That and heavily promoting indie files in certain areas (all my usual  searches have an indie file in the first place, and five or six of the ten top places in the best match, though I know other geographic areas have very different best match results, not 'pushing' indie files).

In my key niche I've now got three of the top eight places, including No. 1. The scary thing is that this is not translating into sales. What does it take to get sales at iS these days?

Quote from: ShadySue on May 01, 2012, 16:25

That and heavily promoting indie files in certain areas (all my usual  searches have an indie file in the first place, and five or six of the ten top places in the best match, though I know other geographic areas have very different best match results, not 'pushing' indie files).

In my key niche I've now got three of the top eight places, including No. 1. The scary thing is that this is not translating into sales. What does it take to get sales at iS these days?

Same here.  Scary to note that even with better search positions, sales are still abysmal!

It looks like Formaccreative is not best pleased either;

"I am an unhappy buyer for sure, it is getting way too exspenive to buy here for us. I was just searching out some images for a project and was shocked at the price hike."

http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=343279&page=4#post6662799

4$ a XS, how far will they go?

"it will be more expensive and more expensive and more expensive and more expensive and more expensive and more expensive..."[/color]

Life's like that.
Our gas (i.e, gas, not petrol) is going to be 15% more expensive next winter.
Hasn't that buyer heard of the Dollar Bin? Since he seems easily to be able to discount all exclusive files, he presumably doesn't very specific needs, which sometimes can only be met by an exclusive file. Hey, even I have some iStockwhacks.

Quote from: ShadySue on May 11, 2012, 09:39

Life's like that.
Our gas (i.e, gas, not petrol) is going to be 15% more expensive next winter.
Hasn't that buyer heard of the Dollar Bin? Since he seems easily to be able to discount all exclusive files, he presumably doesn't very specific needs, which sometimes can only be met by an exclusive file. Hey, even I have some iStockwhacks.

Fuel prices are governed by supply and demand within a world-wide market. Sometimes the prices go down as well as up. Istock's prices have risen something like 2000% for a medium-sized image in less than 8 years.

But let's not forget by how many gazillion percent iStock (and others) lowered the price of stock with the start of microstock...

Quote from: CarlssonInc. Stock Imagery Production on May 11, 2012, 10:42

Quote from: gostwyck on May 11, 2012, 09:47

Quote from: ShadySue on May 11, 2012, 09:39

Life's like that.
Our gas (i.e, gas, not petrol) is going to be 15% more expensive next winter.
Hasn't that buyer heard of the Dollar Bin? Since he seems easily to be able to discount all exclusive files, he presumably doesn't very specific needs, which sometimes can only be met by an exclusive file. Hey, even I have some iStockwhacks.

Fuel prices are governed by supply and demand within a world-wide market. Sometimes the prices go down as well as up. Istock's prices have risen something like 2000% for a medium-sized image in less than 8 years.

But let's not forget by how many gazillion percent iStock (and others) lowered the price of stock with the start of microstock...

That really was the problem. It was, indeed, an unsustainable business model.

Maybe, long-term it was. But it was about balancing the sudden surge in supply with pent-up unsatisfied demand.

The real problem was that the quality of microstock could not be kept down to appropriate levels, because we all kept (and still keep) trying to improve to outperform our rivals.

Originally, iStock wanted beginners to graduate into iStockpro and sell at enhanced prices. Istockpro was a flop because most micro buyers wanted micro prices, so "pro" vanished.... then they decided to abolish iStock and put iStockpro in its place, but still under the istock brand.

Darkface from Germany is not a happy bear;

"*! The new Prices SUCKS! istockphoto push the prices every year up to 100%.

it will be more expensive and more expensive and more expensive and more expensive and more expensive and more expensive..."

and ...

"Before: XS Exclusive Images = 2 Credits (2,92 EUR)

After: XS Exclusive Images = 4 Credits (5,84 EUR!!)

I will stop downloading exclusive Images now."

http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=343279&page=10#post6669089

for f-ucks sake ... 6 euro too expensive ?? how can these guys still be in business ? with 6 euros in germany you can barely get the cheapest mcdonalds meal.

let them switch over Flickr or to piracy and good riddance.

Quote from: antistock on May 12, 2012, 05:04

for f-ucks sake ... 6 euro too expensive ?? how can these guys still be in business ? with 6 euros in germany you can barely get the cheapest mcdonalds meal.

let them switch over Flickr or to piracy and good riddance.

Maybe he buys 1,000 XS images a month.

If there is a 100% price increase for a product, then either the original pricing was wildly wrong or the vendor is trying to screw the customers.

as in any other market, take consumer electronic for instance, to offer a cheap price you either sell sh-it for very small profit, or you enslave your in-house workers or you pay third world prices to outsourced factories ... there's no other way out, sorry, see Apple & Foxconn, HP/Sony/Acer/Compaq with Mitac and Quanta, Philips with Flextronics, and the list can go on and on ...

if the micro pricing will one day be taken to extreme i can tell you that yes living here in asia i could live with 5-600$ per month so it's still a long way from me going out of business but this would mean the death of micro and macrostockers in the west, and by the way who's gonna shoot the rest of the world to get paid  few cents per download ? who's going to Tokyo where it's 30 euro just to sleep in a nasty guesthouse with dormitory and bunk beds and a fast food meal is 6-7 euro to start ? not me, thank you !

micro royalties are already ridicolous even for the third world, there's no way they can squeeze them even more.

billions of images are uploaded every day on the web by happy snappers but this have NO commercial value, and nobody will keyword them properly so who's gonna find them in the ocean of imagery available for free or CC licence or whatever other  cr-ap licence ? there's no excuse for customers, our work has been already devalued to the extreme in the past years and now considered almost worthless.

customers complaining about the price should just f-u-ck off and shut up, as nowadays the prices are so low that it's either take it or leave it, thanks.

and i know the logic .. if a portfolio of 10,000 images is not enough to survice then "just double it", yes and tomorrow triple it ... easy isn't it .. customers think it's funny for us, they also probably think after work we booze around and sh-ag a couple hookers as well with the princely sums they pay us on micros ... and yeah why should they pay with the billions of snapshots on Instagram done with an iPhone ..  i'm so * sick of all this.

There is a remedy for all this!  if at a given date, all agencies and I mean all, everyone, lets say 12, midnight,  would increase their prices by lets say more realistic midstock prices. The following day: Where would the buyers go?  they would have no option but to buy, they still need pictures, dont they,  so they would have to buy regardless of the price increase, since the prices across the board are all the same, after the increase.

There is a Latin expression for this kind of business precidiure,  its not nice perhaps but really, in Micro, I dont see any other option.

Quote from: antistock on May 12, 2012, 22:31

and i know the logic .. if a portfolio of 10,000 images is not enough to survice then "just double it", yes and tomorrow triple it ... easy isn't it .. customers think it's funny for us, they also probably think after work we booze around and sh-ag a couple hookers as well with the princely sums they pay us on micros ... and yeah why should they pay with the billions of snapshots on Instagram done with an iPhone ..  i'm so * sick of all this.

There is a remedy for all this!  if at a given date, all agencies and I mean all, everyone, lets say 12, midnight,  would increase their prices by lets say more realistic midstock prices. The following day: Where would the buyers go?  they would have no option but to buy, they still need pictures, dont they,  so they would have to buy regardless of the price increase, since the prices across the board are all the same, after the increase.

There is a Latin expression for this kind of business precidiure,  its not nice perhaps but really, in Micro, I dont see any other option.

Exactly! That's what I meant in my previous post. 750/month subs should start at a grand (I don't think they could just go away, at least SS is super dependent on them), XS files from 10$ on and so on, ELs should start no lower than 500$. I mean it would cost that designer more to take that 10$ image, even if it's just an apple on white, if you calculate the time in. And it would probably be rubbish, since they don't know the first thing about taking photos (shy should they?) and even the simplest subject would cause them a lot of problems to shoot, hiring lighting gear, looking at tutorials, borrowing a camera...

Where would the buyers go?  they would have no option but to buy, they still need pictures, dont they,  so they would have to buy regardless of the price increase, since the prices across the board are all the same, after the increase.

Actually, they *would* stop buying. Microstock made stock photos much more accessible to a wide variety of customers who did not use photos before. They would just go back to not using photos, until another microstock site popped up. The crowd-sourcing model has also hurt designers. I see logos advertised for $5, or at 99designs, people compete and design logos FOR FREE on the off chance that one of their designs might be selected. And, of course, *everyone* is a web designer these days. So many designers, especially ones who service small businesses, have been forced to lower their prices more and more. Also, don't forget the wide swath of non-designers who could never afford photography before microstock(teachers, bloggers, some churches, non-profits). They'll be gone. Add the still struggling economy into that mix and you will find that access to images will once again be relegated to an elite group. And a lot of photographers will be stuck with photos of apples and background textures that will not sell at higher prices. Let's also face the fact that some microstock photos aren't worth mid-stock or more prices.

Be careful what you wish for.

Quote from: wut on May 13, 2012, 05:32

We don't have to guess about that one, it's a hard fact. Even with 2000% price increase (as gostwyck stated), the price is still absurd. Nobody realizes either how much it would cost him to hire a tog or buy from a trad agency, which have lowered prices many times during the MS era, so in reality even the macro prices are to low.

Regarding the prices, IS is the only one going in the right direction. I just hope for more hikes. I really do. And that the competition wakes up and does the same (without any further commission cuts), or else we're all doomed

I don't know why you wish for that. It doesn't mean contributors are going to make any more money. And it does seem at first glance ridiculous to complain about the low price of photos, but if anything else doubled overnight, let's say the price of gas, I'm pretty sure I'd be complaining about it too.

I don't have a problem with prices moving up if I get a larger cut of the pie, but that hasn't been what's happening. The greedy ba$tards raise prices then cut our commissions (or find some other bull$hit way to cheat us out of money, like changing search algorithms, or having a bunch of "credit card fraud" happening, or some other such nonsense.) And istock is the worst. I totally see why buyers are bailing.

I've bolded another important part of my post, it'll make more sense to you now, without a doubt

Actually, they *would* stop buying. Microstock made stock photos much more accessible to a wide variety of customers who did not use photos before. They would just go back to not using photos, until another microstock site popped up. The crowd-sourcing model has also hurt designers. I see logos advertised for $5, or at 99designs, people compete and design logos FOR FREE on the off chance that one of their designs might be selected. And, of course, *everyone* is a web designer these days. So many designers, especially ones who service small businesses, have been forced to lower their prices more and more. Also, don't forget the wide swath of non-designers who could never afford photography before microstock(teachers, bloggers, some churches, non-profits). They'll be gone. Add the still struggling economy into that mix and you will find that access to images will once again be relegated to an elite group. And a lot of photographers will be stuck with photos of apples and background textures that will not sell at higher prices. Let's also face the fact that some microstock photos aren't worth mid-stock or more prices.

Be careful what you wish for.

No way they would stop buying, unless they go out and take pics themselves, no way, it isnt worth it, and its not a break against the law either. Remember, we are not talking automotive industry here, we are talking pictures, as example, instead of selling a pic for 10 bucks, make it 20, etc, etc.

Warren!  there is no law against this,
[/quote]

Yes, they absolutely would stop buying. Stop being so arrogant as to think the world can't live without photos. It did before and it would again if the price was cost prohibitive. Here's a for-instance for you. I create FB banners for people. Most people (especially since Facebook is a free service) are not going to spend a hefty amount tricking out their Facebook page, but, priced right (say under $100), you can actually sell quite a few of them. Am I going to buy a $50 or $100 photo for such a design? Nope. I'll come up with another solution. I might even get a decent point and shoot and start talking some photos myself. Heck, even some phones are taking quality high-res photos these days. After all, it's not the camera,  that takes the great photo, it's the person, right?

BTW, if all the microstock industry got together and decided to fix prices, it is absolutely against the law. It is called collusion and it has happened before.