Author Topic: Shutterstock is an embarassment (Read 73157 times)

Doug Jensen · « **Reply #50 on:** July 03, 2023, 19:16 »

Quote from: blvdone on July 03, 2023, 17:39

Quote from: Doug Jensen on July 03, 2023, 17:37
Quote from: blvdone on July 03, 2023, 17:35
I think I have to buy his "How to make $$$ uploading videos to Shutterstock" tutorial video. I'm nowhere near making $350/hr. I've been doing this totally wrong way.

That might be true about doing it the wrong way. What is your process? I'd be happy to take a look at your best clips and give you some free feedback on the subject matter, editing, grading, and of course, the all important metadata. Post a link.

It's OK. I'm too embarrassed after seeing your $$$ figure. I totally suck at this. I should go back to delivering newspapers.

Good idea. My first real job was delivering newspapers when I was in Jr. High and that allowed me to buy my first camera. So, yes, that is an excellent place to start.

Doug Jensen · « **Reply #51 on:** July 03, 2023, 19:18 »

Good idea. My first real job was delivering newspapers when I was in Jr. High and that allowed me to buy my first camera. So, yes, that is an excellent place to start.

Zero Talent · « **Reply #52 on:** July 03, 2023, 20:47 »

Quote from: Doug Jensen on July 03, 2023, 16:58

Quote from: Zero Talent on July 03, 2023, 16:45
Quote from: Doug Jensen on July 03, 2023, 16:37
Quote from: Zero Talent on July 03, 2023, 16:34
Quote from: Elijah on July 03, 2023, 16:06
Quote from: Doug Jensen on July 03, 2023, 11:55

Average time to edit, grade, add metadata, and upload each clip: 5 minutes

Right...

Right, right... and I'm earning ♾️/hour because everything I do is for fun.

If that is true, then you are a very lucky person. I hate doing metadata, so that will always be a chore for me and I absolutely must be paid well for doing it. As shown above, I'm at $348 per hour right now, but I'd keep doing it for 1/3 that. If it gets down to less than $100 per hour that is the day I will stop submitting.

I am not lucky! ♾️>348. Therefore I am better, despite my lack of talent!
Imagine that!

Congratulations! I envy your willingness to do it all for free.

Thanks!
But rest assured that I'm not doing all this for free!
I'm doing it for a lot of money and I'm enjoying it!

Based on your calculation, my my rate is ♾️/hour and that's so much fun!

Quote from: Doug Jensen on July 03, 2023, 16:58

Please point me to some of your clips so I can judge your ability. This is gonna be great for both of us!! Makes me feel a little like Tom Sawyer.

There is zero chance that I would ever share my trade secret with you!
Not even if you pay me for a crash course!
It is not up to you to judge my ability, but rather the other way around, since I am making ♾️/hour, and you are only making $348/hour.

Doug Jensen · « **Reply #53 on:** July 03, 2023, 20:54 »

Quote from: Zero Talent on July 03, 2023, 20:47

PS. There is no chance that I would ever share my trade secret with you!
Not even if you pay me for a crash course!

That's a shame. I already had my wallet out.

Zero Talent · « **Reply #54 on:** July 03, 2023, 20:56 »

Quote from: Doug Jensen on July 03, 2023, 20:54

Quote from: Zero Talent on July 03, 2023, 20:47
PS. There is no chance that I would ever share my trade secret with you!
Not even if you pay me for a crash course!

That's a shame. I already had my wallet out.

Well... you will have to learn it the hard way! Go back to grinding!
In life, you don't get success served on a silver platter!

Wilm · « **Reply #55 on:** July 04, 2023, 05:58 »

We have discussed this at length in the past.

From my point of view, this is misleading. There are millions of creatives who love their job and have fun doing it. And there are millions of creatives who are still barely able to make a living because they miscalculate. They sit too long on projects that pay poorly because they want to deliver an excellent result, even if the pay is only enough for an average design.

I too love my job as a designer, enjoy it every day and couldn't imagine doing anything else. Nevertheless, I have to calculate correctly in order not to cheat myself and to be able to feed my family. And even if I enjoy driving a car, for example, I have to calculate the travel time to the customer. Likewise my travel times to Geneva, Amsterdam or Barcelona, even if I enjoy traveling.

I even have fun editing my images for stock. Still, I calculate that time in.

At least, that's how I see it with calculating the hourly rate. And stand by my statement that a calculation of 5 minutes per file is unrealistic from my point of view.

Zero Talent · « **Reply #56 on:** July 04, 2023, 08:28 »

Quote from: Wilm on July 04, 2023, 05:58

I too love my job as a designer, enjoy it every day and couldn't imagine doing anything else.

Nice!
So you are also making ♾️/hour, according to the "Jensen logic"!
Lucky you!

gnirtS · « **Reply #57 on:** July 04, 2023, 09:30 »

Quote from: Zero Talent on July 04, 2023, 08:28

So you are also making ♾️/hour, according to the "Jensen logic"!
Lucky you!

I enjoy taking photos and video. So obviously today i was pleased to learn that instead of seeing monthly income drop off a cliff in the last 3 years im actually earning infinite amounts of money per hour and am richer than my wildest dreams.

Doug Jensen · « **Reply #58 on:** July 04, 2023, 09:50 »

Quote from: Wilm on July 04, 2023, 05:58

We have discussed this at length in the past.

From my point of view, this is misleading. There are millions of creatives who love their job and have fun doing it. And there are millions of creatives who are still barely able to make a living because they miscalculate. They sit too long on projects that pay poorly because they want to deliver an excellent result, even if the pay is only enough for an average design.

Wilm, I am not responsible for, nor do I really care if other creatives are happy or not with their earnings. I wish them success, as I do all people in all professions, but their success or lack of success has nothing to with me. In fact, in my experience, creatives are some of the worst business people I've ever met. And you cannot be successful in stock if you don't know how to manage your time, your expenses, choose to create content that is in demand, be able to generate effective metadata, and have an efficient workflow. I would argue that "creativity" is one of the least important aspects of being successful at stock. I for one do not consider myself creative at all, yet I'm making what I feel is a decent income.

I hope everyone would agree it is very important for any stock contributor to figure out how much they are earning for the amount of time and effort they put into their portfolio. That is just business 101. If someone cannot quantity their earnings by hour, day, or some other metric that makes sense to them, how can they ever get a handle on the value of what they are earning? On the face of it, a $1000 of revenue sounds great, but if I had to spend 100 hours to earn that $1000, then it is not so good. Revenue always has to be viewed against what it took to earn that revenue. I hope we can all agree on that.

However, with that said, we don't have to agree on HOW we calculate the value of the time and effort that goes into our stock footage businesses. I have explained in great detail how I calculate my earnings. Other people may not agree with my formula. Fine. The point is that I have a formula that makes sense to me and I have explained it in detail. I don't expect everyone to agree that they should use the same formula. Other people can calculate their earnings using whatever formula that make sense to them. Only a fool would keep blundering along without stopping to take a look at the big picture of earnings vs. time and expenses.

What I don't understand is why people get so angry when I explain my formula. It brings out such hatred. Why is that? Why is it so offensive to people that I am willing to open the books to show my earnings and then explain how I calculate my hourly income? If you don't agree with my methods, fine, but what difference should it make to you? Why the anger?

I challenge anyone else to open their books and explain how they calculate their own earnings. People always want to take a crap on mine, but nobody else ever steps up to the plate and says "Here's how I do it, and here's why my method makes more sense to me." I could respect that even if my methods differ. Nobody does that. They just want to throw stones at me because I had the gall to go on record with my own earnings.

What do we get instead, silly childish postings about infinite earnings per hour, and dumb stuff like you'd expect to hear from a 2nd grader. Are there no adults in the room who are willing to have an adult conversation without calling people names and throwing insults because they don't agree with someone else's formula? Does throwing out asinine statements about infinite earnings per hour lead to a meaningful conversation about this topic?

It's been a couple of years since SS shut down there forum, and so I come here now to read hundreds of postings by the same cast of characters bitching about the same stuff and tilting at the same windmills. Where does it all get them?

Doug Jensen · « **Reply #59 on:** July 04, 2023, 10:13 »

Quote from: Wilm on July 04, 2023, 05:58

At least, that's how I see it with calculating the hourly rate. And stand by my statement that a calculation of 5 minutes per file is unrealistic from my point of view.

Yes, it might be unrealistic from your point of view because you do things differently than me. Obviously, you are welcome to do things anyway you want to, but that doesn't mean I can't do what I say I can do. I can't free-climb Half Dome in three hours or run a 100 meter dash under 10 seconds, but that doesn't mean other people can't do it.

Yes, I really can process 12 clip per hour (edit, grade, export, generate metadata, and upload) without batting an eye. Actually it is closer to three minutes, but I like to be conservative and say 5 minutes. How can I do it? Because I have a workflow and system in place that allows me to do it. And through my online master class and in-person workshops, I have taught hundreds of other people to use the exact same methods to speed up their workflow too. Here's a secret: The less time I spend creating my content, the more money I earn per hour of my time. It is that simple. If someone can cut their time to create content in half, they have instantly doubled their hourly income. It is as simple as that.

Some contributors are like a cobbler working in their little home workshop to create a perfect pair of shoes by hand. While other people, like myself have more of an assembly line approach where speed and efficiency are king. You might be building a house with a pocket full of nails and a hammer, while I'm using a high-powered nail gun to get the same job done faster. You might be an author banging away on a manual typewriter, while I'm cruising along with a word processor to get the same work done in a fraction of the time.

Why is it that people can't understand that workflow, and the tools we use, actually matter to the bottom line? And that someone else may have a better way of getting the job done.

May I ask what software you use to edit, grade, export, and upload?

May I ask how you generate and manage your vast library metadata, and how you use are able to use older metadate to automate the creation of metadata for new clips?

May I ask how you shoot your footage and what tools you use onboard your camera, and during ingest, that will make you more efficient in post?

Zero Talent · « **Reply #60 on:** July 04, 2023, 10:15 »

Quote from: Doug Jensen on July 04, 2023, 09:50

What do we get instead, silly childish postings about infinite earnings per hour,

I know it hurts, but this not childish.
It's simple math and a logical consequence of your, no matter how you try to spin it, silly calculation.

Doug Jensen · « **Reply #61 on:** July 04, 2023, 10:18 »

Quote from: Zero Talent on July 04, 2023, 10:15

Quote from: Doug Jensen on July 04, 2023, 09:50
What do we get instead, silly childish postings about infinite earnings per hour,

I know it hurts, but this not childish.
It's simple math and a logical consequence of your, no matter how you try to spin it, silly calculation.

Of course it is childish to say you have infinite earnings. Do you have all the money in the world? I think not. Case settled.

What is wrong with my calculation and why is it so offensive to you?

What is your calculation? Please share.

Doug Jensen · « **Reply #62 on:** July 04, 2023, 10:20 »

Quote from: Doug Jensen on July 04, 2023, 10:18

Quote from: Zero Talent on July 04, 2023, 10:15
Quote from: Doug Jensen on July 04, 2023, 09:50
What do we get instead, silly childish postings about infinite earnings per hour,

I know it hurts, but this not childish.
It's simple math and a logical consequence of your, no matter how you try to spin it, silly calculation.

Of course it is childish to say you have infinite earnings. Do you have all the money in the world? I think not. Case settled.

What is wrong with my calculation and why is it so offensive to you?

What is your calculation? Please share.

Zero Talent · « **Reply #63 on:** July 04, 2023, 10:22 »

Quote from: Doug Jensen on July 04, 2023, 10:18

Quote from: Zero Talent on July 04, 2023, 10:15
Quote from: Doug Jensen on July 04, 2023, 09:50
What do we get instead, silly childish postings about infinite earnings per hour,

I know it hurts, but this not childish.
It's simple math and a logical consequence of your, no matter how you try to spin it, silly calculation.

What is wrong with my calculation and why is it so offensive to you?

What is your calculation? Please share.

In case you don't realize, it's an elementary logic tool, called "reductio ad absurdum".
You assume a hypothesis to be right, and you prove it wrong, when it leads to an absurd conclusion.

Doug Jensen · « **Reply #64 on:** July 04, 2023, 10:26 »

Quote from: Zero Talent on July 04, 2023, 10:22

Quote from: Doug Jensen on July 04, 2023, 10:18
Quote from: Zero Talent on July 04, 2023, 10:15
Quote from: Doug Jensen on July 04, 2023, 09:50
What do we get instead, silly childish postings about infinite earnings per hour,

I know it hurts, but this not childish.
It's simple math and a logical consequence of your, no matter how you try to spin it, silly calculation.

What is wrong with my calculation and why is it so offensive to you?

What is your calculation? Please share.

In case you don't realize, it's elementary logic called "reductio ad absurdum".
You asume the premise to be right, and you prove it wrong, when it leads to an absurd conclusion.

You're just avoiding the question with childish statments like that. "It's wrong becuase I say it is wrong". Childish

I'll ask you again . . .

What is wrong with my calculation and why is it so offensive to you?

What is your calculation? Lay it on the table so we can be enlightened at to the correct way to do it that meets your standards. I am listening. Here is you chance to actually post something of substance rather than throwing stones.

Zero Talent · « **Reply #65 on:** July 04, 2023, 10:32 »

Quote from: Doug Jensen on July 04, 2023, 10:26

Quote from: Zero Talent on July 04, 2023, 10:22
Quote from: Doug Jensen on July 04, 2023, 10:18
Quote from: Zero Talent on July 04, 2023, 10:15
Quote from: Doug Jensen on July 04, 2023, 09:50
What do we get instead, silly childish postings about infinite earnings per hour,

I know it hurts, but this not childish.
It's simple math and a logical consequence of your, no matter how you try to spin it, silly calculation.

What is wrong with my calculation and why is it so offensive to you?

What is your calculation? Please share.

In case you don't realize, it's elementary logic called "reductio ad absurdum".
You asume the premise to be right, and you prove it wrong, when it leads to an absurd conclusion.

You're just avoiding the question with childish statments like that. "It's wrong becuase I say it is wrong". Childish

I'll ask you again . . .

What is wrong with my calculation and why is it so offensive to you?

What is your calculation? Lay it on the table so we can be enlightened at to the correct way to do it that meets your standards. I am listening. Here is you chance to actually post something of substance rather than throwing stones.

I am not avoiding anything.

Follow me:
Let's assume that your calculation leading to your claim of $348/hour is correct.
If that's true, then following the same "logic", my earnings are ♾️/hour, as shown above.

But this is absurd. Therefore the original assumption, your calculation, is wrong.
And silly.

Quod Erat Demonstrandum.

Doug Jensen · « **Reply #66 on:** July 04, 2023, 10:36 »

Quote from: Zero Talent on July 04, 2023, 10:32

Quote from: Doug Jensen on July 04, 2023, 10:26
Quote from: Zero Talent on July 04, 2023, 10:22
Quote from: Doug Jensen on July 04, 2023, 10:18
Quote from: Zero Talent on July 04, 2023, 10:15
Quote from: Doug Jensen on July 04, 2023, 09:50
What do we get instead, silly childish postings about infinite earnings per hour,

I know it hurts, but this not childish.
It's simple math and a logical consequence of your, no matter how you try to spin it, silly calculation.

What is wrong with my calculation and why is it so offensive to you?

What is your calculation? Please share.

In case you don't realize, it's elementary logic called "reductio ad absurdum".
You asume the premise to be right, and you prove it wrong, when it leads to an absurd conclusion.

You're just avoiding the question with childish statments like that. "It's wrong becuase I say it is wrong". Childish

I'll ask you again . . .

What is wrong with my calculation and why is it so offensive to you?

What is your calculation? Lay it on the table so we can be enlightened at to the correct way to do it that meets your standards. I am listening. Here is you chance to actually post something of substance rather than throwing stones.
I am not avoid anything.

Follow me:
Let's assume that your calculation leading to your claim of $348/hour is correct.
If that's true, then my earnings are ♾️/hour, as shown above.

But this is absurd. Therefore the original assumption, your calculation, is wrong.
And silly.

Quod Erat Demonstrandum.

Wow, you are really a piece of work I've given you multiple opportunities to explain yourself but you won't do it. Childish. I will not waste time discussing it with you any further. If anyone else would care to enage in an adult conversation and compare methods I would be a happy to do so. I have no time for trolls.

Zero Talent · « **Reply #67 on:** July 04, 2023, 10:51 »

Quote from: Doug Jensen on July 04, 2023, 10:36

Wow, you are really a piece of work I've given you multiple opportunities to explain yourself but you won't do it. Childish. I will not waste time discussing it with you any further. If anyone else would care to enage in an adult conversation and compare methods I would be a happy to do so. I have no time for trolls.

Sorry, man, but it looks like you may have skipped some high school classes, back in the day.
But that's OK, since you were working hard distributing newspapers to buy your first camera.
I respect that 100%.

Nevertheless, it's never too late to catch up with your math and logic and adjust your silly $348/hour calculation.

This knowledge is now widely available on the internet, for free, similarly to what you are selling in your look-at-me-and-get-rich-quick "course".

Doug Jensen · « **Reply #68 on:** July 04, 2023, 11:04 »

Quote from: Zero Talent on July 04, 2023, 10:51

Nevertheless, it's never too late to catch up with your math and logic and adjust your silly $348/hour calculation.

Okay, against my better judgement, and despite what I said in my last post, I will give you one more chance to explain exactly what is about by calculation you don't like. What should I do differently? What is wrong with it? Please tell me what you find so flawed with my calculation -- and I will do my best to plug in the appropriate values to your satisfaction.

In other words, if my calculation is wrong, tell me how to fix it. What is missing? Just tell me in simple words even a moron like me can understand.

The floor is yours.

Doug Jensen · « **Reply #69 on:** July 04, 2023, 11:06 »

Quote from: Doug Jensen on July 04, 2023, 11:04

Quote from: Zero Talent on July 04, 2023, 10:51
Nevertheless, it's never too late to catch up with your math and logic and adjust your silly $348/hour calculation.

Zero Talent · « **Reply #70 on:** July 04, 2023, 11:12 »

Quote from: Doug Jensen on July 04, 2023, 11:04

Quote from: Zero Talent on July 04, 2023, 10:51
Nevertheless, it's never too late to catch up with your math and logic and adjust your silly $348/hour calculation.

Okay, against my better judgement, and despite what I said in my last post, I will give you one more chance to explain exactly what is about by calculation you don't like. What should I do differently? What is wrong with it? Please tell me what you find so flawed with my calculation -- and I will do my best to plug in the appropriate values to your satisfaction.

In other words, if my calculation is wrong, tell me how to fix it. What is missing? Just tell me in simple words even a moron like me can understand.

The floor is yours.

The beauty of the reductio ad absurdum method is that you don't have to show WHY a hypothesis is wrong. You just prove it is.

Besides, I am not here to help you to understand how to better run your business.
I only did you a favor by showing that you made an error. You're welcome!

So accept that your calculation is wrong (and silly) and try to figure out WHY by yourself.

Good luck!

Doug Jensen · « **Reply #71 on:** July 04, 2023, 11:20 »

Quote from: Zero Talent on July 04, 2023, 11:12

Quote from: Doug Jensen on July 04, 2023, 11:04
Quote from: Zero Talent on July 04, 2023, 10:51
Nevertheless, it's never too late to catch up with your math and logic and adjust your silly $348/hour calculation.

Okay, against my better judgement, and despite what I said in my last post, I will give you one more chance to explain exactly what is about by calculation you don't like. What should I do differently? What is wrong with it? Please tell me what you find so flawed with my calculation -- and I will do my best to plug in the appropriate values to your satisfaction.

In other words, if my calculation is wrong, tell me how to fix it. What is missing? Just tell me in simple words even a moron like me can understand.

The floor is yours.

The beauty of the reductio ad absurdum method is that you don't have to show WHY a hypothesis is wrong. You just prove it is.

Besides, I am not here to help you to understand how to better run your business.
I only did you a favor by showing that you made an error. You're welcome!

So accept that your calculation is wrong (and silly) and try to figure out WHY by yourself.

Good luck!

Yup, that's exactly what I expected you to say.

RalfLiebhold · « **Reply #72 on:** July 04, 2023, 11:22 »

Quote from: Zero Talent on July 04, 2023, 11:12

Quote from: Doug Jensen on July 04, 2023, 11:04
Quote from: Zero Talent on July 04, 2023, 10:51
Nevertheless, it's never too late to catch up with your math and logic and adjust your silly $348/hour calculation.

Okay, against my better judgement, and despite what I said in my last post, I will give you one more chance to explain exactly what is about by calculation you don't like. What should I do differently? What is wrong with it? Please tell me what you find so flawed with my calculation -- and I will do my best to plug in the appropriate values to your satisfaction.

In other words, if my calculation is wrong, tell me how to fix it. What is missing? Just tell me in simple words even a moron like me can understand.

The floor is yours.

The beauty of the reductio ad absurdum method is that you don't have to show WHY a hypothesis is wrong. You just prove it is.

Besides, I am not here to help you to understand how to better run your business.
I only did you a favor by showing that you made an error. You're welcome!

So accept that your calculation is wrong (and silly) and try to figure out WHY by yourself.

Good luck!

Would you be so kind as to explain to the uneducated audience reading along here why this discussion is being conducted so aggressively?

Apart from the fact that I don't necessarily see the hourly wage as an adequate parameter for economic success in the stock photo business, I can follow most of Doug's arguments very well and would find the knowledge of his workflow interesting.

At least I don't see any reason for arrogant behavior towards Doug from my side - and before you get any stupid ideas, I didn't skip any high school classes and my latin is still quite fluent

Zero Talent · « **Reply #73 on:** July 04, 2023, 11:48 »

No worries, Ralf.

Discussing workflows is perfectly fine.

But there is difference between discussing workflows and chestbeating yourself with an absurd (for microstock) $348/hour earnings, only because you have fun doing your work.

And all this, to impress some who will be will be willing to pay for his get-rich-quick course.
But since this hasn't happened here, yet: "In dubio pro reo"

Zero Talent · « **Reply #74 on:** July 04, 2023, 13:22 »

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Shutterstock is an embarassment (Read 73157 times)

Doug Jensen

Doug Jensen

Zero Talent

Doug Jensen

Zero Talent

Wilm

Zero Talent

gnirtS

Doug Jensen

Doug Jensen

Zero Talent

Doug Jensen

Doug Jensen

Zero Talent

Doug Jensen

Zero Talent

Doug Jensen

Zero Talent

Doug Jensen

Doug Jensen

Zero Talent

Doug Jensen

RalfLiebhold

Zero Talent

Zero Talent

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors