MicrostockGroup

Agency Based Discussion => iStockPhoto.com => Topic started by: vuk8691 on September 07, 2012, 09:17

Title: Istock vs others
Post by: vuk8691 on September 07, 2012, 09:17
Does some non-exclusive photographer can tell me how much is he selling from various stock agencies in the last year? I am particularly interested in selling Istockphoto compared to other agencies.
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: markrhiggins on September 07, 2012, 09:34
easy to say that SS way outsells IS. The thing is however IS limits uploads so most people end up having a lot more images in SS. With the changes to royalties IS only gets worse. IS used to be a great place to sell as an independent. Now it is just for a very exclusive crowd. I would not take images down but not keen on uploading. Still not sure how they sell an image for 8 cents commission to me. Alamy gave me more revenue over the last 30 days than the micros.
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: packerguy on September 07, 2012, 10:03
Take a look at the poll results on the right.
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: vuk8691 on September 07, 2012, 10:12
easy to say that SS way outsells IS. The thing is however IS limits uploads so most people end up having a lot more images in SS. With the changes to royalties IS only gets worse. IS used to be a great place to sell as an independent. Now it is just for a very exclusive crowd. I would not take images down but not keen on uploading. Still not sure how they sell an image for 8 cents commission to me. Alamy gave me more revenue over the last 30 days than the micros.
Yes but SS sales photos for nothing. In addition, there taxes for non-US Citizens of oversize.
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: traveler1116 on September 07, 2012, 10:23
Still not sure how they sell an image for 8 cents commission to me.

http://www.istockphoto.com/help/sell-stock/rate-schedule (http://www.istockphoto.com/help/sell-stock/rate-schedule) You get paid based on your percentage and what the buyer pays.
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: ShadySue on September 07, 2012, 10:26
Still not sure how they sell an image for 8 cents commission to me.

[url]http://www.istockphoto.com/help/sell-stock/rate-schedule[/url] ([url]http://www.istockphoto.com/help/sell-stock/rate-schedule[/url]) You get paid based on your percentage and what the buyer pays.


But note that the minimum amount payable by a buyer is not disclosed to photographers, i.e. the minimum amount is not visible on any page (and in any case the published prices can be different on different pages at the same time, though hopefully they sorted that out in the recent outage.
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: PixelsAway on September 07, 2012, 12:38
my stats for the first half of 2012:

Payout Structure from Microstock Agencies in 2012 (http://microstock.pixelsaway.com/payout-structure-from-microstock-agencies-in-2012/)
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: traveler1116 on September 07, 2012, 13:08
my stats for the first half of 2012:

Payout Structure from Microstock Agencies in 2012 ([url]http://microstock.pixelsaway.com/payout-structure-from-microstock-agencies-in-2012/[/url])

Why aren't you exclusive?  You would surely be making more money and doing less work.
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: EmberMike on September 07, 2012, 13:38
Yes but SS sales photos for nothing. In addition, there taxes for non-US Citizens of oversize.

SS sells subscriptions and on-demand single images and image packs. None of which are sold for "nothing". In fact, you'll see some forum posts around here talking about the recent addition of the sensitive use license at SS that is resulting in some individual $100+ sales for people. In addition to the increasingly popular single OD and multiple image OD pack, which generally result in sales royalties ranging from around $2 to $19.

Overall the RPD (return per download) at SS is low due to the subscription model. But even then, it's not as low as you think. My average RPD at SS is usually around $0.60.

If RPD is the most important thing to you, skip SS. If bottom-line overall earnings are more important to you, try SS.

Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: Jo Ann Snover on September 07, 2012, 15:38
...With the changes to royalties IS only gets worse. IS used to be a great place to sell as an independent. Now it is just for a very exclusive crowd. I would not take images down but not keen on uploading. Still not sure how they sell an image for 8 cents commission to me...

I happen to have an image (#17206019) I uploaded last July (2011) to IS which provides some data on why it's still an agency worth contributing to, even for independents. I became independent again at the beginning of June 2011 so none of the sales of this image were influenced by me once having been exclusive. 117 sales for a total of $305.17 - an average of $2.61 per sale. There were no ELs for this image but it has been Photo+ for all but the first 3 or 4 sales.

I uploaded that image to SS (81634720) and it's had 101 sales for $83.90, an average of  83 cents a sale.

IS is a miserable excuse for an agency but it can still earn for us, so I'd say you'd do well to upload there if you're looking to maximize your earnings.

Edited to add that at DT the image (20451278) has sold 13 times for $17.38 (average $1.33 per sale). Rather lackluster showing IMO.
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: vonkara on September 07, 2012, 15:54
...With the changes to royalties IS only gets worse. IS used to be a great place to sell as an independent. Now it is just for a very exclusive crowd. I would not take images down but not keen on uploading. Still not sure how they sell an image for 8 cents commission to me...

I happen to have an image (#17206019) I uploaded last July (2011) to IS which provides some data on why it's still an agency worth contributing to, even for independents. I became independent again at the beginning of June 2011 so none of the sales of this image were influenced by me once having been exclusive. 117 sales for a total of $305.17 - an average of $2.61 per sale. There were no ELs for this image but it has been Photo+ for all but the first 3 or 4 sales.

I uploaded that image to SS (81634720) and it's had 101 sales for $83.90, an average of  83 cents a sale.


In the opposite situation, did your old deactivated images at SS and DT kept selling after enabling them again, or did they lose their selling rate after going independent? This is particularly important at SS since their search engine advantage files performance I believe. I am concerned at files who has been deactivated and not selling for a long time on Shutterstock.
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: Jo Ann Snover on September 07, 2012, 17:11
DT required everything to be re-uploaded - although they "deactivate" images, they do remove them after a while and my old ones were gone. So everything there was uploaded in May 2011 or after.

For SS I had about 600 of my images deactivated (I had removed the others before realizing I could just opt out). It's hard to know if the old best sellers have suffered - you can't get a list of sale dates on SS AFAIK. But I do see them in the daily sales summaries some of the time. I'm guessing they aren't selling at the same rate, but are selling.
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: heywoody on September 07, 2012, 17:19
Are you currently an exclusive with IS and wondering what it's like to play the field or someone starting off?  If the latter, IS is a tough place to start and, if the former, lot's of threads on the subject.
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: PixelsAway on September 07, 2012, 21:18
my stats for the first half of 2012:

Payout Structure from Microstock Agencies in 2012 ([url]http://microstock.pixelsaway.com/payout-structure-from-microstock-agencies-in-2012/[/url])

Why aren't you exclusive?  You would surely be making more money and doing less work.


Exclusive? In IS? Seriously?  :o
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: traveler1116 on September 07, 2012, 22:23
my stats for the first half of 2012:

Payout Structure from Microstock Agencies in 2012 ([url]http://microstock.pixelsaway.com/payout-structure-from-microstock-agencies-in-2012/[/url])

Why aren't you exclusive?  You would surely be making more money and doing less work.


Exclusive? In IS? Seriously?  :o

Yeah you would be making at least 4x more as an exclusive than as a nonexclusive.
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: nicku on September 08, 2012, 01:57
easy to say that SS way outsells IS. The thing is however IS limits uploads so most people end up having a lot more images in SS. With the changes to royalties IS only gets worse. IS used to be a great place to sell as an independent. Now it is just for a very exclusive crowd. I would not take images down but not keen on uploading. Still not sure how they sell an image for 8 cents commission to me. Alamy gave me more revenue over the last 30 days than the micros.

Exactly.... I am accepted as a Contributor on IS, BUT at a upload limit of 18 pics/week it will take almost 3 years to upload my existing 2000+ port on the site, and that without producing any new content ( don't mention the commissions levels). I know is not the best business plan but i still keep my decision regarding IS until something changes; and they can start with the upload limit.

Nik
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: sharpshot on September 08, 2012, 02:02
my stats for the first half of 2012:

Payout Structure from Microstock Agencies in 2012 ([url]http://microstock.pixelsaway.com/payout-structure-from-microstock-agencies-in-2012/[/url])

Why aren't you exclusive?  You would surely be making more money and doing less work.

Exclusive? In IS? Seriously?  :o

Yeah you would be making at least 4x more as an exclusive than as a nonexclusive.

4x my istock earnings would be a big loss on my non-exclusive earnings.  It's an option for some people but it wouldn't work for me.
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: ShadySue on September 08, 2012, 04:30
my stats for the first half of 2012:

Payout Structure from Microstock Agencies in 2012 ([url]http://microstock.pixelsaway.com/payout-structure-from-microstock-agencies-in-2012/[/url])

Why aren't you exclusive?  You would surely be making more money and doing less work.


Exclusive? In IS? Seriously?  :o

Yeah you would be making at least 4x more as an exclusive than as a nonexclusive.


That is a possibility, certainly; but there is NO guarantee.
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: PixelsAway on September 08, 2012, 07:15
my stats for the first half of 2012:

Payout Structure from Microstock Agencies in 2012 ([url]http://microstock.pixelsaway.com/payout-structure-from-microstock-agencies-in-2012/[/url])

Why aren't you exclusive?  You would surely be making more money and doing less work.


Exclusive? In IS? Seriously?  :o

Yeah you would be making at least 4x more as an exclusive than as a nonexclusive.


The IS contribution to my total microstock income dropped from 50% to 30% during last 1.5-2 years.
But ... it's not money what makes you happy  :)

Since my living depends on microstock income I prefer to diversify.
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: EmberMike on September 08, 2012, 09:19
Yeah you would be making at least 4x more as an exclusive than as a nonexclusive.

How do you figure that?

If his istock earnings are currently 31% of the total, to hit 4x in exclusivity he'd have to see a jump of 13x current istock earnings. I've never heard of exclusivity giving that sort of boost.

Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: heywoody on September 08, 2012, 10:57
easy to say that SS way outsells IS. The thing is however IS limits uploads so most people end up having a lot more images in SS. With the changes to royalties IS only gets worse. IS used to be a great place to sell as an independent. Now it is just for a very exclusive crowd. I would not take images down but not keen on uploading. Still not sure how they sell an image for 8 cents commission to me. Alamy gave me more revenue over the last 30 days than the micros.

Exactly.... I am accepted as a Contributor on IS, BUT at a upload limit of 18 pics/week it will take almost 3 years to upload my existing 2000+ port on the site, and that without producing any new content ( don't mention the commissions levels). I know is not the best business plan but i still keep my decision regarding IS until something changes; and they can start with the upload limit.

Nik

You could upload the guts of 1000 images in a year, acceptance is unlikely to be 100% but still should earn more than the whole 2000 on lower ranked sites. 
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: ShadySue on September 08, 2012, 10:59
Yeah you would be making at least 4x more as an exclusive than as a nonexclusive.

How do you figure that?

If his istock earnings are currently 31% of the total, to hit 4x in exclusivity he'd have to see a jump of 13x current istock earnings. I've never heard of exclusivity giving that sort of boost.

If he got loads of unique lifestyle images promoted to Agency and selling at that price range?

I wouldn't hold my breath, but maybe Traveller knows the OP's port (I don't).
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: traveler1116 on September 08, 2012, 12:38
Yeah you would be making at least 4x more as an exclusive than as a nonexclusive.

How do you figure that?

If his istock earnings are currently 31% of the total, to hit 4x in exclusivity he'd have to see a jump of 13x current istock earnings. I've never heard of exclusivity giving that sort of boost.
Sorry what I meant was 4x more as an exclusive at istock than as a nonexclusive at istock which is around a 20% increase in total earnings.  I got the number by looking at my own figures.  Looking back at the last 100 sales of mine I found that I got 212% of the redeemed credits that I would have gotten if I was nonexclusive and that my royalty rate would have about doubled which comes to about 4x what I would have earned as a nonexclusive (at istock).  I think for a lot of us a 20% increase in total earnings is very significant, especially when it involves less work.
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: Freedom on September 08, 2012, 14:51
You are either very lucky or have a great port, Traveller. After I became exclusive, even though I have tripled the size of my port, my overall revenue is not four times more than when I was non-ex. However, in a couple of lucky month, it was close.
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: traveler1116 on September 08, 2012, 15:25
You are either very lucky or have a great port, Traveller. After I became exclusive, even though I have tripled the size of my port, my overall revenue is not four times more than when I was non-ex. However, in a couple of lucky month, it was close.
Read the post before yours.
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: Freedom on September 08, 2012, 17:57
Traveller, my last post was actually a response to your post above it. Nope, I am not making 4 times more than what I made from IS before becoming exclusive, in case my previous posts casted any doubts.
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: traveler1116 on September 08, 2012, 19:36
Traveller, my last post was actually a response to your post above it. Nope, I am not making 4 times more than what I made from IS before becoming exclusive, in case my previous posts casted any doubts.
When did you go exclusive?  The point I was making is that your income on IS would pretty much have to go up 4x because of the difference in RCs and royalty % between nonexclusives and exclusives as long as sales stayed the same.
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: ShadySue on September 08, 2012, 20:21
Traveller, my last post was actually a response to your post above it. Nope, I am not making 4 times more than what I made from IS before becoming exclusive, in case my previous posts casted any doubts.
When did you go exclusive?  The point I was making is that your income on IS would pretty much have to go up 4x because of the difference in RCs and royalty % between nonexclusives and exclusives as long as sales stayed the same.

That's the rub. If your port has unique and in-demand photos, yes, no bother.
If your port has a lot of competent stuff which is in fair supply, you are immediately competing against indie files which are lower-priced. Against that, the best match does generally favour exclusive files, but someone price-conscious can always scrutinise the icons. If you get a lot of V/A files, or choose to set your prices to E+, you could get the images mirrored on Getty, if they get round to doing it. And some might consider it an advantage that exclusives don't have to participate in the PP (for the moment. I did notice that JK wants to push Thinkstock, so who knows how long we can keep that 'perk'?)

So higher prices and higher %age (maybe not much more if you're on a lower RC rate) against possibly-dwindling sales.

Lots of people have moved in one direction or the other, and there's no clear winner between independence and exclusivity, if you have the time and inclination to submit across more sites. Probably if you're only going to submit to one, iS is still the one.

Anyway, it's all constantly changing. You can make a careful assessment of the pros and cons, then one or more site can hit you a flanker from nowhere that leaves your accounting in shreds.
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: Freedom on September 08, 2012, 21:13
I agree with Sue.

I became exclusive about the time when RC was announced and have since advanced to a higher RC level. I had some good months before the summer slump and thought I had a good chance to advance to an even higher level. But the slow first week of September does not look promising to me, plus E+, V&A have slowed down too. I am not considering to be independent any time soon and hope, wishfully maybe, that IS will pick up.
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: Reef on September 09, 2012, 03:48
I agree with Sue.

I became exclusive about the time when RC was announced and have since advanced to a higher RC level. I had some good months before the summer slump and thought I had a good chance to advance to an even higher level. But the slow first week of September does not look promising to me, plus E+, V&A have slowed down too. I am not considering to be independent any time soon and hope, wishfully maybe, that IS will pick up.

September is traditionally my slowest month and it seems to be holding true again this year.
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: Freedom on September 09, 2012, 07:39
September has always been my best month of the year. I just have to keep my fingers crossed and hope for a miracle for this year.
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: ShadySue on September 09, 2012, 07:51
September has always been my best month of the year. I just have to keep my fingers crossed and hope for a miracle for this year.
It might take a miracle. I do my weekly stats around midnight on a Sunday, but ATM I'm on my worst week for dls since April 2007 (started in late Dec 06). I lost my stats from the beginning (late Jan 2006) in a HD failure. An EL on Tuesday has retrieved the $$ to some extent. And I can't blame it all on site issues: others have been getting at least 'normal' sales this week.
Pollyanna is telling me there are still ten hours to go before my weekly stats, but I'm not that hopeful.
This year the daily, weekly and monthly fluctuations for my port are far, far greater than before.
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: fotoVoyager on September 10, 2012, 13:46
My iStock sales have completely crashed today. Used to be I sold 150 images a day - today I've sold barely 10.

I would ask what was going on over there in the forums but you just get a slap for daring to complain.

You'd have to be crazy to go exclusive there now.
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: gostwyck on September 10, 2012, 14:35
My iStock sales have completely crashed today. Used to be I sold 150 images a day - today I've sold barely 10.

I would ask what was going on over there in the forums but you just get a slap for daring to complain.

You'd have to be crazy to go exclusive there now.

Trust me, the sluggish start to September is not just at IS. My numbers are well down across the board.

I was really surprised that Freedom said that they went exclusive immediately after the RC debacle. That was the point where 'the great question of exclusivity' suddenly disappeared forever as far as I was concerned.
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: Freedom on September 10, 2012, 14:47
Well, my exclusivity was planned long before RC was announced. That being said, I doubt if I would do better had I stayed independent, given all the complaints I read about other sites. Did IS meet my expectation? Heck no.
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: traveler1116 on September 11, 2012, 01:00
My iStock sales have completely crashed today. Used to be I sold 150 images a day - today I've sold barely 10.

I would ask what was going on over there in the forums but you just get a slap for daring to complain.

You'd have to be crazy to go exclusive there now.
This month has been rough for me too (on pace to be half the sales of last month) but what I was saying is that the RC increase and royalty % increase just from becoming exclusive means istock earnings will quadruple.  So if you are making 25%+ of total income on IS then you are pretty much guaranteed to be doing better, whether that holds up over time is a different story.
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: gostwyck on September 11, 2012, 02:11
... but what I was saying is that the RC increase and royalty % increase just from becoming exclusive means istock earnings will quadruple.  So if you are making 25%+ of total income on IS then you are pretty much guaranteed to be doing better, whether that holds up over time is a different story.

Ha ha ha! Very good joke. For a moment I even thought you were being serious! *wipes tears from eyes*
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: ShadySue on September 11, 2012, 04:03
My iStock sales have completely crashed today. Used to be I sold 150 images a day - today I've sold barely 10.

I would ask what was going on over there in the forums but you just get a slap for daring to complain.

You'd have to be crazy to go exclusive there now.
This month has been rough for me too (on pace to be half the sales of last month) but what I was saying is that the RC increase and royalty % increase just from becoming exclusive means istock earnings will quadruple.  So if you are making 25%+ of total income on IS then you are pretty much guaranteed to be doing better, whether that holds up over time is a different story.

You'll be doing better in RPD, but whether your exclusive price increase means your buyers go elsewhere all hinges on how unique/desireable your work is.
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: traveler1116 on September 11, 2012, 10:18
... but what I was saying is that the RC increase and royalty % increase just from becoming exclusive means istock earnings will quadruple.  So if you are making 25%+ of total income on IS then you are pretty much guaranteed to be doing better, whether that holds up over time is a different story.

Ha ha ha! Very good joke. For a moment I even thought you were being serious! *wipes tears from eyes*
I'm not sure I understand why you think this isn't true?  All things being equal earnings on istock should quadruple for most people.  Go check the pricing differences between nonexclusives and exclusives (the difference between an XS file is a 400% increase in price for example).  When I did the math for my portfolio I found that the RC difference and royalty % difference would mean that in going nonexclusive my earnings on IS would drop by over 75% only from those two factors.   Can you show me the error in this?
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: traveler1116 on September 11, 2012, 10:26
You'll be doing better in RPD, but if your exclusive price increase means your buyers all hinges on how unique/desireable your work is.
I'm not so sure about that, I think that with exclusive files getting better placement in the search those two factors (price vs. best match placement) negate each other.
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: ShadySue on September 11, 2012, 11:14
You'll be doing better in RPD, but if your exclusive price increase means your buyers all hinges on how unique/desireable your work is.
I'm not so sure about that, I think that with exclusive files getting better placement in the search those two factors (price vs. best match placement) negate each other.
Most, but not all, longer term contributors are reporting many fewer dls compared to previous years, though each earns more. Plus with changing royalties, nothing is certain.
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: PixelsAway on September 11, 2012, 11:16
I started my microstock photography with submitting to IS almost 5 years ago, but very early I made decision to be independent and diversify my submissions. So, I've never had a problem with that "exclusive-independent" dilemma, "sitting on a fence" etc.

BTW. I am still getting around 30% of earnings from IS. If switching to the exclusive status would increase 4x my sales at IS, it would mean only 20% increase of my total income. It doesn't look very exciting, especially, with the current condition of IS.
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: traveler1116 on September 11, 2012, 11:21
You'll be doing better in RPD, but if your exclusive price increase means your buyers all hinges on how unique/desireable your work is.
I'm not so sure about that, I think that with exclusive files getting better placement in the search those two factors (price vs. best match placement) negate each other.
Most, but not all, longer term contributors are reporting many fewer dls compared to previous years, though each earns more. Plus with changing royalties, nothing is certain.
Some things are certain like RPD is around 4x higher as an exclusive, it's less work to contribute to IS alone than to IS plus other sites, etc..  If most long term contributors are seeing falling DLs that doesn't really mean anything either if nonexclusives see their downloads falling and still are making 25%+ of their income from IS, it only changes the equation if exclusives are seeing DLs fall at a disproportionate rate compared to nonexclusives since the calculus is based on relative income at IS vs. total income.
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: traveler1116 on September 11, 2012, 11:25
I started my microstock photography with submitting to IS almost 5 years ago, but very early I made decision to be independent and diversify my submissions. So, I've never had a problem with that "exclusive-independent" dilemma, "sitting on a fence" etc.

BTW. I am still getting around 30% of earnings from IS. If switching to the exclusive status would increase 4x my sales at IS, it would mean only 20% increase of my total income. It doesn't look very exciting, especially, with the current condition of IS.
That makes sense.  I was only pointing out that the increase in sales is about 4x since I don't think many people realize the difference in RCs is such a big factor now, it wasn't like that a couple years ago when the only real change between exclusive and nonexclusive was the royalty %.
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: gostwyck on September 11, 2012, 11:31
I'm not sure I understand why you think this isn't true?  All things being equal earnings on istock should quadruple for most people.  Go check the pricing differences between nonexclusives and exclusives (the difference between an XS file is a 400% increase in price for example).  When I did the math for my portfolio I found that the RC difference and royalty % difference would mean that in going nonexclusive my earnings on IS would drop by over 75% only from those two factors.   Can you show me the error in this?

Your maths might be correct right now but I certainly wouldn't go exclusive to find out. My data suggests that Istock have been hemorrhaging customers at an significant rate for some time and that seems to be accelerating recently. I've just projected my stats for September, based on the first 10 days of the month, and Istock are on target to drop to a staggering 17% of my earnings. Last September they were at 30% and before that over 36%. Maybe  there's been a change to the best match or something but the future doesn't look too bright if others are experiencing similar drops in sales.
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: gostwyck on September 11, 2012, 11:42
Some things are certain like RPD is around 4x higher as an exclusive, it's less work to contribute to IS alone than to IS plus other sites, etc..  If most long term contributors are seeing falling DLs that doesn't really mean anything either if nonexclusives see their downloads falling and still are making 25%+ of their income from IS, it only changes the equation if exclusives are seeing DLs fall at a disproportionate rate compared to nonexclusives since the calculus is based on relative income at IS vs. total income.

I don't think that is 'certain'. According to Aluxum in an earlier thread he reported his RPD, as an exclusive on 40%, to be around $5.50. As an independent on 18% my RPD at Istock is about $1.68. If I had been exclusive last month, with the same number of sales, then with an RPD of $5.50 I would have lost nearly 30% of my earnings. Maybe the better best match placement as an exclusive would have helped but I don't think the equation is anything like as clear as you insist.
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: traveler1116 on September 11, 2012, 11:51
I don't think that is 'certain'. According to Aluxum in an earlier thread he reported his RPD, as an exclusive on 40%, to be around $5.50. As an independent on 18% my RPD at Istock is about $1.68. If I had been exclusive last month, with the same number of sales, then with an RPD of $5.50 I would have lost nearly 30% of my earnings. Maybe the better best match placement as an exclusive would have helped but I don't think the equation is anything like as clear as you insist.
I'm a little surprised by that RPD.  I wonder if he is talking about since he started with IS back in 2009?  My royalty rate is not 40% but last month my RPD was significantly higher than that.  I also see that he doesn't have very many files in E+ so that could be a factor too.  I would guess his recent RPD is more than 4x yours which would match my numbers as well for my royalty rate.
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: gostwyck on September 11, 2012, 12:11
I'm a little surprised by that RPD.  I wonder if he is talking about since he started with IS back in 2009?  My royalty rate is not 40% but last month my RPD was significantly higher than that.  I also see that he doesn't have very many files in E+ so that could be a factor too.  I would guess his recent RPD is more than 4x yours which would match my numbers as well for my royalty rate.


We can all 'guess'! Unfortunately that falls somewhat short of your 'certain' statement. The interview with John Lund was published on 31st August and this is what he said;

What is the average amount that you receive from an iStockphoto download?
The average net amount I receive now from an iStock download is $5.50. This depends on where you stand in iStock. Vetta and Agency shooters have a much higher average while non-exclusives have a much lower one.

http://blog.johnlund.com/2012/08/from-tradtional-to-microstock-cristian.html (http://blog.johnlund.com/2012/08/from-tradtional-to-microstock-cristian.html)

Christian appears to have been very open, honest and generous with his information so I have no reason to disbelieve him. My portfolio in terms of subject has many similarities so I'd regard his RPD figure as a reliable guide.
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: traveler1116 on September 11, 2012, 12:46
I'm a little surprised by that RPD.  I wonder if he is talking about since he started with IS back in 2009?  My royalty rate is not 40% but last month my RPD was significantly higher than that.  I also see that he doesn't have very many files in E+ so that could be a factor too.  I would guess his recent RPD is more than 4x yours which would match my numbers as well for my royalty rate.


We can all 'guess'! Unfortunately that falls somewhat short of your 'certain' statement. The interview with John Lund was published on 31st August and this is what he said;

What is the average amount that you receive from an iStockphoto download?
The average net amount I receive now from an iStock download is $5.50. This depends on where you stand in iStock. Vetta and Agency shooters have a much higher average while non-exclusives have a much lower one.

[url]http://blog.johnlund.com/2012/08/from-tradtional-to-microstock-cristian.html[/url] ([url]http://blog.johnlund.com/2012/08/from-tradtional-to-microstock-cristian.html[/url])

Christian appears to have been very open, honest and generous with his information so I have no reason to disbelieve him. My portfolio in terms of subject has many similarities so I'd regard his RPD figure as a reliable guide.

I agree it's probably reliable but a lot of things have changed within the last year or two so I could say my RPD over the last three years or over the last three months and both would be accurate but they would differ a lot.  For instance my RPD as an exclusive (over the last 3 years) is very close to what he said while my recent RPD (over the last 12 months) is significantly higher.  You also say your portfolios are similar so one would expect similar sales and similar sales for nonexclusives vs. exclusives are about 4x less RPD.  Those figures all match what I see as well. 
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: landbysea on September 11, 2012, 12:57
FWIW my iStock RPD at the 35% royalty level is around $12.00. It varies. In June it was $16. I am not counting PP dls or royalties. I only put my slow sellers in there and it doesn't amount to a lot of income. About 1% of my port is V/A. In addition I make money for my files at Getty, which hopefully will go up after the E+ mirroring.
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: PixelsAway on September 11, 2012, 14:00
my RPD from iStock is quite pathetic ...

http://microstock.pixelsaway.com/how-much-am-i-paid-for-a-picture-download-from-microstock/ (http://microstock.pixelsaway.com/how-much-am-i-paid-for-a-picture-download-from-microstock/)

(http://microstock.pixelsaway.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/dollar-download.gif)
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: Freedom on September 11, 2012, 14:04
For whatever reason, my E+ images are not selling well anymore. A couple of days ago, one regular XS file only generated less than $1, while other XS regular sales will likely fetch more than twice as much. I have surpassed my current RC target but it will be nearly impossible to reach a higher level unless I have a lot of E+, V&A sales before the end of the year.
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: Reef on September 11, 2012, 15:23
I never understand the animosity for those who think being exclusive is dumb.

Risky with potentially less earnings, Yes!

But they are not flooding the market for a short term buck.
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: gostwyck on September 11, 2012, 15:36
I never understand the animosity for those who think being exclusive is dumb.

Risky with potentially less earnings, Yes!

But they are not flooding the market for a short term buck.

But then again independent contributors are helping  to ensure a widespread market for our work. Handing over all the power to one agency (if we all went exclusive) would likely be much worse. Don't forget that Istock never paid anyone more than 20% until SS, CanStockPhoto and DT arrived on the scene and we independent contributors signed up with them.
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: Reef on September 11, 2012, 15:46
I never understand the animosity for those who think being exclusive is dumb.

Risky with potentially less earnings, Yes!

But they are not flooding the market for a short term buck.

But then again independent contributors are helping  to ensure a widespread market for our work. Handing over all the power to one agency (if we all went exclusive) would likely be much worse. Don't forget that Istock never paid anyone more than 20% until SS, CanStockPhoto and DT arrived on the scene and we independent contributors signed up with them.

I understand that. It's a dilemma!
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: ShadySue on September 11, 2012, 16:31
FWIW my iStock RPD at the 35% royalty level is around $12.00. It varies. In June it was $16. I am not counting PP dls or royalties. I only put my slow sellers in there and it doesn't amount to a lot of income. About 1% of my port is V/A. In addition I make money for my files at Getty, which hopefully will go up after the E+ mirroring.

To balance that, my monthly RPDs at 30% royalty this year have varied from $3.72 to $5.52, which includes a bit of income I get from Getty (only a very tiny number of V, about 0.35%).  That's much lower than just the difference between 30% and 35%.
More and more often I'm hopping over to Sean's calculator when I see yet another low credit value sale. A higher than ever proportion of my buyers are buying with well under advertised price bulk credits or discounts offered  because of their cockups being disseminated throughout the web.
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: lisafx on September 11, 2012, 17:24
I never understand the animosity for those who think being exclusive is dumb.

Risky with potentially less earnings, Yes!

But they are not flooding the market for a short term buck.

Animosity?  Really?  Can you point me to that?  I am not seeing it.  All I see is people debating the relative merits of exclusivity vs. independence.  Could you quote some of the "animosity" you are referring to?  Thanks.
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: heywoody on September 11, 2012, 17:37
I never understand the animosity for those who think being exclusive is dumb.

Risky with potentially less earnings, Yes!

But they are not flooding the market for a short term buck.

Animosity?  Really?  Can you point me to that?  I am not seeing it.  All I see is people debating the relative merits of exclusivity vs. independence.  Could you quote some of the "animosity" you are referring to?  Thanks.

Is it animosity for those who think exclusivity is dumb (the actual words) or from those who think it's dumb (seems more like the intention)?  I'm not seeing it either side of the fence and both points of view have some merit.
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: Reef on September 11, 2012, 17:59
I never understand the animosity for those who think being exclusive is dumb.

Risky with potentially less earnings, Yes!

But they are not flooding the market for a short term buck.

Animosity?  Really?  Can you point me to that?  I am not seeing it.  All I see is people debating the relative merits of exclusivity vs. independence.  Could you quote some of the "animosity" you are referring to?  Thanks.

Did I also mention sarcasm and hostility :)  If it's not evident to you then I'm not sure anything I say or quote will satisfy you.
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: WarrenPrice on September 11, 2012, 18:23
I never understand the animosity for those who think being exclusive is dumb.

Risky with potentially less earnings, Yes!

But they are not flooding the market for a short term buck.

Animosity?  Really?  Can you point me to that?  I am not seeing it.  All I see is people debating the relative merits of exclusivity vs. independence.  Could you quote some of the "animosity" you are referring to?  Thanks.

Did I also mention sarcasm and hostility :)  If it's not evident to you then I'm not sure anything I say or quote will satisfy you.

As a disinterested bystander ... It seems there is a lot of hostility in many of the posts about iS... not just Exclusives but iS in general ... and anything/anyone associated.

but... I don't have a dog in this hunt.   8)
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: Jo Ann Snover on September 11, 2012, 18:42

As a disinterested bystander ... It seems there is a lot of hostility in many of the posts about iS... not just Exclusives but iS in general ... and anything/anyone associated.

but... I don't have a dog in this hunt.   8)

There are a number of long term contributors, exclusives, independents plus some like me who've done the indie-exclusive-indie shuffle, who are deeply angry with iStock. In my case it's fury at greed throwing away something really great - and some of that anger can spill over into impatience with newer exclusives who haven't yet had anything bad happen. IS's ongoing software incompetence - bungling every software upgrade (and I do mean every single one) and continuing to pick dreadful times to cripple site operations - is a pretty rational rock to throw at them.

 I think there's also a periodic burst of "exclusive content is better than all that rubbish on the other sites" which certainly doesn't sit well with anyone but a subset of exclusives. Probably not reasonable to assume that all exclusives feel that way about indies, but it has certainly primed the pump for some "full and frank exchanges of views" to become dust ups. There's a ton of ill will towards Getty that rubs off on IS more and more as it's absorbed into the parent company.

This is just me, but although I largely ignore what IS is up to these days, if I think about them too much I can get angry again very easily. Hearing all the positive and optimistic chat from current exclusives (who need to believe they've made a wise choice in picking exclusivity) seems to be very dismissive of those who got hurt by the past lies and about faces on a number of business issues. Probably isn't deliberately planned that way, but for anyone without the history, might take them by surprise.

On another forum (no longer around) I was told I was in need of a mental health evaluation for considering exclusivity :) Some people feel very strongly about spreading the risk and that's not anti IS, but they're the only agency where even considering exclusivity makes any sense.
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: WarrenPrice on September 11, 2012, 18:46
Yeppers... just agreeing with you.  There is definitely a tone of animosity and hostility.  Certainly not my place to agree or disagree with the reasons for hostilities ... just stating that I certainly feel the vibes.

Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: Reef on September 11, 2012, 19:16

As a disinterested bystander ... It seems there is a lot of hostility in many of the posts about iS... not just Exclusives but iS in general ... and anything/anyone associated.

but... I don't have a dog in this hunt.   8)

There are a number of long term contributors, exclusives, independents plus some like me who've done the indie-exclusive-indie shuffle, who are deeply angry with iStock. In my case it's fury at greed throwing away something really great - and some of that anger can spill over into impatience with newer exclusives who haven't yet had anything bad happen. IS's ongoing software incompetence - bungling every software upgrade (and I do mean every single one) and continuing to pick dreadful times to cripple site operations - is a pretty rational rock to throw at them.

 I think there's also a periodic burst of "exclusive content is better than all that rubbish on the other sites" which certainly doesn't sit well with anyone but a subset of exclusives. Probably not reasonable to assume that all exclusives feel that way about indies, but it has certainly primed the pump for some "full and frank exchanges of views" to become dust ups. There's a ton of ill will towards Getty that rubs off on IS more and more as it's absorbed into the parent company.

This is just me, but although I largely ignore what IS is up to these days, if I think about them too much I can get angry again very easily. Hearing all the positive and optimistic chat from current exclusives (who need to believe they've made a wise choice in picking exclusivity) seems to be very dismissive of those who got hurt by the past lies and about faces on a number of business issues. Probably isn't deliberately planned that way, but for anyone without the history, might take them by surprise.

On another forum (no longer around) I was told I was in need of a mental health evaluation for considering exclusivity :) Some people feel very strongly about spreading the risk and that's not anti IS, but they're the only agency where even considering exclusivity makes any sense.

It's understandable when put like this. I joined IS in 2002 so I'm not a newbie. I've only ever been a part time contributor and have only ever seen an increase in sales (generally speaking). Thus I don't share the 'bad vibe' feeling towards IS.
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: Freedom on September 11, 2012, 19:21
I am not entirely happy with what I get from my exclusivity and I don't think I owe IS any favor to defend it, but IS is still generating reasonable returns for my efforts.  Jsnover, you have been trying to be fair in most of your messages. I wish I can say the same about few other people who should really consider to have some more balanced and fair views.
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: AKK on September 12, 2012, 06:15
I can really not give any advise about that. It's too personal as decision. what i mean by personal is that there are too many parameters, like kind of image in the port, uniquness, preferences of buyer in different site, approval rate, contributor character and life...

being Ex is a risk, you can win or lose, i my case my total earnings are 30 % more. before Ex my earning distribution was approximatively 60% SS, 30 % IS, 10% all others. I have little drop (approx. 10%) in my down probably due to the higher prices but the higher earnings make more than the drop. Also my E+ make very well, no drop in down. My RPD is about 7$.

Another point is that i'm very happy with my exclusivity but not with IS. I earn more than before Ex. but there are too many problems with the site and if SS give an Ex I'll maybe make the jump. For now I don't think to become independent.

Not: I become Ex. in april of this year, so even with the very bad time for IS i'm making more than before.
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: Minerva Studio on September 16, 2012, 17:27
If it can be of help

http://www.microstockjournal.com/real-value-istock (http://www.microstockjournal.com/real-value-istock)
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: ShadySue on September 16, 2012, 17:38
If it can be of help

[url]http://www.microstockjournal.com/real-value-istock[/url] ([url]http://www.microstockjournal.com/real-value-istock[/url])


These graphs are only useful if you also give the size of your port at each, and the length of time they have been on each agency.

For example, there's a regular poster on the Alamy forum who constantly reiterates how much more he makes from his Alamy port than his iStock port. I don't doubt that for a minute: he has thousands of images in his Alamy port, and the last time I looked, fewer than 20 in his iStock port.

I'm not implying that your figures are so extreme, but there are certainly stats and 'useful stats'. I for one would be more interested in $$ earned at each agency than dls, but again it would mean nothing without the other details.
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: lisafx on September 17, 2012, 14:00

There are a number of long term contributors, exclusives, independents plus some like me who've done the indie-exclusive-indie shuffle, who are deeply angry with iStock. In my case it's fury at greed throwing away something really great - and some of that anger can spill over into impatience with newer exclusives who haven't yet had anything bad happen. IS's ongoing software incompetence - bungling every software upgrade (and I do mean every single one) and continuing to pick dreadful times to cripple site operations - is a pretty rational rock to throw at them.

 I think there's also a periodic burst of "exclusive content is better than all that rubbish on the other sites" which certainly doesn't sit well with anyone but a subset of exclusives. Probably not reasonable to assume that all exclusives feel that way about indies, but it has certainly primed the pump for some "full and frank exchanges of views" to become dust ups. There's a ton of ill will towards Getty that rubs off on IS more and more as it's absorbed into the parent company.

This is just me, but although I largely ignore what IS is up to these days, if I think about them too much I can get angry again very easily. Hearing all the positive and optimistic chat from current exclusives (who need to believe they've made a wise choice in picking exclusivity) seems to be very dismissive of those who got hurt by the past lies and about faces on a number of business issues. Probably isn't deliberately planned that way, but for anyone without the history, might take them by surprise.

On another forum (no longer around) I was told I was in need of a mental health evaluation for considering exclusivity :) Some people feel very strongly about spreading the risk and that's not anti IS, but they're the only agency where even considering exclusivity makes any sense.

Very well put JoAnn.  Sums up the situation perfectly, along with some of the history that got us to this point . 

@Reef, I was not being sarcastic or hostile.  My interpretation of "animosity" is personal attacks.  I do see quite a bit of people extremely upset with Istock, but I have not seen a lot of personal attacks on other members, certainly none that I can point to in this thread.  Which is why I was asking for links. 
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: Poncke on September 17, 2012, 15:29
Since I am new to the business, what happened at IS to PO so many togs?
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: ShadySue on September 17, 2012, 15:40
Since I am new to the business, what happened at IS to PO so many togs?
How long have you got?
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: Poncke on September 17, 2012, 15:42
Since I am new to the business, what happened at IS to PO so many togs?
How long have you got?

I have time. But it might be too much to type up. Is there an old thread about this that sums it up?
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: ShadySue on September 17, 2012, 15:48
I don't know of any that sums up everything,but here is just one strand:
http://www.microstockgroup.com/blog-updates/from-woohaying-to-no-waying-(istock-in-turmoil) (http://www.microstockgroup.com/blog-updates/from-woohaying-to-no-waying-(istock-in-turmoil))
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: Freedom on September 17, 2012, 16:02

There are a number of long term contributors, exclusives, independents plus some like me who've done the indie-exclusive-indie shuffle, who are deeply angry with iStock. In my case it's fury at greed throwing away something really great - and some of that anger can spill over into impatience with newer exclusives who haven't yet had anything bad happen. IS's ongoing software incompetence - bungling every software upgrade (and I do mean every single one) and continuing to pick dreadful times to cripple site operations - is a pretty rational rock to throw at them.

 I think there's also a periodic burst of "exclusive content is better than all that rubbish on the other sites" which certainly doesn't sit well with anyone but a subset of exclusives. Probably not reasonable to assume that all exclusives feel that way about indies, but it has certainly primed the pump for some "full and frank exchanges of views" to become dust ups. There's a ton of ill will towards Getty that rubs off on IS more and more as it's absorbed into the parent company.

This is just me, but although I largely ignore what IS is up to these days, if I think about them too much I can get angry again very easily. Hearing all the positive and optimistic chat from current exclusives (who need to believe they've made a wise choice in picking exclusivity) seems to be very dismissive of those who got hurt by the past lies and about faces on a number of business issues. Probably isn't deliberately planned that way, but for anyone without the history, might take them by surprise.

On another forum (no longer around) I was told I was in need of a mental health evaluation for considering exclusivity :) Some people feel very strongly about spreading the risk and that's not anti IS, but they're the only agency where even considering exclusivity makes any sense.

Very well put JoAnn.  Sums up the situation perfectly, along with some of the history that got us to this point . 

@Reef, I was not being sarcastic or hostile.  My interpretation of "animosity" is personal attacks.  I do see quite a bit of people extremely upset with Istock, but I have not seen a lot of personal attacks on other members, certainly none that I can point to in this thread.  Which is why I was asking for links.

With due respect, JoAnn and Lisa, I think prolonged anger sometimes affects one's judgement and fairness.  A calm and objective voice may deliver better credibility than an angry one.
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: cathyslife on September 17, 2012, 18:39

There are a number of long term contributors, exclusives, independents plus some like me who've done the indie-exclusive-indie shuffle, who are deeply angry with iStock. In my case it's fury at greed throwing away something really great - and some of that anger can spill over into impatience with newer exclusives who haven't yet had anything bad happen. IS's ongoing software incompetence - bungling every software upgrade (and I do mean every single one) and continuing to pick dreadful times to cripple site operations - is a pretty rational rock to throw at them.

 I think there's also a periodic burst of "exclusive content is better than all that rubbish on the other sites" which certainly doesn't sit well with anyone but a subset of exclusives. Probably not reasonable to assume that all exclusives feel that way about indies, but it has certainly primed the pump for some "full and frank exchanges of views" to become dust ups. There's a ton of ill will towards Getty that rubs off on IS more and more as it's absorbed into the parent company.

This is just me, but although I largely ignore what IS is up to these days, if I think about them too much I can get angry again very easily. Hearing all the positive and optimistic chat from current exclusives (who need to believe they've made a wise choice in picking exclusivity) seems to be very dismissive of those who got hurt by the past lies and about faces on a number of business issues. Probably isn't deliberately planned that way, but for anyone without the history, might take them by surprise.

On another forum (no longer around) I was told I was in need of a mental health evaluation for considering exclusivity :) Some people feel very strongly about spreading the risk and that's not anti IS, but they're the only agency where even considering exclusivity makes any sense.

Very well put JoAnn.  Sums up the situation perfectly, along with some of the history that got us to this point . 

@Reef, I was not being sarcastic or hostile.  My interpretation of "animosity" is personal attacks.  I do see quite a bit of people extremely upset with Istock, but I have not seen a lot of personal attacks on other members, certainly none that I can point to in this thread.  Which is why I was asking for links.

With due respect, JoAnn and Lisa, I think prolonged anger sometimes affects one's judgement and fairness.  A calm and objective voice may deliver better credibility than an angry one.

I don't think being angry at istock for pi$$ing everything away has anything to do with credibility. But you are certainly entitled to your opinion. I think JoAnn summed it up well and this sentence particularly applies...This is just me, but although I largely ignore what IS is up to these days, if I think about them too much I can get angry again very easily.

I totally concur with JoAnn. And it isn't the anger that's affecting my judgment or fairness. It's that many, many contributors' sales are continuing to take a nosedive. Pretty hard to be fair or not judgmental about a company whose greed has cut a lot of people's income.
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: ShadySue on September 17, 2012, 19:00
With due respect, JoAnn and Lisa, I think prolonged anger sometimes affects one's judgement and fairness.  A calm and objective voice may deliver better credibility than an angry one.

You yourself said that your income is increasing at iStock. That's no bad thing, congratulations indeed. However it could be argued that thereby your 'more positive than average' comments about iStock are also not being totally 'objective'.
It's more difficult when iStock's business decisions have caused a direct and ongoing reduction in income, which many people have experienced.
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: gostwyck on September 17, 2012, 19:35

There are a number of long term contributors, exclusives, independents plus some like me who've done the indie-exclusive-indie shuffle, who are deeply angry with iStock. In my case it's fury at greed throwing away something really great - and some of that anger can spill over into impatience with newer exclusives who haven't yet had anything bad happen. IS's ongoing software incompetence - bungling every software upgrade (and I do mean every single one) and continuing to pick dreadful times to cripple site operations - is a pretty rational rock to throw at them.

 I think there's also a periodic burst of "exclusive content is better than all that rubbish on the other sites" which certainly doesn't sit well with anyone but a subset of exclusives. Probably not reasonable to assume that all exclusives feel that way about indies, but it has certainly primed the pump for some "full and frank exchanges of views" to become dust ups. There's a ton of ill will towards Getty that rubs off on IS more and more as it's absorbed into the parent company.

This is just me, but although I largely ignore what IS is up to these days, if I think about them too much I can get angry again very easily. Hearing all the positive and optimistic chat from current exclusives (who need to believe they've made a wise choice in picking exclusivity) seems to be very dismissive of those who got hurt by the past lies and about faces on a number of business issues. Probably isn't deliberately planned that way, but for anyone without the history, might take them by surprise.

On another forum (no longer around) I was told I was in need of a mental health evaluation for considering exclusivity :) Some people feel very strongly about spreading the risk and that's not anti IS, but they're the only agency where even considering exclusivity makes any sense.

Very well put JoAnn.  Sums up the situation perfectly, along with some of the history that got us to this point . 

@Reef, I was not being sarcastic or hostile.  My interpretation of "animosity" is personal attacks.  I do see quite a bit of people extremely upset with Istock, but I have not seen a lot of personal attacks on other members, certainly none that I can point to in this thread.  Which is why I was asking for links.

With due respect, JoAnn and Lisa, I think prolonged anger sometimes affects one's judgement and fairness.  A calm and objective voice may deliver better credibility than an angry one.

I don't think being angry at istock for pi$$ing everything away has anything to do with credibility. But you are certainly entitled to your opinion. I think JoAnn summed it up well and this sentence particularly applies...This is just me, but although I largely ignore what IS is up to these days, if I think about them too much I can get angry again very easily.

I totally concur with JoAnn. And it isn't the anger that's affecting my judgment or fairness. It's that many, many contributors' sales are continuing to take a nosedive. Pretty hard to be fair or not judgmental about a company whose greed has cut a lot of people's income.

Absolutely. That's exactly what Istock did. In their astonishing greed they pi$$ed the whole thing away (to the cost of pretty much everyone). Now that they are broken they will atttempt to fleece both customers and contributors for as much and for as long as they can.
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: ShadySue on September 17, 2012, 20:00
H*ll, I;ve had another sh*tty day for dls. A moment of insanity made me look back at my stats for 17th Sept since I started. I started in late Dec 2006. So, on 17th Sept:
2007: 14 (and yes, it was over $1 more than I got today, even at the tiny prices and 20%)
2008: 18
2009: 16
2010: 10
2011:   0 (Saturday)
2012:   2

By the end of July this year, I was reasonably up on $$$ compared to last year by the same date. By August-end, I was down to c$150 up compared to the same date last year. Now I'm about that much below where I was last year at this time.
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: travelstock on September 17, 2012, 22:40
If it can be of help

[url]http://www.microstockjournal.com/real-value-istock[/url] ([url]http://www.microstockjournal.com/real-value-istock[/url])


These graphs are only useful if you also give the size of your port at each, and the length of time they have been on each agency.

For example, there's a regular poster on the Alamy forum who constantly reiterates how much more he makes from his Alamy port than his iStock port. I don't doubt that for a minute: he has thousands of images in his Alamy port, and the last time I looked, fewer than 20 in his iStock port.

I'm not implying that your figures are so extreme, but there are certainly stats and 'useful stats'. I for one would be more interested in $$ earned at each agency than dls, but again it would mean nothing without the other details.


Better still let us see the portfolios. Not quite as extreme as the alamy examples, but still:
12715 images on Shutterstock http://www.shutterstock.com/gallery-210376p1.html (http://www.shutterstock.com/gallery-210376p1.html)
7,594 on Fotolia http://us.fotolia.com/p/202163168 (http://us.fotolia.com/p/202163168)
5,115 Dreamstime http://www.dreamstime.com/minervastudio_info (http://www.dreamstime.com/minervastudio_info)
1559 on istock http://www.istockphoto.com/search/portfolio/3809571 (http://www.istockphoto.com/search/portfolio/3809571)

Probably compounding the difference in sales is that iStock is much more restrictive with image collages & doesn't let you create the sort of "budget bundles" of isolated business people that are popular in this portfolio.
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: Freedom on September 17, 2012, 23:27
With due respect, JoAnn and Lisa, I think prolonged anger sometimes affects one's judgement and fairness.  A calm and objective voice may deliver better credibility than an angry one.

You yourself said that your income is increasing at iStock. That's no bad thing, congratulations indeed. However it could be argued that thereby your 'more positive than average' comments about iStock are also not being totally 'objective'.
It's more difficult when iStock's business decisions have caused a direct and ongoing reduction in income, which many people have experienced.

SS, my income increase is a fact. How can a fact not be objective? I had said this to you before, and am repeating, I think I have benefited from E+, and not increased DLs. My DLs have decreased, just like yours. Again, that is a fact.
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: ShadySue on September 18, 2012, 04:22
With due respect, JoAnn and Lisa, I think prolonged anger sometimes affects one's judgement and fairness.  A calm and objective voice may deliver better credibility than an angry one.

You yourself said that your income is increasing at iStock. That's no bad thing, congratulations indeed. However it could be argued that thereby your 'more positive than average' comments about iStock are also not being totally 'objective'.
It's more difficult when iStock's business decisions have caused a direct and ongoing reduction in income, which many people have experienced.

SS, my income increase is a fact. How can a fact not be objective? I had said this to you before, and am repeating, I think I have benefited from E+, and not increased DLs. My DLs have decreased, just like yours. Again, that is a fact.

These are facts, and are not at issue.
But your personal facts give you a more positive spin on iStock in general, just like other people's experience is less positive, so their general opinions and posts are liable to be less positive. Your overall posts are no more 'objective' than anyone else's.
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: JPSDK on September 18, 2012, 04:25
That is correct.
Either we  are all objective or none of us are.
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: lisafx on September 18, 2012, 11:54
SS, my income increase is a fact. How can a fact not be objective? I had said this to you before, and am repeating, I think I have benefited from E+, and not increased DLs. My DLs have decreased, just like yours. Again, that is a fact.

These are facts, and are not at issue.
But your personal facts give you a more positive spin on iStock in general, just like other people's experience is less positive, so their general opinions and posts are liable to be less positive. Your overall posts are no more 'objective' than anyone else's.

Extremely well put Liz.  One person's positive experience is no more "credible" or "objective" than another person's negative experience.  They are both equally "factual". 

And each person is likely to form their on opinions (which by definition are subjective and not "facts") based on their experiences.  So neither person's opinion is any less valid than the others. 
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: Poncke on September 18, 2012, 12:51
I don't know of any that sums up everything,but here is just one strand:
[url]http://www.microstockgroup.com/blog-updates/from-woohaying-to-no-waying-(istock-in-turmoil)[/url] ([url]http://www.microstockgroup.com/blog-updates/from-woohaying-to-no-waying-(istock-in-turmoil))[/url]


Thanks, I am now reading up on this one, I am at page 6. Long read ahead of me.

http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=252322&page=1 (http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=252322&page=1)
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: RacePhoto on September 19, 2012, 10:37
Thanks Poncke, I followed the link 167 pages and the link to the 346 page continuation, jumped to the next one and found the answer. (I always wanted to read this quote for it's exact context.) OK now I have my answer...

But money isn’t going to be what makes you all happy. kkthompson Posted Fri Sep 10, 2010 4:33PM

I don't know of any that sums up everything,but here is just one strand:
[url]http://www.microstockgroup.com/blog-updates/from-woohaying-to-no-waying-(istock-in-turmoil)[/url] ([url]http://www.microstockgroup.com/blog-updates/from-woohaying-to-no-waying-(istock-in-turmoil))[/url]


Thanks, I am now reading up on this one, I am at page 6. Long read ahead of me.

[url]http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=252322&page=1[/url] ([url]http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=252322&page=1[/url])
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: Minerva Studio on September 19, 2012, 10:52
Just had a brilliant 0,09$ sale. I'm happy.
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: fritz on September 19, 2012, 18:45
Just had a brilliant 0,09$ sale. I'm happy.
....and I just had EL for 21.75$. I'm happy too.
Sorry, but on iStock get 50% more $ than SS. Same port size!
Title: Re: Istock vs others
Post by: Reef on September 29, 2012, 05:13

There are a number of long term contributors, exclusives, independents plus some like me who've done the indie-exclusive-indie shuffle, who are deeply angry with iStock. In my case it's fury at greed throwing away something really great - and some of that anger can spill over into impatience with newer exclusives who haven't yet had anything bad happen. IS's ongoing software incompetence - bungling every software upgrade (and I do mean every single one) and continuing to pick dreadful times to cripple site operations - is a pretty rational rock to throw at them.

 I think there's also a periodic burst of "exclusive content is better than all that rubbish on the other sites" which certainly doesn't sit well with anyone but a subset of exclusives. Probably not reasonable to assume that all exclusives feel that way about indies, but it has certainly primed the pump for some "full and frank exchanges of views" to become dust ups. There's a ton of ill will towards Getty that rubs off on IS more and more as it's absorbed into the parent company.

This is just me, but although I largely ignore what IS is up to these days, if I think about them too much I can get angry again very easily. Hearing all the positive and optimistic chat from current exclusives (who need to believe they've made a wise choice in picking exclusivity) seems to be very dismissive of those who got hurt by the past lies and about faces on a number of business issues. Probably isn't deliberately planned that way, but for anyone without the history, might take them by surprise.

On another forum (no longer around) I was told I was in need of a mental health evaluation for considering exclusivity :) Some people feel very strongly about spreading the risk and that's not anti IS, but they're the only agency where even considering exclusivity makes any sense.

Very well put JoAnn.  Sums up the situation perfectly, along with some of the history that got us to this point . 

@Reef, I was not being sarcastic or hostile.  My interpretation of "animosity" is personal attacks.  I do see quite a bit of people extremely upset with Istock, but I have not seen a lot of personal attacks on other members, certainly none that I can point to in this thread.  Which is why I was asking for links.

The Internet is a curse sometimes. I didn't type it the way I meant it. No disrespect to you. None of us are earning as much as we probably deserve. We are all in the same boat really! Mine isn't sinking quite yet :)
Title: Istock vs others
Post by: Jo Ann Snover on September 29, 2012, 13:36
I think the August PP sales are now complete and the PP is the #3 for me that month - after SS and IS.

Sort of both good news and bad. I'd much rather have had the sales at IS...

 DR had a lackluster August or it might  have been #3. As it was the PP was 40% more than DT