Quote from: caspixel on April 04, 2011, 15:14

Quote from: Pixart on April 04, 2011, 14:27

Buy Pay-as-you-go credits whenever you need them. Use your credits to download royalty-free stock photography, vector illustrations, video footage, audio tracks and Flash files. Credits cost as little as 95� USD/credit.

Pay-as-you-go credit packages
Credits Price (USD)
 12 $18.50 ($1.54/credit)
 26 $39.50 ($1.52/credit)
 50 $75.00 ($1.50/credit)
 120 $175.00 ($1.46/credit)
 300 $430.00 ($1.43/credit)
 600 $800.00 ($1.33/credit)
 1000 $1,250.00 ($1.25/credit)
 2000 $2,250.00 ($1.13/credit)

That's false advertising right there. They really need a class action lawsuit against them for all the crap they've been doing, whether its accidental or deliberate.

It says right under that table: "You can also purchase 5000 credits for $5,250. USD, or 10000 credits for $10,000.00 USD, or 20000 credits for $19,000 USD. To order, phone Customer Sales toll-free 1-866-478-6251."

Or in the PDF: http://www.istockphoto.com/docs/mail_fax_orderform_q1_2011.pdf.  Not that I imagine many would spend $20K on a credit package up front, but it seems you can actually get credits for $0.95 as advertised...

Okay, not false advertising, but sure looks like a bait and switch when the homepage says as low as $0.95. Of course anyone who is spending $20k on credits over there is probably getting one of those super special discounts and actually getting their credits for $.0.50. 

Explain to me exactly what the first conference call accomplished, in the way of getting contributors any of their money back, or more money in the future? It accomplished NOTHING, except stop all the postings in the forum for a while. Again, THAT was to istock's benefit, not the contributors.

I don't really care one way or another if you think I'm a hater...I have no control over what you think, nor do you over what I think. This is a public forum and the only person who can shut me down here is Leaf. If you don't like what I say, use the ignore button. If you don't like what a ton of others are saying, and their postings conflicts with your thoughts, ignore them. And there is always the solution of not coming here at all.

If you think this is a step in the right direction for istock, then good for you. I do not, and I will voice my opinion on it anytime I like.

EXACTLY!!!

Buy Pay-as-you-go credits whenever you need them. Use your credits to download royalty-free stock photography, vector illustrations, video footage, audio tracks and Flash files. Credits cost as little as 95� USD/credit.

Pay-as-you-go credit packages
Credits Price (USD)
 12 $18.50 ($1.54/credit)
 26 $39.50 ($1.52/credit)
 50 $75.00 ($1.50/credit)
 120 $175.00 ($1.46/credit)
 300 $430.00 ($1.43/credit)
 600 $800.00 ($1.33/credit)
 1000 $1,250.00 ($1.25/credit)
 2000 $2,250.00 ($1.13/credit)

That's false advertising right there. They really need a class action lawsuit against them for all the crap they've been doing, whether its accidental or deliberate.

okay.. wow. the slider is all the way at the bottom under "display preferences"  .. how weird is that.  I didn't move mine, it was in the middle and I searched on 'desert' the results were vetta followed by agency.. and pretty much that was it on the main page.

this will certainly help my sales on the other sites as it will definitely drive away customers who freak out on the outrageous pricing.

Odd, because mine, by default was set all the way to the right, which actually shows a more mixed search. However, in yet another dumb move, iStock is going to remove the slider (that no one even knows exists) and make the default the middle position. Should really help your sales at other agencies then!

"fashion" results mixed with slider to the right but almost all photos are vetta when in the middle, some illustrations and video made it.  Southeast Asia btw for the search.

Good thing they are doing away with the slider and making the "default" the middle position, right? 

I'm not sure why everyone is so surprised. The search is back to where it was just a month or so ago, with all the high priced stuff at the top.

The search I did wasn't as stacked with Vetta and Agency as the old search was. I searched "horse" with 200 results per page and most of the top photos were flames with a smattering of Vetta throughout. Wasn't that supposed to be one of the perks of Vetta though? Preference in the search?

ETA: I guess in order to get the Vetta stacked search I needed to move the slider to the middle. It was set all the way to the right, though I've never touched it. What a bizarre system. The slider is really stupid. If you didn't hear people talking about it in the forums, you'd never know it was there. Maybe they should make it a price sensitive slider than a keyword 'relevancy' slider.

Another Best Match change just happened and, wow, this is a big one.

It very obviously is pushing Vetta and Agency files. Another move to quickly boost revenue/profits?

So they changed it *back*? It was a surprise when they changed it to *not* favor Vetta and Agency. I thought that was one of the benefits of having those types of files...favoritism.

ETA: I just did a search on "horse" and I actually don't see near the stacking of Vetta of old. The top of the search appears to all be flames with a smattering of Vetta mixed in (search set for 200 images per page). Previously, it would just be one solid wall of Vetta.

and yeah, I thought the same thing about the snarky tone on that lastremark.  One would think that even in the face of criticism a large company/presence like iStock could remain professional. 

I think they've shown repeatedly that no matter how big they get, they can't seem so shake the high school mentality.

The first thing I thought about this in reading the article is "Wow, he's put on a lot of weight!" 

http://press.istockphoto.com/pr/isp/default.aspx

Stress eating?

How did that crap get accepted anywhere.  I thought all the agencies had much tighter standards. His renders suck and those keyhole images are garbage (well, not the stolen parts).

And there is no doubt in my mind that they sought him out, not the other way around. iStock was killing their business. As Jonathan Klein said, "If someone's going to cannibalize your business, better it be one of your other businesses".

That's right. When it came down to it, money won over his "baby". I am not saying I blame him one bit, but his motives were the same as Getty's. Business is still business.

I think Getty sold him a bill of goods too...how they were totally going to leave iStock alone, how he could run it just the way he always had, how much better it was going to be with the added infusion of cash...I'm sure they made it sound too good to pass up. And of course, all that money. I know I'm not that strong.