MicrostockGroup
Agency Based Discussion => iStockPhoto.com => Topic started by: BaldricksTrousers on April 14, 2011, 06:36
-
Another fairly big best match shift today. The "fish" search now features three non-V/A files in the first 50, instead of three in the first 1,000. A handful of ordinary files now appear on each page (but with a ridiculous concentration on jumping goldfish, so it's not really much better).
It seems they've realised that the V/A boost was grossly overdone.
-
Some of my files' search positioning seem to have improved slightly. A lot of my decent sellers have better placement then my hottest sellers in the same category now which seems kinda strange.
-
Still only one non V/A horse in the top 200, more or less dead centre, where it was before.
-
Odd! but the Vettas chosen to be at the very top in many searches are not even among the better, just run of the mill stuff. I would have thought they wanted to flaunt the best, but no.
-
where's the difference? I thought they meant dearer=better
-
where's the difference? I thought they meant dearer=better
Oh there's a backstory of course. But it's all changed now. All smoke and mirrors.
I've got a high seller (by mystadards!) that I thought would have been good for Vetta as it started out. But at that time Vetta nominations had to have fewer than 100 sales and mine was, at that time, about 125 or so. So now I just have to watch all the newer Vettas pile in on top of mine.
-
Odd! but the Vettas chosen to be at the very top in many searches are not even among the better, just run of the mill stuff. I would have thought they wanted to flaunt the best, but no.
"Better" is subjective. It's not something the best match can determine.
It looks as if the ordinary files have been given a few more points to lift them slightly. In some searches (fish) the top files had enough points already for that to make a difference, in others (horse, monkey) the gap was still too big to pull anything much in among the V/A block. Perhaps the problem they have is that if they give enough extra points to ordinary files, the real stars in the most popular searches will push V/A completely out of contention, and that's the last thing they want.
-
Odd! but the Vettas chosen to be at the very top in many searches are not even among the better, just run of the mill stuff. I would have thought they wanted to flaunt the best, but no.
"Better" is subjective. It's not something the best match can determine.
It looks as if the ordinary files have been given a few more points to lift them slightly. In some searches (fish) the top files had enough points already for that to make a difference, in others (horse, monkey) the gap was still too big to pull anything much in among the V/A block. Perhaps the problem they have is that if they give enough extra points to ordinary files, the real stars in the most popular searches will push V/A completely out of contention, and that's the last thing they want.
Since last Thursday, Ive had 4 buyers ( presumably bought my shots before) on my private mail telling they cant find the shots in question. Vanished. I dont even bother to explain about this best match change, I just privately mail them the shots in question and high-res, they dont even mind the price.
Wonder how many more of us that are experiencing this?
-
Still only one non V/A horse in the top 200, more or less dead centre, where it was before.
Horses are one of those subjects with a long tradition and probably which very much favour Vetta and Agency collection work. You would surely have to agree that the results do look really good. Those are some great images.
If you go to a department store the fancy stuff is always in the window. I guess it's like that ?
-
Still only one non V/A horse in the top 200, more or less dead centre, where it was before.
Horses are one of those subjects with a long tradition and probably which very much favour Vetta and Agency collection work. You would surely have to agree that the results do look really good. Those are some great images.
If you go to a department store the fancy stuff is always in the window. I guess it's like that ?
The horses looks good! sure! but I suggest you have a look at Art-Wolfs gallery of horses, he also makes hundreds available as stock, then perhaps you see what we are up against. He is ofcourse a member of the Getty main core.
Im afraid the Vettas doesnt count for much there.
-
The horses looks good! sure! but I suggest you have a look at Art-Wolfs gallery of horses, he also makes hundreds available as stock, then perhaps you see what we are up against. He is ofcourse a member of the Getty main core.
Is AW still selling through Getty? He was one I alluded to in another thread as a Big Name Getty tog who doesn't (appear to be) selling there any more, just through his own site. Maybe I just can't fnd his work there any more.
-
What's different today in number of regular images in the first page (200) of photos only (with thanks to a test version of one of Sean's greasemonkey scripts that means I don't have to count these :))
Search term Reg 4/12 Reg 4/14
fish* 9 11
senior couple 20 30
woman shopping 31 36
tropical beach 12 15
spa treatment 39 44
woman eating 21 31
woman laptop 30 41
man portrait 26 35
doctor 37 45
swimming pool 13 19
summer outdoors 29 35
child outdoors 36 43
sexy woman 9 12
* both food and animal meanings
So there is a small difference, but if you aren't a flaming image, you're not on the first page of search results in the "regular" section
-
What's different today in number of regular images in the first page (200) of photos only (with thanks to a test version of one of Sean's greasemonkey scripts that means I don't have to count these :))
Search term Reg 4/12 Reg 4/14
fish* 9 11
senior couple 20 30
woman shopping 31 36
tropical beach 12 15
spa treatment 39 44
woman eating 21 31
woman laptop 30 41
man portrait 26 35
doctor 37 45
swimming pool 13 19
summer outdoors 29 35
child outdoors 36 43
sexy woman 9 12
* both food and animal meanings
So there is a small difference, but if you aren't a flaming image, you're not on the first page of search results in the "regular" section
Sean is seriously Superman! thats pretty cool
-
What's different today in number of regular images in the first page (200) of photos only (with thanks to a test version of one of Sean's greasemonkey scripts that means I don't have to count these :))
Search term Reg 4/12 Reg 4/14
fish* 9 11
senior couple 20 30
woman shopping 31 36
tropical beach 12 15
spa treatment 39 44
woman eating 21 31
woman laptop 30 41
man portrait 26 35
doctor 37 45
swimming pool 13 19
summer outdoors 29 35
child outdoors 36 43
sexy woman 9 12
* both food and animal meanings
So there is a small difference, but if you aren't a flaming image, you're not on the first page of search results in the "regular" section
when you say "regular" that means non vetta and agency only or is it also non-exlusive plus?
-
Still only one non V/A horse in the top 200, more or less dead centre, where it was before.
Horses are one of those subjects with a long tradition and probably which very much favour Vetta and Agency collection work. You would surely have to agree that the results do look really good. Those are some great images.
If you go to a department store the fancy stuff is always in the window. I guess it's like that ?
I agree with this, nicely said.
-
when you say "regular" that means non vetta and agency only or is it also non-exlusive plus?
regular = not (Vetta or Agency). So regular would include all independent, E+, exclusive.
-
Looks like there's also a heavy "new file" weight too, judging by my results, much more so than last week.
-
"(with thanks to a test version of one of Sean's greasemonkey scripts that means I don't have to count these"
Ah, an evil use I hadn't thought of! ;)
-
If you go to a department store the fancy stuff is always in the window. I guess it's like that ?
I agree with this, nicely said.
Yes but in a department store it is usually easy to find the cheaper stuff if that is what you want.
-
If you go to a department store the fancy stuff is always in the window. I guess it's like that ?
I agree with this, nicely said.
Yes but in a department store it is usually easy to find the cheaper stuff if that is what you want.
Lots of times stores will put sale stuff in the windows to entice people to come in and buy the more expensive stuff.
-
Yes but in a department store it is usually easy to find the cheaper stuff if that is what you want.
They maybe need a few more signs, but it's not hard at iStock.
Lots of times stores will put sale stuff in the windows to entice people to come in and buy the more expensive stuff.
Destination stores always want the windows and entrances to look fantastic. Think of the big stores in any capital city.
Or think of the Apple website for that matter. You really have to hunt to find the refurb stuff. It's there if you search.
-
Yes but in a department store it is usually easy to find the cheaper stuff if that is what you want.
Lots of times stores will put sale stuff in the windows to entice people to come in and buy the more expensive stuff.
Very true, but if iStock tried that, they'd be accused of bait and swtich, or similar.
-
If you go to a department store the fancy stuff is always in the window. I guess it's like that ?
Not sure that department store is a good analogy - isn't the average age of a department store customer over 65? I can't remember the last time I set foot in a department store except to walk through one if it was at a mall and that was the way from my car to wherever. But even when I did shop in them, they put eye-catching stuff in the window, and that could be seasonal merchandise, sale merchandise or something they hoped might get you to walk in the door instead of walking by.
Department stores don't typically cover the ground from Neiman Marcus to Wal-Mart with Macy's in the middle, which is what IS is more like now, with Agency through the Dollar Bin.
If you look at amazon.com (to cite but one example of this sort of search interface in an online store), when you look at home theatre systems, there are search panels on the left that let you search by brand, by watts, by price (with a list of set ranges and then a from and to text entry field where you specify your price range), rating, etc.. I'm not sure why this successful business model for online shopping is one that Getty/iStock disdain. It seems to be working pretty well for amazon.
This isn't the 1920s where we're trying to appeal to the carriage trade and keep out the riff raff. Have a premium collections landing page (in addition to photos, illos, video, etc.) so that the high end buyers can be directed to start there and never have to see those of us who don't play in that rarefied atmosphere; put a full range of on off switches (and let preferences be saved) so buyers can search as their needs dictate.
I am truly convinced that they can still flog the high price stuff successfully even if they allow buyers to chose not to look at it. It seems like insanity not to let buyers choose and have them take their business elsewhere out of frustration.
-
Maybe department store has a different meaning to you. I think of say Selfridges or the Galleries Laffayette or even Brown Thomas. Often you go in for the atmosphere but just buy a coffee or a tee shirt.
Not to labour the point.
-
I think a pretty important point is often forgotten: the vast majority of buyers does NOT read the forums or newsletters.
Awhile ago i bumped into someone who works on the design department of a rather big company here that spends over $2500/month on stock. He said they recently moved over from istock to shutterstock because istock suddenly tenfolded their prices and became very, very expensive. Don't overestimate buyers, plenty of them are clueless about the different collections and will just turn elsewhere if the expensive ones dominate the search results.
-
I suspect iStock is trying to exploit buyer ignorance - believing that they will not realise there is still cheaper stuff and will not realise that there are alternative sites, so they will pay the price regardless, thinking there is no alternative. It probably works, up to a point. Long term, though, if the buyers get the feeling they are being taken for suckers, it seems certain to backfire.
-
I think a pretty important point is often forgotten: the vast majority of buyers does NOT read the forums or newsletters.
Awhile ago i bumped into someone who works on the design department of a rather big company here that spends over $2500/month on stock. He said they recently moved over from istock to shutterstock because istock suddenly tenfolded their prices and became very, very expensive. Don't overestimate buyers, plenty of them are clueless about the different collections and will just turn elsewhere if the expensive ones dominate the search results.
Good point. I think what you describe may well be happening in significant numbers. Comparing the first quarters of 2010 and 2011 my sales on SS were 28% up and 25% down on Istock. The growth in SS is mainly through ever-increasing PPD sales and they must be getting those new customers from somewhere. Istock do appear determined to drive their ship onto the rocks as quickly as they can.
-
Still only one non V/A horse in the top 200, more or less dead centre, where it was before.
Horses are one of those subjects with a long tradition and probably which very much favour Vetta and Agency collection work. You would surely have to agree that the results do look really good. Those are some great images.
If you go to a department store the fancy stuff is always in the window. I guess it's like that ?
That doesn't mean buyers are going to buy that expensive thing from the window though. And the stores don't make buyers wade through hundreds of racks of clothes before they find the ones they can afford.
In fact, I wonder if your analogy really works here because if the department store is Macys or a high end store, someone that can't afford to shop there wouldn't even go in. They instead would go to JCPenney or Sears or Walmart.
-
I think a pretty important point is often forgotten: the vast majority of buyers does NOT read the forums or newsletters.
Awhile ago i bumped into someone who works on the design department of a rather big company here that spends over $2500/month on stock. He said they recently moved over from istock to shutterstock because istock suddenly tenfolded their prices and became very, very expensive. Don't overestimate buyers, plenty of them are clueless about the different collections and will just turn elsewhere if the expensive ones dominate the search results.
Good point. I think what you describe may well be happening in significant numbers. Comparing the first quarters of 2010 and 2011 my sales on Shutterstock were 28% up and 25% down on Istock. The growth in Shutterstock is mainly through ever-increasing PPD sales and they must be getting those new customers from somewhere. Istock do appear determined to drive their ship onto the rocks as quickly as they can.
Not (deliberately) trying to hate on istock right this second, but I think it's hysterically funny that, the minute a forum stink is raised by contributors, iStock is quick to point out that only a small portion of people use the forums. Yet when it comes to something huge for contributors, they are quick to note that all the info is in the forums for buyers to find. To quote a favorite movie, "It don't compute."
-
I suspect iStock is trying to exploit buyer ignorance - believing that they will not realise there is still cheaper stuff and will not realise that there are alternative sites, so they will pay the price regardless, thinking there is no alternative. It probably works, up to a point. Long term, though, if the buyers get the feeling they are being taken for suckers, it seems certain to backfire.
This are my thoughts also. At one point IS was the only game in town with quality. That is no longer the case and buyers are wising up.
My company recently switched to a yearly subscription to Shutterstock from PAYG with IS. We now only purchase from IS if we can't find what we need at Shutterstock (which does not happen often). We have gone from $1000 per month at IS to maybe $100 per month and we are mostly print so we buy L and up sizes.
-
If you go to a department store the fancy stuff is always in the window. I guess it's like that ?
Not sure that department store is a good analogy - isn't the average age of a department store customer over 65?
I shop at Macy's all the time and I am not over 65... Yet. They have great sales that are easy to find.
[/quote] from jsnover
If you look at amazon.com (to cite but one example of this sort of search interface in an online store), when you look at home theatre systems, there are search panels on the left that let you search by brand, by watts, by price (with a list of set ranges and then a from and to text entry field where you specify your price range), rating, etc.. I'm not sure why this successful business model for online shopping is one that Getty/iStock disdain. It seems to be working pretty well for amazon.
[/quote]
Totally agree with this, MOST online stores have a sort by price. Seems to work out just fine.
ETA: sorry this post looks weird, I don't know how to break quotes.
-
I don't think many buyers who are not also contributors spend tons of time, if any, in the forums. so it is upsetting realizing that many buyers don't know they just need to move in a few pages and find main collection stuff again. FWIW, I have VERY few Vetta or Agency files and my sales this week are really good. and two of my good friends who have a great deal of Vetta have been hit very hard with this best match shake. so, it's tough to pinpoint any pattern, if there even is a pattern.
-
I think a pretty important point is often forgotten: the vast majority of buyers does NOT read the forums or newsletters.
Awhile ago i bumped into someone who works on the design department of a rather big company here that spends over $2500/month on stock. He said they recently moved over from istock to shutterstock because istock suddenly tenfolded their prices and became very, very expensive. Don't overestimate buyers, plenty of them are clueless about the different collections and will just turn elsewhere if the expensive ones dominate the search results.
I don't think that could be said enough times. iStock needs to step up its game in the marketing/communications area which they've always done extremely poorly to the point of being embarassing.
-
I don't think many buyers who are not also contributors spend tons of time, if any, in the forums. so it is upsetting realizing that many buyers don't know they just need to move in a few pages and find main collection stuff again. FWIW, I have VERY few Vetta or Agency files and my sales this week are really good. and two of my good friends who have a great deal of Vetta have been hit very hard with this best match shake. so, it's tough to pinpoint any pattern, if there even is a pattern.
There clearly is a pattern, which is that iStock thinks it will make more money by shoving expensive and wholly-owned files at the front. Whether that will really con people into spending more money (as iStock obviously hopes) is an entirely different question.
Another pattern is that iStock has lost the plot. So it is quite likely to do things that don't work and end up damaging almost everyone, itself included.
My sales are down by about half this week, with sales/image at around 5% of what they were at their peak, a very long time ago. You seem to be in a very small minority if you are managing to ride this out - you must have a lot of stuff in special interest niches where they are not being flooded out of the front of the search.
-
IStock is "old-hand" they had their way for so many years and you cant teach an old dog to sit. Suddenly there are sites mushrooming, like SS, FT, DT, suddenly IS, finds itself in tough competition and frankly I dont think they knew how to deal with this.
Think about it! after Bruces departure, none in the Admin is a fully fledged business-man as such, like KK, its mostly computer guys. When the panic lifted they come up with this Vetta business which was a success in the beginning untill they started to force the damned thing onto the buyers.
Now the Getty Admin, they ARE business people and for all we know they decided that the IS admin couldnt run the show properly so they step in to try and save whats left.
This could be one scenario we really havent thought of.
-
after Bruces departure, none in the Admin is a fully fledged business-man as such, l
Bruce was a fully fledged business man? I thought he was a rocker and a photographer who happened to stumble upon a great idea that took on a life of its own. From my understanding, he had several failed ventures before iStock.
I think one of the reasons iStock flourised is BECAUSE Bruce WASN'T a fully fledged business man. If he was, he never would have cared about the contributors or the buyers, just the bottom line.
-
He is an entrepreneur, same as Branson is. There aren't any qualifications for it. It's kinda like photography in that way. As for business, he probably sold iStock for much less than he should have done.
-
He is an entrepreneur, same as Branson is. There aren't any qualifications for it. It's kinda like photography in that way. As for business, he probably sold iStock for much less than he should have done.
I suspect the business might have had financial backers who actually had control over when and how it was sold. Venture capitalists will always grab the bird in the hand rather than wait for future, potentially larger, returns. Of course back then none of us would have believed that Istock could continue to double their prices and their volume of sales every year for several more years to come.
-
Not (deliberately) trying to hate on istock right this second, but I think it's hysterically funny that, the minute a forum stink is raised by contributors, iStock is quick to point out that only a small portion of people use the forums. Yet when it comes to something huge for contributors, they are quick to note that all the info is in the forums for buyers to find. To quote a favorite movie, "It don't compute."
That's exactly right, that's exactly what they think!
Forums were NEVER a good place to disperse important information, and they still aren't. If you need to contact contributors, send an email. If you need to contact buyers, send an email. All the other sites do it, so it can't be a technology thing...it's just an excuse thing.
-
after Bruces departure, none in the Admin is a fully fledged business-man as such, l
Bruce was a fully fledged business man? I thought he was a rocker and a photographer who happened to stumble upon a great idea that took on a life of its own. From my understanding, he had several failed ventures before iStock.
I think one of the reasons iStock flourised is BECAUSE Bruce WASN'T a fully fledged business man. If he was, he never would have cared about the contributors or the buyers, just the bottom line.
AND, what makes you think he cared all that much?? because he said so? ofcourse he cared, that was in his interest but lets not fool ourselves, he did sell out to Getty, fully aware of their reputation, fully aware of their business methods, i.e. buy something, leave it alone for a couple of years and then BANG! its a classic indead.
It takes one to know one. Apart from that, he is a swell guy.
-
after Bruces departure, none in the Admin is a fully fledged business-man as such, l
Bruce was a fully fledged business man? I thought he was a rocker and a photographer who happened to stumble upon a great idea that took on a life of its own. From my understanding, he had several failed ventures before iStock.
I think one of the reasons iStock flourised is BECAUSE Bruce WASN'T a fully fledged business man. If he was, he never would have cared about the contributors or the buyers, just the bottom line.
AND, what makes you think he cared all that much?? because he said so? ofcourse he cared, that was in his interest but lets not fool ourselves, he did sell out to Getty, fully aware of their reputation, fully aware of their business methods, i.e. buy something, leave it alone for a couple of years and then BANG! its a classic indead.
It takes one to know one. Apart from that, he is a swell guy.
When all is said and done, money talks and BS walks.
ETA: the site turned BS (spelled out) into the word "crap", funny but does not make the point.
-
Holy crap! I just checked my Istock sales from yesterday. They were less than 1/3 of a normal day!!!
Last time I saw a non-holiday weekday that low was 2007 or so. WT-F is going on???
-
Holy crap! I just checked my Istock sales from yesterday. They were less than 1/3 of a normal day!!!
Last time I saw a non-holiday weekday that low was 2007 or so. WT-F is going on???
"Tweaking" can be painful, no? :)
Yesterday (and most of last week) had returned to low-ish normal for me (versus the previous disastrous week). It's be interesting to see if other independents report a poor day yesterday - if independence got fewer "best match points" (using Baldrick's Trousers' explanation of the weighting) in this week's tune-up.
-
"Tweaking" can be painful, no? :)
Yesterday (and most of last week) had returned to low-ish normal for me (versus the previous disastrous week). It's be interesting to see if other independents report a poor day yesterday - if independence got fewer "best match points" (using Baldrick's Trousers' explanation of the weighting) in this week's tune-up.
Something major happened yesterday. Rest of the week was the new (low) normal for me too. Then Friday fell off a cliff.
You're right, I would be interested in knowing if other independents saw the same thing.
-
My sales were about 30% less than the last few Fridays but I occasionally do have a bad Friday so I didn't really think anything about it.
-
Friday dropped about 20% for me in $$$ and DLs, so maybe tax day affected a lot of people, trying to get that all done with.
-
Yesterday was an 'average to low' Friday for me. Thursday was very good by standards of late and Wednesday very poor.
Despite the huge fluctations in fortune this week's payout request will be the highest for 5 weeks. It will however still be about 10% lower than the corresponding week in 2010 and nearly 20% lower than 2009.
-
Stats are so small as to be statistically irrelevant, but Thursday AND Friday were awful. Zeroes on Thursday :(
-
Thursday was OK, Friday: can live with it. in general everything is down BUT, they keep tweaking and tweaking and tweaking and tweaking, until they have tweaked themselves and us all the way to the dole que and we will all be living like the Pinnebergs and the father will be Allastair. Va bene, gracie.
-
Thursday and Friday last week were certainly nothing to write home about. That's the way it's been going for me for a while though.
Today is like a Sunday so far. R e a l l y slow.
-
same here.... really sloooow for monday... anyone doing fairly well?? this weekend was terrible also
-
Absolutely dire sales. Depressing. I am getting very annoyed at the clowns who run this show and are damaging our sales, our living. I have never witnessed so many self destructive decisions in the space of 12 months anywhere. It's unbelievable.
-
today started off well, but then it tanked. totally.
-
today started off well, but then it tanked. totally.
Yup, same here.
-
Not good here either.
So much seems to be still going badly at iStock. If they keep going like this it won't be so much 'Your future is bright'. More 'Your future is sh*te' ;)
-
So much seems to be still going badly at iStock. If they keep going like this it won't be so much 'Your future is bright'. More 'Your future is sh*te' ;)
LOL! If you have to wear "shades" because your future is bright, what do you have to wear if your future is "sh*te"? Galoshes? ;D
-
So much seems to be still going badly at iStock. If they keep going like this it won't be so much 'Your future is bright'. More 'Your future is sh*te' ;)
LOL! If you have to wear "shades" because your future is bright, what do you have to wear if your future is "sh*te"? Galoshes? ;D
Hip waders :)
-
LOL! If you have to wear "shades" because your future is bright, what do you have to wear if your future is "sh*te"? Galoshes? ;D
Hip waders :)
Perfect!!
-
:D
I'll take a gas mask too ;)
-
How 'bout a full body condom?
-
same here.... really sloooow for monday... anyone doing fairly well?? this weekend was terrible also
Ditto what you wrote, unfortunately. :-( Just FYI I'm an exclusive vector contributor.
-
same here.... really sloooow for monday... anyone doing fairly well??
Yes, today was a pretty decent day - no best anything ever, but definitely returning to a recognizable state. But who knows when the next aftershock will hit?
-
today ended up being average for me. things picked up a bit after a slow afternoon.
-
almost a week , no sale...so...so weird ???
-
Slow sales, but an overnight EL, counting as yesterday, helped the $$$. ;D
-
Nothing much after I posted yesterday. About a third of what is "normal".
DLs wise the same as Sunday.
Bwah!
-
same here.... really sloooow for monday... anyone doing fairly well?? this weekend was terrible also
Ditto what you wrote, unfortunately. :-( Just FYI I'm an exclusive vector contributor.
I am an exclusive vector as well. My weekend was about average for me. Monday started out promising and then fell flat. :-[
-
same here.... really sloooow for monday... anyone doing fairly well?? this weekend was terrible also
Ditto what you wrote, unfortunately. :-( Just FYI I'm an exclusive vector contributor.
I am an exclusive vector as well. My weekend was about average for me. Monday started out promising and then fell flat. :-[
its funny after i wrote this statement, i started getting downloads and finished the day really good. It really feels like your portfolio gets to be shown at the front of searches (flow) and then ebbs towards the back of the searches at certain hours. If you really think about this, it would seem like the only fair way to showcase all of the contributors works to some degree.
-
I have been advocating this for years, a few differant searches, old files, new files, etc, etc and at various times of the day. Strange they havent done that already? and it would be a fair game.
-
Still crap ???
-
This new best match has not been in my favor. Yesterday was bad, today is even worse. Glad to hear that some are doing well.
-
Wow. THREE threads over on iStock today complaining about wanting to exclude Vetta and Agency. And all three said they are or will be taking their business elsewhere.
Nic_Taylor - a long time exclusive contributor: There seriously needs to be a way to exclude Vetta and Agency collections. I've been with iStock for over 7 years and I'm getting sick and tired of image searches taking way too long because Vetta and Agency images are getting way way way to much freaking top placement in searches. I have bought from iStock because prices were cheap, key word there WERE. That's what iStock built it's name on and that's what people have always expected. If I was willing to pay $200-$300 I would be buying pics from Getty or some other site rather than iStock.
And don't give me this "we're working on it" bull-crap. I've been buying photos from other sites instead of iStock lately because I've gotten fed up with Vetta and Agency pictures that I can't exclude. I have never and will never buy them and there needs to be a way to remove them from searches.
FCDC - a buyer: Don't get me wrong -- I love iStock. I have spent thousands and thousands of dollars with iStockphoto.com over the past few years, between my own freelance business, other clients and contract work I've done.
That said, I'm at my end -- there HAS to be a way to exclue Vetta and Agency photos from the search.
There's nothing wrong with V/A -- but when introduced, it was promised to be a small, selective group of images, a very small percentage.
Today was the third time in 2 weeks where I searched for an image, got it approved by the client and went to final production -- only to realized, oops -- thats a Vetta image and my client is unwilling to pay that amount.
I am giving my business to Veer.com -- who lets you filter their marketplace photos by credit; sorry, istock -- you gotta do something different here.
-- Frustrated in DC
akirk- a buyer: These days when I search for an image, all I see are images costing 50 or more credits. What happened to the days of cheap photos? Time to hit Fotolia i guess.
Looks like no one is minding the store either. Two of those posts mention contributors. akirk's post is 16 hours old and FCDC's has been up for almost an hour at my posting time.
-
The best match is a bit of a mixed bag for me (I'm also an exclusive vector contributor). Sales and downloads are down, but the sales represent a dramatic increase in the variety of files sold instead of the same files over and over. So I'm torn ... of course I'd like more sales but I also appreciate that -- from what I can see -- a wider variety of my files are ending up in front of buyers' faces.
-
time to drudge up the "buyers bailing on istock thread"
-
time to drudge up the "buyers bailing on istock thread"
by the amount of new exclusives joining and posting on here at msg. Looks like people are really starting to look at alternatives.
-
sales were good today. normally good and steady FWIW.
-
They were OK actually, not tremendous but OK.
-
They were OK actually, not tremendous but OK.
I wouldn't say tremendous either. but at least for me they were better than average, which was a surprise after yesterday being so up and down.
-
They were OK actually, not tremendous but OK.
I wouldn't say tremendous either. but at least for me they were better than average, which was a surprise after yesterday being so up and down.
I had 2 XSm sales yesterday. :-(
I always seem to have to 'pay' for a good day - last week I paid for my relatively good Wednesday by three poor days on the trot.
-
I always seem to have to 'pay' for a good day - last week I paid for my relatively good Wednesday by three poor days on the trot.
That is true for me too - but the balancing act seems to occur across all agencies. I sometimes get paranoid about it and think the whole microstock industry must be in cahoots to keep me in my place :D
-
Yesterday was better than Monday, but still not great. Down to about 50% of a decent week at the moment.
The search results are still looking much the same there. Many, many files from very few contributors coming up in a lot of searches, which doesn't give a the customers a wide selection of material or various price points.
Has to be very bad in the long term.
I'm hoping that the run up to the holidays are having at least some effect on sales at the moment.
-
Yesterday was better than Monday, but still not great. Down to about 50% of a decent week at the moment.
The search results are still looking much the same there. Many, many files from very few contributors coming up in a lot of searches, which doesn't give a the customers a wide selection of material or various price points.
Has to be very bad in the long term.
I'm hoping that the run up to the holidays are having at least some effect on sales at the moment.
Hi Dave!
This morning is quite OK, almost like in the old days. Hope that goes for all.
best Chris
-
Yesterday was better than Monday, but still not great. Down to about 50% of a decent week at the moment.
The search results are still looking much the same there. Many, many files from very few contributors coming up in a lot of searches, which doesn't give a the customers a wide selection of material or various price points.
Has to be very bad in the long term.
I'm hoping that the run up to the holidays are having at least some effect on sales at the moment.
Hi Dave!
This morning is quite OK, almost like in the old days. Hope that goes for all.
best Chris
Hi Chris
That's good to know! I can live with the old Ebb and Flo, it's sudden and irreversible PF death that worries me!
All the best
Dave
-
Yesterday was better than Monday, but still not great. Down to about 50% of a decent week at the moment.
The search results are still looking much the same there. Many, many files from very few contributors coming up in a lot of searches, which doesn't give a the customers a wide selection of material or various price points.
Has to be very bad in the long term.
I'm hoping that the run up to the holidays are having at least some effect on sales at the moment.
Hi Dave!
This morning is quite OK, almost like in the old days. Hope that goes for all.
best Chris
Hi Chris
That's good to know! I can live with the old Ebb and Flo, it's sudden and irreversible PF death that worries me!
All the best
Dave
20 sales in the early mornings up to 12, mid-day and just one sale from there on to now. This is what makes me think independants are cut-off, certain times of the day, criminal, but there you go.
-
Two for me so far today. :(
Haven't been having a particularly brilliant time anyway lately, but this is getting ridiculous.
It's actually worse than last Sunday!
It certainly makes you feel as if something is happening to turn the DLs on and off.
Doesn't look like it's just non-exclusives wired up to the switch though!
-
Two for me so far today. :(
Haven't been having a particularly brilliant time anyway lately, but this is getting ridiculous.
It's actually worse than last Sunday!
It certainly makes you feel as if something is happening to turn the DLs on and off.
Doesn't look like it's just non-exclusives wired up to the switch though!
No it certainly doesnt! something is cooking, and I dont know what.
-
My earnings this month: 11$ (compared to 83 $ last April). Not a single sale since the 15th and only one since the 13th. Slow doesn't even cover it - dead is more likely.
-
20 sales in the early mornings up to 12, mid-day and just one sale from there on to now. This is what makes me think independants are cut-off, certain times of the day, criminal, but there you go.
That's impossible, unless you are accusing them of either batch processing at different times or fraudulently not reporting sales. The search isn't changing that dramatically at certain times of day. In any case, a fair number of buyers probably have stuff in light boxes and buy it days or weeks after finding it, not the instant they see it.
-
"20 sales in the early mornings up to 12, mid-day and just one sale from there on to now. This is what makes me think independants are cut-off, certain times of the day, criminal, but there you go."
Same here.
Itīs the upcoming Easter holiday, for many businesses this is the last real work day. Tomorrow many businesses are closed already or just tydying their desk.
If you see a big drop in downloads next week donīt be surprised...
-
20 sales in the early mornings up to 12, mid-day and just one sale from there on to now. This is what makes me think independants are cut-off, certain times of the day, criminal, but there you go.
I often get sales in the UK morning then nada for the rest of the day. It isn't only independents.
If you wanted to be sure, you'd just have to keep checking that some of your easy to find (by best match or downloads, for example) files are still findable. I guess they'd have to cut off your entire portfolio, which would be easily discoverable.
-
20 sales in the early mornings up to 12, mid-day and just one sale from there on to now. This is what makes me think independants are cut-off, certain times of the day, criminal, but there you go.
I often get sales in the UK morning then nada for the rest of the day. It isn't only independents.
If you wanted to be sure, you'd just have to keep checking that some of your easy to find (by best match or downloads, for example) files are still findable. I guess they'd have to cut off your entire portfolio, which would be easily discoverable.
this is what makes me think that maybe they are doing some sort of batch processing and we aren't actually seeing our downloads the instant it happens. downloads seem to come in batches lately for me too.
-
this is what makes me think that maybe they are doing some sort of batch processing and we aren't actually seeing our downloads the instant it happens. downloads seem to come in batches lately for me too.
I don't know if they are batch processing the sales, instead of reporting them in real time, but it wouldn't surprise me. Seems to happen on DT sometimes for me too.
As long as my sales and royalties are accurately recorded, that's all I care about. But the long dry spells are pretty weird.
-
Thursday turned out to be a brillant day! like in the old days. Is the search beginning to work or what? anybody else with same experience?
-
Why do (some) people over at iStock keep insisting that Getty knows what it is doing and is a successful company? Getty was in real financial trouble prior to the purchase by H&F (and probably still is, but since they are private and don't have to publish financials no one but H&F knows the extent). Getty never saw microstock coming and have been resisting it all along. If they are trying to push iStock into a midstock agency, obviously they haven't been following the past "successes" of that business model.
I also think it's interesting that we haven't heard KKT brag about iStock's financials lately. That seemed to be his favorite thing to do (right before taking more from buyers and contributors).
-
I saw those comments was was sorely tempted to reply with a reality check, not only about Getty but about other examples of corporations that made a mistake, stubbornly stuck to it when things were changing around them and the company tanked in the end.
I decided to save my breath to cool my porridge as the saying goes.
Sometimes it's important to people to believe that their leader, or the person running things, is really competent and knows what they're doing. Things feel very uncomfortable otherwise. "Getty knows best" is like a little kid's blanket, held against the cheek. It's possible things will turn out OK, but I think it's equally possible that they'll destroy IS (even if Getty proper survives).
-
I saw those comments was was sorely tempted to reply with a reality check, not only about Getty but about other examples of corporations that made a mistake, stubbornly stuck to it when things were changing around them and the company tanked in the end.
I decided to save my breath to cool my porridge as the saying goes.
Probably the wiser choice as your post most likely would have been deleted.
-
Thursday turned out to be a brillant day! like in the old days. Is the search beginning to work or what? anybody else with same experience?
Nope. April is bad at IS for me. This week is worse than bad. It's pitiful.
-
I decided to save my breath to cool my porridge as the saying goes.
:D
-
I saw those comments was was sorely tempted to reply with a reality check, not only about Getty but about other examples of corporations that made a mistake, stubbornly stuck to it when things were changing around them and the company tanked in the end.
I decided to save my breath to cool my porridge as the saying goes.
Sometimes it's important to people to believe that their leader, or the person running things, is really competent and knows what they're doing. Things feel very uncomfortable otherwise. "Getty knows best" is like a little kid's blanket, held against the cheek. It's possible things will turn out OK, but I think it's equally possible that they'll destroy IS (even if Getty proper survives).
The emperor has no clothes. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Emperor%27s_New_Clothes)
-
Why do (some) people over at iStock keep insisting that Getty knows what it is doing and is a successful company? Getty was in real financial trouble prior to the purchase by H&F (and probably still is, but since they are private and don't have to publish financials no one but H&F knows the extent). Getty never saw microstock coming and have been resisting it all along. If they are trying to push iStock into a midstock agency, obviously they haven't been following the past "successes" of that business model.
I also think it's interesting that we haven't heard KKT brag about iStock's financials lately. That seemed to be his favorite thing to do (right before taking more from buyers and contributors).
The creative world is always bad, has always been and will always be. Its a classic "bad" business. We are all smack in the middle of it! nice hey.
-
I think that some people sometimes miss some of the issues when they talk about microstock.
It is about much more than just having started out cheap. Much more significant IMO was the crowd sourced, anyone can join model ---> which makes it possible to have huge collections from a much larger pool and for people to learn as they go along . And the contributors do so much of the work (selection, keywording, captioning, descriptions even QC to some extent and especially if you consider that inspection is essentially crowd sourced). All of that was previously work which involved staff. The iStockphoto / microstock model was surely much more streamlined.
The model was just about up and running slightly ahead of 6MP digital SLRs becoming affordable + ubiquitous broadband. It would be daft to pretend that many people could have predicted the stock model changing so dramatically, so quickly.
It really undermines lots of great work to think that it is all or only about price.
-
Thursday turned out to be a brillant day! like in the old days. Is the search beginning to work or what? anybody else with same experience?
No. I only had 5 downloads yesterday and 4 so far today, which is very unusual. :\
-
Still absolutely dire. Really really awful sales. I am on target to earn the lowest amount in nearly 2 years. I have pretty much written Istock off as they have basically destroyed most of what was good about them.
-
Thursday turned out to be a brillant day! like in the old days. Is the search beginning to work or what? anybody else with same experience?
Nope, April could easily be WME for me over there. Istock might be dropping to the fifth ranked agency for me - either already this month or next month if things do not pick up again.
-
If sales continue the way that they are for the month, I'll end at only 66% of my income for the worst month in the past 2 years! Then again, I've only uploaded 11 images since August...
-
Thursday and Friday last week were certainly nothing to write home about. That's the way it's been going for me for a while though.
Today is like a Sunday so far. R e a l l y slow.
went from 15 a day as a non, then best match changed, so 10 a day, then ZERO DL yesterday (Friday). I know it's only one day but ohy vey.
-
Still dismal.
-
Still dismal.
Yep. With Easter and spring break looming, don't expect to see much activity for the rest of the month.
-
Really ? I am earning decent amounts everyday on another site and that includes Easter.
-
I have a really, REALLY bad month, I'm propably going to end up with about half (50%) of last month's earnings. The latest time my sales was as bad at IS was in the summer of 2009 :(
-
I have a really, REALLY bad month, I'm propably going to end up with about half (50%) of last month's earnings. The latest time my sales was as bad at IS was in the summer of 2009 :(
On a lighter note, SS is already almost BME and there is almost a week left... :)
-
I've only just noticed but it would appear that the latest best match has given a very significant boost to exclusive images.
I tried a few sample searches, with about 1000 results in each, and 70-90%+ of the first 100 images were exclusive. The percentage of exclusive images invariably reduces with each further page into the search. For example on the last page or two of the sample searches exclusive images had dropped to only 30% of the results.
I doubt that this is coincidence. If you are an independent contributor and sales have fallen since the new best match was introduced then this may be the reason.
-
^^^ Makes sense. This must be part of a last ditch effort to convince exclusives that site sales are not falling. Even with a stacked deck the huge sales decline is becoming obvious.
-
I've only just noticed but it would appear that the latest best match has given a very significant boost to exclusive images.
I tried a few sample searches, with about 1000 results in each, and 70-90%+ of the first 100 images were exclusive. The percentage of exclusive images invariably reduces with each further page into the search. For example on the last page or two of the sample searches exclusive images had dropped to only 30% of the results.
I doubt that this is coincidence. If you are an independent contributor and sales have fallen since the new best match was introduced then this may be the reason.
I don't see things favoring exclusives, at least not me. Since the "tweak" on the 13th, my already less-than-impressive sales nosedived even further. Checked a few of my (former) top sellers and they are buried hopelessly back, well behind a number of non-exclusive images.
-
I find it hilarious that they have to change the "best match" so often. It's like, here you go customer, here's the best match....no wait.. here it is... no wait over here... oh sh_t, our profits are declining, let's try this.....
What a freakin joke this company is....feel bad for folks that actually have to rely on it for a major source of income - my condolences
-
^^^ Makes sense. This must be part of a last ditch effort to convince exclusives that site sales are not falling. Even with a stacked deck the huge sales decline is becoming obvious.
I doubt if they care much about what the average exclusive thinks is happening. But there is now a potentially serious conflict of interests between Getty cashing in on everything and what is probably happening to the sales of the clique at the heart of the agency. I would be surprised if the tweakers are not under a lot of pressure from old friends with high-ranked portfolios. How many of the top 100 sellers have close ties, either socially or through some kind of employment, with the iStock establishment? I have no idea what the figure is, but I'll bet there are quite a few.
-
Everything is going down at the agencys main-core, RM sales according to some 14 collegues ( known each other for over 10 years) are dropping drastically.
I suggest we do like this: IS, etc, isnt worth beefing about anymore, its a disaster for the average exclusive and independant. Lets just forget about the site and move ahead, put it down to a bad experience, they do happen.
I am friends with six independant diamonds there and all are planning to find new avenues, narrowing the spread of their shots, a theory I happen to agree with and none of them are dependant on IS money.
Lets just leave the site alone, in forums, uploading and in general. Lets venture into new territories, they do exist you know! IS, is by no means all that important anymore, not even the market leader.
-
Here's an update on the results I'd posted in April of the number of "regular" (non-Agency/Vetta) photos in the first 200 with Best Match sort order. Sean's fixed his greasemonkey script to work with IS's latest changes (so I can easily count totals) - thanks Sean - so I updated it with today's results.
Bottom line is some things are slightly better, others are slightly worse. In any event, if you're not a flaming image, you aren't on the first page of "regular" results. Remember, once upon a time, new images would get a lookin on the first page of results for a short while?
Sorry about the formatting, but although the tabs get preserved when I copy and paste - and look fine in the editor on the forum - they don't look right once you exit the editor and post
200 per page, photos only, number of regular images on first page of search
Search term Reg 4/12 Reg 4/14 Reg 5/11
fish* 9 11 13
senior couple 20 30 25
woman shopping 31 36 32
tropical beach 12 15 17
spa treatment 39 44 39
woman eating 21 31 26
woman laptop 30 41 37
man portrait 26 35 29
doctor 37 45 44
swimming pool 13 19 16
summer outdoors 29 35 38
child outdoors 36 43 48
sexy woman 9 12 13
* both food and animal meanings
-
Thanks for tracking and posting this data. It's good to have a window into these best match tweaks, though trying to reach conclusions is a challange.
Shame how they have stacked the deck against new images. Seems designed to keep a top layer of exclusives happy while screwing the rest of exclusives and independents.
-
thanks for that, Joann. just so I understand, "regular" also includes E+ and (now) P+?
-
Regular is everything other than Vetta & Agency - 'cause that's what Sean's script segregates.
If at some point we could separate out E+ P+ main collection and exclusive collection, that'd be really great, but that depends on a new Sean-monkey script update or something :)