Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Yep, after 9 years or so of being top tier im now Level 1 photo and video.

Obviously im feeling REALLY motivated now.  Years of time and effort have paid off cumulating in this.

Im so motivated ive just submitted new content to AS and P5.  I'll do the SS in a few weeks if i remember.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Vector Archive said:

Sometimes I wonder.... do you guys who constantly moan about SS realise that it is completely your choice if you choose to licence your content here?

Not entirely agree.
It was not my choice. When I started a year and a half ago, I looked at all the major Stock sites and ended up choosing Shutterstock, not knowing the terms would change so quickly.
I have now also uploaded my photos to a few other Stocksites. I don't have that many photos, but it takes you a while anyway. I can imagine if you have thousands of photos it will take a lot more time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

All of you seem to think Shutterstock owe you something.... they don't. 

You're also forgetting that the new pricing system has allowed SS to provide more competitive packages to buyers. This means more buyers. More people licensing out images. 

If Shutterstock didn't make those changes, many buyers might have left to a different agency, and our sales figure could be even lower than if we kept the old pricing. 

It's also important to keep shareholders happy, and the new system has done exactly that, with the share price doubling. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Vector Archive said:

All of you seem to think Shutterstock owe you something.... they don't. 

You're also forgetting that the new pricing system has allowed SS to provide more competitive packages to buyers. This means more buyers. More people licensing out images. 

If Shutterstock didn't make those changes, many buyers might have left to a different agency, and our sales figure could be even lower than if we kept the old pricing. 

It's also important to keep shareholders happy, and the new system has done exactly that, with the share price doubling. 

 

You can also turn it the other way around.
The new pricing system has allowed SS to provide more competitive packages to buyers. This means more buyers. More people licensing out images.

That also means that the other agencies sell less. To do something about this, they will either shrink or adjust their pricing system, so that they can compete with Shutterstock again.

Then Shutterstock will be forced to readjust its prices. Their artists will earn a little less, but continue to sell a lot. That means that the other ........................

 

This is sometimes called a race to the bottom.  🙂

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Thijs de Graaf said:

You can also turn it the other way around.
The new pricing system has allowed SS to provide more competitive packages to buyers. This means more buyers. More people licensing out images.

That also means that the other agencies sell less. To do something about this, they will either shrink or adjust their pricing system, so that they can compete with Shutterstock again.

Then Shutterstock will be forced to readjust its prices. Their artists will earn a little less, but continue to sell a lot. That means that the other ........................

 

This is sometimes called a race to the bottom.  🙂

Well yes, exactly, and Shutterstock are leading that race. 

But that's life, some industries collapse, and microstock certainly well. 

The contributors here seem to think a life long salary is owed to them for the work they've put in over the last 10-15 years. But that's not how it works. 
Honestly, it's been over 6 months since SS announced the pricing change. Anyone that is still moaning about it whilst still choosing to license here, simply sounds childish. 

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

Anyone that is still moaning about it whilst still choosing to license here, simply sounds childish. 

If you are just complaining and not looking for alternatives, you are right. Discussing alternatives (which also happens on the forum) makes more sense.

There are also complaints because people were used to the attention of admins on this forum. But they have disappeared.

It is also disappointment for people who have been here for a long time. See the example of Rudy, where the founder was also admin here on the forum. One of the guys. They felt that they had worked on something together.
Or perhaps in the hope that this will make the management a little more careful to take even more measures. Which I doubt because none of the leadership cares about this forum. I am actually surprised that the forum still exists.
I suppose they used to use the forum to see what was going on among their artists. Perhaps found the forum helpful, as it helped them identify problems more quickly. For example, whether there are stolen photos, illustrations. That doesn't interest them anymore. Made it more attractive to new artists.

When I look at myself as a newbie. I assume that the management is only about the profit.They doesn't care about the artists. Only maybe the artists, who make a lot of profit. This prevents disappointments. I do it mainly for fun. If I don't have that in anymore, I'll stop. To be sure, I now also have pictures on other Stocksites.

 

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

But that's life, some industries collapse, and microstock certainly well.

The microstock industry isn't going to collapse. Websites, blogs, news corporations, ad agencies, everyone needs new images every day. So unless that entire sphere is going to collapse, microstock will be up and running because it still offers a good, affordable deal and variety as opposed to traditional stock.

Yes, free sites exist but they aren't competitors to microstock. The emphasis on the free sites is more on beauty than usefulness. So yeah, if you have a port full of random beautiful mountain landscapes and beaches and people, you might get affected. But if a customer is looking for images of a particular town or region or culture or species, it's unlikely you'll find anything useful on the free sites. And that makes a good chunk of microstock business.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Vector Archive said:

All of you seem to think Shutterstock owe you something.... they don't. 

You're also forgetting that the new pricing system has allowed SS to provide more competitive packages to buyers. This means more buyers. More people licensing out images. 

If Shutterstock didn't make those changes, many buyers might have left to a different agency, and our sales figure could be even lower than if we kept the old pricing. 

It's also important to keep shareholders happy, and the new system has done exactly that, with the share price doubling. 

 

I understand Shutterstock  needs to compete in a competitive marketplace, attract more buyers, and keep the shareholders happy. Every business does.

I also understand that more sales at a lower royalty can earn the same as fewer sales at a higher royalty. 10 sales at $0.10 is the same as 1 sale at $1.00, and I really don't care how many sales I make, as long as the money is the same in the end.

My biggest problem with the new system is resetting everyone to level 1 on January 1st. This really isn't fair, because until you work your way up to your previous level again, you will earn significantly less. If I were to sell an enhanced license in January, I make less than selling the same license in July. Shutterstock should make the levels based on lifetime earnings, or at least on the trailing 12 months, not a calendar year.

Since "fresh content" is supposedly more valuable than old content, if I upload fresh content now, I won't make as much from it as I will if I wait until my old content sells enough to raise my level.

So, rather than uploading my new photos here now, I'll wait until I sell enough old photos to get back to level 4 (or at least level 3) so that I'll get more on the average for my new photos when I do upload them. Does this make sense?

Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, balajisrinivasan said:

Yes, free sites exist but they aren't competitors to microstock. The emphasis on the free sites is more on beauty than usefulness. So yeah, if you have a port full of random beautiful mountain landscapes and beaches and people, you might get affected. But if a customer is looking for images of a particular town or region or culture or species, it's unlikely you'll find anything useful on the free sites. And that makes a good chunk of microstock business.

Sorry, but I have to disagree. The free sites are definitely competitors.

When I read our local newspaper, I see every day that half of the pictures now come from the free agencies. If these free agencies did not exist, the images would have to be bought from microstock agencies. And I'm sure the newspaper publishers would survive that.


Here there are also many free magazines from the region. These are financed by ads. Most of the pictures in these magazines are now also from the free stock agencies.
And they exist because they earn money - especially with advertising (even including ads from microstock agencies - what an anachronism!). The photographers who offer their pictures there for free are subsidizing a business model.

If there are so many photographers who don't need the money for their work, I personally would find it much better if they sold their images via Microstock and donated the income to generally charitable social institutions, those in need of help, the homeless, war refugees or hungry people.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Vector Archive said:

All of you seem to think Shutterstock owe you something.... they don't. 

You're also forgetting that the new pricing system has allowed SS to provide more competitive packages to buyers. This means more buyers. More people licensing out images. 

If Shutterstock didn't make those changes, many buyers might have left to a different agency, and our sales figure could be even lower than if we kept the old pricing. 

It's also important to keep shareholders happy, and the new system has done exactly that, with the share price doubling. 

 

Shutterstock owe us everything. Without contributors it just wouldn't exist, let alone made all that money.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Vector Archive said:

The contributors here seem to think a life long salary is owed to them for the work they've put in over the last 10-15 years. But that's not how it works. 

Hold your horses, Vector. We all know the ‘arguments’. A lot of the complaint are contributors trying to get over their (our) frustrations. Basic psychology. Thats part of the human nature, and if you - and others - don’t like it don’t read it ...

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/1/2021 at 12:02 PM, BalkansCat said:

If we were having this reasoning everywhere, we would get screwed by everybody on everything. 

You have been screwed by almost every agency, if you are paying attention. Depending on Microstock for a living wage may have seemed like a good idea years ago, but the market has changed and so have most of the agencies.

Time for people to get over their anger and disappointment and stop whining. We have had seven months now to deal with the grief and disappointment. Pretty much everyone, knew this reset was coming, but now has to bring up the adjusted contract, calling names, accusing, but missing the point. This is the way it is and the way it's going to be.

Denial, Anger, Bargaining, Depression, Acceptance - where are you now in your adjustment to the bad news? (that's everyone here as the you, not any specific person)

Some of us have gone through the stages and have decided to accept our fate. Others have cut their ties and moved on to some other distribution or a different business. Some have decided to remove their work and waste time complaining on the forums. No one promised us anything! They just set down the terms and we either accepted them or rejected that.

Now the terms have changed and we can accept them or decline.

This is the way the world is and the way business runs, maybe that's not a pretty picture, but that's the way things are.

good-luck-for-the-new-year-web.jpg

  

On 1/2/2021 at 6:58 AM, Doug McLean said:

My biggest problem with the new system is resetting everyone to level 1 on January 1st. Shutterstock should make the levels based on lifetime earnings, or at least on the trailing 12 months, not a calendar year.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Studio 2 said:

and @Sharkshock from the 'about social distance' thread: "Agreed. Nobody is thrilled with this arrangement but I'm becoming increasingly bored with the number of people that can't find a way to move on from this. It isn't and never was Shutterstock's responsibility to put food on tables, pay bills and the mortgage. There's no employee/employer relationship.  It's unfortunate that some contributors put all of their eggs into one basket, yes, but at some point it's time to move on"

Although I take your points, I will just add this.  If a person is in a relationship which starts off happily/mutually caring, then becomes abusive (taking advantage of vulnerabilities, taking them for granted, paying no heed or care to the partner, ignoring them, making sure that they are just fine and demonstrating by their actions that the needs of the other person are of no importance to them) then you don't say to the abused partner 'well, just get out of it, stop complaining.  Shut up or leave'.  You show sympathy because the situation that they entered the relationship upon has changed drastically.  Their partner has changed drastically.

I think that contributors feel betrayed, and rightly so.  If therefore they want to voice their anger that is up to them.  It won't change anything because there is no sentiment in business, but at the very least, even if Sstock doesn't care, the aggrieved contributors here are sharing on a forum where most other people do care.  Caring is a good and necessary human emotion as is, as you rightly point out, eventually moving on.

I've watched with my sympathy since May, we aren't partners, never where. Move on stop crying for sympathy. Either stay or go, but please stop!

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Clupeidae said:

I've watched with my sympathy since May, we aren't partners, never where. Move on stop crying for sympathy. Either stay or go, but please stop!

I haven't sold anything on Adobe Stock this year. Oops, that's also complaining. Sorry!!!!!  😧😕

OK. Only good new then. My son (illustrator) is started uploading to Shutterstock in December despite my complaint and crying https://www.shutterstock.com/g/Dirk-Jan+de+Graaf . Didn't listen to me again 🙂.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/1/2021 at 2:07 PM, Vector Archive said:

Sometimes I wonder.... do you guys who constantly moan about SS realise that it is completely your choice if you choose to licence your content here?

 

2 hours ago, HodagMedia said:

Time for people to get over their anger and disappointment and stop whining. We have had seven months now to deal with the grief and disappointment. Pretty much everyone, knew this reset was coming, but now has to bring up the adjusted contract, calling names, accusing, but missing the point. This is the way it is and the way it's going to be.

I don't constantly moan, just a few digs.  I was never angry just disappointed. The point is now is the date when it all kicks in, we have all been demoted and I thought it important to comment.  I have not deleted my port, why should I?  It is still generating income.  I have stopped uploading though.  SS are no a charity but it would have been nice to have a little humanity.  I have generated  lot of income for SS over the years, even with my small port.  

Anyway have a happy New Year!  Eat drink and be merry..

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Doug McLean said:

My biggest problem with the new system is resetting everyone to level 1 on January 1st. This really isn't fair, because until you work your way up to your previous level again, you will earn significantly less. If I were to sell an enhanced license in January, I make less than selling the same license in July. Shutterstock should make the levels based on lifetime earnings, or at least on the trailing 12 months, not a calendar year.

 

This is the crux of the matter, and it is a suggestion of alternatives

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Wilm Ihlenfeld said:

Sorry, but I have to disagree. The free sites are definitely competitors.

When I read our local newspaper, I see every day that half of the pictures now come from the free agencies. If these free agencies did not exist, the images would have to be bought from microstock agencies. And I'm sure the newspaper publishers would survive that.


Here there are also many free magazines from the region. These are financed by ads. Most of the pictures in these magazines are now also from the free stock agencies.
And they exist because they earn money - especially with advertising (even including ads from microstock agencies - what an anachronism!). The photographers who offer their pictures there for free are subsidizing a business model.

If there are so many photographers who don't need the money for their work, I personally would find it much better if they sold their images via Microstock and donated the income to generally charitable social institutions, those in need of help, the homeless, war refugees or hungry people.

Like I said in my post, for generic oversaturated images of mountains and beaches and architecture and people and everyday things, of course, I agree with you, they're competition and they would likely win.

But for a lot of specific categories, like species of insects, fungi, wild animals and locations of, say, a town in Bavaria or a temple in Thailand or a village in India or a particular shop in a city, the free sites are practically useless because they don't have either the range of available images or the rigorous keywording and SEO that comes with the best microstock sites. A lot of my downloads are of the images I have taken in the suburban locality I live in, which have zero representation on the free sites.

I also worked in a studio for years where I bought images from stock sites. So I know for a fact that the free sites aren't good enough to supply most of the images or footage that are needed in the news/media industry.

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...