MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Poll

With new earning structure made by Shutterstock will you disable your portfolio?

Disable photo and video
129 (47.1%)
Disable only photo
15 (5.5%)
Disable only video
21 (7.7%)
Disable nothing
76 (27.7%)
Quit Shutterstock
33 (12%)

Total Members Voted: 270

Author Topic: With new earning structure made by Shutterstock will you disable your portfolio?  (Read 15977 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

« Reply #100 on: May 30, 2020, 13:15 »
+1
People keep saying (hoping) that customers will go to Adobe. They will go to Istock and Getty, unfortunately. There is bigger possibility for that, it's a bigger stock company.

Right. Most of the contributors take their desires for a reality...

I know different people who went from Shutterstock to iStock, not Adobe.
Buyers go where they think it's more convenient for them, and frankly they don't give a dаmn about our "little problems" as contributors!

The agencies know who the buyers are, who has come and gone over the years.  Shutterstock have not been able to compete with Istock on subs until now so have only had half a product with which to compete.  Both are now able to trash the competition with discounting and if they compete with each other heavy discounting.  This will also trash you returns. 

Don't let them chase market share with your images, because there will be either only two dogs left in the race when they are finished or the other agencies will have to join them in the fight.


« Reply #101 on: May 30, 2020, 13:22 »
0
thats not so much vote :(

« Reply #102 on: May 30, 2020, 13:51 »
+2
People keep saying (hoping) that customers will go to Adobe. They will go to Istock and Getty, unfortunately. There is bigger possibility for that, it's a bigger stock company.

Why would they go anywhere?

Thats the big question. Why would any of the customers who have learned how to navigate SS, have become accustomed to the service levels at SS leave when their deals will, for all intents and purposes, get sweeter? To me the impact to SS is meaningful defection, solid negative impact on social media and even mainstream media if possible.  That might mitigate or soften new future customers from signing up with them. The contributor defection is the biggest hit and it has to be significant to make any real impact. And it has to be high impact portfolios that are big revenue generators for SS.  The publicity angle only sticks for a short time. Contributor defection is/can be permanent.
« Last Edit: May 30, 2020, 13:54 by Mantis »

« Reply #103 on: May 30, 2020, 13:54 »
+2
People keep saying (hoping) that customers will go to Adobe. They will go to Istock and Getty, unfortunately. There is bigger possibility for that, it's a bigger stock company.

idk. I personally have the Adobe Sub for pure convenience as I'm sure many creatives do. Same bill, same apps. Literally 3 clicks to have what you need.

« Reply #104 on: May 30, 2020, 17:21 »
+3
I will disable my portfolio June 1st. I haven't uploaded much lately for other reasons, but I won't upload anything to SS.

In addition to tweets about the change, I thought I'd also try highlighting images that would be #GoneJune1 as part of #boycottShutterstock. I haven't put links to Adobe Stock in tweets yet, but might mix tweets about #Shutterstock slashing royalties with "go here instead" messages.

https://twitter.com/joannsnover/status/1265672584315547649

I think the messaging should be simple - to try and get the general point across. Especially on twitter, you don't want lengthy explanations of the details.

https://twitter.com/joannsnover/status/1265693477007851521
Jo Ann, as far as I know, this vector set of mine: https://www.shutterstock.com/image-vector/vector-set-calligraphic-design-elements-page-65754793 still is Shutterstock's most often sold image *ever*. (32,956 downloads so far on a single file.) And I'm going to disable it (and several others) on the first of June. Feel free to use this any way you want - both info and image! :)

That's a pretty amazing total - congratulations!

If you're planning to talk about that on twitter, that's great. Do you not tweet? :) Out of curiosity, how do you know about it being their most sold image - I didn't know of a way to get stats like that.

By the way, the rest of your portfolio is lovely too

« Reply #105 on: May 30, 2020, 23:03 »
+3
I will disable my portfolio June 1st. I haven't uploaded much lately for other reasons, but I won't upload anything to SS.

In addition to tweets about the change, I thought I'd also try highlighting images that would be #GoneJune1 as part of #boycottShutterstock. I haven't put links to Adobe Stock in tweets yet, but might mix tweets about #Shutterstock slashing royalties with "go here instead" messages.

https://twitter.com/joannsnover/status/1265672584315547649

I think the messaging should be simple - to try and get the general point across. Especially on twitter, you don't want lengthy explanations of the details.

https://twitter.com/joannsnover/status/1265693477007851521
Jo Ann, as far as I know, this vector set of mine: https://www.shutterstock.com/image-vector/vector-set-calligraphic-design-elements-page-65754793 still is Shutterstock's most often sold image *ever*. (32,956 downloads so far on a single file.) And I'm going to disable it (and several others) on the first of June. Feel free to use this any way you want - both info and image! :)

That's a pretty amazing total - congratulations!

If you're planning to talk about that on twitter, that's great. Do you not tweet? :) Out of curiosity, how do you know about it being their most sold image - I didn't know of a way to get stats like that.

By the way, the rest of your portfolio is lovely too

Thank you Jo Ann! :)
SS used to have a "100 top selling images" page until a couple of years ago and this set of mine was no.1 in there for several years, until they shut it down. (I still have some screenshots somewhere.) I've never heard of someone (or an image) having outpaced those numbers - I actually can't be absolutely sure, though. I simply think such wouldn't be do-able again today, no matter the quality or originality of an image. Also, I posted a thread on  Shutterstock's forums as soon as the file closed in on a total of $20,000. Alex (one of the forum's moderators whom I also met in person in NY back in the days) was around and commented, but didn't mention something to top that.
However: I'm not entirely sure - and if someone's image performed better than that: CONGRATS! :) - but I think there aren't too many close to or even better than that.
This isn't about bragging, anyway. Things were different at that time, I had a load of good luck and today I'm just someone with a tiny port who doesn't do micro anymore. :) I don't "count", either. Shutterstock won't even notice my portfolio fading away. I simply thought such might be worth mentioning in our interest. :)

I do have an account on Twitter, but that isn't quite "my" platform. Honestly, I don't like it for a reason (or two *g) - rather a visual person here. I'm on Insta and Pinterest - and Facebook ..., if I need to. :)
I might use Twitter in this particular case, though.

« Last Edit: May 30, 2020, 23:45 by Anja_Kaiser »

« Reply #106 on: May 31, 2020, 00:42 »
+3
Just a thought (question):
by deactivating the portfolio on June 1, isn't there a risk of not receiving the earnings for May that should be paid at least in June?
And if this is the case, isn't it better to wait until you have been paid before you deactivate your portfolio?
I don't really trust Shutterstock any more these days...

« Reply #107 on: May 31, 2020, 01:02 »
+2
I don't really trust Shutterstock any more these days...

You and several million others.

« Reply #108 on: May 31, 2020, 01:24 »
+1
Just a thought (question):
by deactivating the portfolio on June 1, isn't there a risk of not receiving the earnings for May that should be paid at least in June?
And if this is the case, isn't it better to wait until you have been paid before you deactivate your portfolio?


That's my plan. At the moment, I'm not all that far from my next payout. And when I do receive that payout, I'll deactivate my port. Better to be safe than sorry.

« Reply #109 on: May 31, 2020, 01:54 »
0
People keep saying (hoping) that customers will go to Adobe. They will go to Istock and Getty, unfortunately. There is bigger possibility for that, it's a bigger stock company.

Right. Most of the contributors take their desires for a reality...

I know different people who went from Shutterstock to iStock, not Adobe.
Buyers go where they think it's more convenient for them, and frankly they don't give a dаmn about our "little problems" as contributors!

The agencies know who the buyers are, who has come and gone over the years.  Shutterstock have not been able to compete with Istock on subs until now so have only had half a product with which to compete.  Both are now able to trash the competition with discounting and if they compete with each other heavy discounting.  This will also trash you returns. 

The next step is to introduce exclusivity, there is no way they can compete with Istock without that move. If that's on the horizon Adobe should react faster and introduce exclusivity right now, because this is the right moment for that.

« Reply #110 on: May 31, 2020, 03:15 »
+2
Just a thought (question):
by deactivating the portfolio on June 1, isn't there a risk of not receiving the earnings for May that should be paid at least in June?
And if this is the case, isn't it better to wait until you have been paid before you deactivate your portfolio?


That's my plan. At the moment, I'm not all that far from my next payout. And when I do receive that payout, I'll deactivate my port. Better to be safe than sorry.

Yes, I will do that too.
I know that I have said that I will disable my portfolio tomorrow, but I have had an unexpected series of EL and S&O, and I don't want to risk to lose these earning.

It's a bit like Shutterstock is courting me to stay... But no, I wait, I take the money, and I get the hеll out! :D
« Last Edit: May 31, 2020, 03:20 by Chichikov »

« Reply #111 on: May 31, 2020, 04:41 »
+3
Waiting to take the money is a good point.

If they really delete you from the platform for using the off switch they keep all your money.

It is amazing how drastic their corporate culture has changed. They had the most liberal work environment. Now they  go after the little people who protest having their income cut abruptly with 6 days notice during a pandemic.

The name is the same, but below is something radically different.

And Oringer approves all these changes. It could not happen without him.

« Reply #112 on: May 31, 2020, 04:57 »
0
I will not disable anything.

I will wait to see the actual sales results in June and July and also to see if Shutterstock comes to their senses and adjusts their new royalty plan, especially, if they cancel the yearly reset to zero.

Once I have all that information I will adjust new uploads accordingly.

Especially with video I might favor other places.

And if the results from photo sales falls, I will upload new content elsewhere first and SS will become an agency for older content.

But if the money is more or less the same, I will change nothing.

Thanks for standing up for a little bit of reason instead of hasty angry reactions.

I will wait and see, before I determine that everything is terrible and that SS has become the evil force in the Universe of Microstock.

I don't understand why people are turning off, closing, shutting down, when they have no information or data, on how this actually affects us? If nothing else, I'm at a good level and will be going up another soon, and I can make money until January 1st, and then decide.

No I will not disable my portfolio June 1st, it's too soon to see how this will affect anything or how it will change my earnings.
I largely agree and normally I accept these changes as an inevitable result of market forces. I have never come so close though to pulling my port though as what SS have done and particularly the way they have done it is shocking. I fully get why many people have had enough and are bailing out.

« Reply #113 on: May 31, 2020, 05:00 »
0
People keep saying (hoping) that customers will go to Adobe. They will go to Istock and Getty, unfortunately. There is bigger possibility for that, it's a bigger stock company.

Right. Most of the contributors take their desires for a reality...

I know different people who went from Shutterstock to iStock, not Adobe.
Buyers go where they think it's more convenient for them, and frankly they don't give a dаmn about our "little problems" as contributors!

The agencies know who the buyers are, who has come and gone over the years.  Shutterstock have not been able to compete with Istock on subs until now so have only had half a product with which to compete.  Both are now able to trash the competition with discounting and if they compete with each other heavy discounting.  This will also trash you returns. 

The next step is to introduce exclusivity, there is no way they can compete with Istock without that move. If that's on the horizon Adobe should react faster and introduce exclusivity right now, because this is the right moment for that.
You'd be crazy to accept exclusivity with SS when you've seen they are happy to slash commissions with a few days notice.

« Reply #114 on: May 31, 2020, 05:14 »
0
People keep saying (hoping) that customers will go to Adobe. They will go to Istock and Getty, unfortunately. There is bigger possibility for that, it's a bigger stock company.

Right. Most of the contributors take their desires for a reality...

I know different people who went from Shutterstock to iStock, not Adobe.
Buyers go where they think it's more convenient for them, and frankly they don't give a dаmn about our "little problems" as contributors!

The agencies know who the buyers are, who has come and gone over the years.  Shutterstock have not been able to compete with Istock on subs until now so have only had half a product with which to compete.  Both are now able to trash the competition with discounting and if they compete with each other heavy discounting.  This will also trash you returns. 

The next step is to introduce exclusivity, there is no way they can compete with Istock without that move. If that's on the horizon Adobe should react faster and introduce exclusivity right now, because this is the right moment for that.
You'd be crazy to accept exclusivity with SS when you've seen they are happy to slash commissions with a few days notice.
I know, but, they could do it soon, if that new CEO is obsessed with Getty performance.

« Reply #115 on: May 31, 2020, 10:02 »
+1
I fear that Shutterstock is ready and waiting for this, and that this planned group deactivation of content is expected and will actually end up being another win for their bottom line.

There have been some contributors reporting that "deleted" content in their Shutterstock portfolios, which they had removed/deactivated up to two months earlier, was still searchable (at least on Google), clickable, able to be added to a cart and presumably able to be purchased. With an officially deactivated portfolio, this appears to mean that Shutterstock would retain 100% of those sales, adding insult to injury. So, if this is accurate, what all this mass deactivation may potentially do is just boost their profits without any noticeable loss in content options to the customers, depending on how they search for it. Not exactly the goal we're looking for, I'm guessing.

In my personal experience, after deleting the last of my content from iStock in 2012, they were still selling that content four years later on partner platforms. When I discovered this, I had to put up a bit of a fight to get paid for the back sales that occurred in that time (which I was surprised they did pay) and to finally persuade them to take it all down, completely. Although I'm still not entirely sure they have, eight years later.

Maybe someone with better legalese translation abilities than myself can decipher Shutterstock's terms & conditions and determine if this retaining and selling of deactivated or deleted content is in any way a violation of their own contract or if something about that practice violates any laws. Something real that the dirtbags at Shutterstock can be called out on, with actual legal repercussions.

« Reply #116 on: May 31, 2020, 10:48 »
+1
Be careful - once you turn your port off your images no longer appear in catalogue manager. If there were some files you wanted to delete you won't be able to until you turn your portfolio back on. That can take quite a while. Turning ports off could end up becoming a trap for some.


« Reply #117 on: May 31, 2020, 10:51 »
+1
...I might use Twitter in this particular case, though.

If you decide you'd rather not and would like me to tweet about it on your behalf, let me know. It's always best if it's the person themselves talking about their work, but if that image is disabled, that's "news" worth talking about (and I grabbed a watermarked JPEG in case) so I will as a back-up plan.

« Reply #118 on: May 31, 2020, 14:21 »
+3
I will not disable anything.

I will wait to see the actual sales results in June and July and also to see if Shutterstock comes to their senses and adjusts their new royalty plan, especially, if they cancel the yearly reset to zero.

Once I have all that information I will adjust new uploads accordingly.

Especially with video I might favor other places.

And if the results from photo sales falls, I will upload new content elsewhere first and SS will become an agency for older content.

But if the money is more or less the same, I will change nothing.

Thanks for standing up for a little bit of reason instead of hasty angry reactions.

I will wait and see, before I determine that everything is terrible and that SS has become the evil force in the Universe of Microstock.

I don't understand why people are turning off, closing, shutting down, when they have no information or data, on how this actually affects us? If nothing else, I'm at a good level and will be going up another soon, and I can make money until January 1st, and then decide.

No I will not disable my portfolio June 1st, it's too soon to see how this will affect anything or how it will change my earnings.
I largely agree and normally I accept these changes as an inevitable result of market forces. I have never come so close though to pulling my port though as what SS have done and particularly the way they have done it is shocking. I fully get why many people have had enough and are bailing out.

Hi Paul,

my opinion evolved ;).

I turned off video today, because I really want to protect those files. Selling them for 60 cents is not attractive. I left photos on to collect some data and in the faint hope that they come to their senses and come back to us with a sensible solution.

Mostly I will focus on uploading elsewhere. But I am not sending new content to SS until this issue is resolved.

But since the managers have all gone into hiding under blankets and are to scared to talk to us, there isnt much hope.

They would probably prefer to bring their own company down before publicly admitting they made a terrible mistake.

We all know the type. Insecure to the core, unable to communicate in public or online, always blaming others, no creative ideas and thinks intimidating people and kicking them out is leadership.

Maybe they will surprise us after all...but the total silence and ghosting of contributors speaks volumes.


« Reply #119 on: May 31, 2020, 14:53 »
+2
Maybe someone with better legalese translation abilities than myself can decipher Shutterstock's terms & conditions and determine if this retaining and selling of deactivated or deleted content is in any way a violation of their own contract or if something about that practice violates any laws. Something real that the dirtbags at Shutterstock can be called out on, with actual legal repercussions.

This is written in their TOS:

Shutterstock shall use reasonable efforts to cause Content removed from or opted out from Shutterstock Websites to be removed from the websites of any Shutterstock affiliates or partners (including co-branded websites) within ninety (90) days of the removal of the subject Content from the Shutterstock Websites.

They allow themselves 90 days and a reasonable effort to remove your content on their websites and affiliates.

Reasonable efforts. I don't even know what that is. They probably don't have much control over their affiliate partners. Guess you'll have to prove in court their negligence and nobody's gonna go to court for this.

If you want your portfolio gone, best thing you can do from my point of view is delete your images, but keep your account active. Any income from images still lingering around on or SS or affiliate sites will probably still be redirected to your account.

« Reply #120 on: May 31, 2020, 16:09 »
+8
Disabling initiated...

« Reply #121 on: May 31, 2020, 16:14 »
+1

« Reply #122 on: May 31, 2020, 19:04 »
+7
...I might use Twitter in this particular case, though.

If you decide you'd rather not and would like me to tweet about it on your behalf, let me know. It's always best if it's the person themselves talking about their work, but if that image is disabled, that's "news" worth talking about (and I grabbed a watermarked JPEG in case) so I will as a back-up plan.
Done. :) But thanks, anyway, Jo Ann! (Just followed you on Twitter, too.)

And:

« Reply #123 on: May 31, 2020, 21:20 »
+4
I fear that Shutterstock is ready and waiting for this, and that this planned group deactivation of content is expected and will actually end up being another win for their bottom line.

There have been some contributors reporting that "deleted" content in their Shutterstock portfolios, which they had removed/deactivated up to two months earlier, was still searchable (at least on Google), clickable, able to be added to a cart and presumably able to be purchased. With an officially deactivated portfolio, this appears to mean that Shutterstock would retain 100% of those sales, adding insult to injury. So, if this is accurate, what all this mass deactivation may potentially do is just boost their profits without any noticeable loss in content options to the customers, depending on how they search for it. Not exactly the goal we're looking for, I'm guessing.

In my personal experience, after deleting the last of my content from iStock in 2012, they were still selling that content four years later on partner platforms. When I discovered this, I had to put up a bit of a fight to get paid for the back sales that occurred in that time (which I was surprised they did pay) and to finally persuade them to take it all down, completely. Although I'm still not entirely sure they have, eight years later.

Maybe someone with better legalese translation abilities than myself can decipher Shutterstock's terms & conditions and determine if this retaining and selling of deactivated or deleted content is in any way a violation of their own contract or if something about that practice violates any laws. Something real that the dirtbags at Shutterstock can be called out on, with actual legal repercussions.


This had me worried, because I deleted my images a couple of months ago. A google search does indeed still bring up one of my best sellers, and I can follow it to SS, but when you get to the page where you might buy it, you cant, and it says the image is no longer available. I will continue to do test searches. I deleted my images when they did nothing about the hole in their API that was allowing people to download high rez images.

« Reply #124 on: June 01, 2020, 01:32 »
0
Hi there, it was me who wrote that post, it's my footage that is still searchable on Google

https://www.google.com/search?client=opera&q=Weeds+growing+through+concrete+ground+shot+background+stock+footage&sourceid=opera&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8

is the link to the Google search results, it is the

Weeds growing through concrete ground shot background stock footage

I have asked others to see if they can add it to their cart and it seems that they can. I terminated my account over 2 months ago, but I didn't disable the licensing options before I asked for termination so this could have something to do with it, also it is footage and not images that I sold at SS which could also have something to do with it.
« Last Edit: June 01, 2020, 01:40 by CHDigitalMedia »


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
8 Replies
6172 Views
Last post January 12, 2009, 13:23
by jsnover
1 Replies
1275 Views
Last post March 04, 2014, 12:11
by OM
11 Replies
3206 Views
Last post April 13, 2015, 23:58
by Me
12 Replies
3885 Views
Last post May 09, 2017, 21:51
by SpaceStockFootage
3 Replies
631 Views
Last post May 27, 2020, 10:59
by Jo Ann Snover

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle