Jump to content

New earnings structure for Contributors


Recommended Posts

27 minutes ago, CPxiom said:

In my opinion, the RESET, is for EQUAL EXPOSURE for every contributor. As it is now, there is no interest for shutterstock to promote the 38 cents images.

That's why mostly 2020 and 2019 portfolios were promoted. But in this way they couldn't support older portfolios, with contributors that did some investments in the meantime, and bought gear, etc. So clients loose quality. I can certainly tell, that even if I did 4 months full time upload, the sales didn't go up. I am here from 2006. I am under 50$ per month since years. That's how you quit. I have to do other things to live. 

I believe this is NOT (hopefully) a scarcity move on behalf of shutterstock. This is for EQUAL EXPOSURE I believe. What do you think? 

Same here, contributor from 2006. I barely made it past $50 this month. It's been downhill for me for several years now. May just might be the worst month I've seen since I first started. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 7.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

In an email that is going out today, we are announcing that we will be updating the earnings structure that determines how much you get paid when customers license your work. We are making this adjust

This is just a joke. 10 years with SS and now I'll be getting 20% commission on my footage clips??? No lifetime sales tier, just what you sold last year/this year.... To get to the curr

This space will be updated to address frequently asked questions.  My email shows different counts for videos than are shown above. Which is correct? Apologies. The email to video contributo

Posted Images

It looks like Shutterstock no longer loves freelancers as the individual contributors but now will prefer to continue working with agencies that upload content for sale in bulk. Maybe someone in leadership had used drugs before making these decisions.

But on the other hand, given the tempo with which correction to Video Levels was announced repeatedly, it all looks more like a whim on the part of Shutterstock than a justified necessity.

part_1_2.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, samoyloff said:

Once again, you're dumb enough to quote the MINUMUM salary that almost nobody makes. We're talking about skilled people who can make photographs and illustrations to be marketed to the global audience, and you keep your "look, these folks to the east from me make $200 a month". You just don't get the point. You think that everyone to the east from you are unskilled low paid people. And that's simply not true in the modern world, where everything is connected throught the global web. People who can do good content and invest thousands into their profession make the same over the world. So quit your boomer stereotyping, it's pathetic, to say the least.

 

im not saying this...but you won't understand....is not about skill is about cost of living cost of production....i wen to ukraine 40 rtimes...compared to any western country is third world, salary are third world, some earn good money mostly earn nothing...even in bank people earn nothing compared to europe....that's why most are doing stock, even at 500 dollar months is super convenient compared to many normal job.  nobody is saying you don't deserve to earn 5000000 a month. i shoot in kiev many times....10 dollar hour rent of studio , good model 15 to 20....in any western country it will be 10 times this, 

Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Olena Zaskochenko said:

deleted 20 more photos from portfolio.. will continue.  feels like a saying good bye for an old friend..

I know the impulse is to try to stick it to SS but they have millions of image files. Make sure you're not hurting yourself. I have decided to keep my account and let it rest, I won't upload to it anymore. But I'll take whatever money they want to throw at me, however paltry, because I need it!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Sharon Day said:

Same here, contributor from 2006. I barely made it past $50 this month. It's been downhill for me for several years now. May just might be the worst month I've seen since I first started. 

Yes, I had several attempts to revitalize portfolio, but, even if worked full time for months, I didn't see any improvement, or very little. So I had to do other things. I remember when we earned almost 1000. It is clear that veteran portfolios were kept under promoted. Why give 38, when you can give 25. But again, this hurts quality on the site, so maybe this change is necessary. I don't know why they don't announce this clearly, and avoid all this reaction.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Morrowind said:

He decided and opened peopleimages.com a few years ago. Building such a site costs too much. Design, frontend & backend programming, dedicated servers, huge bandwidth, security, maintenance etc... But there are also some ınteresting examples such as eyeem.com and arcangel.com with very minimalist design and user friendly interaface. 

I wish someone with the necessary skills and resources would launch a new stock photo company who pay the contributors a fair fee. If such a company existed, I think the best artist would flee to it like moths to a lamp. Of course it would presume that the images and movies are not found on other cheaper sites for the customers to buy.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Angel La Canfora said:

I know the impulse is to try to stick it to SS but they have millions of image files. Make sure you're not hurting yourself. I have decided to keep my account and let it rest, I won't upload to it anymore. But I'll take whatever money they want to throw at me, however paltry, because I need it!

I have decided the same, I will let is rest and stop uploading content to Shutterstock. Many other sites that gives a fair price for my work deserves my time. In a way it is good that they announced it today because I have a lot of fresh content ready to upload, dodged a bullet there :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, LongJon said:

nobody said they deserve to I've poor...but you can live poorly and well, because most people earn far from what people earn in country like usa or spain....is a fact...if i earn 500 dollar with micro i will live under abridge and die of starving, if i earn 500 dollar in micro in many country i earn like millions of people, doing something independent and without rules. that's why most contributor right now come from some country, because there you can live with 1000 dollar a good life....in spain 1000 dollar you don't go out of house after paying rent and bills.

I spend $ 2,000 a month and don’t live normally. You say 200 dollars a month official salary in poor countries. Believe me, those 60 percent who earn 200-600 dollars don’t know what Shutterstock or Adobe are and they won’t be contributors here. And those who know, they earn and spend as in rich countries.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, LongJon said:

i wen to ukraine 40 rtimes...compared to any western country is third world, salary are third world, some earn good money mostly earn nothing.

Oh yeah, you "wen" to ukraine whole 40 times. You must know much more about the country and expenses than the people who live there. Everything costs the same for a professional photographer / illustrator in the Eastern Europe, and in most cases, their equipment costs even more than on the West, because of the higher customs fees and such. But you "wen" to some cheap bar and bought a beer that was priced twice as less, so you made your well thought calculations, so you thought "oh, these pro photographers and illustrators should be able to work for less". And your "that's why most are doing stock, even at 500 dollar months is super convenient compared to many normal job" is simply just a freaking lie. Most people are not doing stock. And 500 a month is some minimum salary a young student would agree to work for, most will find better options. You're not an expert even though you "wen" to Ukrain 40 times. You don't even understand how things are to the East from you, so quit this crap.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That’s my point of view:

  1. It would be ok if SS reduced the commission for the big packages where they pay more to the contributors than they got from their customers (presumed they download all their 750 images per month). On the other hand, they make a huge profit with the small packages and the images which are not downloaded.
  2. A percentual share – depending on the number of sales – is just fair. But starting with 15% and ending with 40% is a scam. It should start with at least 25% and end up to 60%. To be realistic… I by myself would never be able to sell that amount of pictures than SS does. So it’s fair to share the profit. But to reach more than 25k sales is not possible to do this as a hobby. And therefore 40% is not fair!
  3. The reset to level 1 on January 1st is a humiliation for contributors. No more words to say about this.

This step is a breach of confidence! I’ve calculated a reduction of at least 60% up to 85% depending on the average subscription package size. I’ve also tried to call the support in Germany but the person at the phone told me that there is no contributor support. So I’ve written an email to ask for more information about closing my account completely and asked for a personal call. No answer yet…

I’ve been with SS since 2012 and paid my whole studies with the payouts. From the first day of your IPO I’ve spent some percent of my payouts to buy SS shares. So, I’ve just placed a sell order for all my >300 SS shares.

I’ve also forwarded a message to my whole ‘customer’ network with a link to this thread.

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Wetzkaz Graphics said:

We can NOT de-activate our portfolio. Delete or do nothing.

MSG https://www.[do_not_advertise_other_microstock_groups]/shutterstock-com/how-to-disable-(not-delete)-your-portfolio-on-shutterstock/msg0/?topicseen#new
"Are you sure this actually disables your account? The png seems to imply that you're just not letting people use your images for anything defamatory, deceptive, pornographic, etc..."

No, that's not true.  Opting out removes your images from public availability while leaving them on the server.  

https://www.shutterstock.com/contributorsupport/articles/kbat02/How-do-I-make-my-content-unavailable-for-downloading?l=en_US&fs=RelatedArticle

 
Quote

 

If you want to keep your account active but make your content unavailable for customers you can "Opt Out" of sales. This will allow you to (temporarily or permanently) remove your work from our online library without having to delete all images, and with the option to reactivate your portfolio quickly. To make your content available for viewing and downloading you will just need need to “Opt In”.

Opting in or out can take up to 72 hours to be processed.
 
To opt in/out:
  1. Sign into your account.
  2. Choose “Account Settings”  from the drop down menu under your username
  3. Scroll down to the section "How can we license your work?"
  4. Select "No" for the listed options

 

  1.  
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Morrowind said:

All types of editorial or only illlustrative?

 

Just now, SL-Photography said:

Also editorials that shows faces in travel photography style? 

I don't recall the particulars right now.  All I know is that when I tried to upload documentary editorial images, they were rejected because I had not reached "Silver level" (1,000 downloads) yet.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Phil Lowe said:

 

I don't recall the particulars right now.  All I know is that when I tried to upload documentary editorial images, they were rejected because I had not reached "Silver level" (1,000 downloads) yet.  

I see. BTW there was a page in Fotolia where i used to see my rank in the site. In the Adobe site i couldn't find the rank page.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey fellas - stop chewing these salary BS and playing the "rich and poor country" games. This place is not for such discussions

<evil mode activated>
 For those who are complaining that their sells has dropped to the Mariana Trench depth: are you sure that SS is the reason of it but not your content?
  Microstocks are no longer a "sweet spot" for those who wants to upload some shitty or same-as-five-years-before content and get zillions of dollars for it. It's a full time job now(or half-time at least)
Please stop blaming mstocks for all of your fall offs. This is how the market works now and we all should adjust our workflow and make strong decisions to stay on the line.
  <evil mode deactivated>
    
    And as for the SS announcing: I'm waiting for the June to see what I'll get and then will make my final decision.
    For now I'll vote for the floating rating without year to date resetting. It's a good thing and has been successfully implemented on the other stocks long time ago

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LongJon said:

 

600 people only in the world buy top subs plan? are you dreaming.....i know 3 people who have subs plan and all three have the biggest one. 5

As I said its not the exact numbers but the business model suggests its not going to be the bulk.  Look forward to your explanation and model to help advance the conversation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...