock had just changed around their earning system to something where some sales would make you less, but others more, but it was still divided in a way that the overall sum was not too different from what it was before, it might have worked out. The problem is that Shutterstock has never really been an agency that managed to pull in great licence for me and most of my earnings come from SUBs. With royalities for these reduced by over a third, there is no way Shutterstock will get even close to the former number at the end of the month.

Maybe it's too early to tell, maybe there is still  hope, but the first 2 days of June give me a different impression. I only get 0,10$ - 0,14$ sales and if all of June will be like this I will end up with only a third of what I used to make on Shuttertock and what I still make on iStock with almost the same port. That's why I will stay on IS, but will deactivate my account on SS by the end of the month, should my earnings continue to be as low as they are now.
« Last Edit: June 02, 2020, 11:35 by Firn »

« Reply #613 on: June 02, 2020, 11:31 »
+1
I don't understand people who disable their port at SS because they don't accept to get 10 for a sale while they have a port at IS where they can get as few as 2 for a sale :o
When IS lowered to 2 cent a couple of years ago, I deleted my best selling images there, and stopped uploading. Then in september last year, they paid a decent royalty by mistake for some sales, and when they took back the money, I finally terminated my account.
I also stopped uploading to IS when they did that, but as far as I remember there was no possibility to delete just some images, you could delete all images, or none. How was it possible to delete just the best sellers? I'd like to do that too.

« Reply #614 on: June 02, 2020, 11:56 »
+1
I don't understand people who disable their port at SS because they don't accept to get 10 for a sale while they have a port at IS where they can get as few as 2 for a sale :o

This is very true!, this is a two front battle, we can not only disable accounts on SS and still accept iS sales, we may win one battle but we will lose the War.

« Reply #615 on: June 02, 2020, 11:59 »
0
Most of Russian Ukrainian contributors will accept 0.10c sales and adopt with producing even more content while we debate, tweet, complain.  :-X

« Reply #616 on: June 02, 2020, 12:01 »
+3
I don't understand people who disable their port at SS because they don't accept to get 10 for a sale while they have a port at IS where they can get as few as 2 for a sale :o

I had several hugh sales with IS nearly 100 per sale - that makes up for the low sales in IS.

But I never ever had just one big sale with SS - its always just those cheap subscription sales on SS.

I also had my "share" of 10 cent sales and disabled both vids and pics now.



« Reply #617 on: June 02, 2020, 12:02 »
0
I don't understand people who disable their port at SS because they don't accept to get 10 for a sale while they have a port at IS where they can get as few as 2 for a sale :o
Maybe it's too early to tell, maybe there is still  hope, but the first 2 days of June give me a different impression. I only get 0,10$ - 0,14$ sales and if all of June will be like this I will end up with only a third of what I used to make on Shuttertock and what I still make on iStock with almost the same port. That's why I will stay on IS, but will deactivate my account on SS by the end of the month, should my earnings continue to be as low as they are now.
This is what I was implying. I'm not happy with SS new earning scheme, believe me, but unless you can tell the future, I think it is far to early to draw conclusions on whether it is worth going on with SS, compared to IS (I'm on IS too).

The key points for my decision will be SS new RPD and the level reset on January 1st. It would be quite interesting to fill this thread (https://www.microstockgroup.com/shutterstock-com/how-is-ss-rpd-turning-out-for-you-in-this-first-month/msg551036/?topicseen on a regular basis over the year.

« Reply #618 on: June 02, 2020, 12:06 »
+1
I don't understand people who disable their port at SS because they don't accept to get 10 for a sale while they have a port at IS where they can get as few as 2 for a sale :o

I had several hugh sales with IS nearly 100 per sale - that makes up for the low sales in IS.

But I never ever had just one big sale with SS - its always just those cheap subscription sales on SS.
It's just the opposite for me...

« Reply #619 on: June 02, 2020, 12:11 »
0
I don't understand people who disable their port at SS because they don't accept to get 10 for a sale while they have a port at IS where they can get as few as 2 for a sale :o
When IS lowered to 2 cent a couple of years ago, I deleted my best selling images there, and stopped uploading. Then in september last year, they paid a decent royalty by mistake for some sales, and when they took back the money, I finally terminated my account.
I also stopped uploading to IS when they did that, but as far as I remember there was no possibility to delete just some images, you could delete all images, or none. How was it possible to delete just the best sellers? I'd like to do that too.

They disabled that option after we used it. I deactivated my bestsellers and the files they gave away for free over. 1.3 million times. I simply did not want to see them abused in this way ever again. It was really, really painful, especially emotionally.

But they gave us no choice.

« Reply #620 on: June 02, 2020, 12:29 »
+9
For what it's worth, for the greater good and out of self respect, I'm beginning to remove my content from Shutterstock, starting with my best seller. This image has been the #1 photo result for "Martin Luther King" for a long time. Not any more, not on Shutterstock anyways. There's some obvious irony in the subject matter, although there's no intent on my part to equate the current debacle at Shutterstock to the BLM protests and efforts.
« Last Edit: June 02, 2020, 12:32 by Atomazul »

Horizon

    This user is banned.
« Reply #621 on: June 02, 2020, 12:37 »
+3
I think we are getting punished I just had my worst two days ever at SS. Seriously!

« Reply #622 on: June 02, 2020, 12:47 »
0
Out of curiosity, what kind of prices are people getting for non-subscription video sales so far this month? Any ultra low ones? There haven't been many of these reported over on the forums at SS.
« Last Edit: June 02, 2020, 12:52 by dragonblade »

« Reply #623 on: June 02, 2020, 13:49 »
0
I don't understand people who disable their port at SS because they don't accept to get 10 for a sale while they have a port at IS where they can get as few as 2 for a sale :o
When IS lowered to 2 cent a couple of years ago, I deleted my best selling images there, and stopped uploading. Then in september last year, they paid a decent royalty by mistake for some sales, and when they took back the money, I finally terminated my account.
I also stopped uploading to IS when they did that, but as far as I remember there was no possibility to delete just some images, you could delete all images, or none. How was it possible to delete just the best sellers? I'd like to do that too.

They disabled that option after we used it. I deactivated my bestsellers and the files they gave away for free over. 1.3 million times. I simply did not want to see them abused in this way ever again. It was really, really painful, especially emotionally.

But they gave us no choice.
Exactly. It was possible, and easy, to deactivate for a period after the announcement.

« Reply #624 on: June 02, 2020, 14:03 »
+7
Oh look, on day 8 of their shitstorm they are trying to play divide and rule.

Nope, will not work, will totally,totally backfire.

They really have absolutely no clue how internet communities work, do they? And they have had a huge producer community for 15 years.

This strategy might work in authoritarian places, but not with free artists.

https://forums.submit.shutterstock.com/topic/100133-new-earnings-structure-for-contributors/page/140/

Everything they do about this shitstorm is COMPLETLY wrong.

But it does tell you what management really thinks about the lowly masses...

Everyone stop and read this. Its very important. Continue to quote it so that it doesn't get buried in the forum and others will see it. Many members of the Stock Submitters Coalition (the new coalition created to fight changes like these and you can join here: https://www.facebook.com/groups/261369748434285/ ) have reported to us that they received a communication from Shutterstock wanting them to sign a separate deal that will allow them to stay at what they said was the current percentage (Im assuming that means the previous structure) until the end of January and then they would be taken down to level 1 like everyone else. They are hoping to quell the rebellion by throwing a carrot in front of a select group of contributors and making them feel special. Just when you thought they couldn't get worse they go and do something like this. They are now offering different deals to select people in hopes of this all going away. Not to mention the deal they are offering still sucks. If you get one of these letters/emails I implore you to not sign it. In fact, I beg you to post it here and show the rest of the contributors what Shutterstock is trying to do behind everyones backs.

Again, keep quoting and reposting this for others to see. Join the Stock Submitters Coalition and help fight this. We are over 600 members strong now and represent a portfolio of over 7.65 million. Our members have pushed articles out to many websites: https://fstoppers.com/originals/what-wrong-shutterstock-489338 , https://www.dpreview.com/news/7607355790/shutterstock-announces-new-earnings-structure-contributors-are-anything-but-happy , https://petapixel.com/2020/05/27/shutterstock-unveiled-a-new-royalty-structure-and-photographers-are-furious/ . Join in and help make a difference. https://www.facebook.com/groups/261369748434285/


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
87 Replies
32825 Views
Last post July 24, 2006, 06:01
by GeoPappas
21 Replies
7152 Views
Last post May 04, 2006, 08:28
by leaf
14 Replies
6573 Views
Last post March 19, 2008, 14:47
by vonkara
106 Replies
25907 Views
Last post October 04, 2014, 07:33
by Hobostocker
19 Replies
9654 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