Author Topic: Thinkstock earnings posted (Read 63702 times)

YadaYadaYada · « **Reply #25 on:** March 14, 2010, 16:03 »

Quote from: Artemis on March 12, 2010, 16:48

Quote from: Digital66 on March 12, 2010, 14:28
Quote from: VB inc on March 12, 2010, 04:23
... For all the contributors in the imaging industry, we need this site to FAIL MISERABLY. It is GETTY trying to get away with their ridiculous 20% payouts. The more you make on this site, the more you eventually lose because you made it the status quo. We need to stop this "Yes sir, may i have another" mentality.

Ditto!

Wish every stock photographer could understand it.

Double yep!!! Of course everyone is free to submit wherever they want but i cringe everytime i see someone opted in/submitting there... we're digging our own grave with submitting to this one.

Let me quote another site "Neither Time or istockphoto.com can be blamed for this situation; photographers who go down the micro stock path do so with no regard for the value of photography and are responsible for driving prices down."

Paraphrased to fit your view, "photographers who go down the subscription micro stock path do so with no regard for the value of photography and are responsible for driving prices down."

http://www.blackshadow.com.au/2009/07/how-microstock-is-ruining-the-business-of-photography/

You can sell photos for peanuts or a dollar, but if someone undercuts your prices they are digging their own grave. Selling micro for peanuts compared to traditional stock is justified, but anybody undercutting you is out of line.

Writing the blog above doesn't change anything. Writing dittos here criticising people who sell subs, doesn't change anything. It does prove that some people are hypocrites. If you steal sales from a traditional stock agency its just business the new market and change. If someone undersells subs they are stupid.

nruboc · « **Reply #26 on:** March 14, 2010, 16:30 »

Quote from: Digital66 on March 12, 2010, 14:28

Quote from: VB inc on March 12, 2010, 04:23
... For all the contributors in the imaging industry, we need this site to FAIL MISERABLY. It is GETTY trying to get away with their ridiculous 20% payouts. The more you make on this site, the more you eventually lose because you made it the status quo. We need to stop this "Yes sir, may i have another" mentality.

Ditto!

Wish every stock photographer could understand it.

Amen to that

Beach Bum · « **Reply #27 on:** March 14, 2010, 20:12 »

Quote from: VB inc on March 12, 2010, 04:23

Quote from: cthoman on March 12, 2010, 00:30
Hmm... 120 sales from an account that I had been trying to close. I'm not sure how I should feel about that.

You should feel worried... For all the contributors in the imaging industry, we need this site to FAIL MISERABLY. It is GETTY trying to get away with their ridiculous 20% payouts. The more you make on this site, the more you eventually lose because you made it the status quo. We need to stop this "Yes sir, may i have another" mentality.

Absolutely!!!

Dreamframer · « **Reply #28 on:** March 15, 2010, 01:07 »

I kept my account on StockXpert and I had sales through Thinkstock.

VB inc · « **Reply #29 on:** March 15, 2010, 03:15 »

Quote from: YadaYadaYada on March 14, 2010, 16:03

Quote from: Artemis on March 12, 2010, 16:48
Quote from: Digital66 on March 12, 2010, 14:28
Quote from: VB inc on March 12, 2010, 04:23
... For all the contributors in the imaging industry, we need this site to FAIL MISERABLY. It is GETTY trying to get away with their ridiculous 20% payouts. The more you make on this site, the more you eventually lose because you made it the status quo. We need to stop this "Yes sir, may i have another" mentality.

Ditto!

Wish every stock photographer could understand it.

Double yep!!! Of course everyone is free to submit wherever they want but i cringe everytime i see someone opted in/submitting there... we're digging our own grave with submitting to this one.

Let me quote another site "Neither Time or istockphoto.com can be blamed for this situation; photographers who go down the micro stock path do so with no regard for the value of photography and are responsible for driving prices down."

Paraphrased to fit your view, "photographers who go down the subscription micro stock path do so with no regard for the value of photography and are responsible for driving prices down."

http://www.blackshadow.com.au/2009/07/how-microstock-is-ruining-the-business-of-photography/

You can sell photos for peanuts or a dollar, but if someone undercuts your prices they are digging their own grave. Selling micro for peanuts compared to traditional stock is justified, but anybody undercutting you is out of line.

Writing the blog above doesn't change anything. Writing dittos here criticising people who sell subs, doesn't change anything. It does prove that some people are hypocrites. If you steal sales from a traditional stock agency its just business the new market and change. If someone undersells subs they are stupid.

The funny thing is photography is my hobby... im an exclusive vector contributor on istock with minimal photos on my portfolio. I've been making a substantial income from istock recently due to more involvement on producing for istock. my average return per download is over $5 and i get lots in a day so i am nervous when i see some really good vectors showing up on thinkstock. I now have a vested interest in the stock photo market as a whole and wonder where its headed. it is a very uncertain time.

Microstock isn't ruining the business of photography... it's technology with its double edged sword. Technology has allowed cameras cheap enough for the masses to produce quality pictures. The internet and its ability to draw a large mass of buyers to buy an image for a buck trampled on the closed doors/mentality of the established agencies. IMO, capitalism at its core is unsustainable and it eats away at itself until there's nothing left.

IMO with thinkstock, Getty is really going about it the wrong way with their outdated 20% mentallity that they cling to. It might have worked with photographers getting $400 on a $2000 overpriced picture but we're talking cents here. That site really should be for hobbyists and it hurts to see great stuff on that site. For every awesome picture on that site, it robs a sale from a decent payout site imo. I don't get the logic of getting 20 cents for an illustration that took you 8 plus hours to do.

cclapper · « **Reply #30 on:** March 15, 2010, 07:47 »

Regarding the phases of transferring photos to thinkstock...Here's what was posted on the StockXpert forum by an StockXpert admin on Mar. 12.

Quote

They're going to be transferring another million and half images sometime in the next week or two (I will check back to see if I can get a firmer date for that.) Then there's going to be one last transfer of the remaining images probably another month after that. So they are getting there gradually, but yeah, it's taking a lot of time.

There are still people who opted out from day 1 from partner programs who still have their images on thinkstock. Fortunately mine were removed already. I don't know if this has happened to anyone else or if I have been singled out for making a big stink, but I deleted my images on StockXpert on Feb. 2, asked that my account be closed. The images were gone, the account was closed. I received my final payout. Now my images are showing again and my account is open again. The images have been explained away as being cached images (so dump the cache???) but I have not gotten an explanation as to why I still have an account there.

I think it's pretty clear this whole thing has been a fiasco and very ill-planned.

cthoman · « **Reply #31 on:** March 15, 2010, 09:43 »

Quote from: cclapper on March 15, 2010, 07:47

I think it's pretty clear this whole thing has been a fiasco and very ill-planned.

It seems that way to me too. I think that is what has turned me off more than the 25 cents.

Ploink · « **Reply #32 on:** March 15, 2010, 11:37 »

Quote from: cthoman on March 15, 2010, 09:43

Quote from: cclapper on March 15, 2010, 07:47
I think it's pretty clear this whole thing has been a fiasco and very ill-planned.
It seems that way to me too. I think that is what has turned me off more than the 25 cents.

Not to defend the presence of photos that shouldn't even be there - but at least they managed to post the earnings (meagre as they may be) that were made since February, 11th - that is more than can be said about IS, who still didn't say anything about the arrival of "Partner Program Earnings" (apart from "probably this week").

lisafx · « **Reply #33 on:** March 15, 2010, 15:58 »

Quote from: Whitechild on March 15, 2010, 01:07

I kept my account on StockXpert and I had sales through Thinkstock.

Are you still opted in to subs Ivan?

I still have my account and images on StockXpert (too lazy to delete 5k manually) but because I am opted out of subs none of my images are on TS.

Dreamframer · « **Reply #34 on:** March 15, 2010, 21:23 »

Quote from: lisafx on March 15, 2010, 15:58

Quote from: Whitechild on March 15, 2010, 01:07
I kept my account on StockXpert and I had sales through Thinkstock.

Are you still opted in to subs Ivan?

I still have my account and images on StockXpert (too lazy to delete 5k manually) but because I am opted out of subs none of my images are on TS.

Lisa,
If I remember well, I opted out when they announced closing of StockXpert, but I opted in at IS. But now, in my profile at StockXpert I see I'm opted in for Thinkstock, and I'm opted in for Partner sites. I see only my vectors on Thinkstock, and they are transfered from StockXpert. All photos I have on Thinkstock are transfered from IS, there are no my photos from StockXpert. People who had the same images at IS and StockXpert will be transfered at the last phase...which I think is not scheduled yet.

ThomasAmby · « **Reply #35 on:** March 16, 2010, 04:31 »

I thought I did everything necessary to opt out of the Thinkstock program. However, $5.25 had been posted to my earnings and when I went to check, I was opten in at StockXpert. So I opted out of there as well.

a.k.a.-tom · « **Reply #36 on:** March 16, 2010, 18:59 »

well i'm opted in at both IS and StockXpert and still see zero of mine on thinkstock.

=tom

ShadySue · « **Reply #37 on:** March 17, 2010, 03:00 »

Quote from: Ploink on March 15, 2010, 11:37

Not to defend the presence of photos that shouldn't even be there - but at least they managed to post the earnings (meagre as they may be) that were made since February, 11th - that is more than can be said about IS, who still didn't say anything about the arrival of "Partner Program Earnings" (apart from "probably this week").

Not to defend the partnership program, but posting earnings in the middle of the following month has happened since it started and has repeatedly been what Rob (sylvanworks) has said on the forums.

Ploink · « **Reply #38 on:** March 17, 2010, 04:42 »

Quote from: ShadySue on March 17, 2010, 03:00

Quote from: Ploink on March 15, 2010, 11:37

Not to defend the presence of photos that shouldn't even be there - but at least they managed to post the earnings (meagre as they may be) that were made since February, 11th - that is more than can be said about IS, who still didn't say anything about the arrival of "Partner Program Earnings" (apart from "probably this week").
Not to defend the partnership program, but posting earnings in the middle of the following month has happened since it started and has repeatedly been what Rob (sylvanworks) has said on the forums.

That it is true, but I don't see how this makes it any better? We had daily stats updates on StockXpert from our Photos.com sales, I fail to see why it is impossible to have that on IS? Or at least have an "end-of-the-month"-report, that is not two weeks late - but obviously Shank and I are the only two bothered by this

The reason why I'm unhappy with the current reporting is twofold: (a) it makes tracking of sales on a per image basis impossible (as does the whole way PP-sales are reported at IS now) and (b) there were several occasions when Photos.com "forgot" to report sales to StockXpert - this was usually discovered fast, because volume seller would cry our after the second day without sales and eventually everybody would get their money. With a reporting system that is - at the worst - six weeks late, there is no way to find glitches like that...

Dreamframer · « **Reply #39 on:** March 17, 2010, 13:23 »

I think IS should really make a better system for us to see PP sales in real time, and to easily see which images are sold. Also, I think if Yaymicro could manage to pay me the same moment I click "payment" button, that other agencies should do the same. Why we have to wait more than 2 weeks sometimes to get our many?

Fran · « **Reply #40 on:** March 17, 2010, 13:32 »

Quote from: Whitechild on March 17, 2010, 13:23

I think IS should really make a better system for us to see PP sales in real time, and to easily see which images are sold. Also, I think if Yaymicro could manage to pay me the same moment I click "payment" button, that other agencies should do the same. Why we have to wait more than 2 weeks sometimes to get our many?

Because it means two weeks more of money in the bank generating interests.

Dreamframer · « **Reply #41 on:** March 17, 2010, 14:04 »

^^^ Oh, sure, I know that.

jsnover · « **Reply #42 on:** March 17, 2010, 17:29 »

Quote from: Whitechild on March 17, 2010, 13:23

I think IS should really make a better system for us to see PP sales in real time, and to easily see which images are sold. ...

I don't disagree that in an ideal world the sales reporting system should be real time, but there are so many things on the IS to-do list that would come way, waaay higher than this that I'd hate to see them spend any time on it in the foreseeable future.

Clearly I am influenced by the fact that I've been opted out of this program from the beginning (my view is that it's Getty trying to pull our earnings down to a flat 20% (max) for everyone. Whether you're independent and you end up hosing SS by participating in the partner program or you're exclusive to IS and you hose your own higher commissions over time, the only winner in this will be Getty). So if Getty wants to spend their time and energy building contributor reporting tools (which I strongly doubt) let them knock themselves out.

But I wouldn't want any more IS developer time spent on enhancements to partner program reporting.

mwp1969 · « **Reply #43 on:** April 11, 2010, 20:56 »

It will be curious to see if there ends up being any "group 2" or "group 3" transfer activity to ThinkStock here in April as promised ...

-Mark
http://markwpayne.wordpress.com

njnightsky · « **Reply #44 on:** April 17, 2010, 07:21 »

March earnings have were posted today

ThomasAmby · « **Reply #45 on:** April 17, 2010, 08:33 »

How come I keep getting money from Thinkstock when I opted out at both StockXpert and iStock? This is really frustrating, I don't want to have my images available there

cclapper · « **Reply #46 on:** April 17, 2010, 08:55 »

Quote from: ThomasAmby on April 17, 2010, 08:33

How come I keep getting money from Thinkstock when I opted out at both StockXpert and iStock? This is really frustrating, I don't want to have my images available there

I understand totally how you feel. I opted out also. I sent emails every day and posted in the IS forum about the problem, over and over. After a lot of "should be next week" answers and some grief from people in the IS forum who had been on IS way less time than I had, my images were totally gone from Thinkstock. I had already been opted out both on StockXpert and IS for a couple of months and my images still went to TS. I was thoroughly frustrated and not very nice about it.

People can make excuses about the snowstorm and how it costs lots of money to set up a server correctly (see another thread here about istock server problems) but in my opinion they were never set up to handle any of this. What good was having the opt out button to check on IS, when images got opted in anyway? It's almost like the checkbox was put there to shut us up when we complained because there wasn't an opt out, but the button was never really connected to anything on the back end.

leaf · « **Reply #47 on:** April 17, 2010, 12:11 »

Quote from: njnightsky on April 17, 2010, 07:21

March earnings have were posted today

thanks for the heads-up

michaeldb · « **Reply #48 on:** April 17, 2010, 12:50 »

Quote from: leaf on April 17, 2010, 12:11

Quote from: njnightsky on April 17, 2010, 07:21
March earnings have were posted today

thanks for the heads-up

ditto

ShadySue · « **Reply #49 on:** April 17, 2010, 13:11 »

Quote from: michaeldb on April 17, 2010, 12:50

Quote from: leaf on April 17, 2010, 12:11
Quote from: njnightsky on April 17, 2010, 07:21
March earnings have were posted today

thanks for the heads-up
ditto

Gosh, they can't be very stunning if you weren't even noticing!

MicrostockGroup Sponsors - 4 spots

Author Topic: Thinkstock earnings posted (Read 63702 times)

YadaYadaYada

nruboc

Beach Bum

Dreamframer

VB inc

cclapper

cthoman

Ploink

lisafx

Dreamframer

ThomasAmby

a.k.a.-tom

ShadySue

Ploink

Dreamframer

Fran

Dreamframer

jsnover

mwp1969

njnightsky

ThomasAmby

cclapper

leaf

michaeldb

ShadySue

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors