Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by GregDPhotos

  1. Interesting theory. The one variable I would add is the increasing lack of appreciation of what is involved in producing quality content. Unless and until there is a generalized return to the understanding that quality content takes time, energy, and money to produce and bring to market. But if an image only costs 10 cents to produce and bring to market (that's the compensation SS contributors are accepting, right?), and a video only takes 26 cents to produce, why should I pay more? Aren't the agencies with the lowest prices set at $5 price-gouging? As long as this attitude is prevalent, I suspect many people will resort to anything other than paying a substantive price - even piracy.
  2. My portfolio can be viewed here: https://www.pond5.com/artist/gregdphotos#1/2176 #boycottshutterstock
  3. Seriously? I found disabling my portfolio to be highly effective... And I STRONGLY DISCOURAGE attacking SS. I don't think it is constructive.
  4. Dear @Kate Shutterstock, To clarify, we receive royalties (which should be in the 50-80% range); your company receives a commission for selling the products we supply. I think that proper use of industry terms might help with communication around here. Sincerely, A supplier
  5. Tip 16 is to keep learning. My biggest recent lesson regarding photography: Don't contribute to SS.
  6. Divide the amount you received by .3 (your royalty rate) and look for a package where the listed price per image is equal. Works for subs, most SODs, and possibly some ODDs.
  7. That was probably part of the plan - fool prospective contributors (who won't necessarily know much about the dollars and cents or download numbers of this business) with the potential of 40% royalties.
  8. Check out this recent SS blog article on running a successful stock photography business (e.g., contributing to SS). https://www.shutterstock.com/blog/ultimate-stock-photography-business-tips Tip 3: Know what your work is worth and don't work for free. Imagine what would happen to SS if all SS contributors followed that advice...
  9. I and another contributor have been seeing long review times on AS. (And both of us have been with them for some time.) Small batches of mine have taken at least 10 days.
  10. How much do you get paid for a subscription sale of one of your photos? (Please include a screenshot.) Thanks!
  11. @Phil Lowe would be great for answering this question in depth. @Kate Shutterstock would you please get a hold of him? Apparently you told him to leave. The reality is that there is not one perfect answer. But whatever you do, I suggest you don't accept 10ยข royalties for the work you produce.
  12. SS pays more than some and less than others. I stopped selling on SS at the end of May because of the general reduction in royalties received per sale. I don't recommend selling here at all. But that's me.
  13. Generally speaking, it can't be done. Maybe if you sell high quality high commercial value videos across multiple agencies.
  14. Thank you for sharing this. It is clear that, while many contributors here saw a loss in RPD under the new system, you saw an increase. Curious... is there some particular factor you attribute this to that other contributors could influence in regard to their portfolios (images and videos)?
  15. I have substantial overlap, but not complete. Some of the non-overlap is intentional, and some is simply because different agencies accept somewhat different content. I avoid "exclusive" arrangements, but that's me. If I have an image or clip on agency 1 and agency 2, customers of both agencies can buy a license to my work. If I only have the content on agency 1, most customers on agency 2 won't ever even see my work. And one other thing - the diversification means that if one agency goes off the rails (I won't name names here) I can stop working with them and not loose all of my microstock income.
  16. Maybe Dreamstime wanted to get all of us dreaming?
  17. A fundamental principle of AI is that it is continually "learning" - usually without human involvement (i.e., becoming less intelligent, IMHO).
  18. I haven't given much credence to those kind of assurances... Have they ever offered logical reasons for our experiences?
  19. AI could be trained to recognize almost anything - faces, specific structures and landmarks, specific uniforms, specific logos, etc. But I have had some rejections that I don't think AI could have distinguished.
  20. Symptomatic of the "reviewer" being AI. Sometimes I think AI - as dangerous as it is - should be referred to as AU (artificial unintelligence).
  21. At least our pay cut is being put to good use - paying to have the dashboard upgraded to work with the new pay structure.
  22. My latest milestone: 3 weeks that SS hasn't benefited from my work.
  23. Interesting thoughts. I don't foresee it as a substantive source of income long-term and I don't see it coming back, but I don't have a lot to go on. I've only been in the game since 2017. One thing I have found is that there are still ways to make money in photography that have nothing to do with microstock.
  24. Check Denali National Park. Then do a Google image search for the same thing. Epic difference, IMHO.
  • Create New...