MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Istock vs others  (Read 16099 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #75 on: September 17, 2012, 19:35 »
0

There are a number of long term contributors, exclusives, independents plus some like me who've done the indie-exclusive-indie shuffle, who are deeply angry with iStock. In my case it's fury at greed throwing away something really great - and some of that anger can spill over into impatience with newer exclusives who haven't yet had anything bad happen. IS's ongoing software incompetence - bungling every software upgrade (and I do mean every single one) and continuing to pick dreadful times to cripple site operations - is a pretty rational rock to throw at them.

 I think there's also a periodic burst of "exclusive content is better than all that rubbish on the other sites" which certainly doesn't sit well with anyone but a subset of exclusives. Probably not reasonable to assume that all exclusives feel that way about indies, but it has certainly primed the pump for some "full and frank exchanges of views" to become dust ups. There's a ton of ill will towards Getty that rubs off on IS more and more as it's absorbed into the parent company.

This is just me, but although I largely ignore what IS is up to these days, if I think about them too much I can get angry again very easily. Hearing all the positive and optimistic chat from current exclusives (who need to believe they've made a wise choice in picking exclusivity) seems to be very dismissive of those who got hurt by the past lies and about faces on a number of business issues. Probably isn't deliberately planned that way, but for anyone without the history, might take them by surprise.

On another forum (no longer around) I was told I was in need of a mental health evaluation for considering exclusivity :) Some people feel very strongly about spreading the risk and that's not anti IS, but they're the only agency where even considering exclusivity makes any sense.

Very well put JoAnn.  Sums up the situation perfectly, along with some of the history that got us to this point . 

@Reef, I was not being sarcastic or hostile.  My interpretation of "animosity" is personal attacks.  I do see quite a bit of people extremely upset with Istock, but I have not seen a lot of personal attacks on other members, certainly none that I can point to in this thread.  Which is why I was asking for links.

With due respect, JoAnn and Lisa, I think prolonged anger sometimes affects one's judgement and fairness.  A calm and objective voice may deliver better credibility than an angry one.

I don't think being angry at istock for pi$$ing everything away has anything to do with credibility. But you are certainly entitled to your opinion. I think JoAnn summed it up well and this sentence particularly applies...This is just me, but although I largely ignore what IS is up to these days, if I think about them too much I can get angry again very easily.

I totally concur with JoAnn. And it isn't the anger that's affecting my judgment or fairness. It's that many, many contributors' sales are continuing to take a nosedive. Pretty hard to be fair or not judgmental about a company whose greed has cut a lot of people's income.

Absolutely. That's exactly what Istock did. In their astonishing greed they pi$$ed the whole thing away (to the cost of pretty much everyone). Now that they are broken they will atttempt to fleece both customers and contributors for as much and for as long as they can.


ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #76 on: September 17, 2012, 20:00 »
0
H*ll, I;ve had another sh*tty day for dls. A moment of insanity made me look back at my stats for 17th Sept since I started. I started in late Dec 2006. So, on 17th Sept:
2007: 14 (and yes, it was over $1 more than I got today, even at the tiny prices and 20%)
2008: 18
2009: 16
2010: 10
2011:   0 (Saturday)
2012:   2

By the end of July this year, I was reasonably up on $$$ compared to last year by the same date. By August-end, I was down to c$150 up compared to the same date last year. Now I'm about that much below where I was last year at this time.

« Reply #77 on: September 17, 2012, 22:40 »
0
If it can be of help

http://www.microstockjournal.com/real-value-istock


These graphs are only useful if you also give the size of your port at each, and the length of time they have been on each agency.

For example, there's a regular poster on the Alamy forum who constantly reiterates how much more he makes from his Alamy port than his iStock port. I don't doubt that for a minute: he has thousands of images in his Alamy port, and the last time I looked, fewer than 20 in his iStock port.

I'm not implying that your figures are so extreme, but there are certainly stats and 'useful stats'. I for one would be more interested in $$ earned at each agency than dls, but again it would mean nothing without the other details.


Better still let us see the portfolios. Not quite as extreme as the alamy examples, but still:
12715 images on Shutterstock http://www.shutterstock.com/gallery-210376p1.html
7,594 on Fotolia http://us.fotolia.com/p/202163168
5,115 Dreamstime http://www.dreamstime.com/minervastudio_info
1559 on istock http://www.istockphoto.com/search/portfolio/3809571

Probably compounding the difference in sales is that iStock is much more restrictive with image collages & doesn't let you create the sort of "budget bundles" of isolated business people that are popular in this portfolio.

« Reply #78 on: September 17, 2012, 23:27 »
0
With due respect, JoAnn and Lisa, I think prolonged anger sometimes affects one's judgement and fairness.  A calm and objective voice may deliver better credibility than an angry one.

You yourself said that your income is increasing at iStock. That's no bad thing, congratulations indeed. However it could be argued that thereby your 'more positive than average' comments about iStock are also not being totally 'objective'.
It's more difficult when iStock's business decisions have caused a direct and ongoing reduction in income, which many people have experienced.

SS, my income increase is a fact. How can a fact not be objective? I had said this to you before, and am repeating, I think I have benefited from E+, and not increased DLs. My DLs have decreased, just like yours. Again, that is a fact.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #79 on: September 18, 2012, 04:22 »
0
With due respect, JoAnn and Lisa, I think prolonged anger sometimes affects one's judgement and fairness.  A calm and objective voice may deliver better credibility than an angry one.

You yourself said that your income is increasing at iStock. That's no bad thing, congratulations indeed. However it could be argued that thereby your 'more positive than average' comments about iStock are also not being totally 'objective'.
It's more difficult when iStock's business decisions have caused a direct and ongoing reduction in income, which many people have experienced.

SS, my income increase is a fact. How can a fact not be objective? I had said this to you before, and am repeating, I think I have benefited from E+, and not increased DLs. My DLs have decreased, just like yours. Again, that is a fact.

These are facts, and are not at issue.
But your personal facts give you a more positive spin on iStock in general, just like other people's experience is less positive, so their general opinions and posts are liable to be less positive. Your overall posts are no more 'objective' than anyone else's.

« Reply #80 on: September 18, 2012, 04:25 »
0
That is correct.
Either we  are all objective or none of us are.

lisafx

« Reply #81 on: September 18, 2012, 11:54 »
0
SS, my income increase is a fact. How can a fact not be objective? I had said this to you before, and am repeating, I think I have benefited from E+, and not increased DLs. My DLs have decreased, just like yours. Again, that is a fact.

These are facts, and are not at issue.
But your personal facts give you a more positive spin on iStock in general, just like other people's experience is less positive, so their general opinions and posts are liable to be less positive. Your overall posts are no more 'objective' than anyone else's.

Extremely well put Liz.  One person's positive experience is no more "credible" or "objective" than another person's negative experience.  They are both equally "factual". 

And each person is likely to form their on opinions (which by definition are subjective and not "facts") based on their experiences.  So neither person's opinion is any less valid than the others. 

Poncke

« Reply #82 on: September 18, 2012, 12:51 »
0
I don't know of any that sums up everything,but here is just one strand:
http://www.microstockgroup.com/blog-updates/from-woohaying-to-no-waying-(istock-in-turmoil)


Thanks, I am now reading up on this one, I am at page 6. Long read ahead of me.

http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=252322&page=1

RacePhoto

« Reply #83 on: September 19, 2012, 10:37 »
0
Thanks Poncke, I followed the link 167 pages and the link to the 346 page continuation, jumped to the next one and found the answer. (I always wanted to read this quote for it's exact context.) OK now I have my answer...

But money isnt going to be what makes you all happy. kkthompson Posted Fri Sep 10, 2010 4:33PM

I don't know of any that sums up everything,but here is just one strand:
http://www.microstockgroup.com/blog-updates/from-woohaying-to-no-waying-(istock-in-turmoil)


Thanks, I am now reading up on this one, I am at page 6. Long read ahead of me.

http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=252322&page=1

« Reply #84 on: September 19, 2012, 10:52 »
0
Just had a brilliant 0,09$ sale. I'm happy.

fritz

  • I love Tom and Jerry music

« Reply #85 on: September 19, 2012, 18:45 »
0
Just had a brilliant 0,09$ sale. I'm happy.
....and I just had EL for 21.75$. I'm happy too.
Sorry, but on iStock get 50% more $ than SS. Same port size!

Reef

  • astonmars.com
« Reply #86 on: September 29, 2012, 05:13 »
0

There are a number of long term contributors, exclusives, independents plus some like me who've done the indie-exclusive-indie shuffle, who are deeply angry with iStock. In my case it's fury at greed throwing away something really great - and some of that anger can spill over into impatience with newer exclusives who haven't yet had anything bad happen. IS's ongoing software incompetence - bungling every software upgrade (and I do mean every single one) and continuing to pick dreadful times to cripple site operations - is a pretty rational rock to throw at them.

 I think there's also a periodic burst of "exclusive content is better than all that rubbish on the other sites" which certainly doesn't sit well with anyone but a subset of exclusives. Probably not reasonable to assume that all exclusives feel that way about indies, but it has certainly primed the pump for some "full and frank exchanges of views" to become dust ups. There's a ton of ill will towards Getty that rubs off on IS more and more as it's absorbed into the parent company.

This is just me, but although I largely ignore what IS is up to these days, if I think about them too much I can get angry again very easily. Hearing all the positive and optimistic chat from current exclusives (who need to believe they've made a wise choice in picking exclusivity) seems to be very dismissive of those who got hurt by the past lies and about faces on a number of business issues. Probably isn't deliberately planned that way, but for anyone without the history, might take them by surprise.

On another forum (no longer around) I was told I was in need of a mental health evaluation for considering exclusivity :) Some people feel very strongly about spreading the risk and that's not anti IS, but they're the only agency where even considering exclusivity makes any sense.

Very well put JoAnn.  Sums up the situation perfectly, along with some of the history that got us to this point . 

@Reef, I was not being sarcastic or hostile.  My interpretation of "animosity" is personal attacks.  I do see quite a bit of people extremely upset with Istock, but I have not seen a lot of personal attacks on other members, certainly none that I can point to in this thread.  Which is why I was asking for links.

The Internet is a curse sometimes. I didn't type it the way I meant it. No disrespect to you. None of us are earning as much as we probably deserve. We are all in the same boat really! Mine isn't sinking quite yet :)

« Reply #87 on: September 29, 2012, 13:36 »
0
I think the August PP sales are now complete and the PP is the #3 for me that month - after SS and IS.

Sort of both good news and bad. I'd much rather have had the sales at IS...

 DR had a lackluster August or it might  have been #3. As it was the PP was 40% more than DT


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
5 Replies
12725 Views
Last post August 22, 2006, 15:49
by amanda1863
5 Replies
3585 Views
Last post October 27, 2006, 12:10
by CJPhoto
8 Replies
3429 Views
Last post December 10, 2008, 12:04
by lisafx
4 Replies
2485 Views
Last post April 30, 2019, 10:45
by trabuco
1 Replies
2922 Views
Last post April 07, 2020, 13:24
by ShadySue

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle