Quote from: rubyroo on January 18, 2012, 18:46

Quote from: sjlocke on January 18, 2012, 18:28

IS is the only place keeping up image costs and royalties.  Without them, you'd be getting $.10 from SS and images at DT would be $.50 .

... and yet, WITH them, us indies can get $0.7c and $0.10c FROM them.  Less than we get anywhere else.

"us indies" can always go exclusive and get a fair price for your work, a higher commision and so on. (much MORE then you get anywhere else).

For many, going exclusive doesn't make economic sense.  When I was considering it years ago, the numbers showed a significant loss of income, even if my sales doubled.  Even more than the loss of income, the biggest drawback was IS wouldn't accept images from my bread-and-butter collection that sustains me to this day.  Where would I have been able to sell them, if IS wouldn't accept them?  Nowhere. 

Quote from: lisafx on January 18, 2012, 13:32

Quote from: gostwyck on January 18, 2012, 06:01

Slightly off-topic but some customer just tweeted that they're unable to buy credits;

"@shayniebelles
Shayniebelles @iStock hi, i've been tryin to buy credits (50) from your web for a couple of days now but no avail. system is not accepting it. pls help"

Their system is trying to tell this guy something.  "Shop elsewhere". 

I already tweeted a reply to her and told her to try other options like dreamstime, shutterstock, etc... I listed about 5 others. 

I did, too!   

Reddit is another one.  And Google, in a show of support, has blacked out its logo.

I've done three shoot events in AU. Only the 2nd one in Melbourne in 2010 was a mini-lypse. We got a box of swag and a subsidy of US$30/photographer regardless of them being indie or exclusive, but the images were exclusive to istock. The money was paid to me after the event had concluded.

As the organiser I had to be exclusive as well.

At the end of it, the feedback from indies was very clear. Not worth it to only be able to upload to one site. From an organiser pespective I also didn't feel it was worthwhile.

I think the key changes in the new program are mainly around logistical support (identifying content gaps and making sure the details are covered), and it seems as though funding support is a sliding scale ie: the more backing you get, the more IS will contributr (i hope it goes in that direction).

I've been sounding them out a bit on a shoot event in Peru in a few years but it means I'd have to go back to being exclusive to qualify for sponsorship. If it's only US$30/attendee it's probably not worth it (US$ aren't worth what they used to be either).

I've been to numerous photo shoot Meetups in Sacramento and met a lot of IS exclusives.  Can't tell you how many times one of them has gotten the "brilliant" idea to organize a minilypse and how many times I've told them I won't be coming, because of the image exclusivity.  It never seems to register...not until after they've done all the work and no one shows up.  Looks like the latest Sacto'lypse won't suffer the same fate, but...$425 to attend??  OUCH!!! 

Quote

I get where you're coming from, but I have to admit that I've worked at jobs that I totally didn't believe in and were against my principles, because there weren't, at the times, any options, and I needed the job.  It eats away at you, you lose some self-respect -- but you also do what you have to do.  So if they weren't in a position that they could leave on principle -- and it's a lousy economy to do so -- I get that, and I feel for how they must have felt about it.    

Very well put, don't demonize the gears of the machine when the brain controller has got them cornered. In this economy I am sure many admins just avoided any confrontation to keep that paycheck. I can't blame them.

I know of many back end people over the years that have given their full effort to their jobs at iStock and if any of them are affected by this then... I am in solidarity and in support for them to find a job soon. Nothing is as black and white as it seems on the surface; plus we have no info only speculation at best right now.

Well said by both of you.  This is a major turning point in IS's history.  The least we can do is be supportive of those who worked so hard on our behalf and just lost their jobs.

Makes me wonder if KKT was the last line of defense for some of these people. He gets replaced and the trickle is turning into a tidal wave. How I wish Lobo was one of the cuts though! LOL

According to that interview with Kelly in October, he was promoted to Vice President of Product Development, and is now based in New York City. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AbESgjlRjCA

I obviously have a big stake in the reasonable protections for copyright holders so our work isn't pirated.

However, SOPA and the Senate parallel are terrible legislation and should not be passed. The problem is that there's a requirement to take down on the basis of an allegation - think of how that allows malicious takedown - and that an industry group gets to administer it (the worst kind of privatizing government, IMO).

Just because there is clearly a piracy problem does not make every piece of legislation advisable.

+1

Quote from: Karimala on January 17, 2012, 19:54

Quote

Tyler Hellard
@poploser Tyler Hellard
Looks like I'm done being respectfully quiet about the mess @GettyImages is making of @iStock. Assholes.
6 hours ago
replies ↓
Brad Ralph
bstellar Brad Ralph
@
@poploser how do you really feel? Remember, twitter is considered part of the trust-tree.
4 hours ago
Tyler Hellard
poploser Tyler Hellard
@
@bstellar But I'm not giving this "It's not them, it's me" speech when people ask why I left anymore. Because it was totally them.
4 hours ago
Tyler Hellard
poploser Tyler Hellard
@
@bstellar Yeah, except I'm not sure 140 is enough to fully express myself.

Notwithstanding the momentous content, no wonder I don't do Twitter. That's all just gobbledegook.
And what on earth is a trust-tree?
Is '140' an in-joke?

140 refers to the 140 character limit for tweets.

Trust-tree, I'm thinking, means something like a circle of trust?  "Don't tweet, because you're violating a circle of trust" kind of thing...I guess.

Quote from: Karimala on January 12, 2012, 12:53

Quote from: WarrenPrice on January 12, 2012, 12:32

Cutting expenses?
Wonder how many "positions" that eliminated? 

I was wondering the same thing.

Well, if Istock's sales are falling at the rate suggested by the multimedia.de data then cut-backs are inevitable __ otherwise it becomes unsustainable.

Maybe the "free in-office massages at your desk from our very own masseuse" will be the next thing to go.

Yep...the writing was clearly on the wall.  Good call on the bump.

One more from Calgary with a Calgary retweet...

Quote

SoCoAddict Ian Harding
We all saw it coming. RT Looks like I'm done being respectfully quiet about the mess @GettyImages is making of @iStock. Assholes.

Anyone know Ian Harding?  His profile says he's the voice of iStockaudio?

Another tweet from Calgary.

daniel_fontaine Daniel Fontaine
@thecultofteak I'm going to guess that they're consolidating all under the Getty umbrella like Corbis did with Veer.

Quote from: Karimala on January 17, 2012, 18:48

Writing is on the wall!

What does it say?

Here's my post from two days ago...again it was just speculation.  There are so many signs pointing to the end of IS as we know it.  Gostwyck predicted a lot of this a year ago.

http://www.microstockgroup.com/general-stock-discussion/experiences-after-quitting-istock-exclusivity/msg237995/#msg237995

Hopefully someone posts here about what's really happening.

I must sound awfully  ignorant, but how can the US take down foreign websites which fall under other jurisdictions...?
I dont quite get it   Isnt that why Heroturko and consorts are still around, because they fall under Russian jurisdiction and Russia doesnt want to do anything about it?

The websites would still exist, but would be totally inaccessible from the US.