pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Shutterstock just became iStock 2.0  (Read 53575 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #625 on: June 02, 2020, 14:16 »
+3
And really convenient that they did it during "pandemic" so if it becomes full fiasco they give them self maneuver space to say it was or temporary or something, and they went pretty low so they left space to lift royalties a bit if things go wrong.   


« Reply #626 on: June 02, 2020, 14:18 »
+3
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/

unbelievably... Please stand togehter and let us fight back! Shutdown for Shutterstock!

« Reply #627 on: June 02, 2020, 14:21 »
0
Hi, what with those 0.1 sales in SS?

« Reply #628 on: June 02, 2020, 14:40 »
+1
Hi, what with those 0.1 sales in SS?

Its the new normal didn't you know?

Here's the forum post where you can read all about it

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

« Reply #629 on: June 02, 2020, 15:06 »
+3
This agency are just like vampires - s-u-c-k-i-n-g us dry.

It ain't s-u-c-k-i-n-g me dry because I am SOOOOO OUTTA THERE!!

« Reply #630 on: June 02, 2020, 15:13 »
+4
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/

Again this is not a new tactic, they did the same thing when they made changes at BS.

They are who they have always been!

« Reply #631 on: June 02, 2020, 16:24 »
+7
Today 59 sells for $11,29 in total included $6,03 from "single and other" at Level 5.
Two days ago 59 subscription sells mean at least $22,42 (not mention that single and other). Someone stole me more than $11 today. I'm speechless.

« Reply #632 on: June 02, 2020, 17:43 »
+3
Oh look, on day 8 of their shitstorm they are trying to play divide and rule.

This seems like a reaction to what is going on and not a pre-calculated move. I hope that they continue to feel the heat as more and more creators see their reports and payments shrinking.

« Reply #633 on: June 02, 2020, 17:53 »
+5
somebody needs to post this new divide and rule attempt to the microstock.ru forum

« Reply #634 on: June 02, 2020, 19:16 »
0
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.

I think you might be overestimating SS's need for quality, we all witnessed how they opened their gates for signups with virtually no entry test and also let in all kinds of mediocre images spam. When I write phone shooter I also mean any kind of total amateur, whatever the equipment but I used it as example as there is swarm of newbie questions on facebook groups and in majority of these you can see the screenshots of SS mobile app.
I'm not convinced they are trying to filter out newbies and rely on top contributors from which they get smaller percentage. I think they want to filter out middle ground the most.

« Reply #635 on: June 02, 2020, 19:25 »
+6
I don't think that they have put that much thought behind it all. It seems to me that they needed to show growth (for whatever reason) so they took the fastest and easiest way in the short term. I don't know what the CEO's background is but to me he shows a total lack of understanding of the microstock industry.

Edit: I expect them to hide the portfolio disable buttons next.

PaulieWalnuts

  • We Have Exciting News For You
« Reply #636 on: June 02, 2020, 21:05 »
+10
Edit: I expect them to hide the portfolio disable buttons next.

I'm surprised they didn't do it already. Even more surprised they didn't disable it right before they announced the change. But yes they're probably working on removing it right now. It's a big site and even simple changes take time to make and test.

Personally doesn't matter to me. I saw the 10 cent sales and immediately disabled my port. If they force the issue to remove the disable buttons to where I need to delete my account, go ahead. Don't care. All of these stock sites taught me a long time ago that I need to diversify income to where they dont matter. And I have. And they don't.

What's ironic is these stock sites have done so much to diminish our earnings from significant to meaningless for so many of us. In doing so, they've also lost any leverage they have over us. If they paid us all really well and the majority of us were making big money, it would be a different story. If this happened years ago when my earnings were really good, I wouldn't easily be able to walk away. Today, I can, and have. Karma.

« Reply #637 on: June 02, 2020, 23:22 »
+1
What's ironic is these stock sites have done so much to diminish our earnings from significant to meaningless for so many of us. In doing so, they've also lost any leverage they have over us. If they paid us all really well and the majority of us were making big money, it would be a different story. If this happened years ago when my earnings were really good, I wouldn't easily be able to walk away. Today, I can, and have. Karma.

Exactly. Well said.

« Reply #638 on: June 02, 2020, 23:29 »
+6
Edit: I expect them to hide the portfolio disable buttons next.

I'm surprised they didn't do it already. Even more surprised they didn't disable it right before they announced the change. ...

I was fully prepared for them to take away the on/off switch, but as I see how many people are disabling portfolios - I watched the number of photos drop by 70,000 in a half an hour this afternoon while I was tweeting some #BoycottShutterstock stuff - it dawns on me that the more we disable, the less likely they are to remove the control.

At some point, it becomes in their interest to leave them enabled if they believe they can talk contributors into restoring images. Come the end of June they'll have more financials to report and an image count. They may not want to fess up that they inspired a boycott and only have a small growth or a decline in the collection. Also, it would force contributors to choose to close their accounts or delete images if the button were gone - all much more work to manage than the on/off switch.

As they couldn't manage the code to get royalties into the correct columns after the change, they may not want to make things more complicated for engineering than it needs to be :)

« Reply #639 on: June 02, 2020, 23:40 »
+6
If they make disable the disable portfolio ability, they might inspire more contributors to leave for good.  i really do not care what I do once I reach payout.  I am done with SS.  Years of work but I no longer care to associate with such an abusive company.

PaulieWalnuts

  • We Have Exciting News For You
« Reply #640 on: June 02, 2020, 23:48 »
+3
Edit: I expect them to hide the portfolio disable buttons next.

I'm surprised they didn't do it already. Even more surprised they didn't disable it right before they announced the change. ...

I was fully prepared for them to take away the on/off switch, but as I see how many people are disabling portfolios - I watched the number of photos drop by 70,000 in a half an hour this afternoon while I was tweeting some #BoycottShutterstock stuff - it dawns on me that the more we disable, the less likely they are to remove the control.

At some point, it becomes in their interest to leave them enabled if they believe they can talk contributors into restoring images. Come the end of June they'll have more financials to report and an image count. They may not want to fess up that they inspired a boycott and only have a small growth or a decline in the collection. Also, it would force contributors to choose to close their accounts or delete images if the button were gone - all much more work to manage than the on/off switch.

As they couldn't manage the code to get royalties into the correct columns after the change, they may not want to make things more complicated for engineering than it needs to be :)

I doubt they've budged from their dictator approach. They're removing forum and Facebook posts, banning people, not responding in the forum, etc. I still think they're working on whatever they can do to squash contributors including disabling the buttons. Gotta show us peons who's boss even if it hurts them.

« Reply #641 on: June 03, 2020, 00:27 »
+7
This take from the SS forum (several people received this copy/paste reply):

Quote
We are Deeply saddened on the fact that there is a slight cut down in the earnings that Shutterstock used to offer earlier.

The reason of Decline in earnings has been the uncertain pandemic which has caused a huge effect on all the businesses including ours. 
 
The world wide conditions are critical at the moment.We believe that with the passage of time things are expected to improve and once it would happen then we would try to raise the earning opportunities with Shutterstock.

You can learn more about it on the following link https://www.shutterstock.com/blog/contributor-earnings-update       

We need your support during this harsh time around.

Obviously thats complete BS.  This is a company that made several hundred million dollars of profit and has plenty of cash lying around to weather the 2 MONTHS.

A change like this would be planned far far ahead of the pandemic.  Its been tightening for a while.  Just recently the opt out of sensitive removed, subs for videos and so on and now this.  Its a long term, planned strategy.

They're attempting to pretend to be sympathetic.  Maybe some people will go "aww cute", most wont accept it.

Looks like they've turned to page 2 of their plan.  The sympathetic copy/paste and the alleged divide and rule special offer to other people.

SS counter-attack if you like.


« Reply #642 on: June 03, 2020, 01:32 »
+2
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/

Joined - my membership is pending. Thanks for the info. - Marianne Campolongo
« Last Edit: June 03, 2020, 01:48 by wordplanet »

Snow

« Reply #643 on: June 03, 2020, 02:34 »
+1
What's ironic is these stock sites have done so much to diminish our earnings from significant to meaningless for so many of us. In doing so, they've also lost any leverage they have over us. If they paid us all really well and the majority of us were making big money, it would be a different story. If this happened years ago when my earnings were really good, I wouldn't easily be able to walk away. Today, I can, and have. Karma.
Exactly. Well said.

Spot on!

Noedelhap

  • www.colincramm.com

« Reply #644 on: June 03, 2020, 02:56 »
+1
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/

I can't find anything about it on the FB page, or any first-hand stories from contributors who have been approached by SS. Is there a source somewhere?

« Reply #645 on: June 03, 2020, 03:35 »
+3
Posted elsewhere but I'll post it here too.

The reported email doesn't make a lot of sense. It basically promises to keep people on current new tier percentage until January first which already the way the new scheme works. Interpreting it as referring to the old scheme also doesn't make sense as that wasn't a percentage scheme.

As reported it is also in broken English.

My guess is Phishing scam not from SS where you open attached contract and get a virus.

« Reply #646 on: June 03, 2020, 04:44 »
+4
After 2 days under the new tariff regime. A simple observation, I have a 15k portfolio and I'm in L5... I lost a little more than a third of my usual income. I work mainly with models and the cost of the productions is already lowed to the maximum to still produce quality images. I would like to hear the voice of the big image producers, with their teams of stylists, retouchers etc ... plus the cost of the models. How do they see the future with 30% less revenue... If this trend continues.

« Reply #647 on: June 03, 2020, 06:01 »
+5
After 2 days under the new tariff regime. A simple observation, I have a 15k portfolio and I'm in L5... I lost a little more than a third of my usual income. I work mainly with models and the cost of the productions is already lowed to the maximum to still produce quality images. I would like to hear the voice of the big image producers, with their teams of stylists, retouchers etc ... plus the cost of the models. How do they see the future with 30% less revenue... If this trend continues.
Exactly, I don't do model shoots but those who do have massive expenses & require a lot more gear to work with, have been working on a stripped budget as it was. Now I doubt that many big contributors are able to continue with these new rates.

If expenses go down either quality and/or quantity will go down. I have no idea which group of contributors is actually not impacted negatively by this change. All of us are taking a hit.

That sounds to me like an overall loss of uploads and decline of quality content.

If at least big producers or very successful contributors would have actually gotten a raise it would have caused an impulse of higher quality content if that is what SS is after.

But under the current conditions it appears that SS only wants to create inflated numbers for their shareholders. Looking like a desperate attempt to add value to the company...

I'm no trading professional but a successful company doesn't have a chart like this...

« Reply #648 on: June 03, 2020, 06:04 »
+3
After 2 days under the new tariff regime. A simple observation, I have a 15k portfolio and I'm in L5... I lost a little more than a third of my usual income. I work mainly with models and the cost of the productions is already lowed to the maximum to still produce quality images. I would like to hear the voice of the big image producers, with their teams of stylists, retouchers etc ... plus the cost of the models. How do they see the future with 30% less revenue... If this trend continues.
And don't forget we are all down to under half that come first of January...

PZF

« Reply #649 on: June 03, 2020, 06:14 »
+3
Looking forward to seeing just how far down the list on the right SS will go.... :(


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
87 Replies
30930 Views
Last post July 24, 2006, 06:01
by GeoPappas
21 Replies
6771 Views
Last post May 04, 2006, 08:28
by leaf
14 Replies
6240 Views
Last post March 19, 2008, 14:47
by vonkara
106 Replies
24238 Views
Last post October 04, 2014, 07:33
by Hobostocker
19 Replies
9238 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