Author Topic: Why are non-exclusives still uploading new images to istock? (Read 23016 times)

sharpshot · « **on:** April 05, 2011, 15:28 »

There are so many posts in the istock section here with people complaining about istock but it seems like a lot of people are still uploading there. I can understand why exclusives would want to continue as normal with istock but why are so many non-exclusives just carrying on as normal when so many bad things have happened lately? I know we might lose some earnings by not carrying on as normal but surely putting up with this is going to make things much worse in the long term.

It isn't as if there's nowhere else to sell our images. There's lots of sites that are easier to upload to, pay a higher commission, have better communications with contributors and buyers, have a more stable website with less bugs and don't keep coming up with nasty surprises.

stockastic · « **Reply #1 on:** April 05, 2011, 15:35 »

Quote from: sharpshot on April 05, 2011, 15:28

There's lots of sites that are easier to upload to, pay a higher commission, have better communications with contributors and buyers, have a more stable website with less bugs and don't keep coming up with nasty surprises.

Everything but....sales...

lisafx · « **Reply #2 on:** April 05, 2011, 16:06 »

Because they are still 35% of my income.

lagereek · « **Reply #3 on:** April 05, 2011, 16:11 »

Because they DO generate income! its basically a great agency and lets say that when this " bad luck" has blown over, it will all go back to normal.

I hope so.

jamirae · « **Reply #4 on:** April 05, 2011, 16:18 »

Quote from: lagereek on April 05, 2011, 16:11

Because they DO generate income! its basically a great agency and lets say that when this " bad luck" has blown over, it will all go back to normal.

I hope so.

i hope so too.

yes, I still contribute to iStock because they are still a good sales outlet for my work.

stockastic · « **Reply #5 on:** April 05, 2011, 16:24 »

sharpshot - at risk of repeating previous postings, I'll give you a better answer.

I have about 150 images that sell reasonably well on SS DT and IS (although less than half are on IS). Every day, I get a couple of sales, sometimes several. I'd like to start doing more, and I don't want to support IS.

I've had those same images on CC for about 2 years without a single sale. I put them on GL last year, made some sales for a few months, made a payout - then absolutely nothing since November - stone cold.

My point is, I'm totally open to these new sites, but I need to see some number greater than zero before I'd invest more time in them. If either one of them started to generate some sales, my whole picture would change. But zero multiplied by any number is still zero.

I remain hopeful.

donding · « **Reply #6 on:** April 05, 2011, 16:25 »

I pulled everything off of there except about 120 photos and have not uploaded to them since September and don't plan to unless there are major changes...which I really doubt there will be. But on the other hand my life style isn't dependent upon iStock as many here are. A lot of them will lose income which they depend on if they stop uploading all together. I can see why they would continue to upload, but it will not have any real impact if they do. That choice is theirs and we must respect their choices.

luissantos84 · « **Reply #7 on:** April 05, 2011, 16:30 »

my 2nd best agency.. hard to let go after so many weeks/months of uploading (growing over time too)

sharpshot · « **Reply #8 on:** April 05, 2011, 16:38 »

Quote from: lisafx on April 05, 2011, 16:06

Because they are still 35% of my income.

They're a chunk of my income too but I really feel if the other sites see us putting up with commission cuts and all the other shenanigans, it's going to get harder and harder for us to make money with microstock. They will all squeeze us, its an easy way for them to increase their profits.

sharpshot · « **Reply #9 on:** April 05, 2011, 16:43 »

Quote from: stockastic on April 05, 2011, 16:24

sharpshot - at risk of repeating previous postings, I'll give you a better answer.

I have about 150 images that sell reasonably well on Shutterstock Dreamstime and IS (although less than half are on IS). Every day, I get a couple of sales, sometimes several. I'd like to start doing more, and I don't want to support IS.

I've had those same images on CC for about 2 years without a single sale. I put them on GL last year, made some sales for a few months, made a payout - then absolutely nothing since November - stone cold.

My point is, I'm totally open to these new sites, but I need to see some number greater than zero before I'd invest more time in them. If either one of them started to generate some sales, my whole picture would change. But zero multiplied by any number is still zero.

I remain hopeful.

Why not concentrate on SS and DT until you have a big enough portfolio to get more sales on the smaller sites? I'm not saying we should all dump istock for the small sites that don't have sales but I'm sure if we just carry on as normal with istock things will just get worse.

stockastic · « **Reply #10 on:** April 05, 2011, 16:54 »

Quote from: sharpshot on April 05, 2011, 16:43

Why not concentrate on Shutterstock and Dreamstime until you have a big enough portfolio to get more sales on the smaller sites? I'm not saying we should all dump istock for the small sites that don't have sales but I'm sure if we just carry on as normal with istock things will just get worse.

That's pretty much what I'm doing, but if I'm down to just those 2, it's really hard to get motivated. It was barely worth doing even when I was counting on IS to be part of the future.

I don't quite agree though that the small size of my portfolio is why I get no sales on CC and GL. The total size of their archives is small, too, compared to the big 3. I think they just don't have enough of a customer base yet.

RT · « **Reply #11 on:** April 05, 2011, 16:54 »

Quote from: stockastic on April 05, 2011, 15:35

Quote from: sharpshot on April 05, 2011, 15:28
There's lots of sites that are easier to upload to, pay a higher commission, have better communications with contributors and buyers, have a more stable website with less bugs and don't keep coming up with nasty surprises.

Everything but....sales...

+1

I agree with what you say about the other sites but pure and simply I (and most other people) do this for the money, and those other sites don't produce the same revenue that iStock does.

lagereek · « **Reply #12 on:** April 05, 2011, 16:58 »

Quote from: sharpshot on April 05, 2011, 16:43

Quote from: stockastic on April 05, 2011, 16:24
sharpshot - at risk of repeating previous postings, I'll give you a better answer.

I have about 150 images that sell reasonably well on Shutterstock Dreamstime and IS (although less than half are on IS). Every day, I get a couple of sales, sometimes several. I'd like to start doing more, and I don't want to support IS.

I've had those same images on CC for about 2 years without a single sale. I put them on GL last year, made some sales for a few months, made a payout - then absolutely nothing since November - stone cold.

My point is, I'm totally open to these new sites, but I need to see some number greater than zero before I'd invest more time in them. If either one of them started to generate some sales, my whole picture would change. But zero multiplied by any number is still zero.

I remain hopeful.
Why not concentrate on Shutterstock and Dreamstime until you have a big enough portfolio to get more sales on the smaller sites? I'm not saying we should all dump istock for the small sites that don't have sales but I'm sure if we just carry on as normal with istock things will just get worse.

I think both Lisa and myself are concentrating just as much on SS, DT and FT and some of the smaller sites. Thats the name of the game, is it not? and perhaps thats whats annoying people like Getty, etc. I dont know?

WarrenPrice · « **Reply #13 on:** April 05, 2011, 17:06 »

Using the OP logic, the question would be "Why support ANY microstock site?"

lisafx · « **Reply #14 on:** April 05, 2011, 17:07 »

Quote from: lagereek on April 05, 2011, 16:58

I think both Lisa and myself are concentrating just as much on Shutterstock, Dreamstime and Fotolia and some of the smaller sites. Thats the name of the game, is it not? and perhaps thats whats annoying people like Getty, etc. I dont know?

Absolutely right Christian. I am devoting more of my efforts toward the sites I am on, and toward getting portfolios on some of the smaller "fair trade" sites. I have also sunk considerable time and money into starting my own site, and uploading to Dan's Contributors Collective too.

ITLR I am hoping those avenues will offer a lot more to contributors. But in the short term I am not about to give up the substantial monthly income I make at IS. Unless someone here is offering to finance my daughter's 46k/year college education.....?? Any takers?

luissantos84 · « **Reply #15 on:** April 05, 2011, 17:10 »

Quote from: lisafx on April 05, 2011, 17:07

Quote from: lagereek on April 05, 2011, 16:58

I think both Lisa and myself are concentrating just as much on Shutterstock, Dreamstime and Fotolia and some of the smaller sites. Thats the name of the game, is it not? and perhaps thats whats annoying people like Getty, etc. I dont know?

Absolutely right Christian. I am devoting more of my efforts toward the sites I am on, and toward getting portfolios on some of the smaller "fair trade" sites. I have also sunk considerable time and money into starting my own site, and uploading to Dan's Contributors Collective too.

ITLR I am hoping those avenues will offer a lot more to contributors. But in the short term I am not about to give up the substantial monthly income I make at IS. Unless someone here is offering to finance my daughter's 46k/year college education.....?? Any takers?

make her work, 4k monthly??

rubyroo · « **Reply #16 on:** April 05, 2011, 17:18 »

Quote from: lisafx on April 05, 2011, 17:07

Unless someone here is offering to finance my daughter's 46k/year college education.....?? Any takers?

Holy canola! Is that what it costs over there?

lisafx · « **Reply #17 on:** April 05, 2011, 17:21 »

Quote from: luissantos84 on April 05, 2011, 17:10

make her work, 4k monthly??

She does work. But what 19 year old can make 4k/month? I have money saved since she was a baby, and she has gotten some academic scholarship money.

I'm not saying we can't manage it. Just that I need the Istock money. As much as I would like to pull out, I am not going to "cut off my nose to spite my face".

Quote from: rubyroo on April 05, 2011, 17:18

Quote from: lisafx on April 05, 2011, 17:07
Unless someone here is offering to finance my daughter's 46k/year college education.....?? Any takers?

Holy canneloni! Is that what it costs over there?

If she wanted to stay in Florida and go to a state college it would be much cheaper.

stockastic · « **Reply #18 on:** April 05, 2011, 17:22 »

I think we're in a bad spot right now. I have no real faith that SS and DT will continue to be the "good guys" forever. And the fair trade sites aren't taking off yet.

We may get to a point where IS has alienated so many photographers AND buyers that the fair trade sites start to capture a significant share of the business. Until then it feels like we're just giving up 1/3 of our sales and nothing is filling that gap.

The 'sign' I'm waiting for right now is a couple of sales on GL. If I saw signs of life there, it would be like seeing the first robin of spring, here in Minnesota, where we've just had a very long and brutal winter.

cthoman · « **Reply #19 on:** April 05, 2011, 17:25 »

Quote from: sharpshot on April 05, 2011, 16:43

Why not concentrate on Shutterstock and Dreamstime until you have a big enough portfolio to get more sales on the smaller sites? I'm not saying we should all dump istock for the small sites that don't have sales but I'm sure if we just carry on as normal with istock things will just get worse.

As an illustrator, iStock (despite the low royalties) still pays 2 to 3 times more per sale than DT or FT and about 5 or 6 times more than SS. So, I don't really see why I should treat them any different than any other agency. That said, I've stopped uploading to all the big 4, and ditched FT. None of them are growing very much anyway, so I figured I'd focus on some smaller agencies and my own stuff.

Phil · « **Reply #20 on:** April 05, 2011, 18:06 »

I know its OT but personally DT have cut commissions twice now, while they are still much nicer to their contributors, are they really much better than FT or IS?

sharpshot · « **Reply #21 on:** April 05, 2011, 18:11 »

Quote from: RT on April 05, 2011, 16:54

Quote from: stockastic on April 05, 2011, 15:35
Quote from: sharpshot on April 05, 2011, 15:28
There's lots of sites that are easier to upload to, pay a higher commission, have better communications with contributors and buyers, have a more stable website with less bugs and don't keep coming up with nasty surprises.

Everything but....sales...

+1

I agree with what you say about the other sites but pure and simply I (and most other people) do this for the money, and those other sites don't produce the same revenue that iStock does.

I only do this for the money. I'm not saying we should all ditch istock, I just don't understand why lots of people are complaining about them constantly but carrying on uploading new images. They are going to find it easy to cut commissions again in the future because they know people will kick up a stink but they wont stop supplying them. The other sites will probably do the same.

stockastic · « **Reply #22 on:** April 05, 2011, 18:15 »

Buyers need to start finding out about these 'fair trade' sites, and IS has to become such a pain for them that they're willing to look elsewhere. It could happen.

rubyroo · « **Reply #23 on:** April 05, 2011, 18:16 »

Quote from: lisafx on April 05, 2011, 17:21

If she wanted to stay in Florida and go to a state college it would be much cheaper.

Thanks for clarifying that. I hope she does well, reaps great rewards and is eternally grateful to you!

fritz · « **Reply #24 on:** April 05, 2011, 18:23 »

Quote from: Phil on April 05, 2011, 18:06

I know its OT but personally Dreamstime have cut commissions twice now, while they are still much nicer to their contributors, are they really much better than Fotolia or IS?

No, they're not. Actually DT is the worst at Big 4

sobm · « **Reply #25 on:** April 06, 2011, 00:59 »

Quote from: lisafx on April 05, 2011, 17:21

Quote from: luissantos84 on April 05, 2011, 17:10

If she wanted to stay in Florida and go to a state college it would be much cheaper.

OMG,the price of education in America is so so ...expensive...i don't think the quality is equal to that money

pancaketom · « **Reply #26 on:** April 06, 2011, 01:42 »

Quote from: sobm on April 06, 2011, 00:59

Quote from: lisafx on April 05, 2011, 17:21
Quote from: luissantos84 on April 05, 2011, 17:10

If she wanted to stay in Florida and go to a state college it would be much cheaper.

OMG,the price of education in America is so so ...expensive...i don't think the quality is equal to that money

Actually it is probably similarly priced in most developed countries, except that in the USA we give our tax $ to the military instead of into education, so we have to pay privately for it. There are cheaper state schools though. (Cheaper doesn't necessarily mean cheap though).

As far as the original topic. I stopped uploading there. If they can see it in their little black greedy hearts to bring %ages back up, I'll start uploading again. I am sure my measly low commercial value images won't make a difference for them, but I had to draw the line somewhere, and they crossed it. Luckily I am used to living cheap (and I do mean cheap in this case).

qwerty · « **Reply #27 on:** April 06, 2011, 02:04 »

$46K ?
Is that just the fees to go to classes or total cost per year (eg accommodation,expenses etc) that you pay for your daughter.

In Australia a four year engineering degree is about $5-6k per year and you can pay upfront for some discount. Otherwise they take it out of your taxes if you get a job. The debt is indexed with CPI.

20 years ago it was free.

I stopped uploading to Istock for several months, then I saw the que was still sitting at 30-60k and plenty of new content from both exclusives and independents were still flooding in. I couldn't see me holding back a couple of hundred images a year was going to change their minds. I gave it crack but not enough people were "striking" so I crumbled. Istock is around 35% of my income.

I have been submitting to stockfresh to support them, their reasonable pricing and their 50% commission.

aeonf · « **Reply #28 on:** April 06, 2011, 02:38 »

FYI: In germany not only is it free, the actually PAY YOU to get a higher education. Can't beat that...

sharpshot · « **Reply #29 on:** April 06, 2011, 04:05 »

I don't think we should be thinking that the small amount we upload wont make a difference. If we all continue as normal, they are just going to carry on cutting commissions and making things much worse for us and so will the other big sites.

If we keep tolerating this, what will be next?

ThomasAmby · « **Reply #30 on:** April 06, 2011, 04:29 »

Quote from: aeonf on April 06, 2011, 02:38

FYI: In germany not only is it free, the actually PAY YOU to get a higher education. Can't beat that...

Same here in Denmark. It's crazy. However these things are financed by the 40%-65% we pay in taxes + LM contribution. Which is also crazy, bordering on ridiculous.

On topic: I decided I need the money and since we act as individuals there's nothing we can do to prevent royalty cuts in the future, simple as that. However I stopped making "IS friendly" content, but use my energy on stuff I know will get accepted at the other agencies. For instance, icon sets of 25+ items that IS wouldn't allow on their site. If I get a rejection for "too many blend steps" or such imaginary issues, I won't correct and resubmit.

basti · « **Reply #31 on:** April 06, 2011, 07:06 »

I do submit to IS but as said, I do not give a * about creating IS friendly photos. I simply send 18 pictures per week and dont care about how many they reject.

I do not understand badmouthing Dreamstime - they lowered commision only 5% for level 0 images - ALL other images are level up and same commision as before! In fact level 0 behaves as level 1 before, just the commison was cut 5%, which is pretty insignificant compared to raise of the rest. More problematic are weekly subscription packages but we should judge it after month or two and not 5 days after they announced it. I think noone can really predict the result of this subs and credit changes TOGETHER.

On the other hand I see really idiotic rejections on FT all the time (70% rejected compared to 70% accepted everywhere else including IS), their silent commision cuts and very nasty baheviour of IS. In fact DT overcome IS last month about 2x - it didnt happen anytime before.

jbarber873 · « **Reply #32 on:** April 06, 2011, 07:12 »

As to the original post, I upload to IS because they sell images. A lot of them. I also upload to agencies that compete with IS, but the numbers are not enough to make it worth dropping IS. Not that I don't find IS a hateful, grasping company, but business is business. Different files sell at different sites. If i was going to drop any agency, it would be FT, which is slowly becoming a thinkstock clone.
As for Lisa's point about education costs, in my own case I have found a much cheaper school for my daughter ( the last of 3 children now all in college at the same time.) She's only costing me $39k per year. Unsustainable, in the immortal words of a great thinker, whose name escapes me right now.

Devor · « **Reply #33 on:** April 06, 2011, 07:25 »

As for me I stopped uploading long ago right after first changes of best match. At that time my incomes decreased in 10 times instantly and my blue-flamed images appears far from first pages of search results while exclusive never-sold images were far ahead...
I think that humiliating 15% - unattainable 20% revenue for independents don’t worth the trouble.

rubyroo · « **Reply #34 on:** April 06, 2011, 08:40 »

Quote from: jbarber873 on April 06, 2011, 07:12

She's only costing me $39k per year. Unsustainable, in the immortal words of a great thinker, whose name escapes me right now.

Still sounds mind-blowing to me. Given the fees you and Lisa are talking about, the word 'unsustainable' definitely carries more weight on the side of the contributor. Especially the U.S.-based parent. Jeez. Good on you both for making this work for you - even at these rates. Amazing.

lisafx · « **Reply #35 on:** April 06, 2011, 10:58 »

I feel so bad for having derailed this thread with my complaints about college costs. Just to clear a couple of things up so we can get back on topic:

The 46k/year I mentioned was just for classes. Room and board 5k extra.

Most colleges don't cost that here. The art college she wants to go to is one of the very best in the US. It's very prestigious -kind of the "Harvard" of art colleges.

Currently, to save us money, my daughter is getting her AA at a local state college, and living at home. Because of her grades and SAT scores, she has received three full scholarships, so she is going to school absolutely free on one of them, and the other two pay her a check every semester. She's saving up the checks to put toward the expensive college.

So yes, if your child is smart and hard-working, they can get a free college education here in the US. But if they want a premium education, they (unfortunately) are going to pay a premium price.

Thank goodness I only have the one child! And thank goodness for microstock that it has made this an option.

cthoman · « **Reply #36 on:** April 06, 2011, 11:56 »

Quote from: lisafx on April 06, 2011, 10:58

Most colleges don't cost that here. The art college she wants to go to is one of the very best in the US. It's very prestigious -kind of the "Harvard" of art colleges.

Is that Pratt or SVA? I remember those being pretty expensive back in the day. They must be really expensive now. She's not staying in state and going to Ringling? Now, I'm insulted.

lisafx · « **Reply #37 on:** April 06, 2011, 12:04 »

Quote from: cthoman on April 06, 2011, 11:56

Quote from: lisafx on April 06, 2011, 10:58
Most colleges don't cost that here. The art college she wants to go to is one of the very best in the US. It's very prestigious -kind of the "Harvard" of art colleges.
Is that Pratt or SVA? I remember those being pretty expensive back in the day. They must be really expensive now. She's not staying in state and going to Ringling? Now, I'm insulted.

It's MICA in Baltimore. She did seriously consider Ringling. Did a summer program there and had a blast. We were certainly pushing her toward Ringling. Only problem is they are more focused on computer graphics and animation, which she has zero interest in. She is interested in fine arts and MICA was stronger in that area.

My darling daughter is not interested in ANY art field you can actually make a living at, LOL.

SNP · « **Reply #38 on:** April 06, 2011, 12:13 »

Quote from: aeonf on April 06, 2011, 02:38

FYI: In germany not only is it free, the actually PAY YOU to get a higher education. Can't beat that...

yes, Germany and Denmark in particular are model societies when it comes to education IMO. I've spent time in both countries and marvel at the level of education of most people. Cuba is also a country with almost 100% literacy, with education being entirely free up to any level.

I believe Denmark has a 50% income tax rate for everyone or something like that? however, paying high taxes enables the Danish government to subsidize everything from healthcare to education, to social assistance. I believe Denmark has very little unemployment as well as default subsidized care for the elderly.

cthoman · « **Reply #39 on:** April 06, 2011, 12:17 »

That makes sense. Ringling's Fine Art program wasn't as strong as the Computer animation or Illustration. Although, I graduated about 13 years ago, so I'm sure a lot has changed.

ShadySue · « **Reply #40 on:** April 06, 2011, 12:20 »

Quote from: aeonf on April 06, 2011, 02:38

FYI: In germany not only is it free, the actually PAY YOU to get a higher education. Can't beat that...

How long has that been the case? I remember years ago having a student teacher in my care a few years ago who was German. He was already in his late 20s with his own family and was still paying off his debts accrued when he was a student.
I remember thinking how awful that must be: I went to university free, and got a decent grant (means tested) for my books and living expenses. Now most of the UK has fees. Scotland doesn't (yet?) but most students have to take out loans for their living expenses.

cobalt · « **Reply #41 on:** April 06, 2011, 13:26 »

I think he refers to the government loan that your German friend was paying off. University itself is free and there is some interest free funding. If you can pay it all back in one go it used to be that you only have to pay back half. Otherwise you you start paying the governemnt back when you have a job and in very small rates over many years.

These days some universities are charging fees, but it is something like 100 euros a month. People are still horrified by these "fees" and many universities have dropped them again.

The main difference though, while the university is free, you don´t get any comforts.

Lecture halls filled with over 2000 students are not uncommon for popular subjects like economics. There is hardly any interaction with your professors, you basically end up becoming very good at teaching yourself from books. Nobody will ever ask you why you chose your subject and the university doesn´t care if you fail. Exams are very difficult, oversubscribed subjects can have crucial exams with failure rates of up to 90%. The universities have no way of stopping the flood of students, very few subjects (like medicine) are restricted. So they filter with exams.

The standard of education is very high though, especially in subjects like Engineering or Science, that the German industry needs. So if you make it, you´ll have a very thorough understanding of your subject.

But if your looking for a more personal, nurturing environment I really wouldn´t recommend to study here. Maybe at one of the smaller universities. However if you really want a very "challenging" environment" and like a high standard, a German university will give you that.

In the end, our education isn´t free either, we pay much higher taxes, 40-50% is very common even if you are middle class.

jbarber873 · « **Reply #42 on:** April 06, 2011, 17:03 »

Quote from: lisafx on April 06, 2011, 12:04

Quote from: cthoman on April 06, 2011, 11:56
Quote from: lisafx on April 06, 2011, 10:58
Most colleges don't cost that here. The art college she wants to go to is one of the very best in the US. It's very prestigious -kind of the "Harvard" of art colleges.
Is that Pratt or SVA? I remember those being pretty expensive back in the day. They must be really expensive now. She's not staying in state and going to Ringling? Now, I'm insulted.

It's MICA in Baltimore. She did seriously consider Ringling. Did a summer program there and had a blast. We were certainly pushing her toward Ringling. Only problem is they are more focused on computer graphics and animation, which she has zero interest in. She is interested in fine arts and MICA was stronger in that area.

My darling daughter is not interested in ANY art field you can actually make a living at, LOL.

I had an assistant who went MICA. At the time I was living in Baltimore, and he was working at a camera store that was owned by the photographer I was working for. He used to laugh at us for doing "commercial work". Sure enough, a few years later he showed up at my door in NYC, where I had started my advertising studio. He decided that making a living was a good idea, after all.

The good news was that what he had learned at MICA made him a very good photographer, and he did quite well ( after i taught him about doing what the client wants, instead of what he wanted ). No education is wasted, and she's going to a great school! Good luck to her! ( In fairness to cthoman, I've also had assistants from SVA and clients from Pratt, and they were very well educated. And they knew the subway system- always a plus

cthoman · « **Reply #43 on:** April 06, 2011, 17:31 »

Quote from: jbarber873 on April 06, 2011, 17:03

In fairness to cthoman, I've also had assistants from SVA and clients from Pratt, and they were very well educated. And they knew the subway system- always a plus

Hey, I didn't go to those schools, so no insult to me. I went to the clown school in Florida. I just hear those mentioned as some of the best schools in the country, but New Yorkers like to throw around the word "best" a lot too.

Oldhand · « **Reply #44 on:** April 06, 2011, 17:36 »

They charge disgraceful fees in England too, The trick is to move to Scotland for a couple of years - they pay for your childs University fees, even back in England. Once they've finished the couse move back south over the border, and you have a debt free child with a degree.

Back to the thread - IS make sales, that's what keep us there. No loyalty, just cold cash.

Oldhand

klsbear · « **Reply #45 on:** April 06, 2011, 18:23 »

Quote from: lisafx on April 06, 2011, 12:04

My darling daughter is not interested in ANY art field you can actually make a living at, LOL.

Lisa - don't worry - I have my MFA in Silversmithing, a highly marketable skill as you can imagine! I managed to survive with a variety of creative jobs and the skills I learned have helped in microstock, so where there's a will there's a way - she may find a way to turn it into a career.

ETA, regarding the OP: I got accepted at IS right about the time they announced the cut. It was pretty deflating to have finally been accepted after a few rounds of getting that third photo accepted, only to see all the negative comments. I was already on Shutterstock, Fotolia and Dreamstime and after finding this group I started adding to some of the middle tier and low earner sites. I'm on 3 of the middle tier and 5 of the low earner sites now in addition to the top 4. My business plan is to upload to all, and at the end of the year make some assesments as to who's worth continuing in 2012 and who gets dropped. Right now, Shutterstock followed by IS are the top earners with Fotolia and Dreamstime staying rather flat other than an occasional "up" month. Overall, the small size of my portfolio makes it tough to compete, but it's growing every month. Bottom line on why I still up load to IS is that they are one of the premier sites in the eyes of the buyer, and the money they bring me is still better than most other options. They have some low-priced sales, but more high RPI than some of the others too, so overall it's been worthwhile. Their slow review times makes certain that my new content is available at other sites for as much as 2 weeks before they get it. We'll see what the end of the year brings - at that time I may decide to stop uploading.

ShadySue · « **Reply #46 on:** April 06, 2011, 19:01 »

Quote from: Oldhand on April 06, 2011, 17:36

They charge disgraceful fees in England too, The trick is to move to Scotland for a couple of years - they pay for your childs University fees, even back in England. Once they've finished the couse move back south over the border, and you have a debt free child with a degree.
Oldhand

Yeah, but it's constantly on TV wondering how long we can keep up with other unis if we don't charge (for the subjects that need constantly changing technology).

ThomasAmby · « **Reply #47 on:** April 06, 2011, 19:26 »

Quote from: SNP on April 06, 2011, 12:13

Quote from: aeonf on April 06, 2011, 02:38
FYI: In germany not only is it free, the actually PAY YOU to get a higher education. Can't beat that...

yes, Germany and Denmark in particular are model societies when it comes to education IMO. I've spent time in both countries and marvel at the level of education of most people. Cuba is also a country with almost 100% literacy, with education being entirely free up to any level.

I believe Denmark has a 50% income tax rate for everyone or something like that? however, paying high taxes enables the Danish government to subsidize everything from healthcare to education, to social assistance. I believe Denmark has very little unemployment as well as default subsidized care for the elderly.

Yeah, as I stated earlier in this thread it ranges from somewhere between 40-65% (not totally accurate). We have a progressive taxation so people with an income of approx. $73000+ pay an additional ~15% top tax rate on the extra income. Imagine if the stock agencies worked like that - punishing you for doing particularly well.

Really it depends on many different things. We have a local tax that ranges from 22,8% - 27,8% depending on the municipality you live in, a healthcare contribution of static 8%, LM contribution of 8% and then there's the progressive taxation conditional on your income level - a basic tax rate of 3,67% and an additional 15% on income above $73000 - add to that 1% if you're a member of the national church. I think my tax rate is about 44-45%.

On the bright side, we have free public schools, high schools, college, state education grants, hospitals, state pension, social security, libraries, highways and stuff like that.
Starting a business here, however, is not very attractive - obviously.

madelaide · « **Reply #48 on:** April 06, 2011, 20:21 »

The off-topic discussion is quite interesting.

Quote from: ThomasAmby on April 06, 2011, 04:29

Quote from: aeonf on April 06, 2011, 02:38
FYI: In germany not only is it free, the actually PAY YOU to get a higher education. Can't beat that...

Same here in Denmark. It's crazy. However these things are financed by the 40%-65% we pay in taxes + LM contribution. Which is also crazy, bordering on ridiculous.

I suppose this has to do with the shrinking population and the reduced benefit of having a college degree compared to othe rprofesisons? You need skilled workers.

Although the industrial growth in the past years here in Brazil created a huge lack of skilled manpower, it is rare to see a technician who is not taking a university degree. Even if sallaries have increased for these skilled labours, becoming an engineer and getting a job as one often means an attractive incentive. I read this is not quite so in Europe, that this is too much effort for little gain.

Here there are a few good and serious and expensive private universities, but the federal universities and some state universities are completely free and offer a high quality education (with exceptions of course). The problem is that most of the free universities do not offer night courses, so people who need to work have to resort to the private ones, and often these are the low quality ones. People with a solid formation will do well in these universities, but most will only waste their money getting a diploma but no real skills.

Our problem is in fact the primary and secondary education. With a few honorable exceptions, public schools here suck, so everyone who can afford, even with some sacrifice, pays for private schools. There have been improvements here and there, but in general the situation is still like this - if you can afford private schools, you can be approved to the public universities and study for free.

sharpshot · « **Reply #49 on:** April 07, 2011, 01:15 »

Quote from: ThomasAmby on April 06, 2011, 04:29

...On topic: I decided I need the money and since we act as individuals there's nothing we can do to prevent royalty cuts in the future, simple as that. However I stopped making "IS friendly" content, but use my energy on stuff I know will get accepted at the other agencies. For instance, icon sets of 25+ items that IS wouldn't allow on their site. If I get a rejection for "too many blend steps" or such imaginary issues, I won't correct and resubmit.

We will never know if we could of prevented cuts in the future because so many people have just continued uploading there. We do act as individuals but I think there's a lot of heard mentality here. People see others uploading and think why should they miss out.

There isn't much point in me trying to hold back the tide here, I'm still not in the least bit inclined to start uploading to istock again. I have been using the extra time to work with the other sites and I don't think I have lost much income, I might even be better off. I haven't spent as much time worrying about things like the best match, it has less effect on me now.

I respect other peoples decisions, I will just have to agree to differ on this one.

ThomasAmby · « **Reply #50 on:** April 07, 2011, 04:16 »

Quote from: sharpshot on April 07, 2011, 01:15

Quote from: ThomasAmby on April 06, 2011, 04:29
...On topic: I decided I need the money and since we act as individuals there's nothing we can do to prevent royalty cuts in the future, simple as that. However I stopped making "IS friendly" content, but use my energy on stuff I know will get accepted at the other agencies. For instance, icon sets of 25+ items that IS wouldn't allow on their site. If I get a rejection for "too many blend steps" or such imaginary issues, I won't correct and resubmit.
We will never know if we could of prevented cuts in the future because so many people have just continued uploading there. We do act as individuals but I think there's a lot of heard mentality here. People see others uploading and think why should they miss out.

I don't think we disagree. I think it's fairly safe to say that we could have prevented the cuts if we acted as a group. I've also had high hopes for something like that, but have finally come to the conclusion that it's practically impossible. Every thread taking up this topic has been dissolved because people can't agree on what to do in unison to make things better for all of us.

Make 20 prominent contributors pull their port, and I'll do it too.
Get 500 contributors to stop uploading and I'll be a part of that group.

No one wants to be the first, because as individuals we're redundant. I'm wondering if IS' business would be hurt by Yuri leaving (count out the possibility of others following his decision). I honestly think it wouldn't - that's what it has come to, they already have the buyers. Maybe if all the black diamonds left though, it would have some impact.

Actions like the above stated requires some managing efforts and a great speaker. I'm not up for the task but if anyone wants to step up and start the group action revolution we need, sign me up. I think the most significant problem here is that we're artists, not businessmen nor union leaders - but I'd be happy to be proven wrong.

ThomasAmby · « **Reply #51 on:** April 07, 2011, 04:28 »

One more thing to further hinder a group action is that the high-end contributors are almost always pleased when it comes to royalty cuts. Little to no changes in the top level royalties, and that's clever. That way the contributors with the most power are kept happy.

ShadySue · « **Reply #52 on:** April 07, 2011, 05:35 »

Quote from: ThomasAmby on April 07, 2011, 04:28

One more thing to further hinder a group action is that the high-end contributors are almost always pleased when it comes to royalty cuts. Little to no changes in the top level royalties, and that's clever. That way the contributors with the most power are kept happy.

I think there's only been the one actual royalty cut, unless I have somehow expunged the pain of previous cuts.
I wonder if all/most of the top contributors who submit over multiple media kept their percentage rate over all media. That was a really low move, IMO.

lisafx · « **Reply #53 on:** April 07, 2011, 16:24 »

Quote from: ThomasAmby on April 06, 2011, 19:26

Yeah, as I stated earlier in this thread it ranges from somewhere between 40-65% (not totally accurate). We have a progressive taxation so people with an income of approx. $73000+ pay an additional ~15% top tax rate on the extra income. Imagine if the stock agencies worked like that - punishing you for doing particularly well.

Really it depends on many different things. We have a local tax that ranges from 22,8% - 27,8% depending on the municipality you live in, a healthcare contribution of static 8%, LM contribution of 8% and then there's the progressive taxation conditional on your income level - a basic tax rate of 3,67% and an additional 15% on income above $73000 - add to that 1% if you're a member of the national church. I think my tax rate is about 44-45%.

On the bright side, we have free public schools, high schools, college, state education grants, hospitals, state pension, social security, libraries, highways and stuff like that.
Starting a business here, however, is not very attractive - obviously.

Don't look at it as punishment. Look at it as getting off cheaply for the benefits you need to live a fulfilling life. As a business in the US, I pay around 35% in taxes, then have to pay another 10% or so for healthcare, and (as discussed) when my daughter goes to art school I will be paying more than 50% of my income. Social security probably won't be there by the time I retire, so I have to fully fund my own retirement too, or else live in a refrigerator box. Believe me - at 40-60% of your income you are still getting off easy, considering that all your basic needs are being met.

cathyslife · « **Reply #54 on:** April 07, 2011, 17:22 »

Quote from: sharpshot on April 07, 2011, 01:15

We will never know if we could of prevented cuts in the future because so many people have just continued uploading there. We do act as individuals but I think there's a lot of heard mentality here. People see others uploading and think why should they miss out.

There isn't much point in me trying to hold back the tide here, I'm still not in the least bit inclined to start uploading to istock again. I have been using the extra time to work with the other sites and I don't think I have lost much income, I might even be better off. I haven't spent as much time worrying about things like the best match, it has less effect on me now.

I respect other peoples decisions, I will just have to agree to differ on this one.

Well said and I feel the same way.

Re: the bold type: And there are also the people who are convinced that a little something (and I do emphasize little) is better than nothing. Like you said, if that's how they see it, so be it, but I disagree.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Why are non-exclusives still uploading new images to istock? (Read 23016 times)

lisafx

lagereek

lagereek

WarrenPrice

lisafx

rubyroo

lisafx

rubyroo

jbarber873

rubyroo

lisafx

lisafx

jbarber873

lisafx

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors