MicrostockGroup
Agency Based Discussion => iStockPhoto.com => Topic started by: sharpshot on August 24, 2013, 04:09
-
Are you tired of reading all these threads about the latest problems with istock? I can understand exclusives sticking with them but isn't it time non-exclusives did something? I know lots of people have already left or removed images but it seems like there's lots that spend time whinging about them while doing noting about it. We did do something positive with D-Day and that was a success for me. I removed my 500 best images and have no regrets. Perhaps the best thing to do is to inform any buyers you know that istock pay non-exclusives 15 to 19% commission. The few I've spoken to are shocked by how little we get paid. Now that prices have been slashed for non-exclusives and I'll be getting another commission cut at the end of the year, I'll start removing more images.
-
I'm going to pay attention to this thread a while. I'm more concerned about my images being pawned off in some major sell-out move due to the declining circumstances.
-
Are you tired of reading all these threads about the latest problems with istock? I can understand exclusives sticking ovwith them but isn't it time non-exclusives did something? I know lots of people have already left or removed images but it seems like there's lots that spend time whinging about them while doing noting about it. We did do something positive with D-Day and that was a success for me. I removed my 500 best images and have no regrets. Perhaps the best thing to do is to inform any buyers you know that istock pay non-exclusives 15 to 19% commission. The few I've spoken to are shocked by how little we get paid. Now that prices have been slashed for non-exclusives and I'll be getting another commission cut at the end of the year, I'll start removing more images.
I have already removed all images from istock
-
I have already removed all images from istock
This would seem the obvious answer, if it's so terrible why not just close your account?
-
I have already removed all images from istock. Long before d-day.
-
interesting topic, the other day I did a small list of many contributors, the ones that contribute here regularly and also other, I have found a contributor that left this forum I believe after Tyler entering the topic regarding anonymity, he uploaded close to 10k pictures this year
so I wonder if 10 or 50 stopped uploading will change anything, I am starting to think we are just give them advantage as they will continue to collect as our income dry
-
I too deleted a ton of images on D-Day.
Then in July after the latest price cut, when on the 10th I had only sold $21 dollars for the month, I deleted over 500 more only leaving 5 images.
After the August PP payouts are in, I will have passed payout and will drop the account.
I also had to open a support ticket to get the images off of TS and Photos.com, just like after D-Day.
-
"so I wonder if 10 or 50 stopped uploading will change anything,"
Of course it will make no difference to IS, in the same way so-called D-Day made no difference, I doubt it was even noticed at IS. There are tens of thousands of contributors there,new accounts are opened all the time, accounts are closed all the time, a few more here or there makes no difference .
-
"so I wonder if 10 or 50 stopped uploading will change anything,"
Of course it will make no difference to IS, in the same way so-called D-Day made no difference, I doubt it was even noticed at IS. There are tens of thousands of contributors there,new accounts are opened all the time, accounts are closed all the time, a few more here or there makes no difference .
I think what will be telling is the next pay cut in January. Everyone BUT Istock loses.....again. I doubt the sweethearts at GI/IS will adjust the RC levels accordingly, so expect a flurry of new threads come February. This "may" force more exclusives to drop the crown and more, overall, to drop IS altogether. Interesting how IS is DEAD SILENT on the upcoming RC issue.
-
interesting topic, the other day I did a small list of many contributors, the ones that
so I wonder if 10 or 50 stopped uploading will change anything, I am starting to think we are just give them advantage as they will continue to collect as our income dry
It will make no difference to iStock.
They papped Sean because he was trying to call them to rights; they don't give a d*mn about any of us (and probably neither do any of the others).
If you leave, it's for yourself only.
Just don't think they'll even blink as you fly out the door.
I've read that they don't even send out a debriefing email when someone leaves / quits exclusivity - which tells you all you need to know . If they GAD, they'd be finding out why people leave and sort the things that can be sorted.
-
I deleted about 1/3 of my portfolio some time ago. They are irrelevant, they are a waste of time.
I focus on making money elsewhere.
IS cannot be trusted, and it's good that they are getting weaker and weaker. It is not so difficult to replace an 'unsustainable' source of income.
For what it's worth, this month so far I made just a little bit more on Stocksy than on Istock. However, my Stocksy port size is less than 6% of my remaining IS port. Maybe the sample size is still too small to draw conclusions, but anyway I expect Stocksy to continue to grow. For a young agency the results are excellent.
I still have one file at IS that is still usually No. 1 or 2 in the best match of a very popular keyword search and approaching a blue flame. This file doesn't perform as it used to, which tells me it is not me who sucks, it is them. And that is good so.
They are a waste of time, I have moved on to other projects and ideas.
-
so I wonder if 10 or 50 stopped uploading will change anything, I am starting to think we are just give them advantage as they will continue to collect as our income dry
They clearly want more vectors, so I assume they are hurting on that front. I'm not sure what happened though.
-
Regarding vectors. I think they were much easier to leave or ignor because there are a number of better options, not just shutterstock.
-
Regarding vectors. I think they were much easier to leave or ignor because there are a number of better options, not just shutterstock.
That could be it. I just think it is interesting that iStock seems to be courting the vector side a little bit more lately.
-
There seems to be a big push on transferring files to PP.
I'll wait and see.
-
I stopped uploading ages ago. IS is a waste of nerves and time. Which is sad because IS backed by Getty has/had the potential to a least be/stay on par with SS. Sometimes, however, I get the feeling they are deliberately sinking their ship. I mean can bad management really be that bad by accident?
-
;
-
I really don't think we need to do anything at all. iStock seems perfectly capable of self-destructing without any input from us. Too bad, too, as up until about a year ago it looked like the place to be.
I'm hoping that the future lies in concepts like Symbiostock, in the rise of smaller specialty agencies like Macrografiks (which I'm a part of) and in the likes of Stocksy....away from the large self-serving and impersonal corporate agencies and more toward those with customer and contributor service at the forefront.
-
If I delete my images on iStock or close my account
- Will I create some damage to iStock? No
- Will I make more money with iStock? No
- Will I make more money with other sites? No
So what?
-
;
-
If I delete my images on iStock or close my account
- Will I create some damage to iStock? No
- Will I make more money with iStock? No
- Will I make more money with other sites? No
So what?
Three is hard to determine. My earnings jumped at some other places after I left IS. Maybe, it was coincidence. Maybe, it wasn't.
-
I stopped uploading ages ago. IS is a waste of nerves and time. Which is sad because IS backed by Getty has/had the potential to a least be/stay on par with SS. Sometimes, however, I get the feeling they are deliberately sinking their ship. I mean can bad management really be that bad by accident?
I've often wondered exactly the same thing.
-
Yep. Totally dysfunctional and a sinking ship BUT, like Beppo suggests, still probably generate better returns than most others (SS excepted of course).
-
The target of iStock(Getty) is to compete ShutterStock with their ThinkStock.
iStock(Getty) have only the half of ShutterStock images.
It would be interesting to see what would happend in the next months.
-
When they raised their commision for selling my content to 85% I began to look closer at them.
I did a bit of calculations and found out that with my content, they have been able to pay a couple of employees for a year or maybe only a half. But they never spent a minute of their time on me. They didnt even bother to care for my interests.
Then I also noted that all communication from them to me was extremely arrogant, if there was any.
Even if it was on the personal level in the forums.
I was always met with lies, cover ups, manipulations and cheats on the level of Nigerian scams.
In all areas! both with money, facts, processes and future development.
It was always lies, and it was always one sided and it was everywhere.
I had the feeling that no mean would be spared to squeeze the last drop of blood out of me, and I would get nothing back.
I simply will not accept to pay 85% commission for anybody to sell my content, and certainly not if they are not very polite. The annoy factor rose far above the level where you decide to do something about it.
Im not going to be taken the piss on for 15%.
Not!
So I joined D-day and took my content out of their hands, left only a symbolic image.
PLUS, I demean them whereever I can, spread the negative word wherever I can. I still do.
-
It would be interesting to see what would happend in the next months.
I think there will be a full on price war on non premium content sooner or later. But I doubt that Getty and Shutterstock would need to square up against each other whilst they can both still put pressure on Fotolia, Dreamstime and the others. I do not believe that the microstock market is growing therefore it must be about taking market share. A price war could wipe out other microstock companies.
I think that Getty currently still has the potential advantage over Shutterstock in that it has businesses which represent all of the different price points. That could make Shutterstock vulnerable to a costly microstock price war. Getty could further slash prices at iStock and really start pushing Thinkstock, to lure Shutterstock customers without that necessarily affecting its premium or any other businesses.
-
If I delete my images on iStock or close my account
- Will I create some damage to iStock? No
- Will I make more money with iStock? No
- Will I make more money with other sites? No
So what?
- Will I create some damage to iStock? Yes It might be minuscule but every person that stops uploading, deactivates images or leaves will make them less money.
- Will I make more money with iStock? No But there's not much difference between little and nothing.
- Will I make more money with other sites? Yes I don't know how many people have said they made more money on the other sites when they left istock. It makes sense to me, as it can't be hard for a buyer to have an account with istock and another microstock site? I've seen buyers search really hard for what they want and I'm sure if istock don't have it, a lot of them will look elsewhere.
-
interesting topic, the other day I did a small list of many contributors, the ones that contribute here regularly and also other, I have found a contributor that left this forum I believe after Tyler entering the topic regarding anonymity, he uploaded close to 10k pictures this year
so I wonder if 10 or 50 stopped uploading will change anything, I am starting to think we are just give them advantage as they will continue to collect as our income dry
We forget that these sites are operating on slim margins and losing the top 100 contributors who bring in higher than average download for their images would have a huge effect on their bottom line.
The sites are hoping we will not wake up to this fact.
http://investor.shutterstock.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=251362&p=irol-newsArticle&ID=1845768&highlight (http://investor.shutterstock.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=251362&p=irol-newsArticle&ID=1845768&highlight)
Number of paid downloads in Q2 three months = 24,300,000 x $2.33 Reported Revenue Per Download or $56,619,000.00 SS Revenue per total downloads per Three Months in Q2
Number of paid downloads Q2 2013 24,300,000 / Images in collection (end of Q2) 2013 27,300,000 = .89 Paid Downloads Per Image in SS collection
Lets just say that the top contributors receive the average .89 number of downloads per image in their ports as detailed above.
The 100 top contributors have 3,768,907 files on SS
http://www.microstocktime.ru/tool/stats/ss/ (http://www.microstocktime.ru/tool/stats/ss/)
Top 100 Contributors have 3,768,907 files on SS x .89 Average Paid Downloads Per Image On SS = 3,354,327 downloads.
Or $7,815,582.44 of SS's Q2 Revenue For All Top 100 Contributor Downloads
3,354,327 SS's Q2 100 Top Contributor downloads is 13.8% of 24,300,000 SS' Q2 Total Number of Paid Downloads
-
interesting topic, the other day I did a small list of many contributors, the ones that contribute here regularly and also other, I have found a contributor that left this forum I believe after Tyler entering the topic regarding anonymity, he uploaded close to 10k pictures this year
so I wonder if 10 or 50 stopped uploading will change anything, I am starting to think we are just give them advantage as they will continue to collect as our income dry
I thought like that at one time but it feels good to do something positive for myself about everything I've had to put up with as a non-exclusive istock contributor. If other people don't care about getting the lowest commission percentage, having targets that can't be reached and the fact that they can do deals like the Google one without asking or even informing us about it, that's their problem. They can have my lost earnings, they'll need it. I'd rather concentrate on trying to make microstock work for me and carrying on supplying istock as if there isn't a problem doesn't work for me. I know some of the other sites are almost as bad and I don't have any enthusiasm for them either but at the moment, istock seems like the worst for non-exclusives. So I'll carry on deactivating.
-
IS was the very first stock agency I began uploading with, sometime in 2008, I think. Was thrilled to have my test batch accepted, and I kept uploading regularly for about 1 1/2 - 2 years. It was excruciatingly slow, given their small weekly upload (15 per week, I think) and super-nitpicky process. But over that time, I built up a small port of 250-300 images that was reasonably productive.
Then came the abrupt reduction of royalties from 20% to 15% for non-exclusives like me, plus the jerk-you-around-and-you-can't-do-anything-about-it attitude toward their loyal exclusives. And I decided right then that I didn't want anything more to do with that company.
Early in 2010 (I think) I held off until my next payout, then sent an email saying I wanted to delete all my images and close my account. Done and done in one day. Over the years, I've read these various moan-about-IS threads with interest. They always made me glad I managed to escape that nasty environment before things there got even worse.
-
cut my port down to under 50 mostly old mostly crappy images or ones that did better at IS than anywhere else. I just watch their antics with sadness but not distress now. In July my RPD was about 37.5 cents.
-
I just remembered something else that made me decide to dump IS from my life. Do you guys remember that Christmas Eve or Day (2009 or 2010??) when somebody used fake credit cards to download a gazillion images while the IS employees were out of the office for the holiday? And then we contributors were told the $$ we supposedly had earned from all those holiday "sales" would be deleted from our accounts?
Well, I was one who had a nice run of sales that Christmas, only to learn those $$ were going to be pulled out of my account. And they were.
I figured that if IS couldn't even control its own servers well enough to screen out the non-existent credit card(s), I sure couldn't expect them to protect my images. That helped make my decision to bail out even easier.
-
I just remembered something else that made me decide to dump IS from my life. Do you guys remember that Christmas Eve or Day (2009 or 2010??) when somebody used fake credit cards to download a gazillion images while the IS employees were out of the office for the holiday? And then we contributors were told the $$ we supposedly had earned from all those holiday "sales" would be deleted from our accounts?
Well, I was one who had a nice run of sales that Christmas, only to learn those $$ were going to be pulled out of my account. And they were.
I figured that if IS couldn't even control its own servers well enough to screen out the non-existent credit card(s), I sure couldn't expect them to protect my images. That helped make my decision to bail out even easier.
Ja, I remember that, though I was not hit that day but later and earlier. Their refunds were a major reason why I left them. I am not going to pay for that they can not keep their shop in a secure working order.
-
Ja, I remember that, though I was not hit that day but later and earlier. Their refunds were a major reason why I left them. I am not going to pay for that they can not keep their shop in a secure working order.
+1 Absolutely right.
-
Considering that iS is going bad and worst… (and it is my impression too), I wonder why a photographer considered as the best microstock photographer in the whole universe has decided, in this precise moment, to become exclusive with them?
-
Considering that iS is going bad and worst… (and it is my impression too), I wonder why a photographer considered as the best microstock photographer in the whole universe has decided, in this precise moment, to become exclusive with them?
CASH is the answer, I think. He is watching his RPI eroding for quite a while and can extrapolate the date when his image factory business will become unsustainable. I guess he's switching sides from contributor to agent. Thus, he comes up with his own innovative website, partners with desperate but cash-loaded GI and invests in new ventures such as this Scoopoop (? ;D) business. Makes perfect sense too me. BUT: will it help IS stay afloat? I hope so but have serious doubts. Time will tell.
-
Considering that iS is going bad and worst… (and it is my impression too), I wonder why a photographer considered as the best microstock photographer in the whole universe has decided, in this precise moment, to become exclusive with them?
Because he in fact gave up microstock and parked his port where it could bring back the most revenue while he persued other areas of interest.
-
IStock are like a scab you know you should leave alone but keep going back to thinking it won't bleed.
-
Would I dump iStock if it was a purely emotional decision? YES.
Would I dump iStock if it was a purely business decision? Depends.
They are still the #1 earner for me and they recently reinstated the 20% royalty for illustrators.
Sure, they mistreat contributors, they screw up their site every now and then, they have a horrible forum moderator, but in the end, it's all about the money. When the moment comes that iStock dies in terms of sales, that's the moment I'll ditch them. Even though emotionally, I would ditch them right now. But business-wise, it wouldn't make much sense...yet.
-
I'm trying to convince every photo buyer I know to buy elsewhere... do the same and let IS know your disappointment.
Dear IS, advertising is expensive, and loosing customers thanx to your behavior with contributors is a suicide.
-
I have been exclusive with iStock since 2006. I still like iStock and hope they can make it. To me iStock did not understand the market and that a lot of small buyers were artist as well. When KT started yanking us around things started to go south. SS jumped at the chance and now you have the current situation.
-
Continuing to follow the rumored mass exodus. Is it really happening or just a lot of talk?
If so many are leaving, will that lead to more sales for those who ignore the call for action?
At what point will the rumored mass exodus of contributors lead to a decrease in buyers? Will buyers be satisfied with quality of remaining content?
Also, very active effort in transferring files to Thinkstock. More than three quarters of my port is there. Will that be a good source of increased revenue for independent contributors?
As mentioned above; should a decision to exit be less about emotions and more about revenue?
Just thinking.
:-\
-
I have 3 pictures uploaded in 2013 (2 at Thinkstock, other picture still outside and submitted on May 16th)
from the 2 pictures imported (one approved on Feb 4th and other on Feb 27th)
- 0 sales at iStock
- 18 sales at Thinkstock (5.04$)
my stats don't mean much but I would say that iStock income will continue to drop and Thinkstock will be the only place where independents will sell content (Thinkstock AFAIK doesn't sell exclusive files, at least migration stopped so no more fresh files, yes they still have a few "millions" selling there)
-
If I would upload my entire portfolio to IS, I would make good money on TS, its tempting, but I wont, because;
A) The uploading process, I cant get myself to do it, its too much work
B) The company IS is an unreliable, untrustworthy, incapable company with a very fascist like way of working, and as a company, and their employees, have no respect whatsoever for contributors.
C) Their royalties are criminal on their own
I submitted to IS to pass the test I failed when I started with photography. I wanted to prove myself that I could do it. I also wanted access to the forum, where I got banned. And I wanted to be a contributor, so at least I could experience first hand what everyone was talking about.
When I reach payout, I will take the cash, and delete my account. 40 dollars to go.
Its too bad, because I think I could make at least a couple hundred per month on IS.
-
Although I dislike their lack of communication and snail paced speed to fix anything they are still my top earner so i am with them for the ride...if they stop earning or do something that really compromises my work then I may jump ship...until then IS all the way ;P
-
Although I dislike their lack of communication and snail paced speed to fix anything they are still my top earner so i am with them for the ride...if they stop earning or do something that really compromises my work then I may jump ship...until then IS all the way ;P
were you exclusive?
-
I am exclusive in one content category there, but not all
-
I am exclusive in one content category there, but not all
does that mean you are selling photos at iStock and footage at other? asking that once I have read from your posts that you are working with SS as well, thanks for your reply
-
When I reach payout, I will take the cash, and delete my account. 40 dollars to go.
FYI, if you don't already know, you can close your account and get paid before reaching payout. If all you do is delete your images without actually closing your account then you won't be getting your below-payout balance.
-
Continuing to follow the rumored mass exodus. Is it really happening or just a lot of talk?
If so many are leaving, will that lead to more sales for those who ignore the call for action?
At what point will the rumored mass exodus of contributors lead to a decrease in buyers? Will buyers be satisfied with quality of remaining content?
Also, very active effort in transferring files to Thinkstock. More than three quarters of my port is there. Will that be a good source of increased revenue for independent contributors?
As mentioned above; should a decision to exit be less about emotions and more about revenue?
Just thinking.
:-\
I don't think there's ever been a mass exodus and I'm sure there would be people willing to upload for 5% commission or perhaps less. I just don't want to be one of them.
It does look like the only incentive to upload to istock for non-exclusives could be to use Thinkstock but I really can't be bothered with that. Now the upload limits and review standards have gone, TS will get swamped with low quality images and I think it will be harder to make money there. And Getty/istock would be able to experiment with my images, with deals like the Google one or the nanostock scheme that doesn't get mentioned much here.
-
Continuing to follow the rumored mass exodus. Is it really happening or just a lot of talk?
If so many are leaving, will that lead to more sales for those who ignore the call for action?
At what point will the rumored mass exodus of contributors lead to a decrease in buyers? Will buyers be satisfied with quality of remaining content?
Also, very active effort in transferring files to Thinkstock. More than three quarters of my port is there. Will that be a good source of increased revenue for independent contributors?
As mentioned above; should a decision to exit be less about emotions and more about revenue?
Just thinking.
:-\
I don't think there's ever been a mass exodus and I'm sure there would be people willing to upload for 5% commission or perhaps less. I just don't want to be one of them.
It does look like the only incentive to upload to istock for non-exclusives could be to use Thinkstock but I really can't be bothered with that. Now the upload limits and review standards have gone, TS will get swamped with low quality images and I think it will be harder to make money there. And Getty/istock would be able to experiment with my images, with deals like the Google one or the nanostock scheme that doesn't get mentioned much here.
Sorry, I thought you wanted to know what I (and/or others) were doing.
-
Honestly istock isn't the worst thing going right now for me, personally. I only sell vectors, so I'm locked in at 20%, and vectors are very rarely included in their Google Drive type of deals so I'm mostly dodging that bullet.
I'm not thrilled with what's gone on at istock, but really I have more issues with some other companies right now. istock currently doesn't top the list of companies I'm considering pulling the plug on.
-
I'm not thrilled with what's gone on at istock, but really I have more issues with some other companies right now. istock currently doesn't top the list of companies I'm considering pulling the plug on.
That's been my feeling, Mike
-
Honestly istock isn't the worst thing going right now for me, personally. I only sell vectors, so I'm locked in at 20%, and vectors are very rarely included in their Google Drive type of deals so I'm mostly dodging that bullet.
I'm not thrilled with what's gone on at istock, but really I have more issues with some other companies right now. istock currently doesn't top the list of companies I'm considering pulling the plug on.
can I ask which?
-
I can understand vector contributors being more content with 20% commission. 20% was a big psychological barrier for me. It's a very low commission but feels so much better than 17% with the prospect of 16% next year. If they put the photographers commission back up to 20% minimum and had an opt out for some of their more dubious deals, I'd consider uploading again. Having my earnings chipped away when its already harder to make money each year doesn't appeal to me.
They gain money by cutting commissions but they must lose a lot when people remove their images or only upload to their rival sites? I don't see their policy as being a success in recent years, it looks like it has helped make Shutterstock much stronger. I don't think they will change strategy now but they've made so many changes in the past few years, you never know. If they can give vector artists 20%, perhaps they can bring it back for everyone one day?
-
but they must lose a lot when people remove their images or only upload to their rival sites?
Why would this make any difference to IS? The number of files being uploaded daily far exceeds any removed, plus there are 10 million files ( or whatever the number is) already in the database. Why would a few thousand files, or tens of thousands, being removed, make any difference to buyers? The only person affected is the person removing the files. The buyers search for a subject, find thousands of images that are more or less relevant to their search, and buy one. They don't know yours are no longer there, assuming you have removed some, they just buy someone else's.
-
but they must lose a lot when people remove their images or only upload to their rival sites?
Why would this make any difference to IS? The number of files being uploaded daily far exceeds any removed, plus there are 10 million files ( or whatever the number is) already in the database. Why would a few thousand files, or tens of thousands, being removed, make any difference to buyers? The only person affected is the person removing the files. The buyers search for a subject, find thousands of images that are more or less relevant to their search, and buy one. They don't know yours are no longer there, assuming you have removed some, they just buy someone else's.
I agree that nobody (=buyers) cares if a few thousand images are deleted. There's still enough alternatives up there.
And it looks like the majority of contributors continues to upload.
The conclusion is, that almost everyone will continue to upload even if they cut commissions down to 15%, 10%, 5%, 1%? Because when stopping to upload or removing portfolios "The only person affected is the person removing the files"?
It's a classic version of the prisoner's dilemma.
-
but they must lose a lot when people remove their images or only upload to their rival sites?
Why would this make any difference to IS? The number of files being uploaded daily far exceeds any removed, plus there are 10 million files ( or whatever the number is) already in the database. Why would a few thousand files, or tens of thousands, being removed, make any difference to buyers? The only person affected is the person removing the files. The buyers search for a subject, find thousands of images that are more or less relevant to their search, and buy one. They don't know yours are no longer there, assuming you have removed some, they just buy someone else's.
I do think it makes some difference. New images aren't selling much. They don't seem to be bringing in traffic from Google. I presume old images that were selling well must of been bringing them traffic from Google? Now if someone does a Google search for keywords in my 500 best selling images, they'll find them on all the sites other than istock.
I think that might be one reason why Shutterstock doesn't remove old images and the sites that have removed old images haven't been doing as well?
-
I think you are confusing cause and effect. New images not selling much has nothing to do with a few dozen people here removing a few thousand, or even tens of thousands, of files. How are they possibly connected? New files are not selling because the current best match doesn't favour them, and the issue of Google not promoting IS files has been around for ages. If you are non-exclusive at IS you may well be even more disadvantaged by the best match, but don't try and equate the removal of a minute proportion of the overall collection at IS with their imminent demise, because it just ain't like that.Even SS, the darling of MSG, is getting critical posts here from members concerned with poor sales. IS have made lots of stupid mistakes but there are global influences affecting sales, including huge over-supply of images, piracy, global economics etc etc, it's laughable to think that you imagine removing your 500 files is going to make any difference, apart from in your wallet.
-
If I delete my images on iStock or close my account
- Will I create some damage to iStock? No
- Will I make more money with iStock? No
- Will I make more money with other sites? No
So what?
What was more important to me was self-respect. I dont deserve to be treated the way they treat everyone, so i was willing to sacrifice my monthly sales with them to keep my self respect. There are always other ways to make up the loss of income, and i have.
-
I think you are confusing cause and effect. New images not selling much has nothing to do with a few dozen people here removing a few thousand, or even tens of thousands, of files. How are they possibly connected? New files are not selling because the current best match doesn't favour them, and the issue of Google not promoting IS files has been around for ages. If you are non-exclusive at IS you may well be even more disadvantaged by the best match, but don't try and equate the removal of a minute proportion of the overall collection at IS with their imminent demise, because it just ain't like that.Even SS, the darling of MSG, is getting critical posts here from members concerned with poor sales. IS have made lots of stupid mistakes but there are global influences affecting sales, including huge over-supply of images, piracy, global economics etc etc, it's laughable to think that you imagine removing your 500 files is going to make any difference, apart from in your wallet.
Don't think I've ever said that removing my images is going to bring istock down. That's not why I did it. It is a fact that they have lost the 83% that they were making on my best selling images. They can replace that but they would of had the money from the new images and my old images. So I don't really see how they've lost nothing at all? I'm sure some buyers can't find what they want on istock and the more images the other sites have that istock don't, the more likely that buyer will find it elsewhere. Isn't the point of having exclusive images to attract buyers? That's not going to work as well if the other sites have images that istock don't. So while I don't think removing my images makes a huge difference to istock, I do think that if enough people do it, it has some effect.
-
I think you are confusing cause and effect. New images not selling much has nothing to do with a few dozen people here removing a few thousand, or even tens of thousands, of files. How are they possibly connected? New files are not selling because the current best match doesn't favour them, and the issue of Google not promoting IS files has been around for ages. If you are non-exclusive at IS you may well be even more disadvantaged by the best match, but don't try and equate the removal of a minute proportion of the overall collection at IS with their imminent demise, because it just ain't like that.Even SS, the darling of MSG, is getting critical posts here from members concerned with poor sales. IS have made lots of stupid mistakes but there are global influences affecting sales, including huge over-supply of images, piracy, global economics etc etc, it's laughable to think that you imagine removing your 500 files is going to make any difference, apart from in your wallet.
Don't think I've ever said that removing my images is going to bring istock down. That's not why I did it. It is a fact that they have lost the 83% that they were making on my best selling images. They can replace that but they would of had the money from the new images and my old images. So I don't really see how they've lost nothing at all? I'm sure some buyers can't find what they want on istock and the more images the other sites have that istock don't, the more likely that buyer will find it elsewhere. Isn't the point of having exclusive images to attract buyers? That's not going to work as well if the other sites have images that istock don't. So while I don't think removing my images makes a huge difference to istock, I do think that if enough people do it, it has some effect.
I agree, that said the other day made a small list of 20 contributors (11 active at MSG, 9 outside) and that small group have uploaded close to 38k pictures in 2013, like you have said people will accept 5%
-
If I delete my images on iStock or close my account
- Will I create some damage to iStock? No
- Will I make more money with iStock? No
- Will I make more money with other sites? No
So what?
What was more important to me was self-respect. I dont deserve to be treated the way they treat everyone, so i was willing to sacrifice my monthly sales with them to keep my self respect. There are always other ways to make up the loss of income, and i have.
For me, Cathy, that is the most valid point in this thread. I had a very difficult time in the beginning. I had never sold stock, having worked directly with media outlets. I had been out of the photography business for many years. Circumstances changed and "minimal" stock gave me something to do with the old stuff. I figured, "What the Heck am I going to do with all this old crap?"
I was ashamed to tell anyone what it sold for, even pissing off a bunch of "Old-timers" in this very forum when questioning their willingness to accept 35 cents for an image.
Then the 35 centses (my word) started to add up.
I'm still not proud of my sales but, I can live with it. Even get a kick out of making new images. What would I do if I quit? :'(
Ohhhh... and please note that my shame isn't JUST about iStock. There is not a dimes worth of difference in the attitudes at any of the agencies. We're JUST contributors.
:-[
-
The whole summer has been really slow... and September hasn't started very well either. If my sales reflect the average contributor and the downward trend continues iStock will be out of business completely in a year or two.
-
iStock? Wait ... oh yes, I have heard of them ;D
-
Here is what I am doing (and have done) about iStock.
I stopped uploading for several months, not in protest, but because the time it takes did not bring the $ return it previously had. Double the portfolio size, half the return. I was also soured by the threat of a very large law suit over a copyright issue. (iStock did come through for me by the way, and they did not have to). It did take the wind out of the sails so to speak however.
I stopped reading forums for months, both here and iStock. Getting out of this angry, pessimistic, rumor driven loop for a while gave me a better perspective. People really buy my photos? very cool!!! Never in my wildest dreams.
I started taking lots of photos just for fun, no intention of uploading. This hobby can really be fun, especially with all these L lenses and other great gear paid for with a small part of my earnings.
I do not rely on photography for my living, thus I can have a take what I can get and ignore the problems attitude. I do however make significant money being iStock exclusive. I realize those of you that depend on this income will have a very different outlook, and so would I.
Like most of you, I have watched with dismay as earnings have dropped, frustrating changes have taken place, communications have been slow and often opaque. Not to mention the astronomical rise in competition, our personal market share is undermined every day. According to projections of earnings viewed several years ago, I should be earning about $15K per month by now.
Alas I finally tried a couple of uploads after many months off. Poor lighting (but very good subject) for one. The other was a highly cropped macro shot with on camera flash (interesting bug). I never would have considered sending either in the past, both accepted within a few hours. I guess I will continue uploading my "fun" shots, but no marathon uploading sessions. Maybe just as a distraction while watching sports this year.
Best wishes to all. I may follow this topic for a week or so, then another forum sabbatical for a few months, there are lots more bugs to photograph out there.
-
Really enjoyable post Raclo. You have rediscovered the fun of photography. I do rely on my income from stock, but would love to be in a similar position to you one day and only do it for fun.
Thanks for posting. Good reminder not to take things so seriously :)
-
@Raclro,,,
'Getting out of this angry, pessimistic, rumor driven loop for a while gave me a better perspective.'
Quote of the year!!! Two thumbs way up!!!
-
As much as I try to put it all behind me, I can't help rubbernecking to watch this unfolding car crash.
-
but they must lose a lot when people remove their images or only upload to their rival sites?
Why would this make any difference to IS? The number of files being uploaded daily far exceeds any removed, plus there are 10 million files ( or whatever the number is) already in the database. Why would a few thousand files, or tens of thousands, being removed, make any difference to buyers? The only person affected is the person removing the files. The buyers search for a subject, find thousands of images that are more or less relevant to their search, and buy one. They don't know yours are no longer there, assuming you have removed some, they just buy someone else's.
I agree.
And I think that even with 10% of files less, they will not lose 10% of gain.
They will not sell the removed/deleted images (of course) they will just sell other images.
-
There are folks that would sell their photos for a nickel and brag to their friends that they are a 'Professional'!
I am seeing folks doing family, engagement and weddings for FREE! They just want to be able to tell their friends that they just did a wedding to validate their status!
-
Stopped uploading to iS before D-Day. Earnings are less than DT and 123RF.
-
I'm not doing nothing special.Shooting and uploading as always. After the last change, sales have disminished, but RPD has increased a lot,because most of what a sell is S+, followed by S, Vetta and I almost don't sell Main. In the end, I'm earning the same. After many changes and downwards trends I was hoping to be able to earn more. I think that an improvement for exclusives is strongly needed.
-
^
I suspect that all non-exclusives will eventually be moved entirely to the PP sites and removed entirely from iStock itself. Then exclusives can stop moaning about any perceived advantages that nons currently have in the Main collection in terms of cheaper pricing and best match placement anywhere in the first 10 pages..... :'(
-
I am seeing folks doing family, engagement and weddings for FREE! They just want to be able to tell their friends that they just did a wedding to validate their status!
Anyone who "hires" someone to shoot their wedding for free deserves the lousy pictures they will most likely get.
-
^
I suspect that all non-exclusives will eventually be moved entirely to the PP sites and removed entirely from iStock itself. Then exclusives can stop moaning about any perceived advantages that nons currently have in the Main collection in terms of cheaper pricing and best match placement anywhere in the first 10 pages..... :'(
Oh, boo hoo for the minus whoever (exclusive) you are. ;)
-
^
I suspect that all non-exclusives will eventually be moved entirely to the PP sites and removed entirely from iStock itself. Then exclusives can stop moaning about any perceived advantages that nons currently have in the Main collection in terms of cheaper pricing and best match placement anywhere in the first 10 pages..... :'(
If the downtrend continues there, the only exclusives left may be the pseudo-exclusives.
-
They are making this choice really easy for me at the moment, giving them a few more days and them bye, bye if things don't improve greatly on the video side!
-
It's no better on the photo side - sales have catastrophically crashed, for me at least.
-
It's no better on the photo side - sales have catastrophically crashed, for me at least.
I had pretty good sales the last few days of August and then sales seemed to have crashed starting Sept. 1.
Yes, am exclusive.
-
;
-
it's mostly co-workers that go out and buy a Canon Rebel at costco and feel they are now a professional lol...
-
;
-
something strange is in the pipes for the middle of this month, you are probably right in that the writing is already on the wall and I need to jump. I am just being a chicken because I do this full-time and have a family to feed. I just need a little encouragement :)
-
;
-
No inside information but if you have read all the iStock News letters you can see something is going to happen with search soon. It may be to little to late and I am only guessing. I just need someone to hold my hand while I jump :D
-
;
-
No inside information but if you have read all the iStock News letters you can see something is going to happen with search soon. It may be to little to late and I am only guessing. I just need someone to hold my hand while I jump :D
Are you intending to leave iS altogether? If you're just jumping video exclusivity, I think that's a relatively risk-free jump to start with, based on what I've read, not personal experience.
-
sorry Neff but you seem to change your mind on a weekly basis ;D
-
;
-
Weekly how about daily ;D No in all honesty I am making a final decision this week because I am sure people are tired of watching me on the fence! Yes I am talking about just video and the hold up is Getty. I have done really well at earning around $1400.00 per month from my Getty sales which I will loose most of and drop to say 400-900 per month.
-
Weekly how about daily ;D No in all honesty I am making a final decision this week because I am sure people are tired of watching me on the fence! Yes I am talking about just video and the hold up is Getty. I have done really well at earning around $1400.00 per month from my Getty sales which I will loose most of and drop to say 400-900 per month.
Ah, I didn't know about your Getty video sales, so disregard my comment above.
-
Removing images from iStock will increase sales on other agencies, I have no doubt about that. I am waiting to see the totals for the next couple of months (September/November) to make a decision, which would be purely business. If the totals are meager, and it looks like they will be right now, removing files would make sense, since I'd have nothing much to lose and a little to gain. It's simple arithmetic.
Even since Istock introduced exclusivity, I thought - the day will come when they start pushing out non-exclusives. And that's what they're doing right now, by practically giving away our work.
-
Removing images from iStock will increase sales on other agencies, I have no doubt about that. I am waiting to see the totals for the next couple of months (September/November) to make a decision, which would be purely business. If the totals are meager, and it looks like they will be right now, removing files would make sense, since I'd have nothing much to lose and a little to gain. It's simple arithmetic.
Even since Istock introduced exclusivity, I thought - the day will come when they start pushing out non-exclusives. And that's what they're doing right now, by practically giving away our work.
It's not so much that Istock are giving away our work ... it's mainly that they keep over 80% of the proceeds for themselves.
-
;
-
Removing images from iStock will increase sales on other agencies, I have no doubt about that. I am waiting to see the totals for the next couple of months (September/November) to make a decision, which would be purely business. If the totals are meager, and it looks like they will be right now, removing files would make sense, since I'd have nothing much to lose and a little to gain. It's simple arithmetic.
Even since Istock introduced exclusivity, I thought - the day will come when they start pushing out non-exclusives. And that's what they're doing right now, by practically giving away our work.
curiously you have uploaded 467 pictures this year
-
Removing images from iStock will increase sales on other agencies, I have no doubt about that.
Elena, I put a lot of stock in what you say about the industry because I know you are smart, observant, and cautious.
Can you share why you are certain that removing photos from istock will definitely increase sales at other sites?
-
I'm Curious too! by the way Lisa I feel the same about your opinions :)
-
Removing images from iStock will increase sales on other agencies, I have no doubt about that.
Elena, I put a lot of stock in what you say about the industry because I know you are smart, observant, and cautious.
Can you share why you are certain that removing photos from istock will definitely increase sales at other sites?
Thank you Lisa:) I know from speaking to buyers that many search for images across several agencies. If they're looking for something on iStock and don't find it there they'd get it from others. Of course someone may argue that instead of your image they can get a "substitute" from someone else's portfolio, but if you have fairly unique style and content that wouldn't be an issue.
Another factor to consider is that many buyers are also looking for better price, I've had enough feedback on that. If Istock undersells other agencies, your content there will be sold for less and your royalties will be the lowest possible. If you don't have your image on Istock and the buyer still wants it they'd go for the next best deal, including buying from your own site (happened to me many times).
My interactions with buyers also tell me that many don't mind paying up to 50 USD per image for high quality content, so lowering the prices on agencies like Istock and Fotolia seems to be purely due to competitive price wars, not reflecting actual buying potential.
-
;
-
If that theory is correct why not just sell on the one site that gives you the best returns? I think it's clear that buyers switching isn't going to make up the difference in lost sales. Look at how nearly 100% of this forum said nothing would happen when Yuri left all those agencies, no buyers would follow.
It's not an all or nothing proposition. It's a balancing act.
-
Removing images from iStock will increase sales on other agencies, I have no doubt about that. I am waiting to see the totals for the next couple of months (September/November) to make a decision, which would be purely business. If the totals are meager, and it looks like they will be right now, removing files would make sense, since I'd have nothing much to lose and a little to gain. It's simple arithmetic.
Even since Istock introduced exclusivity, I thought - the day will come when they start pushing out non-exclusives. And that's what they're doing right now, by practically giving away our work.
curiously you have uploaded 467 pictures this year
Why curiously? At this point it still makes (made?) financial sense. Other issues like GGD (don't want to open that can of worms here) were at least addressed, so for the time being I feel that my content is relatively safe there. As I said in my post, I'll wait and see what my monthly totals are going to be, and if the income would be worth the time and trouble of dealing with their medieval upload system. I will also keep a close look on sales on other agencies and see if lowering the prices on Istock affects my sales there.
-
If that theory is correct why not just sell on the one site that gives you the best returns? I think it's clear that buyers switching isn't going to make up the difference in lost sales. Look at how nearly 100% of this forum said nothing would happen when Yuri left all those agencies, no buyers would follow.
That's what we all SHOULD do... only sell at the agency with the highest royalty. Then the agencies would have to compete by raising the roaylty and give us other benefits to get any contributors to join them. It would be our market.
But of course, that's just a dream... it'll never happen.
-
Removing images from iStock will increase sales on other agencies, I have no doubt about that. I am waiting to see the totals for the next couple of months (September/November) to make a decision, which would be purely business. If the totals are meager, and it looks like they will be right now, removing files would make sense, since I'd have nothing much to lose and a little to gain. It's simple arithmetic.
Even since Istock introduced exclusivity, I thought - the day will come when they start pushing out non-exclusives. And that's what they're doing right now, by practically giving away our work.
curiously you have uploaded 467 pictures this year
Why curiously? At this point it still makes (made?) financial sense. Other issues like GGD (don't want to open that can of worms here) were at least addressed, so for the time being I feel that my content is relatively safe there. As I said in my post, I'll wait and see what my monthly totals are going to be, and if the income would be worth the time and trouble of dealing with their medieval upload system. I will also keep a close look on sales on other agencies and see if lowering the prices on Istock affects my sales there.
that is what most do, keep on waiting for a change (years of patience) while still feeding them but always with a foot more inside than outside, wonderful life of a stock contributor!
-
that is what most do, keep on waiting for a change (years of patience) while still feeding them but always with a foot more inside than outside, wonderful life of a stock contributor!
Luis, it's not about waiting for a change - it's about "is it worth my time and effort" at this point in time. It is very subjective, and the answer is different for everyone, since it depends on so many factors like size and content of your portfolio, whether or not you do this for a living, how much is your cost of living, etc. For someone in Eastern Europe for example getting the money that Istock pays is still very lucrative, and there are a lot of talented people there. For me in Canada it may end up not being worth my effort anymore pretty soon, so I'd have to switch to other things. But the business we're in is global, and we're competing with talented people for whom 1000 USD a month is very good money. Stock companies know that, so they're balancing their royalty payments taking this into account. With global business like this, you just can't form a union and "force" the company to pay more - you can only decide if this works for you personally or not.
-
If that theory is correct why not just sell on the one site that gives you the best returns? I think it's clear that buyers switching isn't going to make up the difference in lost sales. Look at how nearly 100% of this forum said nothing would happen when Yuri left all those agencies, no buyers would follow.
That's what we all SHOULD do... only sell at the agency with the highest royalty. Then the agencies would have to compete by raising the roaylty and give us other benefits to get any contributors to join them. It would be our market.
But of course, that's just a dream... it'll never happen.
Ok, I am going to start an agency tomorrow and offer 90% royalties. Everyone would join me and .... I don't have any money or skills to advertise. So what good would my agency be if I can't deliver any sales? Istock pays 15% but they provide a lot of sales, and the numbers add up. So it's not that simple. And didn't Yuri just did exactly same thing - went exclusive with the agency that gave him highest royalty? :-)
-
;
-
that is what most do, keep on waiting for a change (years of patience) while still feeding them but always with a foot more inside than outside, wonderful life of a stock contributor!
Luis, it's not about waiting for a change - it's about "is it worth my time and effort" at this point in time. It is very subjective, and the answer is different for everyone, since it depends on so many factors like size and content of your portfolio, whether or not you do this for a living, how much is your cost of living, etc. For someone in Eastern Europe for example getting the money that Istock pays is still very lucrative, and there are a lot of talented people there. For me in Canada it may end up not being worth my effort anymore pretty soon, so I'd have to switch to other things. But the business we're in is global, and we're competing with talented people for whom 1000 USD a month is very good money. Stock companies know that, so they're balancing their royalty payments taking this into account. With global business like this, you just can't form a union and "force" the company to pay more - you can only decide if this works for you personally or not.
sorry but that is not correct, if I had my SS portfolio at iStock I would do a few more bucks I am sure of that BUT I rather eat less grapes at 2 pounds "each" or buy some "value" apples than uploading to an agency that is in fact pulling all agencies down, FT doesn't pay 20% (white ranking) because they come up with that idea, iStock helped them and other agencies paying the flat 20% and then 15% (FT indies can climp up to 46%)
if we talk mainly about business/money we would even accept 1% because it is still more than 0%
don't tell me you need more money than me or anybody else, we are all in this for that not because we want to hear wow that is one lovely picture
-
Removing images from iStock will increase sales on other agencies, I have no doubt about that.
Elena, I put a lot of stock in what you say about the industry because I know you are smart, observant, and cautious.
Can you share why you are certain that removing photos from istock will definitely increase sales at other sites?
Thank you Lisa:) I know from speaking to buyers that many search for images across several agencies. If they're looking for something on iStock and don't find it there they'd get it from others. Of course someone may argue that instead of your image they can get a "substitute" from someone else's portfolio, but if you have fairly unique style and content that wouldn't be an issue.
Another factor to consider is that many buyers are also looking for better price, I've had enough feedback on that. If Istock undersells other agencies, your content there will be sold for less and your royalties will be the lowest possible. If you don't have your image on Istock and the buyer still wants it they'd go for the next best deal, including buying from your own site (happened to me many times).
My interactions with buyers also tell me that many don't mind paying up to 50 USD per image for high quality content, so lowering the prices on agencies like Istock and Fotolia seems to be purely due to competitive price wars, not reflecting actual buying potential.
Thanks very much for posting such a thoughtful and detailed response Elena :)
Your reasoning seems very sound to me. I haven't quite reached the point of no return with Istock, but it is something I think about, and good to thoroughly examine all our options.