Author Topic: shutterstock plz create premium vectors category for more money (Read 7133 times)

VB inc · « **on:** May 13, 2011, 09:42 »

Excuse my ignorance if there is already something besides subscription plan. I cant possibly sell some of my files on istock for pennies for download on your site. Im sure there are many artists like me who will cancel istock exclusitivity if a higher pay as you go plan was introduced. step out of the all you can eat mentality and go with some fine dining on the side!!!

cthoman · « **Reply #1 on:** May 13, 2011, 10:12 »

Interesting idea. I don't see it happening. Although, it wasn't that long ago that you could get a wide variety of vectors for a buck at iStock. Some would say that it is part of the problem at iStock is rising prices.

gostwyck · « **Reply #2 on:** May 13, 2011, 10:18 »

Quote from: VB inc on May 13, 2011, 09:42

... step out of the all you can eat mentality and go with some fine dining on the side!!!

SS do have PPD's for example. Shutterstock's relatively basic business model and pricing architecture is actually what the buying public appear to like. That's why SS are going from strength to strength whilst Istock and others are suffering.

Vectors were always priced high on IS because only one size could be sold. With subscription packages on SS you get the full-size image anyway so there's no real justification for vectors to be priced differently.

click_click · « **Reply #3 on:** May 13, 2011, 10:27 »

Quote from: gostwyck on May 13, 2011, 10:18

Quote from: VB inc on May 13, 2011, 09:42
... step out of the all you can eat mentality and go with some fine dining on the side!!!

Shutterstock do have PPD's for example. Shutterstock's relatively basic business model and pricing architecture is actually what the buying public appear to like. That's why Shutterstock are going from strength to strength whilst Istock and others are suffering.

Vectors were always priced high on IS because only one size could be sold. With subscription packages on Shutterstock you get the full-size image anyway so there's no real justification for vectors to be priced differently.

Not to mention that some photos and 3D also required extensive work and still the artist's are happy since good files will be downloaded many more times than mediocre ones.

VB inc · « **Reply #4 on:** May 13, 2011, 10:49 »

Quote from: gostwyck on May 13, 2011, 10:18

Quote from: VB inc on May 13, 2011, 09:42
... step out of the all you can eat mentality and go with some fine dining on the side!!!

Shutterstock do have PPD's for example. Shutterstock's relatively basic business model and pricing architecture is actually what the buying public appear to like. That's why Shutterstock are going from strength to strength whilst Istock and others are suffering.

Vectors were always priced high on IS because only one size could be sold. With subscription packages on Shutterstock you get the full-size image anyway so there's no real justification for vectors to be priced differently.

Unless i have an option for my files only to be available for PPD, i have a hard time accepting my files to be downloaded by subscription package. i think its more principle than anything else. I value my artwork and think my style is better than clipart. Yes, i can create things i believe would be appropriate for shutterstock, but i cant justify putting some files i created that took me 10-30 hours of work on.

I only say this because i feel buyers are leaving istock and most probably coming to shutterstock and others. these are buyers who are used fine dining. They should take this opportunity to up their game and try to lure professional vector artists. If im feeling this way, im sure there are tons more.

helix7 · « **Reply #5 on:** May 13, 2011, 11:09 »

Good vectors sell well at SS, and quality is rewarded with quantity of downloads. Frankly I don't care that my stuff is going for $0.38 per DL or a few bucks PPD. At the end of the day, SS beats my istock earnings by 3x or 4x, every day of the week. Hell, my PPD earnings at SS alone sometimes beat my istock earnings for the day. The sub sales are almost a bonus.

Maybe that's the wrong mentality, but it's tough to look past the dollar totals. I'd have a hard time leaving SS just on principle, even though I get that it's not so appealing to sell an image that takes many hours to create for less than $1 sometimes. You have to look at SS in terms of the total sum of earnings, not in terms of individual sales.

cthoman · « **Reply #6 on:** May 13, 2011, 11:31 »

Quote from: VB inc on May 13, 2011, 10:49

I only say this because i feel buyers are leaving istock and most probably coming to shutterstock and others. these are buyers who are used fine dining. They should take this opportunity to up their game and try to lure professional vector artists. If im feeling this way, im sure there are tons more.

Umm... Could you be more insulting to us long time Shutterstock contributors? What makes you think if Shutterstock had a premium collection that you would be allowed to participate in it? I'd think it would be reserved for those that have had a track record of sales at SS. Look, I'd love to make changes to many of the micro sites, but it's based on experience using those sites. I wouldn't knock Shutterstock before you've even used it.

gostwyck · « **Reply #7 on:** May 13, 2011, 11:59 »

You have to look at SS in terms of how much they will generate from your portfolio (almost every other microstock agencies have similar subscription packages) not individual sales.

You can either join in and collect your rightful share of the proceeds __ or you can leave it to others to enjoy the sales you might have had.

Alternatively you could leave your most prized vectors as P+ files at Istock alone (but you will lose out that way).

Daevid · « **Reply #8 on:** May 13, 2011, 12:00 »

NO!!!! Leave shutterstock alone, for the love of Mike! Do not try to fix what isn't broken. iStock used to work pretty good for me until they tried to "fix" it.

VB inc · « **Reply #9 on:** May 13, 2011, 12:43 »

Quote from: cthoman on May 13, 2011, 11:31

Quote from: VB inc on May 13, 2011, 10:49
I only say this because i feel buyers are leaving istock and most probably coming to shutterstock and others. these are buyers who are used fine dining. They should take this opportunity to up their game and try to lure professional vector artists. If im feeling this way, im sure there are tons more.

Umm... Could you be more insulting to us long time Shutterstock contributors? What makes you think if Shutterstock had a premium collection that you would be allowed to participate in it? I'd think it would be reserved for those that have had a track record of sales at Shutterstock. Look, I'd love to make changes to many of the micro sites, but it's based on experience using those sites. I wouldn't knock Shutterstock before you've even used it.

Why would you be insulted? Im sorry if i came off that way but there are different approaches to creating artwork. I tend to have a smaller portfolio investing more time in each file i create. Currently, I cant compete on the feeding the beast model that is Shutterstock.

I realize what i am proposing is different than shutterstocks current model. Its more of a rant than anything else and i didnt intend to insult anyone.

melastmohican · « **Reply #10 on:** May 13, 2011, 13:21 »

Aren't there sites dedicated to vectors?

cthoman · « **Reply #11 on:** May 13, 2011, 13:48 »

Quote from: VB inc on May 13, 2011, 12:43

Why would you be insulted? Im sorry if i came off that way but there are different approaches to creating artwork. I tend to have a smaller portfolio investing more time in each file i create. Currently, I cant compete on the feeding the beast model that is Shutterstock.

I realize what i am proposing is different than shutterstocks current model. Its more of a rant than anything else and i didnt intend to insult anyone.

No worries. When you said SS should try to lure professionals and their new IS buyers that are used to fine dining, it seemed to insinuate that those things weren't already offered by SS. Granted, there is more garbage at SS, but there are just as many if not more great artists at SS as IS. It was just the way I read it that made me say, hey wait.. I'm a what now?

Like others said, SS is just a different model. It's definitely not all about feeding the beast either. There are contributors with small targeted portfolios that do well. Personally, I favor the IS system more, but I can see why others might like SS better. SS doesn't have as much of a divisive caste system like IS which is nice.

microstockphoto.co.uk · « **Reply #12 on:** May 14, 2011, 01:07 »

No, Shutterstock please don't change anything. If it ain't broke don't fix it.

wiser · « **Reply #13 on:** May 16, 2011, 19:13 »

Quote from: gostwyck on May 13, 2011, 11:59

You have to look at Shutterstock in terms of how much they will generate from your portfolio (almost every other microstock agencies have similar subscription packages) not individual sales.

You can either join in and collect your rightful share of the proceeds __ or you can leave it to others to enjoy the sales you might have had.

Alternatively you could leave your most prized vectors as P+ files at Istock alone (but you will lose out that way).

P+ is not available to vector artists at IS. Really does not make that much of a difference (to me) since my sales are horrible there this month.

helix7 · « **Reply #14 on:** May 16, 2011, 21:25 »

Quote from: VB inc on May 13, 2011, 12:43

...I tend to have a smaller portfolio investing more time in each file i create. Currently, I cant compete on the feeding the beast model that is Shutterstock...

SS isn't really "feed the beast" anymore. I've got roughly 360 images there (double that if you count the raster versions of my vector files). I didn't upload anything for about 6 months, and my earnings didn't suffer. Matter of fact, they went up most months. SS changed the search algorithm some time ago to give older files a better chance, as opposed to the old system that heavily favored new content.

Meanwhile, in those 6 months my istock earnings have tanked. This month I'm on pace for my worst month there since 2007. From where I'm sitting, istock is more of a "feed the beast" site than SS.

Microbius · « **Reply #15 on:** May 17, 2011, 02:16 »

Quote from: gostwyck on May 13, 2011, 11:59

You have to look at Shutterstock in terms of how much they will generate from your portfolio (almost every other microstock agencies have similar subscription packages) not individual sales.

You can either join in and collect your rightful share of the proceeds __ or you can leave it to others to enjoy the sales you might have had.

Alternatively you could leave your most prized vectors as P+ files at Istock alone (but you will lose out that way).

P+ isn't available for vectors (yet?) only photos and raster illustrations

Microbius · « **Reply #16 on:** May 17, 2011, 02:19 »

Quote from: helix7 on May 16, 2011, 21:25

Quote from: VB inc on May 13, 2011, 12:43
...I tend to have a smaller portfolio investing more time in each file i create. Currently, I cant compete on the feeding the beast model that is Shutterstock...

Shutterstock isn't really "feed the beast" anymore. I've got roughly 360 images there (double that if you count the raster versions of my vector files). I didn't upload anything for about 6 months, and my earnings didn't suffer. Matter of fact, they went up most months. Shutterstock changed the search algorithm some time ago to give older files a better chance, as opposed to the old system that heavily favored new content.

Meanwhile, in those 6 months my istock earnings have tanked. This month I'm on pace for my worst month there since 2007. From where I'm sitting, istock is more of a "feed the beast" site than Shutterstock.

Very similar for me in terms of IS sales.
I noticed one of the top gaining people in the Zeitgeist section is one of the few raster illustrators. I wonder if the last best match change favors vectors a lot less

jm · « **Reply #17 on:** May 17, 2011, 06:20 »

I'm afraid that reviewers decisions if vector is or is not "premium" would start more discussions than "low commercial value" internal opinion. I don't know how to recognize premium vector.
And to me - splitting into number of collections of better and much better images means that site admits that they accepted many images that are not good enough.

dirkr · « **Reply #18 on:** May 18, 2011, 06:11 »

Quote from: VB inc on May 13, 2011, 09:42

Excuse my ignorance if there is already something besides subscription plan.

There is. They do sell PPDs and ELs (I think that's obvious), and (I wonder why nobody already mentioned that) you can opt out of subscriptions and only sell PPDs and ELs. At least that is an option that is offered on Shutterstock. I have no personal experience with it, no idea if that would affect search placement (e.g. because you're just not making enough sales to stay on top of the search), but at least it is (theoretically) possible to sell via Shutterstock but without subscriptions.

Now, please sign up with them using my referral link

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: shutterstock plz create premium vectors category for more money (Read 7133 times)

VB inc

cthoman

gostwyck

click_click

VB inc

helix7

cthoman

gostwyck

Daevid

VB inc

melastmohican

cthoman

microstockphoto.co.uk

wiser

helix7

Microbius

Microbius

jm

dirkr

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors