That's asking a bit much, in my opinion. If you can produce 100 quality illustrations, why not upload them yourself?

Interesting that he has a bid of $471. I wonder what images which cost $4.71 each will look like. 

This request asks for 3 illustrations for the purchaser to use to get approved on IS. Isn't that essentially fraudulent? The name on the account is asking for approval as an illustrator and what they're using to get approved, even if they own the copyright to the purchased items, isn't something they created. So later they upload work from other people - perhaps of differing standards?

If that sort of approach were allowed, you'd have to ditch the initial approval and go to a system where your account gets suspended if your approval rate drops below a certain percentage.

And I agree, if I had the ability to produce 100 15 credit vectors, why would I let someone else make money from them?

You see a lot of inexpensive bids go through some of these job sites. It definitely makes you think about outsourcing stock or other work. I'd definitely be worried about putting my own name on something someone else created though. Basically, vouching that they didn't copy anything to create it. I could see hiring someone to make derivative versions of my own work, but I'm not sure about trusting them with something entirely new.

 Hi All,

 I had an Istock Exclusive call me just last week wanting to rep me through Istock and offer me 35%. I don't agree with this kind of business practice. Stay above board and follow the rules or you get sent back to square one and have to roll again.

Best,
Jonathan

 I had an Istock Exclusive call me just last week wanting to rep me through Istock and offer me 35%. I don't agree with this kind of business practice. Stay above board and follow the rules or you get sent back to square one and have to roll again.

Yikes!  What a can of worms that would open!  Looks like a great way to get him and you kicked off Istock and banned!  Don't blame you for steering clear...

I'm pretty sure this is just flat out against IStock policy.
Don't you have to tick a box saying the illustration is your own work (not only that you own the copyright but that you actually created it)?

 Hi Sean,

 I do shoot my own video, I used a group to help me learn but they do not work with me anymore also I am not exclusive, neither is Yuri or Monkey business. I don't think exclusives can represent others work under their name or am I wrong. Thanks for the help Sean.

Best,
Jonathan

Hi Sean,

 Thanks for the reply. Yes, we started out with a crew to show us the Red One  and cinematography without having to make the big investment and because of the learning curve. We made a deal that they would teach us video and we would teach them stock video and how to produce it at low costs, so you were right assuming that I don't shoot our video. I just haven't ever posted that we are on our own now.
 I am confused on one point, sorry for my not being clear. Are you saying that an Exclusive at Istock can represent other photographers than themselves? I thought this was an absolute no-no. I ask you because there isn't anyone here that knows the ins and outs of Istock better than you.

Thanks,
Jonathan

 Hi Sean,

 Maybe you could ask someone at Istock this seems to be a very grey area. Thanks agin for the help. That goes for any exclusives that might know the answer. I must add that the person asking used the term Hypothetically when asking me, I still felt it was an inappropriate question without the person first knowing if it was even allowed with his agency before e-mailing another photographer, I would not start e-mailing people and ask such questions unless I understood how my agency would feel about it. It's not just about not breaking the rules or walking a thin line, it's about business integrity. They even asked me for my advice. I am not an exclusive and you would think they would have a better idea than me.
 The first question I would ask myself is " How would Istock feel about it " people may not like the changes they have made recently and might feel more justified in doing what is best for themselves but no one is twisting anyones arm to be an exclusive at Istock. If you choose that road you should have to play by their rules.

Best,
Jonathan

Quote from: Microbius on December 13, 2010, 13:15

I'm pretty sure this is just flat out against IStock policy.
Don't you have to tick a box saying the illustration is your own work (not only that you own the copyright but that you actually created it)?

A simple contract transferring all rights to the images is all you need. Its sorta like a model release for second shooters, you release all rights to the material.

Correct.

Thanks CardMavirick and Aeonf,

 I appreciate the feedback that is what I thought, glad to get a clear answer on the subject. Do others agree with this point from Istock, I always thought so but it seems like we have mixed answers on here. Sean says he doesn't know and I would think he would be someone who would be sure. I guess I just want to make sure this is a either a no-no or a thumbs up.

Cheers,
Jonathan

It's not something I ever investigated.  I'm just making a best guess.