Quote from: gostwyck on May 13, 2011, 09:43

Quote from: jamirae on May 12, 2011, 23:05

yes they will!  that was one of my major concerns as well.  You just have to remove the istock logo and address from it. 

Dreamstime won't accept IS MR's unless either the photographer or model is resident in Canada (the laws of which govern Istock's MR).

Since day 1 in microstock, I took the IS MR and altered it to remove the logo and address/country specific wording, making it generic, and have uploaded to Shutterstock, Dreamstime and BigStock without problems. I did the same for the property release.

Is this something new for Dreamstime, because I've uploaded both in the past few months.

I think its a new issue for Dreamstime.  I personally think they go out of their way to make life difficult for former and prospective Istock exclusives.  They have the six month lockup period which causes problems primarily for people seeking to go exclusive at Istock.  Now they introduce this new requirement that basically only affects the Istock model release so former exclusives have difficulty getting their content onto DT.  

I realize this is tin foil hat talk, but why is DT the only one who has this issue with the Istock release?  And why now at the point where they can anticipate a surge in content from former Istockers do they discover this problem after accepting the wording for years?

Quote from: eurobanks on May 13, 2011, 08:09

How are inspections at other sites?  Are they as tough as istock or just different?  It seems like every time I try to take a risk with processing on istock, I get rejected.  Sometimes I just want to let the market to decide.  

All of the sites seem to go through phases where most everything you submit is accepted and then wham, nothing gets approved. It seems to have a lot to do with the hiring of reviewers, but also, you must be diligent and submit only your best. If you think an image is borderline, it will likely get rejected.

It's best to focus on shooting, shooting and shooting. Then uploading and uploading and uploading. The advantage of submitting to multiple sites is that unless the image is totally horrible, it will likely get accepted at some, if not all. If it gets rejected at one site, you still have other chances to get it selling somewhere else.

There really isn't a set answer to give you about who is tough and who isn't because it changes all the time. And it's different for everyone. Such is the roller coaster ride of microstock.  

edit: After a time, you will notice yourself what you can get by with at each place. I used to have problems at Shutterstock with shallow dof photos, but it doesn't seem to be an issue for me anymore. But others might say something different.

I have to agree.  My experience is that I'll upload say a dozen images to the sites I submit to (IS, SS, DT, SF, FT, Alamy, Veer) and different sites will reject different images for different reasons.  rejections used to bug me, but now I really don't care - my dozen images end up online, even if some are on one site and not another.  it's almost comical to me, but sometimes there is a rejection that is justified to me and I make changes based on the rejection.  I learn from it.  It seems a lot of folks think that istock is the most critical, but I agree with Cathy, cclapper, it is like rollercoaster that never ends and always has it's ups and downs. 

Thanks, everyone.  You all gave me alot of helpful advice.
Leslie

It is important to have a high acceptance ratio at Dreamstime, more so than the other sites, because it is a big factor in search placement. 

really? never heard of it..

Quote from: lisafx on May 13, 2011, 14:45

It is important to have a high acceptance ratio at Dreamstime, more so than the other sites, because it is a big factor in search placement. 

really? never heard of it..

Achilles/Serban, the site owner, has confirmed it a number of times in the DT forums. 

Quote from: lisafx on May 13, 2011, 14:45

Leslie, just one additional piece of advice about Dreamstime.  Recently they are VERY strict on uploading similars.  I would suggest culling out a few of the very best images from each series, rather than uploading them all to Dreamstime.  It is important to have a high acceptance ratio at Dreamstime, more so than the other sites, because it is a big factor in search placement. 

Lisa -by similars, does that mean they won't take a series of expressions?  For instance, where I have a model isolated on white and she's looking up in one, looking to the side in another, smiling in one and with a neutral expression in another, would they consider those to be similar?  Otherwise, I don't think I'll run into that problem.  It takes me sooo long to process one image it's hard to imagine having time to process multiples!  Also, on the istock forums awhile back, didn't you say you were having trouble becoming exclusive at istock because other agencies had long lag times for removing your images on their sites?  Is that still an issue?  Thanks for the advice! Leslie

If you have a man and a woman, they might be too similar, or apparently if it is similar to something someone else uploaded, so maybe now you get one person pic, one object pic, one landscape pic, and that is about it. or maybe they will take a whole series with only minor differences between pics. Sometimes it really just feels like a crapshoot, but if they reject pictures apparently it does hurt your placement. Good luck and have fun trying to figure out what they want and don't want.

Wow!  I can't believe how strict Dreamstime is!  But thanks for the warning. And Lisa, your work is fantastic! I've been a longtime fan.  Leslie

As much as we have our pet peeves about iStock, keep in mind that other sites may allow far less freedom of speech. I cannot imagine that other sites will allow any dissenting threads to continue into hundreds and thousand posts.

Fortunately, the other sites don't have as many f-ups as istock, thereby not requiring dissenting threads to continue into the hundreds and thousands of posts. 

Quote from: eurobanks on May 13, 2011, 16:31

Wow!  I can't believe how strict Dreamstime is!  But thanks for the warning. And Lisa, your work is fantastic! I've been a longtime fan.  Leslie

Thanks Leslie!  I just checked out your work, and was really impressed.  I especially like your photographs of Washington DC.  I have loads of family there but have somehow never managed to get there when the cherry blossoms are in bloom.  You have captured them beautifully!  You can count me as a new fan

Thanks, Lisa!  It's funny you mention that about DC.  I've been living in the DC burbs for 17 years and this is the first time I've gotten downtown to photograph them.  For some reason, DC just seems so far away even though it's right down the road!

I didn't boycott E+ exactly. I had a tiny number of Vetta rejects that got in automatically and I didn't see anything happening for them at all. I initially didn't do any more because the promised tools weren't yet ready and the boost in best match was "soon". After the tools went from soon to never and lots of people complained about the lack of a boost, I just put E+ on the back burner.

Some people have had good luck with that and others had very bad results. It's a guess, but given my portfolio - no huge sellers, just a lot of decent files that sell OK - I think I'd be more likely to have have seen poor results.

2010 was a fantastic year for me for sales, and until September 7th, my morale was right up there too. I didn't need E+ to have that great year and absent the many wretched changes recently, I think 2011 could have been just as good and I'd still be exclusive.

I'm well aware that other agencies have their problems, and it was in part because I was tired of endlessly watching out for various anti-contributor moves that I started looking at exclusivity. I won't be back at Fotolia because they've banned me - they weren't happy when I started encouraging contributors to suspend uploading when they first introduced low-ball subscriptions and I'm not shy about speaking up when I think things aren't right. I did approach them as I was considering terminating exclusivity and they said I wasn't welcome.

I have my old accounts at DT and SS, but all the images will have to be uploaded again - I asked DT if the disabled images could be re-enabled and they said no. In SS's case, I think it may work out for the best to re-upload anyway given it's been nearly 2.5 years since I left.

Steep trek is probably about right, but I'm willing to take the hit for a while to move back. iStock is becoming a place for a small group of Vetta/Agency contributors and that's just not me. For those for whom that works - buyers or contributors - that's great.

The only emotional part of it is that while I felt I was part of an organization and was valued in my small role, I was very happy to be involved exclusively with iStock. If I'm going to be ignored and not valued for my contributions - just another slob with a camera - then I'd rather deal with multiple agencies. Lower expectations in that case that I have for a sole partner. And I am still deeply angry about the 180 on the promises for cannister grandfathering.

Snip..
iStock is becoming a place for a small group of Vetta/Agency contributors and that's just not me.

JoAnn... I could not agree more with this statement. IS is doing its very best to turn the site into an elitist club. What use to be a great one-stop (and I mean GREAT) microsite is now a festering cesspool of snobs, cronyism and sycophants. The myriad of price points is confusing and not be able to sort by price is annoying at best. Anyhoo, I digress.

I wish you the best of luck with your Independence. No one deserves more good things than you. You have been a helpful and most supportive contributor. You have helped me out several times in the critique forum (you are sorely missed there) and have been a voice of reason during these dark times.

Thanks for the memories and I raise a glass to some new ones.

I spent over $10k in equipment and software last year, started hiring models, and really tried to treat it as a "business" as Sean has so often stressed.  But none of the those model shoots have panned out the way I was hoping - they've only helped me maintain my already weak numbers in slow drip downloads.

If you're spending money on models, I'd suggest avoiding the "stand around portraits" that you have in large numbers, like this one, for example: http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-14336573-young-woman-portrait.php - they just don't sell.  They really need to be doing something, as you can see from the sales of the business ones.

I  am sorry Cathy, from my own observation, this is simply not true. If all other sites were so good, many of us including Jo Ann and myself, woulld not have become exclusive to begin with. Personally I never had any fights with any admins in any sites, being an observer perhaps gave me an objective perspective.

Sometimes, our judgement can be clouded by our emotions. I completely understand that people want to become non-exclusive because of the fear of having all eggs in one basket and the basket has been dangling dangerously. Had I not come from the other side not a long time ago, I would also envy the perceived greener pasture.

Jo Ann, if you didn't boycott E+(correct me if I am wrong), perhaps you would have seen much better earnings. Can you still your keep your Levels 5, 4, 3, 2 images at Dreamstime, and the old rank at Fotolia? If not, the other side will be a steep trek.

I don't believe I said the other sites were "so good". They all have their faults and the biggest of all, for ALL of them, is that they take a huge piece of the pie. Everyone has their reasons for going exclusive, I myself considered it early last year and had stopped uploading to other sites and was within a couple of weeks of going exclusive at istock. My reasons for considering exclusivity were because of the promise of a company treating exclusives better, making more money, and only having one agency to upload to. I started getting bad feelings, backed out, and in September it all became clear that I had made the right choice. No regrets since.

My opinion differs from yours and that's ok. I don't perceive any agency as "a greener pasture." But since last September, the other sites have few to no problems with fraud, aren't constantly fiddling with their "best match" system so my sales remain consistent or better all the time, aren't constantly bringing new pricing schemes into the picture, haven't gone back on their word, and in general, don't project a lot of drama. They conduct themselves as a business, not a club. And now, it appears as though buyers are shifting away from the nonsense at istock and moving to the other sites, because I have seen a noticeable jump in sales at the other sites. Which only reaffirms that my choice to NOT go exclusive was the right one.

I've been around almost as long as JoAnn. We were uploading and supporting istock at the same time. It was a natural transition for her to go exclusive...she made microstock her career, and she has more than twice the images on istock that I had. I am not in the same position. I never intended to become a full-time microstock photographer. Becoming exclusive at istock does not make sense for me (though I thought it did once). istock has taken such a HUGE turn in a completely different direction, one that doesn't make sense for me. Guess not for JoAnn either. And a lot of other exclusives, apparently.

When people see their sales dropping and dropping because of constant uproar by the agency, I'd say that making a move to do something different is a sound business decision. There may be emotions connected to it too, but everyone is entitled to their reasons for leaving exclusivity. Whether you think it is a bad decision and emotional is irrelevant.

P.S. I've never had fights with admins in any sites either, maybe you were speaking generally when you said that? Or you're confusing me with someone else?