Author Topic: sjlocke was just booted from iStock (Read 128657 times)

somethingpretentious · « **Reply #526 on:** February 18, 2013, 08:46 »

Thanks for clearing that up Peter.

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #527 on:** February 22, 2013, 14:25 »

Quote from: sjlocke on February 15, 2013, 15:05

That is all hi-larious. I'm not sure how I could 'comment' when they never contacted me. And, like its illegal to talk to my friends about new opportunities that come up.

BTW, I just discovered he tweeted to me a contact request that day (?). I never really "use" twitter, so I missed it.

crashoran · « **Reply #528 on:** February 22, 2013, 14:38 »

$30 until I reach payout and can deactivate all my files. But still, at 16% royalty this is going to take forever.

ShadySue · « **Reply #529 on:** February 22, 2013, 14:43 »

Quote from: sjlocke on February 22, 2013, 14:25

Quote from: sjlocke on February 15, 2013, 15:05
That is all hi-larious. I'm not sure how I could 'comment' when they never contacted me. And, like its illegal to talk to my friends about new opportunities that come up.

BTW, I just discovered he tweeted to me a contact request that day (?). I never really "use" twitter, so I missed it.

Good to see they were uber professional throughout.

Petr Toman · « **Reply #530 on:** February 22, 2013, 14:48 »

Did you already decided about your portfolio, where to put it?

oldsalt19 · « **Reply #531 on:** March 05, 2013, 20:11 »

Being right doesn't cut it. This may not be fair but life itself is not fair. The #1 priority of any company is to maintain control. Even if your modifications are the most totally cool things since smart phones, such independence would absolutely not be welcomed by the company unless you keep them in the loop from the very start. The required protocol would have been to present a beta version to Istock and then have them move it upstairs through channels to Getty. If you went to Getty first, Istock management would be pissed because you "went over their heads." If you were ignored or if your work was rejected you needed to keep resubmitting modified versions until they were convinced. I you were truly at the top of the contributor heap, I think that they would have eventually listened to you. If they remained unconvinced, you would have the choice of dropping the project, starting your own company, or taking your work to another company. The last two choices would probably require that you separate yourself from Istock. But you NEVER NEVER proceed independently unless your job includes independent development. Even then you would normally be expected to keep your immediate supervisor in a very tight loop. This may seem bureaucratic and inefficient but this is absolutely the way most business works.

This is a huge thread and I confess that I have not read all of it, so perhaps someone else has also mentioned these concepts. I hope so. Such concepts, right or wrong, are fundamental to modern business and I would be very surprised if there was nobody that is following this thread that realized it.

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #532 on:** March 05, 2013, 20:28 »

Ummm, ok.

luissantos84 · « **Reply #533 on:** March 05, 2013, 20:40 »

Quote from: oldsalt19 on March 05, 2013, 20:11

Being right doesn't cut it. This may not be fair but life itself is not fair. The #1 priority of any company is to maintain control. Even if your modifications are the most totally cool things since smart phones, such independence would absolutely not be welcomed by the company unless you keep them in the loop from the very start. The required protocol would have been to present a beta version to Istock and then have them move it upstairs through channels to Getty. If you went to Getty first, Istock management would be pissed because you "went over their heads." If you were ignored or if your work was rejected you needed to keep resubmitting modified versions until they were convinced. I you were truly at the top of the contributor heap, I think that they would have eventually listened to you. If they remained unconvinced, you would have the choice of dropping the project, starting your own company, or taking your work to another company. The last two choices would probably require that you separate yourself from Istock. But you NEVER NEVER proceed independently unless your job includes independent development. Even then you would normally be expected to keep your immediate supervisor in a very tight loop. This may seem bureaucratic and inefficient but this is absolutely the way most business works.

This is a huge thread and I confess that I have not read all of it, so perhaps someone else has also mentioned these concepts. I hope so. Such concepts, right or wrong, are fundamental to modern business and I would be very surprised if there was nobody that is following this thread that realized it.

too bad you don't come here that often, sure we could have saved microstock, call Bruce

oldsalt19 · « **Reply #534 on:** March 05, 2013, 23:26 »

BTW, Please do not assume that my attitude is in any way hostile. Rather, I think that sjlocke deserves a lot of credit for his initiative and obvious talents for coding-- and I probably deserve some unkind words for the patronizing tone of the first part of this sentence. Mea culpa, really.

. I received the one and only written reprimand of my long career for taking the initiative and putting in place some tools that very much remind me of Sjlocke situation. This is istock-Getty's loss. I'm thinking that there are a number of stock photo managers around the planet who are even now salivating at the possibility of adding this photographer and his impressive portfolio to their library.

tickstock · « **Reply #535 on:** March 10, 2013, 23:50 »

Looks like it's been 30 days now? Any news, hopefully good?

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #536 on:** March 11, 2013, 01:15 »

I make it 31 days, and the portfolio still seems to be there.

ShadySue · « **Reply #537 on:** March 11, 2013, 08:50 »

I thought it was just because no-one works at iS on a Sunday to switch it off, but according to Sean's blog:
To anyone concerned, or interested, my portfolio will continue to be licensed on iStockphoto for a couple more weeks, due to a technical issue. That’s fine, because the extra income will help in the upcoming dry spell when it is no longer there. Thanks.

Great for Sean - as the technical issue isn't his fault, he is no doubt free to sell anywhere else he chooses from today.

pro@stockphotos · « **Reply #538 on:** March 11, 2013, 09:01 »

Quote from: ShadySue on March 11, 2013, 08:50

I thought it was just because no-one works at iS on a Sunday to switch it off, but according to Sean's blog:
To anyone concerned, or interested, my portfolio will continue to be licensed on iStockphoto for a couple more weeks, due to a technical issue. That’s fine, because the extra income will help in the upcoming dry spell when it is no longer there. Thanks.

Great for Sean - as the technical issue isn't his fault, he is no doubt free to sell anywhere else he chooses from today.

That does give him a buffer until stocksy opens and other sites get his work.

gostwyck · « **Reply #539 on:** March 11, 2013, 09:38 »

Quote from: pro@stockphotos on March 11, 2013, 09:01

Quote from: ShadySue on March 11, 2013, 08:50
I thought it was just because no-one works at iS on a Sunday to switch it off, but according to Sean's blog:
To anyone concerned, or interested, my portfolio will continue to be licensed on iStockphoto for a couple more weeks, due to a technical issue. That’s fine, because the extra income will help in the upcoming dry spell when it is no longer there. Thanks.

Great for Sean - as the technical issue isn't his fault, he is no doubt free to sell anywhere else he chooses from today.

That does give him a buffer until stocksy opens and other sites get his work.

Other sites? I doubt it. Sean has never exactly embraced the microstock subscription model and somehow I don't see that changing. I think he may choose to place his entire portfolio exclusively at Stocksy instead, at least for as long as he can afford to do so, depending on how it takes off. Good luck to him whatever he chooses anyway.

Sadstock · « **Reply #540 on:** March 11, 2013, 10:08 »

Quote from: gostwyck on March 11, 2013, 09:38

Quote from: pro@stockphotos on March 11, 2013, 09:01
Quote from: ShadySue on March 11, 2013, 08:50
I thought it was just because no-one works at iS on a Sunday to switch it off, but according to Sean's blog:
To anyone concerned, or interested, my portfolio will continue to be licensed on iStockphoto for a couple more weeks, due to a technical issue. That’s fine, because the extra income will help in the upcoming dry spell when it is no longer there. Thanks.

Great for Sean - as the technical issue isn't his fault, he is no doubt free to sell anywhere else he chooses from today.

That does give him a buffer until stocksy opens and other sites get his work.

Other sites? I doubt it. Sean has never exactly embraced the microstock subscription model and somehow I don't see that changing. I think he may choose to place his entire portfolio exclusively at Stocksy instead, at least for as long as he can afford to do so, depending on how it takes off. Good luck to him whatever he chooses anyway.

In his intial blog post he did say over the next several weeks he would be moving part of his portfolo to several other sites, but he did not say if they were micros or not.

mlwinphoto · « **Reply #541 on:** March 11, 2013, 10:49 »

They can't even kick somebody out without screwing it up. No wonder iStock is tanking.

lisafx · « **Reply #542 on:** March 11, 2013, 11:12 »

He's still there because of a "technical issue"? Interesting. Wonder if that "technical issue" has anything to do with their realizing how badly they f*cked up in setting him free and losing his amazing body of work...

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #543 on:** March 11, 2013, 11:14 »

, no, nothing like that...

Freedom · « **Reply #544 on:** March 11, 2013, 11:45 »

Quote from: sjlocke on March 11, 2013, 11:14

, no, nothing like that...

Sounds like you reached a settlement with iStock?

sharpshot · « **Reply #545 on:** March 11, 2013, 12:38 »

Quote from: lisafx on March 11, 2013, 11:12

He's still there because of a "technical issue"? Interesting. Wonder if that "technical issue" has anything to do with their realizing how badly they f*cked up in setting him free and losing his amazing body of work...

They don't seem to of realized all the many other ways they've f*cked up and they're renowned for having "technical issues" and have managed to f*ck up removing many other people images, so I don't think this is unusual. It would of been more of a shock if they had done this efficiently.

cobalt · « **Reply #546 on:** March 11, 2013, 13:48 »

This is good for Sean, at least he gets some room to breathe. Since they seem to have no problem closing other accounts (Ivar) I would take this as an indication that after the adrenaline power kick they are waking up to the mess they created. Although I really don´t see how they can go back and recover but maybe if they talk to Sean they could find another solution that makes more sense from a business perspective.

Anyway, my exclusivity is ending in 2 days and I look forward to some peace of mind. I am already enjoying my work a lot more than before. All the drama of istock was so demoralising and frustrating. And just today I read their latest marketing gaffe about "online dating with istockphoto". The place must be run by teenagers or people who deep down really hate the company and just love to embarrass istock internationally. They would never do anything like this to gettyimages. They know instinctively that to embarrass Getty means they lose their jobs.

So glad I can move on and work with companies that are maybe a lot smaller but genuinely trying to build a longterm business. It will be more work but I already feel safer knowing I will never again be dependent on one companies managers (that I have no influence in choosing).

cthoman · « **Reply #547 on:** March 11, 2013, 13:51 »

Quote from: cobalt on March 11, 2013, 13:48

Anyway, my exclusivity is ending in 2 days and I look forward to some peace of mind. I am already enjoying my work a lot more than before.

Good luck!

tickstock · « **Reply #548 on:** March 11, 2013, 13:52 »

Quote from: cobalt on March 11, 2013, 13:48

So glad I can move on and work with companies that are maybe a lot smaller but genuinely trying to build a longterm business. It will be more work but I already feel safer knowing I will never again be dependent on one companies managers (that I have no influence in choosing).

Good luck, which companies are you going to contribute to?

luissantos84 · « **Reply #549 on:** March 11, 2013, 13:55 »

if I may add Tyler too (http://www.istockphoto.com/Stalman)

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: sjlocke was just booted from iStock (Read 128657 times)

peter_stockfresh

somethingpretentious

Sean Locke Photography

crashoran

ShadySue

Petr Toman

oldsalt19

Sean Locke Photography

luissantos84

oldsalt19

tickstock

BaldricksTrousers

ShadySue

pro@stockphotos

gostwyck

Sadstock

mlwinphoto

lisafx

Sean Locke Photography

Freedom

sharpshot

cobalt

cthoman

tickstock

luissantos84

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors