pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: How much do you like Istockphoto?  (Read 32545 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: November 16, 2009, 17:06 »
0
I am not member of istockphoto and I don't plan to become one either. But, considering some words I saw here and there I have very justified reasons to suspect that istockphoto contributors are not very pleased with their administration as well with policies.
So, I'd like to see if I am right or wrong about my suspicion... I know that many of people who have to say anything will stay silent because they are afraid of istock administators wraith. Maybe you who are customers as well you who got bullied there have something to say? Maybe someone isn't afraid?
« Last Edit: November 16, 2009, 17:10 by Albert Martin »


nruboc

« Reply #1 on: November 16, 2009, 17:19 »
0
Well, of the 10 agencies I've submitted too, I would place them as my tenth favorite.

« Reply #2 on: November 16, 2009, 17:23 »
0
I like IS just fine. :) And they are my top selling agency by far.

vonkara

« Reply #3 on: November 16, 2009, 17:24 »
0
I know that many of people who have to say anything will stay silent because they are afraid of istock administators wraith. Maybe you who are customers as well you who got bullied there have something to say?
?? Seriously, Istock is not spying their contributors to watch if they say things about them. There is DT and FT who over control their forums, but I don't see where people can be affraid...

I am not member of istockphoto and I don't plan to become one either. But, considering some words I saw here and there I have very justified reasons to suspect that istockphoto contributors are not very pleased with their administration as well with policies.
They are still the only one where subscription give a good share of the purchase. Also the only one who give me 6$ and more for a full size image. They are picky about image quality but they still have the most sensible reviewers.

I am not affraid of Istock administration. I putted the opt out label on my avatar when they wanted to introduce subs. They finally looked at each posts in the sub thread and made something more equal for contributors...

Except if you had a bad experience with them, I don't see what you mean by their policies. You should put some quotes or links showing what you saw/heard

« Reply #4 on: November 16, 2009, 17:26 »
0
Well, of the 12 agencies I submit to, iStock counts for 37% of my revenues...
 ;)

Claude

« Reply #5 on: November 16, 2009, 17:30 »
0
I could write a long list of positives and negatives but I hate typing.  The only real reason I am there is because they have big sales volume, it really hurts to take just 20% commission but they are my second highest earning site.  They keep adding incentives to go exclusive but their low upload limits made that impossible for me from the start.  It is a strange strategy that I have never understood.  It would prefer it if they let the higher earners upload more and those with low selling portfolios were penalized.

Just as I was starting to feel more positive about them, they have ruined it with the photos.com fiasco.  I just hope the management there know what they are doing, as their strategy with photos.com baffles me.

« Reply #6 on: November 16, 2009, 17:35 »
0
Since you're just a troll who won't post their portfolio and has no interest in submitting to microstock, I'm wondering why you are concerned?
http://www.microstockgroup.com/profile/Albert%20Martin/?sa=showPosts

"Hopefully I will retain my sales on macros due to my production isn't so cheap as most of what I saw on micros. I might upload some of my crap-shots and tests on micros, just to see how it goes ;-)"

Anyways...

"I have very justified reasons to suspect that istockphoto contributors are not very pleased with their administration as well with policies.  So, I'd like to see if I am right or wrong about my suspicion"

So, great, you have a buddy who had a bad experience with something.  You will probably run into another person or two who had a bad experience in some sense here.  I don't know what that proves to you, but if you want to feel right, it probably doesn't matter what anyone says, so go ahead and feel right.
« Last Edit: November 16, 2009, 17:38 by sjlocke »

« Reply #7 on: November 16, 2009, 17:50 »
0
For me IS is rigth. The only agency that sells subs without harming the contributor, the creator of the concept of microstock... and a decent site that works fine for me, as exclusive. I have my own private grudges too, but, being private, I will keep them private.
« Last Edit: November 16, 2009, 19:19 by loop »

« Reply #8 on: November 16, 2009, 18:32 »
0
Since you're just a troll who won't post their portfolio and has no interest in submitting to microstock, I'm wondering why you are concerned?
http://www.microstockgroup.com/profile/Albert%20Martin/?sa=showPosts

"Hopefully I will retain my sales on macros due to my production isn't so cheap as most of what I saw on micros. I might upload some of my crap-shots and tests on micros, just to see how it goes ;-)"

Anyways...

"I have very justified reasons to suspect that istockphoto contributors are not very pleased with their administration as well with policies.  So, I'd like to see if I am right or wrong about my suspicion"

So, great, you have a buddy who had a bad experience with something.  You will probably run into another person or two who had a bad experience in some sense here.  I don't know what that proves to you, but if you want to feel right, it probably doesn't matter what anyone says, so go ahead and feel right.


I agree with Sean.  No one really goes out and says "I love this agency".  They will mostly post bad news about it or bad experiences.  There is a bias in favour of the negative. 

KB

« Reply #9 on: November 16, 2009, 18:42 »
0
Since you're just a troll who won't post their portfolio and has no interest in submitting to microstock, I'm wondering why you are concerned?
http://www.microstockgroup.com/profile/Albert%20Martin/?sa=showPosts

"Hopefully I will retain my sales on macros due to my production isn't so cheap as most of what I saw on micros. I might upload some of my crap-shots and tests on micros, just to see how it goes ;-)"

Anyways...

"I have very justified reasons to suspect that istockphoto contributors are not very pleased with their administration as well with policies.  So, I'd like to see if I am right or wrong about my suspicion"

So, great, you have a buddy who had a bad experience with something.  You will probably run into another person or two who had a bad experience in some sense here.  I don't know what that proves to you, but if you want to feel right, it probably doesn't matter what anyone says, so go ahead and feel right.


I agree with Sean.  No one really goes out and says "I love this agency".  They will mostly post bad news about it or bad experiences.  There is a bias in favour of the negative. 

Well, I am not afraid, and I will say it: I love this agency. :-)

That doesn't mean I love everything about them. But they are my #1 earner, and for me, as a relatively low producer, 15-20 images / week is fine. I can understand how it's a major obstacle for some, though.

One thing I really appreciate about them is the relatively high quality of the reviewers, and the Scout system for when the quality fails.  ;D

I don't love the 20% commission rate, but as a seller, I love the bottom line. Their prices are higher (which is bad for buyers), but they sink the money into ads and infrastructure which helps grow the business. Their higher prices mean, even though I get just a measly 20%, I'm still getting as much or more per sale than at other agencies.

I'm also not afraid to say I really hate what they did with StockXpert. All they needed to do to keep me happy was give me my same, already indecent, $0.30/sale that I was getting.  Well, they can keep their nickel -- and the quarter, because they won't be giving it to me.  >:(

« Reply #10 on: November 16, 2009, 19:34 »
0
I'm also a big fan of istock. Sure, I've had my little quibbles here and there, but in the end I think they're one of the best. I'd probably go exclusive there if they were closer to 50% of my income, but it is usually around 30%.

lisafx

« Reply #11 on: November 16, 2009, 19:56 »
0

I'm also not afraid to say I really hate what they did with StockXpert. All they needed to do to keep me happy was give me my same, already indecent, $0.30/sale that I was getting.  Well, they can keep their nickel -- and the quarter, because they won't be giving it to me.  >:(

Yeah, I have been really disappointed about this too.  I would have been perfectly happy to opt in my images for .30.

Like other posters in this thread, Istock is my #1 earner with roughly 40% of my earnings.  Next highest earner is under 20%.  I like making money :D

I like Istock's administration, excellent customer service, and consistent reviewers.  I also really like their profile page and the way they make it easy for us to put up an individualized storefront, of sorts.   Plus they were my first site, so there is some residual loyalty because of that.

What I don't like is the fickleness of their best match.  It's great when I am up, but the downturns seem arbitrary and fairly extreme, even after the BM2 and keyword weighting were supposed to stabilize things.  Istock also has the most site slowdowns and outages and most bothersome upload process of any micro I contribute to.

So to sum it up overall I like them, but I think there is definitely room for improvement. 

« Reply #12 on: November 16, 2009, 20:24 »
0
PITA.  Way too hard to submit, too many hoops, their 'controlled vocabulary' means no 'concept' shots.  They do sell a lot of images. 


« Reply #13 on: November 16, 2009, 20:52 »
0
November, 2009: $8.27 royalties
I only sell 2-5 years old crap there.
Although I have a good acceptance ratio on my newest images, they simply don't sell. They fall right into oblivion in the search engine after acceptance. So for November, even StockXpert made me more.
Istock is great, but we obviously don't match.

helix7

« Reply #14 on: November 16, 2009, 23:08 »
0
istock has the most buggy, problem-ridden site in microstock. It is down or otherwise disabled more than any other microstock site I work with, and in fact the site was unusable just this morning for a couple of hours. They reject more of my images than any other agency, and they have the most time-consuming upload process.

istock is also the most profitable site I work with, accounts for 30-40% of my monthly earnings in microstock, and the site is so buggy and prone to problems because they also have the most robust search functions and site features. Technologically the site is leaps and bounds ahead of most other microstock sites, although I've always wished the site functioned more like the Getty site when comes to searching and overall buyer experience. And average earnings per sale at istock are higher than anywhere else.

istock has it's ups and downs, and the site bugs and glitches are very frustrating. But the problems with istock are the result of the company pushing the limits of the site and wanting to make it the best it can be. And at the end of the month, istock is always at the top of my earnings spreadsheet.

« Reply #15 on: November 17, 2009, 06:17 »
0
November, 2009: $8.27 royalties
I only sell 2-5 years old crap there.
Although I have a good acceptance ratio on my newest images, they simply don't sell. They fall right into oblivion in the search engine after acceptance. So for November, even StockXpert made me more.
Istock is great, but we obviously don't match.

Same for me, I like them, very professional, I like the reviews... It just doesbt sell my stuff, not that I ever claimed it was worth to be sold :)

« Reply #16 on: November 17, 2009, 06:37 »
0
While its easy to complain about Istock, for many they are a good, reliable source of income. Sure there are fluctuations with the best match, but that's true of all sites.

At the moment sales there are particularly strong... no reason to complain.

« Reply #17 on: November 17, 2009, 06:50 »
0
Since you're just a troll who won't post their portfolio and has no interest in submitting to microstock, I'm wondering why you are concerned?
http://www.microstockgroup.com/profile/Albert%20Martin/?sa=showPosts

"Hopefully I will retain my sales on macros due to my production isn't so cheap as most of what I saw on micros. I might upload some of my crap-shots and tests on micros, just to see how it goes ;-)"

Anyways...

"I have very justified reasons to suspect that istockphoto contributors are not very pleased with their administration as well with policies.  So, I'd like to see if I am right or wrong about my suspicion"

So, great, you have a buddy who had a bad experience with something.  You will probably run into another person or two who had a bad experience in some sense here.  I don't know what that proves to you, but if you want to feel right, it probably doesn't matter what anyone says, so go ahead and feel right.


Hey dude... keep calm and stay on topic.... I asked about istock - not about trolls ;-)

« Reply #18 on: November 17, 2009, 07:37 »
0
iStock used to make me crazy the way they would accept marginal images into my portfolio, and then reject my best work. But that frustration was resolved when they fixed the Scout system. Now that I know my best images won't be randomly consigned to oblivion, I'm happy with iStock. I like the way the reviewers will work with you, and let you fix and resubmit; this has helped me to improve the quality of my work. They are also my highest earning site, and the best paying for subscriptions.

« Reply #19 on: November 17, 2009, 07:47 »
0
I've been with Istock since 2004 it has always been my top earner and generally easy to work with. While I find the upload process tedious I can't complain with results. The reviewers are good as well.

« Reply #20 on: November 17, 2009, 09:01 »
0
Quote
istock has the most buggy, problem-ridden site in microstock. It is down or otherwise disabled more than any other microstock site I work with, and in fact the site was unusable just this morning for a couple of hours. They reject more of my images than any other agency, and they have the most time-consuming upload process.

istock is also the most profitable site I work with, accounts for 30-40% of my monthly earnings in microstock, and the site is so buggy and prone to problems because they also have the most robust search functions and site features. Technologically the site is leaps and bounds ahead of most other microstock sites, although I've always wished the site functioned more like the Getty site when comes to searching and overall buyer experience. And average earnings per sale at istock are higher than anywhere else.

istock has it's ups and downs, and the site bugs and glitches are very frustrating. But the problems with istock are the result of the company pushing the limits of the site and wanting to make it the best it can be. And at the end of the month, istock is always at the top of my earnings spreadsheet.

My sentiments exactly.

« Reply #21 on: November 28, 2009, 04:14 »
0

Okay what I like about istockphoto is that my Downloads are healthy and consistent regardless of the occasional curv ball which is thrown usually with non Exclusives taking the hit. I do wish IS was more supportive of ALL Contributers




« Reply #22 on: November 28, 2009, 10:04 »
0
What do I like about iStock?  They've been a consistent performer for me, earning around 20% of my microstock income and behind only Shutterstock in that regard.  What I don't like: their upload process (lack of FTP, disambiguation, the changing rules regarding model releases), their upload limits, and their payout percentages.  My port on other sites is twice as big as on iStock, and combined with a more equitable percentage, how much more could I be making?  Still, what I do make keeps me coming back.  And no one seems likely to challenge them for that #2 spot.

« Reply #23 on: November 28, 2009, 10:14 »
0

Okay what I like about istockphoto is that my Downloads are healthy and consistent regardless of the occasional curv ball which is thrown usually with non Exclusives taking the hit. I do wish IS was more supportive of ALL Contributers


Yup... It is very huge problem there. Exclusives are inspectors and they decide what is stock and what isn't regarding to that what THEY have in their own portfolios. So if they see anything even far similar to their work or to their fellow inspectors they just reject it as not for stock... That is called abusing power to protect their positions. Also, they seems to work as team and that is what is wrong there.

How I know that? Well I can say that I am very well informed person of what is going on where ;-)
I know many people doing stock as well those on micros too... They all have very great experience when combined on one place.

Where Inspectors should be objective they aren't due to that they are also submitters... That is wrong there! With having such organization there will be always biases and not logical consequences on anyone who isn't part of inspectors team!

So, just upload there and boost your inspectors earnings - I won't!


« Reply #24 on: November 28, 2009, 12:12 »
0
I'm bugged by the simple fact that SOOO many of my imags get refused for artifacting!  I look at them at 100%, but darnned if I can see what they are talking about. 

That being said, I LOVE the fact my images accepted there sell like crazy.  I have less than 50 photos in my portfolio, but I've had at least double that in sales!  I've even made it to payout, which is very unfathomable with such a small portfolio. 

My only wish is to have more of my images accepted so I could build my sales.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
4 Replies
4084 Views
Last post May 17, 2008, 03:29
by Magnum
6 Replies
5270 Views
Last post October 21, 2008, 13:50
by hali
3 Replies
2580 Views
Last post December 31, 2009, 03:41
by mwp1969
41 Replies
18003 Views
Last post March 12, 2010, 09:09
by RT
10 Replies
3935 Views
Last post March 27, 2010, 09:08
by click_click

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors