I guess iStock has decided that customer money isn't going to make them happy.

you wanted more security. this is a scam. if you hate everything istock why don't you quit.

Rejection reason:
"Noticeable retouching"
This comment was made on a painting (causing rejection on all submitted images).
Still sure you know everything going on in every Alamy inspector's mind?  (brick wall against stone head it seems....)  

But whatever, I have now said 20 times I now understand their procedure, think it sucks and that is it. You like it, good for you. If this thread made more people aware of the "ridiculous procedure" - good, because I went through the historic threads and I know I am in good company in either not quite getting it in the beginning or finding it silly. So you are now welcome to insult everybody with the same problem as much as you like. This thread has became a waste of everybody's time about 8 entries back, so please take your last shot now and let us close this one down (yawn.......).
Cheers.

So from what I understand some of the other sites not only pay less then IS but also have no transparency what so ever...
Why does everybody flame IS night and day but not the others

That is a good question with no answers what do SS pay people can't or won't answer but 25 cents must be under 15% for the sub donwloads

Quote from: molka on October 10, 2010, 03:27

Quote from: gostwyck on October 09, 2010, 19:44

Quote from: molka on October 09, 2010, 17:13

I obviusly ment the current situation with 'outsiders' dumped into it, otherwise it makes no sense.

Altho imho so called damins / 'inspectors' seem to be hijacking the system since god knows when, but I guess that's just accepted as regular busines at a place like that.

I wouldn't mind a pint of whatever you're drinking. 'Obviusly' truly liberating.

self delusion is cool... for kids

Wow another identity rapidly going to the dumpster. Who will you be next time for your brief flock of rants?

Name:     molka
Useful Posts:    0
Date Registered:    October 08, 2010, 06:01
Ignored by:    24 members


No I'm not ignoring you, I won't waste the clicks to do it.

sniff sniff quack waddle molka is a troll

Fotomind admits that they broke the contract.

"Fotomind will never share your personal information with any third party"

"Since we have partnered with iSyndica for this, we have shared our contributor usernames in order to prepare the transition."

Fotomind shared personal information the email addresses and usernames.

This series had horiz and vert same shot bw then four crop different. Buyer will be bored after seeing five of these. Typical microspam just as keyword spam.

http://www.dreamstime.com/search.php?s_ph=y&s_il=y&s_rf=y&s_ed=y&srh_field=teenage+girl+broken+car&firstvalue=teenage+girl+broken+car&lastsearchvalue=girl+red+car&x=29&y=9&s_sm=all&s_st=new&memso=y&s_cf=1&s_catid=&s_cliid=&s_colid=&memorize_search=1&s_exc=&s_excp=&s_sp=&s_sl1=y&s_sl2=y&s_sl3=y&s_sl4=y&s_sl5=y&s_color1=FFFFFF&s_percent1=10&s_color2=FFFFFF&s_percent2=10&s_rsf=0&s_rst=7&s_clc=y&s_clm=y&s_orp=y&s_ors=y&s_orl=y&s_orw=y

Quote from: Digital66 on March 12, 2010, 14:28

Quote from: VB inc on March 12, 2010, 04:23

... For all the contributors in the imaging industry, we need this site to FAIL MISERABLY. It is GETTY trying to get away with their ridiculous 20% payouts. The more you make on this site, the more you eventually lose because you made it the status quo. We need to stop this "Yes sir, may i have another" mentality.

Ditto!

Wish every stock photographer could understand it. 

Double yep!!! Of course everyone is free to submit wherever they want but i cringe everytime i see someone opted in/submitting there... we're digging our own grave with submitting to this one.

Let me quote another site "Neither Time or istockphoto.com can be blamed for this situation; photographers who go down the micro stock path do so with no regard for the value of photography and are responsible for driving prices down."

Paraphrased to fit your view, "photographers who go down the subscription micro stock path do so with no regard for the value of photography and are responsible for driving prices down." 

http://www.blackshadow.com.au/2009/07/how-microstock-is-ruining-the-business-of-photography/

You can sell photos for peanuts or a dollar, but if someone undercuts your prices they are digging their own grave. Selling micro for peanuts compared to traditional stock is justified, but anybody undercutting you is out of line. 

Writing the blog above doesn't change anything. Writing dittos here criticising people who sell subs, doesn't change anything. It does prove that some people are hypocrites. If you steal sales from a traditional stock agency its just business the new market and change. If someone undersells subs they are stupid.

lower volume photographers are already out of the market unless they produce exceptional images
or are specialized in obscure niches.

if i was a buyer i wouldn't know where to start.

there's simply zillions of photos around, and dozens of very good agencies, and to top it off you've Flickr, Photoshelter, SmugMug, and the 1000s of single photographers selling from their own sites, then finally the art galleries, art sites, auctions, ebay, and who knows what more.

it's just overwhelming, before or later it will be very hard to get noticed in this ocean
of photos.

how's gonna be in 10 years if Flickr has already 1+ billion images and Alamy 18+ millions ?

Modern humans began replacing Neanderthals around 45,000 years ago you need to see that your time has passed. You should just cut and paste your repititious spew because you do nothing but repeat yourself. You need some new material to stay fresh and funny. 1 billions image on flickr isn't microstock.

I requested payout as normal and received it a couple of days ago, I was above the normal threshold limit and everything went smoothly via paypal.

There must be 20 thousand photographers all asking for their money right now and 10 thousand email asking where it is right now and 30 thousand people closing accounts. Looks like everybody has their undies tied up in a bunch over the closing. Sul JoKa has nothing to do but write nasty iStock posts. Whos going to be paying you, its not some tiny business that will disappear in the night. Why is all so impatient.

@Donding,
I thought about it a bit more, and I realised that unfortunately, if you're doing it this way, you're not going to make much of a difference. Neither will I for that matter.
You're only going to hurt yourself, don't do it, Donding!
For this to work we need the big players, experienced photographers with thousands of great images to step in.
But of course, these are the people who make a lot of money and have to consider things very carefully.
Wait until they decide what's best to do. Then it's our turn to follow in their steps.  Just wait a little bit longer please! Give yourself a bit more time!

Just what FL wants you to do that's nothing, sit and wait take the lies until this goes away or they come up with a new avoid. Fear and threats they will control us. I'm closing my acount and following this advise. 

My Advice to You.

Quote from: madelaide on January 24, 2010, 15:26

I wonder if it would be possible to have a lawyer work for us,...

I already thought about that a while ago. Anyone who is interested to work on something please PM me.

Want to make a change with these places that ignore us. Everybody who has a picture on Flickr thats stolen joins in a class action suit against Flickr for not correcting things. Then Devianart, then the next place and soon they will start listening and remove stolen images instead of giving us the run around like clapper ran into. You may not get a penny but the attorny will make their expenses and take the places to court and make it hurt so they start to pay attention.

On the rare occasion that I need something printed, I take it out.

Same here

Alias needs to tell Getty that editorial license is not a license type they have it all wrong.