I created my own site to sell my best images, and the ordinary ones are sold elsewhere... but not on shutterstock, not worth the efforts. You might think 10c and image is reasonable, but it will go down to 1c sooner or later, unless you do something...

I didn't say I think 10c/image is reasonable. On the contrary, I probably dislike it as much as everyone else around here.
My point is: I only look at total earnings, and Shutterstock still makes up for half of my microstock income. So for me, currently, it would be a foolish idea to drop them.

Sure, that might change, and then I will re-evaluate. But I don't believe dropping them would actually be beneficial for my total earnings. Not for the kind of content I provide. Nor do I believe that me (and with me a few hundred or thousand of contributors) leaving Shutterstock or iStock/Getty would make them change their mind and raise contributor commissions again. We are less than a drop in the ocean, and thus powerless.

The only thing I can really do is up my game, start shooting different content, and find a different market than Microstock for it.
Now in all humble honesty: I'm not there yet.

Quote from: thijsdegraaf on November 17, 2021, 03:28

I had uploaded two different photos of a statue in Slovenia a year ago, one of which was rejected as similar. When I searched Shutterstock, I saw that someone else had submitted the exact same photo. I tried again this month out of curiosity, but it was rejected again for similar. So it wasn't rejected because of my other photo, which is what I thought at first. I understand they've gotten stricter on that with the sheer amount of photos they have.
If I have slightly similar photos, I don't upload them at the same time. Then you at least have less chance that they will be rejected because of similar.

Also my experience Thijs. They'd better tag their rejections with "We currently don't need more images of this subject in our database" instead of bugging contributors with fake focus rejections. Subjects that are not well represented get through way easier than hopelessly saturated topics.

Killer shot from the Canal Grande in Venice? Rejected. Out of focus sir.
Crappy cheap ass panorama landscape straight out of outdated smartphone from a landscape in one of the lesser known outskirts of Spain? There you go, thanks for uploading, accepted!

agree. On some sites they reject due to 'No commercial Value' which I am okay with that reason.

This whole thread is nothing but a whine full of negative thinking.
I have never bought into the "the going is tough, let's quit and run" mentality.
Yeah, SS now hands out a lot of rejections for focus, noise and similars.
You can whine and cry about it and accomplish nothing, or you can use
those rejections as a learning experience.
You can quit Shutterstock. That is your right. You can  disable your port if
you want to cut off your nose to spite your face. Shutterstock is so huge
they don't care. They won't notice you left.
It's obvious to me that SS has decided to stop accepting a lot of images
because their memory banks are bulging already. So they have become
a lot more picky. Good for them!
It has forced me to become a lot more picky in my uploads as well.
So, the choice is yours. Keep fighting and uploading and collecting money or
quit and lose. Your choice.
I'm going to leave this thread because it way too negative with a lot of loser attitude.
I'm going to find a positive thread, one with ideas on selling images, on increasing income
and on having fun. Know of any? Maybe I should start one.

I have to completely disagree on this point.

If, for example, a batch of 30 photos is completely rejected because of focus and a few days later all the images are approved, then something is wrong. And not with the images, but with the review itself.
I don't see any learning effect there either. Something has changed in the last months and Shutterstock leaves us in the dark here.

I have the impression that batches with one or two less perfect images are then completely rejected. Just an idea.

This whole thread is nothing but a whine full of negative thinking.
I have never bought into the "the going is tough, let's quit and run" mentality.
Yeah, SS now hands out a lot of rejections for focus, noise and similars.
You can whine and cry about it and accomplish nothing, or you can use
those rejections as a learning experience.
You can quit Shutterstock. That is your right. You can  disable your port if
you want to cut off your nose to spite your face. Shutterstock is so huge
they don't care. They won't notice you left.
It's obvious to me that SS has decided to stop accepting a lot of images
because their memory banks are bulging already. So they have become
a lot more picky. Good for them!
It has forced me to become a lot more picky in my uploads as well.
So, the choice is yours. Keep fighting and uploading and collecting money or
quit and lose. Your choice.
I'm going to leave this thread because it way too negative with a lot of loser attitude.
I'm going to find a positive thread, one with ideas on selling images, on increasing income
and on having fun. Know of any? Maybe I should start one.

I don't know if you have to look at all of that as a negative.

For me personally, the shutterstock development is negative - admittedly. The trend is also negative at 123rf and at dreamstime.

At Adobe the numbers are stable - to say something positive. The same goes for istock. And that's why I personally focus on that. That's why I don't accept the loser attitude. The bottom line is that I'm still happy that money is coming in, even if it's less than it used to be.

The ideas on how to sell more images have already been discussed by Annie and Firn, for example. There have been a lot of suggestions, thoughts and tips from Annie. You can read them here:

https://www.microstockgroup.com/general-stock-discussion/this-month's-sales/100/

And from my point of view it is also positive that SVH now obviously does not want to delete the portfolio. That is a very positive result of this discussion from my point of view.

Quote from: Wilm on November 17, 2021, 05:54

The $0.10 is a symbolic value. Of course, there are also the double-digit downloads. But they also existed before the new revenue structure.

In my case, I have an average monthly loss of $63 in subscriptions, compared to the income when each sub brought in $0.38. That's a loss of $750 per year. I can't compensate these losses with the double-digit downloads, because they haven't become more than before. Therefore, RPD is declining for me.

I can certainly understand that contributors want to close their account because they are frustrated, perhaps also in combination with the difficult selection.
I personally would not do that. It would destroy years of work and you give up revenue. You can just let it expire, not invest any more work and take the money that still comes in.

Fact is: The poll results clearly show that shutterstock has lost the position 1. Adobe Stock is the market leader.

Wilm, I think the way you look at it also depends a bit on how long you've been at it and your frustration and that of others, is understandable and comprehensible.
But for me, when the revenue structure was changed, I was still in the old 25-cent level (which you probably don't remember anymore  ) and then moved to level 4, which was a significant improvement for me.
Roscoe summed it up nicely. As long as I can afford a nice vacation at the end of the year from my Shutterstock earnings, for example, there is no reason to stare only at the "symbolic" 10 cents.
That it was certainly easier and faster in the past to earn more money here is not to be denied. However, this viewpoint is of no use to a newbie like me in the here and now.
Maybe I will see the situation differently in 5 years.

Yes, Ralf, you are right. I did not know that or have not had it in memory.

Quote from: Zero Talent on November 17, 2021, 15:03

Quote from: CSImages on November 16, 2021, 15:10

Quote from: Unamas on November 16, 2021, 14:06

25 out of 25 editorials approved yesterday. 9 out of 10 commercial rejected today for focus. The funny part that only approved photo is the photo with focus issues from my point of view.

As for 10 cents. I have the great run with one photo. ~50 downloads in 1 months, and I earn whopping $8.79 !

At 10 cents an image, if you want to buy a 1000$ lens, you will have to sell 10000 images.. At 120 images a month, that's about 7 years.  Ouch !!

You seem to forget that it's not just 10 cents. I can bet that your RPD is at least twice that amount, probably more.
And you already spread your assets across at least one additional agency.

Redo your math and you will realize that you can afford to buy your lens faster than you think. 

@ 20 cents an image: sell 5,000 images @120 images a month = about 3.5 years 

Nope, because you only took SS into consideration.

After taking AS & Co into consideration, the time CSImages needs to buy that lens will probably fall well below 2 years 

And I'm almost certain that his SS RPD is more than $0.20 (btw, mine is $0.73 for images and $1.31 overall, year to date).

As I said, he should redo his math and come back with accurate numbers, not exaggerations.

Or, if he is only attempting to build a metaphor or play with our emotions, my advice is to refrain from using arithmetics. 

In a perfect world every rejection would be fair and square.
We don't live in a perfect world.
So, if you don't like what Shutterstock is doing, send them a message.
Close your account and quit.
That's fine.
Whining about these problems here on this forum accomplishes nothing.
You complainers never offer a solution except to cut and run.
Fine, cut and run. That's your choice and your right but please don't
bore me with the same old, same old complaints offering no solution.
Who needs that?

I'm happy to repeat it again.

The OP will obviously not delete the account, but has decided to leave the pictures online. I thought that would have become obvious. And I personally feel that is a good solution.

And for potential other solutions, I had posted a link. There are interesting thoughts to read about copy space, backgrounds behind the main subjects, image size and resolution. So to solutions.

Also the old shutterstock forum was a huge resource full of tips, thoughts, suggestions and ideas on how to make better images and get more sales. All this information is now unfortunately lost forever.

You didn't miss the forum, as you write yourself.
On the contrary. From your point of view, as you write, it was worthless and it was foreseeable from your point of view that it would disappear

What do you expect from a forum? That it exclusively blows your horn?

Also now I repeat myself gladly once again. The OP made a good decision from my subjective and personal point of view, which came about because it was discussed in this forum. Is that not a positive thing?

I disabled and deleted my port at SS more than a year ago. I don't contribute videos to Istock, although I am still image exclusive with them as I earn a few thousand dollars every month with them. Since I left SS my video sales at Adobe and Pond5 have doubled. So fine with me. I rather bet on raising agencies that are more friendly to contributors than sinking ships, but every contributor should know exactly how to treat their time.

Yes I am "still "a stock pro although at the pace everything is going don't know for how long. I can perfectly understand those that like photography would shoot anyway and are happy if they can buy a new camera and lens in the process, even  if once you take the time spent and money to create the images they are at a loss.

In my case I have to pay equipment, taxes, social security and I live in an expensive European country. So I have to evaluate very carefully where my effort and future goes. I cannot produce at a loss or a 5$/hour scheme. I also don't want to support those companies that take advantage from their contributors and race to the situation I just was describing, and in the process destroy those that are more fair to their contributors.

This is the reason why I left SS , why I don't contribute to Istock video, why I don't support many other penny chasers. I concentrate on the few that still respect somehow contributors. That is Arcangel, P5, Adobe, Envato market not elements, Artgrid ( still on the fence on that it will depend on this year sales) Alamy (dont contribute for many years but I still have my portfolio with them RM) .... The market of all of those might be not enough to sustain me in the future. Then I will make something else. If the time arrives my relation with creative stock will be gone not even from an amateur point of view.

The reason is that I truly think that many amateurs are creatively taken down once they collaborate with stock agencies, they begin to chase pennies and create boring images for a few dollars when they could grow their passion to truly flourish. Pros don't have the luxury to create what they want as they have to take food on the table every month and the creative stock market is what it is: 99% boring, bland images. So when I leave this industry : no more smiling multicultural groups, no more "conceptual" still life that have to sell a product, no cute animals, no the 1000 times green meadow with a fake composite sky. All this ultra IMHPW bad content will be gone forever 

A few years ago, many people left Istock because they started paying much lower. Was called an anti-social company.
Lately I've been hearing some more positive things about Istock. But most mention IS as third after SS and AS
Some also talk about Alamy, while I haven't been enthusiastic about that lately.
I also see a difference between people who make videos and people who only upload photos and between people who work professionally and the amateurs like me,
Doug Jensen for example, made a lot of money on Shutterstock with his videos. But he is a professional with very good videos of Musk, rockets taking off, forest fires in the Amazon etc.
If you earn that much I assume you are also a professinal.
I think everyone should decide what to do based on their own situation.

I still find istock brings in the most money then Shutterstock, followed by Adobe. I just look at the end of month earnings not individual sale values. You will still get loads of 10 cent sales on Shutterstock at Level 6.
Don't see the point of stopping to upload to any agency myself as I use Microstock Plus uploader, my weekly uploading takes 20mins whether I upload to one agency or 50 agencies. Never create new keywords etc as just copy paste from previous photos.

I still find istock brings in the most money then Shutterstock, followed by Adobe. I just look at the end of month earnings not individual sale values. You will still get loads of 10 cent sales on Shutterstock at Level 6.
Don't see the point of stopping to upload to any agency myself as I use Microstock Plus uploader, my weekly uploading takes 20mins whether I upload to one agency or 50 agencies. Never create new keywords etc as just copy paste from previous photos.

How do you do that with the order of the keywords at Adobe Stock, which is very important there? And how does it work with the Microstock Plus Uploader at istock, where you have to correct half of all keywords?

And last question: How do you do the categories with this software?

And what it costs, I would be interested as well as Pete.

If you do what you like and don't change that habit to make a few pennies more that is great. It is like a Flickr but with revenue attached. From that point of view I think nearly any half serious stock agency is valid. At the end the images would be on your computer and not generating anything. I also understand those that give them for free. It's their choice and if they are that generous kudos to them. What is not logical is to work for air. Nobody can pay their rents with badges, low revenues,....

I guess there are still some pro players at SS because:
1- They have huge portfolios and a very tight and streamlined production system
2- They live in countries with much lower costs of living. I live close in a big city in Europe where a lot of advertising shooting is going on. I have rented lofts at a minimum of 700$ day plus, assistant plus models. Things get really expensive fast and at 0.1$ a pop with ocassional 50-100$ sale you don't get very far if you want to recoup your costs and make a profit .
3- They produce content like illustration 3D motion graphics where costs are much much lower than with photography

As I am in neither of this groups I have to carefully evaluate where I put my work

Cheers.

Quote from: thijsdegraaf on November 20, 2021, 03:27

Yes that's the difference.
My situation is very different. I pay more attention to sharpness than before I uploaded to Shutterstock. In that respect, I've gotten better thanks to Shuttertock.
Now a retired teacher, before that worked as a technical draftsman in construction. My hobby is macro, determining insects. I now earn something from that and I also find it more fun to photograph other things. But I'm not going to buy equipment for stock, which I should do to sell more. I probably wouldn't recoup the money I spend, because I'm not that good a photographer either. I fear that then my pleasure would disappear.
I also live in an expensive country (the Netherlands). Our pension hasn't gone up for years, but we can still make a decent living if we don't do crazy things. So I keep uploading to SS, AS and Alamy.
But if I were to work for a company like SS for my profession, I would very quickly look for another company.

You are absolutely right.