Author Topic: iStock to ThinkStock (Read 18845 times)

WarrenPrice · « **on:** December 30, 2011, 16:51 »

I've notice comments from the iStock Old-timers about images not being transferred to TS. My portfolio is just the opposite. Mine seem to be transferred immediately. My latest group of approved images (approved this week) are already in the iStock/Thinkstock collection.
Does that mean they will be sold ONLY at TS?
I'm not seeing much activity on iS but assumed that would be because of the best match changes?

Any ideas? Comments?

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #1 on:** December 30, 2011, 16:58 »

I'm not uploading to IS at the moment, so I can't comment on new images except to say there are still reports of things not showing up promptly on IS in search results.

As far as existing portfolio, I was opted out of the PP until the ASA changes force me in, but so far I'm up to 14 images out of 2,500 that have been transferred. It's been over a week since the number went from 13 to 14. What got transferred is very strange - couple of more recent images (one from 2011, one from 2010 for example) and a small portion of a very old series and one image from 2004. I can't see any pattern at all (alphabetical, age, sales, subject, keywords) in what's been moved so far.

aeonf · « **Reply #2 on:** December 30, 2011, 17:01 »

They have seem to have fixed the connector.
My portfolio on TS grows daily.

jamirae · « **Reply #3 on:** December 30, 2011, 22:32 »

Quote from: aeonf on December 30, 2011, 17:01

They have seem to have fixed the connector.
My portfolio on TS grows daily.

not mine. just 12 of my 1,440 images on iStock have been forced..er.. I mean moved over.

suemack · « **Reply #4 on:** December 31, 2011, 01:26 »

Not sure how many (if any) of mine have been transferred. I was opted out, till we had no option. How do I search to find out please?

lagereek · « **Reply #5 on:** December 31, 2011, 02:05 »

Quote from: suemack on December 31, 2011, 01:26

Not sure how many (if any) of mine have been transferred. I was opted out, till we had no option. How do I search to find out please?

Nice port with cats. You should do like, once a friend of mine, Bill Wegman, he used to put his dogs in all sorts of situations, dress them up and everything. his pics used to sell like crazy!

anyway, about TS? dont know, right now I have 5 shots transfered out of 1600.

best.

Newsfocus1 · « **Reply #6 on:** December 31, 2011, 03:29 »

Quote from: suemack on December 31, 2011, 01:26

Not sure how many (if any) of mine have been transferred. I was opted out, till we had no option. How do I search to find out please?

Sue, on both Photos.com and Thinkstock.com, just enter a search using your real name (not username) in inverted commas - so in my case "david fowler". Just tried yours, with no results. All my new uploads (excepting editorial) just go straight over -but I was in the PP from the start. I imagine it is going to be a lengthy job getting the backlog of newly conscripted contributors over.
Regards, David.

suemack · « **Reply #7 on:** December 31, 2011, 03:58 »

Thanks David. They may not have been moved over yet, had no pp sales so it's a definite possibility.

ayzek · « **Reply #8 on:** December 31, 2011, 05:35 »

54 of 1000 images. mostly last uploaded. also i am not going to send new images.

RacePhoto · « **Reply #9 on:** December 31, 2011, 14:42 »

All but two made it to ThinkStock. What's odd is I just closed StockXpert in Nov. and expected the "excluded" dupes would never get transferred once they ran that process. I don't know which two and I'm not going to search to find out!

I was always in the PP before the ThinkStock came online, maybe that has something to do with it.

And BTW mine show under three different names!

Check your real name, which was the original system, (with and without a space in between, I have some for both) then because of complaints they changed to Business Name:

If you aren't finding new files, it could be they are under Business Name: "business name" now, if you aren't finding old files, they could be under "Your Name" or "YourName" as it shows in your profile.

Nothing like making it confusing, but please try all three.

Here's another little test, but more random and difficult. If you search for an IS file number on ThinkStock, it will come up, even though the ThinkStock number is different and the IS file number is not visible. Hey, name isn't visible either, so there's more data associated with the files, than we know.

jpg image hosting

What I'm getting at, is your files may be there, but you don't know it.

Karimala · « **Reply #10 on:** December 31, 2011, 16:26 »

I've also been opted in since the beginning and all but seven are on TS. However, 40 images that I removed way back in April are also still on TS, so it appears the migration doesn't go both ways unless you specifically tell IS to remove them.

Update: Found the 40 I thought I'd removed...they are all Dollar Bin files. But that means seven are still missing after two years.

Sure wish IS would simplify the sales section.

mlwinphoto · « **Reply #11 on:** December 31, 2011, 17:19 »

Still at zero over on TS in spite of the forced move....hopefully it will stay that way.

traveler1116 · « **Reply #12 on:** December 31, 2011, 18:51 »

Quote from: mlwinphoto on December 31, 2011, 17:19

Still at zero over on TS in spite of the forced move....hopefully it will stay that way.

Nope http://www.thinkstockphotos.com/search/#mlwinphoto

RacePhoto · « **Reply #13 on:** December 31, 2011, 22:33 »

Maybe I shouldn't assume that people know how to search for their own images?

Go to ThinkstockPhoto.com in the search box enter your name between Quotes. If you get nothing, enter "yourname" with no space. If that doesn't work, you can always try your Business Name on IS and maybe that will show your images. There are three possible identities, depending on when the files were moved.

The whole bit about file ID numbers from IS being included on ThinkStock is just to point out that there's much more being searched than what we can see. Someone would have to use a trigger word in the title and in the caption of another and the Description of another and somehow sneak it through the Keywords. Then wait and see what IS actually searches.

For people who are looking for best match every day. maybe that would be something to keep you entertained in your futile efforts to try to understand the always moving targets on IS? Try to figure out what else is searched besides what we can see, that should be agreat fun.

I can't really do it, I kind of stopped uploading to IS, no new files.

mlwinphoto · « **Reply #14 on:** January 01, 2012, 00:39 »

Quote from: traveler1116 on December 31, 2011, 18:51

Quote from: mlwinphoto on December 31, 2011, 17:19
Still at zero over on TS in spite of the forced move....hopefully it will stay that way.

Nope http://www.thinkstockphotos.com/search/#mlwinphoto

D**n! I searched using my name with and without a space and came up empty; didn't realize I could search using my iStock business name. Lousy way to end the year....at least the bottle is close by.

RacePhoto · « **Reply #15 on:** January 03, 2012, 01:28 »

Quote from: mlwinphoto on January 01, 2012, 00:39

Quote from: traveler1116 on December 31, 2011, 18:51
Quote from: mlwinphoto on December 31, 2011, 17:19
Still at zero over on TS in spite of the forced move....hopefully it will stay that way.

Nope http://www.thinkstockphotos.com/search/#mlwinphoto

D**n! I searched using my name with and without a space and came up empty; didn't realize I could search using my iStock business name. Lousy way to end the year....at least the bottle is close by.

Yeah and for all I know there's a fourth way coming... But it's confusing and depends on when they moved them, so I thought people would want to know, it's kind of strange. Don't feel bad if you can't find them.

I keep thinking that not finding your images sold for 28 cents, might be good news? LOL

lagereek · « **Reply #16 on:** January 03, 2012, 02:05 »

Quote from: mlwinphoto on December 31, 2011, 17:19

Still at zero over on TS in spite of the forced move....hopefully it will stay that way.

Same here! forced move and hope it will stay this way.

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #17 on:** January 03, 2012, 06:57 »

Quote from: lagereek on January 03, 2012, 02:05

Quote from: mlwinphoto on December 31, 2011, 17:19
Still at zero over on TS in spite of the forced move....hopefully it will stay that way.

Same here! forced move and hope it will stay this way.

Nope. You've got four there http://www.thinkstockphotos.com/search/#lagereek/c=431,253,632,28,34,260,263,13,176,621,648,579,528,590,151,268,515,64,663,641,165,477,623,215,445,637,144,2,452,451,109,277,161,588,626,68,591,460,291,344,629,614,647/f=PIHV

stockastic · « **Reply #18 on:** January 03, 2012, 11:33 »

It's like the Titanic - all the rich, important people get in the lifeboats - and we small independents can stay on deck and listen to the band play.

WarrenPrice · « **Reply #19 on:** January 10, 2012, 13:15 »

Quote from: stockastic on January 03, 2012, 11:33

It's like the Titanic - all the rich, important people get in the lifeboats - and we small independents can stay on deck and listen to the band play.

I noticed a post in another thread suggesting that indy ports were being used to populate Thinkstock, especially the lesser known/popular indies. I believe that is happening to me. My accepted uploads are transferred almost immediately to TS. I've stopped (or nearly stopped) getting any sales on iS.

Now, I'm wondering how to get out of this situation? I don't want to have my images ignored by iS in favor of 28 cent sales at TS. But, the last 2 sales at iS were for 9 cents and 22 cents. Damned if you Do; Damned if you Don't.

How do we get out of this?

Karimala · « **Reply #20 on:** January 10, 2012, 13:30 »

I think there might something to your theory, Warren. I have a photo of hot dogs on an outdoor grill. It's sold a whoppin' five times at IS since August 2010. At the PP sites, it's sold 74 times. With results like that, it's no wonder my earnings are in the toilet.

My solution since March 2011 has been to slowly deactivate my portfolio and eventually leave. I joined IS as an alternative to the subscription sites, not to watch my images be exploited by yet another subscription model.

luissantos84 · « **Reply #21 on:** January 10, 2012, 13:49 »

Quote from: Karimala on January 10, 2012, 13:30

I think there might something to your theory, Warren. I have a photo of hot dogs on an outdoor grill. It's sold a whoppin' five times at IS since August 2010. At the PP sites, it's sold 74 times. With results like that, it's no wonder my earnings are in the toilet.

I have one that has 80 sales on TS and 0 at IS

helix7 · « **Reply #22 on:** January 10, 2012, 13:58 »

I'm convinced that TS is eating into istock sales, especially now that I've got some stats to look at. With 1/40th of my portfolio migrated over to TS, I'm making around $1 per day there. In theory, with my full portfolio migrated over I should be making around $40 per day, easily eclipsing my current istock daily earnings but not up to the level my istock earnings used to be at. The forced inclusion isn't going to make up for losses at istock, and instead is potentially taking money out of my pocket and putting it back into Getty's.

I'm actually surprised at the sales volume at ThinkStock. It's stronger than I expected. Still far from any threat to SS, but it does get me thinking about this issue again and if the day I thought would never come might actually be more conceivable than I previously thought. That day is the one in which it looks like TS is, in fact, a threat to SS and then I'm forced into making the decision to more fully support SS by dumping istock altogether and getting my portfolio out of ThinkStock.

I was betting against that ever happening, but now I'm not so sure.

stockastic · « **Reply #23 on:** January 10, 2012, 14:14 »

For months, I had 1 image at TS. I just recently made 10 images Photo+, and all but one (the best seller) showed up at TS right away. I tell IS I want to sell these at higher prices on IS, and they immediately dump them in the bargain bin at TS.

So for independents, Photo+ is just a sucker bet, a quick trip to TS instead of a boost in price. This agency is now officially brain-dead.

WarrenPrice · « **Reply #24 on:** January 10, 2012, 14:17 »

Quote from: helix7 on January 10, 2012, 13:58

I'm convinced that TS is eating into istock sales, especially now that I've got some stats to look at. With 1/40th of my portfolio migrated over to TS, I'm making around $1 per day there. In theory, with my full portfolio migrated over I should be making around $40 per day, easily eclipsing my current istock daily earnings but not up to the level my istock earnings used to be at. The forced inclusion isn't going to make up for losses at istock, and instead is potentially taking money out of my pocket and putting it back into Getty's.

I'm actually surprised at the sales volume at ThinkStock. It's stronger than I expected. Still far from any threat to SS, but it does get me thinking about this issue again and if the day I thought would never come might actually be more conceivable than I previously thought. That day is the one in which it looks like TS is, in fact, a threat to SS and then I'm forced into making the decision to more fully support SS by dumping istock altogether and getting my portfolio out of ThinkStock.

I was betting against that ever happening, but now I'm not so sure.

@Helix; I can't find that info. How do you see the daily earnings at TS?

luissantos84 · « **Reply #25 on:** January 10, 2012, 14:23 »

WarrenPrice · « **Reply #26 on:** January 10, 2012, 14:38 »

I need a translation, Luis.

luissantos84 · « **Reply #27 on:** January 10, 2012, 14:44 »

Quote from: WarrenPrice on January 10, 2012, 14:38

I need a translation, Luis.

go to Stats in your profile and then below you can see this chart and other for monthly downloads, the last one is regular downloads across all year

Karimala · « **Reply #28 on:** January 10, 2012, 15:40 »

You can also see how individual images are performing on TS and Photos.com under My Uploads by clicking one of the three DL links and then clinking the Partner Program link in the list of various types of sales.

WarrenPrice · « **Reply #29 on:** January 10, 2012, 16:02 »

Thank you; thank you; thank you. Now, all the stuff I see folks talking about is starting to make a lot more sense ... to me.

This is much more detailed (and accurate) than what I have been able to see in Deep Meta.

luissantos84 · « **Reply #30 on:** January 10, 2012, 16:32 »

Quote from: Karimala on January 10, 2012, 15:40

You can also see how individual images are performing on TS and Photos.com under My Uploads by clicking one of the three DL links and then clinking the Partner Program link in the list of various types of sales.

exactly

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #31 on:** January 10, 2012, 17:16 »

Quote from: stockastic on January 10, 2012, 14:14

For months, I had 1 image at TS. I just recently made 10 images Photo+, and all but one (the best seller) showed up at TS right away. I tell IS I want to sell these at higher prices on IS, and they immediately dump them in the bargain bin at TS.

So for independents, Photo+ is just a sucker bet, a quick trip to TS instead of a boost in price. This agency is now officially brain-dead.

It's possible it may have just been coincidence. If I wanted my portfolio at TS, I'm not sure what I'd do to get it there - I now have 17 files at TS (of 2500) and none of them are Photo+. I made an image Photo+ a day or two ago and it hasn't shown up at TS.

I don't know how IS is doing overall at getting the entire indie collection at iStock over to TS/photos.com, but I'm assuming they're nowhere near finished. Unless they're attracting new buyers, the earnings for those long-term supporters of the partner program are going to drop when they get all the files moved. My take on the big hit (if there is one) to SS is that it would come when (if?) they forced all the exclusive content at iStock onto TS/photos.com. At that point there'd be something other than a Getty discount that TS offered that SS didn't.

Gannet77 · « **Reply #32 on:** January 10, 2012, 18:04 »

Quote from: WarrenPrice on January 10, 2012, 16:02

Thank you; thank you; thank you. Now, all the stuff I see folks talking about is starting to make a lot more sense ... to me.

This is much more detailed (and accurate) than what I have been able to see in Deep Meta.

DeepMeta doesn't show any information on PP downloads, the API doesn't support them.

BTW, you can use my GreaseMonkey script here - http://www.bullersofbuchan.me.uk/istockphoto/stuff/is_myuploads_adddata_pp.user.js to show the last three downloads for each file - if you're running FireFox with GreaseMonkey, or Chrome.

When you go to the Partner Program list page on iStock, it will add a button saying "Add Sales Data". When you click the button, it adds an extra column to the list with the last three downloads showing. Best to order the list by DLs first.

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #33 on:** January 10, 2012, 19:51 »

There are lots of things about where Getty thinks it's going with Thinkstock that I don't understand (put more bluntly; I can't see how it could possibly be a good idea).

Case in point is their current free image which is from the Stockbyte collection. It's on Getty Images priced from $10 to $350 and also on TS where you could buy it via an Image Pack for $20. It's even credited with the photographer's name, so it makes it very easy to find elsewhere.

wut · « **Reply #34 on:** January 10, 2012, 20:03 »

Quote from: jsnover on January 10, 2012, 19:51

Case in point is their current free image which is from the Stockbyte collection. It's on Getty Images priced from $10 to $350 and also on TS where you could buy it via an Image Pack for $20. It's even credited with the photographer's name, so it makes it very easy to find elsewhere.

Wow, really ?!?!?!?! I can understand files from IS' main collection selling there, can't really understand why can't we at least opt out the P+ files, which we obviously think high of, but selling the same image for 1/1000 of the price is beyond my comprehension, even junkies sell stolen stuff for at least 20% of the market price

. I hope y'all can follow my logic or better said what I really think about this

lisafx · « **Reply #35 on:** January 10, 2012, 20:37 »

Quote from: wut on January 10, 2012, 20:03

Wow, really ?!?!?!?! I can understand files from IS' main collection selling there, can't really understand why can't we at least opt out the P+ files, which we obviously think high of, but selling the same image for 1/1000 of the price is beyond my comprehension, even junkies sell stolen stuff for at least 20% of the market price . I hope y'all can follow my logic or better said what I really think about this

Agree 100%. They make all these collections to differentiate between higher and lower quality content, then shuttle it all to their subscription dumping ground. Makes no logical sense at all.

Elenathewise · « **Reply #36 on:** January 12, 2012, 13:36 »

Quote from: jsnover on January 10, 2012, 19:51

There are lots of things about where Getty thinks it's going with Thinkstock that I don't understand (put more bluntly; I can't see how it could possibly be a good idea).

Case in point is their current free image which is from the Stockbyte collection. It's on Getty Images priced from $10 to $350 and also on TS where you could buy it via an Image Pack for $20. It's even credited with the photographer's name, so it makes it very easy to find elsewhere.

There has to be differences in licensing. They can't sell absolutely same product for 350 and 99 dollars. (let's say I just need a high res of this one image, so I buy the cheapest image pack for 99 dollars and get the image instead of paying 350 on getty site). That would really piss off customers who paid the full price. I doubt that Getty would do that.

StockyEva · « **Reply #37 on:** January 13, 2012, 05:43 »

Hi all,
I used to sell more of my vectors to PP before the change and still I was doing very well on IS. But now - really - I have hardly any DL-s... $:-\$
Thanks for all the info in the thread.
I`m really wondering what to do next.

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #38 on:** January 13, 2012, 06:11 »

Quote from: Elenathewise on January 12, 2012, 13:36

Quote from: jsnover on January 10, 2012, 19:51
There are lots of things about where Getty thinks it's going with Thinkstock that I don't understand (put more bluntly; I can't see how it could possibly be a good idea).

Case in point is their current free image which is from the Stockbyte collection. It's on Getty Images priced from $10 to $350 and also on TS where you could buy it via an Image Pack for $20. It's even credited with the photographer's name, so it makes it very easy to find elsewhere.

I think all the subscription services stipulate that you can only continue using a photo for as long as you have an active subscription. So you need to pay $299 (or whatever) every month. Don't ask me how that is being enforced, though.

There has to be differences in licensing. They can't sell absolutely same product for 350 and 99 dollars. (let's say I just need a high res of this one image, so I buy the cheapest image pack for 99 dollars and get the image instead of paying 350 on getty site). That would really piss off customers who paid the full price. I doubt that Getty would do that.

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #39 on:** January 13, 2012, 11:59 »

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on January 13, 2012, 06:11

I think all the subscription services stipulate that you can only continue using a photo for as long as you have an active subscription. So you need to pay $299 (or whatever) every month. Don't ask me how that is being enforced, though.

Thinkstock sells "Image packs" - small credit bundles in effect - so for $20 ($99 for 5 is the smallest you can buy) you get to buy a license to the image. No subscription requirement. It's possible that the maximum print run or other things are different between the Getty License and TS, but even if you add on an EL (and their licensing section says they have extended licenses for image packs and for subscriptions, but I don't see the prices for those on the site).

And the subscription license says you can keep using a photo after the subscription term in projects that were started during the term of the subscription. How on earth you could police that I don't know; what's a revision of an existing design vs. a new project.

Karimala · « **Reply #40 on:** January 13, 2012, 12:08 »

Quote from: jsnover on January 13, 2012, 11:59

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on January 13, 2012, 06:11
I think all the subscription services stipulate that you can only continue using a photo for as long as you have an active subscription. So you need to pay $299 (or whatever) every month. Don't ask me how that is being enforced, though.
And the subscription license says you can keep using a photo after the subscription term in projects that were started during the term of the subscription. How on earth you could police that I don't know; what's a revision of an existing design vs. a new project.

Our ASA says the same.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: iStock to ThinkStock (Read 18845 times)

WarrenPrice

lagereek

ayzek

RacePhoto

mlwinphoto

traveler1116

RacePhoto

mlwinphoto

RacePhoto

lagereek

WarrenPrice

helix7

WarrenPrice

WarrenPrice

WarrenPrice

wut

lisafx

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors