MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: iStock Content to Sell on Photos.com and JupiterUnlimited  (Read 94392 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

« Reply #275 on: May 06, 2009, 16:11 »
0
It's a real shame that some at IS will give this scheme the benefit of the doubt, because the only power we have is to withhold the content from  the Jupiter sites. Getty doesn't care if anyone's upset, but they would take notice if they had no new content to provide to their subscription properties.

That's not true __ you have far more powers than that if you choose to use them. You can suspend new uploads (which has proved very effective elsewhere), you can drop the crown (which takes a month to take effect anyway), etc, etc.

To be honest I've never understood the attraction of exclusivity. In the normal world higher risk should be in pursuit of higher reward but you guys earn significantly less for taking the risk, you put your livelihoods at the whim of a single distributor and then suffer all the instability that comes with it. Then you complain when it all goes wrong. Why?

Can you make an average of $3 on each download where your at ? Can you explain to me your ROI of each image ? If you haven't been there then it's really a mute point. I myself have been on both sides of the fence. And without any doubt I make much more there, being exclusive, than I did in 5 other sites combined. So to each thier own.
« Last Edit: May 06, 2009, 16:13 by Justme »


« Reply #276 on: May 06, 2009, 16:23 »
0
Can you make an average of $3 on each download where your at ? Can you explain to me your ROI of each image ? If you haven't been there then it really a mute point. I myself have been on both sides of the fence. And without any doubt I make much more there, being exclusive, than I did in 5 other sites combined. So to each thier own.

I'm not so bothered about 'the ROI on each image' as I consider it to be a fairly meaningless statistic __ I can't buy beer with ROI. I have a portfolio of 2000+ images and collectively I want it to make as much money as possible each month.

I've been at Diamond level for a couple of years and IS have only been over 40% of my total earnings on two occasions (which itself would be a 20% loss to me). IS have also dipped to 27% in that time too which would have meant a 46% loss. Enjoy the roller coaster ride __ looks like it might be bumpy ahead.

« Reply #277 on: May 06, 2009, 16:34 »
0
You can't calculate on percentages alone. Exclusives get preference in search. What's that worth?

« Reply #278 on: May 06, 2009, 17:06 »
0
So it looks like there has been a preliminary announcement " ass chewing " of iStocks contributors. And they are asking everyone to remove their Opt Out AVI's.  Must be having an effect. I think I will keep my AVI !

« Reply #279 on: May 06, 2009, 17:24 »
0
So it looks like there has been a preliminary announcement " ass chewing " of iStocks contributors. And they are asking everyone to remove their Opt Out AVI's.  Must be having an effect. I think I will keep my AVI !

Dead right. We change our Avatars when they change their preposterous proposal to the satisfaction of the majority. I can't believe just how quickly everyone appears to be rolling over for their tummy to be tickled after a few soothing words. I knew it would happen __ but not this quick.

« Reply #280 on: May 06, 2009, 17:33 »
0
It's a real shame that some at IS will give this scheme the benefit of the doubt, because the only power we have is to withhold the content from  the Jupiter sites. Getty doesn't care if anyone's upset, but they would take notice if they had no new content to provide to their subscription properties.

That's not true __ you have far more powers than that if you choose to use them. You can suspend new uploads (which has proved very effective elsewhere), you can drop the crown (which takes a month to take effect anyway), etc, etc.

To be honest I've never understood the attraction of exclusivity. In the normal world higher risk should be in pursuit of higher reward but you guys earn significantly less for taking the risk, you put your livelihoods at the whim of a single distributor and then suffer all the instability that comes with it. Then you complain when it all goes wrong. Why?
In the absence of a forced move to subscriptions, suspending uploads at IS is relatively unimportant - it's subscription sites that depend very heavily on the flow of new uploads.

What I meant was that the only power exclusives had to stay exclusive and get Getty to change the plan was to opt out. I'm well aware of the option to drop exclusivity and very well may have to go that route. The appeal of exclusivity for me is a blend of factors, and of course I'm unhappy with a bone-headed move on the part of my agent. If you don't want to read about it, click the ignore button and be happy.

lisafx

« Reply #281 on: May 06, 2009, 17:35 »
0
I don't mind changing my avatar, as requested, but my opinion will not be changed so easily. 

JoAnn, love your new avatar.  Very appropriate.

« Reply #282 on: May 06, 2009, 17:51 »
0
The real issue I have is that it is us the contributors who take all the risk here.  There is no bottom payment (well 3cents but come on).  To earn good money we have to rely on customer apathy and flaky internet conection so they don't use their full amount.

I think istock would have been better off saying 'you'll earn a dime minimum like in the old days, but it might be more.  You get new canisters for photos.com. Help us to become as successful at subscriptions as we are as PAYG. Woo Yay'  But they didn't.

that is my thinking too.  Getty have pushed all the risk of subscriptions onto the contributor

« Reply #283 on: May 06, 2009, 17:52 »
0
I don't mind changing my avatar, as requested, but my opinion will not be changed so easily. 

JoAnn, love your new avatar.  Very appropriate.

We aim to please, ma'am :)

Yes, I got the idea that they were sorry they got everyone in an uproar, but I don't know how I can look at things the same way as before this disastrous announcement. The fact that they'd even think for one second it was a good idea says this isn't the foxhole I want to be in...

« Reply #284 on: May 06, 2009, 17:58 »
0
It's a real shame that some at IS will give this scheme the benefit of the doubt, because the only power we have is to withhold the content from  the Jupiter sites. Getty doesn't care if anyone's upset, but they would take notice if they had no new content to provide to their subscription properties. Once the dribble of stuff starts because some people believe that something is better than nothing, it'll be very very hard to stop the momentum.

well said,
... and we already are seeing a light at the end of a tunnel...
(fotolia 's new president).  8)

this is certainly a big turn of the event. volatile , did i not say?

even just dollar bin images is more than a trickle when you consider the number of images per week.  it is much the same arguments as free images.  a few images from an awful lot of people = a lot of images

« Reply #285 on: May 06, 2009, 18:02 »
0


simple,  be  like Nero playing la violin as Rome burns... Or Victoria saying,"Buf, let em eat cake!"

nowadays the term is 'let them eat cak'

how come I cant click on your name batman? is this some sort of superpower?

« Reply #286 on: May 06, 2009, 18:20 »
0
So it looks like there has been a preliminary announcement " ass chewing " of iStocks contributors. And they are asking everyone to remove their Opt Out AVI's.  Must be having an effect. I think I will keep my AVI !

Dead right. We change our Avatars when they change their preposterous proposal to the satisfaction of the majority. I can't believe just how quickly everyone appears to be rolling over for their tummy to be tickled after a few soothing words. I knew it would happen __ but not this quick.

I don't think anyone is waving the white flags just yet, it looks more like a cease fire to me. No point in being confrontational about it if things can be solved constructively!

bittersweet

« Reply #287 on: May 06, 2009, 18:22 »
0


even just dollar bin images is more than a trickle when you consider the number of images per week. 

Add to that the fact that they are reanimating all the dollar bin images that "timed out" due to non-sales for 28 days. They've started with exclusives but with few exceptions all the rest post-2005 will follow.

« Reply #288 on: May 06, 2009, 19:41 »
0
Add to that the fact that they are reanimating all the dollar bin images that "timed out" due to non-sales for 28 days. They've started with exclusives but with few exceptions all the rest post-2005 will follow.

That smacks of desperation. Don't forget that many of us have already been there for several months with large portfolios of our best images. At those volumes, even at 30c a pop, it makes very little difference __ apart from the fact that it does appear to damage your PPD sales. You're welcome to it.

bittersweet

« Reply #289 on: May 06, 2009, 22:29 »
0
Add to that the fact that they are reanimating all the dollar bin images that "timed out" due to non-sales for 28 days. They've started with exclusives but with few exceptions all the rest post-2005 will follow.

That smacks of desperation. Don't forget that many of us have already been there for several months with large portfolios of our best images. At those volumes, even at 30c a pop, it makes very little difference __ apart from the fact that it does appear to damage your PPD sales. You're welcome to it.

Thanks for the blessing, but I have no intention of taking advantage of this awesome opportunity they've provided me.

Milinz

« Reply #290 on: May 07, 2009, 06:48 »
0
Guys one thing is certain: Authors have power to raise voice against downgrading their work! Avatar change was perfect idea to do so and not break forum rules. Nevertheless, now I expect someone from management of agency to add line where will be 'no text allowed in avatars' - so you're then cut-off with your responses completely from their conspiracies and their tries to take more money from authors.
They will make such policy soon - trust me. They can do it and they will do it!

bittersweet

« Reply #291 on: May 07, 2009, 06:58 »
0
Nevertheless, now I expect someone from management of agency to add line where will be 'no text allowed in avatars' - so you're then cut-off with your responses completely from their conspiracies and their tries to take more money from authors.
They will make such policy soon - trust me. They can do it and they will do it!

They can do it, but really doubt they will enact such a petty "rule". It's one step above an agency hunting down people who talk bad about them on other forums and punishing them for their statements. In fact, they left the hundred or so "opt out" avatars that people created still in the collection. They could have easily deleted them.

I wouldn't be surprised by a lot of things they could do that I wouldn't like, but I still believe something like a "no text in avatar" rule is pretty unlikely to happen.

Milinz

« Reply #292 on: May 07, 2009, 08:42 »
0


[EDIT] Live person there!

« Last Edit: May 07, 2009, 11:24 by Milinz »

« Reply #293 on: May 07, 2009, 08:48 »
0
Now, I will wait to see if they have robotized reply ready for this kind of messages ;-)

I hope they do and I hope it says something along the lines of "You're an arse".

Milinz

« Reply #294 on: May 07, 2009, 09:00 »
0
Now, I will wait to see if they have robotized reply ready for this kind of messages ;-)

I hope they do and I hope it says something along the lines of "You're an arse".

Yep why not!

Anyway I don't have anything to loose there - I am and will be always NON-EXCLUSIVE!

My earnings there are about $16 in 2 years with 19 images and 2 videos... THE LOWEST OF ALL AGENCIES I EVER WORKED WITH!

They sell my work badly and they don't need my vectors... So if there is no my vectors on iStock, I really don't need them at all! And I have over 700 vectors on-line on almost all other competiting agencies!

Next year May I will have over 1500 vectors on-line... So, their limits are quite stupid to follow for me!

If that justifies "You're an arse" response, let it be!
« Last Edit: May 07, 2009, 09:16 by Milinz »

« Reply #295 on: May 07, 2009, 09:16 »
0
Aside from the concerns already listed I'm also wondering how enforcement will work. Who would I report a TOS violation to? Will photos.com and Jupiter modify their TOS to match IS's?

Jupiter allows for up to 10 people to use a single license, and for the images to be shared via a network for this purpose.

Photos.com allows for only a single seat license.

In addition to that Jupiter allows for images to be used in resale items. There is no mention of an EL being required. From the Jupiter website.

(III) Use the Image(s) on product packaging or in any items for personal use or resale, including book covers, calendars, consumer merchandise (T-shirts, posters, art, etc.), except in computer software and electronic video and computer games, which require a separate license (see Section F(IX) below), provided such use is not intended to allow the re-distribution, re-use of the Image(s) or access to the Image(s) apart from a product or service apart from a product or service.

« Reply #296 on: May 07, 2009, 11:11 »
0
Yes be very careful about using sitemail on these sites. The admins have access to them.

bittersweet

« Reply #297 on: May 07, 2009, 11:13 »
0
Yes be very careful about using sitemail on these sites. The admins have access to them.

Sorry, what was this comment in response to?

batman

« Reply #298 on: May 07, 2009, 11:19 »
0
Looks like Batman's flame is out.

They come... they go.  ;D Appeared in April, gone by May.

Don't we expect him back again with another name?


HELLLLL NO ! I was about to take another name but bloody hell RACEPHOTO  was already taken! you chimp! 8)

lisafx

« Reply #299 on: May 07, 2009, 11:36 »
0
Welcome back Batty.  Glad you decided to hang around.  What would we do without your unique and controversial style?  ;D


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
14 Replies
6301 Views
Last post September 16, 2009, 16:03
by Sean Locke Photography
258 Replies
62451 Views
Last post June 15, 2011, 07:17
by bunhill
12 Replies
8847 Views
Last post November 16, 2014, 12:21
by etudiante_rapide
14 Replies
15344 Views
Last post March 23, 2016, 10:06
by Lukeruk
3 Replies
3961 Views
Last post May 28, 2015, 20:22
by WeatherENG

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors