Bob,
Just out of curiosity I looked back at my early Shutterstock records this morning. In my first few months I uploaded about 500 clips (from my archives) but I had $0 sales until the 3rd month. Then it jumped to $265, then $345, etc. My point is to keep uploading right now. Don't wait to upload more until if you see results form the first few. Keep uploading good clips with good metadata and the results will come later.

Just food for thought.

Doug, thanks for that information. I am still uploading clips and hope to have the same success as you have. I have lots of time on my hands. As a matter of fact I leave Monday for a week in the Okefenokee swamp to do some videoing. Now I will be shooting with a different mindset.

I just finished watching the last chapter of the course. I am super busy lately so I did it a few chapters at a time over several weeks. First, I want to say thank you for putting so much work and detail into the course. This has got to be the most complete information package I have ever purchased about any subject in my lifetime. A few years ago I opened a Pond 5 account and dumped in a couple hundred clips to test the waters. I sold a few clips over time but considered it chump change compared to my time and effort. I have barely touched the account since then. Now I understand why my test failed! Because of your course I will approach stock with a brand new system to use and a greater understanding of the process.

Doug, I have a couple of questions for you.

I have been to both of your websites and can't find a couple things you mentioned. I could be wrong but I think you said there is a link to set you up as a referral when I open my Adobe and Shutterstock accounts? I am sure it can be done through their process too but I want to make sure it happens?

Did you say there is a way to download some of your forms to use as templates?

I am real big on professional etiquette. Sometimes that means understanding unwritten rules. Can you explain how to deal with the "pick your own price" approach at Pond 5? It seems to me if I am going to submit to three agencies then the price of the clips should be in the same ballpark. Otherwise it could upset buyers if they see my stuff dirt cheap in the cutthroat pond and twice that at Shutterstock. Am I overthinking that? It makes me wonder if Pond 5 is worth the effort because price competition is so tuff there? Editors know we submit to multiple agencies. It is no secret. But each agency uses a different strategy in how they deal with contributors. Now that you have tested the waters over at Pond 5 would you mind sharing your thoughts? I really appreciate your candid approach to sharing information and your experience!

Thank You for the great course!

Steve

Hi Steve, thanks for the really nice compliments. I can't tell you how happy it makes me when I hear that my training has really made a difference for someone else. That's what it's all about. I wish you great success and I hope you start to see some results. Bet patient, it takes time, but once the snowball gets rolling it is nice to sit back and watch it gather speed without hardly any effort.

Here's my referral link for Shutterstock. Adobe does not have a referral program.
http://submit.shutterstock.com?rid=1113473

Yes, I have a zip file with about a dozen files for you to download. There's some sample database templates and cheat sheets that help when doing metadata. I know I give the link a couple of times in the workshop but I can't remember which chapters. If you send me a private message at Vimeo I can send you the link.

As for Pond5, I purposely didn't talk about them too much in my video because they are still a work in progress for me. As I said, I've had some positive results there and I would love to snap my fingers and have my whole portfolio instantly appear there, but I just don't have the time to deal with it yet. I have done nothing at Pond5 since I produced my video, so there is nothing new to report, It is on my schedule for July, but that may change if something more pressing comes along. I may even decide to do a new chapter for the workshop -- if I think there is enough information/tips to warrant it. We'll see how it plays out.

I'm 99% sure I will not take advantage of Pond5's offer to pay higher commissions in exchange for giving them exclusivity to some of my clips. That is my deal with Getty and I don't like it. I'd rather spread my work around at multiple agencies and hope to make more in the long run. I suppose if I have a bunch of similar clips of the same thing maybe I could give them exclusivity to some of them and send the others elsewhere, but that might be prohibited. I'd not want to break any of their rules about what constitutes exclusivity. I mean, if I have a shot that pans right and another that pans left, technically they are not the same shot, but they might be similar enough to break the rules.

As for the custom pricing aspect of Pond5, I'll probably go for low-ball pricing on my 4K clips. I think 4K is way over priced and I think I'd make more total earnings if customers could buy 4K at just a little bit more than what an HD clip would cost. 4K should only be 10-20% higher than HD, in my opinion. Not double the price. There's no reason for it.

That's my thoughts right now, but I reserve the right to change my opinions when I get deeper into Pond5 and experiment with a few variations! :-)

I successfully added another 380 4K clips this week to my portfolio at Shutterstock. Review times used to be measured in hours and now it took almost 5 days. I hope that is not a trend.

Well if you will sell tutorials and encourage others to send clips. Then, of course, Shutterstock will have more clips to review which all takes time.

That would be cool to think I could have that much influence, but I am not that stupid to think so.

Hey Doug, still happily loading clips to Shutterstock. Now it is all second nature. They were reviewed and accepted in 3 days. I recently upgraded to the Canon XF-705 (I know, your a Sony man) so now I will be uploading in 4K. Heading up to Cades Cove, Tennessee next week. Hopefully I will get some good clips of Black bears.

Hey Bob, I'm sure the XF-705 will prove to be a very capable camera for stock. Good luck with the bears and try to come home with all your fingers.

Hey Bob, be prepared for the traffic thru the park. There are certain days and times when traffic is better https://www.facebook.com/groups/606937769492136/permalink/1042340455951863/

Doug, thanks, I really think I will enjoy this camcorder, operationally it is similar to the XF300. Mark, that looks like a bear-jam at Yellowstone. I hope it isn't that bad. Ill be there during the week. It is one of my favorite places to go. Last year I got some great bear clips. I'll let ya'll know. I leave Monday morning.

Right after Doug released his course I bought it. Smart move, great course with tons of good info.

I also got super busy busy at that time and had "stock' on hold until now. I am digging into it this week.

As Doug suggests I looked at a lot of video from contributors to learn more about what is going on. Here is something I don't understand. I must be missing something:

As I understand it Shutterstock is very clear you must be the rights holder of all clips you submit. I believe you are supposed to be the sole rights holder? There are contributors with tens of thousands of clips in their portfolio they could not possibly have shot or even have the rights to. To me it looks like they are culling the internet for public domain shots or possibly just stealing clips. Look up a contributor named Rick Ray to see an example of this. Tens of thousands of clips in his portfolio. If a historical event took place from 1930 until present day he has a shot of it. News footage, celebrity footage, TV and movie footage, aerial and underwater footage, military footage etc. Its all there and almost all of it is listed as HD. I don't know if this guy has ever shot a frame, but I am sure he was not recording Hitler's speeches in B&W with a HD video cam or riding on the exterior of the space shuttle during launch ;-)

So what am I missing? If it is public domain why is shutterstock licensing it and selling it through a contributor? Maybe these guys have a small stock agency of their own and have curated these massive collections, I don't know? And then to look at some collections you know the same guy could not possibly have shot half the footage they have posted?

The Shutterstock rules are pretty simple and supposed to be stringent. I'm sure they are. But it looks like they could be creating a massive market for piracy. From the outside it looks like someone could become a major contributor and never shoot a frame or leave an office.

I am not accusing anyone of doing anything unethical. I suspect there is a valid answer for how this happens. I would like to know how. I am curious.

For me, I am going to work hard and have fun with this. Last weekend I spent three days in the desert shooting the first of my new stock images. I am using the stock thing as a way to get my passion for shooting back. I have been shooting for so many years I started to loose the MoJo. Shooting stock makes the game fun again in many ways. I am going to have a blast!

Kind Regards,

Steve

There are contributors with tens of thousands of clips in their portfolio they could not possibly have shot or even have the rights to. To me it looks like they are culling the internet for public domain shots...

Quoted for emphasis.

Hmm... I sure would like to get a clarification about this from ShutterStock.

Steve, thanks for signing up for the course. I appreciate your support and I hope you sell a ton of clips.

If you could find some examples of any contributor portfolios that have "modern", non-public domain footage in them, that the person clearly could not have shot themselves, then I'd be a little concerned about piracy of my own clips but I don't think you're going to find any examples of modern pirated footage being sold at Shutterstock. In my opinion you are concerned about a non-issue. Even if we assume, just for the sake of argument, that all that old B&W footage of Hitler and space shuttle launches DOES violate Shutterstock's rules. So what? That is between Shutterstock and the contributor. What difference does it make to the rest of us one way or the other? A non-issue and not even worthy of a second of my attention.

Where would they get copies my footage, or your footage, to pirate anyway? I watermark just about everything I put on Vimeo and Youtube so they couldn't really grab it from those places. So they'd have to buy the clips first at Shutterstock and then re-submit them with no assurances of making a single sale. That would be financial suicide.

I earned $3751 in October just from Shutterstock, which is an 88% increase from October 2018. What am I going to do, stop contributing and make $0 next month just because someone got hold of some old Nazi footage and decided to upload it? That would be crazy. :-)

My advice is to focus on building your portfolio and don't worry about what other people are doing, especially when their subject matter has no overlap on your own.

And don't be so sure that I wasn't at D-Day with a 4K camera! I'm a lot older than I look.

https://www.shutterstock.com/video/clip-15458545-silhouetted-allied-c-47-aircraft-dropping-dozen-paratroopers

https://www.shutterstock.com/video/clip-15458524-world-war-ii-paratroopers-dropping-into-battlefield

Hey Doug,

I'm sure you know I always have been and still am a big supporter of you, your work, and your programs. Mostly because of all the time and effort you put into participating in this community by sharing your knowledge and expertise. I am not knocking Shutterstock or it's contributors. My post was about my observations as I begin to dive into the world of stock footage. It is not up to me to try and identify piracy, nor do I care about what other contributors do. However, I do think my post was was valid because it raises a lot of questions. Not the least of which is, if it is all being done legally and ethically than I will maintain that people are making a lot of money without shooting a frame. So, I asked, "how is this happening?" For me, I really don't care much. I will never be the guy sitting in front of a computer culling footage I might be able to sell. It sure does "appear" there is a lot of that going on. No big deal.

As I have just begun to get my feet my feet wet in stock I am having a blast. Two weeks ago I gave myself my first assignment. I had a few days to go camping by myself. Researching Shutterstock I had noticed there was not a lot of footage of the new Trump Border wall being built. For such a hot news topic I wondered why. I headed to Yuma and San Luis Arizona to shoot stock of the new wall. Now I know why the stock agencies are not flooded with it!

Don't worry Chris, I will not make a political statement here. I am not an activist of anytype. I will stick to what I did and saw. I went after the subject matter purly for stock video reasons.

When I approached the wall for the first time (there is many miles of it) I saw an active construction site. Perfect, exactly what I wanted to find. As I approached the site I was met by two guys in an unmarked desert tan chevy blazer. It was unmarked until they blocked me and lit me up with red and blue grill lights. These guys were in full dress battle uniforms from their helmet to their boots. The driver front slung his AR-15 and came to my widow. He had 5 spare P-Mags on his chest over his armor and of course a side arm as well as the long gun. The passenger stayed at the truck 20 feet away holding his rifle. They didn't even have name tags or insignias other than a shoulder marking that said Alliance Security Services or something like that. On a long sleeved yellow shirt that looked funny under all of BDU and gear. These guys were not messing around. What I ran into is a private security force hired ether by the US government or the contractor to protect the workers and work being done down there. These guys are not Border Patrol. I have to say, as much as I wanted a shot of them I am NOT the idiot you see on YouTube that pushes a video camera into the face of an armed authority and and says "I am recording this in case you shoot me and I know my rights!" I have never owned a camera that will stop a bullet and that is a stupid way to deal with the situation. They were not nice but they were professional. I'm sure they were both former US Military, they were not mall cops. They had a job to do and that was to get me out of there. I wasn't going to argue. The guy at my door informed me I was on land restricted and controlled by the government and that I must immediately leave the area. I tried to chat him up for some access information and of course he would have none of that. All he would say is the entire wall area is a restricted construction zone and that I needed to leave immediately. I left.

I'm not going incriminate myself on a public forum and tell the whole story but I can say I went back to the wall and got a few shots that have been accepted by Shutterstock. I got back to the wall by going far out to the middle of nowhere and 4WD in on soft sandy two track trails where I thought I would be the only one around for miles. Wrong again. At one point on my way back in to wall the trail became lined with signs every 20 feet on both sides for 2 miles. Photo below. That part was not fun.

When I did get back to the base of the wall I hastily began to shoot. What an amazing opportunity. There I was all alone in the middle of nowhere, so many angles I could work! This was going to be great! My glee and my opportunity lasted less than 10 minutes. When I saw the trail of dust coming my way I hoped it wasn't the guys from the security force. It wasn't. It was the US Border Patrol. He was not happy finding a guy out there with a video camera. My camera was on sticks and pointed at the wall. Again, I am not stupid enough to swing it around and immediately be confrontational with a guy that is about to decide if he is going to arrest me or let me go. In fact the very first thing he said to me was "Turn that thing off!" He ran my plates and drivers licence. Then told me he was escorting me out of the restricted area by following me out on the proper dirt road I had intentionally avoided to get in.

As for the footage I only got a couple of angles in the short minutes I had. I have admitted mistakes here several times on this board to remind others not to do it. The biggest crime I committed was a rookie shooting mistake and I am no rookie. In my haste I did not notice steady shot was turned on! Of course that ruined my pans as I could not pan and hold! Kicking myself for that dumb mistake. Shutterstock accepted 9 clips and rejected 11. The rejections were for "similar content". I should have been shooting and moving instead of shooting multiple takes. But hey, I did not expect to get busted so fast. It turns out I was undersurvailance the whole time. But if I go there I would have to move this thread to Area 51.

So yes, for me this stock thing is about having fun and challenging myself to be a better shooter. Eleven clips is a long way from Doug's thousands, but maybe I will get there someday.

Here is one of the clips:

https://www.shutterstock.com/video/clip-1040120351-yuma-arizonausa---october-24-2019-construction

Here is the frendly road signs I passed: Sorry .jpg would not attach.

Send me your .jpg Steve, I will get it attached to your post.

chris at dvinfo dot net

Edit: Done.

Steve, that is a great story and I really enjoyed it. Man, I wish I had been there!! Everyone has their own tolerance for confrontations when out shooting, but I gotta say I love it when someone challenges me. I can't say for sure what I'd have done in your situation, but I like to think that I'd given them a lot of shit. Done it before and never regretted it. I would have been ready to record the whole thing on my phone. In fact, just last week I was shooting in a sensitive place where I thought I might get questioned, even though I was clearly on a public road. In anticipation of that I already had my phone strapped to my camera and set to discreatly record audio should I get hassled. A Suburban came up and stopped about 100 yards away and watched me, but never approached. Good for them. That is exactly what they should have done.

Just like you did, I checked out what was already available on Shutterstock and I saw there was a gap in coverage of this subject that I could fill with something better. I'm not going to say what it was because I haven't even processed the footage yet, but it is amazingly close to the same subject matter as your fence.

Anyway, at least you took the initiative to go out and look for some footage that other contributors won't have of a subject that is in the news. That is exactly the right way to do it and I hope you make some money from it.

Why did you submit your clip as editorial? I see no reason that it wouldn't be approved as commercial, which would open it up to a much bigger market.

Your metadata looks pretty good, but you might want to add . . . border fence, trump, immigrants, crossing, illegal entry, DACA, drug runner, mexican border . Just thinking out loud.

My only critical comment is that there is no real motion in the shot. No pan or no tilt or any action within the frame. Just a straight-in mechanical zoom with no other camera movement. It looks a lot like a still photograph with a keyframed zoom. So a video buyer might just choose to buy a still photo at a lower price. We are selling motion pictures and the footage needs action. A straight-in servo zoom is not desirable in 2019. Just something to keep in mind next time when you don't have armed guards coming down on you!

All true, Doug, but at least Steve was able to get what he got, considering the circumstances.

None of us want to find ourselves on the evening news... not in *that* way, at least.

Yeah, that's why I said everyone has their own tolerance for confrontations and nobody knows what the situation was really like except someone who was there. I hope the clips do well!

Reading the posts above. I think Doug has a good play of words for the metadata which in turn will bring viewers (buyers) to the video. Even less quality videos (unlike Doug's) will get viewed with the right wording.

Steve, great story. Reminds me of the time I was asked by the Federal Agency that I worked for to shoot a video on the health effects of mercury at the Oak Ridge Reservation in Tennessee. This is where they developed the fuel for the atomic bomb. I had all the right permits, and even an escort. Well I guess no one told security about it. I hadn't even had the tripod set up when I was literally surrounded by security forces. Fortunately my escort showed them the permits and all ended up well. It is interesting that lately it seems that Shuttershock is doing really quick turn arounds on reviews. I submitted 7 clips yesterday and they were reviewed and 6 were approved by this morning, the one that was not approved was due to the fact that it was to similar to another one that I also submitted. This has really been a lot of fun for me. I am now shooting video with an entirely different focus, and everything I now shoot is in 4K. Used to be I would see a great shot and then wonder "great, now what do I do with it?" Well, now I know what I am going to do with it. Also, like Doug suggested I have been having a blast looking over old footage to see what I have that may be worthwhile posting on Shutterstock. Thank you Doug!! Bob

As I mentioned in the post I am the first one to admit the opportunity for great shots was there, I did not get them. I have many years of live event and professional sports experience. This is how I always work and how I train crews working for me. When your shooting in a high risk situation ie: non repeatable, fast moving, spontaneous etc. You first priority is to always get "the shot" first. Then go for the hero shot. I will define "the shot" as the insurance shot that is at least good enough to keep your job and satisfy the client. Then knock yourself out with the high risk shots. That is exactly what I was doing in this case, grabbing what I could as quickly as I could. Right after I set up a guy in a construction truck drove by. That let me know I was not as isolated as I hoped. The opportunity was there, the time wasn't. If you want to see heartbreak look at the two shots looking through the wall. One is static letting trucks roll by on the other side and one pans up. To see those two clips as submissions with my name on them sucks. It looks like I don't know how to shoot at all. The sun was shinning through the wall pillars from the Mexico side, it was perfect. Everything was in front of me to get this glorious, high contrast, tilt up from the base of the wall until the brilliant sun rays come shinning through like hope from the other side shot. In reality, that is the moment the Border Patrol guy was walking up to me so the last thing I did was tilt up. The two crappy shots they accepted were the only shots I got to take. No set up time, no exposure adjustments, no multiple takes to play with shooting right into the sun. The shot was right in front of me but I did not get it. Since I had just trespassed into a highly restricted government space and the Federal Agent arrived it is time to turn the camera off. It was heartbreaking to miss the shot. It was also not the time to give him shit. I have only had two careers in my life. Before my 25+ years working in media I was a firefighter/EMT. I understand how cops and authorities work and think and how much discretion they have. I was not shooting from a public road. I turned the camera off and was respectful because I had no desire to go to jail. There is a time to fight for your rights and I am a fighter by nature. When your in the wrong and facing a Federal Agent who can choose between arresting you or escorting you out it is a time to be respectful. Maybe I should be a faster at getting the perfect shot first shot every shot but thats not my reality. I do know I successful avoided going to jail. Thats worth a lot more than making $50 bucks from Sutterstock. And I had a blast playing the game!

I will write more later. I have other things to discus about this. I'm loving the conversation. I have more questions than answers about this topic.

Kind Regards,

Steve

As I approached the site I was met by two guys in an unmarked desert tan chevy blazer. It was unmarked . . . They didn't even have name tags or insignias other than a shoulder marking that said Alliance Security Services or something like that. On a long sleeved yellow shirt that looked funny under all of BDU and gear . . . What I ran into is a private security force . . . these guys are not Border Patrol.


Steve, again, not to second guess the decisions you made in the heat of the moment, but the comments above are what had me wondering if I would have stopped shooting or not. Under the circumstances I may have done the exact same thing as you did, but in other similar situations I've been in before, I often just keep right on shooting and require them to identify themselves and explain what authority they have to even question me -- let alone stop me. I do not hesitate to push back and have never been arrested. Sometime I refuse to even say what/why I am shooting or to identify myself. Occassionally I will allow a uniformed law enforcement officer to see my ID (passport card, not drivers license) but I'm not going to live in a police state where I have to show my papers at every checkpoint. I feel it is my duty to push back.

Sorry if this conversation has gone off the rails! We can get back to talking about stock if you want.

I love this conversation! I have worked all over the world. Dealing with authorities of different types is part of what I do as a photographer and video producer. I handle every situation differently. This conversation is about video.

The heavily armed private security were the first ones I encountered. They did not ask for ID or even ask why I was there. They were the ones that let me know how highly restricted the area is at this time. They informed me it is not public land at this time. There was not a lot of conversation. The only question they would answer was when I asked if there was a place where I could drive up to the wall. They said no, the entire area is designated as a security zone by the US Government and that the Border Patrol was in control of everything. The wall and construction was right in front of me and the guy standing at my door made it clear I had to leave. I had no idea I was going to run into those kinds of restrictions.

There is a dirt road along the border called the Border Road. It is clearly posted as closed and restricted. That is why I went to extremes to sneak in on 4WD trails out in the middle of nowhere.

You are absolutely correct there is a huge difference between private security and Federal law enforcement. The security guys are clearly there on the active work sites for true protection. They are there to fight should one of those sights be attacked. They do not have true police powers. The guy that later stopped me from shooting was US Border Patrol with Federal Agent across his back. That is a different story. All he really wanted to do was get me the hell out of there and I complied. In my two decades of emergency service I saw a lot of people go to jail because of their own attitude and stupidity. They challenged the authority of cops who had no desire to arrest them until the situation escalated beyond reason. The Border Patrol Agent did not harass me. We both knew what I had done. It was his job to get me out of there. No big deal. Much easier to be followed out of a restricted area then getting restricted in a jail cell screaming about "my rights". Its all good!

Steve

I understand and agree with what you are saying. And I certainly don't want to imply my interactions with law enforcement are always negative. Just the opposite. I'm a big proponent of law enforcement in general and support the job they are doing. I have donated my production services to different agencies on numerous occasions. But, as I say in my video, I will stand my ground when I have a right to and the individual who has contact with me is going to get their attitude reflected right back at them. It is really up to them how it is going to go.

I too am enjoying this thread. Plus, the Doug Jensen factor is always a bonus.

Yeah, whatever Doug says. :-)

Andrew

Key Words?

I am trying to understand the anti-spam filter on Shutterstock keywords. As this was my first submission I did not try a CVS file yet. I used the Shutterstock entry port. Very frustrating! Apparently there is a limit on how many times you can use any particular word. Seems to be around 4 or 5 times. But it is not that simple. If you enter words it feels is excessive it accepts the new entry and automatically deletes a previous entry it feels was to close a match. So while your typing away trying hard to come up with relevant terms it is deleting your best earlier entries. It does not tell you what it removed, you have to look at your long list and try to figure out what is now missing. It is a PIA!

If you submit a CSV file I have to assume it is going to edit your key words the same way. Therefore its necessary to proof them after acceptance or to know the exact rules of the filtering. I have searched Sutterstock and not found the keyword specifics yet but it must be there. I think there might be more to it than just a number of times you can include the same word?

And Doug, yes I should have made the wall commercial. Another beginner mistake on my part.

Steve

As Doug suggests in his video next time I will submit using a .cvs file for several reasons. I will also keep a close eye on the filtering. I found a long thread on the Shutterstock forum complaining about the spam bot filter for keywords, just as I mentioned above. By using the .csv system you will have your submitted list to see what happened to it after filtering.

It is a bot so there is no set parameters or rules and it fails common sense as many algorithm systems do. It can be hard to second guess it. It also works backwards. Instead of rejecting your new entry it randomly deletes an entry from your list it feels is too close to the new entry. Bam, something is gone, and you don't know what it is without comparing a written list to what you now have in the Shutterstock entry box.

As I suspected it is not just about using the same word a given number of times. It looks for variations of the word like plural forms of it and such. For example, build, bilt, and building will be be counted the same. And of course it does not know or care about connotation (verb /adjective).

I'm just throwing in my two cents as I go through this learning process.

Kind Regards,

Steve

Doug, I just sold my first clip on Shutterstock!! It was an older HD clip of a black bear eating a salmon at a hatchery in Alaska. Thanks to you and that great course you put together. I am supper happy. Thanks again, Bob

Good for you Bob!

I just uploaded another small batch. Using the .csv method worked much better than the SS tools. I should have listened to Doug's advice in the first place!

Steve

Bob, Congratulations! And the odds just went up that that clip will sell again because the SS computer will be more likely to push it higher in search results. The more people that see it, then the more chances it have to be bought. Good for you.

Good for you Bob!

I just uploaded another small batch. Using the .csv method worked much better than the SS tools. I should have listened to Doug's advice in the first place!

Steve
And even better, you OWN the metadata now and can repurpose it for other agencies. Don't make the same mistake I did when I got started.

Thanks to you and that great course you put together. I am supper happy. Thanks again, Bob

Bob, I've released an update video that crunches my own numbers for 2019 so far. Hopefully it will lay some people's skepticism about making money from stock footage to rest. Anyone who has a professional camera and isn't shooting for stock in their spare time is missing out on a great opportunity. Heck, I haven't even had time to submit anything new since early July and the business keeps growing.

MAKE MONEY SELLING STOCK FOOTAGE - CRUNCHING THE NUMBERS - Nov. 2019 on Vimeo

I am still dabbling in stock a little at a time as time allows. My intent is to figure it out now so when I have more time I can be productive. So far it has been interesting to climb the learning curve. Some lessons are simple and obvious, others are not:

Most of my rejections are for "similar content". When I shoot I try to work a lot of angles or looks for the same subject. They accept the work but not all of the shots. What I see as giving an editor a choice they see as too much similarity to bother with. This is important to learn so I don't waste time editing. Give them your best shots and move on. I believe that is what Doug recommends.

I have had a few rejections for, Noise / Artifacts / Pixelation / Posterization: Sometimes I can't see this issue myself, it does not always make sense. For example, I shot a sunrise over a lake directly into the sun with some beautiful flares and intentional lens artifacts. They accepted a couple of them and rejected others. I can't see the difference in the rejected clips. I had a few other rejections for this reason that made more sense. I learned when it comes to this they will hold a very high standard, as they should.

I have a lot of different cameras. My main camera for this is a Sony PXW-FS5 (witch I still love to shoot with). I am ruined forever by having a variable ND filter at my fingertips. I am recording internally not external raw. This image quality seems to be fine when well shot. My action camera is a Sony FDR-X3000. It seems to me if your going to shoot with a camera of less than professional quality you better make it damn good in every way...technically and content. I guess I'm saying just because you got some cool looking action footage don't think they will accept it if it was not perfectly shot. Content is king only to a reasonable point. They have incredible action cam footage, that is why.

I am no Doug Jensen by a long shot. I am simply sharing my new experiences at stock for the sake of this thread because I love the DVINFO community. My comments above are not complaints at all. My rejections are GOOD NEWS. It seems the biggest hurdle to overcome in getting your clips sold is competing with the millions of clips in the database. And I am talking about getting them seen by a buyer, not the quality competition part. It seems to me even though the quantity numbers are staggering Shutterstock is back to holding very high professional standards of acceptance. That is a good thing for contributors shooting at a professional standard. If they were a garbage dump accepting every cool clip an amature submitted that might sell the numbers would be off the charts. Even the best of submissions would never be found. They are not a garbage dump.

I am loving all of this. It is challenging, fun, and will make me a better shooter. I have been shooting for many years. Shooting stock to the best of my ability will cause me to shoot in many different situations I would not be shooting with my comercial work. For now it is almost a fun game I am playing with myself. So...I think I am a pretty good shooter...right? Well, shooting stock means someone else is going to review the shots and give you a thumbs up or down based on their professional opinion. If you get a thumbs up you might even make a few bucks. Someday maybe more than a few bucks. I am learning from the rejections. It is a lot of fun and I am just getting started with a few submissions.

Kind Regards,

Steve

I just received an email from Shutterstock about a submission. Because I have limited time for stock I am trying to experiment with useful content. For example, I am an avid outdoorsman, but instead of going after sunsets and wildlife I am trying to improve my odds by doing research into what they want. I have received shot list suggestions from two agencies saying shots of alternative lifestyles are a top seller and they need them. So in April I spent a couple hours shooting the LGBTQ Pride Parade in Phoenix. I just got around to submitting. I sent in two totally different types of shots from the parade. Basic benign shots of people marching in the parade that will probably never sell. The other clips were of radical religious protesters shouting hate speech at the alternative lifestyle people. As all of this was editorial I thought the later would be the shots that might sell. If your going to do news or an expose on gay rights wouldn't you want to show what they are still up against? I was wrong. Shutterstock accepted the happy shots and rejected the haters as "objectionable content". What the haters are doing in the shots IS very objectionable. I get that. It is also a very real part of the story and lifestyle. I am not promoting the haters, just the opposite. I offered it for editorial content I think could be used in any conversation about the topic. I removed the audio of the hate speech (typical amature overmodulated PA anyway). These people were screaming pejoratives and hate in the name of God. They were hostile. You don't get much more messed up than that.

The gay samples SS and Pond5 put out in their newsletter was same sex couples kissing and being affectionate and happy. If you get that shot and a release your golden. I don't know a lot of gay couples and certainly not any that are going to sit in front of my camera. So I tried the editorial approach.

This result begs a question I think they answered. Because this is stock should you stay away from controversy? Is ENG type shots not the way to go? Is warm and fuzzy happy stock what sells? Another lesson learned as I try to figure out how to be productive at this.

Photo 1 is a grab of what they accepted. Photo 2 is obviously the phyco haters.

Steven, those are couple of great posts and I agree with almost all your comments and observations. Especially the part that it is good news for us that Shutterstock is getting more selective. The less crap customers have to wade through, the better for everyone. And as professionals we ought to be able to submit clips that are above average quality.

I think that both of your editorial clips should have been approved, but that's Shutterstock's choice. I guess one is hate speech and the other is advocating for change. I think that is a difference and a line they may not want to cross. However, I think you should submit them again and see what happens. Sometimes rejections can be just because of the whims of a single reviewer. Send a couple in again and see if they get through a second time. One thing I do when I resubmit something (only if really think it could be a good seller) is to change the name just in case their system will recognize the old name and automatically reject it or give it closer scrutiny. Change the names on a couple of them so they have no history and then resubmit. I'd love to hear if they get through on another try. Good luck.

Doug, those are some pretty impressive statistics. Thanks for sharing. In addition to uploading new clips I have been going back into Shutterstock and editing the metadata on my earlier submissions. I could not believe that know that I know about what I am doing I was able to really beef up the descriptions as well as significantly increasing the number of keywords that I was able to generate. Again, thanks for putting it all together for us. Bob

It is always a good idea to go back and revisit the metadata with fresh eyes. Occasionally when I'm on a boring phone call or something that doesn't require my full attention I will start surfing through my clips and making improvements. Sometimes I am really surprised at how many good keywords I didn't think of when I originally submitted them. Then I go down this rabbit hole of looking at more clips and before i know it a couple of hours have elapsed. Also, while you're in there, make sure your thumbnails are truly the best "book cover" for what the clip is all about.

Doug, I am happily uploading clips to Shutterstock. Question, under "catalog Management" do you create sets? If so, how do sets benefit you? Is it because if someone say looks at one of my clips of a shrimp boat them all clips I have of shrimp boats will come up regardless of when I posted them? Bob

Hi Bob, creating sets for clips is a feature that Shutterstock just added this week so I have not had a chance to use it yet. I am right in the middle of submitting 550 new 4K clips this week and I don't have time to get distracted by that new feature . . . yet. I think it sounds like a great feature , though. I like the idea of being able to put related clips into a group where customers can see them all together. They've offered this feature for photos for a long time and have just opened it to videos. Which is ironic, because I think video editors are much more likely to purchase multiple images than photo buyers. When you think about how editors often need to build a sequence of shots this could be a great feature. I look forward to giving it a try in the near future. Hopefully it won't be too much hassle to create the sets or else it won't be worth the time it takes. If anyone else tries it before me I'd love to hear what they think.

wow Doug, 550 4k clips is quite impressive. I went in and created a couple of sets of clips. Supper easy. Just check the box of the clips you want in the set, click cerate a set, name the set and that is it. Also, you can delete the set without deleting the actual clips out of your catalog.

I tried that feature also and it worked pretty well.

Thanks for the info. It's good to hear that the sets feature is easy to use and I look forward to giving it a try as soon as I can. Only time will tell if it will be effective or not. Out of all the "improvements" Shutterstock announced this week for contributors this is the only one that actually has any potential value.

I gotta say I am just about burnt out on submitting these 550 new clips. It is too much to tackle in a few days and I'm sure my metadata will suffer due to my boredom. I just want to go outside and shoot. :-)

FINALLY!!!
The contributor account dashboard at Shutterstock now shows the location of the buyer when someone purchases a clip. They've had that feature for photos for a long time but now it works for video. On first glance I'm really surprised to see how many of my buyers are from Europe. It is a much higher percentage that I had expected. Ultimately, I'm not sure if this new feature will actually be useful to increase sales or decide what to shoot, but it does satisfy some curiosity.

Doug:

May I suggest you spend less time on the clips and put that effort into updating your information videos. I've been out of the loop for a couple of years because of illness, so when I got a new camera recently I naturally did what I did in years gone bye... I bought the Vortex videos (I'm on my 5th one, now). I've had some difficulty grasping the editing process because you have given conflicting information on things such as how to import media. In the one for the Z150 you stressed not "digging into" the Sony files. When I kept having problems (with Catalyst on my Mac) I posted for help here. A gentleman suggested I use the files on the card straight into FCPX and forget about Catalyst. Doing so did not make my camera or computer explode. It actually worked. Just fine, as a matter of fact. There have been several instances where I got information that turned out to be not so (because of time aging the data, I'm guessing.) I won't go into all of them, but I will tell you as a very long time customer of yours (over a decade) it is frustrating to spend hours trying to work around issues that could have been avoided if you had updated your guides. I'm not talking about things going back to the DSR 250, but rather two current information guides (Z150 and Selling Footage). Sheesh. I spent a couple hundred bucks and made myself nuts trying to figure out what I was doing wrong. Doug, if you're going to sell those videos please give updates or take them off the market. If asked who I thought was the best in the biz for this sort of thing, I would not hesitate to say it's you. But I feel a little neglected and I'm letting you know. By the way, one of the things that bothered me is your endorsement of Pond 5. I sold some stock through them several years ago and I finally wound up having to threaten to take them to court to get paid. And I wish I had spent more time researching the camera than I did. I relied heavily on your video and shortly found out it's almost impossible to see what you're shooting in daylight. I wound up buying a Hoodman loop and gundecked a mount for it. It's also a pain in the butt to use the menus because my old, fat fingers with neuropathy can barely work the thing. I'm glad I didn't sell my Canons and L lenses. I don't think the Z150's going to get used much. All of this blather aside, my original posting is your should take time to watch your videos, then come up with a way to update us buyers. You can work on your submissions later. Peace, Charles

Hi Charles, thank you for your feedback. I'm not sure why you chose to barge into this thread to bring up a totally unrelated topic, but I'll do my best to answer you. I have not given conflicting or outdated information in my Z150 video.

1) Where did you get the idea that my video would teach you how to import the footage into FCPX, Premiere, or any other NLE? That topic is never covered at all in my video -- so how could I possibly give you the wrong information? There is NO information on that topic in my video. In fact, I just did a search through the script and the only time I even use the words "Final Cut" is to say that all the codecs that the camera can shoot are fully compatible. Which they are.

2) I never said Catalyst Browse should be used to import your footage into FCPX or any other NLE. It is not designed for that and I never said it was. Go back watch chapter 21 again. Catalyst can be used to review your clips, check the metadata, and make your archive HDD backups but it has NOTHING to do at all with importing into FCPX. You are confusing the process of ingesting footage from the memory card to your computer -- with importing the footage into your NLE. Those are two entirely different steps that have nothing at all to do with each other. I offer some advice for one (of many ways) that Catalyst Browse can be used for the first step -- getting footage from the card to your hard drive. But I don't say anything at all about how to get that footage into FCPX, Premiere, Avid, or any other NLE. The purpose of my video is not to teach you how to edit. You have to do that on your own. Don't blame me if you don't understand the FCPX workflow. Go back and watch the video to see how I say Catalyst can be used to review clips, check metadata, and do backups, but it has nothing to do with editing. BTW, that chapter is called "Ingest and Archiving". Note that "importing" and "editing" are not even in the title.

3) The workflow and steps I recommend for Catalyst Browse are just as valid and correct as they were when I produced the video. I wouldn't change anything today because there is nothing that needs changing or updating.

4) My experiences with POND5 have been nothing but 100% positive. How could I possibly anticipate that you have had a problem with them? And even if I did, would it make a difference? No. I cna only speak about my own experiences. If I ruled out doing business with every company that had a customer service problem someplace in their history I'd have to go live in the woods and eat berries for the rest of my life. Besides, in my opinion, your problems with POND5 may be as unfounded as your complaints about my video. Why don't you start a NEW thread and share your experience with POND5 so we can understand what your complaints are. I'd be curious to know how they tried to cheat you. Please share the story on another thread.

5) What am I supposed to do about your having trouble seeing the LCD panel in bright light? How is that possibly my fault? I didn't make the camera. And why would I even think to warn about it in my video? Obviously an LCD panel on any camera is going to be hard to see outdoors. Duh! It is a non-issue. This is why the camera has a great VIEWFINDER. No, I'd go so far as to say a fantastic viewfinder. So why would anyone use the LCD outdoors when it has a great viewfinder? It would never cross my mind that a user, such as yourself, would ignore the viewfinder and try to shoot outdoors with the LCD. And then have the nerve to blame someone else because it didn't work. USE THE VIEWFINDER -- problem solved without spending a penny on unnecessary accessories.

6) I will consider updating the video when I feel there is anything new to say. For now, I stand by the video 100%.

You are right about one thing though, my time is better spent on other stuff than this.

Okay. Due to illness I'm beyond conflict. You're absolutely right about everything. Perhaps I should have blamed chemo and radiation, or possibly my just being old and cranky. In any case, you shall not be troubled with my snivelings again. Best of luck to you and your enterprises.

Doug, you were right. I sold another clip. To all those that think it is to late to get into stock video or that the market is saturated listen. I took Doug's course, I followed his advice and I am actually selling video clips, not many right now, put I am selling clips! Like Doug said the market is not flooded, they are always looking for new content. I posted a little over 100 clips. Clips I shot last month in 4K and clips I shot almost 7 years ago in HD. Guess what, the old HD clips I shot of bears in Alaska are selling! There are over 1,000 clips posted on Shutterstock of bears eating fish in Alaska and yet they chose mine. It is not to late. Believe me, if I can make sales anyone can. Take the course, learn from Doug, post clips with good metadata and start making money! Plus, it is so much fun going through all my old stuff and finding clips worthy of posting. Thanks Doug!!!

Thanks, Bob! That I appreciate the nice comments. All I have done is point you in the right direction and given your canoe a shove out into the water. Everything else is on you and I'm really happy to hear it is starting to pick up some momentum. Sooner later you'll get a few best-sellers that will provide a nice foundation of earnings.

So, I've been submitting a backlog of of 600 4K clips during the past week -- and two drone shots that I uploaded on Dec 12th already sold today just six days later. I can't believe it. Amazing turnaround speed. I have never had any footage sell faster than 5 or 6 weeks, and even that was a shock.

So I got the drone last June -- used it for a couple days -- and was too busy to use it again until last week. I'm having a blast learning to fly it and so any footage I sell will just be icing on the cake.

I shot this gator footage yesterday on the last 80 degree day in Florida for awhile. It has dropped down to 54 degrees today. I like it but my wife says winter has arrived.

https://youtu.be/vvHgjRxgAyU

Doug, great shots. I'll bet your having a lot for fun with that. One of these days I may get the nerve to buy one of those and hopefully not crash it on the first. The shots of the gatter from above is quite impressive. Have fun with your new toy. I can imagine how this will boost your sales. Bob