Microstock Group - A meeting place for microstock photographers

Hi Nasoya,

 Yea till they need my car for a date. Uh, I don't think so but I'd be happy to drive you and your date ( silence ). We talked about this when you were 14 how you needed to start saving for your own car: ) The oldest is 14 right now and is talking a big game about saving but as Cuba Gooding would say " Show me the money ".

Best,
Jonathan

As you can see by the chart I've included, IS accounts for less than 1/4 of my all-time earnings. The only reason that they are so high is the amounts that I used to make there back in the beginning. Now, IS is about 1/5 (20%) of my monthly earnings, perhaps even less. Even if I could upload a reasonable number of images each week and didn't hate their upload system, I can't afford to go exclusive!

Exactly!  Thanks for clarifying, Robyn

@Geopappas - if Istock was already 80% of my earnings I would be able to double that to 160% as a diamond exclusive.  That would have been way too much to resist all these years!

I am a base cont at IS, do you think all this could help me with downloads? Do you think customers will really care if it is a exclusive image, if they have to pay more? my thinking is that designers would rather have more for less. Unless it is a high profile add campaign.
 I have a small port but it seems downloads are just starting to happen and I started thinking there was a ray of hope for that 250. Now holy crap! that tunnel just got very very dark.

I don't see any image exclusivity implied here. istock always wants 'your best work'.  If a diamond independent goes exclusive then they would probably upload their most successful images (that weren't already on istock) first, and maybe not bother with their less successful stuff.

Let me help you out here: There were two posts by JJRD stating something about "giving exclusives more exposure" and making their files "easier to find" - you can find them here:

http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=151691&page=21 - right at the top

and here:

http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=151691&page=55 - sixth post from the top

In the first one JJRD says - answering a question if exclusives would have a better postition in the BM come February: "We do not like, as you know, to answer such questions... with that said, if we introduce such a thing as ''Exclusive +'', controlled by exclusive contributors, chances are that the answer to your question could be yes.", in the second it's less obvious, but he still states that: "So given that statement, the conclusion is obvious, needless to say: yes, it will be easier, somehow, to find files that have been flagged by exclusive contributors as deserving to be included in Exclusive +''.

50 pages later:

http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=151691&page=110

someone calculates, that with the new prices, Istock makes more money on an exclusive sale than on an independent sale - no matter the size of the photo. To me it is obvious where this is going, and you are right: It is scary 

Still, if some files get promoted in the BM, others will have to fall back - and, at 20% of eligible exclusive content, we are talking a possible amount of 600.000 photos here - if every exclusive uses his/her full quota...

For those interested, I have tried to summarize a bit of what has been said here and in the iStock forum (and what the changes are in the first place) in a blog post

http://blog.microstockgroup.com/2009/istock-2010-changes/

We have no idea yet what effect it will have on the BM __ all they've actually said is that the Exclusive+ collection will be promoted (just as Vetta is now). They haven't even said how many images will be in the E+ collection. If they are so keen to reduce the average % commission, which it appears they are, then it would make no sense to hide independents' images on which they pay the least.

We also don't know how the customers are going to react when faced with such huge price rises on so many of the images. An 'average' sale of a Medium exclusive image is going up nearly 70% __ in this climate! It could end up being the biggest gift to the other agencies that they've ever had. It is also conceivable that many lower-canister exclusives could give up their crowns in protest if their commission is reduced __ another gift to the competition.

It is certainly going to be interesting to see how this all plays out with both customers and contributors.

Good point __ I missed that. Of course they've also said that E+ won't be starting until 'later on in 2010' so at least we should be able to monitor the effect of the price increases before our images are affected by it.

It seems to me that independents are in a good place whatever happens. If the IS plan works out we can go exclusive for a significant increase in pay, if it doesn't then maybe we'll get more sales at the other sites. Hopefully Istocks competitors will also react appropriately to close the gap too. It's all very interesting!

The BM thing is kind of the wild card. Without knowing how much damage that will do to non-exclusive files in search placement, it's hard to come to any conclusions about exclusivity. In theory, the royalty percentage increase plus the price increase plus the BM factor could result in similar (or more) earnings compared to independent earnings. But there is no way to know just yet how the BM factor will pan out.

I think it is safe to say, however, that some shift to favor exclusive files will happen, regardless of how vague the istock admins may be about it. They'd be crazy not to favor exclusive files in search results if they are going to start making more money from those files on each sale.

BM seems pretty stable these days, no huge swings like in the past. It does look like exclusives get a little push which is understandable. If newer higher priced collections are getting good placement which nonexclusives have no access to, there is only one direction for nonexclusive earnings to go. Less visibility=less sales, regarless of what happens with BM. But, like you said, what point is there in keeping nonexclusive files up front if they are making less on them.

Because they said this;

"We're also hoping to encourage the strongest talents in stock today to consider bringing their best work to iStock exclusively."

I think they'll also want plenty of the lower-priced images highly visible to counteract any customer dissatisfactions about the price hikes.

Those that remain independent generally do so for reasons of finance, stability and security. Istock would have a pretty hard time convincing them to go exclusive if they keep screwing around with the BM and artificially suppress their sales. Many of us suffered badly in previous amateurish dabblings with the BM and have long memories.

Speaking personally I'll be making my plans based more on what I think might happen to the industry over the next few years rather than the next few weeks or months. The micro market is still in it's infancy and a lot can happen yet. For starters it does rather look as if Istock is 'being fattened for market' (as one of m'learned friends put it via site-mail) and who knows what further changes to canisters/commissions a new owner could make if they wanted to recoup their investment quickly?

I'd need a sizeable financial incentive and a lot of confidence in both the stability of the site and the moral conduct of the owners (to not keep hacking away at commissions, T&C, etc) before I put all my eggs in their basket.