Author Topic: Image Exclusivity? (Read 3834 times)

gclk · « **on:** March 25, 2013, 07:32 »

For me, image exclusivity could be the saviour of my relationship with iStock/Getty. Due to their actions and policies, I currently feel stuck between a rock and a hard place.

The 'rock' being the hugely restrictive (on contributors, not on iStock) exclusive ASA, which (if followed honestly, and I do) requires contributors to place a very high level of trust in the company, at times that can be a major challenge.

But dropping exclusivity would put me in a 'hard place' where my content would be duplicated all over Getty's bottom priced sites, earning less than 15% royalties, and - with that being the case, and having a living to make - I'd be compelled to spread my work across a whole bunch of sites, all with different prices, royalty rates and levels of competence.

So as I see it just now, the viable alternative is to completely sever my relationship with iStock/Getty and get back control of my own work. But obviously that would come with a total RF earnings drop, followed by a long period of building earnings back up. Suppose there's also always the possibility that any of us could get "Locke'd", and have the decision made for us, who knows.

But IMO a better solution, which could work very well for iStock/Getty and for contributors, would be to offer image exclusivity. It's been suggested a fair bit, especially recently, and I didn't miss the opportunity to mention it in the survey. But it would be interesting to get views on it here.

Would indys consider removing files from all other sites to have them exclusive with iS/Getty, having them mirrored to Getty rather then TS etc, and at a better royalty rate? And would exclusives go for it, or prefer to just stick with full artist exclusivity?

Mantis · « **Reply #1 on:** March 25, 2013, 07:59 »

I guess it depends on the terms they offer. Placement, commissions, deactivate terms, etc. I would experiment with some and if it didn't pay off I'd want the option to convert back to non-exclusive. If all I got was 20%, probably would not consider.

BrianM · « **Reply #2 on:** March 25, 2013, 08:35 »

Quote from: gclk on March 25, 2013, 07:32

It's been suggested a fair bit, especially recently, and I didn't miss the opportunity to mention it in the survey. But it would be interesting to get views on it here.

I even brought it up to a manager at HQ during a recent phone call. I made the tough decision and dropped exclusivity. I might have enjoyed and appreciated an opportunity to leave some Vetta and Agency files with iStock, particularly ones that had a record of selling well. It does seem, on the surface, like image exclusivity could be beneficial to both iStock and contributors. It's also easy to implement with a simple change to the ASA, no programming required.

My take away from the call, was that iStock HQ is severly limited in what they can do, and even by what they can know, from upstream Getty-Carlyle. There are probably good people left at iStock who aren't empowered to make positive moves for contributors, even when it seems it could benefit iStock too.

I've come to the conclusion that these suggestions we try/tried to make are mostly just wishful thinking. It's really hard to wrap your head around the fact that it's still called iStock but it's not actually the iStock you knew. Trying to get into the habit of referring to it as "Getty" or "iStock-Getty" helps, but it's still easy fall back into thinking of it as the place you originally signed up.

Reading here gives the impression that a lot of exclusives feel trapped; it's hard for them to leave because it's tough to cover the income gap to pay bills and feed their families. So while image exclusivity might benefit iStock-Getty in the short term (by continuing higher price points for sales of exclusive images of former exclusive artists), in the long term it could hurt them be enabling more exclusives to go independent. It would create a lot of good will, but they don't count that in their bottom line.

michealo · « **Reply #3 on:** March 25, 2013, 08:49 »

Quote from: BrianM on March 25, 2013, 08:35

Quote from: gclk on March 25, 2013, 07:32

It's been suggested a fair bit, especially recently, and I didn't miss the opportunity to mention it in the survey. But it would be interesting to get views on it here.

I even brought it up to a manager at HQ during a recent phone call. I made the tough decision and dropped exclusivity. I might have enjoyed and appreciated an opportunity to leave some Vetta and Agency files with iStock, particularly ones that had a record of selling well. It does seem, on the surface, like image exclusivity could be beneficial to both iStock and contributors. It's also easy to implement with a simple change to the ASA, no programming required.

My take away from the call, was that iStock HQ is severly limited in what they can do, and even by what they can know, from upstream Getty-Carlyle. There are probably good people left at iStock who aren't empowered to make positive moves for contributors, even when it seems it could benefit iStock too.

I've come to the conclusion that these suggestions we try/tried to make are mostly just wishful thinking. It's really hard to wrap your head around the fact that it's still called iStock but it's not actually the iStock you knew. Trying to get into the habit of referring to it as "Getty" or "iStock-Getty" helps, but it's still easy fall back into thinking of it as the place you originally signed up.

Reading here gives the impression that a lot of exclusives feel trapped; it's hard for them to leave because it's tough to cover the income gap to pay bills and feed their families. So while image exclusivity might benefit iStock-Getty in the short term (by continuing higher price points for sales of exclusive images of former exclusive artists), in the long term it could hurt them be enabling more exclusives to go independent. It would create a lot of good will, but they don't count that in their bottom line.

Gettystockphoto or Gettystock or gStock !?

cobalt · « **Reply #4 on:** March 25, 2013, 08:55 »

The biggest advantage of exclusive images would be that high quality indie content would increasingly be placed on istock, because the price point is so much higher and the additional exposure to getty. And a lot of content that is now exclusive could easily be indie content without them missing it. When i was exclusive every object on white, every flower shot became exclusive. But does getty really need these simple images? they don´t even sell well at the higher price point.

I am sure they are thinking about it, but everything with getty seems to take very, very long before they make a decision and then implement it. Give them 2 years and maybe it will happen...

fotoVoyager · « **Reply #5 on:** March 25, 2013, 08:58 »

I think in the long run image exclusivity is going to be the only way exclusive content and providers can survive, especially with the new group of libraries that are about to land.

Getty should do themselves a favour and get on that train early if they want to benefit.

gclk · « **Reply #6 on:** March 26, 2013, 01:38 »

Quote from: fotoVoyager on March 25, 2013, 08:58

I think in the long run image exclusivity is going to be the only way exclusive content and providers can survive, especially with the new group of libraries that are about to land.

Getty should do themselves a favour and get on that train early if they want to benefit.

Yes, browsing through some of Stocksy's excellent initial content, it's a surprise to see how many big and previously heavily featured iStock names have dropped exclusivity and are working with Stocksy. So iStock now find themselves with many tens of thousands of non-exclusive files from these prominent photographers, which they could still perhaps be exclusively representing and selling.

My hat's off to these contribs, they certainly had more to lose than me, but went for it - I got a Stocksy invite a while back (to apply as a photograher, that is), and decided not to make any rash moves for the time being.

Really interesting times. I'm not rabidly anti Getty/iStock, but I do think the whole market - from customers through to contributors - will benefit from this high quality addition to the market, and probably also from the fact that the rest of the opposition is also developing well.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Image Exclusivity? (Read 3834 times)

gclk

Mantis

BrianM

michealo

cobalt

fotoVoyager

gclk

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors