Jump to content

Rob Lavers LRPS

Members
  • Content Count

    340
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Rob Lavers LRPS

  1. I decided to say no, there is no way I am letting my photos be obtained for free, I don’t care if they give a measly one-off payment.
  2. Well after messaging the four sites with contact details I received one reply - a polite apology sent straight away and taking down the photo on their site. That site is in Lagos Nigeria, the others haven’t responded which doesn’t put the ethical standards of US and U.K. news media in a good light. Lagos confirmed it was from a news feed which was probably used by all of them, and did promise to be more careful in future.
  3. Probably not the first time this has been raised, but here goes anyway. I have just discovered that one of my photos was used last year for the same news story in eight online news outlets so I sent all the links to the SS Compliance team who confirmed the source was not Shutterstock, and told me that as I owned the copyright I could send them a take-down notice - not very helpful as the story is history now. Only four sites had contact details so I have emailed them. If I was to pursue claims and in the unlikely event I receive payment do I need to share with SS? This is how the image ap
  4. And SS didn’t help by putting the skids under him with the new price structure. If I were he then I would be pretty p****d off after all that effort.
  5. You are right, I just resubmitted the rejections without any changes and they were accepted. All this b****y effort for 10c cents doesn't exactly encourage one. TBH I only used SS this time for keywording so I can copy and paste onto other sites, I may keep doing that and not bother uploading.
  6. Well I did force myself to upload five photos, all rejected to to noise, artifacts etc. None of the defects listed in this standard rejection are actually present, they were all taken on a full frame camera and well exposed in good light, sharp, not over processed, I have zoomed right in and they are well nigh perfect. I have a good record of successful uploads so I know what I am doing so that is the final straw, no more. SS's loss not mine.
  7. The problem for me is since June I have lost the incentive to upload to any agency. It was easy to upload to SS first and then just copy and paste the data elsewhere but now I have photos sitting in their uploaded folders and just cannot bring myself to complete the key wording and descriptions. SS still gets way more downloads from my existing portfolio than others but the earnings are so miniscule I don’t know when to expect another payout. The same portfolio on Alamy has had just four downloads in two years with no payout, AS is a bit better but restricted in size by commercial only. In Jun
  8. I just got this too, it goes from bad to worse. Reading between the lines it says giving away freebies will actually generate more sales of paid-for stock and we won't have a choice whether our stuff is given away for free.
  9. I didn't know it wasn't working and hadn't noticed the date when I posted, hence the apology above. When it worked I was climbing but as it turns out that was before the commission change.
  10. The site is https://microstockrank.com/ although I have just noticed it hasn't updated since January so I am sorry to have misled you, it looks like a dead site now. I was obviously busy after Christmas!
  11. Well I have uploaded nothing since the change came in but have climbed several hundred places up the performance list, so a lot of people above me must have dropped out. Very naive of Shutterstock to think that subscribers underusing their allowances is a good business strategy, they will either have been stockpiling images/clips in libraries for use later, or dropping to a cheaper package, or both, so whichever way it is going to cost SS.
  12. You are too late, profit's been made! Anyhow you can get a better dividend yield elsewhere. But here is an idea: How about contributors with a portfolio of a certain size and over being made shareholders? Now that would be a nice incentive, with maybe incremental share holding growth as the portfolio grows.
  13. Well this is weird, I haven’t uploaded since the end of May and was waiting for my next payment threshold before doing anything about my portfolio, and June earnings were dire with no downloads for a record 3 weeks; however this month is already best ever and we are only half way through. Over the last year I noticed ODs declining so almost all downloads were subs but that has suddenly changed with as many ODs as subs this month. They vary in price too, whereas before I would get $1.88 they now vary between $1.42 and $2.70 which averages out about the same as the old rate. It will be interesti
  14. I don't know what has happened to my portfolio, it is almost as if a switch has been flicked as I have had no downloads since holding off from uploading new images earlier this month. Anyhow, I have looked at other sites but I cannot really summon up the energy to upload everything again, my enjoyment has gone. I am also on Alamy which has so few downloads I have never reached a payment, and AS which is better but with only half my portfolio as they don't take Editorial. The income is pocket money but I won't put in the effort for someone else to profit at my expense. Apart from seeing downloa
  15. I just looked at DT and they appear to have options to upload as jpegs or RAW files. The former would be preferable as like most photographers I don't like releasing RAW files but does it make any difference to downloads and payments?
  16. I have grown a similar size portfolio there since November 2018 and had just three sales, so not even reached a payment threshold yet. My Adobe Stock portfolio is about half that but have a few more sales there. Last year I met Alamy people at The Photography Show who told me I needed a much larger port (in the thousands). i don’t know how effective their traffic light system is, green for best exposure, amber for poor exposure, but my paltry sales were all from the amber category. I am rather flattered that my upload rating is five stars but what with the SS fiasco I am rapidly losing in
  17. That was my first reading but I think the line about defamatory etc. is a caveat not the option you are selecting.
  18. Pond5 is struggling to cope under their surge in new contributors, I don’t know about the others. Adobe Stock is taking for ever to approve my last uploads (17 days and counting) so I guess they are overwhelmed as well, unfortunately they don’t accept editorials which is about half my portfolio. I am watching my unpaid earnings crawl slowly towards $35 at 10c a time and have stopped uploading in the meantime. After that I will freeze my until SS reverse the changes.
  19. We have seen on another thread that if you delete your account you will not receive the commissions already made but awaiting the payment threshold. The sensible strategy would be to wait until the next payment threshold is reached if you are reasonably close and then decide whether to disable or delete but in the meantime I for one won’t be uploading fresh material. We have all condemned the free stock websites but sales of 10 cents is virtually the same.
  20. Recently I have noticed that almost all my downloads on SS are from subscribers, far less ODs than when I started 18 months ago. That tells me that most image searches are on SS or similar sites rather than say google where I guess people expect free downloads, so the marketing is going to be the hard part. If you have a specialized portfolio like say food then it would be possible to target clients but far more difficult with a general mix portfolio. However with the food option say you could offer a bespoke service alongside your standard images. it is an attractive idea but the admin s
  21. When Alamy reduced its payout it was sold on the basis that more sales would result and contributors would benefit in the long run. Well I haven’t seen this.
  22. See above, those equity values are not what they were.
  23. Here in a nutshell is the reason for change: Shares of the U.S. global provider of stock photography, multimedia and editing tools have fallen by 4% in the past year, 20.8% in the past three years and 42% in the past five years through May 28. The stock has underperformed the S&P 500 by 12%, 46.2% and 85.8%, respectively. The dividend yield of 0.47% also underperforms the S&P 500 yield of 1.97%. Something needed to be done but it remains to be seen if this was the right one.
  24. Hi Sarah, here is what I do now for NT access-free land: load the images as editorial as that complies with NT directives and omit any location reference, just use a generalised description such as “a small cove on the coastal path between A and B” (you could always add keywords layer). Unless it is the well-known locations with recognisable features like Lindisfarne or Trebarwith Steps they are usually accepted; I guess SS software picks up on certain characteristics to recognise restricted locations. That way I am not at risk of confrontation with NT and get around SS’s simplistic block.
  25. A bit sneery this - small does not necessarily equate with poor quality, and at any rate everyone’s image is subjected to the same scrutiny so the quality is set by SS.
×
×
  • Create New...