Phil Lowe

I'm going to be watching these numbers very closely the next few days. They alone will tell whether people are truly fed up with this latest pay cut. As I stated before, I opted out of video yesterday. Will do same for stills on June 1.

I don't distrust them. I fully trust that they will do everything in their power to maximize their profits while keeping us onboard, even while diminishing our returns. They are completely trustworthy to do right by them and wrong by us. You have a vote. Vote "No" between now and June 1st.

Adobe has an income stream entirely separate from what it gets from contributors. SS doesn't. If everyone shut down their ports at AS, Adobe would still laugh all the way to the bank. I don't think the same could be said for SS. The only "NO" vote we have is this: If you don't like this new no earnings structure, make sure you vote no.

There. That's better.

I agree. Tiers effective June 1st are calculated from January 1st of this year.

I deactivated my video port yesterday. Stills follow on June 1.

I already make $2.70 for an SOD/ODD. The highest anyone could make on that chart in now $1.98, and that's only if you manage to sell 25,000 in a year, at which point it resets to 15% again on January 1st. This is worse than running on a hamster wheel. It completely disincentivizes people from building portfolios. No self-respecting photographer, "artist" or not, is going to accept these terms. It's simply not worth it anymore.

Disabled my video port yesterday, disabling my image port June 1st. You are correct: this is the only leverage we have...the power of "No".

Slaves didn't have an "opt out" option. We do. I deactivated my video portfolio yesterday, and will do so for my stills portfolio on June 1st. If enough people do that, and SS loses the only product they sell (our work), then maybe someone will wake up there and realize we aren't going to be treated like this anymore. Anyone who feels like a slave because of this just doesn't know the power of the word "No".

First of all, I am cool. Secondly, deactivating ports is the only real voice any of us have with Shutterstock's management. At some point, you have to respect yourself and your work enough that you aren't willing to be used by these people anymore. I have reached the limit of what I'm willing to take from SS for taking advantage of me. This is where I draw the line. I don't much care where you draw yours, just don't tell me where I can draw mine.

Saying 15% is better than nothing is like saying you'd rather be punched in the face than kicked in the balls. Neither is good from my perspective.

Turned off video today. Images go down June 1st. Will focus all my efforts going forward on my other three agencies.

Because Adobe has an income stream that doesn't depend solely on its contributors. Shutterstock's "product" is our media. In a symbiotic relationship, both parties benefit from the relationship. In a parasitic relationship, only one party benefits. With this announcement, SS has informed us that we are no longer in a symbiotic relationship with them.

I'm curious to know how much SS wasted on leased space in the Empire State Building at a time when most of that space was unused due to the lockdown. We're being made to pay for this management team's wasteful spending and poor database management over the last few years. Nothing "progressive" about the shameful treatment of the people whose work you profit from! Hey SS: why are you poor-mouthing it to us when you're still in that massively expensive edifice, especially since most of your NYC workers were (are?) working from home?