Author Topic: Agency Collection Now Showing up on IStock (Read 50139 times)

nruboc · « **on:** September 15, 2010, 19:57 »

They are marked by a blue camera icon

jen · « **Reply #1 on:** September 15, 2010, 20:01 »

I think buyers are going to wonder why stuff like this costs 100 credits for a Large:
http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-14242019-a-boy-pushing-a-toy-truck-on-a-sidewalk.php

When they can get this for 15:
http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-7358894-little-boy-playing-with-toy-bulldozer.php

I mean no disrespect to the photographer of the former, I just don't see so far how these are "Niche images offering high production value, regional content and cultural diversity."

loop · « **Reply #2 on:** September 15, 2010, 20:04 »

I was expecting something more shocking. These seem plain average shots, and without the edge of Vetta images.

Blufish · « **Reply #3 on:** September 15, 2010, 20:05 »

What the...?

dgilder · « **Reply #4 on:** September 15, 2010, 20:06 »

http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-14156766-beautiful-young-woman-with-shopping-bags.php

http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-14241908-man-holding-gift.php

http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-14241775-close-up-of-fake-vampire-teeth.php

OMFG.

ichiro17 · « **Reply #5 on:** September 15, 2010, 20:07 »

not sure how these get through. i don't have all great photos, and i'm sure a lot of mine are so-so, but those were early on when I was learning. Maybe I'm missing the point here of this Agency Collection

ichiro17 · « **Reply #6 on:** September 15, 2010, 20:08 »

Quote from: dgilder on September 15, 2010, 20:06

http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-14156766-beautiful-young-woman-with-shopping-bags.php

http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-14241908-man-holding-gift.php

http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-14241775-close-up-of-fake-vampire-teeth.php

OMFG.

These are pretty bad

jen · « **Reply #7 on:** September 15, 2010, 20:08 »

IMHO, a lot of these are the kind of things people post in the Critique Forum.

zzz · « **Reply #8 on:** September 15, 2010, 20:08 »

Quite odd indeed. This really reeks of Getty trying to infiltrate more and more and muddy the waters with photos that don't quite fit in the different categories. I mean, they certainly aren't Vetta quality. What is going on here?

nruboc · « **Reply #9 on:** September 15, 2010, 20:09 »

Quote from: dgilder on September 15, 2010, 20:06

http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-14156766-beautiful-young-woman-with-shopping-bags.php

Shocking, what need does this fill? Oh maybe the other 1000's of identical shots

jen · « **Reply #10 on:** September 15, 2010, 20:18 »

Maybe I am being too harsh but a lot of these Agency pictures look soft too. Zoom in on these:
http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-14241977-a-young-boy-being-served-breakfast.php
http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-14241973-a-young-boy-playing-with-a-toy-truck-on-a-neighborhood-sidewalk.php
http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-14241811-young-boy-standing-in-park-in-autumn.php

This is really not good.

Beach Bum · « **Reply #11 on:** September 15, 2010, 20:29 »

Wow! This is amazing. Would any of these pass Istock's inspection?

sharply_done · « **Reply #12 on:** September 15, 2010, 20:30 »

Wow, those are are really bad - no way they're gonna command premium pricing.
I was expecting something to compete with Blend, or maybe even select images from Blend.

Early prediction: Agency will fail even worse than E+.

jen · « **Reply #13 on:** September 15, 2010, 20:31 »

Quote from: nruboc on September 15, 2010, 20:09

Quote from: dgilder on September 15, 2010, 20:06
http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-14156766-beautiful-young-woman-with-shopping-bags.php

Shocking, what need does this fill? Oh maybe the other 1000's of identical shots

That's not Agency!

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #14 on:** September 15, 2010, 21:17 »

OMG. My poor buyers. Having to wade through this stuff...

dgilder · « **Reply #15 on:** September 15, 2010, 21:17 »

Whoops, you are right, that one was my bad, it was in between two others and I must have missed the color.

Is it me? Or are those logos in the blurry photo of the kid with the toy trucks?

dgilder · « **Reply #16 on:** September 15, 2010, 21:22 »

Logos, logos everywhere, but not a drop to drink

http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-14242109-combs-and-brushes-in-a-drawer.php

dgilder · « **Reply #17 on:** September 15, 2010, 21:28 »

Oh WOW. If you want to exclude these Agency files from your search, the only option is to exclude both Agency AND Vetta.

desmondfun · « **Reply #18 on:** September 15, 2010, 21:32 »

LMAO... who gonna buy those with 55 credits or so...

Poor contributors... because nobody gonna pay for that in the end of the day.
If it is at 10 credits or so, I will consider.

Istock gonna kill himself... do they really think buyers are stupid? Buyers can buy somewhere else for 10x times cheaper.

This is a lose-lose-lose situation. Istock lose. Buyer lose. Contributor lose.

epantha · « **Reply #19 on:** September 15, 2010, 21:38 »

It's like the nightmare that never ends.

disorderly · « **Reply #20 on:** September 15, 2010, 21:41 »

Quote from: desmondfun on September 15, 2010, 21:32

This is a lose-lose-lose situation. Istock lose. Buyer lose. Contributor lose.

I don't know. Feels like an opportunity to turn lemons into lemonade. If iStock thinks this crap can sell at 10x the price, I wonder how well higher quality recreations would do somewhere else. Just a thought...

dgilder · « **Reply #21 on:** September 15, 2010, 21:46 »

Yeah, if this is some of the best of the best of traditional RF stock, wow, we really have been giving away the kitchen sink selling through microstock agencies.

KB · « **Reply #22 on:** September 15, 2010, 21:47 »

Reminds me of Fotolia's "Infinite" collection when it began. Has that one gotten any better?

Blufish · « **Reply #23 on:** September 15, 2010, 21:48 »

Anyone else notice that all of these extremely blah pics are from the same person?

SNP · « **Reply #24 on:** September 15, 2010, 21:48 »

they are just plain bad. putting them next to our work and charging more for them is insulting. this is only one contributor so far, but you'd think they would have put the best foot forward. no way these are being inspected by the same standards. otherwise we might as well quit spending money on good equipment and start uploading pictures from our cellphones.

I'm embarrassed iStock. and disappointed. I hope you know what you are doing. sigh. I feel tested beyond the limit now.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Agency Collection Now Showing up on IStock (Read 50139 times)

nruboc

jen

loop

Blufish

dgilder

ichiro17

ichiro17

jen

zzz

nruboc

jen

Beach Bum

sharply_done

jen

Sean Locke Photography

dgilder

dgilder

dgilder

desmondfun

epantha

disorderly

dgilder

KB

Blufish

SNP

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors