MicrostockGroup
Agency Based Discussion => iStockPhoto.com => Topic started by: FreeTransform on March 21, 2011, 12:23
-
In case you missed it,
nico_blue leading the charge for a video-style mass opt-out of Vetta:
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=314922&page=1 (http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=314922&page=1)
-
Interesting.
-
Yeah, those exclusive vector contributors have been pretty grumpy for a while. I don't blame them either. That redheaded step child label seems to be appropriate.
-
I had seen that, and I'm as behind them as I am the video folks - they're quite right. I am opted out of Vetta since the September 2010 changes, but would otherwise have joined this opt out (even though I have a minuscule vector collection).
I think the royalty change didn't inspire the urge to fight in the photo arena because they'd already got most of those in the collection solidly hooked on the extra income. That made it harder to walk away.
Lower royalty percentages for Vetta and Agency sold on iStock is without justification - I don't even think iStock tried to come up with a reason. The problem I see for the video and vector protesters is that IS will be keenly aware that if they gave an inch on rates they'd have a massive clamor from photographers to do the same for them.
Short of winding the Vetta/Agency compensation back to the pre-September model - higher prices, but not stratospheric (i.e. Vetta tops out at 70 not 150); same royalty percentages as elsewhere on IS - I'm not sure what IS can do to make this work.
-
The problem I see for the video and vector protesters is that IS will be keenly aware that if they gave an inch on rates they'd have a massive clamor from photographers to do the same for them.
Absotively.
-
I contacted CR to opt-out of Vetta and said that I would be interested in Vetta only if they paid me my main collection royalty rate.
Istock seems more interested in talking recently so we'll see what comes of all this. I don't anticipate them budging because of the reasons Jsnover stated but there are some big names taking a stand.
If nothing comes of this for Vector and Video contributors then it might be time to at least drop Photo exclusivity for me. I'm not convinced dropping vector exclusivity would be worth it just yet, but at least I can get my foot in the door at the other sites.
-
In case you missed it,
nico_blue leading the charge for a video-style mass opt-out of Vetta:
Thanks for that, I had indeed missed it.
Good luck with the campaign. I don't feel anything like as pessimistic as others about your chances. Without the content providers Istock simply don't have a business. They were very clever in dividing and conquering the photographers by insulating the highest earners from most of the changes. If only we could stick together and act as one more often we'd all be much better off.
-
This is true Gostwyck. I have no personal stake in this, but any victory achieved by the vector artists will resonate throughout all of microstock.
iStock is playing with fire with all of this bad news. If you do a blog search on iStockphoto, you will find plenty of blog posts from buyers sympathizing with contributors over the drastic commission cuts. Many are talking up other agencies, and even quoting commission percentages for artists. Somehow the news has spread beyond the contributor ranks. I guess this internet thing might have a future.
-
The internet is more social now so word spreads faster with twitter and facebook. Ironic that istock was able to harness that social energy early and now -- just as everyone else has caught up -- is tossing it out the window.
-
its ridiculous for getty to try to push down to 20% royalty. Getty really doesnt know how badly they are screwing this up with this ridiculous commission cut. It really is killing off the golden goose.
The only smart thing for every vector artist to do is to opt out. WE NEED TO MAKE A STAND. With the higher price and less commission, the file will get downloaded a lot less than as the regular collection. The vetta vector slowly loses its place on the best match do to slower sales. The agency probably knows this but they dont care since there are only so many slots that will be up front for those images and they will always make money off any contributor. The contributor loses out majority of the time. Win win for istock and lose lose for the contributors. Remember that these new collections will be in front of your best sellers which will slowly start to lose place in the best match line. Istock is accelerating the shrinking pie.
The internet is more social now so word spreads faster with twitter and facebook. Ironic that istock was able to harness that social energy early and now -- just as everyone else has caught up -- is tossing it out the window.
Im sure its Getty/H&F that is calling the shot at istock. This was exactly the reason i didnt like about 9-5 job... the office BS politics.
-
Could some one please explain me what makes illustration Vetta different from photo Vetta ?
Why so much negativity against it with illustration but not against it regarding photos ?
-
Could some one please explain me what makes illustration Vetta different from photo Vetta ?
Why so much negativity against it with illustration but not against it regarding photos ?
When photo Vetta was introduced, the deal for producers was much better, then having lured us in, they shafted us.
-
Could some one please explain me what makes illustration Vetta different from photo Vetta ?
Why so much negativity against it with illustration but not against it regarding photos ?
When photo Vetta was introduced, the deal for producers was much better, then having lured us in, they shafted us.
Yes i know this, but now its the same deal for illustration and photo vetta. so why not rebel against photo vetta as well ???
-
Could some one please explain me what makes illustration Vetta different from photo Vetta ?
Why so much negativity against it with illustration but not against it regarding photos ?
When photo Vetta was introduced, the deal for producers was much better, then having lured us in, they shafted us.
Yes i know this, but now its the same deal for illustration and photo vetta. so why not rebel against photo vetta as well ???
You can start it, if you like - I'm banned.
Plus I can't see iStock quaking in their shoes if I threatened to pull out of Vetta. It needs to be a seriously big hitter with lots of high-sesling Vetta pics; also that they wouldn't like to delete or ban in case they pulled their port or became independent.
-
Could some one please explain me what makes illustration Vetta different from photo Vetta ?
Why so much negativity against it with illustration but not against it regarding photos ?
When photo Vetta was introduced, the deal for producers was much better, then having lured us in, they shafted us.
Yes i know this, but now its the same deal for illustration and photo vetta. so why not rebel against photo vetta as well ???
You can start it, if you like - I'm banned.
I am just a little puppy... less then 10 vettas and maybe 2 which sell from
time to time.
If the big dogs initiate such a move I will surely join.
-
I'm just a humble gold vector contributor. I just opted out.
-
Could some one please explain me what makes illustration Vetta different from photo Vetta ?
Why so much negativity against it with illustration but not against it regarding photos ?
When photo Vetta was introduced, the deal for producers was much better, then having lured us in, they shafted us.
Yes i know this, but now its the same deal for illustration and photo vetta. so why not rebel against photo vetta as well ???
If you read the vector and video threads about this you'll see that the issue is that iStock priced things such that it was more than likely the actual dollar royalty would be lower with Vetta than it is now. So they added a 5% "bonus" which at some point will go away to try and make the deal more appealing. Vector and Video were already a more expensive product, so they didn't want to increase the price too much, especially at first.
I did "rebel" against photo vetta and dropped it in September. They subjected the buyers to highway robbery (nearly doubled the prices) and got existing contributors to be happy with that by sharing some of the extra with them. For those who were heavily invested in Vetta it was as if they were hooked on something addictive already, so there was no fuss for the most part (except from buyers).
With next year's royalties driven by RC targets and high-priced images being a way to try and meet those targets, I doubt anyone could get much traction trying to get Vetta/Agency photographers into rehab and weaned from this. If buyers rebelled and just stopped buying, that might be a way this would rewind back to what Vetta started out as (which I think was a good idea, before the royalty rate reduction, introduction of fake-exclusives from Getty, etc.).
-
Could some one please explain me what makes illustration Vetta different from photo Vetta ?
Why so much negativity against it with illustration but not against it regarding photos ?
I believe the price jump from an exclusive medium is 10 credits to 50 credits for medium vetta. Thats a 5 X jump.
The avg jump from regular to vetta vectors is a little more than 2 X. with the commission cuts and the decrease in downloads, it doesnt seem worth it from the contributors point of view
-
The problem I see for the video and vector protesters is that IS will be keenly aware that if they gave an inch on rates they'd have a massive clamor from photographers to do the same for them.
Absotively.
video contributors can be like the Tunisia of istock rebellion
-
Could some one please explain me what makes illustration Vetta different from photo Vetta ?
Why so much negativity against it with illustration but not against it regarding photos ?
I believe the price jump from an exclusive medium is 10 credits to 50 credits for medium vetta. Thats a 5 X jump.
The avg jump from regular to vetta vectors is a little more than 2 X. with the commission cuts and the decrease in downloads, it doesnt seem worth it from the contributors point of view
OK now I understand. Then why on earth would someone in his right mind join video/illustrator vetta ?
-
Yeah, the video (and now vector) contributors crunched the numbers and it's not worth it. Especially since buyers who are purchasing Vettas will have had to buy a larger credit pack, which puts the individual credit price lower, so in some instances, it's only a few dollars more for the contributor.
-
This addresses the bigger picture about the ability to negotiate terms and conditions. It seems like everywhere else on earth where two businesses agree to do business together, both would have some say in the compensation of each party. Is it even legal for them to automatically opt you in on an agreement where you NEVER had a chance to voice your concerns?
-
This addresses the bigger picture about the ability to negotiate terms and conditions. It seems like everywhere else on earth where two businesses agree to do business together, both would have some say in the compensation of each party. Is it even legal for them to automatically opt you in on an agreement where you NEVER had a chance to voice your concerns?
If the contract you signed says that the powerful party can change any and all terms at any time for any or no reason, sure it is, at least in the US. Some parts of the contract might end up being unenforceable if anyone took it to court, but given the power and money disparity they know that's very unlikely. Not to mention that there are some weasel words that say it's all arbitration in Alberta for disputes.
Your option as a contributor is to quit if you don't like it. Not always appealing, I grant you, but such is the nature of contracts where one party is much more powerful than the other.
-
We were promised something big and special when vetta was taken away from us back in september, but this is definitely not we bargained for. It is especially insulting to video contributors where in one scenario a regular sale earns more for the artist than the equivalent vetta sale, or in another scenario where the artist gets $3 more and istock gets $50 dollars more per sale. In our case with vectors the examples aren't as flagrant, however they still exist... for example for any contributor gold and above a 25 or 30 credit file nets almost the same or more than a vetta 40 credit file.
What this all boils down to is this - istock is proposing a 25-33% cut in royalties to vector and video artists and this is our way of saying no thanks.
-
What this all boils down to is this - istock is proposing a 25-33% cut in royalties to vector and video artists and this is our way of saying no thanks.
If the experience with the partner program is anything to go by, if you can get enough contributors to withhold their content, they'll come back with a better offer. In the case of the partner program, the better offer was still a stinker, so they're clearly trying to get whatever they're looking for at the absolute minimum cost to them.
The other big advantage I think you have is no big block of admin/inspector content to put into the video/illustration Vetta collection to get it going (which there was/is for photos).
The video folks are keeping track of the percent of video diamonds opted out - might be harder to do with illustration diamonds as there are more of you, but being able to say what percent of diamonds were opted out (or what percent of diamond content if that number makes your case better) would be good marketing weapon.
-
We were promised something big and special when vetta was taken away from us back in september, but this is definitely not we bargained for. It is especially insulting to video contributors where in one scenario a regular sale earns more for the artist than the equivalent vetta sale, or in another scenario where the artist gets $3 more and istock gets $50 dollars more per sale. In our case with vectors the examples aren't as flagrant, however they still exist... for example for any contributor gold and above a 25 or 30 credit file nets almost the same or more than a vetta 40 credit file.
What this all boils down to is this - istock is proposing a 25-33% cut in royalties to vector and video artists and this is our way of saying no thanks.
I don't think this is intended for "normal" users like yourself. one must really have a low IQ to opt-in such a program.
I think its a way to pump up prices for contributors of the getty family, like the deal they have with contributor which all of there files are "agency collection"
-
...
What this all boils down to is this - istock is proposing a 25-33% cut in royalties to vector and video artists and this is our way of saying no thanks.
I don't think this is intended for "normal" users like yourself. one must really have a low IQ to opt-in such a program.
I think its a way to pump up prices for contributors of the getty family, like the deal they have with contributor which all of there files are "agency collection"
I am afraid that a lot of talented new vector contributors will be on board this since they just dont have the experience of tracking successful files and equating the loss of downloads the higher the price of a file is. I know i was a bit clueless about microstock for the first couple of years.
-
The only way to effectively reach all of the vector exclusives is to go through and privately site mail all of them about it. Daunting task, but i'm sure it would help considerably.
-
The only way to effectively reach all of the vector exclusives is to go through and privately site mail all of them about it. Daunting task, but i'm sure it would help considerably.
I would agree given that many don't even bother reading anything in the forums. I meet up with a few other iStock artists from time to time and two of them weren't even aware that editorial had rolled out until 2 weeks after the fact, and I sent them a link to the thread.
-
In case you missed it,
nico_blue leading the charge for a video-style mass opt-out of Vetta:
[url]http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=314922&page=1[/url] ([url]http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=314922&page=1[/url])
I had missed this. Thank you for posting, and best of luck with the standoff.
It's too bad that it's so dangerous for badges to speak up - if it weren't I'm sure you'd have many more on board publicly. I won't name names, but at least one badge was canned for speaking out (so no wonder they're so quiet) and it's my understanding that others can't even express their opinions freely in the Inspector forum without threats of being de-badges if they don't pipe down.
So anywho, thank goodness for the vocal Black Diamonds and Diamonds with clout - but no badge - who can still express their opinion, concern, disappointment, etc. You guys are making all the difference (or attempting to) and we thank you!
As much as this is "their" company, this is our company and our images that have made this a multiple-million dollar cash cow of a business.
-
It's too bad that it's so dangerous for badges to speak up - if it weren't I'm sure you'd have many more on board publicly. I won't name names, but at least one badge was canned for speaking out (so no wonder they're so quiet) and it's my understanding that others can't even express their opinions freely in the Inspector forum without threats of being de-badges if they don't pipe down.
Which is why you know when Kelvin and Dawn say they can be critical and are still voicing their opinions, you know it is so much BS.
-
It's too bad that it's so dangerous for badges to speak up
It occurred to me that there are no "vector admins" who concentrate solely on vectors. Bortonia's portfolio is 12% photos. Colonel's is 19%. One third of Diane555's portfolio is photo and video. Chemc's is over 75% photos.
And what about the inspectors? PinkTag has twice as many photos as vectors. mrroboto's portfolio contains 27 vectors, the most recent of which was uploaded in 2007. samposnick's portfolio of 122 is all vectors (woot!) o-che has mostly vectors, but her photos are mostly Vetta. I can't think of/don't know of any other vector inspectors.
I understand that to be an admin or good inspector you don't necessarily have to be a prolific illustrator, but can you imagine some of the big-name photo admins/inspectors having that many vectors in their portfolios? Neither can I.
This makes me wonder if they are fully invested in the future of vector at iS.
-
Here are some inspectors that are mainly vectors:
Jayesh, Borisz, vectorbomb, blindspot
However, I would imagine Istock would want inspectors that are good at both so that can inspect both.
@FreeTransform - Were you ever an inspector? You contribute a lot with the tutorials and are in the Illustrator Wow Books so I figured they would have scooped you up pretty quick. (Also, thanks for using my golfer in your silhouette tutorial. :))
-
Here are some inspectors that are mainly vectors:
Jayesh, Borisz, vectorbomb, blindspot
However, I would imagine Istock would want inspectors that are good at both so that can inspect both.
@FreeTransform - Were you ever an inspector? You contribute a lot with the tutorials and are in the Illustrator Wow Books so I figured they would have scooped you up pretty quick. (Also, thanks for using my golfer in your silhouette tutorial. :))
Oops - forgot about those guys! And I've actually met two of them! :-[ Actually, I didn't know vectorbomb was an inspector. Do they not announce these things?
Nope, I have never inspected. I don't think people trade off between media, though.
-
As i understand it an inspector is hired to inspect in only one type of media. So just because they have multiple media types a vector inspector will only inspect vectors and not photos.
-
^ Ok, I would imagine that it is also harder than people might think. And, in the current situation, a source of internal conflict. Your employer vs. contributors who care if their share is cut.
Speaking of the current situation, some of the video contributors had a call with HQ yesterday and have not reported back. Anyone know anything?
Are Nico, Sodafish, 4 x 6, and others going to also have a meeting with HQ? Things seem to have gone a little silent today. ( err , yesterday for me)
-
I didn't know vectorbomb was an inspector. Do they not announce these things?
Not lately it seems, or not for a long while. No.
-
Nico_Blue just did a list of all opt-outters. Pretty cool. hope it continues to grow.
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=314922&page=1 (http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=314922&page=1)
edited because I just noticed the list is on page 1 too.
-
Nico_Blue just did a list of all opt-outters. Pretty cool. hope it continues to grow.
[url]http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=314922&page=1[/url] ([url]http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=314922&page=1[/url])
edited because I just noticed the list is on page 1 too.
Awesome!
-
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=314922&page=7#post6191662 (http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=314922&page=7#post6191662)
Update from Bortonia.
-
[url]http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=314922&page=7#post6191662[/url] ([url]http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=314922&page=7#post6191662[/url])
Update from Bortonia.
But she ran away from the subject "royalties rate cut"...
-
Update from Bortonia.
But she ran away from the subject "royalties rate cut"...
[/quote]
Yes, she was just 'clarifying' a few side issues and/or attempting to obfuscate the main issue.
I don't think Istock are minded to back down on the reduced commission issue though. If they did so there's a real danger that similar protest action could be launched against other commission rates or other issues. A lot of contributors have many reasons to be unhappy with Istock's actions over the last few months. Illustrators in particular.
-
I don't think they will be inclined to back down either, but they'll have a hard time launching Vetta for video or illustration with so much of their top tier of content opted out (the video folks got all or alll but one of the diamonds, I think).
Perhaps they'll get lucky and find a few very talented and productive newbies to fill the store shelves of Vetta/Video/Vector? If not, this spring will turn into this year and it'll end up like logos - on some back burner somewhere.
-
But guys... we now have official word that this collection will be "super awesome", isn't that enough to get people submitting again :)
-
Perhaps they'll get lucky and find a few very talented and productive newbies to fill the store shelves of Vetta/Video/Vector? If not, this spring will turn into this year and it'll end up like logos - on some back burner somewhere.
I suppose they could just co-opt suppliers like they did with agency. They can bend the rules as much as they like. >:(
But well done to all those Vector and Video non-Vettists.
-
I feel genuinely bad for the people working at istock. Its pretty clear that they really have no say in what their company does when it comes down to maximizing profits at all costs.
-
Hopefully if istock finds that the vetta vector and video store shelves are empty they will reconsider... or they will let it shrivel up in the corner somewhere. Either way we dont lose anything.
-
Great work Nico, stick to your guns.
It did of course take Istock months to 'reconsider' their original commission rates for the PP. They only did so because they couldn't attract enough content. Unfortunately they're still not offering enough to attract most serious contributors. Istock & Getty are simply too greedy for their own good.
-
Looks like we'll get a vector conference call :)
-
^^^ What's the purpose? No %% upgrade is expected, so my bet is they are just going to try and sweet talk you into joining the program.
My second bet is that they will partially succeed, promising you extra revenue from Getty transfers, extra vetta marketing and what not.
I wish I am wrong though...
-
Looks like we'll get a vector conference call :)
Good luck with that. I hope those on the call keep a clear head about the string of broken promises of late - the words are always sweet the night before...
-
^^^ What's the purpose? No %% upgrade is expected, so my bet is they are just going to try and sweet talk you into joining the program.
Nope, they're just going to force V/A into the front of all searches so that buyers not in that market will leave, and sellers who don't opt in will be at the bottom of all searches.
Oh, like they're doing right now.
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=320632&page=1 (http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=320632&page=1)
Then maybe (speculation) all Vetta pics will be compulsorily opted in to Thinkstock via Getty
http://www.microstockgroup.com/general-stock-discussion/photos-from-gettyimages-direct-to-thinkstock-ouch (http://www.microstockgroup.com/general-stock-discussion/photos-from-gettyimages-direct-to-thinkstock-ouch)
- though I notice Sean hasn't had a reply to his straight and simple question asked over 24 hours ago about exactly this possiblity (on iStock's Getty forum).
-
The conference calls are lame. It's like suckering people into feeling they are important by giving them a title so you can take their attention off the fact that they wanted a raise.
-
The conference calls are lame. It's like suckering people into feeling they are important by giving them a title so you can take their attention off the fact that they wanted a raise.
Agreed. They've proved effective though, at least from Istock's point of view. The last one did nip almost all discussion in the bud about the security issues and the truly horrendous cash claw-back. Whatever discussion resulted was conveniently deflected in to the laps of the the contributor participants of the conference call. Istock never had to say another word after the call __ they just left it to the 'lucky' participants to say their words for them.
It will be interesting to see how many of the vector Vetta artists capitulate after Istock have indulged, smooched and massaged their egos in a nice little chat (whilst actually just thinking about how much money can be made out of said artists).
In this case the artists are not actually seeking 'a raise' but simply to maintain their commission rate.
-
Get it in writing.
-
The conference calls are lame. It's like suckering people into feeling they are important by giving them a title so you can take their attention off the fact that they wanted a raise.
Agreed. They've proved effective though, at least from Istock's point of view. The last one did nip almost all discussion in the bud about the security issues and the truly horrendous cash claw-back. Whatever discussion resulted was conveniently deflected in to the laps of the the contributor participants of the conference call. Istock never had to say another word after the call __ they just left it to the 'lucky' participants to say their words for them.
It will be interesting to see how many of the vector Vetta artists capitulate after Istock have indulged, smooched and massaged their egos in a nice little chat (whilst actually just thinking about how much money can be made out of said artists).
In this case the artists are not actually seeking 'a raise' but simply to maintain their commission rate.
Nail on the head, as usual, gostwyck.
-
The conference calls are lame. It's like suckering people into feeling they are important by giving them a title so you can take their attention off the fact that they wanted a raise.
Agreed. They've proved effective though, at least from Istock's point of view. The last one did nip almost all discussion in the bud about the security issues and the truly horrendous cash claw-back. Whatever discussion resulted was conveniently deflected in to the laps of the the contributor participants of the conference call. Istock never had to say another word after the call __ they just left it to the 'lucky' participants to say their words for them.
It will be interesting to see how many of the vector Vetta artists capitulate after Istock have indulged, smooched and massaged their egos in a nice little chat (whilst actually just thinking about how much money can be made out of said artists).
In this case the artists are not actually seeking 'a raise' but simply to maintain their commission rate.
Nail on the head, as usual, gostwyck.
haters are gonna hate
-
The conference calls are lame. It's like suckering people into feeling they are important by giving them a title so you can take their attention off the fact that they wanted a raise.
Agreed. They've proved effective though, at least from Istock's point of view. The last one did nip almost all discussion in the bud about the security issues and the truly horrendous cash claw-back. Whatever discussion resulted was conveniently deflected in to the laps of the the contributor participants of the conference call. Istock never had to say another word after the call __ they just left it to the 'lucky' participants to say their words for them.
It will be interesting to see how many of the vector Vetta artists capitulate after Istock have indulged, smooched and massaged their egos in a nice little chat (whilst actually just thinking about how much money can be made out of said artists).
In this case the artists are not actually seeking 'a raise' but simply to maintain their commission rate.
Nail on the head, as usual, gostwyck.
haters are gonna hate
Cheerleaders are gonna cheer.
-
And while the independent and exclusive contributors hurl sand and cat turds at each other in the virtual sandbox, the heads of the major microstock agencies drink cognac and smoke cigars while discussing how to fleece those morons of another huge percentage of their royalties…
The vector conference call might have a good result and it might not, but at least it's a step in the right direction. People are trying to protect their royalties before having to upload their entire portfolios to 10 different agencies. There is no guarantee that the other sites won't cut royalties at some point. Is there?
-
haters are gonna hate
Cheerleaders are gonna cheer.
Exactly what have i cheered about? I do my fair share of complaints on istock. however, i dont showcase my glaring hatred towards them by filling every post obsessively over and over about the ongoing events there.
Take this case for example. I think this a step in the right direction by istock. You guys dont see it that way. When you cant see any good coming out of istock, your a hater in my eyes.
Just tone it down already. Were all upset but i dont want to get annoyed seeing your avatar and imagining froth coming out of your mouth. Thats the image u leave me with.
-
We don't randomly choose an agency to hate on.
IStock has worked really hard over recent months to get their contributors so worked up.
-
haters are gonna hate
Cheerleaders are gonna cheer.
Exactly what have i cheered about? I do my fair share of complaints on istock. however, i dont showcase my glaring hatred towards them by filling every post obsessively over and over about the ongoing events there.
Take this case for example. I think this a step in the right direction by istock. You guys dont see it that way. When you cant see any good coming out of istock, your a hater in my eyes.
Just tone it down already. Were all upset but i dont want to get annoyed seeing your avatar and imagining froth coming out of your mouth. Thats the image u leave me with.
Explain to me exactly what the first conference call accomplished, in the way of getting contributors any of their money back, or more money in the future? It accomplished NOTHING, except stop all the postings in the forum for a while. Again, THAT was to istock's benefit, not the contributors.
I don't really care one way or another if you think I'm a hater...I have no control over what you think, nor do you over what I think. This is a public forum and the only person who can shut me down here is Leaf. If you don't like what I say, use the ignore button. If you don't like what a ton of others are saying, and their postings conflicts with your thoughts, ignore them. And there is always the solution of not coming here at all.
If you think this is a step in the right direction for istock, then good for you. I do not, and I will voice my opinion on it anytime I like.
I think you are being overly dramatic, using the obsessive word, hate word and any other derogatory word you can think of to describe me. Do a check of my recent posts here on this forum. I barely have time anymore to post, as I am actually out doing work. Check and see how many posts I have made in the istock forum of late...I think I can count them on one hand. Maybe you have me confused with someone else? ;)
Clearly you are running scared because your income is dropping, sales are dropping at IS, and buyers are leaving. Otherwise, you would be out shooting, raking in the bucks, and be way too busy to come here and call people haters. Again, blame all of us here instead of the actual party responsible...ISTOCKPHOTO AND GETTY!
edit: the great thing about the internet is that the average joe now has a place to make others aware of companies that rip them off, mistreat them, etc. I am taking full advantage of that benefit. Sorry if you don't like it.
Go over to the Best Match thread...let's see you call all of those guys haters because they are doing their fair share of discussing all the negatives ;)
-
double post, sorry
-
ignored
-
haters are gonna hate
Cheerleaders are gonna cheer.
Exactly what have i cheered about? I do my fair share of complaints on istock. however, i dont showcase my glaring hatred towards them by filling every post obsessively over and over about the ongoing events there.
Take this case for example. I think this a step in the right direction by istock. You guys dont see it that way. When you cant see any good coming out of istock, your a hater in my eyes.
Just tone it down already. Were all upset but i dont want to get annoyed seeing your avatar and imagining froth coming out of your mouth. Thats the image u leave me with.
Explain to me exactly what the first conference call accomplished, in the way of getting contributors any of their money back, or more money in the future? It accomplished NOTHING, except stop all the postings in the forum for a while. Again, THAT was to istock's benefit, not the contributors.
I don't really care one way or another if you think I'm a hater...I have no control over what you think, nor do you over what I think. This is a public forum and the only person who can shut me down here is Leaf. If you don't like what I say, use the ignore button. If you don't like what a ton of others are saying, and their postings conflicts with your thoughts, ignore them. And there is always the solution of not coming here at all.
If you think this is a step in the right direction for istock, then good for you. I do not, and I will voice my opinion on it anytime I like.
I think you are being overly dramatic, using the obsessive word, hate word and any other derogatory word you can think of to describe me. Do a check of my recent posts here on this forum. I barely have time anymore to post, as I am actually out doing work. Check and see how many posts I have made in the istock forum of late...I think I can count them on one hand. Maybe you have me confused with someone else? ;)
Clearly you are running scared because your income is dropping, sales are dropping at IS, and buyers are leaving. Otherwise, you would be out shooting, raking in the bucks, and be way too busy to come here and call people haters. Again, blame all of us here instead of the actual party responsible...ISTOCKPHOTO AND GETTY!
edit: the great thing about the internet is that the average joe now has a place to make others aware of companies that rip them off, mistreat them, etc. I am taking full advantage of that benefit. Sorry if you don't like it.
Go over to the Best Match thread...let's see you call all of those guys haters because they are doing their fair share of discussing all the negatives ;)
+1, VERY WELL SAID!!!
-
We don't randomly choose an agency to hate on.
IStock has worked really hard over recent months to get their contributors so worked up.
I agree... i pretty much have lost all faith in istock the last 6 months even though i am making more money through them now than ever before. Thats probably the reason i come in here more often nowadays to get a feel of whats going on and how this industry is doing. Istock is clearly squeezing the hobbyists out.
It just gets aggravating for me to sift through threads with certain contributors that say the same crap over and over again on the same topic on the same thread. Got it, i heard you the first 500 times. At least there is this place to vent your frustrations out, but some people just love to vent!
-
I'm not a lover or hater. but I do think it is at least a good thing that iStock is even talking to them. I do hope something good comes of it, but if history is any indication, it might only be a nice gesture with no actual change in istock's side of things.
overall if iStock didn't pull this crap in the first place it would be ideal. I see them making small attempts to prove that they are still the "nice guys" that so many of us were proud to be associated with, but it just looks more and more like the nice guys are out and those are in charge are simply "all business."
please prove me wrong, iStock. Do something good for contributors.
-
+1, VERY WELL SAID!!!
u want my apology for the "dickmove" statement i outed u on earlier? im sorry, i call it like i see it.
I pretty much have nothing good to say about istock at the moment and i still get called a cheerleader.
-
We don't randomly choose an agency to hate on.
IStock has worked really hard over recent months to get their contributors so worked up.
I agree... i pretty much have lost all faith in istock the last 6 months even though i am making more money through them now than ever before. Thats probably the reason i come in here more often nowadays to get a feel of whats going on and how this industry is doing. Istock is clearly squeezing the hobbyists out.
It just gets aggravating for me to sift through threads with certain contributors that say the same crap over and over again on the same topic on the same thread. Got it, i heard you the first 500 times. At least there is this place to vent your frustrations out, but some people just love to vent!
But the problem is that there are many folks here who are venting...so when you do it, it's ok, when everyone else does it, it's ok, when I do it, or Gostwyck does it, were haters? Just listen to yourself. :D
And you better believe it, I do love to vent, especially about istock!
-
+1, VERY WELL SAID!!!
u want my apology for the "dickmove" statement i outed u on earlier? im sorry, i call it like i see it.
I pretty much have nothing good to say about istock at the moment and i still get called a cheerleader.
You got called a cheerleader because you called someone else a hater. If you don't like being called names, don't call anyone else names. Everyone has an equal right to vent here.
-
You got called a cheerleader because you called someone else a hater.
It's this level of debate that makes this site such compelling comedy.
-
You got called a cheerleader because you called someone else a hater.
It's this level of debate that makes this site such compelling comedy.
that may be but in reality there really is a lot more to the discussions here than silly name calling. it is a great forum for being able to express your opinions without getting your topic closed or deleted.
-
You got called a cheerleader because you called someone else a hater.
It's this level of debate that makes this site such compelling comedy.
Totally! I'm working on a Flash website, and this provides a great diversion! :D
-
+1, VERY WELL SAID!!!
u want my apology for the "dickmove" statement i outed u on earlier? im sorry, i call it like i see it.
I pretty much have nothing good to say about istock at the moment and i still get called a cheerleader.
I have no idea what you are talking about, obviously you think I remember or care who you are. You finally managed to find the ignore button, feel free to use it again
-
haters are gonna hate
Cheerleaders are gonna cheer.
Exactly what have i cheered about? I do my fair share of complaints on istock. however, i dont showcase my glaring hatred towards them by filling every post obsessively over and over about the ongoing events there.
Take this case for example. I think this a step in the right direction by istock. You guys dont see it that way. When you cant see any good coming out of istock, your a hater in my eyes.
Just tone it down already. Were all upset but i dont want to get annoyed seeing your avatar and imagining froth coming out of your mouth. Thats the image u leave me with.
I could care less what you think about me or if you imagine froth coming out of my mouth. See that ignore button? Use it and stop whining and name-calling.
-
Explain to me exactly what the first conference call accomplished, in the way of getting contributors any of their money back, or more money in the future? It accomplished NOTHING, except stop all the postings in the forum for a while. Again, THAT was to istock's benefit, not the contributors.
I don't really care one way or another if you think I'm a hater...I have no control over what you think, nor do you over what I think. This is a public forum and the only person who can shut me down here is Leaf. If you don't like what I say, use the ignore button. If you don't like what a ton of others are saying, and their postings conflicts with your thoughts, ignore them. And there is always the solution of not coming here at all.
If you think this is a step in the right direction for istock, then good for you. I do not, and I will voice my opinion on it anytime I like.
EXACTLY!!!
-
It just gets aggravating for me to sift through threads with certain contributors that say the same crap over and over again on the same topic on the same thread. Got it, i heard you the first 500 times. At least there is this place to vent your frustrations out, but some people just love to vent!
It's your problem, not ours that you get aggravated.
-
The conference calls are pointless, as the first/last one demonstrated.
-
The conference calls are pointless, as the first/last one demonstrated.
I agree, completely useless.
-
So how did the conference call go, or has it happened yet? I couldn't find anything on it or the date when it was supposed to happen.
-
Andrew's post in the iS 'Vetta % cut for Vectors' thread (my emphasis)...
Yes, it's more so that we can be more forthcoming on our end about the broader background. The actual substance of what we discuss regarding Vetta rates is going to be public soon enough. The Video contributors we've talked with over the last few weeks have been under NDA, yes.
Seems this either suggests that there's a change coming regarding Vetta rates, or there's a genuine financial reason for them 'having' to be so low.
-
^^^ I would put my money on: "there's a genuine financial reason for them 'having' to be so low."
Just please exchange "reason" for "excuse"
-
Andrew's post in the iS 'Vetta % cut for Vectors' thread (my emphasis)...
Yes, it's more so that we can be more forthcoming on our end about the broader background. The actual substance of what we discuss regarding Vetta rates is going to be public soon enough. The Video contributors we've talked with over the last few weeks have been under NDA, yes.
Seems this either suggests that there's a change coming regarding Vetta rates, or there's a genuine financial reason for them 'having' to be so low.
That is interesting. What could the 'actual substance' be? I'm guessing it might be further intertwining of IS & Getty for Vetta and video and therefore a common commission rate.
-
These conference calls really are a brilliant move on iStock's part. They make the contributors feel like they "care" all the while shutting up the critics (that they haven't already banned). And they resolve exactly nothing. iStock still carries on with business as usual. I'm just surprised so many people are falling for it.
-
And while the independent and exclusive contributors hurl sand and cat turds at each other in the virtual sandbox, the heads of the major microstock agencies drink cognac and smoke cigars while discussing how to fleece those morons of another huge percentage of their royalties…
ROFLMAO!! Don't know how I missed this gem yesterday, but you paint quite a picture Retrorocket :D
-
^Thanks! ;D
It would be nice if all of us contributors could get along and make decisions together. I know that as long as a big chunk of us are exclusive that isn't possible but we are all ultimately on the same team.
I would have never become exclusive under the RC system but uploading 1200+ illustrations to 10 different agencies to maximize my earnings as an independent is a daunting task. I can't imagine having 10,000+ images and be considering that option.
If the conference call doesn't change anything then that is one more option being exhausted. We aren't "falling" for anything Caspixel but attempting the path of least resistance first.
-
I would have never become exclusive under the RC system but uploading 1200+ illustrations to 10 different agencies to maximize my earnings as an independent is a daunting task. I can't imagine having 10,000+ images and be considering that option.
Not trying to persuade you either way on exclusivity, but 90% of my earnings come from just the top 4 agencies. So anyone leaving exclusivity only really has to upload to 3 additional agencies to maximize their earnings.
Other sites have their issues too, though, so whether or not to stay exclusive has many things to consider, but uploading to 10 or more additional sites isn't really necessary.
-
We aren't "falling" for anything Caspixel
Don't take too much notice of Caspixel, her spittle-flecked lunacy is one of the downsides of visiting these forums. Since she was ejected from istock for crimes against fashion ( is there anywhere that shortie leather jackets with turned up collars is de rigueur?) she spends all her time oozing negativity. Just ignore her.
-
We aren't "falling" for anything Caspixel
Don't take too much notice of Caspixel, her spittle-flecked lunacy is one of the downsides of visiting these forums. Since she was ejected from istock for crimes against fashion ( is there anywhere that shortie leather jackets with turned up collars is de rigueur?) she spends all her time oozing negativity. Just ignore her.
Now isn't that the pot calling the kettle black! caspixel oozes negativity, but you talking negative about her and calling her names is OK. Too funny! :D You guys crack me up.
-
We aren't "falling" for anything Caspixel
Don't take too much notice of Caspixel, her spittle-flecked lunacy is one of the downsides of visiting these forums. Since she was ejected from istock for crimes against fashion ( is there anywhere that shortie leather jackets with turned up collars is de rigueur?) she spends all her time oozing negativity. Just ignore her.
Bahahahaha. cclapper is right. Classic pot/kettle, right down to the personal attack! I don't know why you take my criticism of iStock so personally that you would have to make fun of a profile photo that was taken back in the 90s - duh - and was all just in fun.
-
We aren't "falling" for anything Caspixel
Don't take too much notice of Caspixel, her spittle-flecked lunacy is one of the downsides of visiting these forums. Since she was ejected from istock for crimes against fashion ( is there anywhere that shortie leather jackets with turned up collars is de rigueur?) she spends all her time oozing negativity. Just ignore her.
Bahahahaha. cclapper is right. Classic pot/kettle, right down to the personal attack! I don't know why you take my criticism of iStock so personally that you would have to make fun of a profile photo that was taken back in the 90s - duh - and was all just in fun.
LOL, you're getting under his skin ....keep up the good work :)
And you should know, though while anonymous, vlad_the_imp makes in the top 10% of his European country and he retains his anonymity here because some day he may need to say something negative about IStock, because as of yet, they haven't done enough things wrong.
-
If the conference call doesn't change anything then that is one more option being exhausted. We aren't "falling" for anything Caspixel but attempting the path of least resistance first.
Well, judging from the fraud conference call, sorry to say, nothing changed. All iStock did was to get trusted members of the community to back them up and it got people to stop talking about audits and lawsuits. I can't see much more coming out of the Vetta illustration conference call. But just like the fraud one, people were convinced iStock "cared" just by having it. It's definitely one of the more brilliant strategies they devised lately, that's for sure.
-
And you should know, though while anonymous, vlad_the_imp makes in the top 10% of his European country and he retains his anonymity here because some day he may need to say something negative about IStock, because as of yet, they haven't done enough things wrong.
Ha! Thanks for reminding me how "important" he is. Clearly I should be crushed by his ill opinion of me. ;)
-
@caspixel
This conference call is different from the fraud call. They just took our money and some contributors got to listen to the reason why it was done.
I and hopefully everyone one on that list has already contacted support to opt-out of Vetta. If the conference call does not get us our main collection royalty rate for Vetta then I'm staying opted-out.
If Istock decides to punish me for demanding the royalty rate I earned through the canister system and then through the RC system for Vetta then I have the option to drop the crown.
-
@caspixel
This conference call is different from the fraud call. They just took our money and some contributors got to listen to the reason why it was done.
I and hopefully everyone one on that list has already contacted support to opt-out of Vetta. If the conference call does not get us our main collection royalty rate for Vetta then I'm staying opted-out.
If Istock decides to punish me for demanding the royalty rate I earned through the canister system and then through the RC system for Vetta then I have the option to drop the crown.
I wish you good luck!!
-
The call is over, quoting Rogermexico:
"We've just finished the phone call with the Vector group. We are going to do some email follow up with them on a few things. In my opinion it was a really productive discussion. There will likely be a few days with little news so give them some time and space. From the iStock side, we intend to make a post next week with a proposal to the whole Vector community. Thanks Nico_blue, daveturton, johnwoodcock and sodafish for having the discussion!"
-
The call is over, quoting Rogermexico:
"We've just finished the phone call with the Vector group. We are going to do some email follow up with them on a few things. In my opinion it was a really productive discussion. There will likely be a few days with little news so give them some time and space. From the iStock side, we intend to make a post next week with a proposal to the whole Vector community. Thanks Nico_blue, daveturton, johnwoodcock and sodafish for having the discussion!"
So, they have to run it past Getty? :D
-
The call is over, quoting Rogermexico:
"We've just finished the phone call with the Vector group. We are going to do some email follow up with them on a few things. In my opinion it was a really productive discussion. There will likely be a few days with little news so give them some time and space. From the iStock side, we intend to make a post next week with a proposal to the whole Vector community. Thanks Nico_blue, daveturton, johnwoodcock and sodafish for having the discussion!"
was this also video or just vector?
-
The call is over, quoting Rogermexico:
"We've just finished the phone call with the Vector group. We are going to do some email follow up with them on a few things. In my opinion it was a really productive discussion. There will likely be a few days with little news so give them some time and space. From the iStock side, we intend to make a post next week with a proposal to the whole Vector community. Thanks Nico_blue, daveturton, johnwoodcock and sodafish for having the discussion!"
So, they have to run it past Getty? :D
Either they are going to give contributors their money, or they're not. Again with the whole big drama. Dragging it out a week buys Getty/IS more time to take more money.
-
Either they are going to give contributors their money, or they're not. Again with the whole big drama.
And the NDA. ::)
-
This NDA "We can't say anything yet" business is just weird.
-
This NDA "We can't say anything yet" business is just weird.
Exactly. Still no news. I guess they are hoping that just because there was a conference call, all the dissenting voices will be silent. Why can't they just make their "big announcement" and be done with all the stupid drama. Why even have the conference call when the people can't even talk about it? And if there is going to be a "big announcement" why have the conference call at all? The whole thing is so cloaked in such ridiculous drama, and it's clearly just one big diversionary tactic.
-
This NDA "We can't say anything yet" business is just weird.
Exactly. Still no news. I guess they are hoping that just because there was a conference call, all the dissenting voices will be silent. Why can't they just make their "big announcement" and be done with all the stupid drama. Why even have the conference call when the people can't even talk about it? And if there is going to be a "big announcement" why have the conference call at all? The whole thing is so cloaked in such ridiculous drama, and it's clearly just one big diversionary tactic.
The whole thing is just naive.
-
I don't understand why a conference call was thought to be a way of resolving this. The fraud clawback was one thing, where I'm prepared to believe there were things going on that couldn't be told on open forums.
But this one is bizarre. What could be said more in the conference call than could be said, or indeed has already been said in the forums?
"Here's the deal. We know how excited we are about it ($$$) and hope you'll all sign up".
"Bum steer. No way."
-
I have to say, the conference call worked like a charm though. Virtually no one is talking about a Vector Vetta rebellion anymore. That thread is pretty much dead over there now. And I haven't heard anything about the video rebellion since their conference call. Well done iStock! Brilliantly played.
-
IS just delete Dave Turton's message about conference call. I could read the message before deletion and there was really no big deal. Game is getting heavy and starts to look like something Mafia pratices.
-
^^^
I believe that spirit is well known from forums of some other MS sites. Nothing new. IS is just getting in line with them on that front. Not the special community it used to be...
-
Oh snap! Dave's reply is gone! The way I read his comment was that he alluded to an initial percentage increase for the start up of Vetta Vectors in order to lure in contributors, but the percentage bump would be short lived. Please note this is my take on what I read.
-
Oh snap! Dave's reply is gone! The way I read his comment was that he alluded to an initial percentage increase for the start up of Vetta Vectors in order to lure in contributors, but the percentage bump would be short lived. Please note this is my take on what I read.
That was my interpretation as well.
-
Oh snap! Dave's reply is gone! The way I read his comment was that he alluded to an initial percentage increase for the start up of Vetta Vectors in order to lure in contributors, but the percentage bump would be short lived. Please note this is my take on what I read.
That was my interpretation as well.
Mine too. I'm not an illustrator but have been following the thread closely because decisions made about vector Vetta could affect a wider net of contributors.
By giving illustrators some kind of 'non permanent %ge boost', iStock will presumably be trying to get the critical mass of illustrators to sign up to Vetta, while avoiding pressure to give any concessions to photographers.
On a side note, I got a Vetta EL today. Received $61.60 for an EL which cost the customer 150 credits, or $220 in this case. Hope iStock finds their $158.40 (72% share) from the EL to be sustainable. At the old rate of 40% + 10% bonus, I would have been paid $110 for the EL sale at the same price.
The amount of extra income that iStock is be taking from Vetta photo sales alone, since they slashed royalties last September must be mind boggling.
-
Mine too. I'm not an illustrator but have been following the thread closely because decisions made about vector Vetta could affect a wider net of contributors.
By giving illustrators some kind of 'non permanent %ge boost', iStock will presumably be trying to get the critical mass of illustrators to sign up to Vetta, while avoiding pressure to give any concessions to photographers.
On a side note, I got a Vetta EL today. Received $61.60 for an EL which cost the customer 150 credits, or $220 in this case. Hope iStock finds their $158.40 (72% share) from the EL to be sustainable. At the old rate of 40% + 10% bonus, I would have been paid $110 for the EL sale at the same price.
The amount of extra income that iStock is be taking from Vetta photo sales alone, since they slashed royalties last September must be mind boggling.
"... but money isn't what keeps you coming here."
-
Mine too. I'm not an illustrator but have been following the thread closely because decisions made about vector Vetta could affect a wider net of contributors.
By giving illustrators some kind of 'non permanent %ge boost', iStock will presumably be trying to get the critical mass of illustrators to sign up to Vetta, while avoiding pressure to give any concessions to photographers.
On a side note, I got a Vetta EL today. Received $61.60 for an EL which cost the customer 150 credits, or $220 in this case. Hope iStock finds their $158.40 (72% share) from the EL to be sustainable. At the old rate of 40% + 10% bonus, I would have been paid $110 for the EL sale at the same price.
The amount of extra income that iStock is be taking from Vetta photo sales alone, since they slashed royalties last September must be mind boggling.
"... but money isn't what keeps you coming here."
Imagine how bad it might've been if JJRD wasn't out there putting his ass on the line for all you exclusives ::)
-
IS just delete Dave Turton's message about conference call
IS didn't delete it.
-
IS just delete Dave Turton's message about conference call
IS didn't delete it.
Confirmed.
-
Still, I was surprised that he removed the post. It was sincere and informative. Dave stated he removed the post because he just needed to move on.
-
IS just delete Dave Turton's message about conference call
IS didn't delete it.
Confirmed.
Funny, seems that Dave was afraid of some IS retaliation.
-
Why are the others that participated in this conference call so silent? And where's iStock's "big announcement"? The whole thing is so disrespectful to the illustrators.
-
Still, I was surprised that he removed the post. It was sincere and informative. Dave stated he removed the post because he just needed to move on.
------------------------------------
Sounds to me like either he's saying its hopeless that Istock will not change, or he's afraid of what Istock will do to him for speaking his mind. Either way its bad for all.
-
Still, I was surprised that he removed the post. It was sincere and informative. Dave stated he removed the post because he just needed to move on.
------------------------------------
Sounds to me like either he's saying its hopeless that Istock will not change, or he's afraid of what Istock will do to him for speaking his mind. Either way its bad for all.
That seems inconsiderate to the other illustrators out there, since he was supposed to be their representative at the conference call, right?. Now he's abandoning them by removing his post and moving on? I thought this conference call was supposed to help people decide what to do. The ongoing silence is so strange. Nothing like being left in limbo. :(
-
Now he's abandoning them by removing his post and moving on?
If you actually really bothered to follow what was going rather than jumping in only half understanding in your normal swivel-eyed way you'd understand. The ongoing silence isn't strange, he hasn't 'abandoned the other illustrators'. The conference call was last week, IS promised to report back to the vector contributors this week sometime, the conference call reps. were under an NDA and were told IS would contact them some time after the call to OK what was said, DaveTurton jumped the gun and then thought better of it. Simple and non-conspiracy like and openly available info for anyone who wants to discover the facts.
He isn't 'moving on', he stated in his post he was going with the new deal IS were offering.
-
Why are the others that participated in this conference call so silent? And where's iStock's "big announcement"? The whole thing is so disrespectful to the illustrators.
Difficult-to-spin we can do immediately, impossible-to-spin takes a little longer.
-
In his original post he said that 90% of the contributors would be very happy with the deal that was offered. He is also taking it himself.
He just pointed out that he now better understood the bigger changes going on in the industry and the pressure everyone was under. So whatever rates we have, we shouldn´t rely on them to stay unchanged forever. Nothing new there. We all know that there is a complete oversupply of images and that it is a buyers world out there.
Really no conspiracy. But you have to bother reading things yourself...
-
In his original post he said that 90% of the contributors would be very happy with the deal that was offered. He is also taking it himself.
He just pointed out that he now better understood the bigger changes going on in the industry and the pressure everyone was under. So whatever rates we have, we shouldn´t rely on them to stay unchanged forever. Nothing new there. We all know that there is a complete oversupply of images and that it is a buyers world out there.
Really no conspiracy. But you have to bother reading things yourself...
Good recap, well said. :)
-
Really no conspiracy. But you have to bother reading things yourself...
Exactly, the trouble is there are people here such as caspixel who are desperate to find a stick to beat istock with, to avenge her own ejection from the istock forums for being a frothing mentalist, and are not interested in letting the facts interfere with her own nutty theories.
-
That seems inconsiderate to the other illustrators out there, since he was supposed to be their representative at the conference call, right?. Now he's abandoning them by removing his post and moving on? I thought this conference call was supposed to help people decide what to do. The ongoing silence is so strange. Nothing like being left in limbo.
Oddly enough, I agree with you. I thought this was going to be like the fraud call. "We had X discussion ( as much as we can say ) and we feel Y way about it, and they are going to comment Z on it next week". I must have misunderstood the purpose of the call.
-
And nowwwww its gonna get locked. To help us deal with it. That's just super. I would have deleted too if I was Dave. Istock is cutthroat and doesn't mind sending threats through email about account removal and whatever it wants. I admire him wanting to tell us all what's up, but totally understand why he decided to hold off.
-
my first thought was that he jumped the gun then realized what he did so he went back and removed it. I was think it was due to the NDA.
sometimes silence speaks louder than words.
-
my first thought was that he jumped the gun then realized what he did so he went back and removed it.
That is exactly right. He also stated that he was going to accept the deal that was going to be on the table so whatever it is it can't be too bad, as he was pretty definitely opposed previously.
-
my first thought was that he jumped the gun then realized what he did so he went back and removed it.
That is exactly right. He also stated that he was going to accept the deal that was going to be on the table so whatever it is it can't be too bad, as he was pretty definitely opposed previously.
or he realized that IS had him by the short and curlies and he had no choice but to take the scraps that they offered or he'd never be able to buy that new lens cap.
-
my first thought was that he jumped the gun then realized what he did so he went back and removed it.
That is exactly right. He also stated that he was going to accept the deal that was going to be on the table so whatever it is it can't be too bad, as he was pretty definitely opposed previously.
or he realized that IS had him by the short and curlies and he had no choice but to take the scraps that they offered or he'd never be able to buy that new lens cap.
dont you mean wacom tablet?
Im thinking he got a private email regarding his post from the admins so he took it down himself.
-
One thing that stuck in my head that he said was that iStock *really* needs the participation of the illustrators to get this program off the ground. The thought that went through my head was that there's a lot of stuff iStock *could* do for the contributors to help the contributors get their own programs off the ground. So again, it's iStock taking taking taking and giving nothing back. I'm sure the deal will be underwhelming. Dave didn't seem resigned in his post, not excited.
I'm also really surprised at how reluctant they are to speak, the participants in the fraud conference call seemed quite comfortable sharing their thoughts, even with the NDA.
And it looks like iStock is still waiting on approval from Getty (the whole 'i's & 't's being crossed spin...)
-
my first thought was that he jumped the gun then realized what he did so he went back and removed it.
That is exactly right. He also stated that he was going to accept the deal that was going to be on the table so whatever it is it can't be too bad, as he was pretty definitely opposed previously.
or he realized that IS had him by the short and curlies and he had no choice but to take the scraps that they offered or he'd never be able to buy that new lens cap.
That's what it sounds like to me.
-
my first thought was that he jumped the gun then realized what he did so he went back and removed it.
That is exactly right. He also stated that he was going to accept the deal that was going to be on the table so whatever it is it can't be too bad, as he was pretty definitely opposed previously.
or he realized that IS had him by the short and curlies and he had no choice but to take the scraps that they offered or he'd never be able to buy that new lens cap.
That's what it sounds like to me.
I saw the post in question and thought it lacked any hope or excitement. It seemed more despondent, imo.
-
In his original post he said that 90% of the contributors would be very happy with the deal that was offered. He is also taking it himself.
He just pointed out that he now better understood the bigger changes going on in the industry and the pressure everyone was under. So whatever rates we have, we shouldn´t rely on them to stay unchanged forever. Nothing new there. We all know that there is a complete oversupply of images and that it is a buyers world out there.
Really no conspiracy. But you have to bother reading things yourself...
Difficult to read posts which have been removed.
But essentially, the bottom line is we're all screwed?
In which case, I'd like to see a bit less money wasting by/at HQ. Why is it only the contributors who are getting squeezed?
-
In his original post he said that 90% of the contributors would be very happy with the deal that was offered. He is also taking it himself.
He just pointed out that he now better understood the bigger changes going on in the industry and the pressure everyone was under. So whatever rates we have, we shouldn´t rely on them to stay unchanged forever. Nothing new there. We all know that there is a complete oversupply of images and that it is a buyers world out there.
Really no conspiracy. But you have to bother reading things yourself...
Difficult to read posts which have been removed.
But essentially, the bottom line is we're all screwed?
In which case, I'd like to see a bit less money wasting by/at HQ. Why is it only the contributors who are getting squeezed?
They squeeze you because they can....
-
No real conspiracies going on... you will hear our thoughts once the official announcement comes out from istock, the update from rogermexico said it will be in a few days.
-
Anyone wanna take bets on if they will actually say anything this week?
-
... once the official announcement comes out from istock, the update from rogermexico said it will be in a few days.
They said (several times) that the 2011 RC targets would be published within the first quarter too. Still waiting.
-
Anyone wanna take bets on if they will actually say anything this week?
im sure the new proposal is being looked at by Getty's management which has multiple meetings with H&F accountants. Of course its gonna take time between 3 companies and multiple meetings so my bet wouldnt be this week!
-
to think i was so happy not to be in a regular 9-5 job with all the corporate bs... then came sept 2010
-
... once the official announcement comes out from istock, the update from rogermexico said it will be in a few days.
They said (several times) that the 2011 RC targets would be published within the first quarter too. Still waiting.
... and that was after they missed their own target of January.
http://www.istockphoto.com/article_view.php?ID=861 (http://www.istockphoto.com/article_view.php?ID=861) -> "Every year in January we will post the Redeemed Credit targets for the upcoming year." Year one and they've already missed it by a mile.
iStock should really append 'if we feel like it' to every commitment they give.
-
iStock should really append 'if we feel like it' to every commitment they give.
istock is like the govt... inefficient. too many people with different agendas contradicting each other so its a snails pace.
-
Must be bad news. They'll wait until Friday at 4:45PM to release it.
-
iStock should really append 'if we feel like it' to every commitment they give.
LOL!!! Nice one!
Guess the "if we feel like it" is implied.... ;)
-
iStock should really append 'if we feel like it' to every commitment they give.
reminds me of the fortune cookie 'game' (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fortune_cookie#In_popular_culture)...
-
waiting anxiously for the news they are supposed to deliver today.. They will deliver it today right...?? That's what they said... Why would they not, right?
-
waiting anxiously for the news they are supposed to deliver today.. They will deliver it today right...?? That's what they said... Why would they not, right?
If you go by past performance, yes, important news is delivered on a Friday afternoon, usually it contains something that is a negative for the contributors, and then no one can contact HQ for at least the weekend and can only stew and post on the forums. ala drama queens.
-
waiting anxiously for the news they are supposed to deliver today.. They will deliver it today right...?? That's what they said... Why would they not, right?
If you go by past performance, yes, important news is delivered on a Friday afternoon, usually it contains something that is a negative for the contributors, and then no one can contact HQ for at least the weekend and can only stew and post on the forums. ala drama queens.
Or alternately, they won't release the new announcement for several more months. And it will still be a crappy deal.
-
A few more hours and we may have another addition to the broken promises list … :'(
-
A few more hours and we may have another addition to the broken promises list … :'(
I'll get the "Istock Epic Fail" thread warmed up so that it's ready for action.
-
A few more hours and we may have another addition to the broken promises list … :'(
I'll get the "Istock Epic Fail" thread warmed up so that it's ready for action.
HAHAHA
-
A few more hours and we may have another addition to the broken promises list … :'(
I'll get the "Istock Epic Fail" thread warmed up so that it's ready for action.
LOL!
-
The natives are getting restless…
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=324372&page=1 (http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=324372&page=1)
-
Unfortunately, it doesn't look like we're getting that promised update...
-
Surely, they will at least have the decency to post an update today as to when they will have an answer - if they aren't going to give an actual answer today.
-
Apparently not.
-
I just don't understand why they can't eat a little crow and post that they should have had the update out, but they're sorry they're late. It wouldn't get anyone answers, but it would at least appear that they gave a flying eff about meeting their commitments.
I don't know if they have a crappy work ethic, if they're horrendously incompetent, they truly consider contributors unimportant so that it isn't really a commitment if you tell a contributor you'll do something.
If it were just this, it'd be one thing, but this has happened over and over on many issues over many weeks.
This is on topic, although it won't sound like it at first. My husband has become enamored of the program Gordon Ramsay's Kitchen Nightmares. We were discussing the IS disaster-of-the-day over dinner a few days back and my husband asked my daughter "what does Gordon Ramsay say?". "Bleep" came the answer :) Not sure if they air the swearing in the UK, but on BBC America it's bleeped out - that's how I can tell from the other side of the house if my husband is watching it - the steady stream of bleeps...
At any rate, this show is where Ramsay goes in to straighten out failing restaurants and read the riot act to various non performing staff. My husband thinks we should send Ramsay to Calgary to sort out iStock :) While I think the footage would be funny, I read an article a while back that said that the restaurants Ramsay "saves" typically end up going under anyway...
-
:D
It would make for a good laugh, certainly - although I'm not sure that Gordon Ramsay and good manners/etiquette are synonymous ;)
FYI - swearing is broadcast on UK TV after 'the watershed' (i.e. after 9pm), and bleeped out before that (generally speaking - although there have been slip-ups). I'm pretty sure I heard all the swearing when I used to watch this programme, so it must have been broadcast after the watershed here.
-
iStock could go on for months not making any kind of announcement. And they have effectively muzzled the leaders of the charge by making them swear not to disclose anything until that time. Rebellion quashed.
-
I just don't understand why they can't eat a little crow and post that they should have had the update out, but they're sorry they're late. It wouldn't get anyone answers, but it would at least appear that they gave a flying eff about meeting their commitments.
You'd rather they lied?
-
Well, a couple of the appointed phone participants chirped in to say that there is a continuing dialogue with TPTB. IMO one thing is certain, contributor input is absolutely ineffective.
-
Well, a couple of the appointed phone participants chirped in to say that there is a continuing dialogue with TPTB. IMO one thing is certain, contributor input is absolutely ineffective.
So, lots of talk, no real action.
-
Well, a couple of the appointed phone participants chirped in to say that there is a continuing dialogue with TPTB. IMO one thing is certain, contributor input is absolutely ineffective.
So, lots of talk, no real action.
Lol! I can't confirm how much" talk", but if there is any "action" it is definitely behind the scenes. :)
-
Hey
-
At least rogermexico came back and explained why they didn't post anything this week.. OH WAIT.. no .. he didn't did he? Kudos Istock.. Classy.
-
so.....maybe this week? I'll start holding my breath now.
-
so.....maybe this week? I'll start holding my breath now.
For whom the flowers should be sent? :D :D
-
so.....maybe this week? I'll start holding my breath now.
For whom the flowers should be sent? :D :D
LOL ;D
-
I just saw RypeArts is no longer exclusive. Something to do with the rebellion?
-
I just saw RypeArts is no longer exclusive. Something to do with the rebellion?
No, he's got his own site now, and it looks very cool:
http://vectormill.com/ (http://vectormill.com/)
I'm eager to hear how it is working out for him.
-
I just saw RypeArts is no longer exclusive. Something to do with the rebellion?
No, he's got his own site now, and it looks very cool:
[url]http://vectormill.com/[/url] ([url]http://vectormill.com/[/url])
I'm eager to hear how it is working out for him.
Good for him, I wish him the best of luck.
P.S. Love your tagline...one of my fav songs.
-
Here is the update:
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=325962&page=1 (http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=325962&page=1)
-
Knowing the "heavy hand" above, I think that seems like a reasonable compromise. Not that I have a lot of Vetta Illustration or Video quality.
-
Knowing the "heavy hand" above, I think that seems like a reasonable compromise. Not that I have a lot of Vetta Illustration or Video quality.
I'm not sure I see it as a 'compromise' as such. Istock, as usual, were just being their greedy selves and trying to keep more of the pie. They raised prices for customers and basically tried to avoid giving anything at all to the contributors. Unfortunately for Istock this time the contributors were able to bite back and Istock have simply had to retreat somewhat. The 'compromise' will be from the contributors who are still going to have to accept a lower percentage commission whilst also having to agree to additional conditions.
-
Well big congrats to the videographers and illustrators for hanging tough and getting some concessions. Still not an ideal situation, but better than what was on offer before.
If I were an exclusive illustrator or videographer, I would be working to get my portfolio ready to go independent by the end of 2012/beginning of 2013 when all the rules change.
-
It's not fair, but it's a heck of a lot less unfair than the earlier deal :)
As expected, a thread started in the main forum asking where was the photographer's deal. Until they're willing to put their Vetta income on the line, no deal for them. And enough of them won't even consider opting out, so I can't see anything similar happening for photographers.
...I really wish they could dump the Getty imports (which I think is part of the reason they had to jack up Vetta and Agency prices so high) and go back to where Vetta was initially. Add Agency as a similarly priced collection (light and bright vs. edgy and dark) and keep the royalty rates across the board....
...I dozed off for a bit and was dreaming...
-
Well big congrats to the videographers and illustrators for hanging tough and getting some concessions. Still not an ideal situation, but better than what was on offer before.
If I were an exclusive illustrator or videographer, I would be working to get my portfolio ready to go independent by the end of 2012/beginning of 2013 when all the rules change.
Yep.. That's where I'm at.
-
I'm really starting to feel like the last kid in grade school who believes in Santa.
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=325962&messageid=6322462 (http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=325962&messageid=6322462)
-
Who wants to make bets on when that 10% bonus disappears. I know they *said* it will be in place until Dec 31, 2012, but they've said a lot of things.
-
It's not fair, but it's a heck of a lot less unfair than the earlier deal :)
As expected, a thread started in the main forum asking where was the photographer's deal. Until they're willing to put their Vetta income on the line, no deal for them. And enough of them won't even consider opting out, so I can't see anything similar happening for photographers.
I saw your post in the main forum about there being no chance for photographers to unite and stand up to all this bullsh*t. Why not? Why couldn't we? I know our numbers are much larger, but I don't think it's out of the realm of possibility, and I definitely think there's enough anger brewing on the surface for people to be willing to try.
-
It is the large number of Vetta files from the in group of admins/inspectors that made me say this. I can't see that group taking an adversarial stand. Also that so many have found the extra cash made up for the drops in downloads. Walking away from actual cash is harder than theoretical future cash :)
-
I feel like a beggar asking for a piece of bread. These are only only crumbs tossed over us.
-
..I really wish they could dump the Getty imports (which I think is part of the reason they had to jack up Vetta and Agency prices so high) and go back to where Vetta was initially. Add Agency as a similarly priced collection (light and bright vs. edgy and dark) and keep the royalty rates across the board....
I agree with this. I'm so sick of seeing rubberball and other Getty factories at the top of all the search results.
-
Somebody brought this up in the video forum:
"Will there be more of a legal clause in the contract binding iStock to these rates until the end of 2012 other than just a 'promise' in the forums? We've learned from the past that promises in the forums by admins don't mean anything."
He's right, you know.
-
We've all learned that the contractual agreement doesn't mean anything either.
-
Somebody brought this up in the video forum:
"Will there be more of a legal clause in the contract binding iStock to these rates until the end of 2012 other than just a 'promise' in the forums? We've learned from the past that promises in the forums by admins don't mean anything."
He's right, you know.
Seriously! The artists affected should all take screen shots of this promise so they will have proof if/when they need to sue.
-
Somebody brought this up in the video forum:
"Will there be more of a legal clause in the contract binding iStock to these rates until the end of 2012 other than just a 'promise' in the forums? We've learned from the past that promises in the forums by admins don't mean anything."
He's right, you know.
Good point, especially if someone buys GettyIStock
-
We've all learned that the contractual agreement doesn't mean anything either.
When you have a contract without a fixed end date (which is how the IS ASA is) and you have a clause that says they can change the terms unilaterally at any time just by posting the new terms on the site (which is essentially what the ASA says), whatever they put in the contract is no more binding on them that what they write in the forums.
They can change anything at any time for any or no reason. We get to accept and continue to do business with them or pull our content and leave.
The Getty contract has a term - and although they can still issue a take it or leave it requiring you to sign the new contract when yours is up, there is at least a period during which you have something a bit more stable. I think the weasle out provisions in the Getty contract are via the rate card which I think can change during the contract - to add new products like the cheap web license that earlier had a lot of Getty contributors furious with them.
That long post that got deleted from one of the conference call participants referred to us (contributors) learning to live with this "nothing is certain" state of affairs. I really do get the idea in principle, but when the combination of naked greed and a bunch of spin about how it's all so good for us as contributors get combined, it's very hard to live with all the changes being so one-sided.
And yes, I know I can delete my portfolio and leave - I consider that on a weekly basis :)
-
I think I'm going to work on an illustration of a lemming riding a sheep over a cliff today. ;D
-
I think I'm going to work on an illustration of a lemming riding a sheep over a cliff today. ;D
Perfect! Can't wait to see that one :D
-
I think I'm going to work on an illustration of a lemming riding a sheep over a cliff today. ;D
Hilarious! You will post when you are done, right?
-
We've all learned that the contractual agreement doesn't mean anything either.
Yes, so true, and the jsnover answer has the correct reasons why. A screen shot of a promise from the moderator or the president doesn't mean spit! There's a notification period and the change goes into effect. The contract only protects them, not us!
-
Who exactly is rubberballs by the way?
-
Who exactly is rubberballs by the way?
ball singular :) RubberBall images (http://www.rubberball.com/services/about.html). They are one of the Agency Collection pseudo-exclusives on iStock (http://www.istockphoto.com/user_view.php?id=6549683), and here (http://www.gettyimages.com/Search/Search.aspx?query=z.i.H4sIAAAAAAAEAOy9B2AcSZYlJi9tynt_SvVK1-B0oQiAYBMk2JBAEOzBiM3mkuwdaUcjKasqgcplVmVdZhZAzO2dvPfee--999577733ujudTif33_8_XGZkAWz2zkrayZ4hgKrIHz9-fB8_In7dfLn91etf49f4NX6PX_dskV3kvyb9mtD_f41f8_-m59e48fk1zc-krqr2ZVZni8Z89mvh_7s7vxH9-PXevb5uTt-ZN35N729umZ1bgPo7Xv61s_Op7cD_49fGBzsMf9G6Nxftr6u__xa_Bndtf91zv95zv953v-7zr78O9VFaePYvdPfr0h_1wiDQ-fPXR_Nd_PXr8ecTC6PzN792bscU_slQdiyU8w6U84lpiFH-Wq-eWIB1iJb9kwHuWYB1B6D7m2ibWxjmD_yfCb0LQhMx8pV9P_jr184njf3G_MGTk7sevd9_rdw1937_tZvVyn6OPwxGv5V98XLqXryc_tr6-2-Jv3fsb_v2t1389utUtcd49i_-apL7X5m_8Pzas6ul-f3XNH_8Ovh_s_ZGG_z1a-eZw8__g35f-V_YP37dJoAW_vlrv3v23HE__WG_yGoPN--P36iZVqv8yXo5Kz0SB58agD8OOA927uP3X4dYa22bB3_9OvNa_hAKmb_w_Hov8qu8af-fAAAA___zT7dMQQQAAA..) on Getty Images (not Agency Collection).
I say pseudo-exclusive as they operate by none of the regular rules of iStock exclusivity - they sell RF images from their own web site, for example, have no upload limits.
-
Ooh! Thanks jsnover. I had no idea. ;)
-
I think I'm going to work on an illustration of a lemming riding a sheep over a cliff today. ;D
Perfect! Can't wait to see that one :D
I was joking, but you've called my bluff. I guess I'll have to work on one when I get some free time.
-
I think I'm going to work on an illustration of a lemming riding a sheep over a cliff today. ;D
Perfect! Can't wait to see that one :D
I was joking, but you've called my bluff. I guess I'll have to work on one when I get some free time.
Actually, I can see that being a big seller. It's topical to much more than iStock these days. ;D
-
This isn't generally visible because it's in the Vetta forum, but apparently they gave insufficient attention to the details of rolling out Vetta for video and illustrations.
Now the program is accepting nominations, contributors who want to participate are running into bugs that prevent them from doing that.
Trying to nominate a legacy file, they get the error "This file was previously in the Vetta Collection but it is no longer eligible for nominations" which is what you would get if you had taken a file out of Vetta and tried to nominate it again later.
Trying to nominate a new file upon upload, they get the error:
(http://www.friztin.com/images/vettaerror.jpg)
It's hard to say if this is because they're rushing this, or it's just the typical poor quality software rollout.
-
The only files I've had accepted so far into Veta this round are questionable. Not files I consider to be "vetta material"