MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: iStock raises the bar  (Read 33457 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

traveler1116

« Reply #125 on: December 13, 2008, 14:34 »
0
I have to say the same thing, I don't recommend IS to buyers because we get such a low % there.  If IS would give nonexclusives a little more incentive, like maybe just an extra 2% per canister level and an even playing field in the best match, I would be much more likely to recommend them.  As it stands now I think DT is probably the best place to buy individual images and SS is best for subscriptions.  I like the search results on DT the best and how easy it is to report bad keywords, the other agencies could really help themselves out by fixing keywords.


« Reply #126 on: December 13, 2008, 17:08 »
0
The new dollor bin is being developed to attract the buyers from other micro sites.We know shutterstock offers lower prices to buyers.
The library is expanding too fast and the inspectors have lost touch with what is microstock imagery.To many landscapes and holiday snaps have been allowed into the library and  albeit technically sound they won't attract sales so end up in the dollor bin.Now we are going to have 200,000 non stock images in the new DUSTY BIN  <<< my new name for it .

Actually there probably aren't enough specific location shots. Its easy to deride travel photography as "holiday snaps" but when I talk to photo buyers they complain that they can't get images for specific travel locations. If you're writing about a place, although there might be 200K beach photos, you just can't substitute a beach shot from Hawaii and say its in Vanuatu.

caspixel

« Reply #127 on: December 13, 2008, 17:13 »
0

Just out of curiosity, why are you still buying at iStock? I know quality is good and for searching images I would prefer iStock, but there are cheaper places out there. I do not buy a lot of images, but occassionaly I do, but never at iStock, because they are so expensive (compared to other microstock agencies) and I feel better when I buy an image where the contributor gets a higher percentage.  I do not want to bash iStock (in fact they are still my no. 1 earner), but I am interested why buyers choose iStock instead of other agencies which are not far behind in image quality and cheaper.

For a couple of reasons.
1) I don't want to have multiple accounts at multiple sites.
2) Familiarity and misplaced loyalty. ;)
3) Credits for designs uploaded to iStock's Designer Spotlight (this is the biggest reason for continuing to purchase at iStock)

Though I have also used other free sites this year to get images (vector flags and a map), and I also downloaded some stuff from morguefile.com. Something which I would never have done in the past. And I *rarely* ever download the L size file anymore at iStock. I make the S or M size work.

« Reply #128 on: December 13, 2008, 17:24 »
0
Oh, so they can still raise the price further without loosing you, someone should tell them  ::)
No just joking  :)

caspixel

« Reply #129 on: December 13, 2008, 17:25 »
0
.never mind the rest

... if you look at one person who disagreed with you and the one admin who told them not to bother trying as an "immediate smackdown by the forum moderators and contributors", then it is clear that you will not be "taking into account" anything I have to say on the subject.
Perhaps you missed the part where I said I was a buyer since 2003 (actually 2004, just checked :) ). I've seen many a price increase, so trust me, it's been a lot more than ONE person or ONE admin who has disagreed with me. And it's also the experience of some of my fellow buyers too. You know, we do talk amongst ourselves sometimes.

What I will  never understand on these forums is how people always seem to want to speculate about what buyers are thinking (and doing) and then when a buyer comes in and tells them and it's something they don't want to hear, they get all pissy and try to dispute what the buyers are saying, instead of taking into account and considering their feedback.

I actually find it funny that iStock says they asked the buyers and the buyers said they would be willing to pay more for images. I'm calling BS on that one. What buyer EVER says they want to pay more for something they have previously gotten for cheaper? Is there anyone out there who filled their car up with gas over the summer, when prices were going crazy who said "Wooyay!" and said how happy they were for the oil companies? Or were at the grocery store celebrating the increasing cost of food? LOL.
« Last Edit: December 13, 2008, 18:03 by caspixel »

caspixel

« Reply #130 on: December 13, 2008, 17:29 »
0
Oh, so they can still raise the price further without loosing you, someone should tell them  ::)
No just joking  :)


Truly, the only reason I stay at iStock is getting credits for DS submissions. If that goes away, or, for me, the credit is a negative to the cost, buh bye iStock. So, no, they can't raise the price further without losing me. And I can assure you, I won't be buying anything from the Premium Collection.

« Reply #131 on: December 13, 2008, 17:43 »
0
I did not know that you get cresids if you submit to the designer Spotlight. Thanx for showing up here, it REALLY is interesting to know what buyers think. I wish more buyers would participate in this forum..

caspixel

« Reply #132 on: December 13, 2008, 18:00 »
0
Freezingpictures, I love your penguin shots. Back when images were cheaper I would download them just because I liked them and I purchased some of your penguin pics. One guy even lived on my desktop for a while. So cute.  :)

bittersweet

« Reply #133 on: December 13, 2008, 18:40 »
0
.
« Last Edit: December 13, 2008, 21:16 by whatalife »

caspixel

« Reply #134 on: December 13, 2008, 19:01 »
0
I have seen all your posts Carolynne, and they play out pretty much the same every time. Just keep in mind that the contributors are also paying a lot higher prices for everything right now. It's not just you who is affected.
Just keep in mind that the buyers don't force the contributors to upload to any microstock site. That's your choice.

Anyway, I really don't want to have this discussion again. I know how it plays out. I only signed up here to offer a buyers perspective because people were speculating as to where they might be in light of the new price increases at iStock. Glad to see it was apprectiated by at least one person.

bittersweet

« Reply #135 on: December 13, 2008, 19:12 »
0
I'm glad you found a sympathetic audience.

Since my money doesn't count here, I'll be sure not to burden any of your portfolios with my worthless downloads.
« Last Edit: December 13, 2008, 21:17 by whatalife »

« Reply #136 on: December 13, 2008, 19:37 »
0
I actually find it funny that iStock says they asked the buyers and the buyers said they would be willing to pay more for images. I'm calling BS on that one. What buyer EVER says they want to pay more for something they have previously gotten for cheaper? Is there anyone out there who filled their car up with gas over the summer, when prices were going crazy who said "Wooyay!" and said how happy they were for the oil companies? Or were at the grocery store celebrating the increasing cost of food? LOL.

I agree.  The only way someone would be willing to pay more is when they get something more in return too. 

Thanks for your postings showing us the "other side".

Regards,
Adelaide

« Reply #137 on: December 13, 2008, 20:51 »
0
In caspixel's defense I have seen her (?) on several threads at IS over the years voicing her displeasure with pricing.  She's not just referring to the one thread that was referenced here.

To caspixel, welcome!  :) Please continue to give us your perspective.  Speaking for myself, I would love to hear more from the buyers side of things.  I feel like you're getting a bit of a raw deal in some of the responses you've gotten here but your perspective is an important one for us.  Without the buyers where would we be as contributors?  A lot lighter in the pocket, that's for sure.

« Reply #138 on: December 13, 2008, 21:24 »
0
Hi Cas - I am really glad to see you here and to have someone else with a buyer's perspective  ;D - I have followed your posts on the IS forums for a few years and you are correct, you (and really any buyer who complains) always get slapped down for trying to offer the buyers point of view there - I noticed this time around they simply dismissed you with - "oh that's just Cas - she always complains" ... as if your buyer's voice was meaningless ... that is why we dont even bother saying anything in those forums anymore - they treat the buyers like they are a nuisance rather than their bread and butter .... we complained in those forums during the last price increase and had tons of other buyers site mailing us saying they agreed with our position but were not comfortable sharing their views on the forums - anyway welcome and I for one value your opionion, especially as a fellow buyer, and hope you continue to contribute on these boards ...

And take a look around Cas at the other micros - buyers have more options than they have ever had - I think you will find that you might use your free credits on IS but will actually buy elsewhere ...

« Reply #139 on: December 13, 2008, 21:26 »
0
The new dollor bin is being developed to attract the buyers from other micro sites.We know shutterstock offers lower prices to buyers.
The library is expanding too fast and the inspectors have lost touch with what is microstock imagery.To many landscapes and holiday snaps have been allowed into the library and  albeit technically sound they won't attract sales so end up in the dollor bin.Now we are going to have 200,000 non stock images in the new DUSTY BIN  <<< my new name for it .

Actually there probably aren't enough specific location shots. Its easy to deride travel photography as "holiday snaps" but when I talk to photo buyers they complain that they can't get images for specific travel locations. If you're writing about a place, although there might be 200K beach photos, you just can't substitute a beach shot from Hawaii and say its in Vanuatu.

problem there is too, if it looks generic ie a beach you will often get refused for keywords if you put the location in, so you may be getting pics of where you want but the location isn't mentioned for that reason.

Also not enough people want images of 'local' attractions / features (places without huge tourism) so they sell very little (so better in macro library although I think with my limited knowledge there could be a good niche for midstock agency to focus on travel).  anyway micro agencies dont want them cause they are not big sellers etc

Phil

the few times I have bought it has been from DT too.

« Reply #140 on: December 13, 2008, 21:31 »
0
.never mind the rest

... if you look at one person who disagreed with you and the one admin who told them not to bother trying as an "immediate smackdown by the forum moderators and contributors", then it is clear that you will not be "taking into account" anything I have to say on the subject.
Perhaps you missed the part where I said I was a buyer since 2003 (actually 2004, just checked :) ). I've seen many a price increase, so trust me, it's been a lot more than ONE person or ONE admin who has disagreed with me. And it's also the experience of some of my fellow buyers too. You know, we do talk amongst ourselves sometimes.

What I will  never understand on these forums is how people always seem to want to speculate about what buyers are thinking (and doing) and then when a buyer comes in and tells them and it's something they don't want to hear, they get all pissy and try to dispute what the buyers are saying, instead of taking into account and considering their feedback.

I actually find it funny that iStock says they asked the buyers and the buyers said they would be willing to pay more for images. I'm calling BS on that one. What buyer EVER says they want to pay more for something they have previously gotten for cheaper? Is there anyone out there who filled their car up with gas over the summer, when prices were going crazy who said "Wooyay!" and said how happy they were for the oil companies? Or were at the grocery store celebrating the increasing cost of food? LOL.

LOL!

« Reply #141 on: December 13, 2008, 22:13 »
0
Hi Cas - I am really glad to see you here and to have someone else with a buyer's perspective  ;D - I have followed your posts on the IS forums for a few years and you are correct, you (and really any buyer who complains) always get slapped down for trying to offer the buyers point of view there - I noticed this time around they simply dismissed you with - "oh that's just Cas - she always complains" ... as if your buyer's voice was meaningless ... that is why we dont even bother saying anything in those forums anymore - they treat the buyers like they are a nuisance rather than their bread and butter .... we complained in those forums during the last price increase and had tons of other buyers site mailing us saying they agreed with our position but were not comfortable sharing their views on the forums - anyway welcome and I for one value your opionion, especially as a fellow buyer, and hope you continue to contribute on these boards ...

And take a look around Cas at the other micros - buyers have more options than they have ever had - I think you will find that you might use your free credits on IS but will actually buy elsewhere ...

Thank you! You summed up it up perfectly.

And thanks to pixelbrat and madelaide too.

;D

I would just like to also add that I don't begrudge anyone for wanting to make more money, but iStock's price increases might ultimately have the opposite effect on the contributors...and judging from the anectdotal evidence over the past year it seems to be going in that direction.
« Last Edit: December 13, 2008, 22:31 by caspixel »

« Reply #142 on: December 13, 2008, 22:36 »
0
Not on me, Cas. I've almost doubled last year income.

« Reply #143 on: December 13, 2008, 23:11 »
0
[/quote]
I would just like to also add that I don't begrudge anyone for wanting to make more money, but iStock's price increases might ultimately have the opposite effect on the contributors...and judging from the anectdotal evidence over the past year it seems to be going in that direction.
[/quote]



Don't you think that the sluggish world economy might be part of that equation as well?

« Reply #144 on: December 13, 2008, 23:18 »
0
Quote
Don't you think that the sluggish world economy might be part of that equation as well?

I dunno. If so, though, the results of that poll on the right side of the screen seem to indicate that iStock is the only one of the Big 6 suffering from a downturn due to the economy then.
« Last Edit: December 13, 2008, 23:20 by caspixel »

« Reply #145 on: December 14, 2008, 00:04 »
0
Quote
Don't you think that the sluggish world economy might be part of that equation as well?

I dunno. If so, though, the results of that poll on the right side of the screen seem to indicate that iStock is the only one of the Big 6 suffering from a downturn due to the economy then.
And wouldn't one think too that the recession should be bringing more customers to the micros from the trad agencies? I mean even in bad economic times images are still needed ... one would think a bad economy should be a boon to the micros?

« Reply #146 on: December 14, 2008, 03:42 »
0
Thankyou Caspixel, I remember when people of this forum asked how to get in contact with buyers if there is a forum, designer forum etc.
I think it would be great to actually have a section on microstockgroup for buyers and designers with topics of interest to them. Like where to get good deals etc. I guess no one else knows better where one can get a good deal and where the photographer still gets a good share then the people on this forum. I think that this can be very benefitial for both sides, the designer/buyer and the photographer/illustrator.

shank_ali

« Reply #147 on: December 14, 2008, 04:00 »
0
Jeez they let anyone join this forum.Now we have Caz next it will be ritamay,  all the witches from istock will be coming... ;D

« Reply #148 on: December 14, 2008, 09:54 »
0
Quote
Don't you think that the sluggish world economy might be part of that equation as well?

I dunno. If so, though, the results of that poll on the right side of the screen seem to indicate that iStock is the only one of the Big 6 suffering from a downturn due to the economy then.
And wouldn't one think too that the recession should be bringing more customers to the micros from the trad agencies? I mean even in bad economic times images are still needed ... one would think a bad economy should be a boon to the micros?


Indeed one would....and perhaps that is why the less expensive sites are seeing more volume in comparison. But my sales at IS are up since I went exclusive. Not up a lot mind you, but up. best match did kill me there this last change. I am hoping that the next change is more reasonable.

e-person

« Reply #149 on: December 14, 2008, 13:40 »
0
I am not a designer, although sometimes I design web sites and I do computer maintenance for graphic studios. Any time I can advice anyone to buy images, I send them to IS. They look as the most professional microstock site to me, even if I understand all microstock sites are run by kids. It's not that I am Ansel Adams either, you know...


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
42 Replies
10834 Views
Last post August 26, 2009, 05:39
by Karimala
7 Replies
6600 Views
Last post December 21, 2009, 10:32
by cthoman
Istock raises upload limits

Started by lisafx « 1 2  All » iStockPhoto.com

42 Replies
15808 Views
Last post September 22, 2010, 11:21
by Pixel-Pizzazz
26 Replies
15136 Views
Last post November 16, 2011, 19:08
by Jo Ann Snover
39 Replies
12156 Views
Last post June 11, 2014, 18:41
by Jo Ann Snover

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle