Author Topic: istock has roughly 85k contributors (Read 3073 times)

VB inc · « **on:** March 12, 2010, 03:43 »

at least thats what i got from an email from ce.
"Please realize that we have approximately 85,000 contributors currently, many of which use our CE email as a resource for their concerns."

Thats a lot more than what the istockcharts is showing in their figures...

sharply_done · « **Reply #1 on:** March 12, 2010, 03:54 »

Who/what is "ce"?

VB inc · « **Reply #2 on:** March 12, 2010, 03:57 »

Compliance Enforcement.

MikLav · « **Reply #3 on:** March 12, 2010, 04:37 »

stockcharts show active contributors, and 85k is simply registered ones.

In reality the number of people submitting to istock on more or less regular basis doesn't exceed a few thousand.

qwerty · « **Reply #4 on:** March 12, 2010, 05:24 »

I imagine it includes buyers aswell, you can have designers in your network and send sitemails etc.

gostwyck · « **Reply #5 on:** March 12, 2010, 05:26 »

According to 'The Chart' the number of contributors that have uploaded 10 or more images in the last 30 days is about 3600.

Of those the number that have uploaded 100 or more images in the last 30 days is only 165. Of course there will be some serious contributors who are currently taking a break or working on other projects but it's another indicator of how many 'full timers' there are likely to be.

cthoman · « **Reply #6 on:** March 12, 2010, 10:58 »

Quote from: gostwyck on March 12, 2010, 05:26

According to 'The Chart' the number of contributors that have uploaded 10 or more images in the last 30 days is about 3600.

Of those the number that have uploaded 100 or more images in the last 30 days is only 165. Of course there will be some serious contributors who are currently taking a break or working on other projects but it's another indicator of how many 'full timers' there are likely to be.

That's kind of deceptive. I can't upload more than 80 in 30 days. I would if I could.

Lee Torrens · « **Reply #7 on:** March 12, 2010, 11:19 »

Quote from: qwerty on March 12, 2010, 05:24

I imagine it includes buyers aswell, you can have designers in your network and send sitemails etc.

Kelly said in a recent announcement that they have over 100,000 new registrations per month. Obviously the vast majority of those are buyers, and there's probably relatively few who actually spend money. So the 85,000 could not include buyers.

maco0708 · « **Reply #8 on:** March 12, 2010, 11:45 »

Quote from: Lee Torrens on March 12, 2010, 11:19

Quote from: qwerty on March 12, 2010, 05:24
I imagine it includes buyers aswell, you can have designers in your network and send sitemails etc.

Kelly said in a recent announcement that they have over 100,000 new registrations per month. Obviously the vast majority of those are buyers, and there's probably relatively few who actually spend money. So the 85,000 could not include buyers.

Yeah, I think a while back they announced 1,000,000th member (buyers+contributors).
It is pretty shocking to me how few active contributors (people who have more than ~50 uploads total) there are considering they sold something over million DSLRs last year (could be more, can't remember exact numbers). I am pretty glad that is the case, though:)

Digital66 · « **Reply #9 on:** March 12, 2010, 14:22 »

Quote from: maco0708 on March 12, 2010, 11:45

...It is pretty shocking to me how few active contributors (people who have more than ~50 uploads total) there are considering they sold something over million DSLRs last year (could be more, can't remember exact numbers). I am pretty glad that is the case, though:)

I wonder why some non-photographer people buy DSLRs cameras. They really think all they have to do is pressing the shutter button and the camera will do the rest

Having a DSLR camera doesn't make someone a photographer! So, we only have more people taking snap shots with DSRLs cameras.

sharply_done · « **Reply #10 on:** March 12, 2010, 14:31 »

Quote from: Digital66 on March 12, 2010, 14:22

I wonder why some non-photographer people buy DSLRs camera. They really think all they have to do is pressing the shutter button and the camera will do the rest

Having a DSLR camera doesn't make someone a photographer! So, we only have more people taking snap shots with DSRLs cameras.

I'm always amazed by the number of people who use professional-grade equipment to mostly take snapshots to post on sites like Flickr. It must be a more-money-than-common-sense sort of thing.

Pixart · « **Reply #11 on:** March 12, 2010, 14:58 »

Status symbol? I am amazed how many "soccer moms" have better cameras than me when I there working. LOL, they never have better lenses though

My rich-ish friend has a DLSR and man she abuses that thing. Always shattering a lens or a filtre. I gave her one of those sticky dot things that you stick on the lens cap that has an elastic to attach it the lens because at least once a month she was asking me to pick her up a lens cap next time I was collecting my prints. She finally bought a new P&S and is a lot happier using it for the most part!

lisafx · « **Reply #12 on:** March 12, 2010, 16:42 »

Quote from: Pixart on March 12, 2010, 14:58

Status symbol? I am amazed how many "soccer moms" have better cameras than me when I there working. LOL, they never have better lenses though

Yeah, but some of those soccer Dads will have the L lenses too.

I remember from the days I used to hang out on DPReview forums, there are a lot of people who always get the latest gear just to shoot rulers and test patterns, with the occasional cat picture tossed in

I used to feel pressure to always upgrade my gear too, until I started making a living with it. Now I buy better gear to begin with and don't have to upgrade as often.

Susan S. · « **Reply #13 on:** March 12, 2010, 16:50 »

Quote from: Pixart on March 12, 2010, 14:58

Status symbol? I am amazed how many "soccer moms" have better cameras than me when I there working. LOL, they never have better lenses though

My rich-ish friend has a DLSR and man she abuses that thing. Always shattering a lens or a filtre. I gave her one of those sticky dot things that you stick on the lens cap that has an elastic to attach it the lens because at least once a month she was asking me to pick her up a lens cap next time I was collecting my prints. She finally bought a new P&S and is a lot happier using it for the most part!

The reason that soccer mums and dads have DSLRs is that its next to impossible to shoot soccer or other kids sports with a point and shoot, no matter how good the point and shoot is. They don't focus fast enough. Or low light available light shots like kids concerts. I bought my DSLR and 70-200L to shoot swimming carnivals in outdoor pools and school sports days, and the 50mm and 85 1.8 to shoot dance. Once I had the gear then I started shooting for stock.

Digital66 · « **Reply #14 on:** March 12, 2010, 17:33 »

Quote from: Susan S. on March 12, 2010, 16:50

Quote from: Pixart on March 12, 2010, 14:58
Status symbol? I am amazed how many "soccer moms" have better cameras than me when I there working. LOL, they never have better lenses though

My rich-ish friend has a DLSR and man she abuses that thing. Always shattering a lens or a filtre. I gave her one of those sticky dot things that you stick on the lens cap that has an elastic to attach it the lens because at least once a month she was asking me to pick her up a lens cap next time I was collecting my prints. She finally bought a new P&S and is a lot happier using it for the most part!
The reason that soccer mums and dads have DSLRs is that its next to impossible to shoot soccer or other kids sports with a point and shoot, no matter how good the point and shoot is. They don't focus fast enough. Or low light available light shots like kids concerts. I bought my DSLR and 70-200L to shoot swimming carnivals in outdoor pools and school sports days, and the 50mm and 85 1.8 to shoot dance. Once I had the gear then I started shooting for stock.

I still think it's a status symbol.

Most soccer mums & dads just want to be seen with their expensive gear. They just point and shoot and whatever the result is, they think it's a piece of art!

Susan S. · « **Reply #15 on:** March 12, 2010, 18:00 »

Quote from: Digital66 on March 12, 2010, 17:33

Quote from: Susan S. on March 12, 2010, 16:50
Quote from: Pixart on March 12, 2010, 14:58
Status symbol? I am amazed how many "soccer moms" have better cameras than me when I there working. LOL, they never have better lenses though

My rich-ish friend has a DLSR and man she abuses that thing. Always shattering a lens or a filtre. I gave her one of those sticky dot things that you stick on the lens cap that has an elastic to attach it the lens because at least once a month she was asking me to pick her up a lens cap next time I was collecting my prints. She finally bought a new P&S and is a lot happier using it for the most part!
The reason that soccer mums and dads have DSLRs is that its next to impossible to shoot soccer or other kids sports with a point and shoot, no matter how good the point and shoot is. They don't focus fast enough. Or low light available light shots like kids concerts. I bought my DSLR and 70-200L to shoot swimming carnivals in outdoor pools and school sports days, and the 50mm and 85 1.8 to shoot dance. Once I had the gear then I started shooting for stock.

I still think it's a status symbol.

Most soccer mums & dads just want to be seen with their expensive gear. They just point and shoot and whatever the result is, they think it's a piece of art!

If I was interested in recognisable status symbols I wouldn't be buying camera gear, as my average rivals on sports day wouldn't know a 1DmkIV from a point a shoot (in fact I've had more comments about why don't I get a modern small digital camera from other parents than admiring glances, when they see my DSLR!). They would however be impressed by a BMW or an expensive SUV. Until this year my camera bag contents were worth more than my car!

qwerty · « **Reply #16 on:** March 12, 2010, 18:52 »

Quote from: Lee Torrens on March 12, 2010, 11:19

Quote from: qwerty on March 12, 2010, 05:24
I imagine it includes buyers aswell, you can have designers in your network and send sitemails etc.

Kelly said in a recent announcement that they have over 100,000 new registrations per month. Obviously the vast majority of those are buyers, and there's probably relatively few who actually spend money. So the 85,000 could not include buyers.

Okay maybe I meant "designers" that submit to design of the week,post and read forums etc.
You know the ones in the forums recently complaining that prices are too high, I use to get everything I wanted for $1 now I want more but it costs $10 etc.

Uncle Pete · « **Reply #17 on:** March 12, 2010, 21:35 »

Quote from: Susan S. on March 12, 2010, 16:50

Quote from: Pixart on March 12, 2010, 14:58
Status symbol? I am amazed how many "soccer moms" have better cameras than me when I there working. LOL, they never have better lenses though

My rich-ish friend has a DLSR and man she abuses that thing. Always shattering a lens or a filtre. I gave her one of those sticky dot things that you stick on the lens cap that has an elastic to attach it the lens because at least once a month she was asking me to pick her up a lens cap next time I was collecting my prints. She finally bought a new P&S and is a lot happier using it for the most part!

The reason that soccer mums and dads have DSLRs is that its next to impossible to shoot soccer or other kids sports with a point and shoot, no matter how good the point and shoot is. They don't focus fast enough. Or low light available light shots like kids concerts. I bought my DSLR and 70-200L to shoot swimming carnivals in outdoor pools and school sports days, and the 50mm and 85 1.8 to shoot dance. Once I had the gear then I started shooting for stock.

And the biggest reason why people need a higher end camera like a DSLR... Shutter Lag! You can shoot any sports when you push the button and the camera takes a second or two or three to focus and them maybe get a shot. It's gone.

Back on topic, the IS site shows 6480673 total files, contributor charts shows 5.828.591 which is 90% of all the files listed as online by IS.

What that says is that the IS charts site is fairly accurate for a representative view of IS contributors. The charts show 29386 contributors, so adding 10% to that, I'd can estimate the number 32,324 active artists. But... 21657 (see the 67% below) have under 100 images online.

Here's the breakdown I had before starting the survey last month:

4% over 1000 files
5% 500-1000 files
6% 300-500 files
17% 100-300 files
67% 100 or less files on IS

Blue bars are MSG members who answered the survey here.

Hope that explains it better? Roughly 10,667 contributors with over 100 files on IS. Some of those may be inactive and some with under 100 could be active, but in round numbers, very round, 10,000 active contributors.

Quote from: gostwyck on March 12, 2010, 05:26

According to 'The Chart' the number of contributors that have uploaded 10 or more images in the last 30 days is about 3600.

Good point! 7481 contributors added one file or more last month. Which in my limited available information tells me that the number of active uploaders is around 8200 people.

Pick a number between 8200 and 10,000 that's the answer.

FD · « **Reply #18 on:** March 13, 2010, 21:16 »

Why do people buy 500 euro iPods when you can call and txt with a 20 euro cellphone?
Why do people buy Maseratis when they are never going to race with it and never can use them at top speed on public roads?
Why do women buy expensive diamonds when you can't tell the difference from cheap glass?

As Socrates said to his wife Xanthippe when she took a long time to dress up to go to the theater: You're not going there to watch, but to be watched.