How to deactivate your images

[Badon Hill Studio]

5 minutes ago, Aspen Photo said:

Lowest tier, lowest bundle for buyer = "not lower than 10 cents per image" per Shutterstock.

Where did you see this? Can't find it in the announcement. 

[MSPhotographic]

I'm stunned by Shutterstock's latest of making us all work back up the commission levels EACH YEAR.  It gives the shaft to long term contributors in a BIG WAY.  More interesting is how they are locking any threads where we discuss it.  They seem to be taking their cue from YouTube which has started to engage in heavy censorship.  ALL SS has done since day one is devalue photography and the perception of the value of our work across the entire industry and cut earnings to photographers.  IT'S TIME TO TELL SS TO F.O.A.D.  I can't say what that stand for in a forum but the last three words are Off And Die.

[MSPhotographic]

2 hours ago, Photography by Adri said:

I had purposely stopped contributing to iStock because the poor payout structure was pretty insulting. But with this new payout structure with SS, I would be better off dedicating my time to iStock simply because I get more sales there. Even with a smaller port. Adobe, and Pond5 have my full port since they pay well. Definitely considering jumping on the bandwagon and deleting everything on the 1st. This is ridiculous

Adobe is currently the only agency trying to hold the line against the race to the bottom and i hope it takes over the market soon.  The way things are going at SS they will soon be asking us to PAY to submit content.

[Aspen Photo]

11 minutes ago, yusia said:

Where did you see this? Can't find it in the announcement. 

In the "official" Shutterstock announcement post on here. Another person on that thread also did this graph. Math looks accurate to me:

 

 

Again, not my work, but looks accurate. On the thread, Kate Shutterstock said no single license would result in less than a 10 cent commission. The chart shows that with the larger subscriptions, even the highest tiers get at most 15 cents per image....had been a flat 38 cents for the highest earners.

[Aspen Photo]

24 minutes ago, yusia said:

Where did you see this? Can't find it in the announcement. 

Kate Shutterstock

• Member
•  
• 
• Administrators
• 
•  
• 343 posts
• my image portfolio
• my video portfolio

• Report post
•  

Posted 1 hour ago

1 hour ago, Manon_Labe said:

This is not correct.

When the new earnings structure goes into effect, the payout for subscription plans will not be less than 10¢.

 

Actual link to the discussion (page 19 about halfway down I think):

 

[Arnau Soler]

@Kate Shutterstock 25 cents is really low for a photo, but that is insulting. I'm also considering deactivating my portfolio, I spend more in fuel to get to the places than what you will pay us for it. At least the level should be calculated from the sales of the last 12 months... And in the main thread another contributor posted a very good list of our demands.

[Badon Hill Studio]

6 minutes ago, Aspen Photo said:

Kate Shutterstock

• Member
•  
• 
• Administrators
• 
•  
• 343 posts
• my image portfolio
• my video portfolio

• Report post
•  

Posted 1 hour ago

This is not correct.

When the new earnings structure goes into effect, the payout for subscription plans will not be less than 10¢.

 

Actual link to the discussion (page 19 about halfway down I think):

 

Thanks a bunch!

[Steven Tritton]

The new pricing structure is going to hit us all but it's going to really hit hard those who make bigger commissions on lower volume sales and long term contributors. 

 

[Jake Sorensen]

I'm tired of being spit upon by all the different agencies. The only way to put a stop to this is if we band together. As of right now I am creating the Stock Submitters Coalition. It is and will always be free to join. My hope is that we can get enough contributors on board that the companies have to take us seriously when we bring issues to them. The first step is to get an idea of how many people would join such a coalition. I have created a form. If you are interested in putting more control back into the hands of contributors please sign the form. Also share it in every forum and social media outlet you can think of to make its presence known. https://forms.gle/zrq3RswRpYsu6jmq6

[njene]

Well I guess Jon became a billionaire and the higher ups in management all rake in massive salaries with bonuses and they must find a way to preserve that or ride out the gravy train until it stops

will this become a paradigm shift in the marketplace with other players stepping in to take advantage?  Only time will tell

[C5 Media]

If you deactivate... and some miracle SS changes the terms, can you reactivate with a click? or do you have to re-submit everything?

[Wyrostok Creative]

8 hours ago, Richard Whitcombe said:

If everyone deactivated on Jan 1st it would send more of a message.

 

I have fairly low sales right now so not much to lose in the near term by deactivating now. I think it would be a better statement if the data department says to management *this week* we have lots of people halting their licensing... so would encourage if you CAN halt it, even for a week, just go ahead and do it.  

To test this I flipped the status to "off" which triggered a change notification email to me, then 5 minutes later changed it to "on" which did the same. No effect on the library -- everything still safe.  I tried to flip it back to "off" again but the system flagged, "You have changed your settings too many times today. Please try again later.", so I will go back in later and deactivate my library for the immediate future, and evaluate based on any response from SS.

[Steven Tritton]

6 hours ago, Aspen Photo said:

Lowest tier, lowest bundle for buyer = "not lower than 10 cents per image" per Shutterstock.

Not lower than 10 cents per image? Or not lower than 10 cents per lisense sale which could contain any number of images? 

Anyone have clarity on this? 

 

[Phil Lowe]

10 hours ago, MSPhotographic said:

Adobe is currently the only agency trying to hold the line against the race to the bottom and i hope it takes over the market soon.

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. 

[Holy Polygon]

This is good idia. Together we can change it!

[FCG]

I really think its a good idea to deactivate all our portfolios... this is as someone stated... insulting...

[Ikrill]

10 hours ago, Jake Sorensen said:

I'm tired of being spit upon by all the different agencies. The only way to put a stop to this is if we band together. As of right now I am creating the Stock Submitters Coalition. It is and will always be free to join. My hope is that we can get enough contributors on board that the companies have to take us seriously when we bring issues to them. The first step is to get an idea of how many people would join such a coalition. I have created a form. If you are interested in putting more control back into the hands of contributors please sign the form. Also share it in every forum and social media outlet you can think of to make its presence known. https://forms.gle/zrq3RswRpYsu6jmq6

come in and unite!!!!!

 

[oleschwander]

13 hours ago, MSPhotographic said:

Adobe is currently the only agency trying to hold the line against the race to the bottom

Yes, why not support those who are (still) able to pay ‘decent’ fees ..?

[Scorsby]

As Steven has suggested. 

Turn your port off on June 1st for two weeks initially. And keep it up if able. 

SS is a shop window only. Plenty of shops. You do all the work. 

[Anita Ponne]

Are there already contributors who have turned their portfolio off? It seems that those who said they did still have their ports online...

[AB Photostudio]

17 hours ago, Photography by Adri said:

Maybe we shouldn't wait to do it until June 1st. Why not just do it now? Others are already doing it

I did not see any reason for waiting. Hope it will make an impact, my hope and wish doesn't get far. Turning my back on SS, and not looking back, will do better for myself. 

[Whiteaster]

1 hour ago, Anita Ponne said:

It seems that those who said they did still have their ports online.

I see the same thing.

[Steven Tritton]

I feel some sympathy for anyone who depends on Shutterstock at this time. 

[Photography by Adri]

I disallowed licensing for both images and videos yesterday, but my port is still showing here with a "download" button on images:

https://www.shutterstock.com/g/Photography+by+Adri

[underwatercam.tv]

The answer on the following message came via chat in which a also contributor just told me how to cancel my account!

Hi there,

 

I am a contributor since 2013 and I have earned more than 34 000 U$

You know what your share was for the time of our cooperation.

 

I am not accepting the new rules, especially the fact every January the accounts are reset and everybody starts with 15%

it might sound good regarding YOUR earnings, but is on the costs of your hard working contributors.

The argument you want to contributors to submit fresh content, which is hot to day and probably dead by tomorrow.

I am submitting mainly underwater stock footage ...high quality content.

This is a market which always works, even and especially in times of change.

 

But you are setting the rules and I simply cannot accept them.

I never accepted exclusivity deals ...and what just happens is exactly the reason, ...never ever get dependent on one agency!

I am selling on pond 5, adobe stocks, naturefootage, framepool and 2 smaller ones, who give by the way a better share than the 65/35

 

By withdrawing my footage from shutterstock will make me more money with my other partners. Why should I accept 15% ?

Why should I kill my own business with other partners?

 

If you are not coming up with a new fresh idea ...a fair share as we agreed on before, ... my portfolio will be taken off the platform by the 1st of June.

 

By the way, I have another complaint active.

My experience recently, ...the staff reviewing content is highly incompetent or probably not motivated for reasons you know better than I do.

 

My opinion, you are killing your own business!

 

“Be the change you want to see in the world”

here the answer from Steve shutterstock ;O)

Hi Peter

I'm Stephen and I'm a Shutterstock contributor and expert user.
I don't have access to your images, account or your personal data but I am here to help answer your questions.


To completely delete your account and all personal information send your request to:
Privacy@shutterstock.com

best regards
Steve