Meanwhile, over at Shutterstock...

[geogphotos]

1 hour ago, Autumn Sky said:

 

These are 3 great points & I fully agree.   But, in regard to point 2),  question is:  How do you, as contributor, manage your assets in best possible way?   No single answer works for everyone. I even started separate thread about this awhile ago.  I'd be more than happy to be 100% Alamy exclusive but sales are simply too few and far in between.  Last month I had first zero sales month in a long time here, and quite decent month in micros, best in long time despite pandemic.  

 

btw,  as this is "Meanwhile on Shutterstock" thread --- first day at least so far benefited me.   Sub sale that would have been 33 cents in old system paid 2.45.  Ya it's all peanuts but it is 8 times more if you look strictly numbers.  Plenty of 10 cents sales according to their forum though and tons of disgruntled contributors;  should be interesting till it settles down.

 

 

I don't sell them on micro-sites and I don't sell them as RF. That works for me. 

[meanderingemu]

seeing all the comments of people joining Alamy, i wonder if they are ready for the influx of contributors that expects the library to think for them....  

[Autumn Sky]

18 minutes ago, meanderingemu said:

seeing all the comments of people joining Alamy, i wonder if they are ready for the influx of contributors that expects the library to think for them....  

Ah, yes. I made comment in respect to this earlier as "ripple effect".  But I don't expect much real change here... Alamy is not SS and making sale here is tough. SS contributors are used to constant 'sales', and once weeks on Alamy pass without one, grass won't look that much greener on the other side

 

Adobe is more interesting as contributors close SS ports as lots of content will become exclusive there, at least in micro world.

[meanderingemu]

2 minutes ago, Autumn Sky said:

Ah, yes. I made comment in respect to this earlier as "ripple effect".  But I don't expect much real change here... Alamy is not SS and making sale here is tough. SS contributors are used to constant 'sales', and once weeks on Alamy pass without one, grass won't look that much greener on the other side

 

Adobe is more interesting as contributors close SS ports as lots of content will become exclusive there, at least in micro world.

but having seen a few MS type contributors dumping loads of image on Alamy, with little rigueur to rules of licencing, KW or upload- read: "it went through upload so it must be fine", i worry about the client experience over the next few months.  I was always amazed that some contributor felt omitting the truth/lying in the info made an image acceptable for commercial distribution. 

 

Adobe is an option only for those that don't focus on editorials.   

 

 

interesting times. but yes we will get regular posts here "i have no sales, i used to get daily one on MS site"

[BobD]

 

An interesting watch on the situation over there.

 

 

[meanderingemu]

reading the forum on SS, I am fascinated with discussions of "where do we go elsewhere now?" 

I see many of them ready to spend large amount of time uploading to random stock agency, without any information as to client base, library focus, historical data.  Saw one person raving about an agency based on % given back to contributors on sales, without any info about if they actually have any revenue.  

[Autumn Sky]

yes, that Forum is bottomless pit of hate.  And totally unmoderated,  people post photos of execs, invite others to send them spam mail, call company various insulting names and it all goes.  It is public forum and everyone can read it. 

 

10 cent sales are pouring in now.  Will be interesting to do tally at end of month,  I think less that 50% compared with old system as vast majority of "sales" are coming from customers with large subscription packs.  

 

(In the meantime, DT which announced "10% contributor increase" starting June 1 is still compensating the old way)

Edited June 3, 2020 by Autumn Sky

[John Mitchell]

6 hours ago, meanderingemu said:

reading the forum on SS, I am fascinated with discussions of "where do we go elsewhere now?" 

I see many of them ready to spend large amount of time uploading to random stock agency, without any information as to client base, library focus, historical data.  Saw one person raving about an agency based on % given back to contributors on sales, without any info about if they actually have any revenue.  

 

I'm always amazed at how people nowadays plunge into stock photography thinking that they don't have to do any research or take the time learn what the business is all about. I guess it's a symptom of the times. Just download the app and you're good to go.

[BobD]

I have suspended my images over there, once I receive this months payout I will cancel my account.

1 10c sale was enough.

[MizBrown]

On 31/05/2020 at 23:58, Autumn Sky said:

Of course not. Seems lot of people misunderstood; I was talking about micros cleanup.   If 1000th similar image of common flower (or alike) can not make 10cents in a year, it's probably an indicator of a low sale potential that can be phased out.

 

Along these lines, Adobe would not even accept images of flowers "unless they were exceptional". They also don't allow editorial submission, until your port passed 1000 downloads. This policy can be debated one way or the other, but fact remains they have emerged as best micro out there. For how long it remains to be seen

 

They have a large advantage in that they can acquire stock and sell in their software (at least in Photoshop, but I suspect also in some other programs that web designers and publishers might use).  So it's very easy to upload to Adobe Stock and very easy to buy from them.

 

Paypal doesn't work in Nicaragua, but it looks like Skrill does.  

 

Edited June 3, 2020 by MizBrown
more information

[Steve F]

11 hours ago, BobD said:

 

An interesting watch on the situation over there.

 

Interesting video. Also interesting to hear from a former editor, that an editor would find an image they like at an agency, get a price, find the same image at another agency at a lower price, ring the first agency back and tell them the other agency is selling x photo cheaper, what are you going to offer? Etc. The 'benefit' of selling at multiple agencies....

Edited June 3, 2020 by Steve F

[Sally]

3 minutes ago, Steve F said:

 

Interesting video. Also interesting to hear from a former editor, that an editor would find an image you like at an agency, get a price, find the same image at another agency at a lower price, ring the first agency back and tell them the other agency is selling x photo cheaper, what are you going to offer? Etc. The 'benefit' of selling at multiple agencies....

So much for diversification. I wasn’t entirely sure it was the best advice.

[Steve F]

20 minutes ago, Sally said:

So much for diversification. I wasn’t entirely sure it was the best advice.

What, quit Shutterstock?

[John Mitchell]

2 hours ago, BobD said:

I have suspended my images over there, once I receive this months payout I will cancel my account.

1 10c sale was enough.

 

Good for you. I was hoping to make it to the next payout threshold before pulling out with my tiny collection of videos and images. However, I'm not sure that I want to wait that long. Problem is that I don't trust them to pay me the money owing me if I quit now. Not that it's much, but it's the principle of the thing.

[meanderingemu]

3 hours ago, BobD said:

I have suspended my images over there, once I receive this months payout I will cancel my account.

1 10c sale was enough.

 

i respect you.  i've deleted some of my favourite (but had already started only sending 2nd tier stuff last year), and will just let in run for a month or two with no new uploads.  Sadly AS not really an option, since my better stuff is editorial....

[MariaJ]

6 hours ago, BobD said:

I have suspended my images over there, once I receive this months payout I will cancel my account.

1 10c sale was enough.

 

I did the same.  I only have about a hundred images over there.  I started submitting as the same time as I did to alamy but didn't know any better at the time.  So stopped at about a hundred, and kept some images there that never got any interest at alamy but sold there (like some small town Canadian tourist spots).   However my first sale at 10c was yesterday, which is absolutely ridiculous so I suspended my account and will cancel it as well. 

[John Mitchell]

2 hours ago, MariaJ said:

 

I did the same.  I only have about a hundred images over there.  I started submitting as the same time as I did to alamy but didn't know any better at the time.  So stopped at about a hundred, and kept some images there that never got any interest at alamy but sold there (like some small town Canadian tourist spots).   However my first sale at 10c was yesterday, which is absolutely ridiculous so I suspended my account and will cancel it as well. 

 

Hope you don't mind my asking. Did they owe you any money? If so, have you asked for payment?

[Chuck Nacke]

On 31/05/2020 at 15:00, Autumn Sky said:

Yes.  And problem is not easy to solve, mainly because of years and years of dumping of sub-par content  (I am talking micros).   I firmly believe 12 month and out if no sale is the right approach.  If contributor believes image is good and has potential,  they can always re-submit.  But now it would go through  strict QC rules - and not AI approval, now more and more gaining speed.  This is how you clean up.  

 

Then you can also start charging more, and give more to contributors as well.  Because you sell quality and one gets what he pays for

As far as "Dumping sub-par content"  I agree. BUT your suggestion of the 12 months without a sale and delete is a REALLY BAD Idea.  I have many images (chromes)

that have sat for years, mostly in my basement, and now license almost every month.  Some of those images have also sat on Alamy for years without a license and then 

because of events have been licensed many times for good fees.   You also forget that Alamy is a library not a news photo agency, well it is trying but.....

When I began contributing to Alamy, it was as a vehicle to license images that I made during Magazine assignments or working with the real NEWS PHOTO AGENCIES 

around the world over the years.  There are many things about Alamy that I still like and value, but news image distribution is not one of them.

 

Chuck

 

[Autumn Sky]

48 minutes ago, Chuck Nacke said:

As far as "Dumping sub-par content"  I agree. BUT your suggestion of the 12 months without a sale and delete is a REALLY BAD Idea.  I have many images (chromes)

that have sat for years, mostly in my basement, and now license almost every month.  Some of those images have also sat on Alamy for years without a license and then 

because of events have been licensed many times for good fees.   You also forget that Alamy is a library not a news photo agency, well it is trying but.....

When I began contributing to Alamy, it was as a vehicle to license images that I made during Magazine assignments or working with the real NEWS PHOTO AGENCIES 

around the world over the years.  There are many things about Alamy that I still like and value, but news image distribution is not one of them.

 

Chuck

 

Chuck -- "12 month no sale" idea was for micros, not Alamy.  Alamy as heavily editorial is different & think most people agreed on this?

 

Interesting thing in light of all these threats of boycott, disabling ports etc.   Despite everything --- SS library seems to rise. So people keep uploading as if nothing happened.  This is the bottomless pit that eventually caused 10 cents sales & is sadly felt across the industry.

Edited June 4, 2020 by Autumn Sky

[Autumn Sky]

9 hours ago, BobD said:

I have suspended my images over there, once I receive this months payout I will cancel my account.

1 10c sale was enough.

I'll keep my account for couple of months, but I stopped uploading.  10 cents is simply too disrespectful.  Today I got 1 "sale" on Shutterstock, and 1 sale on Adobe.   Adobe sale netted me 30 times more than SS sale (32.4 times more to be precise). This is just not right.  We'll see what happens, but I am now more and more thinking they slashed it too much & it might backfire

[Sally]

11 hours ago, Steve F said:

What, quit Shutterstock?

Nope, I don’t do any other stock agencies. I’m doing just fine here.

[geogphotos]

4 hours ago, Autumn Sky said:

 

 

Interesting thing in light of all these threats of boycott, disabling ports etc.   Despite everything --- SS library seems to rise. So people keep uploading as if nothing happened.  This is the bottomless pit that eventually caused 10 cents sales & is sadly felt across the industry.

 

 

The decision to pay 10cents commission is a business decision to enrich Shutterstock shareholders. It has not been caused by changes in the supply of photos or the demand for photos. 

 

I agree that it is made possible because SS are able to take advantage of people's willingness to accept unfair, unsustainable business practices. But let's keep the responsibility where it belongs with the owners who are majority shareholders of SS. 

 

The end result will be bad for us at Alamy - more competition, less revenue to go around, but even so I would welcome anybody who gets out of Shutterstock and closes the door on them. This isn't an attack on micro stock in general. Adobe by contrast seems a much more legitimate company. 

Edited June 4, 2020 by geogphotos

[BobD]

I was doing OK over there, got a payout practically every month and was about to trip over the next commission rate which increased earning quite a bit, but I will not put up with what amounts to slave labour.

 

To be honest I think they wanted to cull a good deal of their unsustainable mountain of images, the last couple of months they have been rejecting images for the most ridiculous reasons. This way they cut down on images and make more money at the same time.

 

There are rumours on the forum that they have made sweetheart deals with their big factory suppliers that maintains the original commission for those favoured few but that only lasts until January when they will be reset to the lowest rate along with everyone else.

[John Mitchell]

6 hours ago, BobD said:

I was doing OK over there, got a payout practically every month and was about to trip over the next commission rate which increased earning quite a bit, but I will not put up with what amounts to slave labour.

 

To be honest I think they wanted to cull a good deal of their unsustainable mountain of images, the last couple of months they have been rejecting images for the most ridiculous reasons. This way they cut down on images and make more money at the same time.

 

There are rumours on the forum that they have made sweetheart deals with their big factory suppliers that maintains the original commission for those favoured few but that only lasts until January when they will be reset to the lowest rate along with everyone else.

 

It's actually too bad about SS. I like their user-friendly website, and they have their act together in a lot of other respects as well. If they had treated their contributors fairly from the beginning, they could have become a good stock agency. As it is, they are now sowing the seeds of their own demise IMO. It's an old story...

Edited June 4, 2020 by John Mitchell

[Brian Yarvin]

John, I've been around the stock photo business for almost fifty years (I made my first agency sale in 1971, while I was still in high school) and I have seen very many commission cuts. Not once has it ever hurt the agency that made the cuts. You may wish for their "demise," but this isn't a sign.