Any more news on this? Have the mystery sales finally appeared on the website? Have you had any more non-appearing sales since?

nope, no news and these 5 mystery sales are still showing in the app but not on istock.  As far as I know, I've only gotten one additional download today and that one shows in both places just fine as well.  I posted in the istock Help forum but no response there yet.  it's the weekend so I'll wait until tomrrow and maybe someone will reply.

I was on a shoot with a photographer friend this morning - an istock exclusive - and she said she thought she had a similar issue with one download as well and didn't think much of it but was going to go back and check to see if it is indeed the same issue or not.

I also tried to get support from 21Torr folks (the ones who created the app).  Wasn't sure where to go for that help as their website didnt have a support link that I could find, so I posted on their Facebook page here: http://www.facebook.com/istockcharts.

I'll be sure to report back here any updates.

Quote from: gostwyck on May 21, 2011, 18:00

Quote from: patrick1958 on May 21, 2011, 17:52

Who cares anyway.?. who uses iphone.?.

Patrick.......?

I care. You've missed the OP's point entirely. There is a discrepancy in sales between different reporting methods __ and there shouldn't be.

It will be interesting to see what the explanation is.

Excactly my point... who uses it.. so who cares about the discrepancy.?.

P.

if it shows that I have more downloads that istock is not recording then that is a big deal.   I don't get why you are being so negative.

I think I'll post this on the istock forums to see if anyone there notices the same thing.  I've been looking and don't see a report of this weirdness.

Me and a couple of other exclusives I know pulled all of our files from E+.  Unless they're REALLY REALLY unique images, they won't sell at the higher price point. May be different for P+ since the price is a little lower.  

P+ pricing is the same as the regular exclusive collection, so it's not that different, but still, price-conscious buyers may shy away - or just get fed up trying to find the cheaper images at istock and go somewhere else. 

To get started with Shutterstock, can you submit your 10 for initial review before dropping exclusivity with iStock?  In other words, is it just part of the admission process or would those accepted be automatically put in your portfolio?

Thanks, Leslie 

yes you can get accepted there and start uploading even while you wait the 30 day waiting period for your exclusivity to end.  that is, assuming you did cancel the exclusivity and are in the 30 day wating period.  you just opt out of everything at shutterstock, then when your exclusivity is canceled at istock, opt in to the sales programs you want at shutterstock and your portfolio will go live.

Quote from: eurobanks on May 13, 2011, 08:09

How are inspections at other sites?  Are they as tough as istock or just different?  It seems like every time I try to take a risk with processing on istock, I get rejected.  Sometimes I just want to let the market to decide.  

All of the sites seem to go through phases where most everything you submit is accepted and then wham, nothing gets approved. It seems to have a lot to do with the hiring of reviewers, but also, you must be diligent and submit only your best. If you think an image is borderline, it will likely get rejected.

It's best to focus on shooting, shooting and shooting. Then uploading and uploading and uploading. The advantage of submitting to multiple sites is that unless the image is totally horrible, it will likely get accepted at some, if not all. If it gets rejected at one site, you still have other chances to get it selling somewhere else.

There really isn't a set answer to give you about who is tough and who isn't because it changes all the time. And it's different for everyone. Such is the roller coaster ride of microstock.  

edit: After a time, you will notice yourself what you can get by with at each place. I used to have problems at Shutterstock with shallow dof photos, but it doesn't seem to be an issue for me anymore. But others might say something different.

I have to agree.  My experience is that I'll upload say a dozen images to the sites I submit to (IS, SS, DT, SF, FT, Alamy, Veer) and different sites will reject different images for different reasons.  rejections used to bug me, but now I really don't care - my dozen images end up online, even if some are on one site and not another.  it's almost comical to me, but sometimes there is a rejection that is justified to me and I make changes based on the rejection.  I learn from it.  It seems a lot of folks think that istock is the most critical, but I agree with Cathy, cclapper, it is like rollercoaster that never ends and always has it's ups and downs. 

Jo Ann - thanks for providing more details.  I have much to learn!  I value your posts on your experience going back and forth between indendent and exclusive.  Even though I've been agonizing over this for quite some time (as my husband just reminded me!), the simple answer is my numbers should be growning not shrinking.  And that's just not happening at istock and it is never going to.   

My biggest concern in making the decision is the model release.  I've always used iStock's form, so does anyone know if the other sites will accept it?  I'd hate to go back and ask my models to fill out new ones.  Of course, I'll use Getty's form going forward, as I believe Lisafx recently recommended in another post.

Thanks!

Leslie

yes they will!  that was one of my major concerns as well.  You just have to remove the istock logo and address from it.  There is a generic model release (i think that is the getty one) that you can use with all the sites.  I had been exclusive with istock since I started there in 2004 and dumped the crown after the September RC announcement.  I saw the writing on the wall and I have no regrets.

thanks for asking.  done. 

Quote from: HughStoneIan on May 10, 2011, 09:19

My favorite lines are from the last paragraph, quoting A. Saunders:

"...discussed the proposed changes with a cross-section of creative contributors..." (how did they pick this "cross-section"??)

Did they pick any at all? The "creative contributors" have taken a vow of silence so we can't expect to hear their comments ... meaning there is no evidence Getty spoke to anybody. Except GI said it in a PR statement.

Fortunately, I have absolute faith in GI's truthfulness in everything they have ever said so I am certain they didn't just agree this among themselves an then impose it on a take-it-or-leave-it basis. That, after all, is NOT the way Getty works. Is it?

I can't speak for this cross section of photogs, but there was a lot of discussion on the Getty Contributor forums (not the istock-getty forum, some new forums that Getty has on their contributor site).  And it did seem that the contract language changed a bit based on feedback from there (or so it seemed).  However, I just don't have much trust in these guys, nice guys they may be (just like the nice guys at istock).  I've been waiting since January to get my small portfolio removed from Getty and still it sits there, despite several attempts to have them remove it and promises from them that it would be.  I laughed out loud when I got the email from them inviting me to sign the new contract.  seriously?  how many times do I have to tell those guys I quit? 

I still have some time to think about this - and see how others are doing - but it might be a good idea (a) to do what you did with the 'lypse images which can't be anywhere else and (b) soften the blow a little of the cut in both price and commission by putting some proven sellers that I don't think have obvious on-site competition.

I can rationalize it with respect to buyers by thinking that they can easily get the files elsewhere if they wish and the files aren't any more expensive than they are now (as exclusive files)

Edited to add that JJRD just locked a thread in the exclusive forum asking about the (long-ago promised) boost in best match placement for E+ images. In the way he said that it would be coming when they were good and ready and that contributors had to realize that this recent best match change was the biggest they'd ever made, he tacitly acknowledged that there hasn't been any E+ boost yet.

Given how long ago E+ was introduced (at which point this boost in search placement was promised) his comments that some contributors expected things to happen with the flick of a switch seems disingenuous to me - being impatient over one year later (E+ was introduced in April 2010) is hardly expecting things with the flick of a switch.

Bottom line: don't base any decision about putting files into P+ on an assumption of improved search results placement.

this is the sort of stuff that really irritates me.  these statements that continue to spew out of them is unbelievable.  This is why I'm rarely in the forums anymore and only care about my own bottom line.  (as dismal as that is after they royally screwed me with the RC system).

Quote from: jamirae on May 09, 2011, 11:39

Quote from: Elenathewise on May 09, 2011, 11:27

Some of the files that I opted in for Photo+ don't show updated prices. The checkbox is checked (so I can't re-add them), but they are not showing under Photo+ ... Is this the bug people were talking about? Is there a workaround for it?

there was something on the iStock forums about that.  said that you need to go to the admin area for the file then hit the "save" button and it shoudl work.  try that - I am not yet opting any in so can't verify it for you.

here's the istock thread:
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=328522&messageid=6373046

YES this did work. Thank you very much for the info.

that's great.  I just may try it out later this week. I'm still trying to decide if I want to be locked in for 6 months or not. 

The only way the payment to contributors could be essentially the same is if iStock's income has risen enormously. That could only happen if buyers are spending more. Since there is general acceptance that sales are well down, the extra money must be going into V/A file sales. Which means people with Vetta should be seeing a huge boost to their income - though I'm not seeing reports of that.

The other possibility is that we've not been told the truth.

Didnt vetta sales used to have a 10% bonus?  That went away so vetta artists actually are getting less on each sale

Quote from: lisafx on May 07, 2011, 13:33

Quote from: stockastic on May 06, 2011, 15:55

Quote from: caspixel on May 06, 2011, 12:10

I was forced to charge a customer for a 150 credit image recently because I didn't see that it was an Agency image.

This has to be music to the ears of people at IS.  It tells them this plan is working exactly as intended.

Very short sighted though.  I doubt she, or most others, will make that mistake again. 

I have to wonder if that is how many (most?) Agency (and Vetta?) pics are getting sales. People don't shop at microstock *expecting* to see those kinds of prices.

Well istock does have a nice return policy so in some cases, when it is not a last minute "gotta have it now and use it immediately" thing, buyers can fill out the destruction document and get their money/credits back.