I am way down too. So it definitely is not just affecting independents. I have previously seldom been little affected monetarily by best match changes.

The only reason previously that I did not want to call this a 'discernible trend' is that I am never sure whether I am just dealing with what used to be called ebb and flow.

I am wondering whether this is part of the something coming which some people have been darkly hinting at for ages.

this is only my opinion and these things are always about scales of subjectivity but ....

i think there is potentially a difference between graffiti in the US sense and graffiti which is just about writing words on walls. Some graffiti is identifiable almost like intellectual  property. Even if you don't like it. Some tagging is almost like logos.

Stuff scrawled on a wall is more like breaking windows.

exactamundo

My sales have more or less died for the moment too*. I wonder if this is all part of the something coming which people seem to have been hinting at for a while.

My iStockphoto income has been fairly predictable and relatively steady through previous BMs for ages.

* seem well down anyhow

Images that have higher perceived value will get moved to RM.

You might be right, I have no idea. But RM would be more costly to operate wouldn't it - since it more often requires staff involvement ? Isn't the trend towards self service ?

The 'exclusivity' thing is definitely interesting. But I have read questions before on forums where people have been contacted by buyers asking for more or less that - and the buyers have gone ahead with the 'sale' even whilst knowing that others already have an RF license.

What does "ownership" imply, if not a transfer of copyright.  What do you get from the word "ownership", that would be more than just a combination of all the other EL offerings?

I guess that's a different question again. I suppose a buyer has to use their judgement and decide whether the contract offers them the sorts of benefits they are looking for. I guess that is partly down to them researching it.

You quite definitely can attach conditions to how content can be used whilst still basically transferring ownership. Then it looks something like a perpetual lease with conditions. But still a 'sale'. I can think of several cases like this involving quite well known work for example.

Also - you can transfer ownership without transferring copyright. Certainly in this jurisdiction. I say this as someone who is in the middle of formally aquiring a body of work. The contract which the law firm has drafted describes the work and then specifically details that it is the transfer of both the physical content AND any copyright.

You have to assume that Dreamstime have talked to their lawyers.

I think google could have a row of licensed images in their google images searches.  They could then link to a site with a bigger choice of licensed images.  Not many people are going to be interested in paying for a license for an image but with their huge traffic, I think it would work.

It would be even easier for microsoft to do this with bing, as Bill Gates owns Corbis and Veer.  I'm surprised this hasn't happened already.

You mean some image specific version of paid search ? Certainly they are not interested in anything which cannot be done with algorithms.

This is a bit off thread but I sometimes use Image Search as a way of searching for none image content. Let me explain:

I am good at search - but sometimes I am searching for something and there is so much spam, marketing and superfluous SEO manipulated content etc that I go over to image search instead. I often find that the site with the most relevant image is the one which will have the content I am looking for. Obviously this is only sometimes applicable.

I could see them doing something like TinEye but with the addition of a find similar option.

I also increasingly use Twitter for search.

Since you can invent and experiment for yourself - why not stack them, like how stacks work in Lightroom or in Snow Leopard. It would potentially be a neat solution.

Quote from: lisafx on March 12, 2011, 12:19

Quote from: cclapper on March 12, 2011, 08:43

And maybe that's why I'm seeing a boost in sales at all the other microstock agencies.

I'm seeing the same.  I heard from an admin at one of the other agencies that they are getting signups from corporate clients who admit to having only shopped at Istock until recently. 

I may be seeing the same thing this month.  I have Shutterstock and Dreamstime nearly dead even at #1 and #2, with iStock a distant #3.  That's the first time iStock has dropped out of my top 2 in a long time.

Search at iStockphoto has been broken since f5 and is now completely broken.

Sounds like the spin-machine is cranking away.

That's cryptic. What do you mean ?

What do you people find is best for Alamy ?

you are making it look like it is the only place I shop because the prices are lower

Not intentionally. Sorry if it seemed like that

iStock content is cheaper is if it is NON-EXCLUSIVE and available at other sites at a higher price point

Yes - that was what I thought you meant too. Clearly there is also more expensive content there too. It's quite a spread. As I said I think that, on price, it is rather like comparing phone tariffs.

I think we are saying the same thing. It's a mixed picture.