Author Topic: Shutterstock Increase Print Limits to 500,000 and other changes (Read 19368 times)

Semmick Photo · « **Reply #50 on:** April 06, 2015, 09:03 »

Quote from: alison1414 on April 06, 2015, 08:59

I wrote to SS to register my extreme disapproval of this terrible move, but they never responded. So I will say it here. I've been licensing my images for print for 30 years, and there is rarely even a print run of 250,000 let alone 500,000. In fact, years ago I tried to get them to reduce the 250,000 to 10,000 where it belongs. And now this. As I said at the advent of the stupid stupid DPC, anyone who does not close their account at Fotolia has no call to be complaining about this new development because you're adding to the mess. I am disgusted.

Print runs on ELs were long time 500K on FT, CanStockPhoto and DT, even before DPC came along.

alison1414 · « **Reply #51 on:** April 06, 2015, 09:26 »

Quote from: Semmick Photo on April 06, 2015, 09:03

Quote from: alison1414 on April 06, 2015, 08:59
I wrote to SS to register my extreme disapproval of this terrible move, but they never responded. So I will say it here. I've been licensing my images for print for 30 years, and there is rarely even a print run of 250,000 let alone 500,000. In fact, years ago I tried to get them to reduce the 250,000 to 10,000 where it belongs. And now this. As I said at the advent of the stupid stupid DPC, anyone who does not close their account at Fotolia has no call to be complaining about this new development because you're adding to the mess. I am disgusted.
Print runs on ELs were long time 500K on FT, CanStockPhoto and DT, even before DPC came along.

Hi Ron, where have you been. Yes, I know that, and it's why I either don't upload at all to those sites or I don't give them everything I have. Shutterstock was the last bastion, and now they're going down too.

Semmick Photo · « **Reply #52 on:** April 06, 2015, 09:33 »

Ah ok, makes sense.

I am no longer allowed to post on the SS forum.

But I found my peace and quiet here on MSG. Things are nice around here. Less drama, less volatile. Who would have thought!

alison1414 · « **Reply #53 on:** April 06, 2015, 10:18 »

Quote from: Semmick Photo on April 06, 2015, 09:33

Ah ok, makes sense.

I am no longer allowed to post on the SS forum. But I found my peace and quiet here on MSG. Things are nice around here. Less drama, less volatile. Who would have thought!

OH I didn't know that! It's pretty boring there without you, Mike, Steve,and Jens.

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #54 on:** April 06, 2015, 12:56 »

Quote from: JPSDK on April 03, 2015, 06:03

There is a mighty big difference in how the two companies address their contributors. It feels like Shutter is making business with us, contrary to iStock who used us for their business.

I would point you to this page - their Leadership team - and there is no one there who has anything to do with contributors. Says a lot

http://www.shutterstock.com/aboutus.mhtml

I didn't realize that Scott Braut left in December. There's someone who is VP, Content Operations (i.e. not Scott's title) and who was there before Scott left. The linkedin corporate-speak describing his job includes:

"Hired to scale global content operations; extending international teams and content management systems to achieve new levels of operational excellence while driving iterative process innovation & improvement disciplines while strengthening key performance metrics.

Includes:
- Content operations vision and strategy
- Media technical and compliance standards
- Content supply predictive modeling and analysis
- Revenue growth and business strategy
- Operations production, financial and cost modeling
- Workflow development and process improvement
- Contributor and artist support and success
- Content integration, integrity and quality evaluation"

If I were to translate "Content supply predictive modeling and analysis" it might be something like: if we make contributor terms & payouts x% worse, how much content will we lose?

And I would think "Contributor and artist support and success" might include talking with contributors, not just publishing stuff in a blog.

I don't think Paul has been in here though.

Semmick Photo · « **Reply #55 on:** April 06, 2015, 13:26 »

Quote from: alison1414 on April 06, 2015, 10:18

OH I didn't know that! It's pretty boring there without you, Mike, Steve,and Jens.

Thanks, but they dont want me there.

Its ok though

Cheers

alison1414 · « **Reply #56 on:** April 06, 2015, 13:39 »

Quote from: Semmick Photo on April 06, 2015, 13:26

Quote from: alison1414 on April 06, 2015, 10:18

OH I didn't know that! It's pretty boring there without you, Mike, Steve,and Jens.
Thanks, but they dont want me there. Its ok though

Cheers

It looks to me like they just don't want anything interesting!

JPSDK · « **Reply #57 on:** April 06, 2015, 15:09 »

Maybe I have misunderstood the whole thing or half misunderstood it.
However.
It is clear that the terms for reselling of our licences are getting worse for us.

But then again, it could be worse ,they could have begun to suck our blood, like istock did, and others, some without telling us, some pissing on us while they did it. Worst were the middlemens middlemen, that distributed our pictures the strangest of places.

Shutter at least tries to include their contributers, and they do not humiliate us.
And maybe who knows, it is they who know the market, and they might be right, and we might earn more.

For April I can I can see my that download numbers going down but the amount of money is going up, which has been a longtime trend, and maybe shutters expansioning the customer base is is not so much on selling subscriptions but selling really large amounts of images to big businesses on other terms.
I dont know, but I like it when my income goes up on a lesser effort, and it does.

JPSDK · « **Reply #58 on:** April 06, 2015, 15:13 »

BTW..
Semmick
Sad to hear you have been kicked out as well.
We had fun there in the good old days.
And yes, strangely enough, there is more peace and quiet here.
Despite alle the anonymous people.

ShadySue · « **Reply #59 on:** April 06, 2015, 15:29 »

Quote from: JPSDK on April 06, 2015, 15:13

And yes, strangely enough, there is more peace and quiet here.
Despite all the anonymous people.

I suspect we've all been ground down too far by the 'illegitimae'.

JPSDK · « **Reply #60 on:** April 06, 2015, 15:38 »

ha ha ha

ruxpriencdiam · « **Reply #61 on:** April 06, 2015, 16:09 »

Peace and quiet over here!

Yeah right!

Pfffffffttttttttttttttttt~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

robhainer · « **Reply #62 on:** April 06, 2015, 20:37 »

Can't say I care much for this change. I don't see how it makes them money. You're trading ELs for a few new sub accounts maybe. It doesn't make sense. I mean they make $100 or whatever, and we get $28. Now we get .38 and they sell a sub for less than that when you figure in the change that lets people download their whole package in a day if they want. They're just cutting prices to compete, with little idea of whether it will make them more money.