Author Topic: Simplified ingestion/inspection process (Read 18100 times)

cobalt · « **Reply #50 on:** October 06, 2011, 02:41 »

I am wondering - where is Rebecca? Did she come to Milan? Is she still working at istock?

Did she post anything, anywhere on what is coming? It would be nice to hear from her and after all she is now leading a huge community driven site.

qwerty · « **Reply #51 on:** October 06, 2011, 05:28 »

Quote from: cobalt on October 06, 2011, 02:41

I am wondering - where is Rebecca? Did she come to Milan? Is she still working at istock?

Did she post anything, anywhere on what is coming? It would be nice to hear from her and after all she is now leading a huge community driven site.

Honestly I don't want to hear a single thing from them unless its we've decided to restore the previous commission structure.

ShadySue · « **Reply #52 on:** October 06, 2011, 05:44 »

Quote from: qwerty on October 06, 2011, 05:28

Quote from: cobalt on October 06, 2011, 02:41
I am wondering - where is Rebecca? Did she come to Milan? Is she still working at istock?

Did she post anything, anywhere on what is coming? It would be nice to hear from her and after all she is now leading a huge community driven site.

Honestly I don't want to hear a single thing from them unless its we've decided to restore the previous commission structure.

Aaaargh, I didn't have a camera to hand when that pig flew past the window.

Allsa · « **Reply #53 on:** October 06, 2011, 10:31 »

I'm thinking they may plan on making it very, very difficult for anyone to get anything accepted. Then they can flood IS with their wholly owned images, where they don't have to pay any royalties at all. Of course the quality standards will probably be much looser for Getty owned content.

Pixart · « **Reply #54 on:** October 06, 2011, 10:37 »

Well, I just had 8/9 accepted and I was stupid enough to miss a release on the 9th one. They usually rip me to shreds on the over-whites, so maybe they are becoming easier. That wholly owned content can only stay fresh for so long on TS after all.

Can anyone fill me in on Photos.com? Is IS content going there also, or just TS?

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #55 on:** October 06, 2011, 11:29 »

Quote from: Pixart on October 06, 2011, 10:37

Can anyone fill me in on Photos.com? Is IS content going there also, or just TS?

Unless they change things, the existing PP goes to photos.com and TS. The collection is smaller and subs are cheaper at photos.com - why, I can't fathom. It's the best URL for photos and they put the lowest end of the low end there.

travelstock · « **Reply #56 on:** October 06, 2011, 12:12 »

Quote from: ffNixx on October 01, 2011, 15:23

On a personal level, I'm positive that JJRD is an ethically-minded individual. But you must bear in mind he is also a deconstructionist piss artist of the most superior order, someone who perceives the making of money from the labours of others as an art form. Marrying his persona with his job, he is consistent in warning us before the bombshell. This is now his third or fourth warning about the new inspections coming up. All he's really saying is "Tie up your loose ends, upload now as much as you can. Later you may not be so pleased with how your files are accepted." It's not as if he has any power in this. He's merely doing the best he can.

I'm not really sure what a "deconstructionist piss artist of the most superior order" actually means, but as to the intent of the announcements its how I read it as well.

wiser · « **Reply #57 on:** October 06, 2011, 13:37 »

rogermexico's post about 32 minutes ago:

Okay, here's what 'Creative Resources' means and what I'll be doing now at iStockphoto.

Outside of a very brief 'Needs' list in the training manual, iStock has never provided much in the way of direction. We haven't said 'We would like more pictures of this or that subject.'

My new job is to now come to you and say 'we would like more pictures of this or that subject.' Basically, I'll be highlighting our needs - letting you know what subjects our clients need more of, and giving advice on different ways of producing those subjects. I'll be publishing articles and briefs for you covering as many different topics as I can manage.

We want you all to keep providing us with the same kinds of content that you currently do. You already have an excellent understanding of the general client base here at iStock and what to produce for them. Keep doing that and don't change - you are the experts.

What I'll be doing is highlighting all the little niche growth areas where there's room for more, and provide additional creative direction for interested contributors about emerging trends and areas with opportunities.

That's it in a nutshell. I've been working the last month here planning and preparing and look forward to getting rolling over the next while. I'm excited to work with all of you on the images you create and providing you with as much inspiration and direction as I can. Thanks for all the well wishes everyone - it's good to be back.

guenterguni · « **Reply #58 on:** October 06, 2011, 15:28 »

Quote from: cobalt on October 06, 2011, 02:41

I am wondering - where is Rebecca? Did she come to Milan? Is she still working at istock?

Did she post anything, anywhere on what is coming? It would be nice to hear from her and after all she is now leading a huge community driven site.

NO, Rebecca hasn´t been in Milan ... but for my surprise Kelly T. was there ....

mtilghma · « **Reply #59 on:** October 06, 2011, 17:06 »

I had a different take than you all. I assumed they were going to make it way easier, like SS, and also way easier to get accepted. This will all be in anticipation of a change down the road where they can put any photo of anyones on PPs but NOT have it on istock, so they have a slough of mediocre images you thought were lucky to get accepted, but then they move them to their much newer, bigger, shinier dollar bin.

Allsa · « **Reply #60 on:** October 06, 2011, 17:33 »

Quote from: mtilghma on October 06, 2011, 17:06

I had a different take than you all. I assumed they were going to make it way easier, like SS, and also way easier to get accepted. This will all be in anticipation of a change down the road where they can put any photo of anyones on PPs but NOT have it on istock, so they have a slough of mediocre images you thought were lucky to get accepted, but then they move them to their much newer, bigger, shinier dollar bin.

If that happens I think it would lead to a mass exodus of independents from iStock. Why would anyone in their right mind want to stay? It's like getting kicked out and sent to the basement to rot.

lisafx · « **Reply #61 on:** October 06, 2011, 18:01 »

Quote from: wiser on October 06, 2011, 13:37

rogermexico's post about 32 minutes ago:

What I'll be doing is highlighting all the little niche growth areas where there's room for more, and provide additional creative direction for interested contributors about emerging trends and areas with opportunities.

Oh good. So anyone with successful niche areas better be prepared for a whole flood of images destroying their income.

Allsa · « **Reply #62 on:** October 06, 2011, 18:04 »

Quote from: lisafx on October 06, 2011, 18:01

Quote from: wiser on October 06, 2011, 13:37
rogermexico's post about 32 minutes ago:

What I'll be doing is highlighting all the little niche growth areas where there's room for more, and provide additional creative direction for interested contributors about emerging trends and areas with opportunities.

Oh good. So anyone with successful niche areas better be prepared for a whole flood of images destroying their income.

That's how I interpreted rogermexico's post, too. Maybe our thinking reflects 'battered contributor syndrome'.

Batman · « **Reply #63 on:** October 06, 2011, 20:24 »

Quote from: Allsa on October 06, 2011, 18:04

Quote from: lisafx on October 06, 2011, 18:01
Quote from: wiser on October 06, 2011, 13:37
rogermexico's post about 32 minutes ago:

What I'll be doing is highlighting all the little niche growth areas where there's room for more, and provide additional creative direction for interested contributors about emerging trends and areas with opportunities.

Oh good. So anyone with successful niche areas better be prepared for a whole flood of images destroying their income.

That's how I interpreted rogermexico's post, too. Maybe our thinking reflects 'battered contributor syndrome'.

iStock is trying to help make the sales grow and you find flaw with that, just like always you people hate everything IS.

thesentinel · « **Reply #64 on:** October 07, 2011, 02:18 »

Quote from: Batman on October 06, 2011, 20:24

iStock is trying to help make the sales grow and you find flaw with that, just like always you people hate everything IS.

The moment I read the Plain English version of this initiative I immediately thought, pity the people already contributing in that niche and whatever gets put forward to the crowd as an area to shoot is a list of things NOT to shoot.

Lets say that an agency, any micro stock agency with tens of thousands of active contributors, says that there is a perceived need for more Dogs On Rollerskates images.

A handful of folk are making a significant income from a niche that they have some access, expertise and knowledge in. Rather than contact them and give extra art direction and advice thousands of other folk spend a few moments looking at existing Dogs On Rollerskates images and then sally forth to produce Xeroxes of them, pose reluctant smiling cats masquerading as dogs without the correct safety gear, etc.

The market is flooded with Dogs On Rollerskates, some of the new ones may be better than the existing ones but most are no better or even worse, the search results make it harder to find the work of those who know enough to produce the realistic Dogs On Rollerskates vibe, their income falls significantly, a few extra peoples income will rise marginally, the agency will maybe sell more and at a better cut to themselves and thus make more profit but the supply of Dogs On Rollerskates images is devalued to the point that it becomes unprofitable to those who look at it as a business. Thus lies the fundamental flaw in "crowd sourcing".

corepics · « **Reply #65 on:** October 07, 2011, 02:50 »

Quote from: thesentinel on October 07, 2011, 02:18

Quote from: Batman on October 06, 2011, 20:24

iStock is trying to help make the sales grow and you find flaw with that, just like always you people hate everything IS.

The moment I read the Plain English version of this initiative I immediately thought, pity the people already contributing in that niche and whatever gets put forward to the crowd as an area to shoot is a list of things NOT to shoot.

Lets say that an agency, any micro stock agency with tens of thousands of active contributors, says that there is a perceived need for more Dogs On Rollerskates images.

A handful of folk are making a significant income from a niche that they have some access, expertise and knowledge in. Rather than contact them and give extra art direction and advice thousands of other folk spend a few moments looking at existing Dogs On Rollerskates images and then sally forth to produce Xeroxes of them, pose reluctant smiling cats masquerading as dogs without the correct safety gear, etc.

The market is flooded with Dogs On Rollerskates, some of the new ones may be better than the existing ones but most are no better or even worse, the search results make it harder to find the work of those who know enough to produce the realistic Dogs On Rollerskates vibe, their income falls significantly, a few extra peoples income will rise marginally, the agency will maybe sell more and at a better cut to themselves and thus make more profit but the supply of Dogs On Rollerskates images is devalued to the point that it becomes unprofitable to those who look at it as a business. Thus lies the fundamental flaw in "crowd sourcing".

Suppose, Dogs On Rollerscates was my niche. Due to crowd sourcing the existing stock collection is devalued, and the clients, who used to source their images from the agency, are no longer pleased with the content, due to flaws in safety gear, etc. Yet, their demand for those images remain the same, and they now approach me directly, and ask me to continue to shoot in my niche, now on a commission base. Ergo, my income increases, as well as I spread my risks. Markets localise again, and new opportunities arise.

I pity the people, who fail to adapt to a changing market place.

Yes, competition increases, but quite a few should've identified those niches themselves, without someone pointing them there. And whilst these same folks struggle gaining a basic understanding of their new theme, style and technique, others have already moved on, an history repeats itself once again.

Plan - Do - Check - Act

loop · « **Reply #66 on:** October 07, 2011, 03:21 »

Quote from: Batman on October 06, 2011, 20:24

Quote from: Allsa on October 06, 2011, 18:04
Quote from: lisafx on October 06, 2011, 18:01
Quote from: wiser on October 06, 2011, 13:37
rogermexico's post about 32 minutes ago:

What I'll be doing is highlighting all the little niche growth areas where there's room for more, and provide additional creative direction for interested contributors about emerging trends and areas with opportunities.

Oh good. So anyone with successful niche areas better be prepared for a whole flood of images destroying their income.

That's how I interpreted rogermexico's post, too. Maybe our thinking reflects 'battered contributor syndrome'.

iStock is trying to help make the sales grow and you find flaw with that, just like always you people hate everything IS.

Lisa has a point here. On the other hand, these ideas will also be available to independents to submit to other sites. I hope this to be somenthing generic enough ("shoot cuisine recipes of your region") to not stir conflict. Something like the Getty Newsletter for contributors.

fujiko · « **Reply #67 on:** October 07, 2011, 07:51 »

It's very easy to tell what clients look for.

A page with stats of words and phrases used on search.

It's easy as that, anything else is obviously with a different motivation in mind.

ShadySue · « **Reply #68 on:** October 07, 2011, 07:57 »

Quote from: fujiko on October 07, 2011, 07:51

It's very easy to tell what clients look for.

A page with stats of words and phrases used on search.

It's easy as that, anything else is obviously with a different motivation in mind.

I haven't looked recently, but a while back SS had just such a feature and what it showed was what teen boys with spare time were looking for, not necessarily buyers.
Alamy also has just such a feature, and it's only moderately useful.
I'm hoping that RM is going to provide real feedback from real/potental buyers about what they'd like but can't find, or can't find enough of.

(Ha, I might have been a customer last week. I needed photos to illustrate common photography mistakes, e.g. shooting between two subjects, the difference between camera shake and subject movement, under/over exposure etc. Of course, I had to go and shoot them myself.)

fujiko · « **Reply #69 on:** October 07, 2011, 08:49 »

Quote from: ShadySue on October 07, 2011, 07:57

Quote from: fujiko on October 07, 2011, 07:51
It's very easy to tell what clients look for.

A page with stats of words and phrases used on search.

It's easy as that, anything else is obviously with a different motivation in mind.

I haven't looked recently, but a while back SS had just such a feature and what it showed was what teen boys with spare time were looking for, not necessarily buyers.
Alamy also has just such a feature, and it's only moderately useful.
I'm hoping that RM is going to provide real feedback from real/potental buyers about what they'd like but can't find, or can't find enough of.

(Ha, I might have been a customer last week. I needed photos to illustrate common photography mistakes, e.g. shooting between two subjects, the difference between camera shake and subject movement, under/over exposure etc. Of course, I had to go and shoot them myself.)

It's even more easy to do that. Just store the searches that result on a sale or that come from people with credits and a good download history.
Eve better, show both stats. All searches regardless of downloads and searches that result in downloads.

One think is for sure, maybe the buyer can't find what he wants because the collection is limited or the search is not functional, cluttered by useless files from privileged collections. But what he searches is related to what he wanted even if he cannot find it.

I'm sure out of focus, under/over exposed, shaking and such images have a market, but no agency wants them.

Imagine next week IS says they want oof images because clients need them. That would be awesome. Then the images are rejected for oof and the circle is completed

nataq · « **Reply #70 on:** October 07, 2011, 10:39 »

Quote from: ShadySue on October 07, 2011, 07:57

(Ha, I might have been a customer last week. I needed photos to illustrate common photography mistakes, e.g. shooting between two subjects, the difference between camera shake and subject movement, under/over exposure etc. Of course, I had to go and shoot them myself.)

Hahaha, I was thinking exactly the same and had to shoot the same two weeks ago. I bet there is a market for that! It can´t be coincidence that just we two are looking for that within a very short period of time.

RacePhoto · « **Reply #71 on:** October 10, 2011, 07:54 »

Quote from: fujiko on October 07, 2011, 07:51

It's very easy to tell what clients look for.

A page with stats of words and phrases used on search.

It's easy as that, anything else is obviously with a different motivation in mind.

I don't see the big deal. Most of the agencies already have sections saying what people are looking for and tips, and also request areas for customers to ask for images. Also sections devoted to, we don't need these, but people keep shooting those subjects anyway!

So puppies on roller skates or elephants on surfboards, it's not going to make a huge difference.

So IS is going to spoon feed needs (assuming we believe anything will happen at all?) and that's somehow destroying niche markets. Why are so many people always dwelling on the negativity and fear. Telling us what sells, and what's needed, is NOT news.

Quote from: qwerty on October 06, 2011, 05:28

Honestly I don't want to hear a single thing from them unless its we've decided to restore the previous commission structure.

That Would Be News! I'm with you on that opinion.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Simplified ingestion/inspection process (Read 18100 times)

cobalt

qwerty

ShadySue

Allsa

Pixart

Jo Ann Snover

travelstock

wiser

guenterguni

mtilghma

Allsa

lisafx

Allsa

Batman

thesentinel

corepics

loop

fujiko

ShadySue

fujiko

nataq

RacePhoto

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors