iStock to ThinkStock

[luissantos84]

[WarrenPrice]

I need a translation, Luis.   

[luissantos84]

I need a translation, Luis.   

go to Stats in your profile and then below you can see this chart and other for monthly downloads, the last one is regular downloads across all year

[Karimala]

You can also see how individual images are performing on TS and Photos.com under My Uploads by clicking one of the three DL links and then clinking the Partner Program link in the list of various types of sales. 

[WarrenPrice]

Thank you; thank you; thank you.  Now, all the stuff I see folks talking about is starting to make a lot more sense ... to me.

This is much more detailed (and accurate) than what I have been able to see in Deep Meta.   

[luissantos84]

You can also see how individual images are performing on TS and Photos.com under My Uploads by clicking one of the three DL links and then clinking the Partner Program link in the list of various types of sales. 

exactly

[Jo Ann Snover]

For months, I had 1 image at TS.   I just recently made 10 images Photo+, and all but one (the best seller) showed up at TS right away.   I tell IS I want to sell these at higher prices on IS, and they immediately dump them in the bargain bin at TS.  

So for independents, Photo+ is just a sucker bet, a quick trip to TS instead of a boost in price.   This agency is now officially brain-dead.  

It's possible it may have just been coincidence. If I wanted my portfolio at TS, I'm not sure what I'd do to get it there - I now have 17 files at TS (of 2500) and none of them are Photo+. I made an image Photo+ a day or two ago and it hasn't shown up at TS.

I don't know how IS is doing overall at getting the entire indie collection at iStock over to TS/photos.com, but I'm assuming they're nowhere near finished. Unless they're attracting new buyers, the earnings for those long-term supporters of the partner program are going to drop when they get all the files moved.  My take on the big hit (if there is one) to SS is that it would come when (if?) they forced all the exclusive content at iStock onto TS/photos.com. At that point there'd be something other than a Getty discount that TS offered that SS didn't.

[Gannet77]

Thank you; thank you; thank you.  Now, all the stuff I see folks talking about is starting to make a lot more sense ... to me.

This is much more detailed (and accurate) than what I have been able to see in Deep Meta.   

DeepMeta doesn't show any information on PP downloads, the API doesn't support them.

BTW, you can use my GreaseMonkey script here - http://www.bullersofbuchan.me.uk/istockphoto/stuff/is_myuploads_adddata_pp.user.js to show the last three downloads for each file - if you're running FireFox with GreaseMonkey, or Chrome.

When you go to the Partner Program list page on iStock, it will add a button saying "Add Sales Data".  When you click the button, it adds an extra column to the list with the last three downloads showing.  Best to order the list by DLs first.

[Jo Ann Snover]

There are lots of things about where Getty thinks it's going with Thinkstock that I don't understand (put more bluntly; I can't see how it could possibly be a good idea).

 Case in point is their current free image which is from the Stockbyte collection. It's on Getty Images priced from $10 to $350 and also on TS where you could buy it via an Image Pack for $20. It's even credited with the photographer's name, so it makes it very easy to find elsewhere.

[wut]

Case in point is their current free image which is from the Stockbyte collection. It's on Getty Images priced from $10 to $350 and also on TS where you could buy it via an Image Pack for $20. It's even credited with the photographer's name, so it makes it very easy to find elsewhere.

Wow, really ?!?!?!?! I can understand files from IS' main collection selling there, can't really understand why can't we at least opt out the P+ files, which we obviously think high of, but selling the same image for 1/1000 of the price is beyond my comprehension, even junkies sell stolen stuff for at least 20% of the market price . I hope y'all can follow my logic or better said what I really think about this

[lisafx]

Wow, really ?!?!?!?! I can understand files from IS' main collection selling there, can't really understand why can't we at least opt out the P+ files, which we obviously think high of, but selling the same image for 1/1000 of the price is beyond my comprehension, even junkies sell stolen stuff for at least 20% of the market price . I hope y'all can follow my logic or better said what I really think about this

Agree 100%.  They make all these collections to differentiate between higher and lower quality content, then shuttle it all to their subscription dumping ground.  Makes no logical sense at all. 

[Elenathewise]

There are lots of things about where Getty thinks it's going with Thinkstock that I don't understand (put more bluntly; I can't see how it could possibly be a good idea).

 Case in point is their current free image which is from the Stockbyte collection. It's on Getty Images priced from $10 to $350 and also on TS where you could buy it via an Image Pack for $20. It's even credited with the photographer's name, so it makes it very easy to find elsewhere.

There has to be differences in licensing. They can't sell absolutely same product for 350 and 99 dollars. (let's say I just need a high res of this one image, so I buy the cheapest image pack for 99 dollars and get the image instead of paying 350 on getty site). That would really piss off customers who paid the full price. I doubt that Getty would do that.

[StockyEva]

Hi all,
I used to sell more of my vectors to PP before the change and still I was doing very well on IS. But now - really - I have hardly any DL-s... 
Thanks for all the info in the thread.
I`m really wondering what to do next.

[BaldricksTrousers]

There are lots of things about where Getty thinks it's going with Thinkstock that I don't understand (put more bluntly; I can't see how it could possibly be a good idea).

 Case in point is their current free image which is from the Stockbyte collection. It's on Getty Images priced from $10 to $350 and also on TS where you could buy it via an Image Pack for $20. It's even credited with the photographer's name, so it makes it very easy to find elsewhere.

I think all the subscription services stipulate that you can only continue using a photo for as long as you have an active subscription. So you need to pay $299 (or whatever) every month. Don't ask me how that is being enforced, though.

There has to be differences in licensing. They can't sell absolutely same product for 350 and 99 dollars. (let's say I just need a high res of this one image, so I buy the cheapest image pack for 99 dollars and get the image instead of paying 350 on getty site). That would really piss off customers who paid the full price. I doubt that Getty would do that.

[Jo Ann Snover]

I think all the subscription services stipulate that you can only continue using a photo for as long as you have an active subscription. So you need to pay $299 (or whatever) every month. Don't ask me how that is being enforced, though.

Thinkstock sells "Image packs" - small credit bundles in effect - so for $20 ($99 for 5 is the smallest you can buy) you get to buy a license to the image. No subscription requirement. It's possible that the maximum print run or other things are different between the Getty License and TS, but even if you add on an EL (and their licensing section says they have extended licenses for image packs and for subscriptions, but I don't see the prices for those on the site).

And the subscription license says you can keep using a photo after the subscription term in projects that were started during the term of the subscription. How on earth you could police that I don't know; what's a revision of an existing design vs. a new project.

[Karimala]

I think all the subscription services stipulate that you can only continue using a photo for as long as you have an active subscription. So you need to pay $299 (or whatever) every month. Don't ask me how that is being enforced, though.

And the subscription license says you can keep using a photo after the subscription term in projects that were started during the term of the subscription. How on earth you could police that I don't know; what's a revision of an existing design vs. a new project.

Our ASA says the same.