MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: New Collections launching this afternoon (iStock time)  (Read 15471 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #100 on: June 25, 2013, 09:04 »
+1
Amazing Vetta Price for a crappy image - This is the new direction? This is what buyers want? This is how they love their exclusives?

http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-25406043-close-up-of-lettuce-leaves.php?st=040ee5e


« Reply #101 on: June 25, 2013, 09:07 »
+1
Who the heck is clerkn-well whatever.... Is this a Getty collection dumped on iStock, I have noticed every time Getty dumps images on iStock the best match is screwed sideways. Looks good for the future as an exclusive :-)

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #102 on: June 25, 2013, 09:08 »
0
Who the heck is clerkn-well whatever.... Is this a Getty collection dumped on iStock,
Yes.
I'm pretty certain they used to be all Agency, so they'll be pretty miffed to have gone down in the world.
« Last Edit: June 25, 2013, 09:21 by ShadySue »

« Reply #103 on: June 25, 2013, 09:20 »
+1
Wonderful, no wonder the best match is screwed, are these people pseudo exclusive as well like yuri? All of us know that in a court of law you have to apply the same rules to everyone in your company except for iStock which makes the ULA only one sided to benefit them. How is the collections move going to make them more $$ I only see it hurting them short term as well as long term.

« Reply #104 on: June 25, 2013, 09:41 »
+2
Every time I think iStock just might get something right Bam..Slam right between the eyes on this one. I am thinking I am the idiot now.

« Reply #105 on: June 25, 2013, 10:17 »
+4
Although many of the sideways images have been disabled already, there are still a couple like this one:

http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-25406521-juicy-green-apple.php?st=33e00c7

There are images that no one else could even get accepted at all given the terrible lighting, like these:

http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-25406435-close-up-of-orange-slice.php?st=33e00c7
http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-25405954-oranges.php?st=33e00c7
http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-25405856-close-up-of-pomegranate-seeds.php?st=33e00c7
http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-25411556-blurred-view-of-football-players-facing-each-other.php?st=33e00c7

I stopped looking after the first 2000 new Vetta images were all Clerkenwell Images (and it seemed like 1K of them were scientists around greenhouses, which must be a bigger market than I realized)

Getty is dumping whatever it wants onto the iStock site. I find it hard to see how any rational view of what's going on could conclude there is any consideration for iStock exclusives (real ones). People want to believe things will turn around or go back to the way they were. I think that's wishful thinking at best.

Getty has made their intentions (and their competence) manifest.

« Reply #106 on: June 25, 2013, 10:35 »
0
Really. I could not believe until i saw the new vista images myself. So Many sister images.. In fact not only sister but twins/triplets/quadruplets.. lolz i thought now they are accepting series of similar images in their Main collection after increasing the limit to 999 but also in Vista ...?????

ps.. also series of Grasses in vista ?? heck... are the curators favoring certain photographers ?
« Last Edit: June 25, 2013, 10:38 by gemmy12 »

Ron

« Reply #107 on: June 25, 2013, 11:04 »
+2
I thought Getty was crop of the cream. I shoot better than that. How does that crap get accepted onto Getty in the first place. Many top shooters cant get onto Getty, and that crapstock does.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #108 on: June 25, 2013, 11:19 »
0
ps.. also series of Grasses in vista ?? heck... are the curators favoring certain photographers ?
Yes, same as before.

« Reply #109 on: June 25, 2013, 11:25 »
+2
iStock is the only company I know that can take a complete gem and turn it into a turd aka Vetta

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #110 on: June 25, 2013, 11:28 »
0
iStock is the only company I know that can take a complete gem and turn it into a turd aka Vetta
Is this really news?
Clerken_well's first iS submission was in December 2010.
Agency had a lot of ingested and pseudo-exclusive material, some of which would never even have been accepted at the time, had any normal mortal uploaded it. Much of it badly keyworded.
They tried to tell us they were being manually checked, but it was impossible to believe.
Vetta also had some very simple retro raster cartoons ingested from one company.
« Last Edit: June 25, 2013, 12:02 by ShadySue »

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #111 on: June 28, 2013, 16:19 »
+2
Amazing Vetta Price for a crappy image - This is the new direction? This is what buyers want? This is how they love their exclusives?

http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-25406043-close-up-of-lettuce-leaves.php?st=040ee5e


Lobo: "We have premium content Editors who are actually making these picks. I think we will see just how effective the Editor picks are in the future."
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=354610&messageid=6907570

The above is an Editor's Pick, as is:
http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-25324187-grass-full-frame.php?st=1857def and all the rest of that contributor's (contributors'?) work.

Oh, in the same post above, Lobo responsed to posts about how bad the search results look in IE8 by saying "IE8 has about 24% of market share ... observing that it is an old browser and finishing, "I appreciate browser issues will always come up, thankfully there are plenty of alternatives." Which I guess will be buyers going to see if other vendors have sites that work on the browsers they are forced to work on, as was the situation indicated in the posts complaining about the IE8 bugs.
I remember when the rest of the IE using world was on IE6, my sister once saying her entire university staff network was forced to use IE4. I didn't believe her and one time I was in her office tried to update it and got a message saying that tampering with network settings was a potentially sackable offence. Honestly.

So, iS is happy to throw away "about 24%" of market share? I'd think good practice would be to check all changes in all browsers down to at least 5% of market share. But then again, website QC isn't iStock's way.

lisafx

« Reply #112 on: June 28, 2013, 18:28 »
+1
iStock is the only company I know that can take a complete gem and turn it into a turd aka Vetta

And then try to polish it ;)

JFP

« Reply #113 on: July 03, 2013, 13:46 »
0
I saw that 2 inspectors are uploading large amount of images this month. Anybody saw anything similar or it's just a coincidence?? 


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
17 Replies
4920 Views
Last post July 06, 2007, 19:32
by leaf
3 Replies
1529 Views
Last post March 25, 2009, 21:15
by Pixart
15 Replies
4555 Views
Last post March 26, 2010, 06:11
by FD
iStock simplifying collections

Started by Poncke v2 « 1 2 ... 7 8 » iStockPhoto.com

192 Replies
16057 Views
Last post May 20, 2013, 20:00
by ShadySue
38 Replies
5041 Views
Last post April 14, 2017, 23:44
by izzikiorage

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors