MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: How does the NEW iStock stack up against Shutterstock?  (Read 26435 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: September 13, 2014, 13:35 »
0
We now have the new and improved "yuri" iStock. Simple. Cleaner. It was retooled to deal with Shutterstock's product offering and to win back buyers.

So, how do you think it matches up from a buyers perspective in the areas of price, selection, ease-of-use, price-package offerings, etc?

Did iStock get it right? Or no.


« Last Edit: September 13, 2014, 13:39 by Holmes »


« Reply #1 on: September 13, 2014, 13:49 »
0
trying to get the video to work

« Reply #2 on: September 13, 2014, 16:26 »
+19
Find one of Yuri's images in the E+ collection on gettyimage.com where it will cost you between $45 and $429 depending on the file size you need. Then copy and paste a string of the keywords (7 or 8 will do) and go to iStock and do a search for that string of keywords. I think you'll usually find the image where you can buy it for $36 or less depending on the size of the package of credits you buy.

How long will Getty customers to figure out this hack?

How do you think this is going to work for Yuri (or anyone else with images in the Signature collection)?

KB

« Reply #3 on: September 13, 2014, 16:28 »
+3
We now have the new and improved "yuri" iStock. Simple. Cleaner. It was retooled to deal with Shutterstock's product offering and to win back buyers.

So, how do you think it matches up from a buyers perspective in the areas of price, selection, ease-of-use, price-package offerings, etc?

Did iStock get it right? Or no.



"... over 500,000 new images added every month ..."

No wonder they dropped almost all technical and aesthetic inspection standards.

I'm not qualified to answer how the new IS stacks up to SS.  I'm qualified only to see how buyers react. I hope sales start increasing, and the changes don't meet my expectations of an even bigger hit to my earnings than has happened since subs began. We shall see.

« Reply #4 on: September 15, 2014, 14:36 »
+4
this was just posted on the IS forum. Kinda what I am suspecting.

"We purchase images on iStock for illustrating online articles, so we don't need the high resolution images. We typically bought small versions at 2 to 6 old credits, so about $4 to $12 each. Under the new pricing structure they will now be $15 to $45 each. Our budget doesn't support this sort of pricing. Please bring back the smaller sizes at a reduced rate. Otherwise we have no choice but to pursue other more economical options for web-resolution images." 

« Reply #5 on: September 15, 2014, 14:53 »
-2
this was just posted on the IS forum. Kinda what I am suspecting.

"We purchase images on iStock for illustrating online articles, so we don't need the high resolution images. We typically bought small versions at 2 to 6 old credits, so about $4 to $12 each. Under the new pricing structure they will now be $15 to $45 each. Our budget doesn't support this sort of pricing. Please bring back the smaller sizes at a reduced rate. Otherwise we have no choice but to pursue other more economical options for web-resolution images."
The pricing at Shutterstock is the same, $9-15 for single images, any size.  No option for smaller, cheaper files.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #6 on: September 15, 2014, 15:04 »
0
.

« Reply #7 on: September 15, 2014, 15:06 »
-1
this was just posted on the IS forum. Kinda what I am suspecting.

"We purchase images on iStock for illustrating online articles, so we don't need the high resolution images. We typically bought small versions at 2 to 6 old credits, so about $4 to $12 each. Under the new pricing structure they will now be $15 to $45 each. Our budget doesn't support this sort of pricing. Please bring back the smaller sizes at a reduced rate. Otherwise we have no choice but to pursue other more economical options for web-resolution images."
The pricing at Shutterstock is the same, $9-15 for single images, any size.  No option for smaller, cheaper files.

Still, $9 - $15 is a lot less than $15 - 45, if these are the US$ figures.
Exclusive files don't have to compete as much on price as nonexclusive files you can't go to SS and get my photos.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #8 on: September 15, 2014, 15:23 »
+1
this was just posted on the IS forum. Kinda what I am suspecting.

"We purchase images on iStock for illustrating online articles, so we don't need the high resolution images. We typically bought small versions at 2 to 6 old credits, so about $4 to $12 each. Under the new pricing structure they will now be $15 to $45 each. Our budget doesn't support this sort of pricing. Please bring back the smaller sizes at a reduced rate. Otherwise we have no choice but to pursue other more economical options for web-resolution images."
The pricing at Shutterstock is the same, $9-15 for single images, any size.  No option for smaller, cheaper files.

Still, $9 - $15 is a lot less than $15 - 45, if these are the US$ figures.
Exclusive files don't have to compete as much on price as nonexclusive files you can't go to SS and get my photos.
If that matters so much to buyers, you'd think there would be a way that buyers could filter out indie files and only look at exclusives whereas now they can only choose not to see Signature files. AFAICs, there is no way to identify exclusive files - which was stopped when they realised that the 'faux-exclusives' put a spanner into that possibility.
« Last Edit: September 15, 2014, 15:25 by ShadySue »

« Reply #9 on: September 15, 2014, 15:25 »
0
You can search only signature files if you want.

« Reply #10 on: September 15, 2014, 15:25 »
+6
I was always wondering what kind of business cannot afford to pay equivalent of cup of coffee (or even 3 cups) for an image?

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #11 on: September 15, 2014, 15:26 »
0
You can search only signature files if you want.
How?

« Reply #12 on: September 15, 2014, 15:29 »
+1
You can search only signature files if you want.
How?
There is an 'only from istock' checkbox in the search.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #13 on: September 15, 2014, 15:31 »
0
You can search only signature files if you want.
How?
There is an 'only from istock' checkbox in the search.
Tx. That wasn't there yesterday as confirmed by Kelvin in the big moving forward thread, only the subs checkboxes. Glad they responded to that issue.

« Reply #14 on: September 15, 2014, 15:43 »
+4
The pricing at Shutterstock is the same, $9-15 for single images, any size.  No option for smaller, cheaper files.

Wrong.
At least here in Germany, Shutterstock shows me two different image packs:

All sizes and vectors:
5 for €39 (€7.80 per image) or 25 for €179 (€7.16 per image)
and:
Small and medium JPEGs:
12 for €39 (€3.25 per image) or 60 for €179 (€2,98 per image)

« Reply #15 on: September 15, 2014, 15:44 »
0
The pricing at Shutterstock is the same, $9-15 for single images, any size.  No option for smaller, cheaper files.

Wrong.
At least here in Germany, Shutterstock shows me two different image packs:

All sizes and vectors:
5 for €39 (€7.80 per image) or 25 for €179 (€7.16 per image)
and:
Small and medium JPEGs:
12 for €39 (€3.25 per image) or 60 for €179 (€2,98 per image)
They are from the US, I don't see any option here to get smaller images.  I guess it's possible that he moves to Europe to get smaller sized images from SS but I don't think that's very practical.   ;)

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #16 on: September 15, 2014, 15:59 »
0
I see the faux-exclusives show in the search as being 'only from iStock'. I can find lots but I'll just post one:
http://www.istockphoto.com/photo/protecting-her-skin-against-the-harsh-sun-44002796?st=a82fee3
also available at
http://peopleimages.com/image/ID-865993-woman-sitting-applying-pool-beautiful
Apart from the legality and morality of claiming that's 'only from iStock', there's something else interesting.
If Pickerell's article in July was accurate, these latest changes on iS have been devised and project managed by Yu-know-who, presumably including 'one price for any size'.
On his own site, he has many sizes on offer at different prices, and a price match promise on his site's front page. So when iS have 25% off offers his customer service staff could get a lot of calls/emails. And he offers his images in small sizes which buyers can't get from iS. Neat trick!

BTW, love his homepage claim #3:
"3. Only Site In the World With Just Exclusives!
... Our images are of the highest quality and exclusive to us and GettyImages only, so you wont find them anywhere else!"

I'm sure there are more sites with only exclusive images - Stocksy for one; even if 'only on iStock' images aren't necessarily so. Aren't some of the macros also image-exclusive / series-exclusive only?
« Last Edit: September 15, 2014, 20:45 by ShadySue »

« Reply #17 on: September 15, 2014, 16:01 »
+2
this was just posted on the IS forum. Kinda what I am suspecting.

"We purchase images on iStock for illustrating online articles, so we don't need the high resolution images. We typically bought small versions at 2 to 6 old credits, so about $4 to $12 each. Under the new pricing structure they will now be $15 to $45 each. Our budget doesn't support this sort of pricing. Please bring back the smaller sizes at a reduced rate. Otherwise we have no choice but to pursue other more economical options for web-resolution images."
The pricing at Shutterstock is the same, $9-15 for single images, any size.  No option for smaller, cheaper files.

Still, $9 - $15 is a lot less than $15 - 45, if these are the US$ figures.
Exclusive files don't have to compete as much on price as nonexclusive files you can't go to SS and get my photos.
Can one go to SS and get something as close as makes no real difference?

« Reply #18 on: September 15, 2014, 16:03 »
+1
They are from the US, I don't see any option here to get smaller images.  I guess it's possible that he moves to Europe to get smaller sized images from SS but I don't think that's very practical.   ;)

Interesting. That means Shutterstock sells different packages per continent / country?
I did not know that.
So for US buyers Shutterstock is no cheaper option to replace small sized single image sales after the price increase (for small sizes) of Istock.
But there are others, maybe we will see more small sized sales on Dreamstime or Fotolia...

« Reply #19 on: September 15, 2014, 16:13 »
0
this was just posted on the IS forum. Kinda what I am suspecting.

"We purchase images on iStock for illustrating online articles, so we don't need the high resolution images. We typically bought small versions at 2 to 6 old credits, so about $4 to $12 each. Under the new pricing structure they will now be $15 to $45 each. Our budget doesn't support this sort of pricing. Please bring back the smaller sizes at a reduced rate. Otherwise we have no choice but to pursue other more economical options for web-resolution images."
The pricing at Shutterstock is the same, $9-15 for single images, any size.  No option for smaller, cheaper files.

Still, $9 - $15 is a lot less than $15 - 45, if these are the US$ figures.
Exclusive files don't have to compete as much on price as nonexclusive files you can't go to SS and get my photos.
Can one go to SS and get something as close as makes no real difference?
For some images yes, for others no.  Depends.  I try not to shoot fruit isolated on white for that reason.

« Reply #20 on: September 16, 2014, 10:38 »
+7
Question -- How does the NEW iStock stack up against Shutterstock?   Answer - take two dozen eggs and place them one on top of the other.

New video sale on iStock -- 16/09/2014 8:16 AM MDT    HD 1080 (mov)   Regular   $7.50 USD

Old video sales on iStock --    HD 720 (mov)   Regular   $17.85 USD
06/03/2014 6:00 AM MST    HD 1080 (mov)   Regular   $22.15 USD
06/03/2014 5:12 AM MST    HD 1080 (mov)   Regular   $21.85 USD

So much for that.

« Reply #21 on: September 16, 2014, 15:28 »
+2
this was just posted on the IS forum. Kinda what I am suspecting.

"We purchase images on iStock for illustrating online articles, so we don't need the high resolution images. We typically bought small versions at 2 to 6 old credits, so about $4 to $12 each. Under the new pricing structure they will now be $15 to $45 each. Our budget doesn't support this sort of pricing. Please bring back the smaller sizes at a reduced rate. Otherwise we have no choice but to pursue other more economical options for web-resolution images."
The pricing at Shutterstock is the same, $9-15 for single images, any size.  No option for smaller, cheaper files.

Still, $9 - $15 is a lot less than $15 - 45, if these are the US$ figures.
Exclusive files don't have to compete as much on price as nonexclusive files you can't go to SS and get my photos.
Can one go to SS and get something as close as makes no real difference?
For some images yes, for others no.  Depends.  I try not to shoot fruit isolated on white for that reason.

Good thing SS have only photos of fruit on white.  Your safe from competition.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #22 on: September 16, 2014, 19:19 »
+5
From a buyer posting on iS FB page: "I just went on iStock to find an image for my project and was shocked to find my buying power had been cut by more than half. The smallest images have always fit my purpose and where I thought I had enough credits left to get me through the fiscal year, now I am going to run terribly short. How can iStock change the terms of my contract in the middle of the year and literally rob me of money?"
Interesting.
I assumed that like the ASA, they'd no doubt have some incomprehensible and/or ambiguous legalese to say they can do whatever they like re credits. But actually, from the Plans and Pricing page, I can't find it. I went as though to buy credits, and looked at the FAQs, but didn't see it there anywhere.
Anyone know where it is?

« Reply #23 on: September 16, 2014, 19:21 »
+3
My sales at Istock totally evaporated.  Looks like a slow weekend today and yesterday. 

« Reply #24 on: September 16, 2014, 19:47 »
0
Good thing SS have only photos of fruit on white.  Your safe from competition.
It's not all fruit on white but a search for those terms gets nearly 1,000,000 results.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
87 Replies
33314 Views
Last post July 24, 2006, 06:01
by GeoPappas
21 Replies
7265 Views
Last post May 04, 2006, 08:28
by leaf
14 Replies
6668 Views
Last post March 19, 2008, 14:47
by vonkara
9 Replies
11012 Views
Last post October 12, 2011, 00:38
by RacePhoto
14 Replies
4482 Views
Last post April 12, 2013, 13:52
by Poncke

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle