MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: The Present B.M......  (Read 10907 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

vonkara

« Reply #25 on: February 09, 2009, 13:02 »
0
That's an easy one to answer, in order to prosper under the new best match you have to make sure you're whistling (not humming) the theme tune to MASH when you upload a file.


Easy traduction please ?


« Reply #26 on: February 09, 2009, 13:17 »
0
why have the illusion of an open community.

Why even have the illusion of a community period? Like I've said before, once Getty bought the site, things began to change. That's fine. Business is business, but I just wish iStock (to clarify: the business entity, NOT the contributors) would stop acting like it cared about the buyers and contributors, when really, all they care about is milking everyone for as much money as they can. I just think it's disingenuous. I know Yahoo doesn't care about me. I know Visa doesn't care about me. I know my mortgage company doesn't care about me. And I'm fine with that. That's one of my biggest gripes about iStock. I wish they'd just be honest with us (and maybe with themselves) and just drop the pretense.

shank_ali

« Reply #27 on: February 09, 2009, 13:18 »
0
I feel as an exclusive contributor on istockphoto my images should be placed alot higher in the best match than an independant contributor.
Free Moo cards ,quicker review times,higher % on sales and the ability to upload more files per 72 hours are ok perks but i want best match to showcase my work ALL THE TIME.

« Reply #28 on: February 09, 2009, 14:16 »
0
I feel as an exclusive contributor on istockphoto my images should be placed alot higher in the best match than an independant contributor.
Free Moo cards ,quicker review times,higher % on sales and the ability to upload more files per 72 hours are ok perks but i want best match to showcase my work ALL THE TIME.

As a non exclusive contributor I think they shouldn't , you have been given quantity , you should compete other contributors with quality not by being prefered by best match.





 

« Reply #29 on: February 09, 2009, 14:35 »
0
It would just be bad business for Istock to beat down non-exclusives.  They make millions extra from our sales.  Exclusives will never overtake best match fully, unless IS becomes an EXCLUSIVE site and kicks us all out.

RT


« Reply #30 on: February 09, 2009, 17:11 »
0
............but i want best match to showcase my work ALL THE TIME.

Take better photos than everyone else, then it will.

shank_ali

« Reply #31 on: February 09, 2009, 17:27 »
0
............but i want best match to showcase my work ALL THE TIME.

Take better photos than everyone else, then it will.
Richard i am happy with my progress as a photographer and i take alot better photos than i did 6 months ago.
I will not spend my hard earned cash on upgrading my kit,hiring models or expensive lighting.
What i earn from my portfolio on istock will be reinvested when the time is right.
Thankfully the best match will never reflect the fact a file was uploaded to the library from a pro/happy snapper(myself) or indeed a camera costing 400 or 5000.
Do you also realise who actuallY decides what works as a good composition on our photos....The Buyer !
« Last Edit: February 09, 2009, 17:30 by shank_ali »

« Reply #32 on: February 09, 2009, 17:35 »
0
whistling (not humming) the theme tune to MASH

I love it...the theme tune to MASH is titled "Suicide is Painless"  :)

I'm liking the best match...my sales have increased substantially.

Jam

« Reply #33 on: February 09, 2009, 17:51 »
0
............but i want best match to showcase my work ALL THE TIME.

Take better photos than everyone else, then it will.
Richard i am happy with my progress as a photographer and i take alot better photos than i did 6 months ago.
I will not spend my hard earned cash on upgrading my kit,hiring models or expensive lighting.
What i earn from my portfolio on istock will be reinvested when the time is right.
Thankfully the best match will never reflect the fact a file was uploaded to the library from a pro/happy snapper(myself) or indeed a camera costing 400 or 5000.
Do you also realise who actuallY decides what works as a good composition on our photos....The Buyer !

Shank read what he said. "Take better photographs" he did not say upgrade equipment.

Buyers do decide so why not think like a buyer and try to deliver images that are useful.

I understand that you were banned from IS and I can see why, please try to understand the debate and listen to the wise folks here and contribute in a constructive manner. Also before you form an opinion count to 10.  >:(

RT


« Reply #34 on: February 09, 2009, 17:54 »
0
Do you also realise who actuallY decides what works as a good composition on our photos....The Buyer !

Which is exactly the point I was trying to make, the best match search results should showcase the best work irrelevant of whether that is from an exclusive or not, iStock are a business not a charity.

iStock give exclusives enough perks to get their work shown ahead of the rest, if it still ain't selling there's only one person to blame!


yecatsdoherty

« Reply #35 on: February 09, 2009, 18:05 »
0
I'm exclusive, but I have never felt that exclusives should be favoured in best match. I think that best match should use many criteria, and the criteria should change frequently in order to lessen the prolonged impact on any one group. good images should rise to the top, and newer images should also have a fair shot. these criteria should be true for both non-exclusives and exclusives. the end goal for all of us---contributors and iStock--is sales. best foot forward and all that, but our best foot is dynamic, always changing. best match should reflect the dynamic nature of the current db at any given moment in time.

look, nothing has been fully implemented. the best match is supposedly, from my understanding, supposed to go through this ONE more major upheaval, followed by a continuously changing best match algorithm. let''s hope it works. I know that we cannot judge based on the last month. but if things don't get better for me once this thing is implemented fully, I'm not sure what to do. go non-exclusive, which I am researching the heck out of so that I ready if I have to.

I have less than 25% of my normal sales, for almost two months now. this level of 'representation' as an exclusive is unacceptable to me. especially when I have less sales than I did a year and a half ago, when the quality of my portfolio was far less than what it is now. and the powers that be have left me pretty much feeling like sh*t....and they have made it clear that they really aren't too worried that I feel that way.
« Last Edit: February 09, 2009, 18:08 by yecatsdoherty »

Jam

« Reply #36 on: February 09, 2009, 18:50 »
0
Last year I thought I was doing well with 200 images I was earning around $500 per month, then the best match changed and devastated my earnings. It went through several changes through the Autumn (Fall) and now it is back to the good old days.

I know past performance is no guarantee but  I have learnt to take the ruff with the smooth. Also remember the kids at istock are driving a hot rod and have never been here before but there are a few sages around to keep them on the road. Stacey you will be okay stop being inpatient  :)


digiology

« Reply #37 on: February 09, 2009, 18:55 »
0
Stacey you will be okay stop being inpatient  :)

LOL - I think you mean "impatient". Unless Stacey has gone off the deep end and admitted herself to a hospital.  ;)

lisafx

« Reply #38 on: February 09, 2009, 19:09 »
0
We have all been on the down side of the best match.  It really sucks when it happens and it is hard to keep quiet if you are the one watching your sales circle the toilet bowl...

I don't see anything wrong with blowing off a bit of steam when that happens, as long as nobody gets nasty, which I haven't seen.  More often it is the folks with the good sales berating the folks who are suffering.  I can't imagine why except maybe Schadenfreude? 

« Reply #39 on: February 09, 2009, 19:45 »
0
It would just be bad business for Istock to beat down non-exclusives.

Yes, so they have somebody to bash on and discriminate against exclusives, and give the exclusives that warm feeling they are special  :P Imagine IS with all exclusives.   ;D

yecatsdoherty

« Reply #40 on: February 09, 2009, 20:17 »
0
^ lol, then there would be sibling rivalry between exclusives......for the record, even though this best match has killed my sales, I was also very vocal about this last year when my sales were great, but many other contributors were getting killed by the best match. I thought it was bad communication then, and I think it is bad communication now. I know we're all ultimately out for number one, but I, perhaps too idealistically, took the community thing pretty literally.

eyes wide open now though.....but it just makes me want to work even harder. regardless, I feel like I have been flogging a dead horse lately...venting is good, but it gets boring and no one wants to be boring.

Lisa - wise words, as always. you are a constant voice of reason and a really nice person.

« Reply #41 on: February 09, 2009, 21:28 »
0

eyes wide open now though.....but it just makes me want to work even harder. regardless, I feel like I have been flogging a dead horse lately...venting is good, but it gets boring and no one wants to be boring.


Honestly! As much as it is not in my interests to advise anyone to go independent, in your case I think it is probably justified on medical grounds.

Trust me, when your sales are spread around half a dozen sites (4 will probably get you 90%+ of potential earnings) you just don't get so hyper-excited/depressed about one particular site fannying around with sort-order, downtime, etc, etc etc. So much better for your blood pressure as well as your income. It is a complete mystery to me why anyone would voluntarily choose the ball and chain.

« Reply #42 on: February 09, 2009, 21:37 »
0
Honestly! As much as it is not in my interests to advise anyone to go independent, in your case I think it is probably justified on medical grounds.

Trust me, when your sales are spread around half a dozen sites (4 will probably get you 90%+ of potential earnings) you just don't get so hyper-excited/depressed about one particular site fannying around with sort-order, downtime, etc, etc etc. So much better for your blood pressure as well as your income. It is a complete mystery to me why anyone would voluntarily choose the ball and chain.


In my case laziness. Just could not stand all the different keywording and upload protocols for the various sites.
Also, I really REALLY hate when my shots sell for $0.25-0.35 ea (subs).
I'd rather sell a lower volume and get a bit more for each shot.... but that's just me.  8)

yecatsdoherty

« Reply #43 on: February 09, 2009, 22:29 »
0
^ that's me too.....and despite the current situation, I actually researched all of these companies before signing up and found iStock to be by far the best according to my list of criteria. I still think they are potentially the best, and I am reluctant to spread out the efforts and the time management required to maintain multiple accounts if the return on investment will be minimal.

gostwyck, thanks for the concern....the blood pressure is fine ;-) I'm also a writer, so I have lots of outlet for my frustration...plus there's always wine...lol

traveler1116

« Reply #44 on: February 10, 2009, 00:22 »
0
Honestly! As much as it is not in my interests to advise anyone to go independent, in your case I think it is probably justified on medical grounds.

Trust me, when your sales are spread around half a dozen sites (4 will probably get you 90%+ of potential earnings) you just don't get so hyper-excited/depressed about one particular site fannying around with sort-order, downtime, etc, etc etc. So much better for your blood pressure as well as your income. It is a complete mystery to me why anyone would voluntarily choose the ball and chain.


In my case laziness. Just could not stand all the different keywording and upload protocols for the various sites.
Also, I really REALLY hate when my shots sell for $0.25-0.35 ea (subs).
I'd rather sell a lower volume and get a bit more for each shot.... but that's just me.  8)


Istock is the only place I've sold an image for under 20 cents in the last year, had a bunch of .18s and some .10s too.

« Reply #45 on: February 10, 2009, 01:33 »
0
Istock is the only place I've sold an image for under 20 cents in the last year, had a bunch of .18s and some .10s too.

That maybe, but for that little all they were able to purchase is a little tiny image that is only usable on a web page.
Contrast that with a full size image selling on SS and getting only $0.25-0.35 for it?

That is what I object to... and the main reason that I went exclusive on IS.
 

shank_ali

« Reply #46 on: February 10, 2009, 02:14 »
0
1,2,3,4,5,6,7,,8,9,10,  ;D Ty Jam for enquiring about my mental health problems.The new tablets should take effect at the beginning of March.Until then......
5 sales yesterday = $10 Average.
Seems that i actually have some usefull images if and when they get found.
« Last Edit: February 10, 2009, 02:19 by shank_ali »


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
18 Replies
5665 Views
Last post December 21, 2011, 14:05
by mtilghma
8 Replies
2855 Views
Last post December 26, 2011, 11:25
by kiratsinhjadeja
16 Replies
7174 Views
Last post July 27, 2013, 17:03
by shudderstok
6 Replies
2469 Views
Last post December 27, 2013, 11:14
by StockCube
4 Replies
1421 Views
Last post August 28, 2018, 18:55
by Clair Voyant

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle