MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: D-Day (Deactivation Day) on Istock - Feb 2  (Read 131210 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

lisafx

« Reply #675 on: January 28, 2013, 15:32 »
0
A friend of mine who reads but doesn't post went to the trouble of creating a list of who's participating (according to the thread) and how many each has or will be deleting:


https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Ai9dhorY3ovxdHFCY2FqdkFVQUtLMGRrNUhsVzV0SFE#gid=0


For a bit of irony, it was created in Google docs ;D

If anybody has any to add, I am sure they would be receptive to adding more...

And thank you very much - you know who you are :D
« Last Edit: January 28, 2013, 15:37 by lisafx »


« Reply #676 on: January 28, 2013, 16:16 »
0
Lisa, does that include people from the IS forum, or only people here? My guess is only people from here, but just checking.

« Reply #677 on: January 28, 2013, 16:52 »
0
Lisa, does that include people from the IS forum, or only people here? My guess is only people from here, but just checking.

I was wondering that too, coz the last tallied total I saw was over 44,000.

lisafx

« Reply #678 on: January 28, 2013, 16:58 »
0
Lisa, does that include people from the IS forum, or only people here? My guess is only people from here, but just checking.

Oh, sorry, I put that in the OP, but didn't add it here.  AFAIK this is just people on this forum.  The Istock forum people aren't added.  I would still take Denis (Cybernesco's) count as the official one. 

« Reply #679 on: January 28, 2013, 17:02 »
0
Lisa, does that include people from the IS forum, or only people here? My guess is only people from here, but just checking.

Oh, sorry, I put that in the OP, but didn't add it here.  AFAIK this is just people on this forum.  The Istock forum people aren't added.  I would still take Denis (Cybernesco's) count as the official one.


Thats what I thought, just checking. Thanks!

« Reply #680 on: January 28, 2013, 17:04 »
0
Thanks Lisa  :)

« Reply #681 on: January 28, 2013, 17:11 »
+1
.
« Last Edit: May 11, 2014, 22:26 by tickstock »

« Reply #682 on: January 28, 2013, 19:05 »
+4
Well, I stopped uploading last week, for what it's worth.

« Reply #683 on: January 28, 2013, 19:25 »
+2
I'm not sure how much difference this will make, there are over 60,000 files waiting inspection right now.  If you want to protect your IP that's one thing but I don't see this as much of a protest in that the amount of images is too insignificant to have any wider effects.  If this protest is to accomplish anything shouldn't there be some type of demands i.e.  "Change the ASA to stop deals like this one or else we'll pull our images off".  Right now I don't see a clear and concise message supported by the group being presented to Istock.   Maybe a petition drafted and signed by the group would be more effective, right now it looks like people are planning to pull their images off no matter what.  If that's the case why not do it already?
 
The queue is shown here http://www.istockphoto.com/stats

I think having the story about deactivation day spreading around the internet might make some buyers think about using sites other than istock.  That might be more successful than a few of us just deleting images.  I'm sure istock wont give in to any of our demands, as they've not listened for several years now and have really gone out of their way to demonstrate how little they think of us.

« Reply #684 on: January 28, 2013, 19:48 »
+6
I'm not sure how much difference this will make, there are over 60,000 files waiting inspection right now.  If you want to protect your IP that's one thing but I don't see this as much of a protest in that the amount of images is too insignificant to have any wider effects.  If this protest is to accomplish anything shouldn't there be some type of demands i.e.  "Change the ASA to stop deals like this one or else we'll pull our images off".  Right now I don't see a clear and concise message supported by the group being presented to Istock.   Maybe a petition drafted and signed by the group would be more effective, right now it looks like people are planning to pull their images off no matter what.  If that's the case why not do it already?
 
The queue is shown here http://www.istockphoto.com/stats



Getty is NOT going to change a thing. It's the contributors responsibility to look out for their own welfare. When people are fed up, they will leave. Right now, there are too many people who depend on that income and just aren't ready to leave. I don't get it, because sales have been tanking for just about everybody anyway, but some think a little something is better than nothing. Getty knows that and banks on it.

lisafx

« Reply #685 on: January 28, 2013, 20:50 »
0
I'm not sure how much difference this will make, there are over 60,000 files waiting inspection right now.  If you want to protect your IP that's one thing but I don't see this as much of a protest in that the amount of images is too insignificant to have any wider effects.  If this protest is to accomplish anything shouldn't there be some type of demands i.e.  "Change the ASA to stop deals like this one or else we'll pull our images off".  Right now I don't see a clear and concise message supported by the group being presented to Istock.   Maybe a petition drafted and signed by the group would be more effective, right now it looks like people are planning to pull their images off no matter what.  If that's the case why not do it already?
 
The queue is shown here http://www.istockphoto.com/stats


The idea of presenting demands makes sense, but as far as threatening a specific action, I think it would be difficult to get everyone to agree on the same action. 

From reading these forums and the Istock ones, it seems like there are a variety of actions people are planning.

Some are planning to take down their entire portfolios immediately because of worries about their IP. 

Some, like me have stopped uploading and, are planning to take down a specific number of files on Feb 2 and then give it some time to see how things develop (lawsuits, etc). 

Others are planning to drop their crowns, but probably will keep on with Istock for at least awhile as they build portfolios on other sites. 

Personally, I think a lot of us who are very dependent on Istock income will be reluctant to pull entire portfolios immediately.  For example, if I were to deactivate my entire port on Istock at once, my daughter would literally have to leave college at the end of this semester without her degree.  If nothing changes in this intolerable situation, it may yet come to deactivating the entire port, but I see that as an absolute last resort, once all other avenues have been exhausted.

JMHO, others will each have their own personal situations to consider.

So as you see, it will be difficult to send a list of demands stating what specific actions will be taken because I don't think there's enough agreement on what to do. 
« Last Edit: January 28, 2013, 20:57 by lisafx »

« Reply #686 on: January 28, 2013, 20:57 »
+12
The actions people are taking now are entirely appropriate to the situation.  At this point, Getty doesn't care about 20,000 images, or even a few hundred photographers.  But a big steaming garbage barge of bad publicity  is another matter.   The goal is to do whatever we do as loudly and publicly as possible.


lisafx

« Reply #687 on: January 28, 2013, 20:59 »
0

I think having the story about deactivation day spreading around the internet might make some buyers think about using sites other than istock.  That might be more successful than a few of us just deleting images. 

If sales at other sites the past week are anything to go by, it looks like a fair number of buyers are doing exactly as you suggest. 

...But a big steaming garbage barge of bad publicity  is another matter.   The goal is to do whatever we do as loudly and publicly as possible.



Exactly!  Very well put!
« Last Edit: January 28, 2013, 21:06 by lisafx »

m@m

« Reply #688 on: January 28, 2013, 21:11 »
0
The actions people are taking now are entirely appropriate to the situation.  At this point, Getty doesn't care about 20,000 images, or even a few hundred photographers.  But a big steaming garbage barge of bad publicity  is another matter.   The goal is to do whatever we do as loudly and publicly as possible.

Agree 100%

« Reply #689 on: January 28, 2013, 23:08 »
+1
The actions people are taking now are entirely appropriate to the situation.  At this point, Getty doesn't care about 20,000 images, or even a few hundred photographers.  But a big steaming garbage barge of bad publicity  is another matter.   The goal is to do whatever we do as loudly and publicly as possible.

Agree 100%

I agree, interestingly just today, so far, I got over 260 unique users landing on my blog about this deal and I am only a needle in a hay stack. It is a captivating story not just for photographers and artists but the general public as well as most like an underdog story.
I guess big media are reluctant to touch this partly due to their possible affiliation with Getty. Unfortunately for us Getty plays a huge part in today's big media. However, the story is getting traction across the web within many other smaller media outlets which will eventually and probably add up to the same amount of exposure as big media.
« Last Edit: January 28, 2013, 23:27 by cybernesco »

« Reply #690 on: January 29, 2013, 00:19 »
0
A friend of mine who reads but doesn't post went to the trouble of creating a list of who's participating (according to the thread) and how many each has or will be deleting:


https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Ai9dhorY3ovxdHFCY2FqdkFVQUtLMGRrNUhsVzV0SFE#gid=0


For a bit of irony, it was created in Google docs ;D
I dare you to add a free stock image to the doc... I double-dog dare you  ;D

mlwinphoto

« Reply #691 on: January 29, 2013, 00:40 »
+2
I'm not sure how much difference this will make, there are over 60,000 files waiting inspection right now.  If you want to protect your IP that's one thing but I don't see this as much of a protest in that the amount of images is too insignificant to have any wider effects.  If this protest is to accomplish anything shouldn't there be some type of demands i.e.  "Change the ASA to stop deals like this one or else we'll pull our images off".  Right now I don't see a clear and concise message supported by the group being presented to Istock.   Maybe a petition drafted and signed by the group would be more effective, right now it looks like people are planning to pull their images off no matter what.  If that's the case why not do it already?
 
The queue is shown here http://www.istockphoto.com/stats



Getty is NOT going to change a thing. It's the contributors responsibility to look out for their own welfare. When people are fed up, they will leave. Right now, there are too many people who depend on that income and just aren't ready to leave. I don't get it, because sales have been tanking for just about everybody anyway, but some think a little something is better than nothing. Getty knows that and banks on it.


I think the reason people aren't ready to leave is because we/they are holding out in hope that things will turn around. 
The longer this goes on the less likely that seems to be but I, for one, would like to exhaust all reasons to hope before pulling the plug....that day may be coming sooner rather than later.

« Reply #692 on: January 29, 2013, 04:16 »
+8
I still think that people with good portfolios will lose much less than they think if they remove images from istock.  I'm sure lots of buyers will look elsewhere, they'll either have more than one place to buy already or they'll wonder where that portfolio went and have a search for it.  Its a scary thing to do but I think leaving all my best images on istock frightens me much more.

If my earnings dip significantly, I'll have to find another way to make up the difference.  I think that will probably do me good, as I've been in a creative slump ever since the sites started cutting commissions.

« Reply #693 on: January 29, 2013, 05:46 »
+3
I still think that people with good portfolios will lose much less than they think if they remove images from istock.

Depends on what you mean with "good" portfolios. If you have a good microstock portfolio, you probably could make a lot of money back by quickly getting the same images up at other microstock agencies.

However, there are lots of people who produce "good" images that just don't sell often. They are not generic enough, so the number of downloads is lower than the "apple isolated on white" that can be used thousands of times. iStock has managed to charge higher prices and it was quite successful for that kind of images. You won't be able to make the same amount of money that you get for a good selling Vetta image by selling it for $0.25 per download on subscription sales. We're talking about images that achieve RPD of $20 or more on iStock. For those images, the contributor will have to find a better home, somewhere in the middle to top price tiers.

Assuming someone with a strong Vetta / Agency portfolio will make a similar amount of money in microstock alone sounds like a very, very risky assumption to me.

« Reply #694 on: January 29, 2013, 05:52 »
0
Okay. I just noticed you are probably only talking about people who are already non-exclusive and have their images on other agencies. If that's what you mean, sorry if my reply doesn't really match your point.  ;)

« Reply #695 on: January 29, 2013, 06:15 »
+8
Getty won't care about the number of images deleted.

HOWEVER ... I am sure they will be watching what happens with interest and I think it would be helpful if everybody who is upset deletes at least one image.  They are likely to be watching how many people participate, as well as how many files go, in order to assess the strength of contributor feeling.

I'm sure they would be more bothered by 20,000 people each deleting one photo (mass protest) than by one person deleting 20,000 photos (squeaky wheel coming off).

« Reply #696 on: January 29, 2013, 06:50 »
+12
Getty won't care about the number of images deleted.

HOWEVER ... I am sure they will be watching what happens with interest and I think it would be helpful if everybody who is upset deletes at least one image.  They are likely to be watching how many people participate, as well as how many files go, in order to assess the strength of contributor feeling.

I'm sure they would be more bothered by 20,000 people each deleting one photo (mass protest) than by one person deleting 20,000 photos (squeaky wheel coming off).

I suspect that they'll be somewhat more concerned and damaged by exclusives ditching their crowns. Exclusives are Istock's USP, the primary justification for higher prices and the only way they have been able to get away with such poor site functionality. Without exclusives Istock become just one of many microstock agencies, with the same images but at higher prices and on a slow, unreliable site. Every exclusive who ditches their crown and uploads elsewhere weakens Istock's position and also strengthens that of it's competitors. It's a gathering snowball.

Make no mistake this fiasco will cost Getty money in the long run __ just as the disaster of the RC system did. Judging by the numbers published at the time of the Carlyle sale Getty appear to have been flat-lining overall since they were bought by H&F. They could only have achieved that much by virtue of the growth of Istock. With Istock shrinking then so will Getty. Getty nowadays are not all-powerful and their grip on the industry, as far as we microstockers are concerned anyway, is loosening day by day.

I think the hapless responses of the Istock management and the increasing irritability of the forum moderator are quite telling on just how concerned they are (mainly for their own futures).

PS: Edited because the word 'chuck*ng' (as in 'throwing') is apparently not allowed?
« Last Edit: January 29, 2013, 08:37 by gostwyck »

« Reply #697 on: January 29, 2013, 07:03 »
+4

I think the hapless responses of the Istock management and the increasing irritability of the forum moderator are quite telling on just how concerned they are (mainly for their own futures).
+1
« Last Edit: January 29, 2013, 07:06 by picture5469 »

ShadySue

« Reply #698 on: January 29, 2013, 07:05 »
+2
I suspect that they'll be somewhat more concerned and damaged by exclusives * their crowns. Exclusives are Istock's USP, the primary justification for higher prices and the only way they have been able to get away with such poor site functionality. Without exclusives Istock become just one of many microstock agencies, with the same images but at higher prices and on a slow, unreliable site. Every exclusive who ditches their crown and uploads elsewhere weakens Istock's position and also strengthens that of it's competitors. It's a gathering snowball.
You'd think,  but in recent times, they don't seem to have been looking after their exclusives at all; it has seemed to me like they'd like us all to ditch our crowns so that they could earn more percentage off us. Crazy to me, this profitability vs profit choice, but it really seems like it's the way they're going.

But I agree with:
Quote
I think the hapless responses of the Istock management and the increasing irritability of the forum moderator are quite telling on just how concerned they are (mainly for their own futures).

« Reply #699 on: January 29, 2013, 10:26 »
+2

You'd think,  but in recent times, they don't seem to have been looking after their exclusives at all; it has seemed to me like they'd like us all to ditch our crowns so that they could earn more percentage off us. Crazy to me, this profitability vs profit choice, but it really seems like it's the way they're going.

But I agree with:
Quote
I think the hapless responses of the Istock management and the increasing irritability of the forum moderator are quite telling on just how concerned they are (mainly for their own futures).

This is the kind of thing that's driving me crazy, quite apart from my falling earnings. iStock has become so inscrutable it's no wonder that people resort to conspiracy theories.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
4 Replies
4810 Views
Last post February 28, 2011, 17:43
by click_click
17 Replies
5161 Views
Last post January 15, 2013, 08:21
by jtyler
35 Replies
6614 Views
Last post November 22, 2013, 14:24
by BaldricksTrousers
11 Replies
3517 Views
Last post October 01, 2014, 13:42
by Freedom
13 Replies
4876 Views
Last post April 16, 2015, 12:00
by tickstock

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results