Quote from: Pixart on June 10, 2011, 11:49

Why is it that EVERY single topic about Istock these days turns into a mud slinging match at some point?  

Maybe because photographers, in general, seem to be a negative and pessimistic bunch of people.

I believe the problem of some (not only in photography) is an EGO issue, some people just don�t stop and think before talking and even worst it�s after because they never regret it.. in this forum everybody takes things too personal and are attacking constantly other, if it is exclusive, if not, if know more or less about this or that, people just need to calm down and do whatever they enjoy, if it is just bringing bad mood to forum perhaps should leave, must said I am not talking for anyone in special, I do enjoy all comment and this is a lesson for me everyday, don�t enjoy the attacks, take it slowww guys, in a all in the same world and we only live once

Quote from: adamkaz on June 10, 2011, 14:56

Quote from: RT on June 10, 2011, 10:57

I'll put you back on ignore now.

On an unrelated note... I never noticed this nifty little feature, which is so desperately needed particularly in this forum. Thanks!

It doesn't work very well though because people quote those you have on ignore and you end up seeing their posts anyway.  I really don't want to read another word by Macrosuar/Old hippy/Black Sheep but people keep quoting him

he/she is a lot better now

Quote from: luissantos84 on June 10, 2011, 16:03

Quote from: PaulieWalnuts on June 10, 2011, 15:12

Quote from: Pixart on June 10, 2011, 11:49

Why is it that EVERY single topic about Istock these days turns into a mud slinging match at some point?  

Maybe because photographers, in general, seem to be a negative and pessimistic bunch of people.

I believe the problem of some (not only in photography) is an EGO issue, some people just don�t stop and think before talking and even worst it�s after because they never regret it.. in this forum everybody takes things too personal and are attacking constantly other, if it is exclusive, if not, if know more or less about this or that, people just need to calm down and do whatever they enjoy, if it is just bringing bad mood to forum perhaps should leave, must said I am not talking for anyone in special, I do enjoy all comment and this is a lesson for me everyday, don�t enjoy the attacks, take it slowww guys, in a all in the same world and we only live once

Probably also due to a bit of keyboard muscles. It's less risky to pick on someone when they're not standing in front of you. I doubt most people here talk to their family, friends, and coworkers the same way they talk to people here and on the internet in general.

I think this is very true. and I think tone is often misconstrued. I've misunderstood tone on a number of occasions. and I've often been upset knowing my tone is seen as entirely different than how I intend it. I think that--mixed with emotion, the strong sense of not having control over important aspects of our business, and personality clashes all combine to create a snowball of reactions. I include myself in that. I sometimes think instead of 'enter'...the button on the keyboard should read "are you sure you want to post that?".....at the end of the day, I certainly exchange lots of messages with people and receive many in which we all take care to ensure we haven't truly hurt someone's feelings. I think most people around here are good people who don't intend to be hurtful.

that�s the beauty in it, lovely post, it shows that there is still hope and we can continued to think that the world is polite and caring

Quote from: Pixart on June 10, 2011, 11:49

Why is it that EVERY single topic about Istock these days turns into a mud slinging match at some point? 

Maybe because photographers, in general, seem to be a negative and pessimistic bunch of people.

Is it true? I sometimes wonder about it too.

Quote from: Freedom on June 10, 2011, 19:00

Is it true? I sometimes wonder about it too.

I don't know any other photographers personally (in the real world).  I'm curious if this is true also. 

Are we really such a negative bunch?  A few years ago when most of us were seeing our incomes grow every month, I thought we were a pretty positive group.  I suspect it is recent circumstances that have made us over into a bunch of grouches...

Remember: "A cynic is just a heartbroken ideallist".

Quote from: PaulieWalnuts on June 10, 2011, 15:12

Quote from: Pixart on June 10, 2011, 11:49

Why is it that EVERY single topic about Istock these days turns into a mud slinging match at some point?  

Maybe because photographers, in general, seem to be a negative and pessimistic bunch of people.

I believe the problem of some (not only in photography) is an EGO issue, some people just don�t stop and think before talking and even worst it�s after because they never regret it.. in this forum everybody takes things too personal and are attacking constantly other, if it is exclusive, if not, if know more or less about this or that, people just need to calm down and do whatever they enjoy, if it is just bringing bad mood to forum perhaps should leave, must said I am not talking for anyone in special, I do enjoy all comment and this is a lesson for me everyday, don�t enjoy the attacks, take it slowww guys, in a all in the same world and we only live once

Better still, we could look for jobs as forum moderators and grouch at people all day (not on msg, of course). Well, OK, that would be boring after a couple of hours, but hey, it's probably quite well paid.

never mind ...

There's been a new ingestion overnight (UK time), though only a few of them are showing.
What immediately leaps out at me is how very dark most of them are (I'm specifically meaning in lighting; you'd expect serious editorial to have 'dark' subject matter), and how us lesser mortals would certainly have had these rejected.
But also, that generic caption forces people to click on the image to fnd out what it is, so if views have any weight in Best Match, these files will stay at the top. At the moment, the new ones are all showing as 'unknown title' on the thumbnails, but I'll assume that's a temporary blip.
I couldn't imagine what one image was from the thum (the thum title as of this moment isn't showing) so I zoomed in. It really shows either I don't 'get' editorial titling/captioning, or realistically a lot of these images are bulk title/captioned before submission to Getty, and the bulk info doesn't suit all images.
The one I happened on was this one:
http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-16838316-unknown-title.php?st=cc3287d
My immediate first question is, why isn't this main collection. You've all read my rants about images being rejected for editorial and 'should be sent to the main collection' even when hand made by an artisan or when featuring people and a yacht. [1]
Again, total inconsistency about the application of iStock "standards"
Second, the title says, "Mass Evacuations As Mount Merapi Erupts"
There is no evidence in this particular photo of the mass evacuations.
The caption says:
"YOGYAKARTA, INDONESIA - OCTOBER 27: A car is covered with ash from the erupting Mount Merapi volcano at Kaliurang village in Sleman, on October 27, 2010 near Yogyakarta, Indonesia. Thousands have been ordered to evacuate as Mount Merapi, which last erupted in 2006, began to emit plumes of smoke and clouds of ash.(Photo by Ulet Ifansasti)"
Which explains the photo.
BUT I somehow didn't notice before that the photographer's name is mentioned in the caption, even though the image is copyrighted to Ed Stock.

[1] I see this point has been made on the iStock forum with reference to other photos.

I didn't read most of the posts, but I do have a question? Is editorial even worth the time you put in?

The random, walk about "newsy" stuff like people have been posting?  Parades, this or that demonstration, the street down the ways from your house?  Not so much.  Maybe at the old RM pricing - for instance, a one day newspaper RM price on Getty is around $130, but you can now get it on IS for forever use in anyway you like for $5.

I don't think there's a ton of money to be had in editorial as a photographer if you're only shooting editorial. but it depends on what you're shooting and where you're selling it. via iStock, I don't look at editorial as a major income generator. what does seem to sell well, rather than the news images, is product and brand images. I think there's some good potential income in there.

Quote from: SNP on June 11, 2011, 07:58

what does seem to sell well, rather than the news images, is product and brand images. I think there's some good potential income in there.

I haven't come across many of those, except for the iPad/iPhone photos. Otherwise usually just files with 0 DL and from time to time some with up to 4.

I think that most people along with IS had great expectations, though they're going to be seeling editorial shots like people did apples on white back in 2005. Unfortunately nothing like that happened.

Supermarket advertising often depicts particular brands of goods on offer, that's the sort of market where you might sell some of this "editorial" stuff (yes, I know it's a violation of the license terms). The demand for a shot of a specific event from the past is very low. If the subject is a celebrity pin-up there are likely to be so many photos readily available - even from the celeb's own agent - that there is hardly any market.

Quote from: Freedom on June 10, 2011, 19:00

Is it true? I sometimes wonder about it too.

I don't know any other photographers personally (in the real world).  I'm curious if this is true also.  

Are we really such a negative bunch?  A few years ago when most of us were seeing our incomes grow every month, I thought we were a pretty positive group.  I suspect it is recent circumstances that have made us over into a bunch of grouches...

I know several long time pro photographers, mostly stock and commercial shoots.  They are definitely not a positive bunch.  All them them I know were nearly destroyed by us (microstock).  Some have joined us after years of grousing, but have not put in the effort to make it worthwhile, and the "easy" window of opportunity may have passed.  Every one of them says they were not at all worried about competition from "poor quality" point and shoot stock available from mere amatures online at the beginning.  After all they are pros and customers know it and you get what you pay for.  Wow were they wrong.
I fear we are doing the same.