Author Topic: READ THIS if you're fed up with iStock (Read 34497 times)

loop · « **Reply #50 on:** April 08, 2011, 14:41 »

Quote from: herby11 on April 08, 2011, 13:52

I have always wondered why one would be aiming to become a free, self-employed photographer just to sign exclusivity with an "virtual" MS company, that does not make any sense at all. No matter how many little tiny icons they offer you for that and no matter how that company is called.

Maybe IS, stock or microstock are the only source of work for self-employed photographers??? That's new!
Make the world wider.

nruboc · « **Reply #51 on:** April 08, 2011, 15:13 »

Quote from: StockNRoll on April 08, 2011, 09:40

Ok, so after being inspired by this thread yesterday, I got brave and called up 3 local production houses to tell them about istock and their poor treatment of contributors. The response I got was quite mixed. Company 1: Thank you for letting us know. We actually do use istock for a lot of our stock needs and I will certainly pass this information along to other producers that we work with. Company 2: They didn't care about what I had to say, treated me like a telemarketer, etc... not that I entirely blame them as this was an unsolicited call. Company 3: Yes we are aware of the issues with istock and have slowly tapered off our use of them. We typically try other stock sites first to see if we can find the subject we need.

I'm going to try to call a couple more today. Can you imagine what would happen if everybody started doing this?? What we need is a leader to organize this "movement." Individually we can't accomplish much, but together we are a force to be reckoned with.

As long as we're dreaming and talking about off the wall ideas, here's another one: What if we created a boycott istock petition and got a massive amount of contributors to sign it. The petition basically says that on July 4th, 2011, if Istock does not raise their royalties back up to the levels they were at when we signed up with them, then everybody on the list will pull their content. We make a website with a big counter on it, counting down to "Independance Day." As contributors, this alleviates some of the doubts that individually removing our content will accomplish anything and makes us a part of something bigger. As I said before, I doubt this would ever get going... but its fun to dream right!

Great job, I definitely encourage this, let as many companies as possible know how IStock treats it's contributors and the other alternatives out there. Don't worry about the name callers, sometimes a conference call will do that to ya.

sharpshot · « **Reply #52 on:** April 08, 2011, 15:49 »

Quote from: rimglow on April 08, 2011, 10:24

The bottom line is always profit. I belong to the top 8 stock sites. They all turn a profit. Some turn more profit than others. Some are more fair than others. But it's not good business to wish that the least fair go away, on the speculation that I might turn more profit at another site. There will always be a site that is the least fair. If iStock goes away then some other site will be the least fair. So what then? Go after that site?

If you don't like a company's business practices don't work for that company. I recommend that buyers visit the site that earns me the best percentage. I can't support the elimination of of my second biggest earner just because their percentage is low.

I still don't understand. Istock had by far the lowest commissions, if we accept them being cut, surely the other sites will follow? There's also nothing to stop istock doing this again.

Istock are also my second biggest earner but I don't want lower and lower commissions until there isn't enough for me to do this any more.

rimglow · « **Reply #53 on:** April 08, 2011, 17:04 »

You don't have to accept it. Quit. Vote with your feet. Put your money where your mouth is.

sharpshot · « **Reply #54 on:** April 08, 2011, 17:25 »

I'm not accepting it. I haven't uploaded anything to istock since last September and I have deleted a lot of images and video clips. I lost a lot of money when they closed stockxpert and I can't afford to just leave but I'm doing all I can to get to the point where I can leave without taking another big financial hit. I probably wont delete some of my best selling images because some people have made very similar copies and I'm not going to make it easy for them.

rimglow · « **Reply #55 on:** April 08, 2011, 17:39 »

Good for you. I respect your stance. iStock's not the only game in town.

stockastic · « **Reply #56 on:** April 08, 2011, 17:49 »

StockNRoll rocks! If contributors are actually angry enough to start cold-calling design shops, that word will spread. Companies that use IS will at least start getting a creepy feeling about it and wonder if it wouldn't be a good idea to start looking at alternatives.

StockNRoll · « **Reply #57 on:** April 08, 2011, 20:35 »

Heh, well thanks for the vote of confidence, but I am only one person. Like you said, just imagine what could happen if 10 or even 100 of us started doing this...

SNP · « **Reply #58 on:** April 09, 2011, 00:31 »

Quote from: sjlocke on April 08, 2011, 13:08

Quote from: StockNRoll on April 08, 2011, 09:40
Ok, so after being inspired by this thread yesterday, I got brave and called up 3 local production houses to tell them about istock and their poor treatment of contributors. The response I got was quite mixed. Company 1: Thank you for letting us know. We actually do use istock for a lot of our stock needs and I will certainly pass this information along to other producers that we work with. Company 2: They didn't care about what I had to say, treated me like a telemarketer, etc... not that I entirely blame them as this was an unsolicited call. Company 3: Yes we are aware of the issues with istock and have slowly tapered off our use of them. We typically try other stock sites first to see if we can find the subject we need.

I'd suggest using your time to go out and shoot rather than harassing design companies. You sound like a real jerk.

roger that...

nruboc · « **Reply #59 on:** April 09, 2011, 00:56 »

Quote from: SNP on April 09, 2011, 00:31

Quote from: sjlocke on April 08, 2011, 13:08
Quote from: StockNRoll on April 08, 2011, 09:40
Ok, so after being inspired by this thread yesterday, I got brave and called up 3 local production houses to tell them about istock and their poor treatment of contributors. The response I got was quite mixed. Company 1: Thank you for letting us know. We actually do use istock for a lot of our stock needs and I will certainly pass this information along to other producers that we work with. Company 2: They didn't care about what I had to say, treated me like a telemarketer, etc... not that I entirely blame them as this was an unsolicited call. Company 3: Yes we are aware of the issues with istock and have slowly tapered off our use of them. We typically try other stock sites first to see if we can find the subject we need.

I'd suggest using your time to go out and shoot rather than harassing design companies. You sound like a real jerk.

roger that...

sjlocke and SNP... please elaborate on why you think he is a jerk... He's calling design companies about IStock's poor treatment of contributors....truth hurts???

caspixel · « **Reply #60 on:** April 09, 2011, 00:59 »

Quote from: nruboc on April 09, 2011, 00:56

sjlocke and SNP... please elaborate on why you think he is a jerk... He's calling design companies about IStock's poor treatment of contributors....truth hurts???

They are scared exclusives. And they should be. The word is getting out and sales are dropping. People always lash out when they are frightened.

nruboc · « **Reply #61 on:** April 09, 2011, 01:07 »

Quote from: caspixel on April 09, 2011, 00:59

Quote from: nruboc on April 09, 2011, 00:56

sjlocke and SNP... please elaborate on why you think he is a jerk... He's calling design companies about IStock's poor treatment of contributors....truth hurts???

They are scared exclusives. And they should be. The word is getting out and sales are dropping. People always lash out when they are frightened.

Agree, if I was a design company on the receiving end of this call, not knowing the alternatives out there and the way IStock was treating contributors, I would be thankful for the info.

caspixel · « **Reply #62 on:** April 09, 2011, 01:27 »

Quote from: nruboc on April 09, 2011, 01:07

Quote from: caspixel on April 09, 2011, 00:59
Quote from: nruboc on April 09, 2011, 00:56

sjlocke and SNP... please elaborate on why you think he is a jerk... He's calling design companies about IStock's poor treatment of contributors....truth hurts???

They are scared exclusives. And they should be. The word is getting out and sales are dropping. People always lash out when they are frightened.

Agree, if I was a design company on the receiving end of this call, not knowing the alternatives out there and the way IStock was treating contributors, I would be thankful for the info.

I don't blame them for being scared, though. If I was relying on income from iStock, I'd be terrified right now.

nruboc · « **Reply #63 on:** April 09, 2011, 01:29 »

Quote from: caspixel on April 09, 2011, 01:27

Quote from: nruboc on April 09, 2011, 01:07
Quote from: caspixel on April 09, 2011, 00:59
Quote from: nruboc on April 09, 2011, 00:56

sjlocke and SNP... please elaborate on why you think he is a jerk... He's calling design companies about IStock's poor treatment of contributors....truth hurts???

They are scared exclusives. And they should be. The word is getting out and sales are dropping. People always lash out when they are frightened.

Agree, if I was a design company on the receiving end of this call, not knowing the alternatives out there and the way IStock was treating contributors, I would be thankful for the info.

I don't blame them for being scared, though. If I was relying on income from iStock, I'd be terrified right now.

I expected as much from SNP, but you would think sjlocke would rise above the name calling.... guess not.

Microstock Posts · « **Reply #64 on:** April 09, 2011, 02:39 »

Quote from: sjlocke on April 08, 2011, 13:08

Quote from: StockNRoll on April 08, 2011, 09:40
Ok, so after being inspired by this thread yesterday, I got brave and called up 3 local production houses to tell them about istock and their poor treatment of contributors. The response I got was quite mixed. Company 1: Thank you for letting us know. We actually do use istock for a lot of our stock needs and I will certainly pass this information along to other producers that we work with. Company 2: They didn't care about what I had to say, treated me like a telemarketer, etc... not that I entirely blame them as this was an unsolicited call. Company 3: Yes we are aware of the issues with istock and have slowly tapered off our use of them. We typically try other stock sites first to see if we can find the subject we need.

I'd suggest using your time to go out and shoot rather than harassing design companies. You sound like a real jerk.

It must be pretty hard for exclusives who enter independent forums to see almost every thread on their sole or major source of artistic income being absolutely battered. Maybe one comfort is that most buyers probably don't read here. However, no other agency is quite getting it like iStock, in terms of negative threads and this is obviously justifiable. Usually people can only take so much before they lash out.

sharpshot · « **Reply #65 on:** April 09, 2011, 03:39 »

I don't think istock will lose all its buyers. A lot of them must be as loyal as the long term exclusives. I don't see anything wrong with letting buyers know how little commission non-exclusives get from istock. I would hope that if they go to the other sites, they can still buy images from exclusives at istock. It probably wouldn't be good for any of us if a big proportion of exclusive were forced in to putting their portfolios on the other sites.

I can understand why exclusives would feel uneasy about buyers being persuaded to look elsewhere but what other options do we have? Istock still make a significant amount of money for non-exclusives but its really hard to take commissions under 20% when other sites can pay 50% and make a profit. Its also going to cost us a lot of money if we just accept these low commissions and the other sites follow suit.

Perry · « **Reply #66 on:** April 09, 2011, 03:50 »

Everything would be so simple if nobody was exclusive. We could just bash the site together. I was an IS exclusive about 2005 to 2006, then already I did some research about other sites and thought that I don't want to have my all eggs in one basket, because it's just not very wise.

ShadySue · « **Reply #67 on:** April 09, 2011, 04:08 »

Quote from: velocicarpo on April 08, 2011, 09:21

I apply the formula: don`t buy at istock, don`t sell at istock.

Istock is an abusive system.
If you buy at istock, you support an abusive system.
If you upload to istock, you support a abusive system.
If you are an exclusive artist at istock you give your name and all your creativity to an abusive system. Nothing to be proud of, buth rather ashamed.
Simple and clear.

At the same time I started at iStock, I also submitted pics RM to a small, independent agency which gave contributors 60%. Made one sale in four years and last week pulled my images.
60% of (almost) nothing is (almost) nothing.
Agree also with what others have said, e.g. about other agencies having a history of treating their contributors badly in different ways, iStock is topping them all now, but that could change.
Also, nothing great about getting 30c for sub images, agree totally.
It's never as simple and clear as you imply.

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #68 on:** April 09, 2011, 06:59 »

Quote from: nruboc on April 09, 2011, 01:07

Agree, if I was a design company on the receiving end of this call, not knowing the alternatives out there and the way IStock was treating contributors, I would be thankful for the info.

If I was running a design house, busy doing my work, and some random person called me to "inform me" of his opinions about how I should run my business, I'd hang up. Who asked you for your opinion?

And if I want to think you're a jerk for trying to damage my primary source of income, I think I'm allowed to feel that way.

cathyslife · « **Reply #69 on:** April 09, 2011, 07:27 »

Quote from: StockNRoll on April 08, 2011, 20:35

Heh, well thanks for the vote of confidence, but I am only one person. Like you said, just imagine what could happen if 10 or even 100 of us started doing this...

Actually, you aren't, but some folks just aren't voicing their gameplans here. I feel confident that others are right along side of you.

Artemis · « **Reply #70 on:** April 09, 2011, 08:17 »

Quote from: cclapper on April 09, 2011, 07:27

Quote from: StockNRoll on April 08, 2011, 20:35
Heh, well thanks for the vote of confidence, but I am only one person. Like you said, just imagine what could happen if 10 or even 100 of us started doing this...

Actually, you aren't, but some folks just aren't voicing their gameplans here. I feel confident that others are right along side of you.

Getty themselves in the first place; i remember them cold calling istock customers suggesting them to move over to Thinkstock .

SNP · « **Reply #71 on:** April 09, 2011, 09:43 »

Quote from: sjlocke on April 09, 2011, 06:59

Quote from: nruboc on April 09, 2011, 01:07
Agree, if I was a design company on the receiving end of this call, not knowing the alternatives out there and the way IStock was treating contributors, I would be thankful for the info.

If I was running a design house, busy doing my work, and some random person called me to "inform me" of his opinions about how I should run my business, I'd hang up. Who asked you for your opinion?

And if I want to think you're a jerk for trying to damage my primary source of income, I think I'm allowed to feel that way.

I wouldn't even have replied, but I'm glad you did. I've already said what I think about contributors like this attempting to destroy business at iStock. it's not worth repeating in this ridiculous thread which includes serial posts from two people who have nothing to do with iStock except that they've made a career out of being haters.

thesentinel · « **Reply #72 on:** April 09, 2011, 09:54 »

Quote from: SNP on April 09, 2011, 09:43

it's not worth repeating in this ridiculous thread which includes serial posts from two people who have nothing to do with iStock except that they've made a career out of being haters.

Les deux Tricoteuse ?!

stockastic · « **Reply #73 on:** April 09, 2011, 10:08 »

People who cold-call businesses, and try to convince them to use their products and their preferred distributors, might be called "jerks" - or maybe "entrepreneurs".

People who sweet-talk suppliers into investing time and money in long-term committments - and then slash payments once the inventory is in hand - might be called lots of things.

I'd suggest that people who are heavily invested in IS try to maintain some perspective and not fall into "my country, right or wrong" thinking. Does IS have a flag?

disorderly · « **Reply #74 on:** April 09, 2011, 10:09 »

Quote from: sjlocke on April 09, 2011, 06:59

And if I want to think you're a jerk for trying to damage my primary source of income, I think I'm allowed to feel that way.

Why do I feel like I'm watching an abused spouse lashing out at those who are trying to stop that long cycle of abuse? Sean, I can't stop you from feeling the way you feel, and don't know that I'd try even if I thought it would work. But insulting those who have decided to stand up to their abusers? That's both counterproductive and wrong.

Granted, my income from iStock was never enough to matter except in a personal satisfaction sense. And granted, I never would have entered into an exclusivity arrangement with any agency, much less one that made such (in my view) unreasonable demands. But I can see what you either can't or just won't acknowledge: that the arrangement we have with iStock is unequal and, dare I repeat the word, abusive. We all have to deal with that reality in our own ways, including having to acknowledge that some people will react to mistreatment more strongly and more angrily than others. They have cause for that anger, and much as I might wish they might channel it into something more positive, I doubt insulting them will have any desirable effect. It just makes you look petty and dishonest as you attempt to defend the indefensible.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: READ THIS if you're fed up with iStock (Read 34497 times)

loop

nruboc

sharpshot

rimglow

sharpshot

rimglow

stockastic

StockNRoll

SNP

nruboc

caspixel

nruboc

caspixel

nruboc

Microstock Posts

sharpshot

Perry

ShadySue

Sean Locke Photography

cathyslife

Artemis

SNP

thesentinel

stockastic

disorderly

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors