Author Topic: What if SS offer exclusivity with these contributors commissions (Read 38995 times)

Tror · « **Reply #50 on:** June 25, 2015, 06:48 »

Royalties are not everything. The concept of Shutterstocks success in the past was
1. not screwing up
2. good business relations with B2B and customers.

Beyond that, they have not done much to support contributors and actively ignore inquiries of us for _years_ (e.g. Payoneer, incompetent and ridiculous inspection routines, better Release Manager,...). All this and the missing raise which is long overdue already drove away some high class contributors from them. I do not have the impression they are so very interested in the concerns of their suppliers.

And this leads me to the conclusion that I would not want to be exclusively involved.

Any company which wishes to engage me into a more profund commitment like a exclusive contract needs to show actively that it is actually interested in supporting me as their supplier.

MxR · « **Reply #51 on:** June 25, 2015, 08:12 »

Yes... with 1 dollar subs

cobalt · « **Reply #52 on:** June 25, 2015, 10:22 »

Quote from: cuppacoffee on June 25, 2015, 06:31

Yes, seriously. What sells the most is not always of the highest "quality". We know what we would eliminate on most of the sites as lowest quality but when you try to define what should be moved to the top tier you can't always identify what that is. Best camera, best lighting, studio shots? Look at the discussions lately of another site that considers themselves new and meeting the needs of today's designer's. Comments were made about many out of focus, filtered, dull colored photos there were on the site. Do you consider those high quality? I'm just trying to get a definition of high quality when it comes to stock imagery. Saleability and quality are not the same thing, or are they?

This is so true, if you look at the smartphone collections full of underexposed,out of focus,completely overfiltered files and then see that they can be sold for hundreds of dollars...it really is a difficult decision.

I think in the end the customer will pay for the editing and filtering of a collection for a given style or theme.

Of course there are images that cost thousands to produce, but still, some artists find they can get their best return by offering them for 30 cents and get the volume.

gbalex · « **Reply #53 on:** June 25, 2015, 10:25 »

Quote from: cobalt on June 24, 2015, 22:21

We have all understood you don't like shutterstock by now.

So which agency would you recommend for exclusive content? Which agency gets it right?

There are a huge number of agencies out there, or do you think it is better to just sell direct?

Instead of always bashing SS, why don't you promote a fair trade site that you like?

ETA: what about 500pix? Pays out 70% and has macro pricing. Maybe that is a better environment for your work.

You have the right to overlook the facts and exalt various sites, just as I have to the right to answer a direct question regarding any site truthfully. Your suggestion would be off topic.

The thread topic and question was

"Topic: What if SS offer exclusivity with these contributors commissions. Will anyone accept that? Explain why not or why would you?"

cobalt · « **Reply #54 on:** June 25, 2015, 10:30 »

And all discussions here only deal with one question without ever evolving...

So you are not interested in placing images exclusively on SS and I would be, depending on what they offer. Very simple.

stock-will-eat-itself · « **Reply #55 on:** June 25, 2015, 10:31 »

Quote from: cuppacoffee on June 25, 2015, 06:31

Yes, seriously. What sells the most is not always of the highest "quality". We know what we would eliminate on most of the sites as lowest quality but when you try to define what should be moved to the top tier you can't always identify what that is. Best camera, best lighting, studio shots? Look at the discussions lately of another site that considers themselves new and meeting the needs of today's designer's. Comments were made about many out of focus, filtered, dull colored photos there were on the site. Do you consider those high quality? I'm just trying to get a definition of high quality when it comes to stock imagery. Saleability and quality are not the same thing, or are they?

Are you telling me every single image you produce is the same?

There isn't a percentage of your portfolio that is of a higher quality than the rest?

gbalex · « **Reply #56 on:** June 25, 2015, 10:38 »

Quote from: cobalt on June 25, 2015, 10:30

And all discussions here only deal with one question without ever evolving...

So you are not interested in placing images exclusively on SS and I would be, depending on what they offer. Very simple.

Evolving would include the willingness to look at the reality of the situation. At one time we all loved shutterstock, many of us have changed our opinions based on shutterstocks years long actions; which you are now asking me to ignore.

You have been a member of shutterstock for a blip in time and you are asking me to stuff my experience there, so that you can keep your blissful picture. If you want to evolve you might ask yourself why you expect this of me. And you might also ask yourself why you glorify sites that do not deserve it.

cobalt · « **Reply #57 on:** June 25, 2015, 10:48 »

Why do I have to follow your choices? Can´t I make my own? And who said I have the intention of placing thousands of files on the micros? I think I sent less than 100 images to the micros this year.

SS has been very good for video, but not really impressive for photos, like most micro agencies, except for the exclusive files. But in general, exclusive images, both on micro/mid/macro in different places earn me more money, than files distributed everyhwere.

So for my work, exclusive images depending on theme and style, seem to be the best way forward. This is my conclusion from being indie for two years.

Your portfolio and your personal style will give you different results. Other friends of mine upload most of their files everyhwere and it seems to work for them.

It really isn´t a big problem, there are so many different places to work with. And it brings good balance if you are not dependent on one single site. No agency gives me more than 15% in total for the month. And I hope it will stay that way.

Eta: I can relate to the disappointment when you fall in love with a site and then it all comes crushing down around you. But I was artist exclusive, you have always been completely free.

so when I went indie i decided I don't want to ever be overly dependent on just one place.

The sites will all have good years and bad years, good managers with vision and people with no ideas. i can't change that. But I can decide and fully control how much I want to be exposed to them.

etudiante_rapide · « **Reply #58 on:** June 26, 2015, 15:15 »

really, i am not one to believe ex employees any more than i believe some ss guy who comes in here one week to complain about poor sales, then next week say hooray best day ever,etc.
the publishing of how bad ss treat employees is really even more difficult to believe. which ex-employee has anything nice to say if they were fired or just laid-off for poor performance? can i see the reason why they left or quit?
also, when you join any company, you also signed as part of the employment agreement never to give out anything that is considered confidential.

for that last reason, i never believe anything published on the web or anywhere by ex-employees.

but i do believe when someone like JSLocke comes in here and say he had 40% drop in sales. and that is something to worry ... putting your future in ss.

Batman · « **Reply #59 on:** June 26, 2015, 20:40 »

Quote from: gbalex on June 25, 2015, 10:38

Quote from: cobalt on June 25, 2015, 10:30
And all discussions here only deal with one question without ever evolving...

So you are not interested in placing images exclusively on SS and I would be, depending on what they offer. Very simple.

Evolving would include the willingness to look at the reality of the situation. At one time we all loved shutterstock, many of us have changed our opinions based on shutterstocks years long actions; which you are now asking me to ignore.

You have been a member of shutterstock for a blip in time and you are asking me to stuff my experience there, so that you can keep your blissful picture. If you want to evolve you might ask yourself why you expect this of me. And you might also ask yourself why you glorify sites that do not deserve it.

Enjoy your everlasting miserable outlook, personal dissatisfaction and anger. Stop forcing it on everybody else in the forum.

PixelBytes · « **Reply #60 on:** June 26, 2015, 22:07 »

Quote from: Batman on June 26, 2015, 20:40

Quote from: gbalex on June 25, 2015, 10:38
Quote from: cobalt on June 25, 2015, 10:30
And all discussions here only deal with one question without ever evolving...

So you are not interested in placing images exclusively on SS and I would be, depending on what they offer. Very simple.

Evolving would include the willingness to look at the reality of the situation. At one time we all loved shutterstock, many of us have changed our opinions based on shutterstocks years long actions; which you are now asking me to ignore.

You have been a member of shutterstock for a blip in time and you are asking me to stuff my experience there, so that you can keep your blissful picture. If you want to evolve you might ask yourself why you expect this of me. And you might also ask yourself why you glorify sites that do not deserve it.

Enjoy your everlasting miserable outlook, personal dissatisfaction and anger. Stop forcing it on everybody else in the forum.

Gbalex has the same right to his opinion as me and you. Sometimes I agree with him and sometimes not. Do you know about the ignore button?

Pauws99 · « **Reply #61 on:** June 27, 2015, 00:33 »

What a lot of debate about something that's not going to happen.....unless perhaps SS start to lose sales which would not be a good time to go exclusive. I could be wrong of course but will think about it properly if it ever happens

gbalex · « **Reply #62 on:** June 27, 2015, 01:55 »

Quote from: cobalt on June 24, 2015, 22:21

We have all understood you don't like shutterstock by now.

So which agency would you recommend for exclusive content? Which agency gets it right?

There are a huge number of agencies out there, or do you think it is better to just sell direct?

Instead of always bashing SS, why don't you promote a fair trade site that you like?

ETA: what about 500pix? Pays out 70% and has macro pricing. Maybe that is a better environment for your work.

I am not the one telling any of you what to post, where to submit, how to behave or how to view the microstock business.

Instead you are all trying to force your viewpoints on me and you expect me to stuff it if I do not share your veiws. I have every right to answer a direct question honestly.

Pauws99 · « **Reply #63 on:** June 27, 2015, 03:47 »

I like to hear different views that's how we progress and learn. I don't like personal generalised attacks they don't help me.

cobalt · « **Reply #64 on:** June 27, 2015, 11:40 »

gbalex, it is your life. I am just wondering why you seem so focussed on SS, if you are so disappointed. If you want to make SS the main focus of your uploads, time and financial returns that is your decision. You have been indie much longer than me,so you know what you are doing.

But I don´t have to make SS my main source of income and it is definetly not my main source of interest in stock, I am free to look around and work with the whole market. One of the agencies I work with, but not the only one.

I mean, you keep warning us about SS, that years ago it was a good agency, but now it changed, that they have rigged their best match to encourage newbies, but that this "bonus" runs out after two years etc...

So isn´t what I am doing logical, to not be too dependent on them?

Everybody has their own strategy, there is not just one way to do stock.

So if SS starts to offer exclusive images one day, and if the program offered made financial sense, I would add them to my list of exclusive sellers, yes I would.

Maybe SS will go back to being what it was one day and you will earn again as much as you used to.

Would exclusive images help SS become a stronger agency? Would it be good for your income if they offered such a program?

But nobody knows if they will ever do it. They always said they wouldn´t.

gbalex · « **Reply #65 on:** June 28, 2015, 11:37 »

Cobalt you seem to be overly interested in my business. Let me worry about where I place my content.

From a moral standpoint I think it is fair to advise new contributors when a company openly states that they intend to keep pricing at a level that will gain their company market share because their business choices have and will continue to affect the entire market. I can understand that the company and those actively working to promote said company would rather keep those company comments to the wall street crowd hidden.

You have stated in another thread that you are working with fotolia, shutterstock and formerly istock to help groups of their contributors produce authentic content so they can make better offers to their local customers and markets currently provided by macro producers. In that post, you pointed out that of course agencies want to distinguish themselves from each other and your point is valid. I can see why the sites would be interested in working with you to secure such content.

However you tend to only highlight positive points about each company. Many of those points have gone against my own experience with those companies and each of us has the right to report our own experiences.

I can see why your comments would be beneficial for the micro companies you praise enthusiastically. However honest viewpoints from long time contributors and valid comments from said company, might also be helpful for new contributors who would like to know where the value of their portfolios will stand in future years.

photominer · « **Reply #66 on:** June 28, 2015, 11:55 »

Quote from: gbalex on June 28, 2015, 11:37

I can see why your comments would be beneficial for the micro companies you praise enthusiastically. However honest viewpoints from long time contributors and valid comments from said company, might also be helpful for new contributors who would like to know where the value of their portfolios will stand in future years.

So what's your most helpful positive suggestion on where new contributors should place their content?

gbalex · « **Reply #67 on:** June 28, 2015, 12:19 »

ShadySue · « **Reply #68 on:** June 28, 2015, 13:18 »

Quote from: photominer on June 28, 2015, 11:55

Quote from: gbalex on June 28, 2015, 11:37
I can see why your comments would be beneficial for the micro companies you praise enthusiastically. However honest viewpoints from long time contributors and valid comments from said company, might also be helpful for new contributors who would like to know where the value of their portfolios will stand in future years.
So what's your most helpful positive suggestion on where new contributors should place their content?

Quote from: gbalex on June 28, 2015, 12:19

.

Good answer.

photominer · « **Reply #69 on:** June 28, 2015, 14:12 »

Quote from: gbalex on June 28, 2015, 12:19

.

You have no opinion you're willing to share about any agency except SS?

ShadySue · « **Reply #70 on:** June 28, 2015, 14:16 »

Quote from: photominer on June 28, 2015, 14:12

Quote from: gbalex on June 28, 2015, 12:19
.
You have no opinion you're willing to share about any agency except SS?

They were only asked about positive recommendations, which isn't at all the same thing.

photominer · « **Reply #71 on:** June 28, 2015, 14:24 »

Quote from: ShadySue on June 28, 2015, 14:16

Quote from: photominer on June 28, 2015, 14:12
Quote from: gbalex on June 28, 2015, 12:19
.
You have no opinion you're willing to share about any agency except SS?
They were only asked about positive recommendations, which isn't at all the same thing.

Then I will open it up and ask for (their pro, based on long experience) positive or negative opinion on other agencies.

gbalex · « **Reply #72 on:** June 28, 2015, 14:31 »

Quote from: photominer on June 28, 2015, 14:24

Quote from: ShadySue on June 28, 2015, 14:16
Quote from: photominer on June 28, 2015, 14:12
Quote from: gbalex on June 28, 2015, 12:19
.
You have no opinion you're willing to share about any agency except SS?
They were only asked about positive recommendations, which isn't at all the same thing.
Then I will open it up and ask for (their pro, based on long experience) positive or negative opinion on other agencies.

Would you like me to follow you in various threads and critique your responses.

I think I will leave it to you to determine how you wish to conduct your business and what you post in each thread.

photominer · « **Reply #73 on:** June 28, 2015, 14:39 »

Quote from: gbalex on June 28, 2015, 14:31

Quote from: photominer on June 28, 2015, 14:24
Quote from: ShadySue on June 28, 2015, 14:16
Quote from: photominer on June 28, 2015, 14:12
Quote from: gbalex on June 28, 2015, 12:19
.
You have no opinion you're willing to share about any agency except SS?
They were only asked about positive recommendations, which isn't at all the same thing.
Then I will open it up and ask for (their pro, based on long experience) positive or negative opinion on other agencies.

Would you like me to follow you in various threads and critique your responses.

I think I will leave it to you to determine how you wish to conduct your business and what you post in each thread.

Feel free. Although you'd have to look up under my old user id (farbled). Isn't that part of what a forum is about? Challenging opinions (or lack of them)?

Rinderart · « **Reply #74 on:** June 28, 2015, 20:11 »

I would go exclusive under certain conditions But even if those conditions were met the #1 reason if I would do it for them or...."Someone else" Is Not having to upload to all the others. in My 11 years. I've been with more than 39 sites, More than half are gone. I am currently with 9. If I dropped 8 think of the time I would get back pursuing other things instead of this feed the beast thing. Im very big on time VS return and having many other outlets for my work. I am simply spending way to much now for the return. If...in time no one offers a good choice I will have no other options but dropping sites.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: What if SS offer exclusivity with these contributors commissions (Read 38995 times)

Tror

MxR

cobalt

gbalex

cobalt

stock-will-eat-itself

gbalex

cobalt

etudiante_rapide

Batman

PixelBytes

Pauws99

gbalex

Pauws99

cobalt

gbalex

photominer

gbalex

ShadySue

photominer

ShadySue

photominer

gbalex

photominer

Rinderart

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors