iStock changing royalty structure

[hoi ha]

This is a discussion forum, remember? Having read scores of posts by you every time they had a price raise at the Istock one I coudn't avoid a smile. Sorry. And you can buy your files and your food wherever you want, of course. But you can't forbid me to have my own opinion.

Yes this is a discussion forum but what exactly are you discussing? It seems to me the discussion centered around what it is like as a buyer to purchase images at Dreamstime - what exactly were you adding to the discussion then? It seems to me all you were doing was belittlng, not discussing.

[caspixel]

I don't want to pick on caspixel, but if I were to make a constructive comment.....she has truly been threatening to stop buying at iStock since I joined, which was four years ago. it was one of the very first things I noticed about her username in the forums.

so, to suggest that loop's comment was anything but correct just makes you look as biased as you clearly are. seriously tired of watching you attack people, it's completely unproductive.

Unless you can prove it, if I were to make a constructive comment, I suggest you shut the f*ck up too. I can point to posts right here on MSG just from last year that say my purchasing has decreased, but not that I have been purchasing elsewhere. What I have done is commented about OTHER buyers that have gone elsewhere.

As for posts on iStock, oh, here's a post from 2007 from me about a the price increases:

Geez, I just came upon this thread. Didn't even know that the pricing structure was changing and the credit price was going up again. Couldn't they have done one without the other. I think the change in vector pricing is very fair, but wasn't one price increase for the year already enough?

I guess I better get submitting some designs to the designer spotlight and attempt to play Steel Cage battles more often in order to get some extra credits. Maybe they could also come up with some more incentives for buyers. It seems all about giving incentives to the contributors, yet the buyers seem to keep getting the shaft with these price increases.

Nothing about purchasing elsewhere there...

One from 2008:

I thought they already tried this. It was called iStock Pro. And it went bye bye.

As far as the price increases, I knew it was coming...

Three things you can be sure of in life:

1. Death
2. Taxes
3. Price increases at iStock

Signed,

A Depressed Buyer

See anything about threatening to stop buying there? I don't.

And another from 2008:

I've already drastically reduced my spending here. Sorry contributors.

Still nothing about not purchasing from iStock. And I'm pretty sure I didn't even say anything about the 2010 increases, because a) I knew it was coming, and b) I didn't feel like subjecting myself to the wrath of all the contributors...again. Though I did say something here on MSG (referenced above).

And actually, looking back on those old threads, my posts are few and far between, even in protest. So, there is no proof to back up either of your claims. You must have me mistaken for someone else.

[caspixel]

Oops

[vonkara]

I don't know if it have been said before. This is officially the longest MSG thread ever, beating the "comment on the image above yours" pimping StockXpert thread.

Congratulation Istock...

[SNP]

I think the 'other' thread on istock is the longest of its kind too. I don't know what is happening there. I haven't any real interest since it's the same discussion circling in there now, the whole situation seems a bit moot. we're moving forward, it's done and I don't know that much else will be said. perhaps gradual additions to the sticky and that's it.

sales seem good. glad about that.

[gostwyck]

I think the 'other' thread on istock is the longest of its kind too. I don't know what is happening there. I haven't any real interest since it's the same discussion circling in there now, the whole situation seems a bit moot. we're moving forward, it's done and I don't know that much else will be said. perhaps gradual additions to the sticky and that's it.

sales seem good. glad about that.

Terrible stuff that Istockphoto Kool-Aid. Once they're fully addicted there's really not much you can do to help them. It's a real tragedy that so many young artists are lost to it before they've even begun to explore the full potential of their careers. They just seem to end up in some dank basement "Woo-yaying" to each other __ a painful cry for help that few people ever take notice of. Tragic really.

[SNP]

koolaid isn't as bitter as whatever you're drinking....

[Risamay]

I don't want to pick on caspixel, but if I were to make a constructive comment.....she has truly been threatening to stop buying at iStock since I joined, which was four years ago. it was one of the very first things I noticed about her username in the forums.

so, to suggest that loop's comment was anything but correct just makes you look as biased as you clearly are. seriously tired of watching you attack people, it's completely unproductive.

ROFL Talk about tiresome, biased, and completely unproductive comments/attacks! You're just like on IS, but on unmoderated steroids over here. Classic!

[gostwyck]

koolaid isn't as bitter as whatever you're drinking....

Woohoo __ rapier-like wit there! Don't give up your day-job (in the unlikely event that anyone would actually employ you).

[Risamay]

koolaid isn't as bitter as whatever you're drinking....

Was that an example of a constructive comment, a productive post? I'm confused ...

I think the 'other' thread on istock is the longest of its kind too. I don't know what is happening there. I haven't any real interest since it's the same discussion circling in there now, the whole situation seems a bit moot. we're moving forward, it's done and I don't know that much else will be said.

Funny how you look down on the posting that's still going on in the IS thread, say you have no interest in it since it's "the same discussion circling in there now ... moot" and yet, here you are going at it in here. Despite it being pretty much the same discussion circling in here now. We're moving forward. It's done. And yet we all, including you, seem to have plenty still to say

The pointless nature of both threads, at this point, being equal, the only difference seems to me to be that you post bark under protection of a burka here (though quite poorly or thinly veiled, I must say) and without a guise over on IS.

[SNP]

so can we just say you guys are way cooler and move on? as much as I enjoy the attention, I'm pretty sure no one else cares how much you dislike me.

[Danicek]

^^^ Yeah, how about stopping this bashing that you guys pollute this forum with (and in multiple threads)? I know this is an open arena, not a kindergarten, but, we almost always managed to self-moderate here, so...

[Risamay]

^^^ Yeah, how about stopping this bashing that you guys pollute this forum with (and in multiple threads)? I know this is an open arena, not a kindergarten, but, we almost always managed to self-moderate here, so...

Yes please. Let's! It's not about being cool (whatever that is), it's about being constructive. Clearly a challenge, but I think we're up to it

[vlad_the_imp]

You don't remember well.

I remember

she has truly been threatening to stop buying at iStock since I joined, which was four years ago.

I have definitely noticed this, I think she was particularly vocal when the Logo program was first discussed.

I suggest you shut the f*ck up too

Anger management -------------------->

[caspixel]

You don't remember well.

I remember

You're memory is faulty too. See my post from up above where I pulled MY OWN posts from price increase threads. I don't deny speaking out against price increases, but loop's, Hawk Eye's (and now your) characterization that I have been threatening to stop buying at iStock for four years is a flat out lie.

she has truly been threatening to stop buying at iStock since I joined, which was four years ago.

I have definitely noticed this, I think she was particularly vocal when the Logo program was first discussed.

Also not only flat out wrong, but another lie. I couldn't care less out about the logo program. Have fun looking through 1954 posts for all 14 of my posts which will prove you 100% WRONG. And since you can't prove your claim, you should... (see below)

shut the f*ck up too

Seems to me you guys have a real memory problem or something. Must be another side effect of the iStock Kool-Aid. (BTW, I'd rather be angry than a liar.)

[SNP]

that image posted was entirely offensive. as for the topic in here...I'm wondering when we'll see something from HQ. if at all. I think perhaps this is the new normal and we'll just see adjustments made to the sticky without any direct response to the individual points in the thread. half of what's in that thread is nonsense anyways, and that's probably an understatement....

[zzz]

.

[ShadySue]

Not cool dude, not cool

Agree. Bad taste

I agree too.  Completely unwarranted.

That's exactly why I'd be extremely wary about using special needs models in micro.
Not that I'm suggesting that the image used above was sourced from a micro (I don't know), but it does show the danger.

[ShadySue]

Not cool dude, not cool

Agree. Bad taste

I agree too.  Completely unwarranted.

That's exactly why I'd be extremely wary about using special needs models in micro.
Not that I'm suggesting that the image used above was sourced from a micro (I don't know), but it does show the danger.
And that poster has been posted in 261 forums or blogs already. :-(

[SNP]

@shady: I don't know if I agree with that, but it's probably a topic for another thread. I'm entirely offended by the usage of the image. but at the same time, if I use another example...I had every one of my Dachau Concentration Camp shots deactivated, even though they had sold, because the camp is considered a Nazi symbol and they have a zero tolerance on anything related to the Nazi party. one of the suggested reasons was that it could be used to promote the ideology.

maybe it is my perspective as an exclusive, since we have a bit more protection regarding the use of our images, but frankly almost any image could be construed to convey a negative or offensive message with the right copy. to suggest that we keep end use in mind in this context when shooting is absurd. in my example, Dachau is now a memorial to those lives lost. it is a sombre reminder of a terrible period in history. it has a place in the collection, as do images of people with disabilities.

[zzz]

You don't remember well.

I remember

You're memory is faulty too. See my post from up above where I pulled MY OWN posts from price increase threads. I don't deny speaking out against price increases, but loop's, Hawk Eye's (and now your) characterization that I have been threatening to stop buying at iStock for four years is a flat out lie.

she has truly been threatening to stop buying at iStock since I joined, which was four years ago.

I have definitely noticed this, I think she was particularly vocal when the Logo program was first discussed.

Also not only flat out wrong, but another lie. I couldn't care less out about the logo program. Have fun looking through 1954 posts for all 14 of my posts which will prove you 100% WRONG. And since you can't prove your claim, you should... (see below)

shut the f*ck up too

Seems to me you guys have a real memory problem or something. Must be another side effect of the iStock Kool-Aid. (BTW, I'd rather be angry than a liar.)

Here's one of your posts end of 2007 where you said you will start looking elsewhere. See the third post from the top. You may not have said you'll stop buying at iStock, but you sure have made it clear that you were planning to look elsewhere.

I think some of us are just tired of your posts over time how much you dislike where iStock is going (away from "the designer's dirty little secret") and that there are so many other places where you can buy good photos. Just do what you feel is right for you and be done with it.

[ShadySue]

@shady: I don't know if I agree with that, but it's probably a topic for another thread. I'm entirely offended by the usage of the image. but at the same time, if I use another example...I had every one of my Dachau Concentration Camp shots deactivated, even though they had sold, because the camp is considered a Nazi symbol and they have a zero tolerance on anything related to the Nazi party. one of the suggested reasons was that it could be used to promote the ideology.

maybe it is my perspective as an exclusive, since we have a bit more protection regarding the use of our images, but frankly almost any image could be construed to convey a negative or offensive message with the right copy. to suggest that we keep end use in mind in this context when shooting is absurd. in my example, Dachau is now a memorial to those lives lost. it is a sombre reminder of a terrible period in history. it has a place in the collection, as do images of people with disabilities.

Everyone has to make up their own mind. If I had photos of Dachau, I'd put them as RM editorial only. The legal uses for RF are too wide, far less that it's more likely that an abuser would be happier to pay less at a Macro site. Also, I'm not sure how much 'protection' we really get, even as iStock exclusives for abuse of images outside the t&c: IMO, they should name and shame and stress what action they took. They never do that, and the only 'punishment' I know of for abused images (where I've sitemailled 'togs) is a 'cease and desist', or if the damage is done, a rap over the knuckles. Hardly likely to discourage others.

[leaf]

admin note:  A rather untasteful (politically incorrect etc.) image has been removed along with comments responding to that image

[donding]

admin note:  A rather untasteful (politically incorrect etc.) image has been removed along with comments responding to that image

Thank you Leaf

[ShadySue]

admin note:  A rather untasteful (politically incorrect etc.) image has been removed along with comments responding to that image

Thank you.