MicrostockGroup
Agency Based Discussion => Shutterstock.com => Topic started by: Harvepino on January 22, 2016, 16:38
-
This just came in:
Dear xxx,
At Shutterstock, one of our most important goals is to drive our contributor’s success by continuously delivering new earnings opportunities to you, our partners. Our enhanced license provides a great opportunity to license your content at a higher price point. Over the past year, we have been testing ways to better communicate the value of this premium license to our customers.
We have determined that a fixed rate payment for enhanced licences limits our ability to continually drive more downloads. Therefore, effective January 25th 2016 the enhanced license payout will move from a fixed rate of $28 to a tiered percentage model, similar to our custom image license. To help simplify the earnings schedule, your enhanced license payout will now be determined by your earnings tier.
We are your partners and our job is to work tirelessly to serve you and grow our marketplace together.
Paul Brennan
VP, Content Operations
-
"We are your partners and our job is to work tirelessly to serve you and grow our marketplace together. "
He got that wrong he meant to say "We are your masters and our job is to tirelessly screw you over until you bleed to do the absolute minimum for contributors and disregard your place in our world" ;D
-
Yes, I got that as well.
And I wonder what it means?
basically instead of 28 for every El, the make it income dependable. So you can earn more or less dependant on your earnings tier.
Where 38 = 28 I suppose, the low earners being cut.
But I dont know, it could be opposite.
-
Paycut? :-\
-
"To help simplify the earnings schedule"
The current scheme cannot be more simple: $28 for each Enhanced License. Period
-
http://submit.shutterstock.com/payouts (http://submit.shutterstock.com/payouts)
This is the current schedule right now. I assume they'll be updating it with tier payout for EL images in a few days. I doubt this will affect veterans in any way...they'll still get $28 per EL. Its the newbies who are going to take a hit this time around...maybe something like $28, $26, $23, $19.
Won't be much of a problem for me since I'm only going to lose a couple dollars per EL, until probably June when I should reach the top tier.
-
So SS will make a lot more under this setup, so yes, it's a paycut.
The three EL plans published are 2 for $199, 5 for $449 and 25 for $1,699
That works out to $99.50, $89.80 or $67.96 each for the buyer
At 30%, what I will now make is $29.85, $26.94 or $20.38
At the lowest tier, 20%, they will pay out $19.90, $17.98 or $13.59
If there are custom deals for even lower prices, then the paycut just gets bigger
BTW, I don't yet have this e-mail from them...
-
They could sell EL's for much higher prices. I don't think its hard to reach the top tier with SS, unlike some other sites that make it almost impossible.
-
[url]http://submit.shutterstock.com/payouts[/url] ([url]http://submit.shutterstock.com/payouts[/url])
This is the current schedule right now. I assume they'll be updating it with tier payout for EL images in a few days. I doubt this will affect veterans in any way...they'll still get $28 per EL. Its the newbies who are going to take a hit this time around...maybe something like $28, $26, $23, $19.
Won't be much of a problem for me since I'm only going to lose a couple dollars per EL, until probably June when I should reach the top tier.
Yes the newbies who SS just allowed to flood in by lowering the acceptance threshold from 7/10 images to 1/10 images
I am sick of these lies and corporate BS buttered up to make it sound like they are doing us a favor >:(
-
This probably means that they will be offering discounts on ELs to high-volume customers, and will pay a percentage of what they receive, not fixed $28. Which means we'll most likely see a lot of ELs for less than that. Hopefully, the volume will make up for the difference...
-
[url]http://submit.shutterstock.com/payouts[/url] ([url]http://submit.shutterstock.com/payouts[/url])
This is the current schedule right now. I assume they'll be updating it with tier payout for EL images in a few days. I doubt this will affect veterans in any way...they'll still get $28 per EL. Its the newbies who are going to take a hit this time around...maybe something like $28, $26, $23, $19.
Won't be much of a problem for me since I'm only going to lose a couple dollars per EL, until probably June when I should reach the top tier.
They are now saying they will update that page on Monday.
Cart Horse
-
I am sick of these lies and corporate BS
lets wait for numbers, who knows ;D
-
http://forums.submit.shutterstock.com/topic/87696-enhanced-license-change/ (http://forums.submit.shutterstock.com/topic/87696-enhanced-license-change/)
I posted a note saying that they should at least be blunt that this is a paycut.
It used to be that SS had never cut our royalties, but no more
-
>:(
We need to flood them with complaints. Even though I'm in that $3,000-$10,000 tier, I'm still complaining. I just sent mine. Here's how you can send your complaint.
http://submit.shutterstock.com/contact/ (http://submit.shutterstock.com/contact/)
I chose the "Other" category in the menu
-
...
We are your partners and our job is to work tirelessly to serve you and grow our marketplace together.
Paul Brennan
VP, Content Operations
He forgot some smileys >:D >:D >:D
-
QUICK, EVERYONE DELETE YOUR PORTFOLIO!
THIS IS THE END!
IT'S OVER!
YOU'LL NEVER MAKE MONEY AT MICROSTOCK AGAIN!
RUN FOR THE EXITS!
*sarcastic panic off*
Maybe there will actually be more ELs now. Who can tell really?
Anyone who thinks this is a huge affront to contributors can disable ELs for their port. Or just delete everything and throw your hands up in the air while posting repeatedly in the "doom and Gloom" thread.
-
Well I am not concerned about the $ as I dont sell them too often. What worries me is the communication corporate BS approach and not respecting the principles that SS had towards contributors. Which is kind of sad.
-
first we have the "watermark gate"....then we had the 10 pictures approval..now this.... not really good signs....For me, there are more files offer, than real files download ...so that's why those changes... shursock is sinking maybe....
-
Normaly the bad news came in autum now the agencies try to screw us at new year. :o
-
If it doesn't make you feel good, it's probably not good news.
-
What a load of corporate speak. This can only spell trouble, especially for the lower tiers.
-
Whether it is good news or bad (and for myself, I think betting on the latter would make a far better return on cash than how my slim earnings might be affected) this is an entirely useless email.
Individually, I understand the meaning of every word in the email. But putting them together in that order they do not add up to anything useful at all.
-
There is certainly an element of the "chocolate ration increasing from 20 to 15 grams" about the message but still inclined reserve judgement until I see the actual rates.
-
And since then did they introduce an On Demand Image (small/medium) price? I always thought it's one price on all sizes at SS (like the one currently also on payment schedule, at 1.88 USD for lower tier).
Otherwise, the news on EL are definitely bad for most of us and perfectly clear to explain (i.e. their recent open of the floodgate due to new acceptance policy of 1/10). I guess they realized they are loosing the market share quickly and have to stabilize and/or catch up with other agencies. In fact, although this month (January) is usually a slow one due to holidays, in my case it's just terrible for most agencies; however, what is even more amazing is that FT has earned me so far this month more than SS, what has never happened to me before.
-
I am sick of these lies and corporate BS
The only truth in that whole email is "effective January 25th 2016 the enhanced license payout will move from a fixed rate of $28 to a tiered percentage model, similar to our custom image license."
Lying has become a habit for these cooperate people.
-
And since then did they introduce an On Demand Image (small/medium) price? I always thought it's one price on all sizes at SS (like the one currently also on payment schedule, at 1.88 USD for lower tier).
Since about 2009, IIRC.
-
Just got my e-mail and checked the forum to see if there were any post. Yup. And, looks like we're pretty much in agreement. We can wait and see how it works out...but it does not look good for us.
At least on SS.
However. I want to add to Beketoff's comment. I've been seeing FT increase and then match SS this year. As of today (2/3 through the month) my sales on FT are 75% higher than SS.
Yes, 75%.
And every month it has been increasing regularly.
The new SS schedule doesn't worry me too much, because I now hardly ever, ever see an EL from SS anymore.
We should watch FT. The worm may have turned.
-
what is even more amazing is that FT has earned me so far this month more than SS, what has never happened to me before.
That's exactly what I'm seeing too. Very happy with FT the last few months. Not so sure about SS.
-
Let's wait for the numbers. It will most likely affect the lower tier contributors, but it could also increase EL downloads. It may even offer a small increase for upper tier contributors at the expense of the lower tier contributors.
It could be good news for some, bad news for some and meh news for others.
-
I honestly don't see the point of announcing such a big change, and then not giving the details immediately. Like it's some no-name company with two and a half employees.
Unless they want to see how the community reacts to adjust the percentages depending on the reaction. Shutterstock does a lot of A/B testing, trying out different things, so it's unlikely, but also I wouldn't be surprised.
In any case, if the change is negative for me (top tier), I will deactivate enhanced licences (it's very easy to do - account settings - Enhanced License -> Opt Out)
-
It will most likely affect the lower tier contributors, but it could also increase EL downloads. It may even offer a small increase for upper tier contributors at the expense of the lower tier contributors.
Taking away money from contributors will not increase EL downloads. And yes, if they don't discount the price, it is a tiny increase for the top in one case and less in all other cases.
-
... but it could also increase EL downloads. ...
How does cutting royalties induce buyers to purchase more?
I think the likely next step is to cut the prices of ELs which potentially might increase the volume. They already added rights to the basic license (500K print run versus 250K, removing the cap on e-mail and e-book uses), which cut ELs (or certainly seemed to; SS would know but probably won't say).
-
Rookies got to pay their dues so that OGs get paid better, just like in any business.
-
Now there's a hypothesis as to why SS needs the extra money - they've agreed to take on the 36th floor of the Empire State Building (25,000 sq feet) in 2016!
http://biz.yahoo.com/e/160113/sstk8-k.html (http://biz.yahoo.com/e/160113/sstk8-k.html)
-
Now there's a hypothesis as to why SS needs the extra money - they've agreed to take on the 36th floor of the Empire State Building (25,000 sq feet) in 2016!
[url]http://biz.yahoo.com/e/160113/sstk8-k.html[/url] ([url]http://biz.yahoo.com/e/160113/sstk8-k.html[/url])
Good more room for massage tables, pingpong tables, and a slide for the pool
-
I honestly don't see the point of announcing such a big change, and then not giving the details immediately. Like it's some no-name company with two and a half employees.
Unless they want to see how the community reacts to adjust the percentages depending on the reaction. Shutterstock does a lot of A/B testing, trying out different things, so it's unlikely, but also I wouldn't be surprised.
In any case, if the change is negative for me (top tier), I will deactivate enhanced licences (it's very easy to do - account settings - Enhanced License -> Opt Out)
This is the most appropriate and logical response, for those dissaproving the deal.
Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk
-
However. I want to add to Beketoff's comment. I've been seeing FT increase and then match SS this year. As of today (2/3 through the month) my sales on FT are 75% higher than SS.
Yes, 75%.
Wow! Do you have the same port in both agencies? I'm reporting much better sales on FT, but it is still only 20-25% of my SS income and I have the same portfolio of 5000 on both. How come there is such huge difference? :o
-
i did not see a decline in ELs after the license adjustment to 500k. us 38centers might see the same earnings for EL after 25 jan but this change will make them more money for ELs purchased from lower level contribs. which kind of relates to lowering acceptance rules. increasing images at a lower payout level etc. benefits them
-
Now there's a hypothesis as to why SS needs the extra money - they've agreed to take on the 36th floor of the Empire State Building (25,000 sq feet) in 2016!
[url]http://biz.yahoo.com/e/160113/sstk8-k.html[/url] ([url]http://biz.yahoo.com/e/160113/sstk8-k.html[/url])
Jon posted this and a link to a youtube vid not long ago on FB
"Jon Oringer
January 11 at 10:27am · New York, NY ·
Financial incentives only work well for mechanical non-cognitive tasks....?"
Drive: The surprising truth about what motivates us
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6XAPnuFjJc (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6XAPnuFjJc)
-
That's a very interesting presentation. I was sort of joking about funding expansion by swiping royalties, but how does the video tie in with that? I'm missing the connection
-
^ Making stock is a straightforward repetitive task, so we need more money to be more productive! ;D Great video btw.
-
I'm afraid the next SS step will be to push low tier contributors up in the search!
-
The problem with Fotolia is that they don't accept Editorial images. And their review team is a mess!!!
-
This probably means that they will be offering discounts on ELs to high-volume customers, and will pay a percentage of what they receive, not fixed $28. Which means we'll most likely see a lot of ELs for less than that. Hopefully, the volume will make up for the difference...
Agree. The message is f**cked though - better to release the pay scale for contributors AND the details of the package for buyers within the communication so we can make informed decisions.
Anyway, If ELs pick up I'll be placated - otherwise this is bean counters moving numbers from one column to another - One for you, two for me. Two for you, three for me.
-
I'm afraid the next SS step will be to push low tier contributors up in the search!
I think they already have...though I guess it could get worse!
Happy days......!!!!
-
I honestly don't see the point of announcing such a big change, and then not giving the details immediately. Like it's some no-name company with two and a half employees.
Unless they want to see how the community reacts to adjust the percentages depending on the reaction. Shutterstock does a lot of A/B testing, trying out different things, so it's unlikely, but also I wouldn't be surprised.
In any case, if the change is negative for me (top tier), I will deactivate enhanced licences (it's very easy to do - account settings - Enhanced License -> Opt Out)
Maybe give the bad news on Friday and give us something more positive on Monday to make it seem better than it really is? An old trick and one I hoped SS wouldn't use on us but I can't think of any other reason not to give us the full details in one go.
-
I'm afraid the next SS step will be to push low tier contributors up in the search!
Yep.
-
Are we waiting for more info? I thought the announcement covered it. We will be getting the percentages outlined in the pay-scale http://submit.shutterstock.com/payouts (http://submit.shutterstock.com/payouts) under "custom image" resulting in an across the board pay cut for everyone.
Even top tier you only get slightly more in the best possible scenario and much less for the vast majority of EL sales.
It's a shame they can't call it what it is, a massive pay cut.
-
Are we waiting for more info? I thought the announcement covered it. We will be getting the percentages outlined in the pay-scale [url]http://submit.shutterstock.com/payouts[/url] ([url]http://submit.shutterstock.com/payouts[/url]) under "custom image" resulting in an across the board pay cut for everyone.
Even top tier you only get slightly more in the best possible scenario and much less for the vast majority of EL sales.
It's a shame they can't call it what it is, a massive pay cut.
I don't think they've posted the rates yet. That link is the "current"or old rates. That's the missing link.
-
Are we waiting for more info? I thought the announcement covered it. We will be getting the percentages outlined in the pay-scale [url]http://submit.shutterstock.com/payouts[/url] ([url]http://submit.shutterstock.com/payouts[/url]) under "custom image" resulting in an across the board pay cut for everyone.
Even top tier you only get slightly more in the best possible scenario and much less for the vast majority of EL sales.
It's a shame they can't call it what it is, a massive pay cut.
I don't think they've posted the rates yet. That link is the "current"or old rates. That's the missing link.
Thanks, I misread it, it said similar to rather than the same as the custom license tiers
-
Rookies got to pay their dues so that OGs get paid better, just like in any business.
Seems like the manipulation worked on you, if that is your take on this...We will all get paid less, even the top tier contributors.
-
The problem with Fotolia is that they don't accept Editorial images. And their review team is a mess!!!
As opposed to SS' impartial consistency and accuracy in reviewing?
-
A breathtaking piece of corporate gobbledy-gook. I don't think we'll ever really know what it meant. Actually it didn't "mean" anything - other than to announce that we wouldn't be getting $28 anymore, but instead some number derrived from a formula which apparently will not be disclosed.
We don't get 'royalties' anymore, in the sense of a defined payment on a disclosed sale price. The payouts we receive are, from our point of view, arbitrary. We don't know what a customer actually paid for a specific download and, in fact, many customers don't know either because they're on subscription plans and the 'price' of individual images could only be calculated long after the fact, because it's based on how many they actually downloaded, what discounts applied, and probably other factors.
-
For the last two year I am making less and less money with SS. Soon they are not important to me, because I make more with others!
-
That's a very interesting presentation. I was sort of joking about funding expansion by swiping royalties, but how does the video tie in with that? I'm missing the connection
I could see that you were being flipant. The video was shared in the same vein of grey, grains of truth in each.
-
I'm afraid the next SS step will be to push low tier contributors up in the search!
They have already done this with other sales and the tiered EL's will further increase profit.
-
Are we waiting for more info? I thought the announcement covered it. We will be getting the percentages outlined in the pay-scale [url]http://submit.shutterstock.com/payouts[/url] ([url]http://submit.shutterstock.com/payouts[/url]) under "custom image" resulting in an across the board pay cut for everyone.
Even top tier you only get slightly more in the best possible scenario and much less for the vast majority of EL sales.
It's a shame they can't call it what it is, a massive pay cut.
I don't think they've posted the rates yet. That link is the "current"or old rates. That's the missing link.
They have posted them, but not in the chart, just in the support page on earnings
http://support.shutterstock.com/contributor/articles/kbat02/000006640?l=en_US&fs=Search&pn=1 (http://support.shutterstock.com/contributor/articles/kbat02/000006640?l=en_US&fs=Search&pn=1)
If you look at that page a week ago (wayback machine) you can see what it used to say
http://web.archive.org/web/20150905185808/http://support.shutterstock.com/contributor/articles/kbat02/000006640?l=en_US&fs=Search&pn=1 (http://web.archive.org/web/20150905185808/http://support.shutterstock.com/contributor/articles/kbat02/000006640?l=en_US&fs=Search&pn=1)
-
So same as the custom license tiers and a massive cut across the board. So is this last year's shafting come late or this year's come early? Could we see two in one year? I am at the edge of my seat.
-
The geniuses at Istock will be flattered to see that SS has followed their example:
1. Make detrimental-to-suppliers announcement on a Friday afternoon.
2. Supply NO notice period. As I recall, SS always gave at least 30 days notice and this comes into effect Monday.
-
Hmmm....
"Jon Oringer
January 11 at 10:27am · New York, NY ·
Financial incentives only work well for mechanical non-cognitive tasks....?"
What about Jon's own financial incentives through stocks? Does more money make him a worse performer than he was???
::) ;D
Now there's a hypothesis as to why SS needs the extra money - they've agreed to take on the 36th floor of the Empire State Building (25,000 sq feet) in 2016!
[url]http://biz.yahoo.com/e/160113/sstk8-k.html[/url] ([url]http://biz.yahoo.com/e/160113/sstk8-k.html[/url])
Jon posted this and a link to a youtube vid not long ago on FB
"Jon Oringer
January 11 at 10:27am · New York, NY ·
Financial incentives only work well for mechanical non-cognitive tasks....?"
Drive: The surprising truth about what motivates us
[url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6XAPnuFjJc[/url] ([url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6XAPnuFjJc[/url])
-
However. I want to add to Beketoff's comment. I've been seeing FT increase and then match SS this year. As of today (2/3 through the month) my sales on FT are 75% higher than SS.
Yes, 75%.
Wow! Do you have the same port in both agencies? I'm reporting much better sales on FT, but it is still only 20-25% of my SS income and I have the same portfolio of 5000 on both. How come there is such huge difference? :o
wait a little while..
we hate FL a while back with DPC
now they seem to be the new darling 8)
only thing i know is that we don't want this announcement to be the dejavu
of istock and lobo.
if so, our goose is cooked
-
i did not see a decline in ELs after the license adjustment to 500k. us 38centers might see the same earnings for EL after 25 jan but this change will make them more money for ELs purchased from lower level contribs. which kind of relates to lowering acceptance rules. increasing images at a lower payout level etc. benefits them
My FT portfolio is only slightly bigger than at SS (since FT accepts way much more than SS does), but small overall as I started around one year ago (~500 photos on FT). However, FT sales have been accelerating since the beginning of January, have equaled SS's sales in mid-January and exceeded the SS sales by now. Not only sales on FT are more frequent than the ones at SS, they bring considerably higher RPD. Could be a one-time event, or could be a turnaround for FT and demise of SS (in the mid- to long-term), who knows.
-
Hmmm....
"Jon Oringer
January 11 at 10:27am · New York, NY ·
Financial incentives only work well for mechanical non-cognitive tasks....?"
Artists want to be fairly compensated for their work -- we're not looking for financial incentives to spur us on to produce more and better work. I think we all try to do that even at the pittance we get paid.
-
"Jon Oringer
January 11 at 10:27am · New York, NY ·
Financial incentives only work well for mechanical non-cognitive tasks....?"
Yeah, well, it's hardly news: we're Artistes: "money isn't what makes us happy".
::)
C'mon SS, you want to diss contributors? At least think up your own shtick, don't plagiarise.
(As some people apparently haven't realised, I'll labour the point that the above was the infamous quote from KKT, justifying Getty's hammering of iS contributors.)
-
The geniuses at Istock will be flattered to see that SS has followed their example:
1. Make detrimental-to-suppliers announcement on a Friday afternoon.
2. Supply NO notice period. As I recall, SS always gave at least 30 days notice and this comes into effect Monday.
Come on SS! You were my last hope for fare business on microstock market.
Don't kill my last hope!!! >:(
-
"Jon Oringer
January 11 at 10:27am · New York, NY ·
Financial incentives only work well for mechanical non-cognitive tasks....?"
Yeah, well, it's hardly news: we're Artistes: money isn't what makes us happy.
::)
C'mon SS, you want to diss contributors? At least think up your own scams, don't plagiarise.
yes, of course not... we are , like Zappa says, not in it for the money.
oh, just the other day i was helping my grand child to find some wise saying of different cultures.
imagine my red face when she pointed out to me an ancient chinese saying,
and asked me why "anyone would want to pay peanuts to monkeys"..
"when you pay peanuts you attract monkeys". :'(
-
The geniuses at Istock will be flattered to see that SS has followed their example:
1. Make detrimental-to-suppliers announcement on a Friday afternoon.
2. Supply NO notice period. As I recall, SS always gave at least 30 days notice and this comes into effect Monday.
Come on SS! You were my last hope for fare business on microstock market.
Don't kill my last hope!!! >:(
I think the last hope went years ago when we didn't do enough to deter sites from cutting commissions. The majority of contributors that weren't prepared to make a stand have left us in this situation. Sites can keep cutting the amount they pay us, knowing it will just increase their profits.
-
etudiante_rapide: great and exact quotes
-
"Jon Oringer
January 11 at 10:27am · New York, NY ·
Financial incentives only work well for mechanical non-cognitive tasks....?"
Yeah, well, it's hardly news: we're Artistes: "money isn't what makes us happy".
::)
C'mon SS, you want to diss contributors? At least think up your own shtick, don't plagiarise.
The video is totally irrelevant to us. It is about employees being given artificial financial incentives for tasks. When you are in our business your sales are a direct indicator of how good you are at your job. We are self employed
-
"Jon Oringer
January 11 at 10:27am · New York, NY ·
Financial incentives only work well for mechanical non-cognitive tasks....?"
Yeah, well, it's hardly news: we're Artistes: "money isn't what makes us happy".
::)
C'mon SS, you want to diss contributors? At least think up your own shtick, don't plagiarise.
The video is totally irrelevant to us. It is about employees being given artificial financial incentives for tasks. When you are in our business your sales are a direct indicator of how good you are at your job. We are self employed
It is relevant when it comes to the army of hobbyists ready to work for free only to see their name mentioned on a magazine or their work liked on social media. SS acknowledged their potential, constantly making efforts to bring them on board.
-
Money, so they say
Is the root of all evil today
But if you ask for a pay rise it's no surprise
That they're giving none away
;D
In my previous life it always amused me how people paid far than me would constantly try and argue that money wasn't a motivator.
-
i did not see a decline in ELs after the license adjustment to 500k. us 38centers might see the same earnings for EL after 25 jan but this change will make them more money for ELs purchased from lower level contribs. which kind of relates to lowering acceptance rules. increasing images at a lower payout level etc. benefits them
My FT portfolio is only slightly bigger than at SS (since FT accepts way much more than SS does), but small overall as I started around one year ago (~500 photos on FT). However, FT sales have been accelerating since the beginning of January, have equaled SS's sales in mid-January and exceeded the SS sales by now. Not only sales on FT are more frequent than the ones at SS, they bring considerably higher RPD. Could be a one-time event, or could be a turnaround for FT and demise of SS (in the mid- to long-term), who knows.
I too have about 500 images, and my experiences with SS and FT mirror this exactly. In fact at the moment, FT $ALES this month are almost twice my FT sales; a trend that has been increasing over the year.
-
I really don't pay attention to this stuff and maybe I should.
Someone dumb it down for me please.
I get a lot of these 38 cent downloads (I think shutterstock should mint a 38 cent coin) and occasionally I get $2+ sales on others (possibly a guy paying for an image he found via a google search?) and still others from people who want to pay a lot of money for uses I never really looked into. I just say "Hey, cool". I think there's a lot of guys like me which is why the micros can do this $$$$.
How does this impact little me? Do I still get a monthly payout?
-
If it doesn't make you feel good, it's probably not good news.
Maybe it sounds simplistic but I totally agree.
Veer didn't work good: Corbis and Veer sold.
Yaymicro sucked: they totally changed.
mmmmh...
-
Hi
The figures I see on SS for Enhanced licences currently are (UK), and contributor cut are...
EL
2 Pack Ł119 (20%=Ł23.80, 25%=Ł29.75, 30%=Ł35.70)
5 Pack Ł269 (20%=Ł53.80, 25%=Ł67.20, 30%=Ł80.70)
25 Pack Ł1019 (20%=Ł203.8, 25%=Ł254.75, 30%=Ł305.70)
I don't know how this works (never checked) in terms of pack numbers, if I have one image in a '2 pack' sale, do I get half of Ł119?
I don't know if those EL costs are before or after any change though, and then there's the exchange rate...
-
Hi
The figures I see on SS for Enhanced licences currently are (UK), and contributor cut are...
EL
2 Pack Ł119 (20%=Ł23.80, 25%=Ł29.75, 30%=Ł35.70)
5 Pack Ł269 (20%=Ł53.80, 25%=Ł67.20, 30%=Ł80.70)
25 Pack Ł1019 (20%=Ł203.8, 25%=Ł254.75, 30%=Ł305.70)
I don't know how this works (never checked) in terms of pack numbers, if I have one image in a '2 pack' sale, do I get half of Ł119?
I don't know if those EL costs are before or after any change though, and then there's the exchange rate...
? You seem to be calculating what the percentages are of the total paid for an image pack. You need to divide the figures by the number of images in the pack for each EL sale.
So for 25 pack from your figures at 20% you will be getting (1019/25)*.2=Ł8.15 per EL
-
Hi
The figures I see on SS for Enhanced licences currently are (UK), and contributor cut are...
EL
2 Pack Ł119 (20%=Ł23.80, 25%=Ł29.75, 30%=Ł35.70)
5 Pack Ł269 (20%=Ł53.80, 25%=Ł67.20, 30%=Ł80.70)
25 Pack Ł1019 (20%=Ł203.8, 25%=Ł254.75, 30%=Ł305.70)
I don't know how this works (never checked) in terms of pack numbers, if I have one image in a '2 pack' sale, do I get half of Ł119?
I don't know if those EL costs are before or after any change though, and then there's the exchange rate...
? You seem to be calculating what the percentages are of the total paid for an image pack. You need to divide the figures by the number of images in the pack for each EL sale.
So for 25 pack from your figures at 20% you will be getting (1019/25)*.2=Ł8.15 per EL
Hi
Yes I thought that might be the case, how did it work before, we got $28 for each image in an EL pack?
-
We got a flat 28 dollars for any EL sale
-
So is this right, 30%? On left are the prices I see in Canada.
2 = $199 U.S. 30% x 100 = $30
5 = $$449 U.S. 30% x 89.8 = $26.94
25 = $1699 U.S. 30% x 67.96 = $20.39
Uhm.... I always wondered why they force customers into buying more than one.
-
"Jon Oringer
January 11 at 10:27am · New York, NY ·
Financial incentives only work well for mechanical non-cognitive tasks....?"
Yeah, well, it's hardly news: we're Artistes: "money isn't what makes us happy".
::)
C'mon SS, you want to diss contributors? At least think up your own shtick, don't plagiarise.
(As some people apparently haven't realised, I'll labour the point that the above was the infamous quote from KKT, justifying Getty's hammering of iS contributors.)
Exactly
It does indicate the mindset we are dealing with, they feel free and entitled to take full advantage
-
Well it increases the number of downloads a person makes. They may feel that getting 3 files at cheaper makes more sense and hence will download files that they might have otherwise avoided
-
from pixart:
2 = $199 U.S. 30% x 100 = $30
5 = $$449 U.S. 30% x 89.8 = $26.94
25 = $1699 U.S. 30% x 67.96 = $20.39
if we knew what packages were bought we could calculate the impact for us and SS
considering the above:
2 ELs pay increase of 7%
5 ELs pay decrease of 3.8%
25 ELs pay decrease of 27.2%
sigh, lets hope they sold 2 EL pacakges the most, but considering they want to increase their profit, i am afraid we will see a lot of 20 dollar ELs now...
-
It is the second cut that SS made, the first was about refferals income.
-
theres been more cuts, they also cut the sods pricing and they increased sub pricing without sharing the profits and they increased standard licence print run
-
I have had 2 EL today, each $28 so no change yet. I am 30% tier.
-
It looks like SS has updated their earnings schedule.
http://submit.shutterstock.com/payouts (http://submit.shutterstock.com/payouts)
$0.38 - 30% of EL
$0.36 - 28% of EL
$0.33 - 25% of EL
$0.25 - 20% of EL
And it also looks like they dropped the price of EL to $89 from $99 for standard rates (or maybe it's been like this for a while), which means we'll see a small decrease. It's the newbies who will see the biggest decrease for EL. The new payout will probably be something like this:
$0.38 - $26.70 per EL
$0.36 - $24.92 per EL
$0.33 - $22.25 per EL
$0.25 - $17.80 per EL
-
its a disgrace
-
its a disgrace
It's one way to boost their profits. They allow more newbies in so they can take from the newbies. Without the price drop from $99 to $89, vets would have seen $29.7. Who knows, maybe the lower EL price will mean more EL downloads in the long run, which could even things out.
It's not a big concern for me since I rarely see EL downloads...a total of 5 since I started uploading early last year.
-
And it also looks like they dropped the price of EL to $89 from $99 for standard rates (or maybe it's been like this for a while)
I'm US based and I can still see the "old" rates (see attached). Can you mention your location?
I have had 2 EL today, each $28 so no change yet. I am 30% tier.
As you can see below these prices, ELs can be downloaded "within 1 year of purchase". Maybe your ELs are part of an already paid pack, only partially downloaded, and the old rate still applies. If this is the case, we might see some residual $28 ELs, for a while.
-
And it also looks like they dropped the price of EL to $89 from $99 for standard rates (or maybe it's been like this for a while)
I'm US based and I can still see the "old" rates (see attached). Can you mention your location?
I'm on the West Coast of the US and I still see the 2-99/5-449/25-1,699 pricing. Sometimes these things take time to move around to all the servers, but other than Canada, where are there $ that are close to the US numbers?
The only other thing I noticed was that in the new chart for payouts (https://submit.shutterstock.com/payouts), they have removed wording that used to be there saying we might get more than the "up to" number if the price was higher:
"Percentage is based on sale price received. Amount earned may be more if sale price received is more."
-
Why do "vets" consider they should get more than "newbies" anyway.........? Just curious don't want to start a war
-
no one said or insinuated that
-
no one said or insinuated that
Well Shutterstock and other sites seem to think so?
-
Why do "vets" consider they should get more than "newbies" anyway.........? Just curious don't want to start a war
Maybe because 'vets' are the ones who made their company successful ?
-
And it also looks like they dropped the price of EL to $89 from $99 for standard rates (or maybe it's been like this for a while)
I'm US based and I can still see the "old" rates (see attached). Can you mention your location?
I'm on the West Coast of the US and I still see the 2-99/5-449/25-1,699 pricing. Sometimes these things take time to move around to all the servers, but other than Canada, where are there $ that are close to the US numbers?
The only other thing I noticed was that in the new chart for payouts (https://submit.shutterstock.com/payouts), they have removed wording that used to be there saying we might get more than the "up to" number if the price was higher:
"Percentage is based on sale price received. Amount earned may be more if sale price received is more."
Huh, maybe they haven't changed at all then. My company have a subscription license, and when you download an image, you have the option to buy an EL for $89. It seems like a discount for sub downloaders. In that case, this is an upgrade for veterans. Let me revise the numbers then.
$0.38 - $29.70 per EL
$0.36 - $27.72 per EL
$0.33 - $24.75 per EL
$0.25 - $18.80 per EL
So this means it's raise for veterans and a cut for newbies which I originally theorized. Vets get $1.70 more per EL with with standard 2-pack EL pricing based on those numbers and the lowest tier get a paycut of nearly $9. Good news for some, bad news for others.
I'd like to add that the raise is only for 2-image EL pack ($199), but it'll be a lower number if they bought a 5-image or 25-image EL pack.
-
no one said or insinuated that
Well Shutterstock and other sites seem to think so?
thats not what you said, you said vets think they should earn more, you did not say agencies
-
...So this means it's raise for veterans and a cut for newbies...I'd like to add that the raise is only for 2-image EL pack ($199), but it'll be a lower number if they bought a 5-image or 25-image EL pack.
The only interesting (in a good way) thing to come out of this change is that we'll get to see who buys in quantity versus in a 2 pack. I'm guessing that a lot more people buy 5 packs, in which case it is a cut for everyone.
If they cut the price of ELs (which I have to believe they will given their hints about wanting to sell more) then it's less for everyone, but a bigger cut for newer contributors.
-
"Jon Oringer
January 11 at 10:27am · New York, NY ·
Financial incentives only work well for mechanical non-cognitive tasks....?"
Yeah, well, it's hardly news: we're Artistes: "money isn't what makes us happy".
::)
C'mon SS, you want to diss contributors? At least think up your own shtick, don't plagiarise.
The video is totally irrelevant to us. It is about employees being given artificial financial incentives for tasks. When you are in our business your sales are a direct indicator of how good you are at your job. We are self employed
It is relevant when it comes to the army of hobbyists ready to work for free only to see their name mentioned on a magazine or their work liked on social media. SS acknowledged their potential, constantly making efforts to bring them on board.
BINGO!!!!!!!! and a Fact.
-
...So this means it's raise for veterans and a cut for newbies...I'd like to add that the raise is only for 2-image EL pack ($199), but it'll be a lower number if they bought a 5-image or 25-image EL pack.
The only interesting (in a good way) thing to come out of this change is that we'll get to see who buys in quantity versus in a 2 pack. I'm guessing that a lot more people buy 5 packs, in which case it is a cut for everyone.
Yes, but 5-pack buyers could very well get offset by 2-pack EL buyers.
It's +$1.70 per image for 2-pack and -$1.06 per image for 5-pack. Say we get 2 EL downloads, one from a 2-pack and one from a 5-pack, you'd still get $0.64 extra, which means that in the end, when everything averages out, veteran $0.38 contributors will barely see a difference. It'll be interesting to see the buying behavior of EL buyers.
Obviously, lower tier contributors are the biggest losers in this deal. I just need to work my way out of the $0.36 tier and join the veterans.
-
no one said or insinuated that
Well Shutterstock and other sites seem to think so?
There's no extra money from having been around a long time, just from selling more. So some really good newcomers raced to the $10K sales mark much more quickly that old-timers like me (I'm contributor 249).
The only time being around a while got us any extra cash was when we were paid 23 cents a download on subscriptions versus 20 cents for everyone else - it was for putting up with the chaos while they introduced FTP and got all sorts of things working back in the beginning. As soon as everyone got a raise to 25 cents per subscription, that veterans "thank you" bonus went away.
-
EL we will get a % now not a flat rate. 30% for top level that most people are. As your lifetime earnings increase, the amount you earn per download increases, too. The new people who work for nothing will make it harder to get to where we are. While people don't like change and only see bad side, percentage is the business way to pay us, not fixed number.
Too many new people willing to work for low pay. Too many people willing to sell on terrible agency like DP or Veer for some pittance. Message to agencies is we will take any low pay and keep working for chicken feed and scraps.
I don't have hardly the ELs that I used to get. I read that over many times for people here. EL isn't what they used to be. Means I like the 30% as a raise, don't care about the change.
-
I just got my first EL under the new structure, I got $30.
-
I just got my first EL under the new structure, I got $30.
Did it show under SOD? I got a 30 dollar SOD (as well as some really good ones) today too.
-
I just got my first EL under the new structure, I got $30.
Did it show under SOD? I got a 30 dollar SOD (as well as some really good ones) today too.
That's good news for veterans so far. If there are more people buying 2-packs, the EL average could be higher for some people.
-
I just got my first EL under the new structure, I got $30.
Did it show under SOD? I got a 30 dollar SOD (as well as some really good ones) today too.
It showed up under EL, not SOD.
-
Otherwise, the news on EL are definitely bad for most of us and perfectly clear to explain (i.e. their recent open of the floodgate due to new acceptance policy of 1/10). I guess they realized they are loosing the market share quickly and have to stabilize and/or catch up with other agencies.
It seems to me that if they are losing market share, it makes more sense to fix their bogus review process than to do this or change the application to lower standards. But of course hiring people costs money so better to short change the contributors than hire/train more people to review.
-
Article by Lee Torrens (sorry if it was already posted)
http://www.microstockdiaries.com/shutterstock-cuts-royalties.html (http://www.microstockdiaries.com/shutterstock-cuts-royalties.html)
-
I just got my first EL under the new structure, I got $30.
Did you get $29.85 or $30? I ask because 30% of 99.50 ( the current price of the 2-pack in the US) is $29.85. Possibly if the purchase were made in another country, the price amounted to $100 when converted into USD, but nice round numbers on currency conversions suggest shenanigans with the exchange rate
-
I just got my first EL under the new structure, I got $30.
Did you get $29.85 or $30? I ask because 30% of 99.50 ( the current price of the 2-pack in the US) is $29.85. Possibly if the purchase were made in another country, the price amounted to $100 when converted into USD, but nice round numbers on currency conversions suggest shenanigans with the exchange rate
It was a $30.00 EL
-
I just got an enhanced download and was paid $20.40 and I'm just about to hit the $50K earnings threshold
Steve
-
The next step will be reducing EL prices. >:(
-
The next step will be reducing EL prices. >:(
I got that impression from the initial email. It gives them flexibility to "drive more downloads" by charging lower prices rather than having to stay above $28+X to maintain their margin.
-
I just got an enhanced download and was paid $20.40 and I'm just about to hit the $50K earnings threshold
Steve
$50K!!! You mean $50,000/month? :o
-
No change for me here. Just got 28 for EL and 27 for SOD. But I did not get the email so that might be it.
-
two Enhanced Downloads for me yesterday, first was $28, second $28,50
-
That email has the nasty smell of IStockphoto.
-
no one said or insinuated that
Well Shutterstock and other sites seem to think so?
Surely it's not about being old-timers, it's about having a track record of producing stuff people want to buy. One person might have 100 images sitting there from 2004 and still be on the bottom earnings tier while another who started uploading six months ago could already have reached the top tier if he or she is really, really good.
-
First ss enhanced download today. FOR 17,50$
-
no one said or insinuated that
Well Shutterstock and other sites seem to think so?
Surely it's not about being old-timers, it's about having a track record of producing stuff people want to buy. One person might have 100 images sitting there from 2004 and still be on the bottom earnings tier while another who started uploading six months ago could already have reached the top tier if he or she is really, really good.
Thanks I can see the Logic of that as a kind of incentive for producing marketable work but does create a perverse logic that it is in the interests of the supplier to encourage customers to go to lower tier supplier's images.
-
no one said or insinuated that
Well Shutterstock and other sites seem to think so?
Surely it's not about being old-timers, it's about having a track record of producing stuff people want to buy. One person might have 100 images sitting there from 2004 and still be on the bottom earnings tier while another who started uploading six months ago could already have reached the top tier if he or she is really, really good.
Thanks I can see the Logic of that as a kind of incentive for producing marketable work but does create a perverse logic that it is in the interests of the supplier to encourage customers to go to lower tier supplier's images.
Their interrest is to keep the customers happy by presenting them the best photos available.
If they start playing games, as you suggest, customers will notice and leave, going to agencies with better search algorithms, able to offer a better product.
Their foremost incentive is to keep their customers loyal and happy.
Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk
-
Why do "vets" consider they should get more than "newbies" anyway.........? Just curious don't want to start a war
It really, really, isn't about vets getting more. It's about newer people getting less. Everyone should be getting more, but the agencies are constantly looking for ways to save by paying out less to everyone, but especially newer people because they will take less in the hope of earning a bit more in future at higher tiers.
Wait a few months and you will see, everyone will be making less from ELs, newer people less than vets true but the agencies bank on them continuing to upload so they can aim for the few pennies more they will see at higher tiers.
-
So I assume the price of EL's to SS customers didn't change? just our rate? And some excuse that as we are taking less of a cut, it allows them to sell more?
Obviously they don't like to engage in conversation these days, because they just cant justify what they do without annoying everyone. I assume the mentality is, "if we don't engage, the quicker it will be accepted" that's what I would do if I was doing something negative and unjustifiable to people.
It would be really nice to see someone man up and just be adult about it, and say "yes its a unfortunate but it is a reduction in revenue for contributors".
We should be able to demand some information, after all we are employing SS to represent our images to customers, for a percentage of the sales. They sell our goods for US. If we all decided not to contribute a single new image for a week, i'm sure that would open up some dialogue.
-
SS can now offer whatever custom deals for ELs they like. No matter how small the price is, SS is now paying the author a percentage, and not flat 28$ for each EL.
I think that's what the previous lack of flexibility mentioned in the letter meant. Either that or they're going to make standard EL tariffs lower for the client.
-
...If we all decided not to contribute a single new image for a week, i'm sure that would open up some dialogue.
Unfortunately, we wont do that, been tried before and not enough people do it. I don't think it would make any difference anyway, they have so many images now, one week of not uploading is insignificant.
Perhaps the best thing we can do is ask buyers to use the few sites that haven't cut commissions below 50%?
-
if shutterstock still so bad treating to contributors would happen what happened to iStock.
Deactivation day ??
-
they have changed their policy for deleting images, when they announced a 100 image limit for 90 days I knew they were safeguarding themseleves for communicating bad news
-
The thing with a boycott in submitting for 1 week or 1 month, means its not harming the contributor, you haven't pulled your whole port, its not harming SS... massively.
The great thing with it is, it shows force in numbers, it shows cohesion, and it shows we are willing to come together. At the moment its totally fragmented.
I would be very happy to have a boycott period, to help us come together as a single force. Its a bit like a one day strike for national workers, its not going to affect anyone dramatically, but it gets headlines, it gets people together for the common good.
We deserve some respect. YOU deserve some respect.
Can you image in the headlines when SS didn't get a single upload for a week? or a least the headlines when new uploads were 50% down in protest?
I wouldn't expect massive payrises, but id want a proper dialogue and to see some sort of plan some justification. If all this happened in a physical workplace, employers wouldn't last long.
Remember, they are nothing without us, we are something without them.
-
Great move Shutterstock!
Now I have no other choice, I will delete all my portfolio and start to upload to Yaymicro and Cutcaster!
-
they have changed their policy for deleting images, when they announced a 100 image limit for 90 days I knew they were safeguarding themseleves for communicating bad news
That's fine, 90 days is nothing, bad publicity and no new uploads is instant (when organised)
Can we start a poll on who would or wouldn't take part in a weeks upload boycott if there was no proper dialogue to contributors and explanation about plans on how our image sales are dealt with?
-
no one said or insinuated that
Well Shutterstock and other sites seem to think so?
Surely it's not about being old-timers, it's about having a track record of producing stuff people want to buy. One person might have 100 images sitting there from 2004 and still be on the bottom earnings tier while another who started uploading six months ago could already have reached the top tier if he or she is really, really good.
Thanks I can see the Logic of that as a kind of incentive for producing marketable work but does create a perverse logic that it is in the interests of the supplier to encourage customers to go to lower tier supplier's images.
Their interrest is to keep the customers happy by presenting them the best photos available.
If they start playing games, as you suggest, customers will notice and leave, going to agencies with better search algorithms, able to offer a better product.
Their foremost incentive is to keep their customers loyal and happy.
Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk
Actually I thnk you are right up to a point though many customers don't want the best they want something fit for purpose so if two pictures meet that need then it may be that the supplier would want to promote the most profitable to them whether they are sophisticated enough to do this I'm not sure.
-
We are an intelligent bunch of people, it would not take much to setup a dedicated independent central body we all subscribe to that looks after our rights and acts as a central go between, between contributors and resellers.
Microstockgroup is half way there is terms of popular and independent.
Another poll, would you pay $10 a year to subscribe to a independent agency that looks after the rights on microstock contributors?
10k people join = $100,000 revenue to run it. Its pretty simple stuff.
100k people join = Ł1m a year to run it
that's 100k people with one voice, that's powerful.
-
Cats are quite intelligent but I think you have as much chance of herding them as getting this to fly.......sad but true I think
-
they have changed their policy for deleting images, when they announced a 100 image limit for 90 days I knew they were safeguarding themseleves for communicating bad news
Is this true?
-
Their interest is to keep the customers happy by presenting them the best photos available.
If they start playing games, as you suggest, customers will notice and leave, going to agencies with better search algorithms, able to offer a better product.
Their foremost incentive is to keep their customers loyal and happy.
Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk
Actually I thnk you are right up to a point though many customers don't want the best they want something fit for purpose so if two pictures meet that need then it may be that the supplier would want to promote the most profitable to them whether they are sophisticated enough to do this I'm not sure.
The search algorithm is one of the most important differentiators in this competition. And its primary goal is to make the best photos float above an ocean of garbage. Fit for purpose is mandatory, of course, but there is always a hierarchy of photos, once fit for purpose is satisfied. Customers would always look for the best photos fitting their purpose.
I believe a company like SS is smart enough to realise that if they stop offering customers their best, they set themselves on a slippery slope. It is easy to imagine a competitor, let's say FT, going after SS customers and running comparative search tests. FT could easily convince SS customers to switch, if they can prove that SS is tricking them, for the sake of an easy profit, with underpar photos made by first tier contributors (and I'm not saying that beginners make underpar photos)
Personally, long after I reached the top tier, I have yet to see a decline. On the contrary, I see growth year over year. But again, I'm also aware that "una hirundo non facit ver"
If I would be SS, I would offer an easy way to make the believers in this "theory" happy: if you believe that your sales are affected by a promotion, you should be allowed refuse the promotion! Make the promotion optional. Maybe you can even ask SS, right now, to demote you to the first tier! ;) But, I'm rather certain that you will see a massive drop in your revenue, and no change in your sales numbers.
-
Fit for purpose is a binary.......this is why I believe some people end up frustrated and confuse stock with art people don't want the best ever picture of a tomato they want one which looks OK in their cook book etc. Other that I pretty much agree though SS seem to be doing strange things lately.
-
We are an intelligent bunch of people, it would not take much to setup a dedicated independent central body we all subscribe to that looks after our rights and acts as a central go between, between contributors and resellers.
Microstockgroup is half way there is terms of popular and independent.
Another poll, would you pay $10 a year to subscribe to a independent agency that looks after the rights on microstock contributors?
10k people join = $100,000 revenue to run it. Its pretty simple stuff.
100k people join = Ł1m a year to run it
that's 100k people with one voice, that's powerful.
This idea has been thought of many times before and nothing has ever happened. Unfortunately, we aren't as intelligent as you think. It would probably be easier to start our own site or buy a majority share in one of the current ones than start a central body that would probably have no teeth but that hasn't happened either.
-
Its a catch 22...... if EVERYONE boycotted it would be good for us all in the long run but If everyone joins except me I would make a fortune.......
-
This option available to everyone:
-
We are an intelligent bunch of people, it would not take much to setup a dedicated independent central body we all subscribe to that looks after our rights and acts as a central go between, between contributors and resellers.
Microstockgroup is half way there is terms of popular and independent.
Another poll, would you pay $10 a year to subscribe to a independent agency that looks after the rights on microstock contributors?
10k people join = $100,000 revenue to run it. Its pretty simple stuff.
100k people join = Ł1m a year to run it
that's 100k people with one voice, that's powerful.
Its time for somthing like that maybe a good Kickstarter project. But the CEO of this project can not be contributor of any other agency cause the big 3 will not longer work with him.
-
We are an intelligent bunch of people, it would not take much to setup a dedicated independent central body we all subscribe to that looks after our rights and acts as a central go between, between contributors and resellers.
...
This topic has come up before.
The issue isn't setting up the organization but getting a disparate group of people to act in concert to balance out the power the agencies wield. You can't force people to act in unison just because they paid dues.
In addition to the issue of getting a majority to participate in action (and there have been some cases where we've been able to effect change with agencies, but you'd be surprised how hard it is to get people to act, especially those who are successful, do this full time and have a family to feed), you have the ability of the agencies to terminate a contributor's contract at any time for any or no reason. Recall Getty "firing" Sean Locke and Rob Sylvan to warn other contributors? Remember Fotolia terminating accounts of those who were participating in the DPC boycott?
The agencies will play hardball to maintain their power because that's how they make substantial profits. Getty had many deeply unhappy contributors when they made major changes in their contract (I think in 2011) and they just told photographers to leave if they didn't like the new terms, knowing that as long as they made photographers more than anywhere else, the bulk of them would hold their noses and put up with the garbage to keep making a living. And they did.
A better option for contributors than a union is a strong competitor to SS that behaves better (even if that is temporary until they too become top dog). There's some hope that Adobe might be that agency, but (a) it's still Fotolia under the hood and (b) Adobe's heart and primary focus really isn't in the stock licensing business - they're just doing this to try and strengthen their primary businesses.
Starting with an upload suspension is a much easier option than removing a portfolio. As it appears that older images with good search position are generally doing better anyway, it'd arguably be a pretty low-impact move for contributors while denying SS the nice big number in their "added this week" number.
Today it's only "693,200 new stock images added this week" - a few days back it was in the 800K range. Perhaps set a goal of getting that down to 250K or less?
-
Great move Shutterstock!
Now I have no other choice, I will delete all my portfolio and start to upload to Yaymicro and Cutcaster!
And when those places make changes to your disadvantage then what? There's a pattern here. When contributors get mad at a site they then flock to the "friendly" sites. Then those sites do something bad. They all eventually do.
I said this back in 2010 when IS became the evil empire and everybody loved SS. Now SS seems to be following the IS playbook probably due to financial pressure from investors. That's unfortunate because those moves don't seem to have ended up well for IS.
Quote from: PaulieWalnuts on September 07, 2010, 19:45
Quote from: dehooks on September 07, 2010, 19:38
All of this reminds me of why I love Shutterstock.
Don't kid yourself. You'll eventually need vaseline over there too.
I'm now mostly selling direct and that's the only way you'll ever have control of prices and profits.
-
I think the comments about yay and Cutcaster were ironic ;-)
-
I think the only question for me about this is whether I lose a larger sale for a smaller, or if we gain a sale from someone who would not otherwise purchase an EL. I only get a few a month, so if I find that I get a whole bunch of EL's at $10 or $20 or whatever, then I will assume that these are sales that I would not have gotten under the old scheme. Since there's really absolutely nothing I can do about the terms regardless, it seems to be the best solution for me. I don't think I will opt out of anything until I have some numbers to look at.
-
The search algorithm is one of the most important differentiators in this competition. And its primary goal is to make the best photos float above an ocean of garbage. Fit for purpose is mandatory, of course, but there is always a hierarchy of photos, once fit for purpose is satisfied. Customers would always look for the best photos fitting their purpose.
I believe a company like SS is smart enough to realise that if they stop offering customers their best, they set themselves on a slippery slope. It is easy to imagine a competitor, let's say FT, going after SS customers and running comparative search tests. FT could easily convince SS customers to switch, if they can prove that SS is tricking them, for the sake of an easy profit, with underpar photos made by first tier contributors (and I'm not saying that beginners make underpar photos)
Very well stated.
I think the announcement just means that SS wants to compete on price for ELs, and they couldn't do that and still pay us $28 across the board (and keep their profit percentage where they want it). By paying the usual percentage they are at least being fair. However, they should have just said that they are planning to reduce prices and we will get a smaller cut than in the past so too bad, rather than trying to say they are going to make up for lower commissions by increased volume - how many times have we heard that from agencies in the past and how often has it been true? Tons of times stated and never once true as far as I can remember.
-
We are an intelligent bunch of people, it would not take much to setup a dedicated independent central body we all subscribe to that looks after our rights and acts as a central go between, between contributors and resellers.
...
This topic has come up before.
The issue isn't setting up the organization but getting a disparate group of people to act in concert to balance out the power the agencies wield. You can't force people to act in unison just because they paid dues.
In addition to the issue of getting a majority to participate in action (and there have been some cases where we've been able to effect change with agencies, but you'd be surprised how hard it is to get people to act, especially those who are successful, do this full time and have a family to feed), you have the ability of the agencies to terminate a contributor's contract at any time for any or no reason. Recall Getty "firing" Sean Locke and Rob Sylvan to warn other contributors? Remember Fotolia terminating accounts of those who were participating in the DPC boycott?
The agencies will play hardball to maintain their power because that's how they make substantial profits. Getty had many deeply unhappy contributors when they made major changes in their contract (I think in 2011) and they just told photographers to leave if they didn't like the new terms, knowing that as long as they made photographers more than anywhere else, the bulk of them would hold their noses and put up with the garbage to keep making a living. And they did.
A better option for contributors than a union is a strong competitor to SS that behaves better (even if that is temporary until they too become top dog). There's some hope that Adobe might be that agency, but (a) it's still Fotolia under the hood and (b) Adobe's heart and primary focus really isn't in the stock licensing business - they're just doing this to try and strengthen their primary businesses.
Starting with an upload suspension is a much easier option than removing a portfolio. As it appears that older images with good search position are generally doing better anyway, it'd arguably be a pretty low-impact move for contributors while denying SS the nice big number in their "added this week" number.
Today it's only "693,200 new stock images added this week" - a few days back it was in the 800K range. Perhaps set a goal of getting that down to 250K or less?
Ummmm, no.
The problem is that you can get all the folks you want to delete their ports at the evil Top Tier sites and head over to micro-utopia but unless you have some way of getting buyers over there too then the flock is going to go back to where they actually get sales.
I see alot of people stomping their feet and threatening to hold their breath until they die but I don't see anyone actually doing anything. Come on, all those who "have no choice now but to delete my port" crowd. Don't let the door hit you on the way out.
-
I got today $29.85 Enhanced sale.
-
I see alot of people stomping their feet and threatening to hold their breath until they die but I don't see anyone actually doing anything. Come on, all those who "have no choice now but to delete my port" crowd. Don't let the door hit you on the way out.
Agree. If I had a dollar for every time I saw someone say this, I could retire. People do a lot of talking, but in the end, you still find their ports on the sites. After all the boycotts and such, they are still there. The fact is, people think $10.00 a day is better than nothing. And when they are getting $2.00 a day, they will still be there. And when they are getting $.20 a day, they will still be there. Maybe when they actually get nothing, they will leave.
Me, I am on two sites that pay me next to nothing. When it gets down to nothing, then I will leave those two like I left the rest. It's getting pretty close.
-
Their interest is to keep the customers happy by presenting them the best photos available.
If they start playing games, as you suggest, customers will notice and leave, going to agencies with better search algorithms, able to offer a better product.
Their foremost incentive is to keep their customers loyal and happy.
Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk
Actually I thnk you are right up to a point though many customers don't want the best they want something fit for purpose so if two pictures meet that need then it may be that the supplier would want to promote the most profitable to them whether they are sophisticated enough to do this I'm not sure.
The search algorithm is one of the most important differentiators in this competition. And its primary goal is to make the best photos float above an ocean of garbage. Fit for purpose is mandatory, of course, but there is always a hierarchy of photos, once fit for purpose is satisfied. Customers would always look for the best photos fitting their purpose.
I believe a company like SS is smart enough to realise that if they stop offering customers their best, they set themselves on a slippery slope. It is easy to imagine a competitor, let's say FT, going after SS customers and running comparative search tests. FT could easily convince SS customers to switch, if they can prove that SS is tricking them, for the sake of an easy profit, with underpar photos made by first tier contributors (and I'm not saying that beginners make underpar photos)
Personally, long after I reached the top tier, I have yet to see a decline. On the contrary, I see growth year over year. But again, I'm also aware that "una hirundo non facit ver"
If I would be SS, I would offer an easy way to make the believers in this "theory" happy: if you believe that your sales are affected by a promotion, you should be allowed refuse the promotion! Make the promotion optional. Maybe you can even ask SS, right now, to demote you to the first tier! ;) But, I'm rather certain that you will see a massive drop in your revenue, and no change in your sales numbers.
I think older files are relegated to the lower rungs, if you have a newer port you will not be impacted much after reaching the top tier. I have watched many claim it is not impacting them only to see them come back and claim 30% drops when their files hit the threshold age. And SS can and does dynamically change that age. I see old files come to life for weeks at a time. They just do not stay there long no matter how good those files are or how much the customers like them.
Shutterstock is happy to sell good enough files at a lower price for increased profits in bursts. The one thing you can not do is keep your port from aging.
-
Great move Shutterstock!
Now I have no other choice, I will delete all my portfolio and start to upload to Yaymicro and Cutcaster!
oh??? & earn what??? 1.3 % or less (since i don't see either paying more than 1.3%
on the right column here...)
what ss is paying you today???
until another agency comes up to contest ss , even with 76 .8 % which is low all time,
it is no use moving anything to anywhere else???
.. even the ones who claim to be the new kid of the block that listens to the contributor,
could be the next to pull an istock (or canva) on us 8)
-
I got today $29.85 Enhanced sale.
That's completely impossible. Everyone knows that this new change has only one purpose, to screw contributors and help shareholders buy a new solid gold toilet.
Oh, wait, did you ever consider that you really "should be" getting $40.00 for that EL? I'll bet SS made a huge pile of money off of it. Besides all of the image hosting, sales, advertising, providing buyers with a place to consistently find a huge diversity of images, dealing with financial transactions what did they do to deserve to make ANY money off of your image? Practically criminal I say.
-
I got today $29.85 Enhanced sale.
That's completely impossible. Everyone knows that this new change has only one purpose, to screw contributors and help shareholders buy a new solid gold toilet.
Oh, wait, did you ever consider that you really "should be" getting $40.00 for that EL? I'll bet SS made a huge pile of money off of it. Besides all of the image hosting, sales, advertising, providing buyers with a place to consistently find a huge diversity of images, dealing with financial transactions what did they do to deserve to make ANY money off of your image? Practically criminal I say.
What ??? I just reported the amount.
-
I got today $29.85 Enhanced sale.
That's completely impossible. Everyone knows that this new change has only one purpose, to screw contributors and help shareholders buy a new solid gold toilet.
Oh, wait, did you ever consider that you really "should be" getting $40.00 for that EL? I'll bet SS made a huge pile of money off of it. Besides all of the image hosting, sales, advertising, providing buyers with a place to consistently find a huge diversity of images, dealing with financial transactions what did they do to deserve to make ANY money off of your image? Practically criminal I say.
What ??? I just reported the amount.
I know. My reply was entirely sarcastic. If you read all of the doom and gloom around here you would think that your results are actually impossible since the entire system is against "us"
-
So I have one data point that someone buys the 25-pack ELs - I just received my first at the new "improved" rate and the royalty was $20.39. Nice that they rounded up from 20.388, but that's all the good I can find in this cash grab.
So the SS coffers just swelled by an extra $7.61 on that sale.
Having been through a whole series of cash grabs from a whole series of greedy agencies, I feel entirely justified in complaining about this latest conversion of contributor cash to agency nice-big-yacht fund. Those of you newer to this racket feel free to celebrate SS's "improvement" in our circumstances
-
So I have one data point that someone buys the 25-pack ELs - I just received my first at the new "improved" rate and the royalty was $20.39. Nice that they rounded up from 20.388, but that's all the good I can find in this cash grab.
So the SS coffers just swelled by an extra $7.61 on that sale.
Having been through a whole series of cash grabs from a whole series of greedy agencies, I feel entirely justified in complaining about this latest conversion of contributor cash to agency nice-big-yacht fund. Those of you newer to this racket feel free to celebrate SS's "improvement" in our circumstances
A EL poll over the course of a few months would give us a ball park idea of the spread of downloads each package is capturing on the buyer side.
-
I got today $29.85 Enhanced sale.
That's completely impossible. Everyone knows that this new change has only one purpose, to screw contributors and help shareholders buy a new solid gold toilet.
Oh, wait, did you ever consider that you really "should be" getting $40.00 for that EL? I'll bet SS made a huge pile of money off of it. Besides all of the image hosting, sales, advertising, providing buyers with a place to consistently find a huge diversity of images, dealing with financial transactions what did they do to deserve to make ANY money off of your image? Practically criminal I say.
What ??? I just reported the amount.
Strange that BelieveInStock did not mention the $$$$$, resources and time investments that contributors provide.
The list is long and longer still for quality creative images and illustrations!
-
I got today $29.85 Enhanced sale.
That's completely impossible. Everyone knows that this new change has only one purpose, to screw contributors and help shareholders buy a new solid gold toilet.
Oh, wait, did you ever consider that you really "should be" getting $40.00 for that EL? I'll bet SS made a huge pile of money off of it. Besides all of the image hosting, sales, advertising, providing buyers with a place to consistently find a huge diversity of images, dealing with financial transactions what did they do to deserve to make ANY money off of your image? Practically criminal I say.
What ??? I just reported the amount.
Strange that BelieveInStock did not mention the $$$$$, resources and time investments that contributors provide.
The list is long and longer still for quality creative images and illustrations!
You are right. In the perfect world of mine it would be 50-50. I have no idea why Shutterstock considers 30% (or even less) a "sweet spot".
-
I think older files are relegated to the lower rungs, if you have a newer port you will not be impacted much after reaching the top tier. I have watched many claim it is not impacting them only to see them come back and claim 30% drops when their files hit the threshold age. And SS can and does dynamically change that age. I see old files come to life for weeks at a time. They just do not stay there long no matter how good those files are or how much the customers like them.
Shutterstock is happy to sell good enough files at a lower price for increased profits in bursts. The one thing you can not do is keep your port from aging.
This is a theory like any other, or an opinion like any other. We will never know for sure.
In my opinion, the popularity algorithm, designed to promote trends dynamically, independently from long term file performance, is the reason for the old file surge, you mentioned.
But if by some unlikely remote possibility, your theory about file age is true, then it has nothing to do with the tiered revenue structure. You can very well be stuck on the first tier with old files. What you say is that ports and contributors are not penalised, once they reached the top tier, despite what some conspirationists like to believe.
So from this point of view, we agree.
-
I think older files are relegated to the lower rungs, if you have a newer port you will not be impacted much after reaching the top tier. I have watched many claim it is not impacting them only to see them come back and claim 30% drops when their files hit the threshold age. And SS can and does dynamically change that age. I see old files come to life for weeks at a time. They just do not stay there long no matter how good those files are or how much the customers like them.
Shutterstock is happy to sell good enough files at a lower price for increased profits in bursts. The one thing you can not do is keep your port from aging.
This is a theory like any other, or an opinion like any other. We will never know for sure.
In my opinion, the popularity algorithm, designed to promote trends dynamically, independent from long term file performance, is the reason for the old file surge, you mentioned.
But if by some unlikely remote possibility, your theory about file age is true, then it has nothing to do with the tiered revenue structure. You can very well be stuck on the first tier with old files. What you say is that ports and contributors are not penalised, once they reached the top tier, despite what some conspirationists like to believe.
So from this point of view, we agree.
When it happens to your port you will understand that it is not a theory. The over night drop drives the point home nicely and when it happens every year on the clock it becomes undeniable.
-
I think older files are relegated to the lower rungs, if you have a newer port you will not be impacted much after reaching the top tier. I have watched many claim it is not impacting them only to see them come back and claim 30% drops when their files hit the threshold age. And SS can and does dynamically change that age. I see old files come to life for weeks at a time. They just do not stay there long no matter how good those files are or how much the customers like them.
Shutterstock is happy to sell good enough files at a lower price for increased profits in bursts. The one thing you can not do is keep your port from aging.
This is a theory like any other, or an opinion like any other. We will never know for sure.
In my opinion, the popularity algorithm, designed to promote trends dynamically, independent from long term file performance, is the reason for the old file surge, you mentioned.
But if by some unlikely remote possibility, your theory about file age is true, then it has nothing to do with the tiered revenue structure. You can very well be stuck on the first tier with old files. What you say is that ports and contributors are not penalised, once they reached the top tier, despite what some conspirationists like to believe.
So from this point of view, we agree.
When it happens to your port you will understand that it is not a theory. The over night drop drives the point home nicely and when it happens every year on the clock it becomes undeniable.
An "undeniable", warm and convenient "truth", indeed. It is much easier to blame external factors, instead of keeping your port competitive.
But I'm happy we agree there is neither port nor contributor penalty once the top tier is reached.
-
I think older files are relegated to the lower rungs, if you have a newer port you will not be impacted much after reaching the top tier. I have watched many claim it is not impacting them only to see them come back and claim 30% drops when their files hit the threshold age. And SS can and does dynamically change that age. I see old files come to life for weeks at a time. They just do not stay there long no matter how good those files are or how much the customers like them.
Shutterstock is happy to sell good enough files at a lower price for increased profits in bursts. The one thing you can not do is keep your port from aging.
This is a theory like any other, or an opinion like any other. We will never know for sure.
In my opinion, the popularity algorithm, designed to promote trends dynamically, independent from long term file performance, is the reason for the old file surge, you mentioned.
But if by some unlikely remote possibility, your theory about file age is true, then it has nothing to do with the tiered revenue structure. You can very well be stuck on the first tier with old files. What you say is that ports and contributors are not penalised, once they reached the top tier, despite what some conspirationists like to believe.
So from this point of view, we agree.
When it happens to your port you will understand that it is not a theory. The over night drop drives the point home nicely and when it happens every year on the clock it becomes undeniable.
An "undeniable", warm and convenient "truth", indeed. It is much easier to blame external factors, instead of keeping your port competitive.
But I'm happy we agree there is neither port nor contributor penalty once the top tier is reached.
Feel free to imbibe in personal superiority and arrogance, however do not presume to twist my words.
-
One thing I've observed over the years: any time contributor payments are cut, there are a few posters here who somehow manage to rationalize it. It's either a good thing and the rest of us just can't see that, or it's "fair" because, well, the agencies have to make money. And more all the time.
-
I'm having Deja Vu. So they're cutting commission percentage but we'll make up the difference from increased sale volume? Where have I heard this before?
-
I'm having Deja Vu. So they're cutting commission percentage but we'll make up the difference from increased sale volume? Where have I heard this before?
Exactly. Sad to see Shutterstock going down this path. And a bit nerve-wracking for those of us who depend on this industry for our livelihood.
-
This feels like the true nature of crowdfunding exploitation for the sake of higher profits for the shareholders. It was bound to happen when shutterstock went public and the new boss is wall street.
Letting more contributors in (releasing the floodgates) is bound to have a negative impact on everyone else's download numbers.
I'm just giving a probable scenario. When as a business decision to raise profits, you designate 3 image slots the first 3 pages only to the lowest tiered group to give them the unfair boost over the higher tiered images just for the sake to get more revenue. You would be stupid as a business NOT to do this especially with this new contributor payout scheme. More slots given = happier noobs... more money for SS. Lets just say the images are comparable to mine in quality. Why should they get seen while mine doesn't get a fair chance? This type of stuff isn't accountable but most likely probable. Maybe I am a conspiracy nut to think these thoughts but they make so much sense to me. hehe
-
This feels like the true nature of crowdfunding exploitation for the sake of higher profits for the shareholders. It was bound to happen when shutterstock went public and the new boss is wall street.
Letting more contributors in (releasing the floodgates) is bound to have a negative impact on everyone else's download numbers.
I'm just giving a probable scenario. When as a business decision to raise profits, you designate 3 image slots the first 3 pages only to the lowest tiered group to give them the unfair boost over the higher tiered images just for the sake to get more revenue. You would be stupid as a business NOT to do this especially with this new contributor payout scheme. More slots given = happier noobs... more money for SS. Lets just say the images are comparable to mine in quality. Why should they get seen while mine doesn't get a fair chance? This type of stuff isn't accountable but most likely probable. Maybe I am a conspiracy nut to think these thoughts but they make so much sense to me. hehe
Nope. Buyer wants the best image, fast. If Shutterstock was to favor low-tier or as you call them "noobs" in the search engine, they would very quickly lose clients who would migrate to Fotolia etc.
QUALITY WILL ALWAYS WIN.
-
out of 70 million images they will never know if they got the best image or not. if they search and get 200 pages of images and they wont know if the first 10 pages are newbiew photos or not. they will pick the photo they like best on those 10 pages, i doubt they will look further than 2000 images.
-
out of 70 million images they will never know if they got the best image or not. if they search and get 200 pages of images and they wont know if the first 10 pages are newbiew photos or not. they will pick the photo they like best on those 10 pages, i doubt they will look further than 2000 images.
Yes and how can a search engine define "best" anyway its subjective and in the eye of the buyer. Its not really about best its about "good enough for what I want" most stock is for images that will be glanced at for seconds not to be hung on the wall to be admired for years to come ;)
-
out of 70 million images they will never know if they got the best image or not. if they search and get 200 pages of images and they wont know if the first 10 pages are newbiew photos or not. they will pick the photo they like best on those 10 pages, i doubt they will look further than 2000 images.
Yes and how can a search engine define "best" anyway its subjective and in the eye of the buyer. Its not really about best its about "good enough for what I want" most stock is for images that will be glanced at for seconds not to be hung on the wall to be admired for years to come ;)
Nobody settles for good enough. Do you? When you have the choice to get a better camera for the same amount of money, you will go for it. You will not settle for an inferior product, even if it looks good enough.
When I search for keywords specific to my speciality, sometimes I find my photos on the 1st page (popularity or relevant), but most of the time, I find photos I would love to have on my port, because those photos are definitely better. And clearly much better than what can be found on, let's say, the 3rd page and beyond.
Customers don't behave differently.
FYI I'm not uploading tomatoes on white, handshakes or skies with fluffy clouds. That would be foolish, indeed.
Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk
-
Buyer wants the best image, fast.
No.
1) Buyer wants the image he needs (subject, composition, fitting correctly in the page/layout, matching with other images in the page/layout)
2) Buyer wants an image that has not been used before (or not too much used)
-
zero talent, tell me, how do you determine if you have the best image without checking all, lets say, 38,000 results for diversity in the office? are you going to check all 38,000 results?
i actually like this image on page 200 better than the image on page 1, both submitted roughly in the same period
page 200
(http://thumb1.shutterstock.com/display_pic_with_logo/2117717/315498158/stock-photo-multiethnic-group-people-discussion-with-global-concept-315498158.jpg)
page 1
(http://thumb9.shutterstock.com/display_pic_with_logo/2117717/300362036/stock-photo-diverse-group-people-working-together-concept-300362036.jpg)
were going off topic, apologies
-
"Nobody settles for good enough. Do you? When you have the choice to get a better camera for the same amount of money, you will go for it. You will not settle for an inferior product, even if it looks good enough." On the other hand if I was buying a bag of chips I would probably go in the first decent looking chip shop I saw in the High Street....the price point of most stock photos is nearer here than a new camera (sadly)
-
zero talent, tell me, how do you determine if you have the best image without checking all, lets say, 38,000 results for diversity in the office? are you going to check all 38,000 results?
i actually like this image on page 200 better than the image on page 1, both submitted roughly in the same period
page 200
([url]http://thumb1.shutterstock.com/display_pic_with_logo/2117717/315498158/stock-photo-multiethnic-group-people-discussion-with-global-concept-315498158.jpg[/url])
page 1
([url]http://thumb9.shutterstock.com/display_pic_with_logo/2117717/300362036/stock-photo-diverse-group-people-working-together-concept-300362036.jpg[/url])
were going off topic, apologies
Purely subjective which one is best
-
I prefer page 1 image.
This expensive shots and photographers are guilty for lower the value of the pictures.
-
zero talent, tell me, how do you determine if you have the best image without checking all, lets say, 38,000 results for diversity in the office? are you going to check all 38,000 results?
It's called crowdsourcing. The crowd "votes" for the most popular photos. Sometimes the popular vote doesn't match yours, but most of the time it is an indication of what the public (read customer) wants.
You can't have success if you fail to acknowledge this basic fact.
Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk
-
shameless and utterly disgusting move from SS
we should all write a letter to Jon (filling that expensive office built with our creativity, time, investment and sweat) saying how this measure will only benefit SS and not the contributors like agencies love writing down on this type of announcement, we aren't stupid ;)
now please go suck a lemon!
-
shameless and utterly disgusting move from SS
we should all write a letter to Jon (filling that expensive office built with our creativity, time, investment and sweat) saying how this measure will only benefit SS and not the contributors like agencies love writing down on this type of announcement, we aren't stupid ;)
now please go suck a lemon!
Luis, haven't seen you around in a while. Nice to see you posting again.
-
zero talent, it has been proven over and over that the most sold photo is not the most popular photo ss is showing in the results. my most sold photos are not even near the position they should be at. but that was not the point, the point was, how do you know if you got the best image? answer, you dont, unless you wade through 38,000 photos.
-
shameless and utterly disgusting move from SS
we should all write a letter to Jon (filling that expensive office built with our creativity, time, investment and sweat) saying how this measure will only benefit SS and not the contributors like agencies love writing down on this type of announcement, we aren't stupid ;)
now please go suck a lemon!
Luis, haven't seen you around in a while. Nice to see you posting again.
thanks man! I have been making money outside stock, it has been fun, never as exciting as agencies I must say ;D
-
shameless and utterly disgusting move from SS
we should all write a letter to Jon (filling that expensive office built with our creativity, time, investment and sweat) saying how this measure will only benefit SS and not the contributors like agencies love writing down on this type of announcement, we aren't stupid ;)
now please go suck a lemon!
YES YES well said!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Nobody settles for good enough. Do you?
Depends on the budget. If I am looking for an image, and the client has x amount of dollars to spend on the job, I can't afford to wade through 20,000 images for hours and hours to be sure I got the best one. In that instance, yes, I settle for good enough. High budget clients who don't care what it costs and want the best, no, I don't settle for good enough.
-
Nobody settles for good enough. Do you?
Depends on the budget. If I am looking for an image, and the client has x amount of dollars to spend on the job, I can't afford to wade through 20,000 images for hours and hours to be sure I got the best one. In that instance, yes, I settle for good enough. High budget clients who don't care what it costs and want the best, no, I don't settle for good enough.
You will settle for what is on the first pages of your relevant/popular/new tabs.
These photos are already filtered for you, out of that ocean of garbage.
You will not randomly go to the 213th page, close your eyes and pick a good enough photo. Short of time, you will still pick it out of what the crowd considers "the best" You will trust the "popular vote". The same goes for the majority of customers, because these customers are the ones deciding what's popular/relevant and what not.
Everyone's goal is to produce the quality able to push photos up on the first few pages of the popular/relevant hierarchies for specific keywords.
Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk
-
so you actually agree with me then great
-
Nobody settles for good enough. Do you?
Depends on the budget. If I am looking for an image, and the client has x amount of dollars to spend on the job, I can't afford to wade through 20,000 images for hours and hours to be sure I got the best one. In that instance, yes, I settle for good enough. High budget clients who don't care what it costs and want the best, no, I don't settle for good enough.
The point is for high end clients Good Enough = the best you can reasonably find just like if you spend ŁŁŁŁŁs on a top end camera you expect the best image quality. I would argue that for the majority of microstock we are talking about delivering value rather than top end quality.
-
Nobody settles for good enough. Do you?
Depends on the budget. If I am looking for an image, and the client has x amount of dollars to spend on the job, I can't afford to wade through 20,000 images for hours and hours to be sure I got the best one. In that instance, yes, I settle for good enough. High budget clients who don't care what it costs and want the best, no, I don't settle for good enough.
You will settle for what is on the first pages of your relevant/popular/new tabs.
These photos are already filtered for you, out of that ocean of garbage.
You will not randomly go to the 213th page, close your eyes and pick a good enough photo. Short of time, you will still pick it out of what the crowd considers "the best" You will trust the "popular vote". The same goes for the majority of customers, because these customers are the ones deciding what's popular/relevant and what not.
Everyone's goal is to produce the quality able to push photos up on the first few pages of the popular/relevant hierarchies for specific keywords.
Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk
Actually, I never pick what the crowd considers the best, because those are the images that are used the most. And I don't typically use what's on the first few pages of relevant either. And sometimes I randomly go to the middle of the relevant results and start from there. And sometimes, if I have the time in the budget, I sort by newest and see what's coming down the pike. You are presuming to know how buyer's shop.
Sorry to the OP for the thread derailing.
-
out of 70 million images they will never know if they got the best image or not. if they search and get 200 pages of images and they wont know if the first 10 pages are newbiew photos or not. they will pick the photo they like best on those 10 pages, i doubt they will look further than 2000 images.
Yes and how can a search engine define "best" anyway its subjective and in the eye of the buyer. Its not really about best its about "good enough for what I want" most stock is for images that will be glanced at for seconds not to be hung on the wall to be admired for years to come ;)
Nobody settles for good enough. Do you? When you have the choice to get a better camera for the same amount of money, you will go for it. You will not settle for an inferior product, even if it looks good enough.
When I search for keywords specific to my speciality, sometimes I find my photos on the 1st page (popularity or relevant), but most of the time, I find photos I would love to have on my port, because those photos are definitely better. And clearly much better than what can be found on, let's say, the 3rd page and beyond.
Customers don't behave differently.
FYI I'm not uploading tomatoes on white, handshakes or skies with fluffy clouds. That would be foolish, indeed.
Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk
Denial is a luxury and can be costly, in fact it has gotten us where we are today!
Those who regularly produce advertising & promotional material have very little time to find images and deliver projects. They have bosses and clients breathing down their back asking them to deliver.
Good enough is the order of the day. They do not have time to wade through pages of images to find a perfect fit.
-
Denial is a luxury and can be costly, in fact it has gotten us where we are today!
Those who regularly produce advertising & promotional material have very little time to find images and deliver projects. They have bosses and clients breathing down their back asking them to deliver.
Good enough is the order of the day. They do not have time to wade through pages of images to find a perfect fit.
You are free to produce "good enough" photos, if you believe it works for you. :o
My goal is to produce the quality able to push my photos as high as possible on the top popular/relevant pages, because these are, strangely enough :-[, my best sellers.
Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk
-
From my personal Alamy measures for a rolling month, I can see that buyers have searched for from one page (where that is the full amount of images for that particular search term) to, someone who looked through 26,100 (sic) images for 'park bench' and zoomed 32 of them.
There is no one way in which buyers search. Like the rest of us, they're all different. That's not to say that Best Match (or whatever the default is called) placement isn't very important. And obviously I offer no insight into SS buyers.
-
Denial is a luxury and can be costly, in fact it has gotten us where we are today!
Those who regularly produce advertising & promotional material have very little time to find images and deliver projects. They have bosses and clients breathing down their back asking them to deliver.
Good enough is the order of the day. They do not have time to wade through pages of images to find a perfect fit.
You are free to produce "good enough" photos, if you believe it works for you. :o
My goal is to produce the quality able to push my photos as high as possible on the top popular/relevant pages, because these are, strangely enough, my best sellers.
Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk
Still twisting words to fit your agenda of denial.
I am saying the opposite, if you produce content with the intent of delivering your very best work.
It will matter not, if that content is not shown to customers! You are beyond naive, if you think the search has not been design to take advantage of serving a shifting % of good enough images at the lower pay tiers.
The changes in the search after the IPO were eye opening, for those of us who have been working at producing relevant new content at the highest quality. However feel free to continue with the ostrich routine.
-
Denial is a luxury and can be costly, in fact it has gotten us where we are today!
Those who regularly produce advertising & promotional material have very little time to find images and deliver projects. They have bosses and clients breathing down their back asking them to deliver.
Good enough is the order of the day. They do not have time to wade through pages of images to find a perfect fit.
You are free to produce "good enough" photos, if you believe it works for you. :o
My goal is to produce the quality able to push my photos as high as possible on the top popular/relevant pages, because these are, strangely enough :-[, my best sellers.
Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk
I produce the best I can in a reasonable time at low cost if I were to produce super high quality pics using international models and Hasselblad cameras I wouldnt be selling them on microstock
-
I'm not twisting anything, you fail to produce a consistent conspiracy theory.
On one hand, you say that the age of a file matters in the search algorithm:
I think older files are relegated to the lower rungs .... and SS can and does dynamically change that age. I see old files come to life for weeks at a time. They just do not stay there long no matter how good those files are or how much the customers like them.
If this is true, then nothing stops you from producing new, competitive files, and successfully continue to play the game.
On the other hand, you now switch to the "tier based theory".
You are beyond naive if you think the search has not been design to take advantage of serving a shifting % of good enough images at the lower pay tiers.
... which concludes that top tier contributors are penalised in the search algorithm.
This is definitely NOT the same thing and you must realise the difference.
I also tried to explain that tricking customers with inferior quality, for the sake of an easy profit, is very easy to be exploited by competitors. Maybe SS is foolish enough to do that, but I don't see it happening to me, and I'm not the only one.
This is why I strongly doubt your "certainty" and "expertise" on this matter, even when you use words like "naive", "arrogant", etc, even if your "theory" is music to some of this forum ears.
Anyway, feel free to continue with your personal attacks, instead of debating with arguments and facts.
Frankly, I'm not impressed.
-
Those of us who have been around for a while talk to each other and know each others work well.
We know who meets the quality and content requirements needed to stay on the front pages of the search and we know each other well enough to know when each of us joined shutterstock. We also notice who is new to the game.
The oldest members saw the file demotions to the lower rungs first, while friends who joined later did not. A year or two later more of our friends also saw sharp drops.
As this was occurring I looked at front page results and found shutterstocks new IPO inspired search dynamically changing to serve content from contributors who joined within specific time periods. This changes dynamically weekly/daily with a larger % weight of new contributors showing up on the first pages. Not rocket science to see that this does increase profits.
In the mean time a large number of older contributors have noticed that our new files are buried in the search. Not motivating to produce new content for shutterstock, who in turn pays back those who helped them become successful by burying our content to increase their bottom line.
-
Its called competition I'm afraid you might have to get used to it.....just like the old pros who used macrostock :o
-
Its called competition I'm afraid you might have to get used to it.....just like the old pros who used macrostock :o
Exactly!
Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk
-
Nobody settles for good enough. Do you?
Depends on the budget. If I am looking for an image, and the client has x amount of dollars to spend on the job, I can't afford to wade through 20,000 images for hours and hours to be sure I got the best one. In that instance, yes, I settle for good enough. High budget clients who don't care what it costs and want the best, no, I don't settle for good enough.
EXACTLY! Time = money, so the logical and economical thing for most buyers is to go with the first image that meets their needs and is adequate quality. Nobody is going to search thru thousands more pictures after they find one that they are satisfied with, just to see if they can find one marginally better. Its looking for a needle in a haystack.
-
Nobody settles for good enough. Do you?
Depends on the budget. If I am looking for an image, and the client has x amount of dollars to spend on the job, I can't afford to wade through 20,000 images for hours and hours to be sure I got the best one. In that instance, yes, I settle for good enough. High budget clients who don't care what it costs and want the best, no, I don't settle for good enough.
EXACTLY! Time = money, so the logical and economical thing for most buyers is to go with the first image that meets their needs and is adequate quality. Nobody is going to search thru thousands more pictures after they find one that they are satisfied with, just to see if they can find one marginally better. Its looking for a needle in a haystack.
Definitely! Exactly!
This is why most of the customers will only search for the first few pages of the popular/relevant/new, and sometimes the undiscovered hierarchies.
Maybe some customers like to play roulette and jump to page 213, but it must be only an insignificant minority.
Producing the same quality or better than seen on those top pages will definitely maximise your chances to break into those top pages and better sell your stuff. This is not rocket science, really!
I'm afraid that "good enough" photos will never make it to the top, where the "big bucks" (relatively speaking) are.
The top pages must be your goal. I know it is mine.
-
Maybe some customers like to play roulette and jump to page 213, but it must be only an insignificant minority.
When all else fails, insult. ::)
-
Maybe some customers like to play roulette and jump to page 213, but it must be only an insignificant minority.
That would be like the insignificant minority iStock always said didn't use this, that or the other feature whenever they disabled them, but who evidently added up to a significant number.
Still, SS seems hellbent on imitating iS a few years behind, so ...
-
Maybe some customers like to play roulette and jump to page 213, but it must be only an insignificant minority.
When all else fails, insult. ::)
Oh, I sincerely apologize if you feel insulted. It was not my intention. You said "randomly", I said "roulette" which is a metaphor for random. Sorry again! :(
-
Denial is a luxury and can be costly, in fact it has gotten us where we are today!
Those who regularly produce advertising & promotional material have very little time to find images and deliver projects. They have bosses and clients breathing down their back asking them to deliver.
Good enough is the order of the day. They do not have time to wade through pages of images to find a perfect fit.
You are free to produce "good enough" photos, if you believe it works for you. :o
My goal is to produce the quality able to push my photos as high as possible on the top popular/relevant pages, because these are, strangely enough :-[, my best sellers.
Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk
both good points.
i think stock is like the other stock (inventory) you find at your supermarket or book store,etc..
the one that is right in line with the customers is usually the one that is picked up...
that is no secret why most of the junk funk and sweets etc are stacked where you file in to pay your grocery,etc...
one day, i watched the clients in front of me went back to the sweet shelf 5 times ...
while she waits to be her turn to pay.
stock photos are i am sure the same...
the client has no time to wade through to find that gem..
it's not his/her money , but the company who pays him/her to find that stock photo.
he /she is not going to sit there and look for that amazing photo on pg 233..
if they did, they would be sacked for wasting company's time.
so yes, being current is vital, as your new images are most likely to be there ones most busy clients will look first.
-
This is getting circular but looking at my own sales in no way do I think my best pictures technically or artistically are my most successful it may have more do do with the concept or it may be our old friend luck ;-). I believe that we and the sites are far more concerned about technical quality than 99% of customers.
-
Its called competition I'm afraid you might have to get used to it.....just like the old pros who used macrostock :o
Competition is good and improves our work. I have no problem with the merit system as long as the search cards are not stacked against you. That was the case before shutterstock introduced its post IPO search to increase stock prices.
Great for Jon and friends but crap for the rest of us. The new tiered EL's allow to SS to manipulate maximize profit further.
-
As a buyer, my most common habit is to download the best image I find on the first page. There are other scenarios though.
- Occasionally, I would switch between the Popular & Relevant tab to see what's available.
- For a game, I download about 200 images. I've dug as much as 20 pages deep to find what I need. I needed specific type of landscapes, houses, objects and collage parts.
- For a food app, I downloaded over 300 images, most of it from the first page of the Popular tab.
- For work, I dug between 1-10 pages deep before I give up and download the best image.
As a contributor, I know that it doesn't matter how good my image is, it's my job to get it to the first page. From what I've seen, it can take as little as 3 downloads to get to the first page in some categories. For it to stay on there, the image must be as good, if not better than the competition on the first page, otherwise it'll start falling.
-
Its called competition I'm afraid you might have to get used to it.....just like the old pros who used macrostock :o
One middleman ending up in control of a market isn't 'competition', it's the opposite.
-
Its called competition I'm afraid you might have to get used to it.....just like the old pros who used macrostock :o
One middleman ending up in control of a market isn't 'competition', it's the opposite.
I don't think this is the case according to the poll on the right they have about 30% of the market which is too high but hardly "control"
-
Its called competition I'm afraid you might have to get used to it.....just like the old pros who used macrostock :o
Competition is good and improves our work. I have no problem with the merit system as long as the search cards are not stacked against you. That was the case before shutterstock introduced its post IPO search to increase stock prices.
Great for Jon and friends but crap for the rest of us. The new tiered EL's allow to SS to manipulate maximize profit further.
Having reread what you said I think I was being unfair although wouldn't be simpler for SS to simply pay a flat rate to everyone rather than create sophisticated algorithms and risk alienating customers. I don't have the evidence but couldn't it just be that the tide of new images is flooding you like everyone else?
-
Its called competition I'm afraid you might have to get used to it.....just like the old pros who used macrostock :o
One middleman ending up in control of a market isn't 'competition', it's the opposite.
I don't think this is the case according to the poll on the right they have about 30% of the market which is too high but hardly "control"
They aren't quite there yet but the handwriting is on the wall. They don't need 100%; they're already big enough that they control price and no new competitors can come in. The remaining ones are being steadily squeezed out or sold off. And don't pin your hopes on Adobe; they're just acquiring stock archives to wring more money out of Photoshop.
-
As a buyer, my most common habit is to download the best image I find on the first page. There are other scenarios though.
- Occasionally, I would switch between the Popular & Relevant tab to see what's available.
- For a game, I download about 200 images. I've dug as much as 20 pages deep to find what I need. I needed specific type of landscapes, houses, objects and collage parts.
- For a food app, I downloaded over 300 images, most of it from the first page of the Popular tab.
- For work, I dug between 1-10 pages deep before I give up and download the best image.
As a contributor, I know that it doesn't matter how good my image is, it's my job to get it to the first page. From what I've seen, it can take as little as 3 downloads to get to the first page in some categories. For it to stay on there, the image must be as good, if not better than the competition on the first page, otherwise it'll start falling.
Weird! There are people on this forum I 100% agree with! ;D
-
Its called competition I'm afraid you might have to get used to it.....just like the old pros who used macrostock :o
One middleman ending up in control of a market isn't 'competition', it's the opposite.
I don't think this is the case according to the poll on the right they have about 30% of the market which is too high but hardly "control"
They aren't quite there yet but the handwriting is on the wall. They don't need 100%; they're already big enough that they control price and no new competitors can come in. The remaining ones are being steadily squeezed out or sold off. And don't pin your hopes on Adobe; they're just acquiring stock archives to wring more money out of Photoshop.
Last time I checked Fotolia were accepting new images while I agree there is a danger its a much more open market than in the days of macro sites when a small cabal of suppliers held sway and of course Getty still take full advantage of their near monopoly of historic pics
-
Its called competition I'm afraid you might have to get used to it.....just like the old pros who used macrostock :o
Competition is good and improves our work. I have no problem with the merit system as long as the search cards are not stacked against you. That was the case before shutterstock introduced its post IPO search to increase stock prices.
Great for Jon and friends but crap for the rest of us. The new tiered EL's allow to SS to manipulate maximize profit further.
Having reread what you said I think I was being unfair although wouldn't be simpler for SS to simply pay a flat rate to everyone rather than create sophisticated algorithms and risk alienating customers. I don't have the evidence but couldn't it just be that the tide of new images is flooding you like everyone else?
If that was the case it would not have happened overnight in one day. The drop would have been gradual and dynamic according to the new content we upload.
-
This is getting circular but looking at my own sales in no way do I think my best pictures technically or artistically are my most successful it may have more do do with the concept or it may be our old friend luck ;-). I believe that we and the sites are far more concerned about technical quality than 99% of customers.
that definitely you are spot on. looking at the reality that most of our dls are web usage and the image size is no large than 4 by 5 ins.
to expect 200% sharpness edge to edge is a bit overkill. it isn't that say , the client intends to print a life size or a billboard usage from the image . i would say if so, then introduce some sort of high end
single high earning like what used to be $80-120 commission earnings for us,
and then get us to upload on request that same image of high res .
most of my, and i am sure many of yours, popular dls are really nothing much demanding, technically speaking... much like majority of the ads you see in news media...
or like those horrible horrible ads you see on youtube,etc..
.. amateurish ads with very little need of high end production...
\that saying, yuri was right... mob phone is all we need today.
-
Its called competition I'm afraid you might have to get used to it.....just like the old pros who used macrostock :o
One middleman ending up in control of a market isn't 'competition', it's the opposite.
I don't think this is the case according to the poll on the right they have about 30% of the market which is too high but hardly "control"
They aren't quite there yet but the handwriting is on the wall. They don't need 100%; they're already big enough that they control price and no new competitors can come in. The remaining ones are being steadily squeezed out or sold off. And don't pin your hopes on Adobe; they're just acquiring stock archives to wring more money out of Photoshop.
Last time I checked Fotolia were accepting new images while I agree there is a danger its a much more open market than in the days of macro sites when a small cabal of suppliers held sway and of course Getty still take full advantage of their near monopoly of historic pics
Yes that's true; I think Adobe probably doesn't really have a plan, this was just some exec's hot idea and who knows where it will end up.
The internet created new opportunities for photographers: anyone could get into the game and sell photos. But the downside was that a handful of middlemen were able to gain control of the online photo market, keep buyers and producers from ever coming into contact, and totally exploit the situation despite adding little value to the product. What's needed now is what economists call 'disintermediation' and we call 'cutting out the middleman'.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disintermediation
-
Its called competition I'm afraid you might have to get used to it.....just like the old pros who used macrostock :o
One middleman ending up in control of a market isn't 'competition', it's the opposite.
I don't think this is the case according to the poll on the right they have about 30% of the market which is too high but hardly "control"
They aren't quite there yet but the handwriting is on the wall. They don't need 100%; they're already big enough that they control price and no new competitors can come in. The remaining ones are being steadily squeezed out or sold off. And don't pin your hopes on Adobe; they're just acquiring stock archives to wring more money out of Photoshop.
Last time I checked Fotolia were accepting new images while I agree there is a danger its a much more open market than in the days of macro sites when a small cabal of suppliers held sway and of course Getty still take full advantage of their near monopoly of historic pics
Yes that's true; I think Adobe probably doesn't really have a plan, this was just some exec's hot idea and who knows where it will end up.
The internet created new opportunities for photographers: anyone could get into the game and sell photos. But the downside was that a handful of middlemen were able to gain control of the online photo market, keep buyers and producers from ever coming into contact, and totally exploit the situation despite adding little value to the product. What's needed now is what economists call 'disntermediation' and we call 'cutting out the middleman'.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disintermediation
You can do this anytime, even today, by deleting your port from all agencies and fly solo. Do your own marketing, your own sales calls, etc. What stops you?
-
Its called competition I'm afraid you might have to get used to it.....just like the old pros who used macrostock :o
Competition is good and improves our work. I have no problem with the merit system as long as the search cards are not stacked against you. That was the case before shutterstock introduced its post IPO search to increase stock prices.
Great for Jon and friends but crap for the rest of us. The new tiered EL's allow to SS to manipulate maximize profit further.
Having reread what you said I think I was being unfair although wouldn't be simpler for SS to simply pay a flat rate to everyone rather than create sophisticated algorithms and risk alienating customers. I don't have the evidence but couldn't it just be that the tide of new images is flooding you like everyone else?
If that was the case it would not have happened overnight in one day. The drop would have been gradual and dynamic according to the new content we upload.
Have you ever considered that the "old way" might have been the "wrong way"?
Maybe your photos were over-ranked by the early version of the search algorithm, making difficult for new and fresh content to penetrate the top pages.
This might have been an issue for customers who were constantly offered the same "old" stuff. Good for you, but bad for them.
The new and improved search algorithm is more dynamic, allowing fresh content to climb the ranks faster. See the observation made by Minscer: "it can take as little as 3 downloads to get to the first page". I concur with his observation.
So most probably you benefited from a privilege which got taken away from you, while making the competition fair for both newcomers and veterans.
I fully understand your frustration.
-
Search algorithms change all the time. Google change their search algorithm all the time. Apple change their app store algorithm to make results more relevant. Each time, the one who loses spots in the rankings are usually the loudest. It's the same with microstock.
If you lose your ranking on SS, do something about it. Adjust the keywords to make it more searchable. If you do nothing, it's your own fault, not anyone else's. You can't expect the world to stay the same while you improve. This is why learning SEO is super important for microstock. If you don't learn to compete in a tougher environment, you're only going to get frustrated.
-
Got an EL today. 10$ (!) less than before. And I'm in the top tier.
Thanks shutterstock, I really feel like a partner now. :)
I'll wait for like a month before making a decision, but by the looks of it, I'll opt out from EL's.
-
"This is why learning SEO is super important for microstock"
There's no class on 'learning SEO for microstock'. Because there's nothing to do, aside from using appropriate titles and descriptive keywords.
-
yup... so many naive people in the world
-
"This is why learning SEO is super important for microstock"
There's no class on 'learning SEO for microstock'. Because there's nothing to do, aside from using appropriate titles and descriptive keywords.
There are ways to optimize metadata for the SS search engine. Proper titles, proper keywording, long tail keywords. Off the top of my head, there are another 3 more ways to improve the visibility of images even more. On top of that, good optimization will lead to higher image results on Bing and Google, which will lead to more sales and overall better search ranking on SS.
There is no class for it, but that doesn't mean there isn't a lot to learn.
-
Have you ever considered that the "old way" might have been the "wrong way"?
Maybe your photos were over-ranked by the early version of the search algorithm, making difficult for new and fresh content to penetrate the top pages.
This might have been an issue for customers who were constantly offered the same "old" stuff. Good for you, but bad for them.
The new and improved search algorithm is more dynamic, allowing fresh content to climb the ranks faster. See the observation made by Minscer: "it can take as little as 3 downloads to get to the first page". I concur with his observation.
So most probably you benefited from a privilege which got taken away from you, while making the competition fair for both newcomers and veterans.
I fully understand your frustration.
It is understandable that because you are relatively new and the new search is placing your images on prime pages that this would be your perspective. It is based only on your own limited experience.
To use your words, the old search "allowed fresh content to climb the ranks". I found that fair and had no problem producing new and successful content. That changed "OVERNIGHT" when they introduced the new improved post IPO search. In one fell swoop overnight my new images died on the vine never to see the light of day.
Ask some of the old timers how their new content is doing. I would say that you are fairly arrogant if you can actually look them in the eye and toss out your reoccurring diss that they need to up their game and that their content is outdated and inferior when the change in sales happened over night.
-
You only confirm what normally happens when the search algorithms are changed.
And such changes can happen "OVERNIGHT" and not only "post IPO".
I find perfectly justifiable to constantly fine tune and improve the search algorithm in order to make easier for customers to find what they need. There are patents and PHD thesis dealing with such algorithms.
Do you expect a company like SS to stick forever to some 10 years old dusty algorithm only because it used to work in your favor?
Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk
-
"This is why learning SEO is super important for microstock"
There's no class on 'learning SEO for microstock'. Because there's nothing to do, aside from using appropriate titles and descriptive keywords.
There are ways to optimize metadata for the SS search engine. Proper titles, proper keywording, long tail keywords. Off the top of my head, there are another 3 more ways to improve the visibility of images even more. On top of that, good optimization will lead to higher image results on Bing and Google, which will lead to more sales and overall better search ranking on SS.
There is no class for it, but that doesn't mean there isn't a lot to learn.
LOL! Adorable! We'll Sean, guess you just got schooled. You must bee doing it all wrong. Obviously you have a lot to learn from Minscer. ;D ;D
:o
-
"This is why learning SEO is super important for microstock"
There's no class on 'learning SEO for microstock'. Because there's nothing to do, aside from using appropriate titles and descriptive keywords.
There are ways to optimize metadata for the SS search engine. Proper titles, proper keywording, long tail keywords. Off the top of my head, there are another 3 more ways to improve the visibility of images even more. On top of that, good optimization will lead to higher image results on Bing and Google, which will lead to more sales and overall better search ranking on SS.
There is no class for it, but that doesn't mean there isn't a lot to learn.
LOL! Adorable! We'll Sean, guess you just got schooled. You must bee doing it all wrong. Obviously you have a lot to learn from Minscer. ;D ;D
:o
We all have a lot to learn from each other. Sean is a great photographer, but even he isn't an expert in everything.
Your sarcasm aside, if you choose to believe that it won't work, then it won't work for you. If I believe that I can take advantage of the nuances of the system, then it will work for me. That's all there is to it.
-
Just got my first for 17 dollars. We will see if the volume increases.
-
Quit the whining and navel gazing take some positive action and opt out of Enhanced Licenses; I have
The microstock community forced Fotolia's hand on Dollar Photo Club which eventually dissappeared so they can do the same with this SS rubbish >:(
-
There are ways to optimize metadata for the SS search engine. Proper titles, proper keywording, long tail keywords. Off the top of my head, there are another 3 more ways to improve the visibility of images even more. On top of that, good optimization will lead to higher image results on Bing and Google, which will lead to more sales and overall better search ranking on SS.
OK, Mr Specialist Subject: The Bleedin' Obvious.
Once you've done that, what do you change when "Search algorithms change all the time. Google change their search algorithm all the time."
-
There are ways to optimize metadata for the SS search engine. Proper titles, proper keywording, long tail keywords. Off the top of my head, there are another 3 more ways to improve the visibility of images even more. On top of that, good optimization will lead to higher image results on Bing and Google, which will lead to more sales and overall better search ranking on SS.
OK, Mr Specialist Subject: The Bleedin' Obvious.
Once you've done that, what do you change when "Search algorithms change all the time. Google change their search algorithm all the time."
The only thing I can think of that would make a difference to placement aside from the obvious is downloading your own images via your work account. Which will of course get you banned quicker than anything else. I am guessing this could be one of the mysterious other methods alluded to. Especially given the knowledge of how many downloads it takes to move work onto whatever page.
-
Oh, and I've had an EL, top tier and it's below $28. Should we keep track of how many top tier EL downloads are below the old level? I think so far there has only been one reported above $28.
-
Oh, and I've had an EL, top tier and it's below $28. Should we keep track of how many top tier EL downloads are below the old level? I think so far there has only been one reported above $28.
on the 26th for 25.22$
-
There are ways to optimize metadata for the SS search engine. Proper titles, proper keywording, long tail keywords. Off the top of my head, there are another 3 more ways to improve the visibility of images even more. On top of that, good optimization will lead to higher image results on Bing and Google, which will lead to more sales and overall better search ranking on SS.
OK, Mr Specialist Subject: The Bleedin' Obvious.
Once you've done that, what do you change when "Search algorithms change all the time. Google change their search algorithm all the time."
The only thing I can think of that would make a difference to placement aside from the obvious is downloading your own images via your work account. Which will of course get you banned quicker than anything else. I am guessing this could be one of the mysterious other methods alluded to. Especially given the knowledge of how many downloads it takes to move work onto whatever page.
At the end of the day the subject and quality of content and the keywords and title are the only things we contributors really have any real control over. I've got a feeling that apart from those methods, any way of getting better placement with any of the agencies is either against the rules, or has minimal or no effect.
ETA, I thought I'd modified the text to get it back to the right size. Anyone know why it does the tiny text thing when you backspace?
-
There are ways to optimize metadata for the SS search engine. Proper titles, proper keywording, long tail keywords. Off the top of my head, there are another 3 more ways to improve the visibility of images even more. On top of that, good optimization will lead to higher image results on Bing and Google, which will lead to more sales and overall better search ranking on SS.
OK, Mr Specialist Subject: The Bleedin' Obvious.
Once you've done that, what do you change when "Search algorithms change all the time. Google change their search algorithm all the time."
The Apple App Store changed their algorithm 5 times on me. The Google search algorithm changed last year which favored responsive sites over desktop only ones. When Google announced their change, I did what I had to do, made the site responsive. But with Apple's recent change that put more weight on titles, we made some title changes and kept the keywords the same.
Even if Shutterstock change its search algorithm again, some of your images should already be prepared for it. And those that are not prepared, be ready to adjust the titles and keywords. If you have a portfolio of 1500, you can updated every image in a day or two. Yeah, it's a lot of work, but you can't just ignore it.
I've updated the metadata for 60% of my images at least TWICE now, some 3 times. When I have free time, I update the metadata for images that are not selling. That's what true SEO is about. You find out what doesn't work and fix those mistakes. And I don't use my work account to download my images. I did that for about 2 dozen images as a test, that's it.
People read my posts and think I'm some BS artist, but if you only look at the your "Image Gallery Stats", you'll see that the keywords people used to find your image are not so obvious. Sometimes it's downright shocking, but that's really the beauty of it. To understand how your users think is one of the keys to good metadata. A little while back, someone asked a question about who enjoys creating metadata...I'm one of the guys who do sometimes. If you hate it, you won't put in the effort to create good metadata.
-
.... And I don't use my work account to download my images. I did that for about 2 dozen images as a test, that's it.....
Thought so, thanks.
-
There are ways to optimize metadata for the SS search engine. Proper titles, proper keywording, long tail keywords. Off the top of my head, there are another 3 more ways to improve the visibility of images even more. On top of that, good optimization will lead to higher image results on Bing and Google, which will lead to more sales and overall better search ranking on SS.
OK, Mr Specialist Subject: The Bleedin' Obvious.
Once you've done that, what do you change when "Search algorithms change all the time. Google change their search algorithm all the time."
The Apple App Store changed their algorithm 5 times on me. The Google search algorithm changed last year which favored responsive sites over desktop only ones. When Google announced their change, I did what I had to do, made the site responsive. But with Apple's recent change that put more weight on titles, we made some title changes and kept the keywords the same.
Even if Shutterstock change its search algorithm again, some of your images should already be prepared for it. And those that are not prepared, be ready to adjust the titles and keywords. If you have a portfolio of 1500, you can updated every image in a day or two. Yeah, it's a lot of work, but you can't just ignore it.
I've updated the metadata for 60% of my images at least TWICE now, some 3 times. When I have free time, I update the metadata for images that are not selling. That's what true SEO is about. You find out what doesn't work and fix those mistakes. And I don't use my work account to download my images. I did that for about 2 dozen images as a test, that's it.
People read my posts and think I'm some BS artist, but if you only look at the your "Image Gallery Stats", you'll see that the keywords people used to find your image are not so obvious. Sometimes it's downright shocking, but that's really the beauty of it. To understand how your users think is one of the keys to good metadata. A little while back, someone asked a question about who enjoys creating metadata...I'm one of the guys who do sometimes. If you hate it, you won't put in the effort to create good metadata.
And how much sense does it make to spend this amount of time for such a small return on the sale of microstock images? If you were talking a macro port, i would totally agree with you. And also, this is where it got boring for me. I wanted to spend my time shooting. I didnt want to spend my days as an "seo expert".
Everyone has to decide that for themselves. You are ok with doing that...a lot of other people aren't. Doesnt matter how many times you try to tell them that it is something they HAVE to do.
-
I've updated the metadata for 60% of my images at least TWICE now, some 3 times. When I have free time, I update the metadata for images that are not selling. That's what true SEO is about. You find out what doesn't work and fix those mistakes.
That just means you didn't do it right the first time. You don't suddenly say "Oh, this image is a dog wearing a hat - why didn't I keyword it with dog?". That's not SEO, that's just doing it right.
-
.... And I don't use my work account to download my images. I did that for about 2 dozen images as a test, that's it.....
Thought so, thanks.
Welcome.
-
I've updated the metadata for 60% of my images at least TWICE now, some 3 times. When I have free time, I update the metadata for images that are not selling. That's what true SEO is about. You find out what doesn't work and fix those mistakes.
That just means you didn't do it right the first time. You don't suddenly say "Oh, this image is a dog wearing a hat - why didn't I keyword it with dog?". That's not SEO, that's just doing it right.
Nobody does it right the first time, not even the best. That's the fallacy of many people, to think that we can do it right the first time. What we can do is improve on our first try, like add the words "food" and "gathering" to a turkey image so it becomes even more visible.
-
I've updated the metadata for 60% of my images at least TWICE now, some 3 times. When I have free time, I update the metadata for images that are not selling. That's what true SEO is about. You find out what doesn't work and fix those mistakes.
That just means you didn't do it right the first time. You don't suddenly say "Oh, this image is a dog wearing a hat - why didn't I keyword it with dog?". That's not SEO, that's just doing it right.
Nobody does it right the first time, not even the best. That's the fallacy of many people, to think that we can do it right the first time. What we can do is improve on our first try, like add the words "food" and "gathering" to a turkey image so it becomes even more visible.
But (arguably) not "food" if it a live turkey, and not "gathering" if the turkey isn't part of a gathering. . .
Or Christmas, Thanksgiving etc. unless the turkey is part of that celebration in the image.
Most of the folks here who have been doing this for years, do get it right first time. Not every time, but most of the time, because they don't want to spend the time going back over images. After all's said and done the main "what you see" keywords are what gets you most of the sales.
-
You only confirm what normally happens when the search algorithms are changed.
And such changes can happen "OVERNIGHT" and not only "post IPO".
I find perfectly justifiable to constantly fine tune and improve the search algorithm in order to make easier for customers to find what they need. There are patents and PHD thesis dealing with such algorithms.
Do you expect a company like SS to stick forever to some 10 years old dusty algorithm only because it used to work in your favor?
Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk
No I don't, however I DO expect and have earned a level playing field and that changed when they introduced the new search.
If you think that you are superior and smarter and that your port will never be downgraded so that shutterstock can earn more money serving content from new contributors you are in for a shock down the line.
-
Quit the whining and navel gazing take some positive action and opt out of Enhanced Licenses; I have
The microstock community forced Fotolia's hand on Dollar Photo Club which eventually dissappeared so they can do the same with this SS rubbish >:(
I don't like the wording (calling complaints whining is dismissive and rude) but I think the recommendation is right. I just opted out of ELs. It means less money in the short run, but I'm willing to give it a shot to see if we can halt SS's looting of contributor royalties before it gets too far gone.
https://twitter.com/joannsnover/status/692752694927167488
-
I've updated the metadata for 60% of my images at least TWICE now, some 3 times. When I have free time, I update the metadata for images that are not selling. That's what true SEO is about. You find out what doesn't work and fix those mistakes.
That just means you didn't do it right the first time. You don't suddenly say "Oh, this image is a dog wearing a hat - why didn't I keyword it with dog?". That's not SEO, that's just doing it right.
Nobody does it right the first time, not even the best. That's the fallacy of many people, to think that we can do it right the first time. What we can do is improve on our first try, like add the words "food" and "gathering" to a turkey image so it becomes even more visible.
But (arguably) not "food" if it a live turkey, and not "gathering" if the turkey isn't part of a gathering. . .
Or Christmas, Thanksgiving etc. unless the turkey is part of that celebration in the image.
Most of the folks here who have been doing this for years, do get it right first time. Not every time, but most of the time, because they don't want to spend the time going back over images. After all's said and done the main "what you see" keywords are what gets you most of the sales.
Well, the image I was referring to did had a family gathering and a cooked turkey. The obvious keywords are incredibly hard to compete for. If you started early and got placed well with an obvious keyword, you don't have to do anything. If you're uploading an image today, and you're placed at the bottom of a 100,000 image heap, what do you do? You absolutely include the obvious keywords, but it must be accompanied by other longtail and unconventional keywords to help it climb up the ranks.
-
I've updated the metadata for 60% of my images at least TWICE now, some 3 times. When I have free time, I update the metadata for images that are not selling. That's what true SEO is about. You find out what doesn't work and fix those mistakes.
That just means you didn't do it right the first time. You don't suddenly say "Oh, this image is a dog wearing a hat - why didn't I keyword it with dog?". That's not SEO, that's just doing it right.
Nobody does it right the first time, not even the best. That's the fallacy of many people, to think that we can do it right the first time. What we can do is improve on our first try, like add the words "food" and "gathering" to a turkey image so it becomes even more visible.
But (arguably) not "food" if it a live turkey, and not "gathering" if the turkey isn't part of a gathering. . .
Or Christmas, Thanksgiving etc. unless the turkey is part of that celebration in the image.
Most of the folks here who have been doing this for years, do get it right first time. Not every time, but most of the time, because they don't want to spend the time going back over images. After all's said and done the main "what you see" keywords are what gets you most of the sales.
Well, the image I was referring to did had a family gathering and a cooked turkey. The obvious keywords are incredibly hard to compete for. If you started early and got placed well with an obvious keyword, you don't have to do anything. If you're uploading an image today, and you're placed at the bottom of a 100,000 image heap, what do you do? You absolutely include the obvious keywords, but it must be accompanied by other longtail and unconventional keywords to help it climb up the ranks.
No argument there. The "obvious" keywords are going to be hard to compete with. Unfortunately getting too creative with keywords can just end with spamming, which does nobody any good in the long run. At the end of the day it's better to try to find less obvious "niche" subjects if you can.
-
You only confirm what normally happens when the search algorithms are changed.
And such changes can happen "OVERNIGHT" and not only "post IPO".
I find perfectly justifiable to constantly fine tune and improve the search algorithm in order to make easier for customers to find what they need. There are patents and PHD thesis dealing with such algorithms.
Do you expect a company like SS to stick forever to some 10 years old dusty algorithm only because it used to work in your favor?
Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk
No I don't, however I DO expect and have earned a level playing field and that changed when they introduced the new search.
If you think that you are superior and smarter and that your port will never be downgraded so that shutterstock can earn more money serving content from new contributors you are in for a shock down the line.
No, I'm neither smarter nor superior. I'm continuously learning and experimenting.
When my revenue will decline, I will look in the mirror to try and understand what is wrong with my work. I'll do my best to fix the problems, instead of going paranoid blaming IPO conspiracies, etc.
A clear fact is that our competition is getting stronger every day, the abundance of pictures is driving costs down. So, I am aware that this business is in decline. But again, it has nothing to do with IPOs and other speculations.
My goal is to ride this wave as long as possible.
Btw, when is this "veteran penalty" expected to kick in? The day after you reach top tier, as I read some of your fellow conspirationists claim? The month after? The year after? 2 years after? Do I have to get myself ready to be shocked 3 years after? When?
-
Oh, and I've had an EL, top tier and it's below $28. Should we keep track of how many top tier EL downloads are below the old level? I think so far there has only been one reported above $28.
I think we need a poll to report our results long term
-
You only confirm what normally happens when the search algorithms are changed.
And such changes can happen "OVERNIGHT" and not only "post IPO".
I find perfectly justifiable to constantly fine tune and improve the search algorithm in order to make easier for customers to find what they need. There are patents and PHD thesis dealing with such algorithms.
Do you expect a company like SS to stick forever to some 10 years old dusty algorithm only because it used to work in your favor?
Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk
No I don't, however I DO expect and have earned a level playing field and that changed when they introduced the new search.
If you think that you are superior and smarter and that your port will never be downgraded so that shutterstock can earn more money serving content from new contributors you are in for a shock down the line.
No, I'm neither smarter nor superior. I'm continuously learning and experimenting.
When my revenue will decline, I will look in the mirror to try and understand what is wrong with my work. I'll do my best to fix the problems, instead of going paranoid blaming IPO conspiracies, etc.
A clear fact is that our competition is getting stronger every day, the abundance of pictures is driving costs down. So, I am aware that this business is in decline. But again, it has nothing to do with IPOs and other speculations.
My goal is to ride this wave as long as possible.
Btw, when is this "veteran penalty" expected to kick in? The day after you reach top tier, as I read some of your fellow conspirationists claim? The month after? The year after? 2 years after? Do I have to get myself ready to be shocked 3 years after? When?
Done squabbling with you, again fairly arrogant if you think we have not asked ourselves those questions, including doing what we can on our end to solve the problem.
I can remember talking in person to someone with a similar attitude, who thought it could never happen to him.
Until it did.
-
There are ways to optimize metadata for the SS search engine. Proper titles, proper keywording, long tail keywords. Off the top of my head, there are another 3 more ways to improve the visibility of images even more. On top of that, good optimization will lead to higher image results on Bing and Google, which will lead to more sales and overall better search ranking on SS.
OK, Mr Specialist Subject: The Bleedin' Obvious.
Once you've done that, what do you change when "Search algorithms change all the time. Google change their search algorithm all the time."
Even if Shutterstock change its search algorithm again, some of your images should already be prepared for it. And those that are not prepared, be ready to adjust the titles and keywords. If you have a portfolio of 1500, you can updated every image in a day or two. Yeah, it's a lot of work, but you can't just ignore it.
Makes no sense. If you have a handle on keywording, which we should get long before 1500 images, there should only ever be a very tiny number where you forgot a keyword (normal human error), at least on an non-CV site like SS.
if you only look at the your "Image Gallery Stats", you'll see that the keywords people used to find your image are not so obvious.
I'll take your word for it, but these are the words you already thought of; what it can't tell you is whether you missed possible sales because of not thinking of a keyword. And there's always the risk of hacking off buyers from the site if too many searches throw up too many files that they weren't expecting because of very loose keywording, far less loose search algorithm, genuine error or deliberate spamming.
-
I've updated the metadata for 60% of my images at least TWICE now, some 3 times. When I have free time, I update the metadata for images that are not selling. That's what true SEO is about. You find out what doesn't work and fix those mistakes.
That just means you didn't do it right the first time. You don't suddenly say "Oh, this image is a dog wearing a hat - why didn't I keyword it with dog?". That's not SEO, that's just doing it right.
Nobody does it right the first time, not even the best. That's the fallacy of many people, to think that we can do it right the first time. What we can do is improve on our first try, like add the words "food" and "gathering" to a turkey image so it becomes even more visible.
But (arguably) not "food" if it a live turkey, and not "gathering" if the turkey isn't part of a gathering. . .
Or Christmas, Thanksgiving etc. unless the turkey is part of that celebration in the image.
Most of the folks here who have been doing this for years, do get it right first time. Not every time, but most of the time, because they don't want to spend the time going back over images. After all's said and done the main "what you see" keywords are what gets you most of the sales.
Well, the image I was referring to did had a family gathering and a cooked turkey. The obvious keywords are incredibly hard to compete for. If you started early and got placed well with an obvious keyword, you don't have to do anything. If you're uploading an image today, and you're placed at the bottom of a 100,000 image heap, what do you do? You absolutely include the obvious keywords, but it must be accompanied by other longtail and unconventional keywords to help it climb up the ranks.
No argument there. The "obvious" keywords are going to be hard to compete with. Unfortunately getting too creative with keywords can just end with spamming, which does nobody any good in the long run. At the end of the day it's better to try to find less obvious "niche" subjects if you can.
I wouldn't call it spamming. Certain keywords will always be considered spam when taken out of context. Take for instance: Sunglasses. If you have "ultraviolet" and "protection" as keywords, both words would be considered 'spam' when taken out of context. And yet, they are relevant keywords to the image.
And you know you can't just find a 'niche' if you want to be hugely successful. I'm perfectly OK with competing in certain popular categories if I believe I can do better.
-
for those who don't follow these things regularly. Our 'partner' is now worth $1.03 billion, ($1,030,000,000).
SSTK@ $28.67 (we might just about have been able to buy a common share with an old style ED). 17 million more ED's and you could control the company.
I'd say our 'partner' is doing rather well. 'Partner' in this context being somewhat analagous to a Hump Back Whale being a partner with a krill. Hump Back's like to crowd source their dinners.
-
for those who don't follow these things regularly. Our 'partner' is now worth $1.03 billion, ($1,030,000,000).
SSTK@ $28.67 (we might just about have been able to buy a common share with an old style ED). 17 million more ED's and you could control the company.
I'd say our 'partner' is doing rather well. 'Partner' in this context being somewhat analagous to a Hump Back Whale being a partner with a krill. Hump Back's like to crowd source their dinners.
ŕ propos on many levels
-
I wouldn't call it spamming. Certain keywords will always be considered spam when taken out of context. Take for instance: Sunglasses. If you have "ultraviolet" and "protection" as keywords, both words would be considered 'spam' when taken out of context. And yet, they are relevant keywords to the image.
And you know you can't just find a 'niche' if you want to be hugely successful. I'm perfectly OK with competing in certain popular categories if I believe I can do better.
If the keywords are stretching what is actually there in the image, then most people consider it to be spam. What you do is of course up to you and the agencies you submit to.
FWIW, I'd say "protection" as applied to sunglasses is pretty marginal, they're more to do with fashion, and "looking cool" IMHO. You have to ask yourself why anyone searching for "Ultraviolet" would want to find sunglasses, they will want shots of UV light effects, or UV lighting equipment.
Good luck with being "hugely successful", and I sincerely mean that. It's a hard path to tread with so many people who are already successful already there at the top. I think you will find that quality of images, models and concepts, and time spent working hard at getting the largest PF possible will far outweigh the dubious benefits of applying every conceivable keyword to every image.
-
FWIW, I'd say "protection" as applied to sunglasses is pretty marginal, they're more to do with fashion, and "looking cool" IMHO. You have to ask yourself why anyone searching for "Ultraviolet" would want to find sunglasses, they will want shots of UV light effects, or UV lighting equipment.
And that is why keys are subjective. I can think of many, many reasons for sunglasses to be protective and a good selling keyword. Health and safety, eye protection (outside) and the like are actually quite common in industrial settings and by extension, industrial customers. I once used to work building websites for mining companies and I have done searches for similar things when I used to buy image licenses.
-
Unless you know something I don't Minscer its very hard to determine what keywords customer actually search for to retrieve our images on. SS give some info on what is found and Dreamstime on the search used for the most part the terms are blindingly obvious but in some cases on Dreamstime the search words have nothing to do with the image WHATSOEVER and do not appear in the keywords. Personally I think time is better spent on creating new images than tweaking existing failures but if it works for you then great.
-
Quit the whining and navel gazing
LOL i like that... ;D
i don't know all the answers, and from here so many pages, it's obvious neither do anyone .
or else we won't be going on and on and on ... whining and navel gazing... as teddy the cat
so well puts it.
only thing i know is... whoever is still making money with ss, and is seeing an uptick in earnings
...
why would they come in here to tell you their way???
obviously the ones who are not talking, are the ones not whining and the ones still making $$$$$$
-
In the end the only stats that you can rely on are your own.........and the only thing you can change is your portfolio and where you choose to put it
-
FWIW, I'd say "protection" as applied to sunglasses is pretty marginal, they're more to do with fashion, and "looking cool" IMHO. You have to ask yourself why anyone searching for "Ultraviolet" would want to find sunglasses, they will want shots of UV light effects, or UV lighting equipment.
And that is why keys are subjective. I can think of many, many reasons for sunglasses to be protective and a good selling keyword. Health and safety, eye protection (outside) and the like are actually quite common in industrial settings and by extension, industrial customers. I once used to work building websites for mining companies and I have done searches for similar things when I used to buy image licenses.
They are indeed subjective. I'd say that tinted safety glasses, as would (or at least should) be used in industry for protection, are a different thing to "sunglasses" which I'd think of a fashion accessory, and wouldn't (or shouldn't) be relied on for protection.
If you have "sunglasses" in an image with ordinary sunglasses in it then that's enough IMO.
-
In the end the only stats that you can rely on are your own.........and the only thing you can change is your portfolio and where you choose to put it
i agree with u.
i know it's temptation to opt out on EL or complain about the weed man and ukrainians spamming the ss
and pushing the good stuff out. but i don't know if opting out or boycotting by withdrawing portfolio going to stocksy, we know not everyone is welcomed there,.
or going to adobe , yay, alamy, etc that produce 0 sales ... is going to help you or me.
it is only cutting your own hand and letting the grass people flood the market even more.
also, last, i cannot see how this will make the clients pull out of ss. unless the clients are looking for grass and marijuana, and tomato and apples, and repitition icons,
the client is not going to know ss big addition each day contain garbage.
cutting out on ss is not the solution. writing an email may not also do anything.
you have to talk to the boss to make a dent in this,..
and afaik , no one knows how to talk directly to jon o.
-
"only thing i know is... whoever is still making money with ss, and is seeing an uptick in earnings
...
why would they come in here to tell you their way???
obviously the ones who are not talking, are the ones not whining and the ones still making $$$$$$"
I was mainly talking about this I don't think anyone has some great secret about SEO or anything else you can look at your own stats and portfolio and see what sells and is profitable for you and do more of that. No one is forcing you to do this and if you think your pictures are worth more of course you should pull them and make the money elsewhere.
-
You only confirm what normally happens when the search algorithms are changed.
And such changes can happen "OVERNIGHT" and not only "post IPO".
I find perfectly justifiable to constantly fine tune and improve the search algorithm in order to make easier for customers to find what they need. There are patents and PHD thesis dealing with such algorithms.
Do you expect a company like SS to stick forever to some 10 years old dusty algorithm only because it used to work in your favor?
Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk
No I don't, however I DO expect and have earned a level playing field and that changed when they introduced the new search.
If you think that you are superior and smarter and that your port will never be downgraded so that shutterstock can earn more money serving content from new contributors you are in for a shock down the line.
No, I'm neither smarter nor superior. I'm continuously learning and experimenting.
When my revenue will decline, I will look in the mirror to try and understand what is wrong with my work. I'll do my best to fix the problems, instead of going paranoid blaming IPO conspiracies, etc.
A clear fact is that our competition is getting stronger every day, the abundance of pictures is driving costs down. So, I am aware that this business is in decline. But again, it has nothing to do with IPOs and other speculations.
My goal is to ride this wave as long as possible.
Btw, when is this "veteran penalty" expected to kick in? The day after you reach top tier, as I read some of your fellow conspirationists claim? The month after? The year after? 2 years after? Do I have to get myself ready to be shocked 3 years after? When?
Done squabbling with you, again fairly arrogant if you think we have not asked ourselves those questions, including doing what we can on our end to solve the problem.
I can remember talking in person to someone with a similar attitude, who thought it could never happen to him.
Until it did.
No problem. Anyway, we are not going anywhere with your "Believe me, I'm a doctor" attitude.
Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk
-
"only thing i know is... whoever is still making money with ss, and is seeing an uptick in earnings
...
why would they come in here to tell you their way???
obviously the ones who are not talking, are the ones not whining and the ones still making $$$$$$"
I was mainly talking about this I don't think anyone has some great secret about SEO or anything else you can look at your own stats and portfolio and see what sells and is profitable for you and do more of that. No one is forcing you to do this and if you think your pictures are worth more of course you should pull them and make the money elsewhere.
There is no great secret. It's usually the small details that makes the big difference, isn't it? I'm not trying to sell anyone a service, so we can strike that out.
What I'm sharing is a belief and the fewer people subscribe to that belief, the better I'm off. And my belief is that if people take their time creating metadata, the better their images will perform in the long-term. I equate creating metadata to cooking. You can throw everything into a pot and pray something good will come out of it, or you can learn the nuances of it and make something good. A lot of people just throw everything into a pot and pray.
It's just like some pickup artist teaching guys to pick up women. All things being equal, the guy who believes in it and work the hardest will have the most success, while the guy who have doubts will not be good at it. Success is dependent on the whole package and in the case of Microstock — quality, artistic value, commercial value & metadata / keywording. If one of the ingredients is missing, then it won't reach its full potential.
-
"only thing i know is... whoever is still making money with ss, and is seeing an uptick in earnings
...
why would they come in here to tell you their way???
obviously the ones who are not talking, are the ones not whining and the ones still making $$$$$$"
I was mainly talking about this I don't think anyone has some great secret about SEO or anything else you can look at your own stats and portfolio and see what sells and is profitable for you and do more of that. No one is forcing you to do this and if you think your pictures are worth more of course you should pull them and make the money elsewhere.
There is no great secret. It's usually the small details that makes the big difference, isn't it? I'm not trying to sell anyone a service, so we can strike that out.
What I'm sharing is a belief and the fewer people subscribe to that belief, the better I'm off. And my belief is that if people take their time creating metadata, the better their images will perform in the long-term. I equate creating metadata to cooking. You can throw everything into a pot and pray something good will come out of it, or you can learn the nuances of it and make something good. A lot of people just throw everything into a pot and pray.
It's just like some pickup artist teaching guys to pick up women. All things being equal, the guy who believes in it and work the hardest will have the most success, while the guy who have doubts will not be good at it. Success is dependent on the whole package and in the case of Microstock — quality, artistic value, commercial value & metadata / keywording. If one of the ingredients is missing, then it won't reach its full potential.
Totally agree with the bold part with a slight tweak. Optimized metadata. I'm constantly working on evaluating and updating my website metadata. This month my personal website sales will exceed all of my stock and POD sites combined. It's not metadata alone that did this but it's a big part. Until search engines can accurately identify what's in an image, metadata is the the only way they see an image
-
It was not long before SS changed their sub package structure to steal more money from the contributors, and now this... >:(
-
The russian microstock forum microstock.ru has begun keep track of the new EL downloads based on sales price point and country of sale origin.
You can see the translated discussion text, spreadsheets and graphs here.
http://tinyurl.com/hen75yz (http://tinyurl.com/hen75yz)
-
The russian microstock forum microstock.ru has begun keep track of the new EL downloads based on sales price point and country of sale origin.
You can see the translated discussion text, spreadsheets and graphs here.
[url]http://tinyurl.com/hen75yz[/url] ([url]http://tinyurl.com/hen75yz[/url])
Interesting!
I wonder if we can use the poll system available on this site to do something similar.
I never created a poll here, so, will it work if we set one with the following options:
- voting intervals <=$15, $18, $22, $25 and >=$28 (since only 5 voting options are available)
- unlimited number of votes/user (eg.1000)
- allow voters to change their vote
- set the poll to run for, let's say, 1000 days
I mean, with the above settings, will voters be able to return to the poll and vote again, each time an EL is sold, without losing the previous vote?
?
-
The russian microstock forum microstock.ru has begun keep track of the new EL downloads based on sales price point and country of sale origin.
You can see the translated discussion text, spreadsheets and graphs here.
[url]http://tinyurl.com/hen75yz[/url] ([url]http://tinyurl.com/hen75yz[/url])
As per Shutterstock Paul Brennan:"To help simplify the earnings schedule, your enhanced license payout will now be determined by your earnings tier."
Yeah, these tables and graphs look really SIMPLIFIED compared to the original 28 dollars per EL ;D ;D ;D
-
The russian microstock forum microstock.ru has begun keep track of the new EL downloads based on sales price point and country of sale origin.
You can see the translated discussion text, spreadsheets and graphs here.
[url]http://tinyurl.com/hen75yz[/url] ([url]http://tinyurl.com/hen75yz[/url])
As per Shutterstock Paul Brennan:"To help simplify the earnings schedule, your enhanced license payout will now be determined by your earnings tier."
Yeah, these tables and graphs look really SIMPLIFIED compared to the original 28 dollars per EL ;D ;D ;D
Looks like Paul is thinking that contributors are stupid.
"We are partners..." bla bla...
-
The russian microstock forum microstock.ru has begun keep track of the new EL downloads based on sales price point and country of sale origin.
You can see the translated discussion text, spreadsheets and graphs here.
[url]http://tinyurl.com/hen75yz[/url] ([url]http://tinyurl.com/hen75yz[/url])
Interesting!
I wonder if we can use the poll system available on this site to do something similar.
I never created a poll here, so, will it work if we set one with the following options:
- voting intervals <=$15, $18, $22, $25 and >=$28 (since only 5 voting options are available)
- unlimited number of votes/user (eg.1000)
- allow voters to change their vote
- set the poll to run for, let's say, 1000 days
I mean, with the above settings, will voters be able to return to the poll and vote again, each time an EL is sold, without losing the previous vote?
?
Yes we could do this, however the numbers seem to be a moving target.