Author Topic: New IS Contributor Charts data (Read 6430 times)

sharply_done · « **on:** January 29, 2009, 08:15 »

The IS Contributor Charts website has been revised to include two new columns: DLs Last 90 Days and %Gain/Loss. This makes it very easy to see the effects of the latest best match change. Some familiar names here are among the biggest gainers. Click here to check it out.

Perrush · « **Reply #1 on:** January 29, 2009, 08:45 »

Well I know for one exclusive who isn't happy.

http://www.istockphoto.com/Liliboas I followed her by coincidence because one image of her interfered with my best selling. I was amazed she had such an amount of dl's with such average portfolio.

with the new best match, she lost 80% of her DL's !! Once she was second or third by DL/last 90 days, a long with Yuri and Lisa. Now she fell back from 450 DL / day to just over 100 ... ...

I you rank the site by most downloads, she is n°17 (although made anonymous)

leaf · « **Reply #2 on:** January 29, 2009, 09:32 »

very interesting... thanks for the link.

loop · « **Reply #3 on:** January 29, 2009, 09:34 »

Not so strange, Liliboas relies a lot on her abundant,popular and very well done portfolio of Christmas images.

gostwyck · « **Reply #4 on:** January 29, 2009, 10:54 »

I've noticed one or two people disappearing completely from the charts (not just becoming anonymous) __ now I see Lise has apparently vanished into thin air too.

Shame really as it devalues the overall efficacy of the charts and the info on each individual is publically available anyway.

Vonkara · « **Reply #5 on:** January 29, 2009, 11:01 »

I'm at -8.06... AND FALLING LOL

araminta · « **Reply #6 on:** January 29, 2009, 11:11 »

+80% and flying high

sjlocke · « **Reply #7 on:** January 29, 2009, 11:32 »

Quote from: loop on January 29, 2009, 09:34

Not so strange, Liliboas relies a lot on her abundant,popular and very well done portfolio of Christmas images.

Yes, and it's hardly average.

yingyang0 · « **Reply #8 on:** January 29, 2009, 11:42 »

Quote from: sjlocke on January 29, 2009, 11:32

Quote from: loop on January 29, 2009, 09:34
Not so strange, Liliboas relies a lot on her abundant,popular and very well done portfolio of Christmas images.

Yes, and it's hardly average.

I'd call it above average. I'd also like to point out that I think iStock should block this. No one should have to put up with their financial information being spread all over the internet in such detail.

sharply_done · « **Reply #9 on:** January 29, 2009, 11:51 »

Quote from: yingyang0 on January 29, 2009, 11:42

I'd call it above average. I'd also like to point out that I think iStock should block this. No one should have to put up with their financial information being spread all over the internet in such detail.

I wish that all sites ceased publishing individual sales data - it only serves to make copying, already an easy task, even easier. I see it's other purpose - comparing your sales with those of others - as a luxury and not a necessity.

sjlocke · « **Reply #10 on:** January 29, 2009, 11:57 »

Quote from: yingyang0 on January 29, 2009, 11:42

I'd call it above average. I'd also like to point out that I think iStock should block this. No one should have to put up with their financial information being spread all over the internet in such detail.

How can you say that? Aren't we all here to share and encourage others?

thesentinel · « **Reply #11 on:** January 29, 2009, 12:00 »

Quote from: sharply_done on January 29, 2009, 11:51

Quote from: yingyang0 on January 29, 2009, 11:42
I'd call it above average. I'd also like to point out that I think iStock should block this. No one should have to put up with their financial information being spread all over the internet in such detail.

I wish that all sites ceased publishing individual sales data - it only serves to make copying, already an easy task, even easier. I see it's other purpose - comparing your sales with those of others - as a luxury and not a necessity.

A bit odd then that you posted the link !

gostwyck · « **Reply #12 on:** January 29, 2009, 12:01 »

Quote from: sharply_done on January 29, 2009, 11:51

I wish that all sites ceased publishing individual sales data - it only serves to make copying, already an easy task, even easier. I see it's other purpose - comparing your sales with those of others - as a luxury and not a necessity.

But of course it is in IS's (and the others) interests to publish this data. They want you to produce what the market wants and the best way of telling you is with this data __ and as we all know it is very effective too.

Speaking personally, although I've never consciously copied anyone else's work, I've certainly learnt a lot about which subjects and styles of shooting are most popular. Knowing about others' sales is also motivating and makes you aware of just what is possible. I think I've gained far more from this knowledge than I'm likely to lose through others copying my best-sellers.

Microbius · « **Reply #13 on:** January 29, 2009, 12:18 »

how do you get your data removed from the charts? just curious as some people aren't listed but I can't see an easy way to request removal.

Vonkara · « **Reply #14 on:** January 29, 2009, 12:23 »

The problem is that nobody will be successful by copying someone else work IMO. If one photographer is already successful with his own style or subjects, I will never loose my time shooting this. That's why I will never shoot a people at work (as example). This subject have been taken by too much talented people before. Filing the holes it's the way to go, even if that mean searching instead of shooting

Microbius · « **Reply #15 on:** January 29, 2009, 12:48 »

Quote from: Vonkara on January 29, 2009, 12:23

The problem is that nobody will be successful by copying someone else work IMO. If one photographer is already successful with his own style or subjects, I will never loose my time shooting this. That's why I will never shoot a people at work (as example). This subject have been taken by too much talented people before. Filing the holes it's the way to go, even if that mean searching instead of shooting

Sorry but loads of people make a living doing just that.
It's actually a lot harder to make a living in microstock by filling the holes because the only subjects not covered will be small niches. You can't get a good return in micro from a very small niche as volume sales are the name of the game.
Covering the same old ground works because new work gets favored by most sites in their search results.

Vonkara · « **Reply #16 on:** January 29, 2009, 12:59 »

Quote from: Microbius on January 29, 2009, 12:48

Quote from: Vonkara on January 29, 2009, 12:23
The problem is that nobody will be successful by copying someone else work IMO. If one photographer is already successful with his own style or subjects, I will never loose my time shooting this. That's why I will never shoot a people at work (as example). This subject have been taken by too much talented people before. Filing the holes it's the way to go, even if that mean searching instead of shooting
Sorry but loads of people make a living doing just that.
It's actually a lot harder to make a living in microstock by filling the holes because the only subjects not covered will be small niches. You can't get a good return in micro from a very small niche as volume sales are the name of the game.
Covering the same old ground works because new work gets favored by most sites in their search results.

LOL... One search result on IS give 150 results. 12 images are mine. What better search results you want to get. . I found like 8 other subjects sometimes whorty sometimes not only on IS. Continue in the way you use if it's working, but I will continue my way. I can't compete in the people category, so I try to fill the holes

RT · « **Reply #17 on:** January 29, 2009, 14:37 »

Hmmm... Note to self - Must try harder

madelaide · « **Reply #18 on:** January 29, 2009, 15:31 »

I believe my numbers are so ridiculous that this is why I get a "n/a" in gain/loss...

holgs · « **Reply #19 on:** January 29, 2009, 15:40 »

The problem for non-exclusives on IS is that when an exclusive artist copies your work, they automatically get a boost through the best match - so if its a similar image, it doesn't matter how many downloads yours has had, whether its bigger etc, your image will sink.

While I'd like to think that quality of an image is going to lead to higher sales, we all know that this business is all about search rankings.

sjlocke · « **Reply #20 on:** January 29, 2009, 15:45 »

Quote from: holgs on January 29, 2009, 15:40

The problem for non-exclusives on IS is that when an exclusive artist copies your work, they automatically get a boost through the best match - so if its a similar image, it doesn't matter how many downloads yours has had, whether its bigger etc, your image will sink.

While I'd like to think that quality of an image is going to lead to higher sales, we all know that this business is all about search rankings.

The problem for exclusives on IS, is that when a non-exclusive artist copies your work, they are free to distribute it cheaper at other sites, so it doesn't matter how many downloads yours has had, you'll make less money.

Gannet77 · « **Reply #21 on:** January 29, 2009, 16:20 »

Quote from: Microbius on January 29, 2009, 12:18

how do you get your data removed from the charts? just curious as some people aren't listed but I can't see an easy way to request removal.

You can sitemail multimedia_de (on iStock) and ask to be made anonymous; your figures may still be included but no identification.

sharply_done · « **Reply #22 on:** January 29, 2009, 17:29 »

Quote from: RT on January 29, 2009, 14:37

Hmmm... Note to self - Must try harder

Sure looks like you're doin' okay to me, RT.

yingyang0 · « **Reply #23 on:** January 29, 2009, 17:39 »

Quote from: sjlocke on January 29, 2009, 11:57

Quote from: yingyang0 on January 29, 2009, 11:42
I'd call it above average. I'd also like to point out that I think iStock should block this. No one should have to put up with their financial information being spread all over the internet in such detail.

How can you say that? Aren't we all here to share and encourage others?

You're right sjlocke, so in the spirit of encouraging others I'll post a link to images of my tax returns and W-2s. Heck, while I'm at it I'll attach copies of my birth certificate, SS card, and driver's license.

Seriously, no one should have to sitemail anyone to prevent such an intrusion into their personal financial data and making the person a

? doesn't protect them from being identified, as shown earlier in this thread.

Gannet77 · « **Reply #24 on:** January 29, 2009, 17:58 »

It isn't actually financial information... and it's always been publicly available, just not collected - or at least, not where everyone can see it.

But I have been wondering what iStock's position is on it. Generally they don't publish things like total downloads and this site makes it possible for anyone to track their (iStocks) peformance over time.

Wouldn't surprise me if they decided to allow an opt out, or perhaps made it so that the information could only be seen by the user when logged in.