MicrostockGroup
Agency Based Discussion => iStockPhoto.com => Topic started by: Uncle Pete on March 17, 2024, 12:43
-
Coming Monday, the 18th. But I thought I'd just jump ahead and start the thread. ;D
-
From iStock? About $0, but I don't have an account there, so that could be it ;)
-
Coming Monday, the 18th. But I thought I'd just jump ahead and start the thread. ;D
Nice one ;-)
-
No statement for me yet.
-
From iStock? About $0, but I don't have an account there, so that could be it ;)
Ah yes and I have friends who say the same about Shutterstock. 8) 👍 We're all our own boss and free to do as we think.
No statement for me yet.
Yes, I was surprised as it's Monday the 18th and about the right time for processing.
-
From iStock? About $0, but I don't have an account there, so that could be it ;)
Ah yes and I have friends who say the same about Shutterstock. 8) 👍 We're all our own boss and free to do as we think.
No statement for me yet.
Yes, I was surprised as it's Monday the 18th and about the right time for processing.
The statement usually comes in by the 20th. Often it's earlier, but the 20th ist the official date.
I do not know where the info is from, I just remember that that's the date I have read on their website at some point. Thought it might have been their forum, but it looks like iStock followed Shutterstock's lead and took down their forum?
-
it looks like iStock followed Shutterstock's lead and took down their forum?
Nah, the forum is still there. They moved it to the menu on the left side. Click on Community in that menu to access it. There's a post in the forum saying that they are moving the forum link back to to the front page.
-
Just checked, no update yet. It's 6:45 EST Monday. Will check back tomorrow.
-
Yes, I was surprised as it's Monday the 18th and about the right time for processing.
Hehe, stock agencies will always let you down whenever you expect anything from them.
-
In my opinion, the author of this post is bored in life ;D
-
In my opinion, the author of this post is bored in life ;D
Yes, it was a slow day, I was bored and wanted to start a thread about IS reporting earnings and stop reading theories about how fast Adobe reviews, because of some secret system (which of course always favors someone else) or our rank (which is meaningless). I was also bored with all the talk of AI, whether it's good or bad or will ruin stock forever.
You're right. ;D
I'm also disappointed that IS had all weekend to run stats and report our lovely Connect Sales: License Fee $0.00276 @ Rate 15%
Gross royalty $0.00041 👈
I finished all my March Madness brackets, read all the details of Draft Kings, NASCAR and PGA Golf. The weather was cold and windy. Yup, I'm bored.
The statement usually comes in by the 20th. Often it's earlier, but the 20th ist the official date.
I do not know where the info is from, I just remember that that's the date I have read on their website at some point. Thought it might have been their forum, but it looks like iStock followed Shutterstock's lead and took down their forum?
ps Dec was the 18th, Jan was the 18th, Feb was the 16th. Just a note for those with faulty memories, NO it's not usually reported on the 20th. From the official site: "Royalty Statements are published on the 20th of each month. You will see what you have sold and what you have earned and can download that data." And here's the forum that they took down. ;) https://contributors.gettyimages.com/forum/
Now please IS, I'll be back soon, show me the money?
-
it's the afternoon of the 20th in Australia and still no sign of downloads or reports :(
-
Fully expect Istock to beat shutterstock this month considering how low SS sales have dropped off lately. Only happened twice before, January and February of 2024.
-
Coming Monday, the 18th. But I thought I'd just jump ahead and start the thread. ;D
How did you know they were going to be late this month?
-
ps Dec was the 18th, Jan was the 18th, Feb was the 16th. Just a note for those with faulty memories, NO it's not usually reported on the 20th. From the official site: "Royalty Statements are published on the 20th of each month. You will see what you have sold and what you have earned and can download that data."
Now please IS, I'll be back soon, show me the money?
Good Post ...
-
Lower than January by far, which would have been fine if it didnt receive a negative balance of $38 for premium use. Is that a refund?..
-
Fully expect Istock to beat shutterstock this month considering how low SS sales have dropped off lately. Only happened twice before, January and February of 2024.
I guess I jumped the gun on this. First time ever that I've had "negative sales" on istock and it's a substantial amount. I hope it's a glitch but goddamn, it sucks whatever little enthusiasm I had for this "game".
-
Also have negative sales.
-
"negative sales" ..........same here
-
Big amount of negative sales here too.
-
wow, was that worth the wait or what? mine are mostly refunds like reported above. just a few cents above losing money for the month.
-
Shocking having earned $51.6 in January, I only earned $4.98 in February.
The reason 24 sales for a negative amount.
:(
-
Coming Monday, the 18th. But I thought I'd just jump ahead and start the thread. ;D
How did you know they were going to be late this month?
Posted as a joke
Fully expect Istock to beat shutterstock this month considering how low SS sales have dropped off lately. Only happened twice before, January and February of 2024.
I guess I jumped the gun on this. First time ever that I've had "negative sales" on istock and it's a substantial amount. I hope it's a glitch but goddamn, it sucks whatever little enthusiasm I had for this "game".
Wow and the joke is on me, as I have negative sales too. Hopefully this is a mistake and they will issue the real "earnings" revised report.
-
what's especially fun is all my "refunds" are dated to Nov.
-
why is istock selling my images for negative dollars? are they stupid?
-
Yep, bunch of those "negative sales". On the bright side, however, it's all very exciting.
-
Where do you find these negative sales listed?
-
You have to download statement, then drop into that archaic Deep Meta; click on "Gross Royalty" column to sort ascending and negative will swim on top (see attachement)
Looks like Everybody got negative sales. For me its all same amount, most in Nov '23 and same client (someone from Washington US)
IMHO whole iStock platform is so outdated, with unclear accounting practices and this is just another example.
-
If this is the case why they are taking huge commission, even they cant manage refund or why they are not able to manage their clients.
Accounting and Sales marketing people should resign from their jobs.
-
can you please check and confirm does the " Net US earnings" are in negative or " Net non-US earnings " also negative.
My " Net non-US earnings" is positive, if this is the case then i think its financial issues in their company.
-
Reading posts on iStock forums suggests something might of gone wrong with February statements. Eg: One US based contributor had zero US sales with otherwise average of 500 sales a month and another had entire negative sales on all Premium Access.
-
I see what you mean by the iStock forum going berserk.
All the negative sales seem to be listed as:-
Customer: NA (WASHINGTON)
Type: Premium Access Time Limited
Date: 12th November 2023
-
A good month, no negative sales here...
-
Small consolation that Getty eats 85% of the refunds.
-
I see what you mean by the iStock forum going berserk.
All the negative sales seem to be listed as:-
Customer: NA (WASHINGTON)
Type: Premium Access Time Limited
Date: 12th November 2023
Mine too, I went back and they are listed in the November ESP download. I checked the PDF versions.
"WASHINGTON 100.00% Getty 12.35 15.00% 1.85"
Where do you find these negative sales listed?
If you aren't useing Deep Meta, look on ESP and download the PDF version, the refunds will be in red near the bottom, listed as GETTY
-
Well, in my case, it's showing Royalties for February but NOT the Downloads. I WOULD appreciate knowing my Downloads.
Royalties were slightly better than normal.
-
I’m not convinced there is no error on the royalties this month, I’ve never had negative sales before in 5 years and my usual consistent $200 a month has dropped to $5 this month :-o with premium access stating a negative 1750%! All looks a bit odd…..
-
I got those refunds as well, many... (all for bigger sales). So yeah, totally disastrous month.
How can there be a refund for an image sale? You clearly see what you are buying. The asset can turn out to be misleading (location-wise etc.) then it is justified, but here it wasnt the case. Shall contributors suffer the consequences of someone changing their mind couple of months after they purchased the asset??
-
All my negative sales are listed as Washington too, must be an error somewhere
-
This is all Uncle Pete fault for starting thread too early ;D
-
This is all Uncle Pete fault for starting thread too early ;D
Yes we have the guilty ;D ;D ;D ;D
BTW I have a HUGE amount of refunds too...
-
You have to download statement, then drop into that archaic Deep Meta; click on "Gross Royalty" column to sort ascending and negative will swim on top (see attachement)
Out of curiosity, how do you sort by just the month?
-
From what I can see I didn't have many refunds in the February statement. So overall February 2024 was just a crap month for royalties (especially given the hundreds of images and videos uploaded during the year) - down 29.6% on February 2023 - and there's still no downloads in ESP for February. Disastrous admin. I'm only glad these people are not our airline pilots.
-
You have to download statement, then drop into that archaic Deep Meta; click on "Gross Royalty" column to sort ascending and negative will swim on top (see attachement)
Looks like Everybody got negative sales. For me its all same amount, most in Nov '23 and same client (someone from Washington US)
IMHO whole iStock platform is so outdated, with unclear accounting practices and this is just another example.
same here, I got negative sales, from Washington and Nov 2023
-
Mine are WAY down compared to the positive trend of the last 6 months, partly caused by a lot of negative "washington" sales ...
Are we supposed to all open a ticket at Istock now, or do you think the massive protest on the Istock forums will do the trick?
-
Kelvin said on the forums that there is no need to open a ticket, they are already looking into it.
-
The entire process is very odd. The statements themselves were bordering on overdue. Views, interactions and downloads still have not been updated. Then there were almost an avalanche of anomalies reported by iStock contributors. IStock needs to get its sh!t together.
-
- February 2024 was better than shutterstock.
- February 2024 was better than in the two previous years, but worse than January 2024.
- I don't get download stats for February 2024 - so I have no idea how the RPD was.
- I got 4 negative refunds for downloads from Washington on November 11, 12, 13 and 15, 2023 "Premium Access Time Limited" from Washington.
-
I did extremely bad. Worst month in years... :-\
-
Now noticed over 250 dollars of negative earnings in February, what .?
-
I don't like complaining, but good riddance, has February been a bad month.
Even without the negative earnings it would have been on the low side.
Adobe Stock aside, all agencies have performing below average for me in 2024, despite regular uploads.
-
Kelvin said on the forums that there is no need to open a ticket, they are already looking into it.
Thanks for the info - I'm very curious to see what comes out of it - if anything :-)
I'm "only" in with 7 refunds at $1.83 - all from November and all from Washington (5x editorial, 2x commercial).
-
Terrible sales month.
-
This is all Uncle Pete fault for starting thread too early ;D
I gave that a plus! :)
Kelvin said on the forums that there is no need to open a ticket, they are already looking into it.
Well we can hope?
I pretty well came up with two personal answers, that could cover this. 1) Someone bought a whopping big package and downloaded everything they could, until Getty figured out the payment was a fraud? or 2) Accounting Error.
It just seems odd that so many people, even someone like myself who barely does $10 a month on IS, would have so many refunds. Or if it is #1, someone just downloaded most of everything from IS.
Just a note, the two I sold, that are refunded, were the same image, two times. :o
-
This is all Uncle Pete fault for starting thread too early ;D
I gave that a plus! :)
Always a good sport :D
Seriously, this is not even so surprising. iStock Platform is so inflexible and outdated. Once a month reporting (anyone else doing that??) , bloated and completely unnecessary "managed keywords" system, open a ticket if you want to modify keyword (????), standalone heavy "Deep Meta" (when everyone is doing lightweight Web Front End), List goes on. It's like having an old car; change brake pads, but now battery won't start. Replace battery, but ignition fails. Etc. It's time for a new Car
-
No refunds for me, but the lowest month in over four years... by a long shot!
-
14 dollars after all the washington refunds. haven't seen sales like this since 2005.
Not motivating.
-
One of the most poorly conceived and cynical cash-grabs I've seen in my lifetime.
-
We have an official response from kelvinjay on the iStock/Getty forum:
" UPDATE: Refunds / cancellations
Some contributors have noticed an increase in cancellations on their royalty statement this month.
A large corporate customer who licenses a high volume of content mistakenly selected these uses as royalty-bearing when, in fact, they were for comp / low-resolution image use. It is standard industry practice that comp uses, for client pitches, mock-ups, etc., are not a royalty generating license.
We subsequently met with the customer to reiterate the correct licensing requirements and reversed these transactions. Due to the customer's sizable team, some assets were selected for intended comp use multiple times, necessitating multiple cancellations
In future, if the customer licenses and downloads some of the affected assets for actual, published projects, these will appear on Connect statements. Please note there is no need to open tickets regarding this issue.
We sincerely apologize for any inconvenience or confusion caused during this process."
-
Due to the massive amount of refunds reported that's a surprisingly large number of comps and doesn't seem right,
-
We have an official response from kelvinjay on the iStock/Getty forum:
" UPDATE: Refunds / cancellations
Some contributors have noticed an increase in cancellations on their royalty statement this month.
A large corporate customer who licenses a high volume of content mistakenly selected these uses as royalty-bearing when, in fact, they were for comp / low-resolution image use. It is standard industry practice that comp uses, for client pitches, mock-ups, etc., are not a royalty generating license.
We subsequently met with the customer to reiterate the correct licensing requirements and reversed these transactions. Due to the customer's sizable team, some assets were selected for intended comp use multiple times, necessitating multiple cancellations
In future, if the customer licenses and downloads some of the affected assets for actual, published projects, these will appear on Connect statements. Please note there is no need to open tickets regarding this issue.
We sincerely apologize for any inconvenience or confusion caused during this process."
This well articulated response to the above from istock forum member Bulgac....
"I can't believe what's written in this statement. It's utterly outrageous!
Firstly, it's alarming that such a fundamental misunderstanding of licensing terms could occur with a "large corporate customer." How could they mistakenly categorize high-volume content usage as royalty-bearing when it was intended for comp/low-resolution image use? This reflects a severe lack of diligence and competence on their part.
Furthermore, the fact that this mistake led to multiple cancellations due to assets being selected for comp use multiple times is simply unacceptable. It suggests a systemic issue within the customer's team regarding understanding and adhering to licensing terms.
The nonchalant tone of the statement, suggesting that such occurrences are just part of the norm in the industry, is appalling. This is not standard industry practice; it's a glaring oversight that should have been addressed swiftly and rigorously.
Moreover, the suggestion that affected assets for actual published projects will be accounted for in future statements does little to rectify the inconvenience caused to contributors. This situation could have serious implications for their income and workflow, and a mere apology is insufficient.
In conclusion, this statement fails to acknowledge the gravity of the situation and the impact it has on contributors. It reflects a worrying disregard for proper licensing procedures and accountability."
-
In addition to the comments above about how outrageous this vague explanation is, I noted (and posted about it in the Getty forum) the strange wording about "...low-resolution image use...". What exactly is that and why is it free?
And the icing on the cake is not notifying contributors ahead of time about this mess. Did they think we wouldn't notice?
I had to modify my spreadsheet where I track this stuff to correctly count downloads as only those items where the sale amount is >0 as bundling (in my case 10) refunds in with the licenses really makes a mess of the totals, RPD, etc.
Unfortunately Todayis20 makes the same naive assumption :)
-
I feel there is STILL something wrong( despite negative earnings). I am missing ALL the sales from US on my iS earnings graph in February ( I see them in pdf ). How about you?
-
Half earning for Feb. Very strange.
-
This incident is what we noticed. Who knows what is happening that we do not notice and that is not reflected in our participant accounts...
-
I feel there is STILL something wrong( despite negative earnings). I am missing ALL the sales from US on my iS earnings graph in February ( I see them in pdf ). How about you?
The same
-
There are many thieves among the participants. He steals our photos and sells them here. Again, participants investigate, find and disclose. is checked and the thief account is closed. So, what happens to the visual money sold by the thief until then? If it is below the $100 payment limit, the thief will not be paid. Are the profits transferred to the original owners of the images?
No.
So why is the mistake made by someone else being blamed on us, the participants?
When I checked again, one of my videos had previously been sold for $54 and was returned days later. And many more images. How do we know that these images and videos, which were sold and returned, were not returned after use?
never....
-
In future, if the customer licenses and downloads some of the affected assets for actual, published projects, these will appear on Connect statements.
Oh I feel so much better, that maybe, in the future, I might get a fractional, 1/100th of a cent, Connect credit for this error. ::)
-
Regardless of the explanation there is a problem, I never go under $150 a month and feb it shows $5 for the month. I do not believe my warnings can drop like that and iStock owe a lot of money to a lot of people for February. Everyone should raise a ticket.
-
Regardless of the explanation there is a problem, I never go under $150 a month and feb it shows $5 for the month. I do not believe my warnings can drop like that and iStock owe a lot of money to a lot of people for February. Everyone should raise a ticket.
If you had royalties of $155 for February and refunds for $150 (from all those November licenses that were refunded), that'd leave you with $5 net. Your earnings probably didn't drop (if you exclude the refunds)
Getty's charts are useless and are incorrectly showing your percentages of February's total sales. They are tallying the negative refunds with the positive sales and presenting the net result. In my case they stay Premium Access was 31% of my February total, but it was actually 40% if you just count the royalties for February and not the November refunds.
When you look at your royalty statement (the PDF), do you see a bunch of licenses that are negative numbers?
Look in the Getty forums - Kelvin Jay has provided a statement and said there's no need to raise a ticket as they know about the problem. I doubt ticket responses will provide anything useful as an answer :)
-
i don't see anything to complain about, look at this useful and informative chart
-
In terms of money;
Subscription earned non returned images $50.67
Credit Pack earned non returned images $25.25
Premium Access earned but returned -$73.03
Surely at least the subscription and credit pack earnings are safe as they were not returned and premium access should just be $0 as all images were returned but instead I only get $5 plus it is unlikely all my premium access sales were from only one company. Defo not convinced there is a problem and we all need paid for non returned images.
-
One more thing that comes to mind from all this: Level of communication between their departments. It didn't take a rocket scientist to figure people would be unhappy and want to know what happened. Calvin Jay comes in and posts that vanilla "IStock Royalty Statements" thread before royalties are published. He probably wasn't even informed about refunds. Why didn't someone tell him what is going to happen and to post bit of explanation ahead of time. There would still be grumbling but at least more transparency compared to this debacle now.
-
Curious why still the views, interactions and downloads have not been updated. Probably because it will reveal a huge discrepancy.
-
Curious why still the views, interactions and downloads have not been updated. Probably because it will reveal a huge discrepancy.
Kelvin Jay's post on this was that it's a separate technical problem, only affecting some contributors (mine haven't updated either). Someone will resolve this next week...
I have, effectively, a report on all my February downloads from the royalty statements along with payment. I'd rather be missing the list with pictures of the downloaded files than the payment :)
-
Here's what Getty/IStock support has to say about the many refunds... if you ask me, not really an explanation, except for their own mistakes in communication.
My support case was also closed immediately after this reply without a chance to respond.
-----------------
Thank you for contacting Getty Images | iStock.
Some contributors have noticed an increase in cancellations on their royalty statement this month.
A large corporate customer who licenses a high volume of content mistakenly selected these uses as royalty-bearing when, in fact, they were for comp / low-resolution image use. It is standard industry practice that comp uses, for client pitches, mock-ups, etc., are not a royalty generating license.
We subsequently met with the customer to reiterate the correct licensing requirements and reversed these transactions. Due to the customer's sizable team, some assets were selected for intended comp use multiple times, necessitating multiple cancellations.
We sincerely apologize for any inconvenience or confusion caused during this process.
-----------------
In summary, for me that means as much as:
"We don't care what you think, the main thing is that the cash register is right and our major customer is satisfied even if he screwed it up himself" ;-)
-
We have an official response from kelvinjay on the iStock/Getty forum:
" UPDATE: Refunds / cancellations
Some contributors have noticed an increase in cancellations on their royalty statement this month.
A large corporate customer who licenses a high volume of content mistakenly selected these uses as royalty-bearing when, in fact, they were for comp / low-resolution image use. It is standard industry practice that comp uses, for client pitches, mock-ups, etc., are not a royalty generating license.
We subsequently met with the customer to reiterate the correct licensing requirements and reversed these transactions. Due to the customer's sizable team, some assets were selected for intended comp use multiple times, necessitating multiple cancellations
In future, if the customer licenses and downloads some of the affected assets for actual, published projects, these will appear on Connect statements. Please note there is no need to open tickets regarding this issue.
We sincerely apologize for any inconvenience or confusion caused during this process."
Team comp use means all of these are reversed.
-
Brutal, does it mean that someone with a Super Duper Business Premium account has downloaded the entire database?
Who can actually guarantee that it wasn't misuse and that the images are now being used illegally for training AI models or offered elsewhere?
I mean, you can see from the account downloads that something is wrong. Why not prevent this in advance and block the account in advance?
-
I have 30 Dollars negative income in february >:(
-
How was my February? Worst month in 15 years. I’ve gone from making a couple of thousand a month on the late 2010s, to a few hundred a month in the early 2020s, to $90 in February 2024!! I just don’t get it. I haven’t been below $250 since like 2012 (and that was back when I got paid weekly!!) and January this year was close to $500. I seem to have fallen off the cliff and won’t even get paid this month. Pretty discouraging. Maybe time to throw in the towel. That averages less than 1 cent per file uploaded!!
-
I was also in the red this month.
Let me ask you a stupid question.
Why do we actually have to pay if a customer buys pictures here illegally and against the rules?
In my world, the customer has to pay for the damage.
-
I am also down with negative earning.. This is really crushed my plans.
-
Long time contributor.
The explanation Getty gave is fishy to say the least.
I just don't buy it because on the strong discrepancies of the amounts paid in every transactions.
I think it is long due a deep auditory of their accounts.
Personally I don't trust their accuracy, transparency and honesty of their statements.
-
I feel there is STILL something wrong( despite negative earnings). I am missing ALL the sales from US on my iS earnings graph in February ( I see them in pdf ). How about you?
I just tried out the stats features in DeepMeta4 (it's in beta but that part is working). It needs the text file version of your stats (not the PDF) and then produces much better graphs than anything on the Getty ESP site. It also handles refunds correctly - i.e. shows that they are refunds rather than just muddling them with new sales.
https://deepmeta.creativ.zone/
-
Surprise - big customers get to use our files for free for some uses (planning, mock ups, etc. ) with no watermarks so if they accidentally just go live with it nobody really notices.
The question I have for the people that got heaps of refunds, were your earnings for November oddly high (by about the same amount as the refunds)?
Pretty shoddy on the part of Getty all around.
-
An image of mine has been published numerous times, always credited to Getty, the last payment I received for it , for pennies, was in May 2023. I have emailed and requested an explanation. no reply unfortunately. i do wonder about the credibility of this company.
-
apparently I had no sales in Feb from the US, nor have I had any US 'interactions' in the rolling month 24 Feb - 24 March.
Weird, it's usually my #2 country, if not, it's #1.
LIke everyone else, Feb sales spoiled by a slew of refunds.
-
The question I have for the people that got heaps of refunds, were your earnings for November oddly high (by about the same amount as the refunds)?
Pretty shoddy on the part of Getty all around.
That's really good question. Went and checked: Nov '23 was my 3rd best month last year on iStock, but nothing out of proportion.
Accounting certainly appears shady, but I don't think it's deliberate - whole system is set up in such a bad way it is easy for all kinds of mistakes to creep in. Biggest thorn to me is 15% royalty which is downright disrespectful.
-
The question I have for the people that got heaps of refunds, were your earnings for November oddly high (by about the same amount as the refunds)?
Pretty shoddy on the part of Getty all around.
That's really good question. Went and checked: Nov '23 was my 3rd best month last year on iStock, but nothing out of proportion.
Accounting certainly appears shady, but I don't think it's deliberate - whole system is set up in such a bad way it is easy for all kinds of mistakes to creep in. Biggest thorn to me is 15% royalty which is downright disrespectful.
Agreed
Pretty funny or odd, or I ask, how do people reason out the glaring contradiction, when SS pays us more and a higher percentage, with a higher minimum, but they can't stop shouting how bad SS is or what crooks they are? "I'd never upload anything to SS, paying 10 cents is an insult."
I won't dwell on Connect which is, fractions of cents, because no one really knows what or how those images are used. Maybe for mock-ups, or maybe not. Maybe on a website, or chat, or somewhere in Asia for some mystery use, and maybe not. We don't get anything detailed or specific. Oh but we do get hundredths of a cent royalty.
BUT... for iStock when we do get the details. How do we get downloads like this? 4 cents? 3 cents?
Type Regular
Month 2024-02
Sales date 2/5/2024
Uploaded 5/30/2013
Gross royalty $0.04762
License Fee $0.31745
Rate 15%
File Type Editorial Image
Type Regular
Month 2024-02
Sales date 2/6/2024
Uploaded 10/6/2011
Gross royalty $0.03150
License Fee $0.21000
Rate 15%
Please tell me how SS is nothing but despicable crooks, and then someone explain, how iStock isn't worse? ;D Oh IS is much better, they pay fractions of cents, and then 3 cents or 4 cents. Really? That's better than the terrible, insulting, demoralizing... 10˘ :o
-
My November sales were normal but my December sales were high, I see iStock still not showing number of downloads for February…..
-
The question I have for the people that got heaps of refunds, were your earnings for November oddly high (by about the same amount as the refunds)?
Pretty shoddy on the part of Getty all around.
That's really good question. Went and checked: Nov '23 was my 3rd best month last year on iStock, but nothing out of proportion.
Accounting certainly appears shady, but I don't think it's deliberate - whole system is set up in such a bad way it is easy for all kinds of mistakes to creep in. Biggest thorn to me is 15% royalty which is downright disrespectful.
Agreed
Pretty funny or odd, or I ask, how do people reason out the glaring contradiction, when SS pays us more and a higher percentage, with a higher minimum, but they can't stop shouting how bad SS is or what crooks they are? "I'd never upload anything to SS, paying 10 cents is an insult."
I won't dwell on Connect which is, fractions of cents, because no one really knows what or how those images are used. Maybe for mock-ups, or maybe not. Maybe on a website, or chat, or somewhere in Asia for some mystery use, and maybe not. We don't get anything detailed or specific. Oh but we do get hundredths of a cent royalty.
BUT... for iStock when we do get the details. How do we get downloads like this? 4 cents? 3 cents?
Type Regular
Month 2024-02
Sales date 2/5/2024
Uploaded 5/30/2013
Gross royalty $0.04762
License Fee $0.31745
Rate 15%
File Type Editorial Image
Type Regular
Month 2024-02
Sales date 2/6/2024
Uploaded 10/6/2011
Gross royalty $0.03150
License Fee $0.21000
Rate 15%
Please tell me how SS is nothing but despicable crooks, and then someone explain, how iStock isn't worse? ;D Oh IS is much better, they pay fractions of cents, and then 3 cents or 4 cents. Really? That's better than the terrible, insulting, demoralizing... 10˘ :o
Brutal, how is this even possible? 3 to 4 cents comissions?
What the heck?
I wouldn't be surprised if all agencies are ripping off their contributors since they all have become to greedy.
Didn't we also have the thread about Shutterstock, where even sales were not passed on to the contributors?
IStock states that they pay out almost 2 million a week.
Presumably that's a similar number of sales. So mistakes can happen ...
You probably don't even notice smaller ones and they are simply covered up.
Nobody can check the sales system.
-
Still no payment this month.
-
Nobody can check the sales system.
Yeah that's the thing. How do we know, how can anybody check that without direct involvement?
We don't, and we can't.
Not even speaking of something intentional. But on a technical level. Consider a database with hundreds of millions of records. All the programming and scripts that involve connecting all the commission variants from different kinds of subscriptions, direct sales, credit packs, premium access, Getty library, iStock library, Thinkstock library or any other weird thing they set up in the past.... Consider all those API's from partners or customers with direct access. There's a lot of it than can go technically wrong, from database corruptions over api's not working to misprogramming that nobody ever discovers and when they do can take weeks or months to fix... Consider all the internal teams and divisions having access and manipulation rights on the database intervening to their own needs creating side-effects for others... The way Getty or any other big agencies operates their data must be very complex.
I'm not very technically involved, but from my work experience from more service managing related positions I can assure you that data or transactions in likewise constructions gets lost. And very often, when discovered, the consideration is made: what costs more? Accepting the data-loss, or trying to fix the issue and also restore data loss or perform corrections, wherever possible. There are cases where data loss is accepted as a more cost-efficient way to deal with the issue. There are a lot of cases too where the issue does gets fixed, but it can takes months to do that due to the complexity of the issue, and the complexity of the company itself (often dealing with off-shore programmers who might be competent people on a technical level, but have no clue at all about the system that they are trying to fix, they just write code)
I'm pretty sure that in this whole mess, a unreported sales happen. And they can percentage-wise be considered as the exception, we're still talking about quite the volume.
-
They did the Blunder and still there is no download report for Feb24.
-
Have you received your February payment?
-
Have you received your February payment?
Yes, a week ago.
-
according to the profile page i made my first 2 video sales on istock this month. i hope they're not both returns! fingers crossed.
-
For the first time for getting on for 20 years, I didn't even make payout this month.
Not even before the refunds.
Pretty sad what this has come down to now.
-
Brutal, how is this even possible? 3 to 4 cents comissions?
What the heck?
I wouldn't be surprised if all agencies are ripping off their contributors since they all have become to greedy.
Didn't we also have the thread about Shutterstock, where even sales were not passed on to the contributors?
IStock states that they pay out almost 2 million a week.
Presumably that's a similar number of sales. So mistakes can happen ...
You probably don't even notice smaller ones and they are simply covered up.
Nobody can check the sales system.
3 or 4 cents has been going on for some time at IS. Check their forum, I think some people have been as low as 2˘ and that's not Connect, that's a iStock or Getty download.
All agencies have their best self interest to pay us what we are due and not cheat. If someone ever found out there were unpaid downloads, that were paid for and licensed, there would be one heck of a lawsuit, which could destroy the business.
Didn't we also have the thread about Shutterstock, where even sales were not passed on to the contributors?
Alleged, claimed, unsupported, unless you believe everything you read on an Internet Forum, without any proof?
Correct, nobody can check the sales system. We can't anywhere or for many other business in life. There has to be some trust? If anyone works on a commission basis, they have to believe that the company they work for, is going to be honest and report everything. Otherwise, why start?
I noticed that, as usual, the people who claim SS is a bunch of crooks and insulting us with 10˘, don't have an answer to why they are not just as insulted or worse for 3˘ downloads and connect sales, from iStock? But people flocked away from SS in protest, and formed a coalition, tried a boycott, and two years later can't stop writing hate messages... still work for IS? :o
As a note: I still work for both. Yes, I'm insulted, but I'll take the money. 8)
-
Brutal, how is this even possible? 3 to 4 cents comissions?
What the heck?
I wouldn't be surprised if all agencies are ripping off their contributors since they all have become to greedy.
Didn't we also have the thread about Shutterstock, where even sales were not passed on to the contributors?
IStock states that they pay out almost 2 million a week.
Presumably that's a similar number of sales. So mistakes can happen ...
You probably don't even notice smaller ones and they are simply covered up.
Nobody can check the sales system.
3 or 4 cents has been going on for some time at IS. Check their forum, I think some people have been as low as 2˘ and that's not Connect, that's a iStock or Getty download.
All agencies have their best self interest to pay us what we are due and not cheat. If someone ever found out there were unpaid downloads, that were paid for and licensed, there would be one heck of a lawsuit, which could destroy the business.
Didn't we also have the thread about Shutterstock, where even sales were not passed on to the contributors?
Alleged, claimed, unsupported, unless you believe everything you read on an Internet Forum, without any proof?
Correct, nobody can check the sales system. We can't anywhere or for many other business in life. There has to be some trust? If anyone works on a commission basis, they have to believe that the company they work for, is going to be honest and report everything. Otherwise, why start?
I noticed that, as usual, the people who claim SS is a bunch of crooks and insulting us with 10˘, don't have an answer to why they are not just as insulted or worse for 3˘ downloads and connect sales, from iStock? But people flocked away from SS in protest, and formed a coalition, tried a boycott, and two years later can't stop writing hate messages... still work for IS? :o
As a note: I still work for both. Yes, I'm insulted, but I'll take the money. 8)
IS drew first blood - and I removed most of my content there, and if everyone had done that I am pretty sure SS would not have done what they did, but they did.
The SS pulled their money grab. So I turned off my port. If everyone had done that, they would be gone or backtrack, but they didn't and they didn't.
Tragedy of the commons. I am glad I am not relying on this for my food or shelter, although it managed to be over 50% of my income for a brief while.
-
But a lot of people did stop uploading ro are uploading a lot less to SS. They are getting less than 50% of content that they used to get. With video the drop is even steeper, although that might be balanced by the exclusive content on pond5.
They have also lost their stock groth and are only talking about how much money they want to do with ai.
Adobe seems to be getting the best content at the money and they are showing a very strong surge in sales.
Basically SS transferred a lot of producers to. Adobe and they took their clients with them.
However, if SS reopened their forums, came up with a much more sensible royalty plan, they could easily win back the producers that left.
Eventually it will happen, but it might take a few more years. At the moment they are having phenomenal earnings and growth with ai.
So who cares about the basics?
And maybe they are right, perhaps with ai they can create anything they need and longterm can live without new producers.
-
Since Getty is a public company, I wonder did their auditors spot something that led to this mass refund.
-
more than happy to not have to see this rubbish anymore! :)
It's our fault that we continue to provide content to these agencies,like Istock or SS.
I stopped thinking about money in the short term,and I decided almost a year ago to only support Adobe which is the only honest agency,and which in my opinion could also raise the prices of content to customers,which unfortunately cannot do because it has to remain competitive with these other large agencies like Istock,and it's our fault because we continue to give content to these thieves.
I'm tired of this nonsense,15% and 10c on the other side and clip pack sales of 0.25c yes of course on SS you can also sell a video for 100usd or more but you have to be extremely lucky,but a business cannot be founded on luck.
anyway next month will be better (maybe) and many will forget all this until the next theft,and in the meantime you will continue to fill the bellies of these people who do not have the slightest respect for people and their work.
all this is our fault,the microstock has changed,maybe it's time for us to change too!
Since I've been working only with Adobe Stock,I've had a better and more peaceful life,and I am more focused and creative,I remember when I worked for Istock,with all their stupid and antiquated systems from indexing to statements and all the rest,they were eating my soul! :D
-
more than happy to not have to see this rubbish anymore! :)
It's our fault that we continue to provide content to these agencies,like Istock or SS.
I stopped thinking about money in the short term,and I decided almost a year ago to only support Adobe which is the only honest agency,and which in my opinion could also raise the prices of content to customers,which unfortunately cannot do because it has to remain competitive with these other large agencies like Istock,and it's our fault because we continue to give content to these thieves.
I'm tired of this nonsense,15% and 10c on the other side and clip pack sales of 0.25c yes of course on SS you can also sell a video for 100usd or more but you have to be extremely lucky,but a business cannot be founded on luck.
anyway next month will be better (maybe) and many will forget all this until the next theft,and in the meantime you will continue to fill the bellies of these people who do not have the slightest respect for people and their work.
all this is our fault,the microstock has changed,maybe it's time for us to change too!
Since I've been working only with Adobe Stock,I've had a better and more peaceful life,and I am more focused and creative,I remember when I worked for Istock,with all their stupid and antiquated systems from indexing to statements and all the rest,they were eating my soul! :D
Basically, I agree with you.
Unfortunately, I - and other contributors - have noticed that RPD is also declining at AS. In my case, it's down 16% compared to one or two years ago. It has to be said clearly that AS still has the greatest fairness among the larger agencies. But they also operate for their own benefit - not ours.
Concentrating exclusively on AS is certainly a good way to counteract price dumping. But there is also a big risk. If there is a significant change in the AS search algorithm, sales can drop dramatically from one day to the next. That's why I've always avoided being dependent on a single agency.
No matter how you do it, there is always a catch.
-
more than happy to not have to see this rubbish anymore! :)
It's our fault that we continue to provide content to these agencies,like Istock or SS.
I stopped thinking about money in the short term,and I decided almost a year ago to only support Adobe which is the only honest agency,and which in my opinion could also raise the prices of content to customers,which unfortunately cannot do because it has to remain competitive with these other large agencies like Istock,and it's our fault because we continue to give content to these thieves.
I'm tired of this nonsense,15% and 10c on the other side and clip pack sales of 0.25c yes of course on SS you can also sell a video for 100usd or more but you have to be extremely lucky,but a business cannot be founded on luck.
anyway next month will be better (maybe) and many will forget all this until the next theft,and in the meantime you will continue to fill the bellies of these people who do not have the slightest respect for people and their work.
all this is our fault,the microstock has changed,maybe it's time for us to change too!
Since I've been working only with Adobe Stock,I've had a better and more peaceful life,and I am more focused and creative,I remember when I worked for Istock,with all their stupid and antiquated systems from indexing to statements and all the rest,they were eating my soul! :D
Basically, I agree with you.
Unfortunately, I - and other contributors - have noticed that RPD is also declining at AS. In my case, it's down 16% compared to one or two years ago. It has to be said clearly that AS still has the greatest fairness among the larger agencies. But they also operate for their own benefit - not ours.
Concentrating exclusively on AS is certainly a good way to counteract price dumping. But there is also a big risk. If there is a significant change in the AS search algorithm, sales can drop dramatically from one day to the next. That's why I've always avoided being dependent on a single agency.
No matter how you do it, there is always a catch.
when I started in microstock I worked with several agencies and I still have ports open in some agencies,but simply for about a year I have only been uploading to Adobe.
since I started working only on Adobe my sales have improved,in 2023 I earned 300% more on Adobe than in 2022 in terms of money,and that's because I have more time to research what's missing on Adobe and I've found a huge niche where I have virtually no competition,and I no longer have that frenetic attitude of having to think about all these agencies so I am more relaxed and focused,take care of the descriptions and all the possible details that are not possible when you have to think about too many agencies,because you have to work more schematically and quickly,and then I believe it is important to work with those who treat me fairly.
I don't think there can be a change in the search algorithm,Adobe's sales system works differently from all other agencies,from what I understand,it is done in such a way that all active contributors sell,and over time they sell more depending on how much and what you produce.
the point in my opinion is simple,in the current state of affairs if Adobe sinks,the microstock is finished.
agencies like Istock are based on the fact that contributors try to get money where they can,and therefore exploit us,because they still receive content from contributors.
the problem is that Adobe must remain competitive with the other large agencies,and the truth in my opinion is that if RPD drops on Adobe,it's our fault because we help the competition.
by continuing to support agencies like Istock we end up shooting ourselves in the foot.
the problem is that we need money,and this mania of ours to have everything possible will end up ruining us,whether we like it or not,I am firmly convinced that the fault of the current state of things of microstock is ours,because we are the ones who allow it,we are the microstock,agencies like Istock are nothing without us.
of course Adobe thinks about its own interests,and I'm happy about it,because if Adobe Stock grows as an agency we contributors are growing too.
Having said this,I am the first hypocrite of all,because I still have my active port on SS because unfortunately I need the money,but at least I have achieved the decency to no longer upload! :D
-
@Wilm
I just wanted to add this,and sorry if I'm digressing from the main topic:
an RPD down 16% means nothing,are your sales numbers increasing?Overall with the passing of the years,are you earning more on Adobe or not?
put RPD aside because they are also market strategies,more sales at a lower price lead to higher profits.
-
Unfortunately, I - and other contributors - have noticed that RPD is also declining at AS. In my case, it's down 16% compared to one or two years ago. It has to be said clearly that AS still has the greatest fairness among the larger agencies. But they also operate for their own benefit - not ours.
No matter how you do it, there is always a catch.
RPD is dropping? Now I have to look. I generally only watch income. Too bad it's so difficult to extract historical data from AS.
2023 RPD $.97 (more income every year, than the year before)
2022 RPD $.97
2021 RPD $.98
2020 RPD $.76
2024 RPD $.77 but it's only April. I'll give it some time. The holiday season at the end of the year is my best time.
-
Unfortunately, I - and other contributors - have noticed that RPD is also declining at AS. In my case, it's down 16% compared to one or two years ago. It has to be said clearly that AS still has the greatest fairness among the larger agencies. But they also operate for their own benefit - not ours.
No matter how you do it, there is always a catch.
RPD is dropping? Now I have to look. I generally only watch income. Too bad it's so difficult to extract historical data from AS.
2023 RPD $.97 (more income every year, than the year before)
2022 RPD $.97
2021 RPD $.98
2020 RPD $.76
2024 RPD $.77 but it's only April. I'll give it some time. The holiday season at the end of the year is my best time.
Yep!that's exactly what I meant! :)
an RPD could only make sense by assuming that the total number of sales is always the same,but this is not the case.
now we should calculate an RPD on Istock on annual basis so we can have a laugh! :D
my RPD on Istock:
2019 RPD 0,50 usd
2020 RPD 0,43 usd
2021 RPD 0,56 usd
2022 RPD 0,47 usd
2019 was the year in which I earned the most,much,much more than the following years,so RPD means nothing.
-
now we should calculate an RPD on Istock on annual basis so we can have a laugh! :D
Wanting to get that laugh, or just being curious, I tried to see. But again, just like everything else on Archaic IS platform, obtaining even simplest piece of info is extremely convoluted. I calculated last 3 months
Dec '23: 0.59
Jan '24: 0.44
Feb '24: 0.19 (refunds included)
before giving up. Maybe it would have been easier on Deep Meta, but why can't they have simple Web based interface that lets you get this piece of info with click of mouse; like Adobe portal, just set "From" "To", click and voila: Earning, Downloads.
IMHO this is key reason of IS issues. Whole system set up so poorly: once a month reporting, standalone desktop Deep Meta you have to import statements to, convoluted submission process (managed keywords nonsense, open ticket if you want to update something etc etc) list goes on. No wonder reporting errors are common. They should hire someone with knowledge of modern technology to revamp whole thing, starting with back-end which is from IT perspective likely one of biggest messes you will ever see.
-
now we should calculate an RPD on Istock on annual basis so we can have a laugh! :D
Wanting to get that laugh, or just being curious, I tried to see. But again, just like everything else on Archaic IS platform, obtaining even simplest piece of info is extremely convoluted. I calculated last 3 months
Dec '23: 0.59
Jan '24: 0.44
Feb '24: 0.19 (refunds included)
before giving up. Maybe it would have been easier on Deep Meta, but why can't they have simple Web based interface that lets you get this piece of info with click of mouse; like Adobe portal, just set "From" "To", click and voila: Earning, Downloads.
IMHO this is key reason of IS issues. Whole system set up so poorly: once a month reporting, standalone desktop Deep Meta you have to import statements to, convoluted submission process (managed keywords nonsense, open ticket if you want to update something etc etc) list goes on. No wonder reporting errors are common. They should hire someone with knowledge of modern technology to revamp whole thing, starting with back-end which is from IT perspective likely one of biggest messes you will ever see.
There's a lot to laugh about,after these RPD we can all laugh all the way to the bank! :D
I don't think they can hire someone with knowledge of modern technology,because they are not even capable of hiring someone who has the slightest experience of well-known creative software such as Photoshop or Illustrator,I can tell you because I know it from personal experience.
The only thing Istock is interested in is making money on people's backs,no matter what they have to do or say to make money.
and 15% already says everything,we do most of the work and they pocket 85%
Istock is a blatant example of modern slavery in all its twisted aspects,I don't want to have anything to do with them anymore.
-
@Wilm
I just wanted to add this,and sorry if I'm digressing from the main topic:
an RPD down 16% means nothing,are your sales numbers increasing?Overall with the passing of the years,are you earning more on Adobe or not?
put RPD aside because they are also market strategies,more sales at a lower price lead to higher profits.
My sales have been relatively constant since 2020. Before that I had more sales. As I upload very few images (maybe 20 or 30 a year), I can't expect an increase in sales.
My best RPD was in 2015 - 1.37. Currently in 2024 I am at 0.94. In addition, the 1.37 was actually in Euros (which was equivalent to 1.54 USD at that time) and it is now 0.94 USD. If I deduct the exchange fees, that leaves 0.91 USD. However, I have not included these because otherwise the PRD would not be comparable with that of the contributors, who have always been paid in USD. Nevertheless, it is actually the case that I have a personally loss of 41% in 2024 compared to 2015 as far as the RPD alone is concerned. It doesn't look any better for the other agencies.
To answer your question specifically and briefly: My income at AS has fallen due to the lower RPD while sales figures have remained relatively constant since 2020.
-
@Wilm
I just wanted to add this,and sorry if I'm digressing from the main topic:
an RPD down 16% means nothing,are your sales numbers increasing?Overall with the passing of the years,are you earning more on Adobe or not?
put RPD aside because they are also market strategies,more sales at a lower price lead to higher profits.
My sales have been relatively constant since 2020. Before that I had more sales. As I upload very few images (maybe 20 or 30 a year), I can't expect an increase in sales.
My best RPD was in 2015 - 1.37. Currently in 2024 I am at 0.94. In addition, the 1.37 was actually in Euros (which was equivalent to 1.54 USD at that time) and it is now 0.94 USD. If I deduct the exchange fees, that leaves 0.91 USD. However, I have not included these because otherwise the PRD would not be comparable with that of the contributors, who have always been paid in USD. Nevertheless, it is actually the case that I have a personally loss of 41% in 2024 compared to 2015 as far as the RPD alone is concerned. It doesn't look any better for the other agencies.
To answer your question specifically and briefly: My income at AS has fallen due to the lower RPD while sales figures have remained relatively constant since 2020.
Wilm,thanks for the reply! :)
-
@Wilm
I just wanted to add this,and sorry if I'm digressing from the main topic:
an RPD down 16% means nothing,are your sales numbers increasing?Overall with the passing of the years,are you earning more on Adobe or not?
put RPD aside because they are also market strategies,more sales at a lower price lead to higher profits.
My sales have been relatively constant since 2020. Before that I had more sales. As I upload very few images (maybe 20 or 30 a year), I can't expect an increase in sales.
My best RPD was in 2015 - 1.37. Currently in 2024 I am at 0.94. In addition, the 1.37 was actually in Euros (which was equivalent to 1.54 USD at that time) and it is now 0.94 USD. If I deduct the exchange fees, that leaves 0.91 USD. However, I have not included these because otherwise the PRD would not be comparable with that of the contributors, who have always been paid in USD. Nevertheless, it is actually the case that I have a personally loss of 41% in 2024 compared to 2015 as far as the RPD alone is concerned. It doesn't look any better for the other agencies.
To answer your question specifically and briefly: My income at AS has fallen due to the lower RPD while sales figures have remained relatively constant since 2020.
Wilm,thanks for the reply! :)
You're welcome! :)
-
Unfortunately, I - and other contributors - have noticed that RPD is also declining at AS. In my case, it's down 16% compared to one or two years ago. It has to be said clearly that AS still has the greatest fairness among the larger agencies. But they also operate for their own benefit - not ours.
No matter how you do it, there is always a catch.
RPD is dropping? Now I have to look. I generally only watch income. Too bad it's so difficult to extract historical data from AS.
2023 RPD $.97 (more income every year, than the year before)
2022 RPD $.97
2021 RPD $.98
2020 RPD $.76
2024 RPD $.77 but it's only April. I'll give it some time. The holiday season at the end of the year is my best time.
Yep!that's exactly what I meant! :)
an RPD could only make sense by assuming that the total number of sales is always the same,but this is not the case.
now we should calculate an RPD on Istock on annual basis so we can have a laugh! :D
my RPD on Istock:
2019 RPD 0,50 usd
2020 RPD 0,43 usd
2021 RPD 0,56 usd
2022 RPD 0,47 usd
2019 was the year in which I earned the most,much,much more than the following years,so RPD means nothing.
I realize that the subject had a slight diversion, since someone mentioned, they felt Adobe RPD was down. I'll get back on topic.
IS 2020 and before somewhere around .82, last two years, not including connect, around .50
I don't recall when they removed all the audio files (2020) or when they removed all my editorial, before that, but RPD and income were better before each of those events. I'm coasting, not uploading new, unless I get In The Mood. Or have something, so stunning, amazing and new, that I just must share it with Getty. ;)
-
Now I have checked my RPD for istock. Only images, no videos.
2023 = 0,66
2022 = 0,58
2021 = 0,68
2020 = 0,60
2019 = 0,62
2018 = 0,65
2017 = 0,62
Not statistically usable, but still quite interesting:
01.2024 = 1,24
02.2024 = 1,09
For 03.2024 I can only say that I had 10% more downloads than in January and February.
-
However, if SS reopened their forums, came up with a much more sensible royalty plan, they could easily win back the producers that left.
How many actually left? Does SS really care about "winning back" anyone? Sure we'd all like a fair royalty plan, people would leap back for that. Re-open the forums? (https://i.postimg.cc/x1JL1LMm/rofl.gif)
(https://i.postimg.cc/m2g4X7Zn/pigfly.gif)
If you have drained a stinky swamp and remove the trash, would you refill it with raw sewerage? Most of the forum was negative towards SS. People constantly stirring up dissent and complaining. (doesn't matter that they were exposing the truth most of the time) Do you think SS wants that public forum, or wants to host it?
-
March earnings are in. Second month without payment :(.
-
Now I have checked my RPD for istock. Only images, no videos.
2023 = 0,66
2022 = 0,58
2021 = 0,68
2020 = 0,60
2019 = 0,62
2018 = 0,65
2017 = 0,62
Not statistically usable, but still quite interesting:
01.2024 = 1,24
02.2024 = 1,09
For 03.2024 I can only say that I had 10% more downloads than in January and February.
03.2024 = 0,52 :(