Author Topic: READ THIS if you're fed up with iStock (Read 38469 times)

caspixel · « **Reply #100 on:** April 09, 2011, 12:28 »

Quote from: cclapper on April 09, 2011, 12:26

Quote from: lightscribe on April 09, 2011, 12:22
snip
Totally agree about the abusive spouse thing. I wonder if psychologists will one day coin a term for this type of Stockholm Syndrome thing where the abused party tries to protect their abuser in an effort to help themselves feel more in control of the abusive situation.

Now that's funny!

There's already a name for it - iStockholm syndrome.

bunhill · « **Reply #101 on:** April 09, 2011, 12:31 »

incessantly going on about not liking iStockphoto does seem a bit pointless. Not just you.

And I think it has the potential to somewhat undermine this forum TBH. I think this forum is at its best when it is more to do with trends and the picture industry in general.

lightscribe · « **Reply #102 on:** April 09, 2011, 12:36 »

Quote from: caspixel on April 09, 2011, 12:28

Quote from: cclapper on April 09, 2011, 12:26
Quote from: lightscribe on April 09, 2011, 12:22
snip
Totally agree about the abusive spouse thing. I wonder if psychologists will one day coin a term for this type of Stockholm Syndrome thing where the abused party tries to protect their abuser in an effort to help themselves feel more in control of the abusive situation.

Now that's funny!

There's already a name for it - iStockholm syndrome.

Now that is Hilarious! Seriously some of these istock exclusives are starting to sound like Patty Hearst....Reality check...how could you possibly support a company that takes 85% of the commission...The lowest commission of any stock site that exists on this planet. Fine upload to them if you need the money but for God's sake don't be happy about it and lash out at the people who are trying to put pressure on istock to make this whole situation better. jeez it baffles the mind.

loop · « **Reply #103 on:** April 09, 2011, 12:43 »

Quote from: SNP 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.

And note that at least one of them was already a hater about four or five years ago, way before thinkstock, changes in royalties and new macrostock agency contributors. That really makes me wonder.

(And the other, for not contributing nor buying at istock spents looooooots of time there, always the first to notice and report here anything, big or tiny, that happens --More food for thought)

stockastic · « **Reply #104 on:** April 09, 2011, 12:49 »

Quote from: bunhill on April 09, 2011, 12:31

I think this forum is at its best when it is more to do with trends and the picture industry in general.

Nothing wrong with that feeling. And we accomodate it by naming threads. The name of this thread is "READ THIS if you're fed up with iStock".

Maybe someone should start another thread: "READ THIS if you think that people who complain about IStock are a bunch of naive fools".

cathyslife · « **Reply #105 on:** April 09, 2011, 12:51 »

Quote from: stockastic on April 09, 2011, 12:49

Quote from: bunhill on April 09, 2011, 12:31
I think this forum is at its best when it is more to do with trends and the picture industry in general.

Nothing wrong with that feeling. And we accomodate it by naming threads. The name of this thread is "READ THIS if you're fed up with iStock". So if you aren't fed up, why are you here, reading this, and ridiculing other posters?

You beat me to it. There are TONS of other threads here on the home page having nothing to do with istock. If someone is tired of reading about it, why even click on the thread? I think we have a bunch of in-the-closet haters here.

nruboc · « **Reply #106 on:** April 09, 2011, 12:51 »

Quote from: loop on April 09, 2011, 12:43

Quote from: SNP 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.

And note that at least one of them was already a hater about four or five years ago, way before thinkstock, changes in royalties and new macrostock agency contributors. That really makes me wonder.

(And the other, for not contributing nor buying at istock spents looooooots of time there, always the first to notice and report here anything, big or tiny, that happens --More food for thought)

You're right, I was a 'hater' five years ago when they were paying 20% commissions (the lowest in the industry at that point too) and had a ridiculously tedious upload process. There was alot to hate even back then.....LOL.. thanks for bringing that up.

caspixel · « **Reply #107 on:** April 09, 2011, 12:52 »

Quote from: loop on April 09, 2011, 12:43

And note that at least one of them was already a hater about four or five years ago, way before thinkstock, changes in royalties and new macrostock agency contributors. That really makes me wonder.

(And the other, for not contributing nor buying at istock spents looooooots of time there, always the first to notice and report here anything, big or tiny, that happens --More food for thought)

LOL. Clearly you've spent a lot of time thinking about it and following this person around. Why does it matter to you so much?

bunhill · « **Reply #108 on:** April 09, 2011, 13:00 »

Quote from: cclapper on April 09, 2011, 12:51

There are TONS of other threads here on the home page having nothing to do with istock. If someone is tired of reading about it, why even click on the thread?

There are a few posters here who seem to have a tendency towards taking every thread here in the same inevitable direction whatever the thread title.

I just don't see how it is useful to hold such partisan opinions. Surely it's more useful to be more neutral and to try to take a longer view.

SNP · « **Reply #109 on:** April 09, 2011, 13:02 »

Quote from: bunhill on April 09, 2011, 13:00

Quote from: cclapper on April 09, 2011, 12:51
There are TONS of other threads here on the home page having nothing to do with istock. If someone is tired of reading about it, why even click on the thread?

There are a few posters here who seem to have a tendency towards taking every thread here in the same inevitable direction whatever the thread title.

I just don't see how it is useful to hold such partisan opinions. Surely it's more useful to be more neutral and to try to take a longer view.

she's not looking for a real answer. any of us coming into this thread expecting a relevant discussion should have known better, me included.

caspixel · « **Reply #110 on:** April 09, 2011, 13:06 »

Quote from: SNP on April 09, 2011, 13:02

Quote from: bunhill on April 09, 2011, 13:00
Quote from: cclapper on April 09, 2011, 12:51
There are TONS of other threads here on the home page having nothing to do with istock. If someone is tired of reading about it, why even click on the thread?

There are a few posters here who seem to have a tendency towards taking every thread here in the same inevitable direction whatever the thread title.

I just don't see how it is useful to hold such partisan opinions. Surely it's more useful to be more neutral and to try to take a longer view.

she's not looking for a real answer. any of us coming into this thread expecting a relevant discussion should have known better, me included.

The discussion IS relevant however. What boggles my mind is why anyone would click on this title and expect a "non-partisan" discussion. Which again begs the question, why are *you* here? Are you fed up with iStock?

nruboc · « **Reply #111 on:** April 09, 2011, 13:07 »

Quote from: caspixel on April 09, 2011, 13:06

Quote from: SNP on April 09, 2011, 13:02
Quote from: bunhill on April 09, 2011, 13:00
Quote from: cclapper on April 09, 2011, 12:51
There are TONS of other threads here on the home page having nothing to do with istock. If someone is tired of reading about it, why even click on the thread?

There are a few posters here who seem to have a tendency towards taking every thread here in the same inevitable direction whatever the thread title.

I just don't see how it is useful to hold such partisan opinions. Surely it's more useful to be more neutral and to try to take a longer view.

she's not looking for a real answer. any of us coming into this thread expecting a relevant discussion should have known better, me included.

The discussion IS relevant however. What boggles my mind is why anyone would click on this title and expect a "non-partisan" discussion. Which again begs the question, why are *you* here? Are you fed up with iStock?

Exactly, the title of this thread says it all

photoagogo · « **Reply #112 on:** April 09, 2011, 13:30 »

I *am* fed up with iStock and their crap, so I come here looking for discussion, commiseration and ideas from my peers and fellow contributors. Instead, all I get is the mad screechings of an obsessed ex-buyer on this and every other thread with the word iStock in the title.

caspixel · « **Reply #113 on:** April 09, 2011, 13:38 »

Quote from: photoagogo on April 09, 2011, 13:30

I *am* fed up with iStock and their crap, so I come here looking for discussion, commiseration and ideas from my peers and fellow contributors. Instead, all I get is the mad screechings of an obsessed ex-buyer on this and every other thread with the word iStock in the title.

IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT USE THE IGNORE BUTTON. It's quite simple, really. But see, I think you *like* to read my posts, because it makes *you* feel better to attack me.

acv · « **Reply #114 on:** April 09, 2011, 14:03 »

Istock really have no morals! Robbing contributors! Making their banker owners filthy rich. Remember Klein bought a $10million apartment with your earnings.

It is the the great photographers that made istock the success it is. Sadly there exists nothing out there that can compete.

If some of the clever photographers at istock could create your own sales platform and everyone went there it could work.

Blend is made up of a small number of photographer/owners and they are now very successful. Bringing several million dollars.

StockNRoll · « **Reply #115 on:** April 09, 2011, 14:32 »

It wasn't my intention to upset anybody in here or to solicit their seemingly "self-deflecting" insults. I have simply decided that the more people in this industry that know the truth about istock, the better. I'm not making anything up, just providing pure facts. From there it is up to the individual to decide what to do with those facts. To my critics, I'm not a "hater" just somebody who is tired of the fact that iStock continues to profit off of the ignorance of others. It is my theory that if everybody understood exactly what goes on behind the scenes at iStock, many would choose to take their business elsewhere. That's all folks. Please allow me a moment to put my "flame" retardant suit on before you begin with the insults.... ok I'm ready now.

PaulieWalnuts · « **Reply #116 on:** April 09, 2011, 14:49 »

I wonder if browser companies can create a button to ignore entire websites. I just can't stop coming back here to watch this Jerry Micro-Springer show and need a feature like that.

cathyslife · « **Reply #117 on:** April 09, 2011, 14:54 »

That's Entertainment!

jbarber873 · « **Reply #118 on:** April 09, 2011, 15:13 »

Quote from: SNP on April 09, 2011, 13:02

Quote from: bunhill on April 09, 2011, 13:00
Quote from: cclapper on April 09, 2011, 12:51
There are TONS of other threads here on the home page having nothing to do with istock. If someone is tired of reading about it, why even click on the thread?

There are a few posters here who seem to have a tendency towards taking every thread here in the same inevitable direction whatever the thread title.

I just don't see how it is useful to hold such partisan opinions. Surely it's more useful to be more neutral and to try to take a longer view.

she's not looking for a real answer. any of us coming into this thread expecting a relevant discussion should have known better, me included.

Don't let the door hit you on the way out. One person's "neutral" is another person's "sheep". If the OP's point is to try to influence the direction of microstock as a business, then it's worth discussing. Just watching it happen and crying about it won't change anything. I don't see how any of the posts here, aside from the "hater's" and "jerk" posts, are not appropriate.

cthoman · « **Reply #119 on:** April 09, 2011, 15:40 »

In defense of the exclusives, sending iStock's customers to DT, FT or SS isn't beneficial for my business either. I'd end up making less money. Sending them to Pond5 doesn't seem very beneficial either since I don't have images there. I applaud the OP for trying to do the right thing, but it isn't necessarily helpful or beneficial to the rest of us. That said, I send customers to my own site and that doesn't help anybody but me. The moral is every man/woman for themselves.

cathyslife · « **Reply #120 on:** April 09, 2011, 15:50 »

Quote from: cthoman on April 09, 2011, 15:40

In defense of the exclusives, sending iStock's customers to Dreamstime, Fotolia or Shutterstock isn't beneficial for my business either. I'd end up making less money. Sending them to Pond5 doesn't seem very beneficial either since I don't have images there. I applaud the OP for trying to do the right thing, but it isn't necessarily helpful or beneficial to the rest of us. That said, I send customers to my own site and that doesn't help anybody but me. The moral is every man/woman for themselves.

There's going to be collateral damage no matter what happens. When the exclusives' files were being bumped to the front, the independents were losing out and the exclusives did not much care about doing anything about it. Now the tide has shifted and bloody murder is being screamed and all hell is breaking out.

I'm sad that it had to come down to this for anybody. We all would have been happier if istock had not been sold to Getty/H&F, whoever.

Yes, every man/woman for themselves.

lisafx · « **Reply #121 on:** April 09, 2011, 16:00 »

Quote from: cclapper on April 09, 2011, 15:50

I'm sad that it had to come down to this for anybody. We all would have been happier if istock had not been sold to Getty/H&F, whoever.

I completely echo this. What's been going on at Istock for the past 6 months or more is not good for ANY contributors ITLR.

Would love to see them get the search and site functionality back on track so everybody can start making (more) money again.

pancaketom · « **Reply #122 on:** April 09, 2011, 17:47 »

Quote from: lisafx on April 09, 2011, 16:00

Quote from: cclapper on April 09, 2011, 15:50

I'm sad that it had to come down to this for anybody. We all would have been happier if istock had not been sold to Getty/H&F, whoever.

I completely echo this. What's been going on at Istock for the past 6 months or more is not good for ANY contributors ITLR.

Would love to see them get the search and site functionality back on track so everybody can start making (more) money again.

Agreed, but I'd REALLY like to see them get their commission %ages back on track too.

Mantis · « **Reply #123 on:** April 09, 2011, 19:31 »

Quote from: SNP on April 09, 2011, 11:29

Quote from: sjlocke on April 09, 2011, 10:40
Lol, Stacey said 'haters'.

no right-wing tea party reference intended. definitely do not support anything of that sort.

Oh, it's the left wing then, even worse.

SNP · « **Reply #124 on:** April 09, 2011, 19:37 »

Quote from: Mantis on April 09, 2011, 19:31

Quote from: SNP on April 09, 2011, 11:29
Quote from: sjlocke on April 09, 2011, 10:40
Lol, Stacey said 'haters'.

no right-wing tea party reference intended. definitely do not support anything of that sort.

Oh, it's the left wing then, even worse.

because no one can have moderate views. has to be right or left, white or black. hate or love. no balanced perspectives or critical thinking allowed. got it.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: READ THIS if you're fed up with iStock (Read 38469 times)

caspixel

bunhill

lightscribe

loop

stockastic

cathyslife

nruboc

caspixel

bunhill

SNP

caspixel

nruboc

photoagogo

caspixel

acv

StockNRoll

PaulieWalnuts

cathyslife

jbarber873

cthoman

cathyslife

lisafx

pancaketom

Mantis

SNP

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors