|
MicrostockGroup Sponsors
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - sodafish
Pages: [1]
1
« on: October 31, 2013, 04:35 »
The reason they couldn't (or at least, won't) dump all the independent files is that it would immediately create a several hundred percent inflation of the lowest price points, which they use to try to lure buyers in. Faced with that, the buyers would desert in droves, so to keep the buyers they would have to cut the price of all the exclusive files in the main collection to the level of independent files, which would probably cut the average exclusives' earnings by more than half overnight, prompting a rush for the door by the remaining suppliers.
Yes, but cutting the price in half isn't necessarily the same as half revenue. Remember that when prices where a fraction of what they are today, overall revenue was often higher. High prices and price discrepancy could be the main reason buyers have left. And image exclusivity as a third option, yes, that sounds good. And why not raise royalties to 50/50, wait ... no ... I'm having fantasies again ...
2
« on: October 31, 2013, 03:55 »
Off course they can remove the 250 requirement. They can change just about everything they want, like royalty rates as well.
So why shouldnt you be able to submit un-exclusive to TS while contributing only exclusive to IS? Thats done in a breeze. Why should they lose all un-exclusive content? You might be tempted by a lot of things if they do it right and give you time. And why shouldnt they listen to valuable suggestions from the community? I admit its exceptional, but they sure did that in some earlier occasions.
No incentive for iStock? Well, if they dont manage to give new work sales they will have their incentive very soon, it might be the only way to keep exclusive content. I wouldnt underestimate some of the trouble the site has, a lot of things might be possible at the moment. Especially if it benefits istock and if theyre willing to think long-term. So, why should competitors be happy about that? They could as well lose valuable content by it.
True, I might be immersed in my fantasies, maybe its a result of too much thinking or personal business dev. But I have a feeling this discussion could use a bit more of that. In the end we all want decent marketplaces and revenue for our work. And a race to the bottom isnt exactly what Im looking for.
3
« on: March 09, 2012, 03:38 »
is it a vector you uploaded from a traced photo?
4
« on: February 02, 2012, 16:46 »
While I agree it's frustrating, I think IS is right in refusing vectors with lots of fonts in it. You're selling something copyrighted you did not create yourself. I think it's the most professional approach to simply refuse them, no matter how good it might sell.
Btw, AKaiser indeed has some great quality vectors. I just don't understand why she deleted her iStock portfolio since she also has some great images without fonts. Great artist !
5
« on: January 13, 2012, 14:44 »
I think it's tempting for those whose income is currently OK at iStock to dismiss the reports of others (such as in the Dec sales thread and the 2011 sales thread) about drastically falling sales. Neither iStock or Getty is going to share any real information with contributors, so we inevitably have to read things into the data we can gather. If H&F is looking for growth in income, there's only so long iStock can deliver by cutting contributor payouts to a portion of their suppliers and dumping wholly owned content from Getty onto the site.
I think I am pretty level-headed and I am not dismissing the reports of others. I come here to keep up on trends so I'm not surprised down the road. I'm listening to the reports of falling sales and factoring it in. The trend doesn't look good. But on the flip side, there's a lot of animosity towards iStock on this forum, some justified, but as a result those folks are extra vocal and may be making things seem worse than they actually are. Lagereek's posts are a good example. I especially liked when he said that a monkey playing with himself in the bush could do better than their programmers...I guess what I'm saying is I take some things with a grain of salt. There are still people doing well there, for example last year was my best at iStock, and I've been there 6 years. Maybe I've had some best match luck to help out, who knows?
I don't disagree with you Scott, there indeed can be a very negative sentiment regarding iStock here, and it's not always completely objective. But if I'm correct you somehow doubled your icon portfolio during the last year, so you should take that into account for the fact you had a good year. The question is, was it good enough for having twice as much work for sale. I also hope iStock (and somehow even believe that) is just having a little break before rising again, but we should also be realistic somehow. A lot of things have happened over there, and I can't remember many of them were good news.
6
« on: January 06, 2012, 08:28 »
Personally, I don't see why it would be of any advantage to delete images from iStock. If they are buried in the best match they won't sell, and since they can't be found they will not be any competition for the other sites. If it's placed good in Istock's best match it will sell so there's no reason to deactivate.
Also, I do not believe buyers follow specific photographers. I think they search the image(s) they need for a specific project. But I could be wrong, just my personal thoughts.
I'm officially un-exclusive (Photo) for 2 days now and started uploading to the competition, but so far haven't thought a moment about deleting images at iStockphoto. For the reasons stated here and maybe because I still have silent hopes things will be like before again, I don't know.
7
« on: December 21, 2011, 06:59 »
I gonna try work harder in 2012
8
« on: December 15, 2011, 16:46 »
And they're not always who you'd think. Much as I respect sodafish's work, I have no worries about him ever going independent because he mostly does icons and icons are very very rarely being accepted at SS anymore.
If things should go really bad at iStock, I will only be interested to upload my vectors to SS if they take my whole portfolio at once, not through the regular process. Otherwise there's no change I will drop the vector crown in the near distance, so you're right on that one. btw, Shutterstock is mainly subscription and that's something I don't want my vectors on for sale. Photo is different since JPG is not an open source format. But vectors are too easy (read: cheap) to copy and reproduce in their subscription model. That, in combination with the fact I still love iStock are the main reasons I won't upload a single vector. But hey, who knows what tomorrow brings ... 
9
« on: December 13, 2011, 02:58 »
Yes, for me, they pushed it too far indeed. And somehow I really hope they will come to their senses and reverse some (bad) decisions. I might reconsider the crown because I really miss the place it once was. But at this point, I'm happy I ended the agreement.
Can I recover the loss with the competition? I don't know, and at the moment I even don't care. Since photo is not my first medium, it's a calculated risk I have to take. On the other hand, speaking of Yuri. He's smart and ultra commercial, still he always stayed independent. If he thought he could have made significantly more by being iStock exclusive, I'm sure he would have tried it.
10
« on: December 12, 2011, 05:29 »
After 5 loyal years, I just ended my photo exclusivity.
While I truly hope I will still stay exclusive for vectors for a long time, I have to run my own business and want to be prepared for the worst. I'm simply too disappointed with their latest decisions at the moment, so I'm gonna test the waters for photo.
If you ask me you should be able to recover most of your revenue by simply submitting to Shutterstock. Add a few more decent agencies and you will get back what you had being exclusive, and maybe more.
Somehow, I'm not convinced there are much more "decent" agencies besides IS and SS at the moment, speaking revenue wise. But since I was always IS exclusive, I'm an amateur on that front. I guess all the recent bugs and the new "rules" at IS made it too uncomfortable for me. I want to have a more stable long time perspective. It will be interesting too see how SS can compensate and how it evolves. Looking forward to some new challenges.
11
« on: December 10, 2011, 09:16 »
After 5 loyal years, I just ended my photo exclusivity.
While I truly hope I will still stay exclusive for vectors for a long time, I have to run my own business and want to be prepared for the worst. I'm simply too disappointed with their latest decisions at the moment, so I'm gonna test the waters for photo.
12
« on: April 20, 2011, 15:09 »
Pages: [1]
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
