The featured lightboxes are filled with images from the same contributors every week. We're a contributor base of thousands. There's no reason to showcase the same contributors over and over, multiple images per contributor in multiple lightboxes. Or are they simply telling us that those contributors are the only good contributors on iStock? I don't even care so much about whether my images are in the lightboxes. I'd just like to see a good variety of contributors' work marketed.

The content management at iStock has become more and more clubby over the last year. I'm disappointed. I thought the content management team was going to take it in a much more open and community-oriented direction. that was the crux of their messages all year.

The featured lightboxes are filled with images from the same contributors every week. We're a contributor base of thousands. There's no reason to showcase the same contributors over and over, multiple images per contributor in multiple lightboxes. Or are they simply telling us that those contributors are the only good contributors on iStock? I don't even care so much about whether my images are in the lightboxes. I'd just like to see a good variety of contributors' work marketed.

The content management at iStock has become more and more clubby over the last year. I'm disappointed. I thought the content management team was going to take it in a much more open and community-oriented direction. that was the crux of their messages all year.

Embrace the power of the dark side.  I stopped trying to understand what any agency does anymore. You just have to try to make money with whatever crazy hoops they set up.

I noticed the same thing about the lightboxes when they first did the site redesign.  It seems obvious those lightboxes are designed to promote expensive files, by certain anointed contributors.  If they were a genuine effort to serve buyers they should offer more diverse content. 

If Istock doesn't refocus it's efforts on buyers, sales volume will continue to decline IMO. 

Quote from: SNP on January 10, 2011, 11:40

The content management at iStock has become more and more clubby over the last year. I'm disappointed. I thought the content management team was going to take it in a much more open and community-oriented direction. that was the crux of their messages all year.

------------------------------
I think Istock is becoming/has become a company representing the work of 300 to 500 or contributors, those people it pays 40%, and the 1 20% contributor, and effectively nobody else.  Their work appears at the start of pretty much every search and just about everywhere else including as you noted the promotional lightboxes.  I never look at the hot shots email, but assume they are there as well. 

I'm not knocking those people as they are very talented and successful, but most contributors including many with great talent are being or will be left in the dust shortly.  I think in 1 to 3 years Istock will be only a name plate with a Vetta look to it, sold at a premium with the rest of the content shifted somewhere else paying a flat 20%

you said it even better...

I think 'clubby' sounds about right.  It's a great shame.  As Sadstock says, a lot of good talent will most likely never get a look in.

Ah well... thankfully there are other agencies.  Let's hope they seize their moment.

There's a ton of value, IMO, in improved search position. I'm not sure whether these lightboxes generate any traffic with buyers, but I'd bet a lot less.

Favoring a special group still isn't the right way to run a business (vs. a banana republic) but it may be that it doesn't affect the rest of us half as much as preferred search position.

At the moment, getting search to actually work correctly is the biggest obstacle in our way. Next priority is making it so buyers can turn off the special collections (Vetta and Agency) if they want to. After that, I don't think I'll care much what they fill their favored few lightboxes with

What on earth is going on with search today?
Twice I've made a search and ended up apparently searching  on 'source' as a keyword, when that wasn't what I entered. This most recent time I typed in Edinburgh, and then clicked on Edinburgh as it appeared below the search box and got 'source'.
Earlier, only the top few thums on a search showed, and several refreshes made no difference (FF)
I switched to IE, did a search, clicked on an image, then clicked the back button and came out of my original search.
I'm sure it's not the only reason I have no dls today or yesterday, but it can't be helping.  
Of course, I can't report it on the forums.  

Added: why is is so inconsistent? The last time (just before I typed the above) I typed Edinburgh in the top search box, it offered me Edinburgh, Edinburgh Castle or Edinburgh (Holyrood), This time, it's only offering me Edinburgh, and I've noticed this sort of thing before too.