MicrostockGroup
Agency Based Discussion => iStockPhoto.com => Topic started by: leaf on January 14, 2013, 05:02
-
I thought we could keep a little list of how many images we have collectively deactivated on iStock photo.
When you deactivate some files, add to the tally here.
I just did my first one.
------------
Total 1
-
.. now I'm figuring out how to install Sean's greasemonkey script (http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=350491&messageid=6818805) to easily deactivate files.
edit: .. that was easier than I thought.
Just install the greasemonkey plug in for firefox, then click Sean's link. Done.
-
Deactivated 7 flames.
Also uploaded one of the hot flames to shutter.
-
100 more files deactivated from my port.
-edit: and just to be transparent here, I'm deactivating my poor sellers first. I'm willing to give iStock a chance to explain themselves and try to change my mind. So, they can do so while I chop off the bottom of my portfolio. I'll keep moving up to the top while I wait for their answer and delete the entire port if they don't come up with something persuading in time. I am not interested in having my images given away for free and iStock said themselves that there are more 'deals' to come.
Google is an important partner for us and we have many innovative licensing arrangements with them in place and in negotiations. Our goal is to continue to expand and improve this partnership over time
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=350491&messageid=6817897 (http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=350491&messageid=6817897)
----
Total = 108
-
deleted post.
-
I don't have any files at istock but I do have files on Thinkstock (from Stockxpert) anybody knows If I can still and how delete there?
-
Ja, its easy enough to delete from stockexpert. I did it yesterday.
-
okay will have a look into it and delete some model-released one as I do care about them.
-
170 this weekend. Not my bestsellers. Mostly new and better images that I put into E+ but would like to sell somewhere else soon.
-
I have very few files at Istock and will hold off deactivating those for a few days, to give a chance for this mess to be amicably sorted.
Today, I have deactivated all my files from the old StockXpert site.
-
A measly 2 so far, maybe more to come. But I'm not uploading.
-
make sure you update the total when you make a post that you have deactivated some files.
--
Running Overall Total 280
-
Hello? Hello?
Did I miss something? Did IS do something over the weekend that I missed?
Did they screw up again in a much bigger way than the last 5 years?
Please fill me in.
-
Hello? Hello?
Did I miss something? Did IS do something over the weekend that I missed?
Did they screw up again in a much bigger way than the last 5 years?
Please fill me in.
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=350439&page=1 (http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=350439&page=1)
-
Hello? Hello?
Did I miss something? Did IS do something over the weekend that I missed?
Did they screw up again in a much bigger way than the last 5 years?
Please fill me in.
http://www.microstockgroup.com/istockphoto-com/google-giving-photos-away-free-for-commercial-use-and-istock-agrees/ (http://www.microstockgroup.com/istockphoto-com/google-giving-photos-away-free-for-commercial-use-and-istock-agrees/)
Here's a truncated copy of one of my posts on that thread:
"Yeah I'm getting into tin foil hat territory, but if you told me a few months ago that Getty would be offering unlimited numbers of commercial licenses for our images for $12....... I would have thought you were paranoid too!"
Getty has a deal with Google for a custom license whereby they can give away our images an unlimited number of times free for commercial or personal use. Result: millions of downloads and 5000 dead images.
Now add in every way they could make that worse (no link backs, stripped copyright data)
That is what they did.
Am I missing anything?
-
WOW, thanks for the links. I must have been living under a rock.
This blows. >:(
-
Hello? Hello?
Did I miss something? Did IS do something over the weekend that I missed?
Did they screw up again in a much bigger way than the last 5 years?
Please fill me in.
[url]http://www.microstockgroup.com/istockphoto-com/google-giving-photos-away-free-for-commercial-use-and-istock-agrees/[/url] ([url]http://www.microstockgroup.com/istockphoto-com/google-giving-photos-away-free-for-commercial-use-and-istock-agrees/[/url])
Here's a truncated copy of one of my posts on that thread:
"Yeah I'm getting into tin foil hat territory, but if you told me a few months ago that Getty would be offering unlimited numbers of commercial licenses for our images for $12....... I would have thought you were paranoid too!"
Getty has a deal with Google for a custom license whereby they can give away our images an unlimited number of times free for commercial or personal use. Result: millions of downloads and 5000 dead images.
Now add in every way they could make that worse (no link backs, stripped copyright data)
That is what they did.
Am I missing anything?
In addition, they said they have other similar deals on the way. It is just like we don't exist. The iStock RF agreement is no longer valid as we are at the mercy of what ever Getty wants Getty gets
-
Okay, I went ahead and started. I deactivated 203 so far with Sean's script (thank you Sean!). It gets kind of addictive!
Total tally at 483 now.
-
I'm gonna try and hold off until Feb 2 for more deleting, or at least the main earners in my port. I still think having a day where we all start deleting together would send a strong message.
-
My "deactivation finger" is getting itchy, but I'll wait until February 2nd.
-
Haven't deleted yet but have stopped new uploads to allow an opportunity for clarification/ corrections to take place. If that does not happen > really like the idea of 'delete day' when we all take down some of our files.
-
I'm gonna try and hold off until Feb 2 for more deleting, or at least the main earners in my port. I still think having a day where we all start deleting together would send a strong message.
I've deleted 7 so far, the site is painfully slow for me.
Where did this date of Feb 2nd as 'Deactivate Day' come from? I haven't seen any other references to it.
Total tally now at 490.
-
I agree with a set date and Feb 2nd is fine with me. We need to get as many members as possible that are willing to deactivate else this will not mean anything. I think we really need something like, at least, a million deactivated images to make a dent. Which means we need at least ten times the traffic of what we have now. Anyway, just to see how deactivating works I got one taken out.
Total tally at 491 now.
-
I still think having a day where we all start deleting together would send a strong message.
Do you honestly believe that? I doubt it very much. I think personally the only person you will harm will be yourself, by dropping your income. If you're really p*** off, why not leave completely, surely that would be more positive. They must get thousands of uploads a day, many many thousands, a couple of thousand being deactivated, what will that do? I don't want to sound negative, but this is doomed to failure.
-
I'm gonna try and hold off until Feb 2 for more deleting, or at least the main earners in my port. I still think having a day where we all start deleting together would send a strong message.
I've deleted 7 so far, the site is painfully slow for me.
Where did this date of Feb 2nd as 'Deactivate Day' come from? I haven't seen any other references to it.
Total tally now at 490.
It's Grounhogs Day:)
-
I still think having a day where we all start deleting together would send a strong message.
Do you honestly believe that? I doubt it very much. I think personally the only person you will harm will be yourself, by dropping your income. If you're really p*** off, why not leave completely, surely that would be more positive. They must get thousands of uploads a day, many many thousands, a couple of thousand being deactivated, what will that do? I don't want to sound negative, but this is doomed to failure.
So what action do you suggest to take?
-
I still think having a day where we all start deleting together would send a strong message.
Do you honestly believe that? I doubt it very much. I think personally the only person you will harm will be yourself, by dropping your income. If you're really p*** off, why not leave completely, surely that would be more positive. They must get thousands of uploads a day, many many thousands, a couple of thousand being deactivated, what will that do? I don't want to sound negative, but this is doomed to failure.
So what action do you suggest to take?
Whining and b_itching and talking about how Getty has us by the balls, if his other posts are any indication.
Vlad has been an apologist for Getty for years, and now he's only just managed to realize they are not out for his best interest. Taking concrete action is too scary for him to contemplate.... ::)
-
I'm gonna try and hold off until Feb 2 for more deleting, or at least the main earners in my port. I still think having a day where we all start deleting together would send a strong message.
I've deleted 7 so far, the site is painfully slow for me.
Where did this date of Feb 2nd as 'Deactivate Day' come from? I haven't seen any other references to it.
Total tally now at 490.
Try installing Sean's greasemonkey script. You can fly through deactivations in no time flat.
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=350491&messageid=6818805#post6818805]
[url]http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=350491&messageid=6818805#post6818805 (http://[url)[/url]
I believe Elena was the one to mention in the other thread that Feb 2 would be two weeks from the date this was discovered and enough time for Getty to come up with an appropriate response.
-
+1 = 492
Just trying out deactivation, as I was not sure I could deactivate Photo+ files (it worked).
Does Sean's script work in IE9 ? if yes, how?
-
I'm gonna try and hold off until Feb 2 for more deleting, or at least the main earners in my port. I still think having a day where we all start deleting together would send a strong message.
Feb 2 sounds good for me too. I think have a collective day is a good idea s well. It will be more of a drastic drop in numbers instead of a steady flow.
-
I still think having a day where we all start deleting together would send a strong message.
Do you honestly believe that? I doubt it very much. I think personally the only person you will harm will be yourself, by dropping your income. If you're really p*** off, why not leave completely, surely that would be more positive. They must get thousands of uploads a day, many many thousands, a couple of thousand being deactivated, what will that do? I don't want to sound negative, but this is doomed to failure.
I could delete all my files today and they wouldn't even blink. It would hurt me much more than it hurt them. But if several high-selling contributors also did it, that would be a serious wake-up call.
-
If some major contributors *did* agree to a mass deactivation of files on the 2 Feb that would encourage more contributors to take part, send a concerted message to Getty / istock and possibly provide the 'hook' for press / journalistic interest too.
-
I believe Elena was the one to mention in the other thread that Feb 2 would be two weeks from the date this was discovered and enough time for Getty to come up with an appropriate response.
In Pedant Mode, three weeks ...
(as you were)
-
I had a few minutes to kill so I killed another 20 images
running total: 512
I'll try to resist doing more until Feb.2
-
I am saving the confirmation e-mails for every deactivation in a separate folder. It's proof of the date of deactivation. Might come in handy if they throw another bunch of files on the market for free and one of the deactivated files is on the list.
-
Where is Yuri? Are you reading this? Tell us what you think?
-
1 image left in portfolio. 1 ticket open to check/ensure that all images are removed from PP as well. Sad, messy weekend. My wife decided for me ;-)
-
I believe Elena was the one to mention in the other thread that Feb 2 would be two weeks from the date this was discovered and enough time for Getty to come up with an appropriate response.
In Pedant Mode, three weeks ...
(as you were)
Ooops! Thanks Liz.
-
Where is Yuri? Are you reading this? Tell us what you think?
Seriously. Nothing from Yuri, Andres, etc. Possibly they are pursuing this through legal channels already. If there is a pending suit their lawyers would have probably advised them not to speak publicly.
-
But if several high-selling contributors also did it, that would be a serious wake-up call.
Forget about several high-selling contributors. This time it is completely different than their shenanigans in the past. It is a question whether one wants to wake up one fine day and find out that their complete portfolio is suddenly completely worthless, just a collection of worthless pixels.
Well, I don't. And I don't care whether high selling contributors deactivate or not.
-
Can anyone fill me in as to why they are deactivating images before the February 2nd date? Is it those that you don't want released in similar deals before that time, or is there another reason?
I have 6600+ ready to be pulled on February 2nd as part of the group initiative. But, if there is a reason I should pull some early I'm prepared to do so.
-
For me the reason is simple: there might be more scams already in the pipeline.
Feb 2nd gives them too much time. They should have reacted on Friday. Well, they reacted, but that was the wrong kind of reaction.
-
Can anyone fill me in as to why they are deactivating images before the February 2nd date? Is it those that you don't want released in similar deals before that time, or is there another reason?
I have 6600+ ready to be pulled on February 2nd as part of the group initiative. But, if there is a reason I should pull some early I'm prepared to do so.
Speaking for myself, I was just trying out Sean's script and got carried away. I am still planning to participate in the Feb 2 mass deactivation.
Hopefully the word will spread about the group action of Feb 2 and we can get enough people on board to represent a large portion of the library.
-
February 2nd is a Saturday.
Wouldn't it be more powerful to have a mass deactivation on a business day?
-
Can anyone fill me in as to why they are deactivating images before the February 2nd date? Is it those that you don't want released in similar deals before that time, or is there another reason?
I have 6600+ ready to be pulled on February 2nd as part of the group initiative. But, if there is a reason I should pull some early I'm prepared to do so.
Speaking for myself, I was just trying out Sean's script and got carried away. I am still planning to participate in the Feb 2 mass deactivation.
Hopefully the word will spread about the group action of Feb 2 and we can get enough people on board to represent a large portion of the library.
Yes, I posted in the istock forum that I was on board with this initiative.
-
February 2nd is a Saturday.
Wouldn't it be more powerful to have a mass deactivation on a business day?
If we start debating which day to do it, we will never get anything done. Do it when you want or do it with the group on Feb 2. Up to you. :)
-
Where is Yuri? Are you reading this? Tell us what you think?
Seriously. Nothing from Yuri, Andres, etc. Possibly they are pursuing this through legal channels already. If there is a pending suit their lawyers would have probably advised them not to speak publicly.
Hey, How about crowd sourcing an attorney for a class action lawsuit. No one contributor would get much but getty could be hit harder.
500 artist were subjected to this ruse. There is no way it's legally okay.
-
February 2nd is a Saturday.
Wouldn't it be more powerful to have a mass deactivation on a business day?
How about fri at 4:30 calgary time so they have time to see what happened but not do anything about it, like they always do to contributors? :-)
-
I predict the site will go down on February 2nd due to planned "upgrades". ;D
-
I predict the site will go down on February 2nd due to planned "upgrades". ;D
I wondered the same thing. Something that would disable greasemonkey for instance?
-
February 2nd is a Saturday.
Wouldn't it be more powerful to have a mass deactivation on a business day?
If we start debating which day to do it, we will never get anything done. Do it when you want or do it with the group on Feb 2. Up to you. :)
Not trying to be awkward. It's just that everyone's talking about sending a powerful message, and I wondered if they'd noticed that was a Saturday.
-
.
-
Do you honestly believe that? I doubt it very much. I think personally the only person you will harm will be yourself, by dropping your income. If you're really p*** off, why not leave completely, surely that would be more positive. They must get thousands of uploads a day, many many thousands, a couple of thousand being deactivated, what will that do? I don't want to sound negative, but this is doomed to failure.
You're certainly entitled to your opinion just like the rest of us. I think (and I may be wrong) that this is a case of people who were planning to deactivate anyhow, but would rather do it all at once.
If it doesn't make a difference, at least those artists are out of the line of fire for future "deals" an if it sends a message, so much the better.
-
I don't really know that this will make a difference but I have joined the deactivation group just for the simple reason - to protect myself, I'm independent if all my best photos are on google for free who will buy them on any site?
so deactivate them now before they become free.
total 191 deactivated, (full portfolio about 2400)
-
How can you deactivate files from stockxpert account?? My stockxpert account was closed when the site was sold.
-
Where is Yuri? Are you reading this? Tell us what you think?
Seriously. Nothing from Yuri, Andres, etc. Possibly they are pursuing this through legal channels already. If there is a pending suit their lawyers would have probably advised them not to speak publicly.
Hey, How about crowd sourcing an attorney for a class action lawsuit. No one contributor would get much but getty could be hit harder.
500 artist were subjected to this ruse. There is no way it's legally okay.
I would contribute some doe.
-
785 gone, the remaining 480 will go on feb 2
-
I've deactivated my best 100. Don't see much point in deactivating the low sellers first, as that helps istock.
-
384 deactivated, 36 to go. I really don't want to wait until February 2, I would not be surprised if they tried to stop that somehow. Maybe I'll leave a couple up there til then.
Sent from my DROID2 GLOBAL using Tapatalk 2
-
I've deactivated my best 100. Don't see much point in deactivating the low sellers first, as that helps istock.
Indeed, people with thousands of images deleting their bottom 10% makes no sense at all, it doesn't hurt them, you actually make them a favour since you're taking the garbage out. Now deleting all your flamed images, that would send a message.
Sean made this nice script, but did he, in fact, deleted any files himself? I hope he did or at least plans to, making a script and using it, would really send a strong message, especially since he's #4 at IS
-
I'm on board for Feb 2nd but just deactivated 10 for practice. I know your busy Leaf... but can we get a nice counter button going? I want to be counted!
Thanks
-
In installed Sean's updated script and deactivated 10 just to see how it all worked. I deleted old files that haven't sold in a while - no message to send with this except that if they keep track of deactivation counts it might make them notice that something is happening (I consider the likelihood that they are that on the ball in monitoring things pretty low)
-
Lost track of the total, but I have deactivated around 20 over the weekend, including my best sellers - red flames. I'll wait to do the rest (around 300) on the 2nd.
ETA - Couldn't get Sean's script to work for me, even though I was using it fine before. It spread the columns out noticeably, but didn't add a new one.
-
Lost track of the total, but I have deactivated around 20 over the weekend, including my best sellers - red flames. I'll wait to do the rest (around 300) on the 2nd.
ETA - Couldn't get Sean's script to work for me, even though I was using it fine before. It spread the columns out noticeably, but didn't add a new one.
Did you open the options link at the top - the one where you choose the date format and which columns to display? That's where the checkbox is to select adding the deactivation box to the page
-
I consider the likelihood that they are that on the ball in monitoring things pretty low
They do not care.
I totally understand people deactivating files in order to protect their work from deals which result in them being given away. Or if you do not trust them to act in your best interests. I believe that it would be a mistake to do it in order to send a message or as a protest. It's a one way street.
-
ETA - Couldn't get Sean's script to work for me, even though I was using it fine before. It spread the columns out noticeably, but didn't add a new one.
Had the same problem, until I found out there's another script : IS_myUploads_fixes.user.js (http://www.digitalplanetdesign.com/scripts/IS_myUploads_fixes.user.js)
With both running, the deactivation column is added.
-
I consider the likelihood that they are that on the ball in monitoring things pretty low
They do not care.
I totally understand people deactivating files in order to protect their work from deals which result in them being given away. Or if you do not trust them to act in your best interests. I believe that it would be a mistake to do it in order to send a message or as a protest. It's a one way street.
I am well aware that the only thing they care about is their own profits.
What I was trying to suggest was that if they got wind of something happening and saw some spike in deactivations and drop in uploads it might be something that convinced them the February deactivations were going to happen. I think they discount contributor discontent because they don't expect any action.
-
Lost track of the total, but I have deactivated around 20 over the weekend, including my best sellers - red flames. I'll wait to do the rest (around 300) on the 2nd.
ETA - Couldn't get Sean's script to work for me, even though I was using it fine before. It spread the columns out noticeably, but didn't add a new one.
Did you open the options link at the top - the one where you choose the date format and which columns to display? That's where the checkbox is to select adding the deactivation box to the page
Thanks! That was it! Should be a breeze now!
-
If the owners of the pictures in the istock front pages could deactivate their files, it could make a real splash.
-
I think they discount contributor discontent because they don't expect any action.
They don't care either way. Don't think about them, think about yourself. Don't do it for them. We are not an important part of their vision.
-
I've deactivated my best 100. Don't see much point in deactivating the low sellers first, as that helps istock.
Indeed, people with thousands of images deleting their bottom 10% makes no sense at all, it doesn't hurt them, you actually make them a favour since you're taking the garbage out. Now deleting all your flamed images, that would send a message.
Sean made this nice script, but did he, in fact, deleted any files himself? I hope he did or at least plans to, making a script and using it, would really send a strong message, especially since he's #4 at IS
---------------------
I imagine he's considering it, given that he created the script. (unless this has been around awhile and I never heard about it.)
-
I think they discount contributor discontent because they don't expect any action.
They don't care either way. Don't think about them, think about yourself. Don't do it for them. We are not an important part of their vision.
I agree with you. If they cared at all, they wouldnt have made the deal in the first place. The deals are done, and i dont believe anything is going to be reversed. In fact, as they have said, they are moving forward with more deals. Waiting to deactivate best sellers just gives them more time to "steal" those best sellers. This should be about contributors wanting to protect their property, not only from istockgetty, but from any other site thinking this is a great way to make money.
-
I've deactivated my best 100. Don't see much point in deactivating the low sellers first, as that helps istock.
Indeed, people with thousands of images deleting their bottom 10% makes no sense at all, it doesn't hurt them, you actually make them a favour since you're taking the garbage out. Now deleting all your flamed images, that would send a message.
Sean made this nice script, but did he, in fact, deleted any files himself? I hope he did or at least plans to, making a script and using it, would really send a strong message, especially since he's #4 at IS
---------------------
I imagine he's considering it, given that he created the script. (unless this has been around awhile and I never heard about it.)
It's very easy to check by browsing the portfolios, the deactivated files are notified in red:
http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-8577895-technology-panic.php?st=94f5c78 (http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-8577895-technology-panic.php?st=94f5c78)
-
I've deactivated my best 100. Don't see much point in deactivating the low sellers first, as that helps istock.
Very true.
And it's not about punishing iS only - we have to protect our images. What if just our top seller is to be next that appears on Google Drive?
-
Deactivated 242 on Saturday - will wait to do more until Feb 2.
-
They don't care either way. Don't think about them, think about yourself. Don't do it for them. We are not an important part of their vision.
While I agree we should do it for ourselves, I have to disagree that we, or at least our content, are not an important part of their vision. Without our images, they have nothing to sell, bargain with, or give away. It is time to remind them.
-
That's 104 gone, including all model released pics and others we wanted to protect from being given away.
-
HEY, maybe there is good news.
The files I deactivated sell better than usual at other places today.
I know, I know, one day is not significant.
-
HEY, maybe there is good news.
The files I deactivated sell better than usual at other places today.
I know, I know, one day is not significant.
Hey, I'll take any bit of good news at this point :)
Add my six pending files to the deactivated tally.
That brings us to 601 currently deactivated, including Travelling-Light's post above.
If you delete, please total the tally. I think this tally is way under the actual number. :)
-
I removed most of my files after the RC system was introduced. I've got 64 images left and I'll be removing 63 of them ASAP. I don't really want to wait until 2nd Feb - three weeks is a long time, maybe enough time for them to hurriedly extend their scheme?
ETA: Oops forgot to tally, thanks lisafx :)
-
I removed most of my files after the RC system was introduced. I've got 64 images left and I'll be removing 63 of them ASAP. I don't really want to wait until 2nd Feb - three weeks is a long time, maybe enough time for them to hurriedly extend their scheme?
Total climbs to 664 then :)
-
Please correct me if I'm wrong but wouldn't this type of protest only have the strongest impact if tens of thousands of images were deactivated with the majority being high sellers? It's only when istock actually starts to lose money and unfortunately yourselves (hopefully only briefly) is when they will take any notice.
I think it's great that many contributors are collectively taking concerted action but i fear it will be too weak. Nowadays istock with getty in the background appear to be more daring in what they think they can get away with, therefore a strong response is the only thing that will work.
-
Please correct me if I'm wrong but wouldn't this type of protest only have the strongest impact if tens of thousands of images were deactivated with the majority being high sellers? It's only when istock actually starts to lose money and unfortunately yourselves (hopefully only briefly) is when they will take any notice.
I think it's great that many contributors are collectively taking concerted action but i fear it will be too weak. Nowadays istock with getty in the background appear to be more daring in what they think they can get away with, therefore a strong response is the only thing that will work.
You're not wrong. However you may have missed the message that D-Day or Deactivation day will be Feb 2. Lots of folks holding their fire until then.
-
I still think having a day where we all start deleting together would send a strong message.
Do you honestly believe that? I doubt it very much. I think personally the only person you will harm will be yourself, by dropping your income. If you're really p*** off, why not leave completely, surely that would be more positive. They must get thousands of uploads a day, many many thousands, a couple of thousand being deactivated, what will that do? I don't want to sound negative, but this is doomed to failure.
Im afraid I think youre right. I doubt it will even make a dent. Good effort though. Further more they might be playing Getty right into the lap. This might be exactly what they have been waiting for. Remember IS have always been a thorn in the side of Getty and here comes an aid to their non existence.
-
I don't want to sound negative, but this is doomed to failure.
Try to see a larger picture. This issue is much bigger than IS. It involves Google, and potentially every other player in the image market. We probably can't inflict serious damage on IS, or cause their current management to change direction, but our actions will surely influence any other agencies who'd been considering such deals, and they might decide not to pursue them. And eventutally IS may very well go away, completely, for other reasons.
-
Add 16 to my tally, for a total of 400 deactivated. I'll leave the remaining 20 up there til the 2nd of Feb.
-
I don't want to sound negative, but this is doomed to failure.
Try to see a larger picture. This issue is much bigger than IS. It involves Google, and potentially every other player in the image market. We probably can't inflict serious damage on IS, or cause their current management to change direction, but our actions will surely influence any other agencies who'd been considering such deals, and they might decide not to pursue them. And eventutally IS may very well go away, completely, for other reasons.
I think the notion of this effort being doomed to failure rather depends upon how you define success :)
If you define success as having Getty stay "I'm so sorry. What a terrible and disrespectful idea it was to sell off such massive rights for so little money. We'll tell Google it was all a mistake and the deal's off right away.", then you're probably right.
However, at a minimum I can keep my images out of Getty's hands - at least until they buy all the agencies out there. I stand a non-zero chance of getting something better than that. Lying down and playing dead just because Getty is a big ugly bully isn't an appealing option.
-
200 gone, 283 to do. I'm waiting for a payout before I delete the best sellers. Be dammed if I let them keep my money!
-
we should really leave our worst files up, so buyers just see B-grade content.
I'm not really keen on trying to take down iStock, but I think our hands are tied? putting that many high quality images out there for free, training ppl to expect free images, is going to hurt us all.
I only have a small port so I'm just a little tin boat floating along with the big ships, but I'm in.
-
I've deactivated all my model released photos from istock when the Google deal first came to light. This was before the D day deactivation was discussed - but I think I'm nervous enough about my model released images (as all but a few are of kids) that they would be coming down right now anyway whatever happens. That's I think about 60 images including one which was just about to go blue flames and a couple of other decent if not spectacular sellers for a hobbyist.
-
So if I counted right the total stands at 940
If anyone adds a post with deactivations already done, could you add them to the total and post that? Makes it easier to keep up :)
-
152 files deactivated.
Total stands at 1092.
-
For me the reason is simple: there might be more scams already in the pipeline.
Feb 2nd gives them too much time. They should have reacted on Friday. Well, they reacted, but that was the wrong kind of reaction.
That concerns me too. Istock may see this Feb. 2nd date and push those other deals through to beat that date. As of now, I'm still going to wait, but doing so very anxiously.
-
I pulled another 10 or so early.
Total stands at 1102
-
My three pictures with my daughter in have been deactivated.
1105
-
I've always been sensitive about using my children - I have deactivated the only 2 shots I had of them in IS
Total 1107
-
I hope this will make an impact, that the word will spread in the community and to various news channel etc.
But it's not the sole reason I'm pulling my portfolio on February 2. I'm doing this primarily for myself - as an investment in time and happiness. I'll never have to worry about iStock again, I won't spend anymore time reading threads of hundreds of pages about how Getty/IS managed to screw us once again. I won't be furious when they bring us more "exciting news" in the future.
That's how I see it and I think the fuel that powers Deactivation Day should be regaining freedom and getting new opportunities focusing on other more positive ways of selling stock content, rather than the impact itself.
-
I hope this will make an impact, that the word will spread in the community and to various news channel etc.
I'm afraid you overestimate the effect biased by a forum of a small percentage of contributors. For the fun of it, I am keeping track and the iStock overall library has grown by 10,000 files since Saturday - that's maybe 5,000 less than usual. I'm looking forward to see if Feb 2 will have an impact on those numbers but so far... well, not really.
-
Did you read my entire post (particularly the section that starts with "but...")? That was exactly my point. I'm not doing this for the sake of making an impact, but should the word happen to spread in the design community, I certainly wouldn't mind either - that would be an added bonus. That's why I plan on doing it on February 2 rather than right away, because nevertheless chances of that to happen are probably marginally higher than if I go ahead and deactivate my measly 82 files today. Maybe it will inspire others to take a stand as well. Trying to be a little strategic about the gift that I'm giving myself.
In fact this would be my advise to everyone participating in D-Day: Don't expect iStock to fall on their knees, do this for yourself. You deserve to be freed from the Getty corporation and focus your thoughts on positive stuff - the future is bright..
-
I have deactivated 2. Total 1109
-
I have deactivated 2. Total 1109
When I went to bed last night the number of files on iStock was 12607375; now it's 12609076, and the queue has gone up by over 100.
However, if people are holding their fire until 2nd Feb, the above is obviously irrelevant.
Later: anyways, another 2. Total 1111.
-
deactivated 107
tally is now 1218
-
did another 100
tally: 1318
-
I don't know how we can effectively track these numbers, but in the istock forum threads people are deactivating images now - here's one example (http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=350613&messageid=6822857)
-
I don't know how we can effectively track these numbers, but in the istock forum threads people are deactivating images now - here's one example ([url]http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=350613&messageid=6822857[/url])
Well, there is no effective way of tracking them. By the way, those I have seen are only talking about removing images from the Partner Program or E+, they are not really deleting.
You can track the number of total files on the site and the queue (http://www.istockphoto.com/stats.php (http://www.istockphoto.com/stats.php))
I have made a screenshot on Saturday at 12,597,549 files and today the number shows 12,623,445 - equalling a growth of 26,000 images in five days.
If you remember that 10 million was passed in the middle of December 2011, that amounts to about 200,000 files added per month or roughly 6,700 a day. This would mean a growth of about 33,000 images in five days would have been expected.
So the impact of the active protest (holding back uploads or deleting files) so far has affected a lower than expected count of about 7,000 files.
-
Did another 189
Tally 1507
-
Desactivated 50 photos
tally now is 1557
Thanks Sean for the firefox script:)
-
If you look at the problem from the viewpoint that deactivating is going to save your images from being given away, and that deactivating is NOT going to teach getty anything because they dont care, then it doesnt really matter what the tally is or when images get activated. They have plans to send more images on an ongoing basis, so at any time, your earning potential could be snatched out right from under you. It has ALWAYS been that there are so many contributors now that losing a couple thousand contributors or a few thousand images means nothing to getty.
-
I Will join the D-day, I have already pulled 6 images, that had my wife and on 2. February I will pull the rest - 537 images.
I'm grebcha on istock.
-
I wanted to start deactivate some of images but stopped staring at "reason for deactivation" box.
I know it doesn't matter but I wonder what reasons do you give? Humorous, angry, lorem ipsum or do you try to explain real reason?
-
I put ''getty/google drive deal'' I think we will understand:)
-
I put ''getty/google drive deal'' I think we will understand:)
It would be nice if Sean could build that into his script, providing us to just use that as our reason.
-
I alternated between "to keep Getty from giving them away" and "because Getty cannot be trusted with the intellectual property of others." Juvenile maybe, but I felt better.
-
I think I'll start using "because my photos aren't going to make you happy!"
-
If you look at the problem from the viewpoint that deactivating is going to save your images from being given away, and that deactivating is NOT going to teach getty anything because they dont care, then it doesnt really matter what the tally is or when images get activated. They have plans to send more images on an ongoing basis, so at any time, your earning potential could be snatched out right from under you. It has ALWAYS been that there are so many contributors now that losing a couple thousand contributors or a few thousand images means nothing to getty.
I agree. I don't really care if removing my images makes no difference to Getty/istock. It does mean my images wont be involved in the Google giveaway or other appalling deals they have lined up.
It's a shame that other people carry on uploading however bad istock becomes but I have no control over that.
-
here was my deactivation reason:
copyright concerns if image is ported to another getty site or getty gives image away and strips exif data
most iStockers dont know about the Getty/Google deal
-
You could always give the classic: "It's not me....it's you."
-
I think I'll start using "because my photos aren't going to make you happy!"
Hahaha... love that.
Or how about "because money DOES make me happy and it's my SOLE purpose for sending my work to an AGENT!"
-
Deactivated 85 files
1642
Kone
-
1642 + 20 = 1662
Sorry, the rest will be done on 2nd February, but I wanted to see how fast Sean's script worked : Wow! Deactivating 20 files is done faster than just going to the next page ...
-
1642 + 20 = 1662
Sorry, the rest will be done on 2nd February, but I wanted to see how fast Sean's script worked : Wow! Deactivating 20 files is done faster than just going to the next page ...
So this is the only thing working well on the whole site?
-
I have not had a single download since I deactivated my flames.
So it hurts.
But then again, it hurts istockphoto 84% more, and I like that.
-
It doesn't hurt so much if you don't check your downloads there and spend that time working on something else. I will be happy when I can skip the istock threads here or just have a quick look without having that horrible feeling that they've made things worse for me again.
Hopefully the challenge of replacing my istock earnings will motivate me to work harder again. I wont have enough money for food so I better get down to it soon.
-
15 images with my daughter in have been deactivated.
1662+15=1677
-
1642 + 20 = 1662
Sorry, the rest will be done on 2nd February, but I wanted to see how fast Sean's script worked : Wow! Deactivating 20 files is done faster than just going to the next page ...
So this is the only thing working well on the whole site?
That's because Sean wrote it, not the iS IT team.
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=349553&messageid=6823565 (http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=349553&messageid=6823565)
-
Glad you're all having fun ;) .
BTW, I've stopped uploading for now.
-
I'm ready to start deactivating, but I have a couple of questions first. If you deactivate images from IS, are they deactivated on Thinkstock as well, or will it take IS/Getty forever to get around to deactivating them on TS? I mean if the images remain available on TS for a long time after deactivation, then what will we have accomplished by mass deactivation? Also, I seem to remember someone on this forum saying that if you deactivate images older than 1 1/2 years then they must be reinspected before being reactivated, is that true?
-
You could always give the classic: "It's not me....it's you."
Good one. I alternate among:
"Unsuitable for stock"
"Unsustainable"
"Peebert made me do it"
-
You could always give the classic: "It's not me....it's you."
Good one. I alternate among:
"Unsuitable for stock"
"Unsustainable"
"Peebert made me do it"
LCV, esp after you give it to Google.
-
Listen fellas and try and understand something! this is a formidable and courages effort to make things better but go back in history a bit, to the stoneage in fact.
This scenario has been tried before, a unanimous effort and that was back when agencies were not this powerful and STLL, it didnt have any impact at all.
Imagine then whats it like today and with powerful agencies, this and that.
For every image you deactivate there are 20 being uploaded either by new members, old members or new applicants constantly knocking at the door.
Like we have all agreed on before, its a numbers game, got nothing to do with how good you are how well known you are its just numbers. Cant beat that. Its like getting a straight-flush in stud poker. And youre loosing money at the same time.
all the best.
-
This scenario has been tried before, a unanimous effort and that was back when agencies were not this powerful and STLL, it didnt have any impact at all.
I very much hope that you're wrong and that things will be different this time - because the only alternative is to do nothing, and that just leaves them doing whatever they like with our property.
In any case, for many of us it's not so much about trying to make a point, it's a considered and personal decision to withdraw our IP from careless handlers.
-
Listen fellas and try and understand something! this is a formidable and courages effort to make things better but go back in history a bit, to the stoneage in fact.
This scenario has been tried before, a unanimous effort and that was back when agencies were not this powerful and STLL, it didnt have any impact at all.
Imagine then whats it like today and with powerful agencies, this and that.
For every image you deactivate there are 20 being uploaded either by new members, old members or new applicants constantly knocking at the door.
Like we have all agreed on before, its a numbers game, got nothing to do with how good you are how well known you are its just numbers. Cant beat that. Its like getting a straight-flush in stud poker. And youre loosing money at the same time.
all the best.
Like it has been said before, this is more about protecting my images than it is making a giant fall down. There are plenty of other places that Getty don't have control over.
-
Listen fellas and try and understand something! this is a formidable and courages effort to make things better but go back in history a bit, to the stoneage in fact.
This scenario has been tried before, a unanimous effort and that was back when agencies were not this powerful and STLL, it didnt have any impact at all.
Imagine then whats it like today and with powerful agencies, this and that.
For every image you deactivate there are 20 being uploaded either by new members, old members or new applicants constantly knocking at the door.
Like we have all agreed on before, its a numbers game, got nothing to do with how good you are how well known you are its just numbers. Cant beat that. Its like getting a straight-flush in stud poker. And youre loosing money at the same time.
all the best.
I agree. Personally I don't believe that iS will change themselves. And I know that deactivation of few thousands of images won't hurt them. If they decide that their policy of arrogance and their way of communication with contributors is right - then nothing will change.
But "And youre loosing money at the same time." doesn't have to me true. I will lose money by deactivating images, but I could lose much more if I keep them on iS - if they appear on Google Drive and their sales on other sites will drop.
-
Glad you're all having fun ;) .
BTW, I've stopped uploading for now.
I've just installed your greasemonkey de-activation script. Thank you very much !
I've stopped uploading anything on iStock and will keep ready for D-Day
-
my account closed completely. so i guess that means 921 images 'deactivated'.
-
Listen fellas and try and understand something! this is a formidable and courages effort to make things better but go back in history a bit, to the stoneage in fact.
This scenario has been tried before, a unanimous effort and that was back when agencies were not this powerful and STLL, it didnt have any impact at all.
Imagine then whats it like today and with powerful agencies, this and that.
For every image you deactivate there are 20 being uploaded either by new members, old members or new applicants constantly knocking at the door.
Like we have all agreed on before, its a numbers game, got nothing to do with how good you are how well known you are its just numbers. Cant beat that. Its like getting a straight-flush in stud poker. And youre loosing money at the same time.
all the best.
That may well be true for the time being, but the continuous bad publicity from their greedy behaviour will effect them in the long term.
Recently I was talking to a friend in Salt Lake City who's a keen amateur and I was telling him who sells my images and the first thing he said to me, unprompted, since I prefer not to slag off my agent in public, was 'I hear iStock treats their photographers really badly'.
So the message seeps out and has a corrosive effect. They must realise that they have to do something to stop the rot or their billion dollar investment is going to be worthless.
-
Listen fellas and try and understand something! this is a formidable and courages effort to make things better but go back in history a bit, to the stoneage in fact.
This scenario has been tried before, a unanimous effort and that was back when agencies were not this powerful and STLL, it didnt have any impact at all.
Imagine then whats it like today and with powerful agencies, this and that.
For every image you deactivate there are 20 being uploaded either by new members, old members or new applicants constantly knocking at the door.
Like we have all agreed on before, its a numbers game, got nothing to do with how good you are how well known you are its just numbers. Cant beat that. Its like getting a straight-flush in stud poker. And youre loosing money at the same time.
all the best.
That's exactly the mentality that has caused this mess. I don't really blame the sites. Some of the owners sold out for millions, so would I. The hedge funds have taken all the money, that's what they do. The majority of contributors have carried on uploading after commissions were cut and every trick was used to grab more money from us. So the sites that are only interested in making quick profits for their investors are going to keep squeezing us. But it can't go on forever, just as the banks got in to a mess, so has Getty/istock. The market leaders aren't guaranteed to always dominate. I think Getty are killing istock . Why hang around and get less money for more work each year until there's nothing left?
Anyone putting up with having their images virtually given away for $12 is losing money. It's a shame so many people are blinded by the fact that Getty has been the market leader but I remember when Kodak were the biggest thing in photography and look how that's worked out. It's hard to see how Getty are going to cope when they've been saddled with debt and passed on to new owners that don't seem interested in the stock images business. Every decision seems to be made for the short term with no plan for the long term. I have no confidence in their future.
-
Listen fellas and try and understand something! this is a formidable and courages effort to make things better but go back in history a bit, to the stoneage in fact.
This scenario has been tried before, a unanimous effort and that was back when agencies were not this powerful and STLL, it didnt have any impact at all.
Imagine then whats it like today and with powerful agencies, this and that.
Three years ago a large multinational group of companies decided they wanted to build a coal-fired power station near here. The locals were furious on all sorts of grounds, but most said, "It's a done deal, there's no point in fighting it". So a small group of locals, backed by some large environmental and developmental groups, had to do it ourselves, with the rest saying, "You're right, but you've no chance; save your energy."
But first of all we persuaded our local council, so that it had to go to a National Enquiry; but last autumn, out of the blue and before the national enquiry, they caved in.
There are at least five points here:
1. "It's better to light one candle than curse forever the darkness" (origin vague)
2. It's not only to send a warning blow to Getty, it's to protect our images (any I deactivate at this stage will not be going back up on iStock, even with a backtrack on their part.)
3. If Getty gets off with this, the other agencies could be champing at the bit to try similar scams.
4. You don't have to participate if you don't want to, and if you do, the level of participation is optional.
5. "A journey of a hundred miles starts with a single step" (Lao Tzu)
-
1. "It's better to light one candle than curse forever the darkness" (origin vague)
5. "A journey of a hundred miles starts with a single step" (Lao Tzu)
Aside: Congrats on your success against the multinational - and thanks for those two quotes... along with your sig that's three of my all time favourites. Love a bit of Lau Tzu in the mornings... :)
-
Listen fellas and try and understand something! this is a formidable and courages effort to make things better but go back in history a bit, to the stoneage in fact.
This scenario has been tried before, a unanimous effort and that was back when agencies were not this powerful and STLL, it didnt have any impact at all.
Imagine then whats it like today and with powerful agencies, this and that.
Three years ago a large multinational group of companies decided they wanted to build a coal-fired power station near here. The locals were furious on all sorts of grounds, but most said, "It's a done deal, there's no point in fighting it". So a small group of locals, backed by some large environmental and developmental groups, had to do it ourselves, with the rest saying, "You're right, but you've no chance; save your energy."
But first of all we persuaded our local council, so that it had to go to a National Enquiry; but last autumn, out of the blue and before the national enquiry, they caved in.
There are at least five points here:
1. "It's better to light one candle than curse forever the darkness" (origin vague)
2. It's not only to send a warning blow to Getty, it's to protect our images (any I deactivate at this stage will not be going back up on iStock, even with a backtrack on their part.)
3. If Getty gets off with this, the other agencies could be champing at the bit to try similar scams.
4. You don't have to participate if you don't want to, and if you do, the level of participation is optional.
5. "A journey of a hundred miles starts with a single step" (Lao Tzu)
True! but very differant concept, that had to do with coal, toxic, waste, smog, global warming, etc. These things takes place all the time and in most cases the opposition wins.
This is stock-photography, micro stock Sue! differant kettle of fish.
Listen just to underline my original post. I mean well, I hope it makes a dent. I dont want to see anybody losing money, etc. you know me! Im the first one to raise hell. In this case though ONLY because its sporadic images being deactivated instead of full portfolios, sorry but I cant see this make an impact.
-
Opposition to coal doesn't always win in the UK. There have been some quite notorious coal victories, especially in England.
However, many people aren't deactivating to make a point.
People are deactivating to keep their best-sellers from being given away willy-nilly;, i.e. to keep their ownership of their work.
Others are deactivating model-released work, as there seem to be no 'senstive use' restrictions via Google.
(I'm so ignorant about the Google Drive thing. Do they have a PS equivalent where they'd be able to take a head from an image and stick it onto e.g. a scuddy body (or worse)? If not, that would be a violation, as it wasn't done with the Google software - but would Getty pursue it?)
-
i closed my account not simply because of the google thing, but it was the final straw. i used to be proud to be an istock contributor. the simple truth is i stopped being so. the google thing had little impact on me, and i very much doubt it or any other similar deals would ever have done. i have no axe to grind either. i understand how business works and sometimes how that includes making painful and unpopular decisions. i may not agree with it, but i can't deny the pursuit of profit is the holy grail for some folks. however, there is an element of my (scottish) upbringing which is staunchly socialist (with a small 's'). the thought of sitting back doing nothing simply because there's a belief that any positive action would seem futile makes me want to cry. the truth of the matter is sitting back watching istock being run like a private club by some people, with total disregard and contempt for others has been making my skin crawl for sometime. like i say, i was a small player who's actions - as has been pointed out - will probably have little or no impact on the current situation. i've lost an income (admittedly a small one) and i'm now searching for work outside of photography (to be fair, that was always on the agenda anyway), but i've felt nothing but liberation from the moment i received the email stating my account had been closed - and i was no longer part of the stench which had started to overpower me. to me that's worth an awful lot more than allowing myself to get shafted for the lame reason that in not doing so, i'd simply allow someone else to assume the position in my place.
-
...
-
Listen fellas and try and understand something! this is a formidable and courages effort to make things better but go back in history a bit, to the stoneage in fact.
This scenario has been tried before, a unanimous effort and that was back when agencies were not this powerful and STLL, it didnt have any impact at all.
Imagine then whats it like today and with powerful agencies, this and that.
For every image you deactivate there are 20 being uploaded either by new members, old members or new applicants constantly knocking at the door.
Like we have all agreed on before, its a numbers game, got nothing to do with how good you are how well known you are its just numbers. Cant beat that. Its like getting a straight-flush in stud poker. And youre loosing money at the same time.
all the best.
You know, normally I’d agree but lots of significant players are at least pledging deactivations and, if even Sean has stopped uploading, there is a possible “storming of the Bastille” on the cards here.
Slightly off topic, I’m amused at the -9 hearts – maybe someone has cried “Wolf” too often or this is just the reaction to honest opinion pointing out something unpalatable.
-
I realize I've entered this discussion rather late and I'm behind the loop here, and so my questions may seem redundant, but I would appreciate it if someone would take a moment to answer them anyway. I have a port of about 1000 images on IS and want to participate in deactivation day, but I just need a couple of questions answered first.
I'm ready to start deactivating, but I have a couple of questions first. If you deactivate images from IS, are they deactivated on Thinkstock as well, or will it take IS/Getty forever to get around to deactivating them on TS? I mean if the images remain available on TS for a long time after deactivation, then what will we have accomplished by mass deactivation? Also, I seem to remember someone on this forum saying that if you deactivate images older than 1 1/2 years then they must be reinspected before being reactivated, is that true?
-
I'm ready to start deactivating, but I have a couple of questions first. If you deactivate images from IS, are they deactivated on Thinkstock as well, or will it take IS/Getty forever to get around to deactivating them on TS? I mean if the images remain available on TS for a long time after deactivation, then what will we have accomplished by mass deactivation? Also, I seem to remember someone on this forum saying that if you deactivate images older than 1 1/2 years then they must be reinspected before being reactivated, is that true?
Allsa, bad new I'm afraid :
Deactivated images will probably/hopefully/eventually be deleted on Thinkstock (estimated 2 months later). There are known cases where TS did not delete the files until after an e-mail request by the contributor.
If you deactivate old images (we think older than 18 months), yes they have to be reinspected. Younger files can be reactivated without reinspection.
Most of us have 2 reasons to deativate : (1) make a point, let Istock/Getty/Google/theWorld know and (2) protect our files the only way we can, even if it's with 2 months delay.
Are you joining us?
-
I'm ready to start deactivating, but I have a couple of questions first. If you deactivate images from IS, are they deactivated on Thinkstock as well, or will it take IS/Getty forever to get around to deactivating them on TS? I mean if the images remain available on TS for a long time after deactivation, then what will we have accomplished by mass deactivation? Also, I seem to remember someone on this forum saying that if you deactivate images older than 1 1/2 years then they must be reinspected before being reactivated, is that true?
Allsa, bad new I'm afraid :
Deactivated images will probably/hopefully/eventually be deleted on Thinkstock (estimated 2 months later). There are known cases where TS did not delete the files until after an e-mail request by the contributor.
If you deactivate old images (we think older than 18 months), yes they have to be reinspected. Younger files can be reactivated without reinspection.
Most of us have 2 reasons to deativate : (1) make a point, let Istock/Getty/Google/theWorld know and (2) protect our files the only way we can, even if it's with 2 months delay.
Are you joining us?
Problem is, I've uploaded very little since Sept 2011, which means that for me deactivating would be almost the same as deleting, since the vast majority of my deactivated files would have to be reinspected. Are most people deactivating only those files uploaded within the past year and a half?
-
The thing to keep in mind is that Getty/iStock has shown us that they feel that they have the right to do as they please with OUR intellectual property. That includes licensing them to Google so that Google can give them away.
There is no trust left. I'm deleting my portfolio not to "make a difference," but to keep my images from being taken out of my control or given away completely.
Regardless of what Getty/iStock has to say now or in the future, my images will not be available for license through them.
-
I'm a new member here, although I've been reading these forums for several years. I have a very small portfolio at iStock and stopped uploading two years ago. However, the images I do have there were bringing in some useful change until whatever iStock did in September sent DLs over the cliff. And now this unbelievable Google/Getty thing.
I just wanted to say that I've already deactivated 48 files, mostly my MR images. I only have three more MR images, which are among my best-sellers, and I'll likely deactivate them on D-Day. It's not as painful as it might have been since earnings have taken such a nose-dive recently. (Ironic that by screwing up DLs and site functionality, iStock has actually made it easier for a lot of people to take the step of deactivating files, giving up the crown and/or shutting down their accounts.)
I also moved my Vetta images back to the regular collection -- only to be told that Getty doesn't have the ability to remove such Vetta images mirrored on their site, although they're "working on it." So I've lost the Vetta royalty and the images are still vulnerable to being sent over to Google. Wonderful.
I'm not sure it's worth continuing with microstock. Even if Getty backpedals to some extent (which I doubt), I don't see how it's possible to trust any promises they make, and it's clear that iStock has absolutely no control over these things, so whatever they say is meaningless. I will definitely drop my crown and close my account if it becomes clear that files in the regular iStock collection are going to be included in these kinds of "deals" in the future. If they bother to tell us...
-
Listen fellas and try and understand something! this is a formidable and courages effort to make things better but go back in history a bit, to the stoneage in fact.
This scenario has been tried before, a unanimous effort and that was back when agencies were not this powerful and STLL, it didnt have any impact at all.
Imagine then whats it like today and with powerful agencies, this and that.
For every image you deactivate there are 20 being uploaded either by new members, old members or new applicants constantly knocking at the door.
Like we have all agreed on before, its a numbers game, got nothing to do with how good you are how well known you are its just numbers. Cant beat that. Its like getting a straight-flush in stud poker. And youre loosing money at the same time.
all the best.
Like it has been said before, this is more about protecting my images than it is making a giant fall down. There are plenty of other places that Getty don't have control over.
Yes there are A LOT of other places that Getty doesn't have control over, and this is where I will be concentrating my efforts from now on.
@ClaridgeJ - it seems that you're quite out of touch with modern world. A company dependent on wide base of contributors/users CAN NOT survive a lot of bad publicity. With this thingy called internet news spread far and wide around the world. People deactivating images might not have impact on immediate iStock sales figures, but it sends a very powerful message to general public, both buyers and contributors. Apart from saving your work from misuse, it is also a political action.
The problem is, most people who worked in stock industry for more than 10 years are still trying to apply obsolete concepts and rules to it. Getty's butchering of iStock is a telling example. The industry is very different these days, but somehow the rigidity of the minds of "traditional" stock people doesn't allow them to understand the changes... and this is not the first time in history... remember Luddites? "
-
I've deactivated 9 files so far...
-
I feel like I'm super late to this party, so I'm sorry if this has been answered. I attempted to read as much as I could here, but I'm still catching up. I haven't checked in here for a bit, been sick and busy with life... anyhow and thanks to Jo Ann I found out something was up and I needed to get back on here to catch up. so...
Groundhog day is still a few weeks out. is everyone deactivating now or on that day? seems like people are doing it now or is everyone prepping for that?
-
I feel like I'm super late to this party, so I'm sorry if this has been answered. I attempted to read as much as I could here, but I'm still catching up. I haven't checked in here for a bit, been sick and busy with life... anyhow and thanks to Jo Ann I found out something was up and I needed to get back on here to catch up. so...
Groundhog day is still a few weeks out. is everyone deactivating now or on that day? seems like people are doing it now or is everyone prepping for that?
Some people are just testing with a few images now - using Sean's greasemonkey script (http://www.microstockgroup.com/istockphoto-com/d-day-(deactivation-day)-on-istock-feb-2/msg291150/#msg291150) to make sure they know what to do and how. Some - Lisa, you know you who are! - got carried away and did several hundred that way.
Some are concerned that in waiting for Feb 2 Getty may give their images away in some other deal and so are deactivating model released images now.
Sean's blog post (http://seanlockephotography.com/2013/01/18/the-getty-google-drive-situation/) is a very good summary of what's been going on
I deactivated 10 the other day to test and I'll zap 1,000+ on February 2nd if we don't get anywhere useful by then - for example.
-
I think it would be good idea to each of us send a e-mail using iStock contributor relations form and inform them about our readiness to protest and deactivate images.
If somebody could compile a standard text it would be good.
Anther thing - I don't really read iStock forums, so I was unaware about this issue.
However if I get iStock site-mail - I always read it.
Again,
maybe somebody can compile a simple message alerting about this issue. And then each one of us could send this message to our "Creative network" on IS site???
-
Probably a link to Sean's blog post (referenced by JoAnn above) would do the trick if you want to alert your creative network.
-
Sorry, already sent a message around my CN yesterday. Should've waited for Sean's text ...
I think mailing the message to one's CN is an excellent way to reach out to people who are not on MSG or don't visit any forums (probably the majority of Istock contributors).
-
Listen fellas and try and understand something! this is a formidable and courages effort to make things better but go back in history a bit, to the stoneage in fact.
This scenario has been tried before, a unanimous effort and that was back when agencies were not this powerful and STLL, it didnt have any impact at all.
Imagine then whats it like today and with powerful agencies, this and that.
For every image you deactivate there are 20 being uploaded either by new members, old members or new applicants constantly knocking at the door.
Like we have all agreed on before, its a numbers game, got nothing to do with how good you are how well known you are its just numbers. Cant beat that. Its like getting a straight-flush in stud poker. And youre loosing money at the same time.
all the best.
You know, normally I’d agree but lots of significant players are at least pledging deactivations and, if even Sean has stopped uploading, there is a possible “storming of the Bastille” on the cards here.
Slightly off topic, I’m amused at the -9 hearts – maybe someone has cried “Wolf” too often or this is just the reaction to honest opinion pointing out something unpalatable.
minus 11 actually! who cares Im not here to score points.
Yes if ppl like Sean and in his league joins in , then and only then this might have some impact.
-
I just sent the link to Sean's blog post to my CN.
-
I just deactivated 73 of my best sellers. It's scary, but I can't risk them being sold to Google and hurting their sales on the other sites. Also, I'm worried that by telegraphing a February 2 takedown, Getty might negotiate another secret deal before then.
-
I just deactivated 73 of my best sellers. It's scary, but I can't risk them being sold to Google and hurting their sales on the other sites. Also, I'm worried that by telegraphing a February 2 takedown, Getty might negotiate another secret deal before then.
I agree mine came down two days ago, it is not worth the risk of leaving them up. You can add another 500 to the tally.
-
80 today. I wonder how long does it take them to disappear from ThinkStock.
-
From Istock forum :
Just checked my December Getty statement and see another (3rd?) round of licenses to Google Drive occurred last month.
ETA: They've now licensed 5 of my images total in two separate rounds, all from Getty RF (Photodisc, not iStock/E+/Vetta/TAC), but I don't see any of them on Google Drive yet. I'm assuming they will be expanding this further.
New batch of images already queued up and ready to go ?
-
Just did another 50. Don't think I could cope with doing 1,000 in one day, I'll do it in small batches.
-
Another 20 for me
-
I sent a link to Sean's blog to my CN also, at least to those that I haven't seen posting about it elsewhere already - in other words, to those who might not know. I'm waiting to get my sitemail shut down now for that.
Also, I deactivated another ten, leaving only ten more -- those may or may not wait until February 2, That still gives them two weeks to screw around with things, and who knows what will happen.
-
I sent a link to Sean's blog to my CN also, at least to those that I haven't seen posting about it elsewhere already - in other words, to those who might not know. I'm waiting to get my sitemail shut down now for that.
Also, I deactivated another ten, leaving only ten more -- those may or may not wait until February 2, That still gives them two weeks to screw around with things, and who knows what will happen.
Perhaps send your CN a message asking them to send you e-mail - if you have an e-mail address you're willing to share? That way if you do get shut down on iStock you'll have a distribution list you can use where the reach of Lobo isn't an issue
-
Didn't realize what was happening over at istock, am now deactivating all my images. A little over 1600 to go.
-
Perhaps send your CN a message asking them to send you e-mail - if you have an e-mail address you're willing to share? That way if you do get shut down on iStock you'll have a distribution list you can use where the reach of Lobo isn't an issue
Oh I gave them my personal email address -- I've learned to expect the worst. :) I also asked them not to "reply to all" because then it just needs one person who didn't like that to report it to Lobo, and then it would for sure get shut down. At this point, I guess I don't care much anymore.
-
Didn't realize what was happening over at istock, am now deactivating all my images. A little over 1600 to go.
I don't know if you saw this (and I wish I had the link handy but I don't) -- but Sean made a greasemonkey script that makes the whole deactivation process go a lot faster. It's in one of the recent Google threads here too.
-
Didn't realize what was happening over at istock, am now deactivating all my images. A little over 1600 to go.
I don't know if you saw this (and I wish I had the link handy but I don't) -- but Sean made a greasemonkey script that makes the whole deactivation process go a lot faster. It's in one of the recent Google threads here too.
Here's Leaf's post (http://www.microstockgroup.com/istockphoto-com/d-day-(deactivation-day)-on-istock-feb-2/msg291150/#msg291150) with the link
-
Listen fellas and try and understand something! this is a formidable and courages effort to make things better but go back in history a bit, to the stoneage in fact.
This scenario has been tried before, a unanimous effort and that was back when agencies were not this powerful and STLL, it didnt have any impact at all.
Imagine then whats it like today and with powerful agencies, this and that.
For every image you deactivate there are 20 being uploaded either by new members, old members or new applicants constantly knocking at the door.
Like we have all agreed on before, its a numbers game, got nothing to do with how good you are how well known you are its just numbers. Cant beat that. Its like getting a straight-flush in stud poker. And youre loosing money at the same time.
all the best.
You know, normally I’d agree but lots of significant players are at least pledging deactivations and, if even Sean has stopped uploading, there is a possible “storming of the Bastille” on the cards here.
Slightly off topic, I’m amused at the -9 hearts – maybe someone has cried “Wolf” too often or this is just the reaction to honest opinion pointing out something unpalatable.
minus 11 actually! who cares Im not here to score points.
Yes if ppl like Sean and in his league joins in , then and only then this might have some impact.
For many people it's not about sending a message (although that would be nice) but about protecting their property. If Getty gives yours stuff away you won't be able to sell it anywhere. Also if you've made assurances to models (perhaps family, friends) that the bespoke Google license doesn't appear to offer any protections for, then you might want to reduce their exposure to abuse.
-
Thanks for the link, down to 1200
-
That script is the bomb.
(https://dl.dropbox.com/u/2465491/deactivate.png)
-
Done, all images deactivated. That script is the bomb.
-
That script is the bomb.
(https://dl.dropbox.com/u/2465491/deactivate.png)
Don't delete those deactivation messages in your e-mail. Save them as proof for the date of deactivation.
-
Good point.... I presume you mean in case anyone ever wanted proof of financial loss arising out of the Getty-Google deal?
-
I wonder how many inboxes look like this?
(http://img525.imageshack.us/img525/460/ddayd.jpg)
-
wow! post this to the istock fb wall...? ;D
-
Good point.... I presume you mean in case anyone ever wanted proof of financial loss arising out of the Getty-Google deal?
Yes, just in case one of the deactivated files is part of the next Google Drive collection : Nice to have proof an image was deactivated BEFORE it went on Google Drive. We do not have an "opt out" button, but this is our way of opting out.
-
I still think having a day where we all start deleting together would send a strong message.
Do you honestly believe that? I doubt it very much. I think personally the only person you will harm will be yourself, by dropping your income. If you're really p*** off, why not leave completely, surely that would be more positive. They must get thousands of uploads a day, many many thousands, a couple of thousand being deactivated, what will that do? I don't want to sound negative, but this is doomed to failure.
1. Do you really really believe they will still get thousands of uploads a day AFTER THE GOOGLE DEAL?
2. The deactivated images will be definitely more and more than "a couple of thousand". The count of deactivated images will constantly rise and uploading will constantly reduce, it just takes time.
3. Actually many contributors are leaving completely(from IS), cause if they choose to stay, they will be harmed more and more deep. Dropping recent income is much better than dropping the half-life income.
-
I still think having a day where we all start deleting together would send a strong message.
Do you honestly believe that? I doubt it very much. I think personally the only person you will harm will be yourself, by dropping your income. If you're really p*** off, why not leave completely, surely that would be more positive. They must get thousands of uploads a day, many many thousands, a couple of thousand being deactivated, what will that do? I don't want to sound negative, but this is doomed to failure.
1. Do you really really believe they will still get thousands of uploads a day AFTER THE GOOGLE DEAL?
2. The deactivated images will be definitely more and more than "a couple of thousand". The count of deactivated images will constantly rise and uploading will constantly reduce, it just takes time.
3. Actually many contributors are leaving completely(from IS), cause if they choose to stay, they will be harmed more and more deep. Dropping recent income is much better than dropping the half-life income.
I'm not deactivating because I'm p*** off, or to send a message. I'm deactivating now to protect my photos. I don't want to quit iStock completely, because a number of things could happen to prevent further sales to Google, or any Company that intends to give our photos away for free. (lawsuits, or the company changes hands again)
iStock brings me a lot of income, so I hope things turn around. I'll continue to upload and then deactivate upon acceptance, in hopes of a brighter day in the future.
437 deactivated as of today. Pretty much my whole portfolio except for about 28 with no sales.
-
I know this has probably been covered before at least once, but I can't find the info - could someone tell me how to install Sean's Deactivation script?
-
I feel like I'm super late to this party, so I'm sorry if this has been answered. I attempted to read as much as I could here, but I'm still catching up. I haven't checked in here for a bit, been sick and busy with life... anyhow and thanks to Jo Ann I found out something was up and I needed to get back on here to catch up. so...
Groundhog day is still a few weeks out. is everyone deactivating now or on that day? seems like people are doing it now or is everyone prepping for that?
Some people are just testing with a few images now - using Sean's greasemonkey script ([url]http://www.microstockgroup.com/istockphoto-com/d-day-(deactivation-day)-on-istock-feb-2/msg291150/#msg291150[/url]) to make sure they know what to do and how. Some - Lisa, you know you who are! - got carried away and did several hundred that way.
Some are concerned that in waiting for Feb 2 Getty may give their images away in some other deal and so are deactivating model released images now.
Sean's blog post ([url]http://seanlockephotography.com/2013/01/18/the-getty-google-drive-situation/[/url]) is a very good summary of what's been going on
I deactivated 10 the other day to test and I'll zap 1,000+ on February 2nd if we don't get anywhere useful by then - for example.
-
I know this has probably been covered before at least once, but I can't find the info - could someone tell me how to install Sean's Deactivation script?
Use Firefox, install GreaseMonkey (add-on), install: http://digitalplanetdesign.com/scripts/IS_myUploads_fixes.user.js (http://digitalplanetdesign.com/scripts/IS_myUploads_fixes.user.js)
-
I know this has probably been covered before at least once, but I can't find the info - could someone tell me how to install Sean's Deactivation script?
Use Firefox, install GreaseMonkey (add-on), install: [url]http://digitalplanetdesign.com/scripts/IS_myUploads_fixes.user.js[/url] ([url]http://digitalplanetdesign.com/scripts/IS_myUploads_fixes.user.js[/url])
The problem is, I have the script, I just don't know how to install it. In the past, I've always installed add-ons by going to Firefox's add-on page, picking out the add-ons I wanted, and then installing them with just one or two mouse clicks. But this is different, I don't know where or how to install the script. It's probably very simple, but I can't seem to figure out how to do it.
-
The problem is, I have the script, I just don't know how to install it. In the past, I've always installed add-ons by going to Firefox's add-on page, picking out the add-ons I wanted, and then installing them with just one or two mouse clicks. But this is different, I don't know where or how to install the script. It's probably very simple, but I can't seem to figure out how to do it.
[/quote
I just double clicked and the install happened automatically. If that happened, then you go to your Istock My Uploads page and at the top there's a list of things you can display. The last of that list is "my uploads options" If you click that, you get a list with check boxes. The last one should say "deactivate". If you click that and then refresh, you should see a column on the right hand side that lets you delete each file. Let me know if that doesn't work and I or somebody else will try to help out more :)
BTW, you have to have Greasemonkey installed. do you?
-
No I don't have Grease Monkey installed, never used it. Can someone post a link? Thanks.
The problem is, I have the script, I just don't know how to install it. In the past, I've always installed add-ons by going to Firefox's add-on page, picking out the add-ons I wanted, and then installing them with just one or two mouse clicks. But this is different, I don't know where or how to install the script. It's probably very simple, but I can't seem to figure out how to do it.
[/quote
I just double clicked and the install happened automatically. If that happened, then you go to your Istock My Uploads page and at the top there's a list of things you can display. The last of that list is "my uploads options" If you click that, you get a list with check boxes. The last one should say "deactivate". If you click that and then refresh, you should see a column on the right hand side that lets you delete each file. Let me know if that doesn't work and I or somebody else will try to help out more :)
BTW, you have to have Greasemonkey installed. do you?
-
No I don't have Grease Monkey installed, never used it. Can someone post a link? Thanks.
sigh http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Grease+Monkey (http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Grease+Monkey)
-
In an earlier post, I mentioned that I have had my Vetta images removed from the Vetta collection back to the main collection. Unfortunately, I found out afterwards that this does not guarantee that they would be removed from Getty's site if they've been mirrored there. (I'm still not sure if they have been -- I've tried once to figure out how to look for them there and got nowhere. AFAIK, I've never had a sale there.) It appears that one of Getty's convenient (for them) inefficiencies is that they can't move images into and out of collections on the Getty site.
Fortunately, these Vetta images did not involve models and, AFAIK, were the only ones of my portfolio that were vulnerable to the Google deal. Nevertheless, I don't want them given away on Google, so I'd like to know what happens if I deactivate them on iStock. Does that prevent them from being sold or given away to Google from Getty's site or not? If yes, I'll deactivate them on D-Day along with my remaining MR images.
-
If they're still on Getty, they can still be sold from Getty. But check this page:
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=350645&page=2#post6824553 (http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=350645&page=2#post6824553) if you haven't already.
Of course, just because the last lot sold from Getty and TS, it doesn't mean the next batch wouldn't come from images on iS only.
To find your own images on Getty, click on Advanced Search, put your photographer's name as used on Getty in the Search Field. Immediately under the search box in advanced search is a dropdown with the default 'keywords or Image #'. Choose photographer from the dropdown there.
-
No I don't have Grease Monkey installed, never used it. Can someone post a link? Thanks.
sigh [url]http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Grease+Monkey[/url] ([url]http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Grease+Monkey[/url])
That did it! I'm all set now, thanks.
-
If they're still on Getty, they can still be sold from Getty. But check this page:
[url]http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=350645&page=2#post6824553[/url] ([url]http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=350645&page=2#post6824553[/url]) if you haven't already.
Of course, just because the last lot sold from Getty and TS, it doesn't mean the next batch wouldn't come from images on iS only.
To find your own images on Getty, click on Advanced Search, put your photographer's name as used on Getty in the Search Field. Immediately under the search box in advanced search is a dropdown with the default 'keywords or Image #'. Choose photographer from the dropdown there.
Thanks for this information. The advanced search didn't work exactly as described above (the "keywords or image #" dropdown box was greyed out and unusable) but when I just searched on my username, I got two E+ images that I removed from E+ last week. I guess they'll stay on Getty until Getty feels like getting around to removing them, if ever. Neither of the Vetta images is there.
Fortunately, the E+ images are not MR either and they weren't included in the first batch sent over to Google, but I guess I should check the new ones showing up. I read somewhere that the transfer to Google has continued apace in the last week and there are nearly 8000 images there now.
I wasn't able to follow the link to the iStock forum that you provided. It just went to the main Forum page that lists all the different forums. Did it contain information about what happens on Getty if you deactivate images on iStock? It appears that I need to consider deactivating both the former Vetta and former E+ images. I may do it anyway, but it's infuriating if even that won't prevent Getty from giving them away. And, as you say, they may be coming for the main iStock collection soon and probably without any warning. I'm very close to just shutting down my account.
ETA: if my Vetta images are not currently showing on Getty, would deactivating them on iStock prevent them from going over there now?
-
Sorry, can't imagne why the Getty dropdown doesn't work for you.
Sorry x2, you mentioned Vetta, but I missed that you'd dropped exclusivity, and that link I posted was to the Exclusive forum.
I'm not sure how to summarise it, it seems that no one really knows for sure what happens when you 'demote' your Vetta files, and certainly not in which timescale. Same with E+ files that were already mirrored.
Specifically, Michael Jay asked:
"If someone drops exclusivity, all his files are going to move collection. Does it mean, they are not going to disappear from Getty then?"
To which Oldladybird replied:
"Michael, all this Connector stuff is confusing for me too so I'm going to try and get the correct answer from the Connector guys downstairs. I'll post here as soon as I know what happens with exclusivity."
(as though there was some doubt as to whether she'd be given the correct answer, the way I read it.)
That was on Friday, so no hope of an answer before iStock business hours tomorrow.
-
Sorry, can't imagne why the Getty dropdown doesn't work for you.
Sorry x2, you mentioned Vetta, but I missed that you'd dropped exclusivity, and that link I posted was to the Exclusive forum.
I'm not sure how to summarise it, it seems that no one really knows for sure what happens when you 'demote' your Vetta files, and certainly not in which timescale. Same with E+ files that were already mirrored.
Specifically, Michael Jay asked:
"If someone drops exclusivity, all his files are going to move collection. Does it mean, they are not going to disappear from Getty then?"
To which Oldladybird replied:
"Michael, all this Connector stuff is confusing for me too so I'm going to try and get the correct answer from the Connector guys downstairs. I'll post here as soon as I know what happens with exclusivity."
(as though there was some doubt as to whether she'd be given the correct answer, the way I read it.)
That was on Friday, so no hope of an answer before iStock business hours tomorrow.
No, I haven't dropped exclusivity (yet.) I can see the Exclusive forums but the link didn't take me there -- it just took me to the main page so I didn't know which forum you were linking too. Anyway, you summarized the information, for which I thank you, and I'll go and look tomorrow if there are any answers. Not that I think there will be, of course....
It's an interesting question about dropping exclusivity. I would not do so unless and until I'm ready to quit iStock altogether. I don't want images going to Thinkstock and I'm not interested in doing the rounds of other microstock agencies; I'm going in another direction altogether. So I'll maintain exclusivity as long as I stay at iStock.
The real dilemma for me is whether the main collection will remain protected from Google or similar deals and whether we'll receive any notification that it will no longer be so protected. If it remains protected, I might just leave the remnants of my portfolio there to collect a few pennies from time to time. If it does not remain protected, I'll close the account.
I'm waiting to see what, if anything, Getty/iStock says about this. Of course, it's hard to trust anything they do say so it would probably be smart to just close the account and be done with it. But I really want to know how long Getty intends to hang on to images after we've deactivated them, moved them from collections or closed our account.
-
It's an interesting question about dropping exclusivity. I would not do so unless and until I'm ready to quit iStock altogether. I don't want images going to Thinkstock and I'm not interested in doing the rounds of other microstock agencies; I'm going in another direction altogether. So I'll maintain exclusivity as long as I stay at iStock.
The real dilemma for me is whether the main collection will remain protected from Google or similar deals and whether we'll receive any notification that it will no longer be so protected. If it remains protected, I might just leave the remnants of my portfolio there to collect a few pennies from time to time. If it does not remain protected, I'll close the account.
I'm in the same postion. I want TS even less than I want SS, and have no interest in any of the others. I think it's highly unlikely that we'll get any sort of guarantee about our content, and as you suggest, what does an iStock promise amount to anyway?
Luckily, I'll still eat even if I deactivate altogether.
Oh, just found out that link works for me when I'm logged in in FF, but not when I'm logged out in IE. Don't know if IE is the issue (?). Anyway, there are only two pages in the new TAC/VETTA/E+ 2013 thread in the Exclusive forum as of now, and the page I quoted was the second. It may be worth reading the two pages, which are asking the sort of questions you're asking, but not with concrete answers.
Good luck whatever you decide.
-
It's an interesting question about dropping exclusivity. I would not do so unless and until I'm ready to quit iStock altogether. I don't want images going to Thinkstock and I'm not interested in doing the rounds of other microstock agencies; I'm going in another direction altogether. So I'll maintain exclusivity as long as I stay at iStock.
The real dilemma for me is whether the main collection will remain protected from Google or similar deals and whether we'll receive any notification that it will no longer be so protected. If it remains protected, I might just leave the remnants of my portfolio there to collect a few pennies from time to time. If it does not remain protected, I'll close the account.
I'm in the same postion. I want TS even less than I want SS, and have no interest in any of the others. I think it's highly unlikely that we'll get any sort of guarantee about our content, and as you suggest, what does an iStock promise amount to anyway?
Luckily, I'll still eat even if I deactivate altogether.
Oh, just found out that link works for me when I'm logged in in FF, but not when I'm logged out in IE. Don't know if IE is the issue (?). Anyway, there are only two pages in the new TAC/VETTA/E+ 2013 thread in the Exclusive forum as of now, and the page I quoted was the second. It may be worth reading the two pages, which are asking the sort of questions you're asking, but not with concrete answers.
Good luck whatever you decide.
Thanks. I recall now that I did view the TAC/VETTA/E+ 2013 before so I'll go and check it again for more recent posts and keep an eye on it this week to see if anything's forthcoming from iStock. Maybe I'll see a unicorn too -- it seems equally likely.
-
Nevertheless, I don't want them given away on Google, so I'd like to know what happens if I deactivate them on iStock. Does that prevent them from being sold or given away to Google from Getty's site or not? If yes, I'll deactivate them on D-Day along with my remaining MR images.
Having deactivated some E+ images more than a week ago because I want to submit them somewhere else exclusively, I can tell you: Deactivating them on iStock does not remove them (quickly) from Getty.
I will wait a few more days to see if my non-exclusivity (as of yesterday) will remove my files from Getty quickly.
Otherwise iStock support might be able to help. When I removed my images from the PP, almost all got removed quickly with a few files remaining. They had them pulled manually within a few more days after writing to support.
-
Nevertheless, I don't want them given away on Google, so I'd like to know what happens if I deactivate them on iStock. Does that prevent them from being sold or given away to Google from Getty's site or not? If yes, I'll deactivate them on D-Day along with my remaining MR images.
Having deactivated some E+ images more than a week ago because I want to submit them somewhere else exclusively, I can tell you: Deactivating them on iStock does not remove them (quickly) from Getty.
I will wait a few more days to see if my non-exclusivity (as of yesterday) will remove my files from Getty quickly.
Otherwise iStock support might be able to help. When I removed my images from the PP, almost all got removed quickly with a few files remaining. They had them pulled manually within a few more days after writing to support.
Thanks for that information. I may try to see if I can get iStock to get my E+ pulled from Getty. There's only two of them and they're the only images currently vulnerable to being shipped off to Google, as far as I know.
It would also be a way of highlighting my personal objections about this mess to iStock. Not that it would make any difference to them, but it would give me a little bit of satisfaction.
-
Deactivated 19, but don't know where the running total is.
-
For the sake of accuracy in keeping the tally total, may I suggest that from now on anybody deactivating or deleting files from IS, report their numbers to the D-Day thread. I have been keeping tab in that thread. This number being reported should be from files that you are deactivating or deleting because of the recent Getty / Google deal or because it is one of many reasons. The reported number should be, from now on, one that has not been reported yet in any MSG thread and one that would totaled actual deleted or deactivated files plus the ones that you are committed to delete or deactivate on or around Feb 2nd. Thanks
-
Is possible to open a special poll for that and ask how many pictures people will deactivate on Feb2 then no need to do the total all the time?
-
Is possible to open a special poll for that and ask how many pictures people will deactivate on Feb2 then no need to do the total all the time?
I am not sure if that would work as anybody could open an account and put in some wild numbers.
-
maybe we an do both and check:)
anyway that's the link to the google drive library: http://kga.me/gds/ (http://kga.me/gds/)
11781 pictures so far, unbelievable!
-
just found about Sean's script - deleted 1 so far to try the script.
Plan to remove more on 2-Feb.
-
anyway that's the link to the google drive library: [url]http://kga.me/gds/[/url] ([url]http://kga.me/gds/[/url])
11781 pictures so far, unbelievable!
Wow! The number of images involved has nearly doubled since this all started.
Happening over a weekend too. I'm wondering why the PP stats stopped coming through on Friday and I think we may have just found our answer. Looks like that spare server capacity was diverted to Getty's more urgent requirement __ Google Drive.
It almost looks like they're in a panic to get the images up there before they're stopped or have to provide an explaination. This is coming from the very top of Getty. They're never usually this 'efficient'.
-
Maybe. There are a lot of 6MP+ images in the latest ingestion, it seems. I've even noticed some 9MP among them. I don't know if they can be downloaded at the max poss size or not
-
Funny how some things can easily get done over the weekend.
Shows where their priorities lie.
-
Rebecca even works on Saturdays, remember?
-
Rebecca even works on Saturdays, remember?
But she's had time off in lieu ever since.
-
I've just deleted 15, another 520 to go!
-
100 for me, another 400 to go...
-
Just deleted 691 images from StockXpert...now for iStock...
-
how you removed your pictures from Stockxpert?
-
I just sent a request to close my stockxpert account... and remove it's 327 images from thinkstock, photos.com, etc.,. Will resume deactivating my istock portfolio on Feb 2nd... if I can wait that long.
-
how you removed your pictures from Stockxpert?
I think you have to login and write support. I deleted some files manually last year (as a test).... they're still online at thinkstock.
-
Ok Cheers I ll do that then:)
-
What is the current tally for removed images?
-
I had to send the file numbers on all deleted files from stockexpert to istockphoto team to get them removed. Deleting them from Stockexpert doesn't remove them from Thinkstock/Photos.com.
-
really that sucks... any quick way you extracted the file numbers, I have more than 1500 there...
-
I did a search on Thinkstock "artist name" clicked Hemera under collections, wish there was an easier way though.
-
I see .. thanks:)
-
What is the current tally for removed images?
25+k
-
Michael Utech posted some interesting stats in iStock's Discussion forum - http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=350403&page=2#post6825629 (http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=350403&page=2#post6825629)
No exclusive exodus yet (2 diamonds and 5 gold members returned their crown so far in January, only one gold member became exclusive), however it takes 30 days until the status change becomes visible so we might see a few more. Downloads still as low as the whole final quarter of last year, absolutely no upswing visible.
A little more interesting - About 140 members deleted 7300 files the last week (week before was 4600, already much more than usual). In addition upload numbers are about 30% lower than between summer and Christmas. These 7300 are more than what gets uploaded on a regular day. Let's see what happens when the Feb 2nd plans of a group of contributors become reality here...
-
Hmm. Photos.com has been down for a while. Perhaps getting things ready for 02/02?
-
Michael Utech posted some interesting stats in iStock's Discussion forum - [url]http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=350403&page=2#post6825629[/url] ([url]http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=350403&page=2#post6825629[/url])
No exclusive exodus yet (2 diamonds and 5 gold members returned their crown so far in January, only one gold member became exclusive), however it takes 30 days until the status change becomes visible so we might see a few more. Downloads still as low as the whole final quarter of last year, absolutely no upswing visible.
A little more interesting - About 140 members deleted 7300 files the last week (week before was 4600, already much more than usual). In addition upload numbers are about 30% lower than between summer and Christmas. These 7300 are more than what gets uploaded on a regular day. Let's see what happens when the Feb 2nd plans of a group of contributors become reality here...
It's happening. This is just the calm before the storm.
Thanks for posting.
-
Why not just stop uploading immediately / now and deactivate everything on February 2nd?
-
Why not just stop uploading immediately / now and deactivate everything on February 2nd?
You'd think even apart from the current shock, people might be easing up on uploading because new prints are sinking fast in the best match.
-
I deleted 15 earlier and now thanks to Sean's tool I have managed to delete the other 520 files! My portfolio is completly empty!
I will now send an message to Istock support explaining why I have deleted all the files.
I would hate to give them the opportuity to disable the website or something !
Mark
-
I will be deactivating a minimum of 100 images from my not-so-large port.
Also, I have posted an article about the Deactivation threat from contributors. I have over 2000 followers on Twitter and nearly 1000 on Facebook, most of whom are graphic designers, bloggers, and fellow photographers. This article will be promoted through social media to spread the word to our target audience, and hopefully get the plight of artists recognized by the mainstream media.
Furthermore, as I wrote in the Selling Stock Direct Link Exchange thread, I have included a list of websites from which artists are selling their images direct from. I will have further thoughts in that forum about how to continue revealing how agencies treat artists, and the options buyers have for avoiding the agencies altogether.
http://www.warmpicture.com/blog/2013/01/21/artists-fight-back-d-day-for-istockphoto-and-google/ (http://www.warmpicture.com/blog/2013/01/21/artists-fight-back-d-day-for-istockphoto-and-google/)
-
One of my facebook friends just posted your article to their page, and another said they knew nothing about this. I'd encourage everyone here to let your networks on facebook and twitter know about this, flood the #istockphoto #istock twitter hashtag with this info the more people that know the more effect this will have....
-
One of my facebook friends just posted your article to their page, and another said they knew nothing about this. I'd encourage everyone here to let your networks on facebook and twitter know about this, flood the #istockphoto #istock twitter hashtag with this info the more people that know the more effect this will have....
Another one is istock friends list for those who dont check forums
-
One of my facebook friends just posted your article to their page, and another said they knew nothing about this. I'd encourage everyone here to let your networks on facebook and twitter know about this, flood the #istockphoto #istock twitter hashtag with this info the more people that know the more effect this will have....
Absolutely. Great use of social media, Wolfman!
-
Add another 9 for me, -- for a total of 419. One left, I'm not sure why I'm leaving it there really.
-
Okay, even though I have a very small port and no one knows who I am to include Istock, I have started deactivating (2 as of right now and will go back and do more on the 2nd)
-
Okay, I pulled the trigger. Entire portfolio has been deactivated. 470 total.
Sorry, I couldn't wait until Feb. 2. The situation is too fluid.
-
First 6 gone.
-
Updated the article to include a quote from Tyler.
I feel the same way. Like he wrote, I don't know if this will make a difference to iStockphoto, but it will to me. Why allow our images to be given away for free?
-
Wonderful article Dan. You have really broken down the issues effectively so they can be understood by the buying public, who are most likely unaware of the the situation. Appreciate that you compiled a list of fair trade sites where they can buy directly from artists too.
Very well done!!
-
I am very, very sad that because of the lack of communication and the ongoing transfers to google I deactivated 27 files today. please add them to the tally.
It is a really painful process and no fun at all. It included my bestselling file with over 3000 downloads.
But without clear communication I really don´t know what to do :(
On feb.2 I will deactivate more files. But I sincerly hope there will be an opt out and this nightmare stops.
-
anyway that's the link to the google drive library: [url]http://kga.me/gds/[/url] ([url]http://kga.me/gds/[/url])
11781 pictures so far, unbelievable!
Wow! The number of images involved has nearly doubled since this all started.
Happening over a weekend too. I'm wondering why the PP stats stopped coming through on Friday and I think we may have just found our answer. Looks like that spare server capacity was diverted to Getty's more urgent requirement __ Google Drive.
It almost looks like they're in a panic to get the images up there before they're stopped or have to provide an explaination. This is coming from the very top of Getty. They're never usually this 'efficient'.
Wow, wow, wow!! They're really pushing for it, it looks like they know they're going to loose tens of thousands of images and more even if they'd stop. I'm not waiting for groundhog day, I'm installing greasemonkey script and getting rid of all my images, except 10 or so, because I need another 20$ to get to request my payout. They really are scum!
-
@cobalt: I know how painful that was for you.
The only thing that is giving me the slightest chink of light is that Lobo is leaving posts up, much worse posts than he banned me for during the RC fiasco.
I can understand that Kelvin and Pink would, as contributing artists, be torn; but Lobo doesn't give a d*mn, yet he's letting (most of?) the posts stay up (some that seem to have been removed were just shifted to other threads or forums).
That must say something, but I'm still not sure what.
Maybe Getty outflanked the iStock staff who are left, and they are madly battling behind the scenes to try to retrieve some crumbs for contributors.
Or maybe the whole place is falling down, Lobo foresees his job disappearing, and 'forum moderator' is an odd CV for a grown man, so he doesn't feel like removing harsh posts.
-
Yeah, lobo is probably drunk during his business hours and the orchestra has stopped playing and is just watching the ship sink. Drunk as well ;)
-
I will be deactivating a minimum of 100 images from my not-so-large port.
Also, I have posted an article about the Deactivation threat from contributors. I have over 2000 followers on Twitter and nearly 1000 on Facebook, most of whom are graphic designers, bloggers, and fellow photographers. This article will be promoted through social media to spread the word to our target audience, and hopefully get the plight of artists recognized by the mainstream media.
Furthermore, as I wrote in the Selling Stock Direct Link Exchange thread, I have included a list of websites from which artists are selling their images direct from. I will have further thoughts in that forum about how to continue revealing how agencies treat artists, and the options buyers have for avoiding the agencies altogether.
[url]http://www.warmpicture.com/blog/2013/01/21/artists-fight-back-d-day-for-istockphoto-and-google/[/url] ([url]http://www.warmpicture.com/blog/2013/01/21/artists-fight-back-d-day-for-istockphoto-and-google/[/url])
Brilliant article Dan! very well written. Glad to be a part of Warmpicture! :)
-
Michael Utech posted some interesting stats in iStock's Discussion forum - [url]http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=350403&page=2#post6825629[/url] ([url]http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=350403&page=2#post6825629[/url])
...About 140 members deleted 7300 files the last week (week before was 4600, already much more than usual). In addition upload numbers are about 30% lower than between summer and Christmas. These 7300 are more than what gets uploaded on a regular day...
How can iS/Getty ignore these numbers? More than one whole day's submissions have been negated by deactivations. Maybe iStock thinks it is ebb and flow. :P
-
Question: Is there anything legal in the ASA between myself and IS allowing Getty to continue to sell my images after I have deactivated them?
Answer: There's nothing in the ASA at all about deactivating images.
-
Question: Is there anything legal in the ASA between myself and IS allowing Getty to continue to sell my images after I have deactivated them?
Answer: There's nothing in the ASA at all about deactivating images.
Hmmm.
I wonder if there could be a precedent in the ASA re termination.
EASA:
Effect of Termination
Upon the termination of this Agreement with respect to one or more of Photo Content, Illustration Content, Flash Content or Motion Content, except where the Artist Supply Agreement (Non-Exclusive) governs the Content, the grant of authority given to iStockphoto shall cease with respect to the relevant category of Content subject to the following conditions: (i) iStockphoto shall remove the applicable Accepted Exclusive Content from the Site and distribution partners within thirty (30) days of the termination of this Agreement; (ii) notwithstanding termination, iStockphoto and its distribution partners shall have the right to continue licensing Accepted Exclusive Content until it is removed from the Site or other sites where Accepted Exclusive Content is distributed and for up to (1) year following termination where such Accepted Content has previously appeared in iStockphoto's promotional materials, CD programs or Distribution Partner marketing programs; and (iii) regardless of the expiration or termination of this Agreement, iStockphoto will continue, in accordance with this Agreement, to pay compensation due to the Supplier at the applicable non-exclusive royalty rate set out in the Rate Schedule in respect of licenses granted to members during any transitional period, subject to any rights of set-off under this Agreement or at law.
Upon termination, iStockphoto will be entitled to retain all amounts owing to the Supplier for a period of thirty (30) days to determine any applicable rights of set-off, and shall be entitled to deduct from such amounts, a reasonable administrative fee for establishing, managing and terminating your account.
They seem to have hidden the indie ASA, as I was curious to see how it compared for terms of termination, but I couldn't even find it on the SiteMap, or when signed out.
-
Istock told me as an independent, it will take up to 30 days to remove my content.
-
I deactivated 450 on January 11th.
-
Istock told me as an independent, it will take up to 30 days to remove my content.
I guess you asked support for termination of your account? In that case, it is written in the ASA that termination can take up to 30 days (Article 12 a).
You can however deactivate your own images yourself anytime, image by image (or easier with Sean's script), which takes effect immediately.
-
177 deleted today. What's bothersome is I am 100% sure I had deleted some of these in the past. Perhaps a year or more ago.
-
+286
-
109 deactivated today
-
A friendof mine is an editor. He is going to pass the link for Dan's article onto some photojournalists. They are going to run some articles.
Thanks Mark
-
Final image deactivated today for a total of 420. Furthermore, I just canceled my entire account with them. There's no reason not to.
-
Just deactivated all 56 of my model released images. More to come tomorrow.
I think it would be interesting to see what people are putting in the reason box. I'll start off with my stated reason:
"Removed to protect IP rights from being usurped by Getty and others."
-
Just deactivated all 56 of my model released images. More to come tomorrow.
I think it would be interesting to see what people are putting in the reason box. I'll start off with my stated reason:
"Removed to protect IP rights from being usurped by Getty and others."
"I can not risk that you might sell my photos to Google."
-
Deactivated my 7 people images.
-
Deactivated 299 so far
-
Looks like Istock has set a new Guinness World Record:
"Most stock images deleted by contributors in a single month."
-
Just deactivated all 56 of my model released images. More to come tomorrow.
I think it would be interesting to see what people are putting in the reason box. I'll start off with my stated reason:
"Removed to protect IP rights from being usurped by Getty and others."
My understanding is that nobody but you sees what's in that box.
-
Just deactivated all 56 of my model released images. More to come tomorrow.
I think it would be interesting to see what people are putting in the reason box. I'll start off with my stated reason:
"Removed to protect IP rights from being usurped by Getty and others."
My understanding is that nobody but you sees what's in that box.
Email support directly and tell them why you have deleted them. If you are professional, polite and courteous there can't be any come backs. I emailed them and told them why. I also put a question in the email to make them respond so that I knew they got the message!
-
Email support directly and tell them why you have deleted them. If you are professional, polite and courteous there can't be any come backs. I emailed them and told them why. I also put a question in the email to make them respond so that I knew they got the message!
Have they responded? I have an issue on a totally different matter in my open tickets list since 31st Dec - and open tickets sometimes just disappear without trace.
-
Hi Sue,
Within 24 hours. The comment back from them was "thank you for your comment" they then went on and answered my question
Mark
-
Hi Sue,
Within 24 hours. The comment back from them was "thank you for your comment" they then went on and answered my question
Mark
:)
Guess they've had to generate a new cut and paste for this purpose.
Or maybe I'm just too cynical.
-
Here's a post from absolutely_frenchy (http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=350613&messageid=6827837) saying her 662 images and illustrations will be gone on D-Day
-
Here's a post from absolutely_frenchy ([url]http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=350613&messageid=6827837[/url]) saying his 662 images and illustrations will be gone on D-Day
She's female and a gifted illustrator and photog.
-
Here's a post from absolutely_frenchy ([url]http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=350613&messageid=6827837[/url]) saying his 662 images and illustrations will be gone on D-Day
She's female and a gifted illustrator and photog.
And one of the people I think of as an Istock exclusive fixture. I can't believe that they are witnessing the loss of exclusives of this caliber and doing nothing about it. Boggles the mind, but then, so do most other things they've done the past couple of years... :o
-
Just deactivated all 56 of my model released images. More to come tomorrow.
I think it would be interesting to see what people are putting in the reason box. I'll start off with my stated reason:
"Removed to protect IP rights from being usurped by Getty and others."
My understanding is that nobody but you sees what's in that box.
I believe you are correct which is why I suggested we post the reasons here for all to see.
-
Here's a post from absolutely_frenchy ([url]http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=350613&messageid=6827837[/url]) saying his 662 images and illustrations will be gone on D-Day
She's female and a gifted illustrator and photog.
And one of the people I think of as an Istock exclusive fixture. I can't believe that they are witnessing the loss of exclusives of this caliber and doing nothing about it. Boggles the mind, but then, so do most other things they've done the past couple of years... :o
I think of her more as one of the rocks on which iStock was built. I always admired her work tremendously, from the time I joined almost nine years ago, now. It seems the foundations are crumbling.
-
I think of her more as one of the rocks on which iStock was built. I always admired her work tremendously, from the time I joined almost nine years ago, now. It seems the foundations are crumbling.
Another of your metaphors that I am loving. Very apt description of the situation.
-
Regarding the StockXpert/Thinstock deactivation it going to take a while....
see e-mail below:
hank you very much for your email.
Your request has been received and will be processed within 30 days. You
will receive an email notification once your royalties are deposited to
your Moneybookers account.
As per your stockxpert artist supply agreement, it may take up to 90 days
for all files to be removed. Any royalties earned during the transition
period will be paid to you promptly.
If there is anything else we can help you with, don't hesitate to contact
us.
Regards,
Darek
iStockphoto Team
-
Finally done 507 pictures deactivated, just left 3 to reach payout in 2020 :D
-
Here's a post from absolutely_frenchy ([url]http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=350613&messageid=6827837[/url]) saying his 662 images and illustrations will be gone on D-Day
She's female and a gifted illustrator and photog.
Sorry about the gender mixup - I looked at an image to see if the copyright had a real name, but it didn't. I know the work and the member name but haven't ever "known" the person. It's not only the talent going but the fact that she's been around for 10 years and now has to exit. As I have contemplated the possibility that I will have to do the same, the fact that iStock was my first stock site and how much history I'd leave behind bothers me a lot. Sentimentality...
-
Finally done 507 pictures deactivated, just left 3 to reach payout in 2020 :D
Way to go!
-
I was all set to post a link to this article on my Facebook page, until one thing stopped me cold - I have no images on any of the linked sites, so how is this to my benefit? Or, for that matter, how does it benefit most independents and ex-exclusives? Most of the links point to private sites that individual microstockers have set up to sell their own work, and then there's the link to Warmpictures, an invitation only site that I was never invited to join. Why would I want to promote a site that I'm unable to join? If there were links to SS, DT, and Canstock, then it would make sense for me to promote this article, as I have a portfolio on those sites and they have a history of treating us fairly.
I realize all of the above sounds very self-serving, but microstock has become my livelihood, and so I need to look out for my own interests. I understand that we need to band together to work for the common good and to protect the future of microstock, and I want to do what I can to help, but from what I can see this article has the potential to benefit only a select few.
I will be deactivating a minimum of 100 images from my not-so-large port.
Also, I have posted an article about the Deactivation threat from contributors. I have over 2000 followers on Twitter and nearly 1000 on Facebook, most of whom are graphic designers, bloggers, and fellow photographers. This article will be promoted through social media to spread the word to our target audience, and hopefully get the plight of artists recognized by the mainstream media.
Furthermore, as I wrote in the Selling Stock Direct Link Exchange thread, I have included a list of websites from which artists are selling their images direct from. I will have further thoughts in that forum about how to continue revealing how agencies treat artists, and the options buyers have for avoiding the agencies altogether.
[url]http://www.warmpicture.com/blog/2013/01/21/artists-fight-back-d-day-for-istockphoto-and-google/[/url] ([url]http://www.warmpicture.com/blog/2013/01/21/artists-fight-back-d-day-for-istockphoto-and-google/[/url])
-
Perfectly reasonable concern IMO Allsa. Perhaps if you link to the article, you also include a link to fair trade sites that you are on such as Stockfresh and GLimages on the facebook page? That way you are promoting fair trade but not at the expense of your own sales?
Just a suggestion. :)
-
I just deactivated 15 images that are on Thinkstock so I can test how quickly they come down. I know some people had seen images gone the next day, but as I still don't have my whole IS portfolio over there (over a year from when they said the files would be moved), I guess I just wanted to see what happened
-
I have deactivated 500+ images and saw my Thinkstock total going down a bit but twice now the total has gone up! iS hadn't transferred all my images over yet but apparently they are still adding to TS. And some of the newly added are among those recently deactivated. Typical.
-
So I checked Thinkstock this morning and my total has gone up too! From 2463 to 2482.
The 15 files I deactivated are gone - whether or not deleting images triggered them to add more of the missing ones I can't say, but it's been many weeks since anything was added to my Thinkstock portfolio (from backlog; I'm not uploading to IS)
-
Perfectly reasonable concern IMO Allsa. Perhaps if you link to the article, you also include a link to fair trade sites that you are on such as Stockfresh and GLimages on the facebook page? That way you are promoting fair trade but not at the expense of your own sales?
Just a suggestion. :)
Thanks Lisa. For a long time I didn't consider GL because I thought it was a vector only agency. Then when they came up in this discussion, I looked into it and discovered they also accept raster illustrations and photos, I'll have to apply. Are DT, SS, BS, and CS considered to be fair trade sites as well?
-
Are DT, SS, BS, and CS considered to be fair trade sites as well?
That's surely for you to decide.
Some pay more than an indie at iStock gets, and less than an average exclusive.
Yet commercial buyers can get huge files for very little money, so IMO there is not a 'fair' price on some of these sites. But many here disagree with me on this - which is fine. We all have to decide where our personal line lies.
FWIW, I was with a pretty reasonably fair site for ages and sold 1 file. Sure, for more than an EL would get me at iStock, and at a reasonable %age, but one fairly-priced sale doesn't pay the bills.
-
Okay, so I opted-out from Partner Program 10 days ago. But yesterday I received as usual... a miserable 0.40$ for some PP sale. How can I know that I really deactivated all files from PP?
-
Okay, so I opted-out from Partner Program 10 days ago. But yesterday I received as usual... a miserable 0.40$ for some PP sale. How can I know that I really deactivated all files from PP?
PP sales are posted once a month - mid to end - for the prior month. So we just finished (I think) seeing the December PP sales. I would expect you'd see sales posted in mid-February for files that were for sale in the first part of January.
What was the date for this 40 cent sale?
-
The 15 files I deactivated are gone - whether or not deleting images triggered them to add more of the missing ones I can't say, but it's been many weeks since anything was added to my Thinkstock portfolio (from backlog; I'm not uploading to IS)
lucky you! My model released flame files that I deactivated on 14th January are still on Thinkstock :(
-
Okay, so I opted-out from Partner Program 10 days ago. But yesterday I received as usual... a miserable 0.40$ for some PP sale. How can I know that I really deactivated all files from PP?
PP sales are posted once a month - mid to end - for the prior month. So we just finished (I think) seeing the December PP sales. I would expect you'd see sales posted in mid-February for files that were for sale in the first part of January.
What was the date for this 40 cent sale?
You're right those were December sales. However, I had like 10$ or so in sales from PP in December, so I don't where 0.4$ came from? Since I opted-out from PP I don't have any PP details anymore.
-
You're right those were December sales. However, I had like 10$ or so in sales from PP in December, so I don't where 0.4$ came from? Since I opted-out from PP I don't have any PP details anymore.
Try (while logged in) going to this page (http://www.istockphoto.com/my_uploads_partner_program.php) - it's my uploads but the PP data. The link to it, for me, is on the left side of the my_uploads.php page but perhaps that's gone for you now you opted out?
-
Got a 0.08 sale today :-[ these always make me feel insulated in a deep and profound way...
-
I deactivated 9 more today, when I had a couple spare minutes, including a flame or two.
Then later I got to thinking. When iStock sends those Deactivation Notice emails, does anyone stamp them as spam? I mean, I would never do such a thing because it might cause spam filters to raise the spam score of emails from iStock, and start putting all those emails in people's spam folders instead of delivering them to inboxes. I just wondered if anyone else was doing that.
Maybe be good to get an answer to this before Feb 2? Just so people would know not to do anything which might hurt Getty and iStock by accident.
-
Okay, I pulled the trigger. Entire portfolio has been deactivated. 470 total.
Sorry, I couldn't wait until Feb. 2. The situation is too fluid.
This is big. His port is A1 FANTASTIC.
-
You're right those were December sales. However, I had like 10$ or so in sales from PP in December, so I don't where 0.4$ came from? Since I opted-out from PP I don't have any PP details anymore.
Try (while logged in) going to this page ([url]http://www.istockphoto.com/my_uploads_partner_program.php[/url]) - it's my uploads but the PP data. The link to it, for me, is on the left side of the my_uploads.php page but perhaps that's gone for you now you opted out?
Thanks! Yes, it's confirmed, I opted-out from all PPs.
-
I will participate in this action by deactivating 150 images (roughly 15% of my total).
-
Here's a post from absolutely_frenchy ([url]http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=350613&messageid=6827837[/url]) saying his 662 images and illustrations will be gone on D-Day
She's female and a gifted illustrator and photog.
Before JoAnn edited her post I was going to mention that the last time I met Absolute_Frenchy she was a beautiful, brown-eyed girl. Relieved that she hasn't actually had a sex-change.
Not good for Istock when such loyal, committed and long-term contributors lose all confidence with them. They'll be a few more yet too.
-
Stopped contributing and deactivated 11 images. 100%
-
I have a small portfolio, mostly vectors (635). I dropped my photo exclusivity crown and deactivated my photos with people in them. Only 9, but that is a start. I will deactivate the last 8 photographs on D-Day.
I stopped uploading in mid 2011. I thought, when the last image I submitted had 250 views, I would start up again. But the image sank quickly and then the counter broke... Reading the forums and looking for a sensible time to start submitting again has been a frustrating task. So many site issues over the last few years!
Since the discovery of the Google Drive deal, I think contributors are being strung along in the forums. The forums are filled with criticisms about how badly iStock is run. There are posts about legal actions stated to be taken by contributors over the Google deal. There are long time contributors with announcements of dropping their crowns and questions by artists who want to deactivate photos from their portfolios. Typically, these posts would be deleted, immediately. I believe iStock is allowing this to happen to buy time to prepare a statement. Sure, there will eventually be some announcement, but I feel certain it will only dig further into it's artist's pockets and diminish our rights.
I am planning to drop illustration exclusivity soon and have no plans to upload any more work. I'm just watching for the timeframe. Since I have no other experience with any other micro-stock suppliers, I need to figure out what will be the most useful sites for illustrators. - Best of luck to everyone and especially those that depend on the income. I hope this bullsh@t precedent is stopped in it's tracks.
-
@ Dhandford, check out the Envato marktplaces, and Graphic Leftover. Those sites are geared towards vectors and illustrations. Also, I believe vector artists do well on Shutterstock. Shutterstock should be your first goal, as they make you the most money for sure.
-
@ Dhandford, check out the Envato marktplaces, and Graphic Leftover. Those sites are geared towards vectors and illustrations. Also, I believe vector artists do well on Shutterstock. Shutterstock should be your first goal, as they make you the most money for sure.
Poncke, thank you so much for the information, I will look into all of this! ;)
-
I have a small portfolio, mostly vectors (635). I dropped my photo exclusivity crown and deactivated my photos with people in them. Only 9, but that is a start. I will deactivate the last 8 photographs on D-Day.
I stopped uploading in mid 2011. I thought, when the last image I submitted had 250 views, I would start up again. But the image sank quickly and then the counter broke... Reading the forums and looking for a sensible time to start submitting again has been a frustrating task. So many site issues over the last few years!
Since the discovery of the Google Drive deal, I think contributors are being strung along in the forums. The forums are filled with criticisms about how badly iStock is run. There are posts about legal actions stated to be taken by contributors over the Google deal. There are long time contributors with announcements of dropping their crowns and questions by artists who want to deactivate photos from their portfolios. Typically, these posts would be deleted, immediately. I believe iStock is allowing this to happen to buy time to prepare a statement. Sure, there will eventually be some announcement, but I feel certain it will only dig further into it's artist's pockets and diminish our rights.
I am planning to drop illustration exclusivity soon and have no plans to upload any more work. I'm just watching for the timeframe. Since I have no other experience with any other micro-stock suppliers, I need to figure out what will be the most useful sites for illustrators. - Best of luck to everyone and especially those that depend on the income. I hope this bullsh@t precedent is stopped in it's tracks.
I agree. I'm amazed by the people saying they will give it "just another few months" or "until the end of the year".
If IS had wanted to fix all the problems, they would have done it long ago.
IS is over, for most contributors. They just don't want to accept it.
-
My tally so far: 5 images
Many more to be deactivated. Someone can add me to the tally spreadsheet if they want, for at least 200 images. It will probably be many more than that, but I will update the final tally here later.
-
I really agree IS is over and over. Deactiveted just 3 plus many more in D-day.
-
I've deactivated all of mine already, told them why and asked them to immediately remove my images from their partner sites, which they seem to have done. I'll wait till next month in case there are any more pp sales and then close my account. Having images at IS is not worth the risk.
-
It's night time in Australia where our speadsheet creator is, but I already sent a note asking for updates.
Flotsom, is your final total still 66?
-
Yes, didn't upload anything else.
-
I could not wait D day so I have only 3 left lol, just to reach payout, I removed 533 pictures in total from Istock.
i also close stockxpert coonected to thinkstock about 1300 pics. last time i checked they were gone from TS but got still about 400 on thinkstock coming from Istock, will have to check from time to time as I do not trust them.
-
Have got 20 files deactivated today for a warm up. Tomorrow some more.
-
I'll delete 3 files.
It's not much, but at least I did something.
-
Deactivated 3. Now some sleep and then some more deactivation.
A nice day to receive the "You have reached $500.00 or more..." -mail from SS :D
-
I've deleted 6 so far. Oddly enough, have had a lot more downloads than normal the last few days :-\
-
Deactivated my first 2 now
-
+19 for now, more when I get a bit more time later
-
325 deactivated - I need more caffeine ;)
-
I removed all my images from the Partner Programme.
-
Another 54 deactivated. (Brings my total to 210).
-
02 deactivated.
-
Done my bid. 25 deleted. Just a small port here, so not much more possible. But every single one counts.
-
Deactivated 3. Now some sleep and then some more deactivation.
A nice day to receive the "You have reached $500.00 or more..." -mail from SS :D
8 more totaling 11 now.
-
12 from me
-
- 260 files
(it brings a lot of memories how the upload was painful :) )
-
My total is now 11 (three a while back, eight today)
-
252 just deactivated for me (originally only pledged 200 for deactivation, but got a bit carried away - may do a few more later today - recommend seans script to anyone who is not sure how to easily deactivate)
-
-125
-
22 so far for me this morning, but I think I will go back and do more this afternoon.
-
-100 deactivated.. another 200 to go.
-
Deactivated 46 files. All of these required model releases and were not selling well anyway.
-
I just deactivated 66 files, in addition to the 48 I deactivated earlier, for a total of 114. I have a very small portfolio so this represents a reduction of about 42%.
I wasn't sure whether to report here or in the "D-Day" thread or the "Feb. 2" thread. I'll add it to the Feb. 2 thread.
-
The problem is, I have the script, I just don't know how to install it. In the past, I've always installed add-ons by going to Firefox's add-on page, picking out the add-ons I wanted, and then installing them with just one or two mouse clicks. But this is different, I don't know where or how to install the script. It's probably very simple, but I can't seem to figure out how to do it.
[/quote
I just double clicked and the install happened automatically. If that happened, then you go to your Istock My Uploads page and at the top there's a list of things you can display. The last of that list is "my uploads options" If you click that, you get a list with check boxes. The last one should say "deactivate". If you click that and then refresh, you should see a column on the right hand side that lets you delete each file. Let me know if that doesn't work and I or somebody else will try to help out more :)
BTW, you have to have Greasemonkey installed. do you?
Hi I have deactivated 360 so far. I want to do hundreds more but can't find the list of things you can display. I have installed greasemonkey, went to the Istock my uploads page but no 'my uploads options'. What do I do wrong?
Thanks
-
18 deactivated today.
-
Just deleted the five hundred I planned to plus 300 more (hey, when you're on a roll... ;) ). Total deleted today 800. Total of my images deleted since this Getty Google deal - 1009.
-
Hi I have deactivated 360 so far. I want to do hundreds more but can't find the list of things you can display. I have installed greasemonkey, went to the Istock my uploads page but no 'my uploads options'. What do I do wrong?
Thanks
Sean's script runs on greasemonkey, but it isn't included in it. You need to go here to download his script:
http://digitalplanetdesign.com/scripts/IS_myUploads_fixes.user.js (http://digitalplanetdesign.com/scripts/IS_myUploads_fixes.user.js)
-
10 (I have a small portfolio lol)
-
So this is the thread for totals! Adapted from my post in the others:
Last night I deactivated images totaling (with the test images I did a few days ago) 2496 leaving a grand total of 153 editorial and iStockalypse images in my portfolio. I removed all my vectors back in September 2011 (to keep them off Thinkstock) so I won't count those in this D-Day total
Thank heavens for Sean's greasemonkey script - it has turned an excruciating job into a merely painful one. Thanks Sean.
Blog post (http://www.digitalbristles.com/leaving-istock-sadly/), Facebook timeline cover (http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10151478935671019&set=a.10151149063076019.499682.661701018&type=1&theater), tweet (https://twitter.com/joannsnover/status/297656035244658688)
-
20 Deactivated today.
-
20-30 seems like the "symbolic gesture of support" level, so I've dumped 30 files.
-
I'm going for 100 deactivations today
Steve
-
One token deactivation held until today to add to my 24 deactivated earlier.
That's as far as I'm going just now; no commitment not to deactivate more at a later date.
-
Shame on me, for now I only deactivated 3 images today. Low/no sellers for a start.
I have only a tiny port there, stopped uploading quite a while ago anyway.
This is all so sad. Seven years ago I loved iStock so much. It added a new quality to my life. So joyful. Then all the known nuisances occured, one after another, and now the Google deal. This time they/Getty went too far!
How could they do this? I am speechless.
-
130 deactivated today
-
Together with yesterday I have 43 files deactivated as a sign of support.
-
ok, I'll repeat here - deactivated 300 photos
-
dont know where i posted but.....
125 deactivated today
-
Leaf asked to put our numbers in this thread, so I'll repeat it here : I deactivated 1052 this morning, so I did 552 more than listed (got carried away).
-
12 in support from me
-
150 images deactivated so far from my port.
-
80 so far
-
I did 552 more than listed (got carried away).
It's easy to get carried away, right? Good old Sean made it a breeze. ;D
-
I did 552 more than listed (got carried away).
It's easy to get carried away, right? Good old Sean made it a breeze. ;D
He deserves a statue.
Without that script, I would have quit after 50 deactivations ...
-
A few more from me making 170+ deactivations. Time to go to the pub!
-
50 done
-
103 total deactivations. More possible in the future as I continue to reassess my business relationship with iStock.
-
70 deactivated out of my tiny portfolio of 71.
-
500
-
25 images deactivated with a consise note about general failure of iStock.
-
I deactivated a third of my portfolio. it's small so it's only 15 files but I gave "gGoogle deal protest" as the reason for all of them. I'd do them all but I'm close to a payout and don't want to lose my $100 - I think I'll lose my photo plus slots but, though I don't have any photos in the google deal, I want to stand in solidarity with those of you who do. I'll close my account once I reach a payout. Viva la resistance!
-
547 more deactivated today, overall 687 in the past few weeks.
-
105 so far here
-
101 for me. All the photos where my kids or friends kid's faces are shown. The note was about not wanting to upload photos fo children when there is no assurance they wont be misused.
-
Ok.. 1300 deactivated for me
-
Nice one Leaf.
I have taken 379 down so far, but I got a bit depressed by the whole thing so will stop for a bit. More later though...
-
i deactivated my small port of around 200...i'll cash out when the PP has finished and close my account. Easy for me, this is a hobby - I'm full of admiration for full timers doing the same thing...
-
Ok, so, in total, around 2000 deactivated for me. I left 900 photos with 0 download, some videos and some musics.
-
385. Had a beer and fell asleep.
-
I notice that this has 13,000+ views and 15 people currently viewing it. I don't believe I've ever seen a thread get that sort of following before (except, I now notice, for all the others on the same topic).
-
Plus another 60 deactivated, for good measure.
-
45 deactivated. Nothing uploaded for a while. Will watch and decide on further action.
-
22 from a very small port. The remaining 22 come down after next payout.
-
250 for me, bit over a 1000 for the past few weeks.
-
I did 552 more than listed (got carried away).
It's easy to get carried away, right? Good old Sean made it a breeze. ;D
He wrote it, but is he using it himself. I remember him saying he wouldnt delete any images?
-
Have deleted −300 images today plus another −4 that were in pending awaiting model release.
-
Deleted 72 more vectors so far today. Only about 100 left, will do some more before midnight. Kind of sad to see those go which I submitted back in 2005 when I first applied to iStockphoto. But what you gonna do? :-\
-
12 from my tiny port (makes nearly 20% of it). Not the most fun I've ever had but I wanted to show my support and protect some images I hope will have a future as sellable art one way or another.
-
Ok, I have deactivated about 458 images. ~30 left active. I have to admit after being with iStock since 2005 this is a very sad day indeed.
-
I deleted 195 more yesterday for a running total of 200, as I pledged earlier on the spreadsheet. I'll keep removing more at leisure, whenever the mood strikes me.
-
I deactivated 10 more of my images, which brings my total protest deactivations up to 37.
-
I just killed off 85. Man it's a lot more tedious than I had anticipated. Still have several hundred to go. I don't think I'll get it all done today though.
-
Did 50 today. Would've done more, but for some reason the script isn't working for me. Will do more tomorrow.
-
OK - I'm confused where I've posted, and where I haven't, but I deactivated around 40 today, with around 35 of my better sellers deactivated last week. I'm interested to see what this week will bring. Watching, waiting, trying to balance business sense with personal ethics.
-
537 total today (a little over 50% of my port), feeling proud!
-
For instant I removed only 15. I dropped my crown few days ago and thinking about long term strategy, if I remove only some categories of images or the whole portfolio.
-
I deactivated a total of 505 images today.... I stopped uploading a year ago.
-
As previously pledged: 126 files deactivated. My entire port except (2) files for account maintenance purposes. Sad day - first time I have pulled my port from somewhere.
-
I deactivated 26 yesterday, bringing my total up to 200.
Though I do it for different reasons than many here, I think it's important to show a coordinated effort of contributors is possible.
-
They have broken the stats link, they dont want us to see the numbers. Wow, they really are doing everything to deceive people.
-
They have broken the stats link, they dont want us to see the numbers. Wow, they really are doing everything to deceive people.
It works for me
Total files 12691070
Waiting approval 63580
Which is about 10,000 fewer than a day ago. Presumably several thousand have also been approved during that period, so a little over 0.1% of the collection was probably deleted yesterday and maybe a similar proportion in the run-up to the protest. Then you need to factor in how much of iStock is now composed of files carted in from elsewhere. At a rough guess, one contributors file in ever 300 has been pulled.
-
Ok this was 8 hours ago, not much difference
Total files 12691392
Waiting approval 63951
00:20 GMT 3 feb 2013
-
They have broken the stats link, they dont want us to see the numbers. Wow, they really are doing everything to deceive people.
I think it only works if you are logged in to the site?!?
-
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=350913&page=20 (http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=350913&page=20)
Quote from Lobo
"And that's that. Feb 3."
Could he be anymore antagonistic and dismissive?
Anyway, assuming "that's" not"that" what now? Continue to deactivate or suspend further deactivation for another week with the demand of an opt out of further give away deals?
-
Everything is fine! Without the deactivated pics, the agency earns fewer money! I think they earns so much fewer money, what the have earned from google for the pics, they have sold.
If istock and getty not concern i will delete my port.
-
I don't think we should be thinking about the numbers or what Getty think about this. What matters is that lots of buyers are made aware of how little Getty/istock respect us, how low our commissions are and that non-exclusives have much bigger portfolios on other sites. Hopefully more and more of them will at least get a second account and only use istock to buy from exclusives.
There's a lot more we can do but I think we should wait and see what effect D-Day has had before planning another group action. It was great to take part in this and see so many joining in. It's made me think that perhaps we do have some power.
-
I don't think we should be thinking about the numbers or what Getty think about this. What matters is that lots of buyers are made aware of how little Getty/istock respect us, how low our commissions are and that non-exclusives have much bigger portfolios on other sites. Hopefully more and more of them will at least get a second account and only use istock to buy from exclusives.
There's a lot more we can do but I think we should wait and see what effect D-Day has had before planning another group action. It was great to take part in this and see so many joining in. It's made me think that perhaps we do have some power.
I think that is about right. Wait a while but let it be known (especially to buyers) and organize for:
D-Day2
-
I don't think we should be thinking about the numbers or what Getty think about this. What matters is that lots of buyers are made aware of how little Getty/istock respect us, how low our commissions are and that non-exclusives have much bigger portfolios on other sites. Hopefully more and more of them will at least get a second account and only use istock to buy from exclusives.
There's a lot more we can do but I think we should wait and see what effect D-Day has had before planning another group action. It was great to take part in this and see so many joining in. It's made me think that perhaps we do have some power.
I think that is about right. Wait a while but let it be known and organize for:
D-Day2
IS won't have any files left!
-
[url]http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=350913&page=20[/url] ([url]http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=350913&page=20[/url])
Quote from Lobo
"And that's that. Feb 3."
Could he be anymore antagonistic and dismissive?
He obviously shows few symptoms of a mental disorder. But, in the same time he must be a very capable person if he does the same work since 2000.
[url]http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=341795[/url] ([url]http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=341795[/url])
Oh, and note the use of iStock time:
"Lobo and the rest of our forum moderator team (more on them soon)" in a post dated on March 12th last year.
They definitely have a "new meaning of 'soon'" to repurpose a famous iStock idiom.
Maybe they need to write a special iStock glossary, explaining what they mean by 'trust', 'soon', 'this week', 'this month', 'No', 'Yes' etc. ...
-
[url]http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=350913&page=20[/url] ([url]http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=350913&page=20[/url])
Quote from Lobo
"And that's that. Feb 3."
Could he be anymore antagonistic and dismissive?
Anyway, assuming "that's" not"that" what now? Continue to deactivate or suspend further deactivation for another week with the demand of an opt out of further give away deals?
Could be worse. Remember Peebert?
-
If we want to encourage buyers to go to other sites, how about removing niche files next? If you have a file that is rare, it may sell only occasionally on IS, but if a buyer needs it they will have to go elsewhere.
In this way you would not lose much income from IS, but buyers who normally only buy at IS (if there are any left) could be gently encouraged to look at what else is out there.
-
Plus 250 deactivated at noon for the coffee break, I found I've forgotten some files with few downloads, now the 650 files I left have 0 download. Total: 2250 files deactivated.
-
Deactivated my 2 best sellers of my small portfolio. They had 5500 downloads together.
-
I did 552 more than listed (got carried away).
It's easy to get carried away, right? Good old Sean made it a breeze. ;D
He wrote it, but is he using it himself. I remember him saying he wouldnt delete any images?
Sean is in a different position to most of us here. I suspect he is going another (but possibly even more effective) route. I do not for a minute think he's sitting back and doing nothing.
-
Ok this was 8 hours ago, not much difference
Total files 12691392
Waiting approval 63951
00:20 GMT 3 feb 2013
Yesterday morning it showed 12706607... so the number dropped by about 15,000... ???
-
I did 552 more than listed (got carried away).
It's easy to get carried away, right? Good old Sean made it a breeze. ;D
He wrote it, but is he using it himself. I remember him saying he wouldnt delete any images?
Sean is in a different position to most of us here. I suspect he is going another (but possibly even more effective) route. I do not for a minute think he's sitting back and doing nothing.
I did take down about 30. It was fun to use!
-
I did take down about 30. It was fun to use!
Oh, good to know. :)
It was fun, wasn't it?
Thank you again for making it so much easier than it could have been!
-
If I were in charge at istock I'd have been certain to flood as many Getty images into istock on the 2nd Feb as possible to attempt to negate the contributor deactivations. I wonder if they did..?
-
If I were in charge at istock I'd have been certain to flood as many Getty images into istock on the 2nd Feb as possible to attempt to negate the contributor deactivations. I wonder if they did..?
I doubt whether they care much what numbers are showing.It's not something the outside world is going to show any interest in.
-
If I were in charge at istock I'd have been certain to flood as many Getty images into istock on the 2nd Feb as possible to attempt to negate the contributor deactivations. I wonder if they did..?
They might have had to have had someone working Saturday to do it - their auto-flows don't seem to work well, as we know.
Funnily enough, I was miffed for a while that I haven't had any E+ moved over to Getty since before Christmas, but now I'm quite relieved. Though there's nothing (more than didn't stop them plundering Getty and TS etc) to stop them misappropriating any iS images if they feel like it.
-
Quote from Lobo
"And that's that."
That's what I said when I deleted my last file. ;D
-
For what its worth, I dropped my crown back in december. This was b4 this google fiasco came out and i feel that i have made the right decision. Although i will miss the income i will lose out on temporarily, i feel a heavy weight is lifted off my shoulder. I am excited once again to actually upload files. I don't plan to upload anything to istock and in fact deactivated all my vetta illustrations roughly 20. There is no way istock is making a cent more on these files i have labored over.
-
Deactivated my good sellers last week. Now today 50-100 images, 1/4th of my port, the rest will follow, as soon as I get my last payout.
I will leave one image:
(http://i.istockimg.com/file_thumbview_approve/5870225/2/stock-photo-5870225-cockroach.jpg)
-
↑ But that image is too good to leave . . . . . . . ;D
-
If I were in charge at istock I'd have been certain to flood as many Getty images into istock on the 2nd Feb as possible to attempt to negate the contributor deactivations. I wonder if they did..?
They already tried that a few months ago.
-
I still think having a day where we all start deleting together would send a strong message.
Do you honestly believe that? I doubt it very much. I think personally the only person you will harm will be yourself, by dropping your income. If you're really p*** off, why not leave completely, surely that would be more positive. They must get thousands of uploads a day, many many thousands, a couple of thousand being deactivated, what will that do? I don't want to sound negative, but this is doomed to failure.
I agree with Vad_the_Limp...deactivation is the smartest way to put space btwn you and the idiots you wish to avoid...!
-
I did 36 more this weekend. Personal totals are 62 deactivated at istock and 327 deactivated via stockxpert. I plan to continue deactivating... gradually.... until things improve or my portfolio is gone.
-
Apart from the decrease in total files, has anyone been noticing what the waiting approval file numbers have been doing? I failed to write down what the waiting number was at the outset, but the last posted number here was 63951. I do know it's been climbing and is likely even higher by now. Going strictly by memory (a dangerous thing at best) I believe this number is close to 4000 images higher than it was at the beginning. If anyone has such records, it would be interesting to see if that figure is comparable for a similar period of time or different in one direction or another. Have others been uploading more than usual in an attempt to take advantage of the decrease in high quality images which are/have been taken down?
-
I and others have posted stats from time to time.
The queue does fluctuate a lot anyway, and for all we know might reflect some sort of slow-down by inspectors.
During the three or so weeks since the Google heist was announced, I've seen the queue as high as 64,xxx and as low as 57,xxx, but up and down a lot between the extremes.
-
I still think having a day where we all start deleting together would send a strong message.
Do you honestly believe that? I doubt it very much. I think personally the only person you will harm will be yourself, by dropping your income. If you're really p*** off, why not leave completely, surely that would be more positive. They must get thousands of uploads a day, many many thousands, a couple of thousand being deactivated, what will that do? I don't want to sound negative, but this is doomed to failure.
I agree with Vad_the_Limp...deactivation is the smartest way to put space btwn you and the idiots you wish to avoid...!
I'm a bit confused. You say you agree with him that deactivation is smart, but he was arguing AGAINST deactivation. So which is it?
-
I still think having a day where we all start deleting together would send a strong message.
Do you honestly believe that? I doubt it very much. I think personally the only person you will harm will be yourself, by dropping your income. If you're really p*** off, why not leave completely, surely that would be more positive. They must get thousands of uploads a day, many many thousands, a couple of thousand being deactivated, what will that do? I don't want to sound negative, but this is doomed to failure.
I agree with Vad_the_Limp...deactivation is the smartest way to put space btwn you and the idiots you wish to avoid...!
What do you plan to do?
-
+49 deactivated of my small 52 images port (last 3 staying till I reach payout then dropping them too).
Glad to be out of it since iStock screw photographers in so many ways it's hard to believe people have even been submitting there the last couple of years :/ (I stopped c2009)
-
Submitting to Getty...
I've only just realised what a double entendre that is...
-
Submitting to Getty...
I've only just realised what a double entendre that is...
ROFL! Touche ;D
-
Deactivated my 2 best sellers of my small portfolio. They had 5500 downloads together.
Based my own response and the majority of comments on MSG and various other sites. I think it is safe to conclude that beyond loss of integrity and trust. A key motivation for deactivating files has been the need to protect our most valuable files.
I know that I deleted my best selling files on IS first and then proceeded to protect files which sell well on other sites next. If even half of us used the same strategy, IS lost some of its most sought after HCV files.
-
Deactivated quite a few more tonight. About 25% of my portfolio is currently deactivated, and I plan on closing the account in a few months if there aren't radical changes.
-
Does anyone know how many images actually came down in the lead up to and including 02 FEB?
Sorry is its posted somewhere and I've missed it ... :D
-
I still think having a day where we all start deleting together would send a strong message.
Do you honestly believe that? I doubt it very much. I think personally the only person you will harm will be yourself, by dropping your income. If you're really p*** off, why not leave completely, surely that would be more positive. They must get thousands of uploads a day, many many thousands, a couple of thousand being deactivated, what will that do? I don't want to sound negative, but this is doomed to failure.
I agree with Vad_the_Limp...deactivation is the smartest way to put space btwn you and the idiots you wish to avoid...!
I'm a bit confused. You say you agree with him that deactivation is smart, but he was arguing AGAINST deactivation. So which is it?
I think there's a bit of sarcasm in action there. Note the name change. It made me laugh.
-
.
-
I haven't had a chance to deactivate my images. However, I have a lot of images that were taken at iStock minilypse events so they can only be sold on istock. I'm thinking of leaving those there and just removing all the other items. Any one else with this situation? Do you plan to remove images taken at istock events (minilypse/istockalypse) and just let them languish on your hard drive?
-
I haven't had a chance to deactivate my images. However, I have a lot of images that were taken at iStock minilypse events so they can only be sold on istock. I'm thinking of leaving those there and just removing all the other items. Any one else with this situation? Do you plan to remove images taken at istock events (minilypse/istockalypse) and just let them languish on your hard drive?
I know I read of one other person who had istockalypse and some editorials that they were just leaving up. Sorry, not sure which thread it was in, though.
-
Over 31% of my port has just been deactivated, I needed a pick-me-up today, besides my coffee ;)
You guys can update me in the spreadsheet to say 408 total images removed. I might yank another 200 by the end of the week; it depends what mood I'm in.
-
xcuse my total lack of business expertise but my question is:
is it true that while i'm exclusive with iStock i can not submit any of my new work to another site ie: shutterstock or who ever?
i try & read the contract but my eyes glaze over and i start snacking . . lol . . . .
-
.
-
Posted By cobalt:
I think everyone is waiting for the newsletter/more detailed explanations that lobo announced would be coming today or tomorrow.
Well in order to manage your expectations I should note there may not be much more on the Google Drive situation quite yet. We do have some other news that should prove interesting for all, however.
I want everyone to understand that the Google Drive issues are still very important and there has been some progress in the discussions but we aren't going to be able to give much more information with this Newsletter. We aren't ignoring it or putting off anything in order to see how long it will take before we have fatigued the entire community on discussing it. It's important to us as well. So please temper you responses and appreciate that it isn't the only news worth reporting. We will continue to work on getting things together in the hopes of having something to share as soon as possible.
Lobos answer shows me they have not been able to fix the problem and will not fix the problem.
-
Does anyone know how many images actually came down in the lead up to and including 02 FEB?
Sorry is its posted somewhere and I've missed it ... :D
44,516 were pledged to be taken down. The totals are 11,000 less images now than before Feb. 2. Many files that were taken down had zero dls or were very low selling images, not all but a lot of them.
Total files 12695464
Waiting approval 68305
I wouldn't trust the istock numbers. The site is buggy and they will never reveal the true effect of d-day. Could even be more than 44,000 images removed for that matter. Besides, look at their "Make a Difference" campaign where they "tweaked" the numbers. They will take a corporate response, not mention what happened, and you will hear "moving forward" as their reply. It's damage control, they did it back in 2010 when they told us buyers and contributors were not leaving.
PS - Enjoy the istockphoto forum while you can, they are going to make some big changes to it in the next 30 days. Corporate is not happy with the little people speaking out and making a stink. I'm guessing any old posts may be deleted, don't want any evidence of your past failures out in the open...
-
I still think having a day where we all start deleting together would send a strong message.
Do you honestly believe that? I doubt it very much. I think personally the only person you will harm will be yourself, by dropping your income. If you're really p*** off, why not leave completely, surely that would be more positive. They must get thousands of uploads a day, many many thousands, a couple of thousand being deactivated, what will that do? I don't want to sound negative, but this is doomed to failure.
I agree with Vad_the_Limp...deactivation is the smartest way to put space btwn you and the idiots you wish to avoid...!
I'm a bit confused. You say you agree with him that deactivation is smart, but he was arguing AGAINST deactivation. So which is it?
My appologies L...my post was dripping with sarcasm...since Vlad is quite the fangirl, I really only posted to have fun with her name. In truth, I've deactivated 400 of my massive 480 image port at WHYstock, but giving serious consideration to just closing the account...things are not going to get better there with time.
-
I haven't had a chance to deactivate my images. However, I have a lot of images that were taken at iStock minilypse events so they can only be sold on istock. I'm thinking of leaving those there and just removing all the other items. Any one else with this situation? Do you plan to remove images taken at istock events (minilypse/istockalypse) and just let them languish on your hard drive?
@cathy That was probably me. I left 153 iStockalypse and editorial images on the site (deactivated 2,496 others). Jami, I didn't see any reason to pull the editorial images as I'm not selling them anywhere else (I'm not selling much of them at iStock either!). Likewise, the iStockalypse images I left as I can't sell them anywhere else anyway
-
I haven't had a chance to deactivate my images. However, I have a lot of images that were taken at iStock minilypse events so they can only be sold on istock. I'm thinking of leaving those there and just removing all the other items. Any one else with this situation? Do you plan to remove images taken at istock events (minilypse/istockalypse) and just let them languish on your hard drive?
@cathy That was probably me. I left 153 iStockalypse and editorial images on the site (deactivated 2,496 others). Jami, I didn't see any reason to pull the editorial images as I'm not selling them anywhere else (I'm not selling much of them at iStock either!). Likewise, the iStockalypse images I left as I can't sell them anywhere else anyway
Yep, it was you. Glad you jumped in. The old memory ain't what it used to be. I remember that I saw it, just not who said it. :o
-
Posted By cobalt:
I think everyone is waiting for the newsletter/more detailed explanations that lobo announced would be coming today or tomorrow.
Well in order to manage your expectations I should note there may not be much more on the Google Drive situation quite yet. We do have some other news that should prove interesting for all, however.
I want everyone to understand that the Google Drive issues are still very important and there has been some progress in the discussions but we aren't going to be able to give much more information with this Newsletter. We aren't ignoring it or putting off anything in order to see how long it will take before we have fatigued the entire community on discussing it. It's important to us as well. So please temper you responses and appreciate that it isn't the only news worth reporting. We will continue to work on getting things together in the hopes of having something to share as soon as possible.
Lobos answer shows me they have not been able to fix the problem and will not fix the problem.
The quoting mechanism didn't work correctly on your post, but I'm assuming that the middle two paragraphs are what Lobo said. If so, wow, I'm surprised. I think it's exactly like someone else said in another thread somewhere...they put out that crap to feed the "hopeful" contributors. I imagine they did stop some deactivating because of it. ::)
-
Lobo:
"We do have some other news that should prove interesting for all, however."
Intrigued as always, but it's a curse (not a blessing) to wish that someone will live in "interesting" times.
-
And this is the interesting news:
https://api.gettyimages.com (https://api.gettyimages.com)
(I'll start a new thread for comments)
-
My appologies L...my post was dripping with sarcasm...since Vlad is quite the fangirl, I really only posted to have fun with her name.
Oh, sorry. I didn't get the sarcasm. Now the post makes sense to me ;)
-
And this is the interesting news:
https://api.gettyimages.com (https://api.gettyimages.com)
(I'll start a new thread for comments)
"Getty APIs
Our set of APIs enable seamless integration of Getty Images' expansive content, powerful search and rich metadata directly into your internal workflows, products and services. With Connect's API solutions, you can fully control, customize and scale as you grow."
https://api.gettyimages.com/apis
-
I haven't had a chance to deactivate my images. However, I have a lot of images that were taken at iStock minilypse events so they can only be sold on istock. I'm thinking of leaving those there and just removing all the other items. Any one else with this situation? Do you plan to remove images taken at istock events (minilypse/istockalypse) and just let them languish on your hard drive?
@cathy That was probably me. I left 153 iStockalypse and editorial images on the site (deactivated 2,496 others). Jami, I didn't see any reason to pull the editorial images as I'm not selling them anywhere else (I'm not selling much of them at iStock either!). Likewise, the iStockalypse images I left as I can't sell them anywhere else anyway
Yep, it was you. Glad you jumped in. The old memory ain't what it used to be. I remember that I saw it, just not who said it. :o
thank you to both of you! I now need to find some time to remove images from IS and get more on my other sites.
-
I had an odd request the other day from someone wanting to give a surprise gift of support to someone who is deactivating some of their files from iStock. Here is the initial message
I've been reading the threads about the Getty/iStock/Google debacle, though I haven't posted, since I deleted my entire (small) iStock port when they lowered commissions over a year ago.
Many horrible, unfair practices throughout history have ended, but first some effective people had to decide that it was worth fighting, with more than words, against it.
And, building on that, I'd like to do a little more than just say supportive things to MSG'ers who de-activate files on February 2.
But, because of obvious privacy issues, I can only think of way that involves you. So, if you find this idea workable, please drop me a line. If you have tweaks that make it workable, please don't hesitate to tell me.
1. I'd send you $100 gift certificate
(something widely used, and ideally that could be emailed - such as Amazon.com email gift certificate, or, if such a thing exists, a PayPal email gift certificate...)
2. After Feb. 2, you'd randomly select name of one Premium member (or any full member, if you prefer) of MSG who posted here that s/he de-activated at least 100 files on February 2, and ask that person if s/he'd like the $100 gf. If not, you'd pick someone else....
It would be my way of saying thank you for someone doing something concrete to help stock photographers, and really photographers in general. I don't have preference one way or other if my name is ever mentioned - that's up to you.
After a little back and forth and trying to find something fair without having to pick someone directly I (we) decided to pick someone at random who had deactivated at least 100 images. I looked at the number of posts in this thread and got a random number using wolfram alfa between 1 and 436 (The result was 371). Then, I went to post 371 (http://www.microstockgroup.com/17956/17956/msg296062/#msg296062) and if necessary I was going to scroll down until I found someone who had deactivated 100 images. I didn't need to .. ArenaCreative had deactivated 200 images.
I've send him an email.
Thanks mystery person.
-
a heart for the unknown . . . . . . .
-
That's such a nice thing to do and I'm pleased that Todd won it.
-
Lovely gesture. Thanks to the mystery benefactor.
-
Wow, thank you so much, anonymous donor. I never win anything... this prize will at least give me a little something back as I continue to use my own time deactivating more photos.
How about this? I'd like to pay half of it ($50) forward. I can't hog all of it to myself. Let's say 2nd place get's $30, and 3rd place gets $20.
Tyler - please go ahead and randomly generate some numbers from the tally thread, and post the results here. Let's make a few more hard working microstockers have a slightly better day as well.
-
Congrats Todd!
-
The iStock deactivation count is about to grow by 10K-ish (sjlocke's files)
-
.
-
The iStock deactivation count is about to grow by 10K-ish (sjlocke's files)
Is that a joke? You realize that Sean didn't choose to do this and may actually depend on the income he and his family receive from Istock.
It's a little wry humor, but I do realize Sean didn't do this of his own volition. I know Sean (have met him in the real world anyway) and I'm sure if he thinks I'm out of line he won't be shy in telling me off - he's done it before
-
The iStock deactivation count is about to grow by 10K-ish (sjlocke's files)
Is that a joke? You realize that Sean didn't choose to do this and may actually depend on the income he and his family receive from Istock.
None of this is funny.
Make your case about Sean and his family to those who wronged him.
-
.
-
... I have a lot of images that were taken at iStock minilypse events so they can only be sold on istock...
... the iStockalypse images I left as I can't sell them anywhere else anyway...
I didn't know that you cannot sell images that were shot on a Lypse on istock only. Where in the contract does it say that? I didn't sign anything at the Lypses I have attended.
-
I only attended the HQ lypse in Calgary in 2009. I seem to remember that even for mini-lypses they said in the forums that when iStock kicked in some cash for the event, they wanted the images, even from indies, to be sold only on iStock.
In my case it was in the agreement I signed "You agree that you will make all images or video recorded by you during the Event available for license exclusively from istockphoto.com whether or not you are currently or later become a non-exclusive contributor."
-
I only attended the HQ lypse in Calgary in 2009. I seem to remember that even for mini-lypses they said in the forums that when iStock kicked in some cash for the event, they wanted the images, even from indies, to be sold only on iStock.
In my case it was in the agreement I signed "You agree that you will make all images or video recorded by you during the Event available for license exclusively from istockphoto.com whether or not you are currently or later become a non-exclusive contributor."
Is that the contributor agreement you are talking about or a separate agreement you have signed at the Lypse?
-
I haven't been to a full lypse, but that was the agreement for an official minilypse too. Also in the only minilypse I have experience of, we didn't every have access to the signed releases. The organiser sent them all off to HQ to be verified, then we all got electronic copies, at a time when only pen signed paper copies were accepted. So I guess these releases wouldn't be acceptable anywhere else anyway.
It depends whether the lypse was funded or not, even if the funding was extremely token.
-
And FWIW, I've just deactivated another
15 20 and will do more later when we get back from Les Mis.
Reason: "iStock idiocy. No faith in management."
-
And FWIW, I've just deactivated another 15 and will do more later when we get back from Les Mis.
Reason: "iStock idiocy. No faith in management."
"I dreamed a dream of times gone by..."
-
.
-
I only attended the HQ lypse in Calgary in 2009. I seem to remember that even for mini-lypses they said in the forums that when iStock kicked in some cash for the event, they wanted the images, even from indies, to be sold only on iStock.
In my case it was in the agreement I signed "You agree that you will make all images or video recorded by you during the Event available for license exclusively from istockphoto.com whether or not you are currently or later become a non-exclusive contributor."
Is that the contributor agreement you are talking about or a separate agreement you have signed at the Lypse?
It was a document titled "iStockalypse Attendee Registration" that was specifically for the 'lypse
-
And FWIW, I've just deactivated another 15 20 and will do more later when we get back from Les Mis.
Reason: "iStock idiocy. No faith in management."
Went to see that last week.
I couldn't help but be reminded of all that's happening around here.
I can't write anything that doesn't sound melodramatic, but you'll understand what I mean, I'm sure.
-
I haven't been to a full lypse, but that was the agreement for an official minilypse too. Also in the only minilypse I have experience of, we didn't every have access to the signed releases. The organiser sent them all off to HQ to be verified, then we all got electronic copies, at a time when only pen signed paper copies were accepted. So I guess these releases wouldn't be acceptable anywhere else anyway.
It depends whether the lypse was funded or not, even if the funding was extremely token.
Right, we don't hold physical releases but we do have the digital copies and I am pretty sure these would hold up in court should a model sue us for whatever reason.
I can't find anything in the release that says that the content must be sold on stock only. In the contrary it says in the definitions part "ASSIGNS means a person or any company to whom Photographer/Filmmaker has assigned or licensed rights under this release as well as the licensees of any such person or company."
Regarding the iStockalypse Attendee Registration: Does anyone have a copy? I seem to remember I have signed something about my participation on my own risk blablabla but I cannot remember a document forbidding to sell the content somewhere else.
-
This is them the Minilypse Sticky
Here are the Golden Rules of a Minilypse:
1) Any images created during the event must be distributed exclusively by iStockphoto.
2) The Host/ Organizer is in constant contact with HQ
3) Have fun
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=339193&page=1 (http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=339193&page=1)
-
And FWIW, I've just deactivated another 15 20 and will do more later when we get back from Les Mis.
Reason: "iStock idiocy. No faith in management."
Went to see that last week.
I couldn't help but be reminded of all that's happening around here.
I can't write anything that doesn't sound melodramatic, but you'll understand what I mean, I'm sure.
I saw it a couple of weeks ago, but have managed to persuade my husband that he'll enjoy it. I also was reminded during the film of all Getty's cr*p.
-
This is them the Minilypse Sticky
Here are the Golden Rules of a Minilypse:
1) Any images created during the event must be distributed exclusively by iStockphoto.
2) The Host/ Organizer is in constant contact with HQ
3) Have fun
[url]http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=339193&page=1[/url] ([url]http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=339193&page=1[/url])
Thanks. So it's in a sticky.
But what can they do when someone is leaving iStock for good? The only risk I can see is that another agency might not accept the release.
-
.
-
I haven't been to a full lypse, but that was the agreement for an official minilypse too. Also in the only minilypse I have experience of, we didn't every have access to the signed releases. The organiser sent them all off to HQ to be verified, then we all got electronic copies, at a time when only pen signed paper copies were accepted. So I guess these releases wouldn't be acceptable anywhere else anyway.
It depends whether the lypse was funded or not, even if the funding was extremely token.
Right, we don't hold physical releases but we do have the digital copies and I am pretty sure these would hold up in court should a model sue us for whatever reason.
I can't find anything in the release that says that the content must be sold on stock only. In the contrary it says in the definitions part "ASSIGNS means a person or any company to whom Photographer/Filmmaker has assigned or licensed rights under this release as well as the licensees of any such person or company."
Regarding the iStockalypse Attendee Registration: Does anyone have a copy? I seem to remember I have signed something about my participation on my own risk blablabla but I cannot remember a document forbidding to sell the content somewhere else.
The electronic release I have just has the organizer's signature not mine, mine would be on the attached lypse roster as stated on the model release.
Correct. The photographers name is nowhere to be found but it is clear that there is a photographer and that it is you and that you have been given a release. You have been given that release. Not iStockphoto.
-
.
-
...Regarding the iStockalypse Attendee Registration: Does anyone have a copy? I seem to remember I have signed something about my participation on my own risk blablabla but I cannot remember a document forbidding to sell the content somewhere else.
I have a copy of the one for the August 2009 iStockalypse in Calgary. The registration was separate from the liability waiver (if you kill yourself it's not our fault) and also from the MR I signed as an attendee - I was an extra in some other people's shots
-
...Regarding the iStockalypse Attendee Registration: Does anyone have a copy? I seem to remember I have signed something about my participation on my own risk blablabla but I cannot remember a document forbidding to sell the content somewhere else.
I have a copy of the one for the August 2009 iStockalypse in Calgary. The registration was separate from the liability waiver (if you kill yourself it's not our fault) and also from the MR I signed as an attendee - I was an extra in some other people's shots
Great. Would you mind quoting the text? I assume they all have the same wording.
-
Brian Powell asked me to add his 315 to the tally - I have also deleted 260 today.
-
...Regarding the iStockalypse Attendee Registration: Does anyone have a copy? I seem to remember I have signed something about my participation on my own risk blablabla but I cannot remember a document forbidding to sell the content somewhere else.
I have a copy of the one for the August 2009 iStockalypse in Calgary. The registration was separate from the liability waiver (if you kill yourself it's not our fault) and also from the MR I signed as an attendee - I was an extra in some other people's shots
Great. Would you mind quoting the text? I assume they all have the same wording.
I did several posts back - the paragraph about where the content can go.
-
Right, we don't hold physical releases but we do have the digital copies and I am pretty sure these would hold up in court should a model sue us for whatever reason.
Do you? Because I don't. At lypses, the models usually only sign one global release. That gets approved by iStock HQ and then will be distributed to the photographers.
So I don't hold any releases with my name on it. I won't be able to upload them anywhere else.
-
Wow, thank you so much, anonymous donor. I never win anything... this prize will at least give me a little something back as I continue to use my own time deactivating more photos.
How about this? I'd like to pay half of it ($50) forward. I can't hog all of it to myself. Let's say 2nd place get's $30, and 3rd place gets $20.
Tyler - please go ahead and randomly generate some numbers from the tally thread, and post the results here. Let's make a few more hard working microstockers have a slightly better day as well.
sure..
I've drawn 2 more numbers from mr. wolfram and MichaelJphoto (http://www.microstockgroup.com/17956/17956/msg292681/#msg292681) and MicrostockExp (http://www.microstockgroup.com/17956/17956/msg291793/#msg291793) get the $30 / $20 split
-
Alright :) Congratulations guys!
Thanks again to Mr. Wolfram - we very much appreciate your kind gesture. Also thank you Tyler for helping out with this, much appreciated as well.
-
Alright :) Congratulations guys!
Thanks again to Mr. Wolfram - we very much appreciate your kind gesture. Also thank you Tyler for helping out with this, much appreciated as well.
Mr. Wolfram (http://www.wolframalpha.com/ (http://www.wolframalpha.com/)) just gave me the random numbers.. it was someone else who is giving the funds :)
-
Another 20 deactivated while (back home and) listening to Red and Black. Very inspirational.
-
.
-
@Mars, that's another 36 i.e.76 total for today.
Can't think who would even see if I posted something on Fb or Twitter. No-one ever has before, except for the pervs who haunt Twitter.
You'd presumably have to have friends or followers or fans or whatever to make a scrap of difference.
-
.
-
I've dropped 290 from my folio. The remaining 'lypse images will go when the newcomer goes live.
-
Marina, I want to thank you for all the effort you have put into this issue. By creating the spreadsheet, and also promoting this on social media you have done a great service to the stock community, IMO.
I have not done social media in the past because it is such a huge time-suck (even more than MSG!), but this issue has really made me see how limiting it is not to be participating. Hope others who are already on FB and Twitter will go ahead and like, and retweet this. Awareness has to be raised, and it isn't too late. Sean's ouster indicates that this story is far from over.
-
@Mars: another 9, but I'm going to bed: it's nearly 3am and I need to be at Fit'n'Fifty bright eyed and bushy tailed at 10 a.m. 8)
-
Thanks for the anonymous member who gave the gift, Todd and Tyler:) it was a nice surprise:) Even without that it was a pleasure to remove my pictures from IStock:)
-
I just removed 60 more.
-
...Regarding the iStockalypse Attendee Registration: Does anyone have a copy? I seem to remember I have signed something about my participation on my own risk blablabla but I cannot remember a document forbidding to sell the content somewhere else.
I have a copy of the one for the August 2009 iStockalypse in Calgary. The registration was separate from the liability waiver (if you kill yourself it's not our fault) and also from the MR I signed as an attendee - I was an extra in some other people's shots
Great. Would you mind quoting the text? I assume they all have the same wording.
I did several posts back - the paragraph about where the content can go.
Thanks. I will look for it.
-
Right, we don't hold physical releases but we do have the digital copies and I am pretty sure these would hold up in court should a model sue us for whatever reason.
Do you? Because I don't. At lypses, the models usually only sign one global release. That gets approved by iStock HQ and then will be distributed to the photographers.
So I don't hold any releases with my name on it. I won't be able to upload them anywhere else.
What I was trying to say is that the digital copy is a proof for the fact that a valid release was given to us as photographers so the model would not be the problem. Even though your name is not on the paper the model could not argue that you took the pictures, she or he signed a release and approved to commercial usage of the images.
I do see difficulties regarding the acceptance of the releases by other agencies.
-
.
-
And FWIW, I've just deactivated another 15 20 and will do more later when we get back from Les Mis.
Reason: "iStock idiocy. No faith in management."
Went to see that last week.
I couldn't help but be reminded of all that's happening around here.
I can't write anything that doesn't sound melodramatic, but you'll understand what I mean, I'm sure.
Is that the production with Jon Klein as "Master of the 'ouse" and Rebecca Rockafella playing his wife?
"Charge 'em for the lice, extra for the mice
Two percent for looking in the mirror twice
Here a little slice, there a little cut
Three percent for sleeping with the window shut
When it comes to fixing prices
There are a lot of tricks he knows
How it all increases, all them bits and pieces
Jesus! It's amazing how it grows!"
-
Wow, thank you so much, anonymous donor. I never win anything... this prize will at least give me a little something back as I continue to use my own time deactivating more photos.
How about this? I'd like to pay half of it ($50) forward. I can't hog all of it to myself. Let's say 2nd place get's $30, and 3rd place gets $20.
Tyler - please go ahead and randomly generate some numbers from the tally thread, and post the results here. Let's make a few more hard working microstockers have a slightly better day as well.
sure..
I've drawn 2 more numbers from mr. wolfram and MichaelJphoto ([url]http://www.microstockgroup.com/17956/17956/msg292681/#msg292681[/url]) and MicrostockExp ([url]http://www.microstockgroup.com/17956/17956/msg291793/#msg291793[/url]) get the $30 / $20 split
Thanks for the email's guys. The money is now transferred to you.
-
Wow, thank you so much, anonymous donor. I never win anything... this prize will at least give me a little something back as I continue to use my own time deactivating more photos.
How about this? I'd like to pay half of it ($50) forward. I can't hog all of it to myself. Let's say 2nd place get's $30, and 3rd place gets $20.
Tyler - please go ahead and randomly generate some numbers from the tally thread, and post the results here. Let's make a few more hard working microstockers have a slightly better day as well.
sure..
I've drawn 2 more numbers from mr. wolfram and MichaelJphoto ([url]http://www.microstockgroup.com/17956/17956/msg292681/#msg292681[/url]) and MicrostockExp ([url]http://www.microstockgroup.com/17956/17956/msg291793/#msg291793[/url]) get the $30 / $20 split
Thanks for the email's guys. The money is now transferred to you.
Thanks to the anonymous donator, Tyler for administering this uncommon request and Todd for sharing the win.
That was really unexpected. And honestly I don't feel comfortable receiving a "bonus" from an uninvolved party for doing what I find is the best for my own business. So I decided this money will got into my Kiva (http://www.kiva.org) account and put to good use there.
-
The iStock deactivation count is about to grow by 10K-ish (sjlocke's files)
Is that a joke? You realize that Sean didn't choose to do this and may actually depend on the income he and his family receive from Istock.
It's a little wry humor, but I do realize Sean didn't do this of his own volition. I know Sean (have met him in the real world anyway) and I'm sure if he thinks I'm out of line he won't be shy in telling me off - he's done it before
I actually thought that too yesterday when I saw this thread again.
-
Another 40 from me; I'll pause again there.
-
Is there a link to the spreadsheet somewhere? Can you keep posting an up-to-date tally in here please? Cheers
-
.
-
I started late (missed Feb 2 but was on vacation) but am now down a symbolic 13 images on the way to a total of 75 or so. That'll be roughly 10% of my relatively small portfolio with iStock. And, I've stopped uploading for the time being until there's an update.
-
Beside not uploading i will go deactivating an image or two on daily basis.
I will try to fill that istock share by setting my portfolio on some smaller sites i never contributed...
I will invest the time i would usually spend reading some new announcements, in places like like FAA and maybe spend some time at my zazzle store. I sell something now and than and invested maybe 2 hours of work there altogether.
Maybe that helps filling the hole a bit
Deleted 1 that never sold before tonight... really bad one , made the decision easier and Im not felling any worse then when i woke up this morning ;D.
lets see what tomorrow brings...
-
There has been an update, the text on Google has been amended to tell people they cant use or resell the images outside google drive
-
There has been an update, the text on Google has been amended to tell people they cant use or resell the images outside google drive
And we know already how few people read t&c, even when in red on an editorial page.
-
The picture Im looking its a bit wider , so off i go to delete another one for today...