sounds like an interesting idea and I hope it works, as the more sales opportunities we have the better.  The prices seem fair enough.  The only problem I see is that logos are often very personalized incorporating lots of aspects of the company in the design and layout.

sounds like an interesting idea and I hope it works, as the more sales opportunities we have the better.  The prices seem fair enough.  The only problem I see is that logos are often very personalized incorporating lots of aspects of the company in the design and layout.

The price is fair? Seriously?

Look at www.brandstack.com before you make further comments.

WARNING: All possible contributors! Go join brandstack and price your logos for $3000 - $5000 where appropriate. Even higher prices like $15.000 per branding is possible! Before you get screwed, think twice!

Get %85 of $5000 of your unique logo on brandstack! Don't feed the beast who want to give away your logos for $750 (max) and pay you %50 of that ridiculously low amount.

Leaf, you have no idea about logo design market if you think it is fair. Never did I accept to design a logo for less than $1000. Now why should I accept %50 of 750 credits??

Photographers are already screwed bigtime. At least logo designers can save themselves! But I understand you! Getting pennies for you photos must have become a habit. (No offence, sincerely this is what you made me think)

Not sure about this.  Stay away from my freelance work iStock!

The company I use, personal design service, logo and stationary pack for < �100

My Domains I register through my hosting company for <$10, many are parked by companies but there are still some to be had.

This week I was thinking about cloud technologies and web images so I registered DigitalRaindrops.net and DigitalRaindrops.co.uk, dot com had gone, I will get the logo (Choose 1 from 6 designs) and stationary pack again < �100  

I will need a couple of raindrops designed later, looking at the amounts quoted here I will have to shop around  
David  

FWIW, graphic designers that I work with typically charge $150 for a logo.

The problem with this model for me is that its missing potential to make it big. You see with stock photography, having the ability to sell multiple times, gives you the ability to make it big. Even if you could knock off a logo a day 5 days a week, and you sold everyone of them for 750 credits, you would make 90k US per year. Which is decent, but not as good as the best stock photographers. But then again, thats more then I make now

Isn't this discussion a lot like micros vs macros?

I don't see that. To me, it is more like "spec" work.

This looks very cheap. Logos are something which should be personalized. However, I still think there will be hundreds of contributors who will do this...

Quote from: madelaide on September 22, 2009, 18:06

Isn't this discussion a lot like micros vs macros?

I don't see that. To me, it is more like "spec" work.

I'm referring to the price discussion.  Some people are happy to get a bit of money for what others make a lot.  That's how micros started.

I wonder how far the micro model will take on everything... Prices should (and could) be 5x-10x of what they are now and yet they would be good prices.  The notion that everything has to be sold for pennies (or small amounts of money) is worriesome and sickening, especially with logos that have zero potential of being sold over more than once.  I certainly hope that this one fails, it would be best for everyone. The problem is that there will always be someone that gets a "thrill" to see his logo used by someone.

Blame the internet. As a buyer you now have quick and cheap access to services and products from all over the globe when not so long ago the only practical option was your local area.

I have to say that the sums of money being suggested here for logos seems bizarre to me. Reminds me of the London Olympics 2012 logo which, apart from being pretty crap, apparently cost something like $600K!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1553545/Olympic-chiefs-under-fire-for-puerile-logo.html

Dreadful prices for a one off, and I can't see how the price point will lead to anything else but designers generating a raft of similar looking designs (different colours, layouts) all based on the same theme.

there's definitely a market for off the shelf logos, but even brandstack and the 'design bidding' sites had designers wanting to boycott/ logo design jobs or work together to try to keep a minimum prices of around $50 per off the shelf logo.

would you sell a buy out license on one of your photos or illustrations for $5?

Quote from: microstockinsider on September 22, 2009, 22:03

would you sell a buy out license on one of your photos or illustrations for $5?

Well, that's irrelevant, because minimum price is 100 credits.
http://bit.ly/19jyTT

Indeed, my mistake, and thanks for clearing that up, I see they've edited the original post on istock since I read it, I don't think I was the only one who made the mistake - I'd have been none the wiser!

I see they've edited the original post on istock since I read it

I think you misread it, as have a number of forum contributors. It's said the same thing from the off.
There are a lot of forums comments from designers who've been perfectly happy to pay low prices for illustrations and photos but are suddenly complaining when the boot is on the other foot.

I was not impressed with the Logo's on  brandstack and It is a common reaction when something is cheap to attack quality, I think I got better quality and far better service from the specialist logo company I used than I would get from Istock or  brandstack.

David  

David seriously;

brandstack logos are much better than the ones on the link you provided. You may not agree and that's fine since we have different opinions about "what a good logo is"

brandstack and IS will be providing the best possible solution in the world. brandstack is already doing it, and IS is getting ready to join them.

I know they will become the popular way for branding. My only problem with IS is their ridiculous %50 commission for a 1 time sell out. How do they expect us to make decent money getting %50? I don't even draw a bloody line for $50!

Come one now!

Quote from: cidepix on September 23, 2009, 06:15

I don't even draw a bloody line for $50!

Come one now!

Isn't that exactly the attitude that makes it easy for others to compete against you and provide a more cost-effective service?

It's a bit like a photographer saying "I don't even click the shutter for less than $100". You can try but you probably won't get too many takers.

I would rather do one job and get $5000 for a design than do 50 jobs for $100 to get the same money. There are enough people who will go for the former.

One thing to keep in mind for those of you that are interested in this offering, is that IS is offering a 50% ROYALTY ONLY FOR THE FIRST 6 MONTHS.  This rate is a "special offer" rate to entice you to join up and build up their library.

Here is the quote from the IS text:

"iStock will pay a base royalty rate of 50% per logo design for the first 6 months. We�ll give advanced notice for the rate going forward after that."

My bet, is that the royalty rate will be reduced at some point in the future (once they have built up their library).

I'd bet that as well, but I don't think it would be a very smart thing to do.  Hopefully that isn't the plan.

Would you sell the rights of one of your photos for $50 commission?

I'd certainly consider it if it were a poor seller. It would depend on who was doing the asking too.

Quote from: madelaide on September 22, 2009, 18:06

Isn't this discussion a lot like micros vs macros?

I don't see that. To me, it is more like "spec" work.

Which is exactly what stock photography/illustration is.

Quote from: ShadySue on September 23, 2009, 11:53

Which is exactly what stock photography/illustration is.

I think the difference is that they were discussing having to modify the logo files for the buyers. I'm not sure what they will eventually decide on, but the beauty of stock is that you don't have to make changes or deal with clients.

I would be happy to deal with clients.  You get to sell them a load more stuff.  At the moment I produce stock photos and don't know if they will sell or not.

There are a lot of questions that need answers in this program.

1. The TOS clearly states that images/vectors etc can not be used as logos. How will a buyer know if they are searching for an Apple logo vs. an Apple image? Will the logos be in a completely separate section of the site to avoid confusion?

2. How does the new guarantee apply? What happens when it's discovered that the logo is using a copyrighted font? Reviewers don't have the time now to properly research possible copyright/trademark issue so they routinely reject perfectly usable images. Will the same thing happen with logos resulting in frustrated contributors?

3. Logos are locked in for 6 months. The introductory offer of 50% commission is also only available 6 months. So what will happen if I upload a logo in month 5 and they change the commission rate in month 6? Will I get the 50% or the new percentage? Will I have the ability to remove my files that are less than 6 months old if I don't agree with the commission change?

4. What does 50% of 100 credits (not dollars) equal out to in dollars? 1 credit ranges from $1.80 to $0.47. According to the IS forum thread logos will be sold for 100 to 700 credits.

For a 100 credit logo contributor will be paid between $28 and $95. (credit value X credits used / 2) You have to remember that IS sells things in "credits" not dollars, and we are not privy to see which credit package the buyer is using.

5. They are offering a $5 bonus if your logo is one of the first 10,000 accepted. Another bonus of $5 if they reach the goal of 10,000 before the program launch in January. This just sounds like a bribe and it may work for some people. Are logo designers really going to stop selling through their normal channels for an extra $5?

6. What about exclusives? The legal terms of exclusivity say that it's all or nothings. Will exclusives who design logos have to choose between selling the logos on IS to keep their exclusivity or dropping exclusivity to keep their private clients? Or is this the first "image exclusive" program and the whole concept of exclusivity will be soon changing to an image based system?

The logos thing seems like a different business and more complicated than RF stock and footage. I wonder whether it shouldn't be a different company and website.

IS is such a nice simple and easy to understand idea. The logos might have the potential to contaminate that simplicity.

On the other hand anything new at IS is always a big old fuss and thread which breaks all previous records.

And then everything calms down and it all ends up being fine.

Regarding recent massive disabling of outsourced logo solutions I think that someone made very wrong decision on Istock with giving such product as logos...

Regarding that Logo isn't child play and you need to know much more than to compose design or just draw I'd make some additional points:

1. 50% for logo is too low 'royalty' for any serious logo designer - no matter what is the price by which logo is sold.
2. Regarding logo pricing - it comes up to 'bottom feeders' territory - so any serious company will avoid this istock service. Also, any starter company will avoid this due to price and not guaranteed possibility to trademark such logo obtained on istock.
3. What I've seen there are tons of some kind of signs which never could be perceived as logos. Also, very much people as people who obviously don't have enough knowledge for logo design are creating very close or similar to already published and trademarked logos...

As a notice to such people I'd say that logo design isn't plain stock submitting as well it brings very high level of author's responsibilities while istock is washing hands from authors in their agreement. So, some authors might end up as someone who is legally charged on court while istock will turn their back to them.

If you are working on logo design be sure that you NEVER create something like logos shown here:

http://www.brandsoftheworld.com/

Good luck!

" 50% for logo is too low 'royalty' for any serious logo designer - no matter what is the price by which logo is sold."
This of course makes no sense. If the price is right then the 50% received is fine.

I've had 30 plus logo designs accepted, most take around 1 or 2 hours. I'll be happy to get $2/300 for any of them.  I'm a very experienced designer, I'm also a pretty successful istock contributor, I'm looking forward to the successful launch of the service.

Really? You think your right price is $200 - $300 per logo? Can I get your contact if you are so experienced? I know some people who can hire you for outsourcing logo designs and maybe you can earn much, much more ;-)

Quote from: vlad_the_imp on November 23, 2009, 05:26

I've had 30 plus logo designs accepted, most take around 1 or 2 hours. I'll be happy to get $2/300 for any of them.  I'm a very experienced designer, I'm also a pretty successful istock contributor, I'm looking forward to the successful launch of the service.

A 'very' experienced designer does not waste a minute of his lifetime for this kind of BS. You made 30 logos! Good luck selling them all. You will see the sore truth when you actually sell 1/10 of the logos you made. Which is going to come down to $20 per logo  

Enjoy!

Cidepix, when people understand that their work is manipulated and lowered by such 'brilliant' 50:50 deals where all risks are on authors part they will understand. It just need some time that to happen when someone sells logo and problems come up ;-)

Your points are very clever and some people will understand that logos aren't microstock images as well if other people ever understand what is the difference on micro and macro shots. Differences are fading due to some macros are dropping prices. But, there is still quite a lot of them where macro is quite different than micro. Logos are by default macro and exclusive so they can't be sold more than once. Not to mention that any of that logos should be able for buyer to trademark. And problems will come there! Regarding that, prices and cuts on istock are very funny! The more funniest thing is that now army of people who thinks that they know to draw or design trying to become logo designers ;-)

As a freelancer, half of my job is promotion, finding clients and communicating with clients (definitely not the fun half). I can see the appeal of this logo program because eliminating all the time and money spent tracking down clients might be worth the lower prices. I'm taking a cautious approach to the logo program. I haven't uploaded any logos, but I'm definitely going to monitor its success or failure. I think it is a mistake to just outright dismiss it. Especially since many people are creating logos for it.

This is the approach that I've decided to take. I'm far from a professional logo designer, but I've been designing and researching logos for the last year as a way to get comfortable working in Illustrator. This thread came up just as I decided to start researching the online market for pre-designed logos. It seems to me that istock and Brandstack are asking for two very different products. I've read the briefs on both sites, and it apprears that they're going to sell to different markets. istock is asking for simple one or two color vector designs with no type unless it's an integral part of the logo design. Brandstack is asking for a more complete brand with several colorways and one example with typography included. Brandstack will put the designer and client in touch for modifications to the original design. This is more like a traditional designer client relationship. istock is selling the logos as, and it seems that this will appeal to designers looking for a logo for inspiration or to save time on basic designing. They will then take the logo and make the modifications themselves and build the brand around the basic logo. What istock is asking for seems to me to be a starting point for logo design for designers who want to save time. Brandstack is for nondesigners who want to buy a more compete package.

Does this make sense? Anyone with more experience please feel free to jump in and correct me.

Pat Ballard

There will always be enough market for companies who want special/exclusive/personalized logos. Those hire designers and don't look for their logos on Istock

Update on topic:

As I said it will have great consequences on iStockphoto with trying to pick-pocket designers!

Here it is:

http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=148521&page=1#post2469291

Just in case that thread to dissapear:


""


Last week HOW and Print magazines sent a promotional email from one of our clients which promoted stock logos.

This message has produced a firestorm of anger and disappointment over how two well respected brands could endorse something that violates and threatens the basic principles of graphic design. Our editorial teams ? who were unaware of the promotional message ? were equally outraged, as it reflected poorly on their brands. And all of the outrage is justified.

It is not my place to pass judgment on the products and services promoted by our advertisers; however it is my responsibility to determine whether or not we should deliver the message. We have a process in place to safeguard against promotional messages that do not meet our standards and do not best serve our community. Last week that process broke down.

Unfortunately this has put the editors of HOW and Print in the awkward position of having to defend this message. I am responsible for vetting all marketing messages that carry the HOW and Print names and this one I missed. For that, I apologize.

I can state unequivocally that last week's email does not reflect HOW and Print's sensibilities in regards to the integrity and importance of graphic design. Nor does it represent an editorial endorsement of any kind regarding the usage of stock logos.

We thank you for your input and feedback regarding this matter. Once again I am left inspired by the passion and dedication of our collective design community.

Please feel free to contact me directly.

Sincerely,

Gary Lynch
Publisher
F+W Media Design Community
HOW, Print and I.D.
[email protected]

___________________________

Added: So, there is someone who has higher standards than iStock? Is it really possible that someone has higher standards?

Obviously Yes IMHO!

;-)