pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: istock not accepting new contributors ???  (Read 27255 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

namussi

« Reply #50 on: March 01, 2018, 19:43 »
+2
Perhaps the word is "sanctimonious"?

Check your dictionary: sanctimonious is no different than what you said earlier about me "taking a moral stance". Repeating it doesn't make it true. I'm pragmatic, because I still sell through iStock, despite disliking them. This is the opposite of "sanctimonious". Even more, some idealist might say that I have no scruples!


Here are some other words that are synonyms.

self-righteous, holier-than-thou, churchy, pious, pietistic, moralizing, unctuous, smug, superior, priggish, mealy-mouthed, hypocritical, insincere, for form's sake, to keep up appearances;


« Reply #51 on: March 04, 2018, 11:53 »
0
Maybe we should have an anonymous poll and grant to the qualified agencies the right to use a "fair trade" label.

Exactly my thought after reading this topic. Would be even nicer if this could be done "officially" like setting some terms under which an agency can have this label and they could add this to their website.
I wonder if it is possible.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #52 on: March 04, 2018, 13:18 »
+5
Which of the Micros is anywhere near fair trade? Certainly none of the well known ones.
Then some may give contributors a decent percentage, but of hardly any sales - fair, but no trade.
PS, we've had this exact suggestion before.


Maybe we should have an anonymous poll and grant to the qualified agencies the right to use a "fair trade" label.

Exactly my thought after reading this topic. Would be even nicer if this could be done "officially" like setting some terms under which an agency can have this label and they could add this to their website.
I wonder if it is possible.
« Last Edit: March 04, 2018, 14:14 by ShadySue »

« Reply #53 on: March 05, 2018, 01:59 »
+1
Maybe we should have an anonymous poll and grant to the qualified agencies the right to use a "fair trade" label.

Exactly my thought after reading this topic. Would be even nicer if this could be done "officially" like setting some terms under which an agency can have this label and they could add this to their website.
I wonder if it is possible.

its posible. But we are to stupid to unite...
« Last Edit: March 05, 2018, 18:47 by r2d2 »

« Reply #54 on: March 05, 2018, 09:43 »
0
Which of the Micros is anywhere near fair trade? Certainly none of the well known ones.
Then some may give contributors a decent percentage, but of hardly any sales - fair, but no trade.
PS, we've had this exact suggestion before.


Maybe we should have an anonymous poll and grant to the qualified agencies the right to use a "fair trade" label.

Exactly my thought after reading this topic. Would be even nicer if this could be done "officially" like setting some terms under which an agency can have this label and they could add this to their website.
I wonder if it is possible.

Some are more than the others, not all are equally bad. Very few, if any, are as bad as iStock.

Give the best ones the "fair trade" label.
Maybe this will attract the activist customers.
Sales could go up for them and this could stimulate shameful iStock and other agencies to do better.
I'm aware this far fetched, but in relative terms, I believe it is more realistic, positive and without the financial impact of the boycott, so often called out when it comes to iStock.

« Reply #55 on: March 20, 2018, 14:03 »
+2
Today, I got contacted again by an IS customer, asking details about one of my photos.
After providing him all the information he was interested in, I ended up with this email:

No problem, Jo. I'm glad I could help.

On the other hand, if it doesn't make a difference to you, I would prefer if you could get the same photo from other agencies, like Shutterstock, since they have better rates for their contributors:

Here is my gallery:
[link to my SS port]

And here is the photo you liked:
[SS link for the photo he liked]

Cheers,

[Me].

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #56 on: March 20, 2018, 14:52 »
0
Today, I got contacted again by an IS customer, asking details about one of my photos.
...
On the other hand, if it doesn't make a difference to you, I would prefer if you could get the same photo from other agencies, like Shutterstock, since they have better rates for their contributors:
...
But that's just not always true. Although I'm complaining about an average $1.47 this month from iS (still photos only), I bet not many SS photo-only contributors get that much, and if so, it's only the top ones, not the middlings like me.

« Reply #57 on: March 20, 2018, 15:06 »
+1
Today, I got contacted again by an IS customer, asking details about one of my photos.
...
On the other hand, if it doesn't make a difference to you, I would prefer if you could get the same photo from other agencies, like Shutterstock, since they have better rates for their contributors:
...
But that's just not always true. Although I'm complaining about an average $1.47 this month from iS (still photos only), I bet not many SS photo-only contributors get that much, and if so, it's only the top ones, not the middlings like me.
Yes its not that simple.....if someone was to go to a site specifically for one image or just a few then  I would earn hugely more than a sub package. FWIW my Return per image is overall very similar for SS and IS. It rankles a bit that IS take a higher share....but in the end its cash in my wallet that counts....If IS can persuade someone to pay $200 for a pic and I get $30 thats better that SS selling it for $75 and me getting $25 ;-).

« Reply #58 on: March 20, 2018, 15:07 »
0
Today, I got contacted again by an IS customer, asking details about one of my photos.
...
On the other hand, if it doesn't make a difference to you, I would prefer if you could get the same photo from other agencies, like Shutterstock, since they have better rates for their contributors:
...
But that's just not always true. Although I'm complaining about an average $1.47 this month from iS (still photos only), I bet not many SS photo-only contributors get that much, and if so, it's only the top ones, not the middlings like me.

Well... it is very true for me, month after month, since many years.
In January, my RPD was a record $0,82 on IS and $1.35 on SS. This means that IS paid me 64% less than SS!

If by a miracle, all IS customers will migrate to SS and buy the same photos, I will be making many hundreds of dollars more, each month!

I'm fairly certain that this is the case for a large majority of non-exclusives.
« Last Edit: March 20, 2018, 15:15 by Zero Talent »

« Reply #59 on: March 20, 2018, 15:19 »
0
Today, I got contacted again by an IS customer, asking details about one of my photos.
...
On the other hand, if it doesn't make a difference to you, I would prefer if you could get the same photo from other agencies, like Shutterstock, since they have better rates for their contributors:
...
But that's just not always true. Although I'm complaining about an average $1.47 this month from iS (still photos only), I bet not many SS photo-only contributors get that much, and if so, it's only the top ones, not the middlings like me.
Yes its not that simple.....if someone was to go to a site specifically for one image or just a few then  I would earn hugely more than a sub package. FWIW my Return per image is overall very similar for SS and IS. It rankles a bit that IS take a higher share....but in the end its cash in my wallet that counts....If IS can persuade someone to pay $200 for a pic and I get $30 thats better that SS selling it for $75 and me getting $25 ;-).

I'm with you, I don't mind if IS is getting a larger share, if I also get more in absolute numbers. Good for them if they can do a better job in selling!
But, that's only in theory, because in practice, you will get less. See the RPD example I gave above. That's why I want IS customers to migrate to SS.

Do you get a better RPD from IS, than from SS, to justify your example?

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #60 on: March 20, 2018, 15:40 »
+6
If by a miracle, all IS customers will migrate to SS and buy the same photos, I will be making many hundreds of dollars more, each month!
I'd prefer the miracle that all iS/SS/Ft customers would migrate to Alamy.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #61 on: March 20, 2018, 16:09 »
0
Today, I got contacted again by an IS customer, asking details about one of my photos.
...
On the other hand, if it doesn't make a difference to you, I would prefer if you could get the same photo from other agencies, like Shutterstock, since they have better rates for their contributors:
...
But that's just not always true. Although I'm complaining about an average $1.47 this month from iS (still photos only), I bet not many SS photo-only contributors get that much, and if so, it's only the top ones, not the middlings like me.

Well... it is very true for me, month after month, since many years.
In January, my RPD was a record $0,82 on IS and $1.35 on SS. This means that IS paid me 64% less than SS!

If by a miracle, all IS customers will migrate to SS and buy the same photos, I will be making many hundreds of dollars more, each month!

I'm fairly certain that this is the case for a large majority of non-exclusives.

The point your buyer was making was that s/he believed that SS gave better rates to contributors than iS. I was just saying that that isn't always true.
The discussion about whether one would prefer a better rate or a better total is different.

« Reply #62 on: March 20, 2018, 16:16 »
+1
Today, I got contacted again by an IS customer, asking details about one of my photos.
...
On the other hand, if it doesn't make a difference to you, I would prefer if you could get the same photo from other agencies, like Shutterstock, since they have better rates for their contributors:
...
But that's just not always true. Although I'm complaining about an average $1.47 this month from iS (still photos only), I bet not many SS photo-only contributors get that much, and if so, it's only the top ones, not the middlings like me.

Well... it is very true for me, month after month, since many years.
In January, my RPD was a record $0,82 on IS and $1.35 on SS. This means that IS paid me 64% less than SS!

If by a miracle, all IS customers will migrate to SS and buy the same photos, I will be making many hundreds of dollars more, each month!

I'm fairly certain that this is the case for a large majority of non-exclusives.

The point your buyer was making was that s/he believed that SS gave better rates to contributors than iS. I was just saying that that isn't always true.
The discussion about whether one would prefer a better rate or a better total is different.

I think there is a misunderstanding. The buyer only asked for some details for one of the photos he was planing to buy from IS.

I stated that SS has better rates (I know that for a fact, see above), asking him, as a favor, to check if he could get the same photo from SS instead.

« Reply #63 on: March 20, 2018, 16:36 »
0
Today, I got contacted again by an IS customer, asking details about one of my photos.
...
On the other hand, if it doesn't make a difference to you, I would prefer if you could get the same photo from other agencies, like Shutterstock, since they have better rates for their contributors:
...
But that's just not always true. Although I'm complaining about an average $1.47 this month from iS (still photos only), I bet not many SS photo-only contributors get that much, and if so, it's only the top ones, not the middlings like me.

Well... it is very true for me, month after month, since many years.
In January, my RPD was a record $0,82 on IS and $1.35 on SS. This means that IS paid me 64% less than SS!

If by a miracle, all IS customers will migrate to SS and buy the same photos, I will be making many hundreds of dollars more, each month!

I'm fairly certain that this is the case for a large majority of non-exclusives.

The point your buyer was making was that s/he believed that SS gave better rates to contributors than iS. I was just saying that that isn't always true.
The discussion about whether one would prefer a better rate or a better total is different.

I think there is a misunderstanding. The buyer only asked for some details for one of the photos he was planing to buy from IS.

I stated that SS has better rates (I know that for a fact, see above), asking him, as a favor, to check if he could get the same photo from SS instead.
Yes it is theoretical but if he already had a subs package with SS and was planning to buy a one off image from IS because the SS search engine didn't find it you could easily find yourself worse off ;-). Largely academic discussion really.....

« Reply #64 on: March 20, 2018, 17:09 »
0
Yes it is theoretical but if he already had a subs package with SS and was planning to buy a one off image from IS because the SS search engine didn't find it you could easily find yourself worse off ;-). Largely academic discussion really.....

Yes, this could happen, indeed. But it can only be a remote case. I would expect customers to first try to take advantage of their subscription, before they start googling for alternatives. Don't say that you "can't see the forest for the trees".

The fact is the I will be better off, in average, if my IS customers will migrate to SS.
And I'm fairly certain that I'm not alone. Even more, a large majority of non-exclusive IS contributors would benefit from such hypothetical migration.

I will definitely welcome academic discussions for a change  ;)!

« Last Edit: March 20, 2018, 17:36 by Zero Talent »

« Reply #65 on: March 21, 2018, 01:29 »
0
Yes it is theoretical but if he already had a subs package with SS and was planning to buy a one off image from IS because the SS search engine didn't find it you could easily find yourself worse off ;-). Largely academic discussion really.....

Yes, this could happen, indeed. But it can only be a remote case. I would expect customers to first try to take advantage of their subscription, before they start googling for alternatives. Don't say that you "can't see the forest for the trees".

The fact is the I will be better off, in average, if my IS customers will migrate to SS.
And I'm fairly certain that I'm not alone. Even more, a large majority of non-exclusive IS contributors would benefit from such hypothetical migration.

I will definitely welcome academic discussions for a change  ;)!
You are probably right and certainly you seem to have a strategy that works for you though I do recall seeing some people report what to me are very high RPDs at Istock last month mine was almost identical to SS.....I just believe RPD generally is a poor and often deceptive measure. I just look at total income.
« Last Edit: March 21, 2018, 01:35 by Pauws99 »

« Reply #66 on: March 21, 2018, 07:00 »
0
Quote from: Pauws99
I just believe RPD generally is a poor and often deceptive measure. I just look at total income.

Same with me. The total income matters.
That low IS RPD is only telling me that I could earn more, if more customers would migrate from IS to SS.
Or to FT.
Or to DT.
Or to 123.
Or to Alamy.
« Last Edit: March 21, 2018, 07:02 by Zero Talent »

« Reply #67 on: March 31, 2018, 08:47 »
0
So if I want to start video submissions should I start off with Shutterstock? Currently learning how to process videos.

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #68 on: April 02, 2018, 10:12 »
0
You are probably right and certainly you seem to have a strategy that works for you though I do recall seeing some people report what to me are very high RPDs at Istock last month mine was almost identical to SS.....I just believe RPD generally is a poor and often deceptive measure. I just look at total income.

Just looked at a whole month of SS, keep in mind we get around 22% at SS, and 15% or less at IS. SS RPD $1.54 last month, IS according to DM .65 that's photo only. Most of the difference that I can see is ODs on SS.

Mostly I agree with your view, that RPD is a poor measure and total income is what makes sense = real income.

« Reply #69 on: May 07, 2018, 06:52 »
0
Could someone give me a directions how to check my stats/profile etc. Like where I even log in?

« Reply #70 on: May 07, 2018, 07:48 »
0
So if I want to start video submissions should I start off with Shutterstock? Currently learning how to process videos

ProArtWork

niktol

« Reply #71 on: May 07, 2018, 08:07 »
0
Could someone give me a directions how to check my stats/profile etc. Like where I even log in?
login
https://esp.gettyimages.com/sign-in?returnUrl=/
you can download last month's report from royalties->export->...

« Reply #72 on: May 07, 2018, 12:11 »
0
Could someone give me a directions how to check my stats/profile etc. Like where I even log in?
login
https://esp.gettyimages.com/sign-in?returnUrl=/
you can download last month's report from royalties->export->...

And install Deepmeta.

« Reply #73 on: May 08, 2018, 05:52 »
0
Could someone give me a directions how to check my stats/profile etc. Like where I even log in?
login
newbielink:https://esp.gettyimages.com/sign-in?returnUrl=/ [nonactive]
you can download last month's report from royalties->export->...

And install Deepmeta.

Thank you so much


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
6 Replies
4533 Views
Last post March 20, 2013, 02:42
by Yure
44 Replies
33628 Views
Last post March 06, 2015, 11:13
by EmberMike
15 Replies
4138 Views
Last post January 14, 2016, 04:17
by Stockmaan
1 Replies
3480 Views
Last post February 25, 2018, 10:49
by Sean Locke Photography
30 Replies
15176 Views
Last post September 05, 2018, 11:33
by Noedelhap

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle