|
MicrostockGroup Sponsors
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - SNP
Pages: 1 ... 14 15 16 17 18 [19] 20 21 22 23 24 ... 54
451
« on: September 08, 2011, 09:41 »
I don't know who said it earlier...but yup, iStock is "downstream" from Getty.....at least according to their model.
452
« on: September 07, 2011, 15:01 »
images being buried isn't my main concern...it's the principle of fair business standards that we're all strictly held to but to which TPTB do not adhere. it's watching Getty move images over when we're not allowed to either upload the same type of editorial content, nor may we sell it elsewhere as RF. it's these moves that are in bold contrast to what we're being told that make me realize that although on one level of management the efforts to advocate for us are sincere, that middle level of iStock content managers is becoming more and more impotent against the machine pushing the bottom line mandates.
453
« on: September 07, 2011, 13:47 »
@ JoAnn: absolutely, and great examples. +1
454
« on: September 06, 2011, 12:03 »
close to 40K now, so much for a few thousand images....and a banner on the home page advertising celebrity images we're not allowed to upload. explanations include documentation concerns....utter nonsense. they don't want iStock editorial competing with Getty. they want to maximize Getty editorial exposure by moving over GE files, but as far as I can see, there is no real plan to build an editorial contributor base from within iStock. incredibly disappointing.
455
« on: August 24, 2011, 19:12 »
To all those who have said they are not going to fill in the survey I would beg you to do it. If you don't I bet they will assume that you are happy with IStock rather than so disgusted you can't even bothered to fill in their survey. We will hear the usual "it's just a vocal minority" clap trap. Even if you just fill out every box with a statement that you don't want to help them by filling it in. Just something to let them know that your refusal to fill in the survey isn't a positive statement but a negative one.
if you're unwilling to fill it out than don't gripe when you don't like things that happen. 
456
« on: August 22, 2011, 11:38 »
Well, that's what I quoted above: ""The Supplier wishes to appoint iStockphoto as its exclusive agent to license, sublicense and distribute Exclusive Content (as defined below)"
If you have something that is exclusive content, you've agreed they're the only ones who can license it. Solution - just don't upload editorial to iStock.
yeah, that's the decision I'm working on.....;-)
457
« on: August 22, 2011, 10:47 »
you cant sell images as rm if you already sell them as rf elsewhere
Sigh, yes you can.
Sean - I need to add a comment here. I've been involved in a lengthy ongoing discussion with iStock contributor relations about this. in my situation it is regarding editorial files. iStock claims that I cannot sell any files I am already selling as RF editorial on iStock as RM elsewhere. so I am caught in a decision about selling any editorial at iStock when it means I'm shooting myself in the foot. I would prefer to sell editorial through news wires and agencies than through iStock where I can't even sell much of my editorial work because they don't take it (celebs, politics, time-sensitive news etc.). I know this is in regards to Alamy, but iStock claims that we cannot sell ANY files or similars that we sell on iStock as RM ANYWHERE. I still dispute this and it is NOT stated in our ASA. it is incredibly frustrating. supplying editorial to iStock has turned into a PITA for me.
458
« on: August 19, 2011, 12:48 »
balancing the success of the company with the success of its suppliers and customers is a science. my summary isn't meant to gloss over the complexity of managing a venture as large as iStock. But, Getty has been around the block a few times; they should have access to good business minds and it's obvious that if they don't prioritize the financial success of their suppliers; it's not because they can't, it's because they choose not to. that's what needs to change.
459
« on: August 19, 2011, 12:08 »
when I read the survey OP and subsequent replies on the IS forum, I also had the impression that the survey is about delivering news more effectively and reducing contributor backlash. I suspect the survey is really meant to improve communication and nothing more.
in any case, how I feel can be summed up as follows:
don't go back on promises made to contributors even if technically the contract protects you (the agent) as you effectively do as you please. value contributors because our work and only our work fuels the agency. take a long-term approach to our business model rather than implementing initiatives designed to achieve short-term profit increases that ultimately alienate your suppliers. truly lead in the industry; be successful without cutting corners or commissions further. value the work that you attach value to when charging customers. devaluing work and contributors will do nothing more than whittle revenue down to nothing in the long run for all of us. nourish your suppliers and we'll in turn provide you with our best work, some of us exclusively.
I also have to add that they need to do away with discussions in the forum now. people have to be so guarded and careful and the forum no longer serves any discussion purpose, at least as far as I'm concerned. use it to post announcements. the community has moved offsite to social networks and third party forums.
460
« on: August 18, 2011, 16:15 »
I suppose it's like a company meeting versus the suggestion box. people tend to be less showoffy and more honest when the communication is direct. I think they're also looking to distill comments into actionable points rather than sifting through rants....the proof will be in the application (or lack thereof) of the data collected ....
I'd suggest that Rebecca has simply breezed in to her new job, had a meeting and been told that dissatisfaction amongst contributors is one of the issues facing the business. So she's decided to have a survey to find out why (she doesn't know because she wasn't there). She probably thinks that giving contributors the opportunity to vent will probably help anyway.
I'd guess it's a bit of both. but anything that indicates concern for contributor sentiment is a good thing right now, assuming that it's used for good and not evil.
461
« on: August 18, 2011, 15:55 »
Quite frankly, after the thousands of messages from contributors on their forum, if they still don't know how we feel then this little survey isn't likely to do them much good.
When SS did a similar survey last year they did it properly and used the services of an independent professional survey company. All the interviews were done on camera (from home PC's) and the contributors who agreed to take part were paid $100 for their time (it took less than 30 mins). Much better than being entered into a raffle for a couple of iPods.
I guess the lack of investment into this 'survey' is a fair reflection of how much they actually care and how much notice they are likely to take of contributors' views. Not a lot.
I suppose it's like a company meeting versus the suggestion box. people tend to be less showoffy and more honest when the communication is direct and not public like a forum. I think they're also looking to distill comments into actionable points rather than sifting through rants....the proof will be in the application (or lack thereof) of the data collected ....
462
« on: August 18, 2011, 14:37 »
mine are slow again too. I can't help but feel we're teetering on the edge of a big scary fall announcement as they play around with the back end....hopefully not.
463
« on: August 18, 2011, 08:09 »
cool website. hate the name, sorry. I'm exclusive so I won't be contributing but I love to see a new business start off well. your site is really good, clean, simple, easy to navigate, great illustrations. as said previously, you'll need to get some big players to gather clout. build significant traffic, give contributors (and buyers) a reason to migrate (maintain your commission percentages where they are). good luck!
464
« on: August 17, 2011, 08:35 »
Ok, I'm at work now and what I see on my Best Match images on my PC is totally different than what I see on my ipad and different on my mac at home. So maybe it's the cookie.
Mac users are used to paying 3x more for stuff so the best match probably promotes all the expensive images for them.
yeah really...lol
465
« on: August 17, 2011, 07:21 »
Something is going on. Once again, my overnight sales are at %25 of what they would be on a Wednesday, even two months ago.
something is definitely up. since last week my sales pattern is up, down, brutal.
466
« on: August 16, 2011, 10:11 »
It's hard to tell. Most People in media and advertising agencies usually take vacation in august.
I guess it's a combination of factors. though last August I didn't see this kind of sales pattern.
467
« on: August 16, 2011, 08:50 »
My sales are at about 50% of where they usually are for this time on a Tuesday.
that sucks Sean. mine are slow too, compared to yesterday though they seem better. hope it improves, any theories about what's happening?
468
« on: August 16, 2011, 08:05 »
Honestly Im quite happy with the results. If it were more localized, it would mean that some of us could lose a lot of money. As a contributor of a small european country I guess my files would hardly sell anywhere if the search was localized too much.
The way it is now it seems that there is some local content, but not too much.
From what I understand the search is meant to factor in the content that buyers actually purchase from some locations, rather than where the seller comes from. So if you're producing images specifically for the US market from Europe it shouldn't penalise you.
To me if iStock is serious about going beyond the US market, then the results don't show a strong enough local flavour.
definitely see the regional popping up in search terms like cityscape as you pointed out. but I'm also glad it isn't so prominent that it completely changes best match results. cool....thanks Holger, interesting experiment.
469
« on: August 16, 2011, 08:02 »
I've just calculated I'm past 60% of my BME. So far so good, with a EL or 2 and pace like this it could be an awesome month and would more than adequately make up for losses at SS due to insane rejections and fresh content not getting online and selling. It looks like in a few weeks my IS port will outgrow my SS port 
that's good, well done. to summarize my sales from yesterday; I ended up with my normal amount of dls all coming in after 2pm Toronto time. So I had a fifteen hour zero download stretch, which has never happened to me on a weekday. I still feel something weird was happening, either with reporting or who knows. I did open a CR ticket to let them know something was up. cheers.
470
« on: August 16, 2011, 07:58 »
Shank how about you go over to luminous landscape forum and tell them how good Istock is. You'll have heaps more fun than here.
lol.
471
« on: August 16, 2011, 07:56 »
Bees are inexpensive and they work so well. Not so expensive that if one tumbles and smashes you cry for a month, and they produce great lighting results. I think lighting is one of those things that boils down primarily to experience. my favourite stock portrait shooter is the best with lighting that I've ever seen, and his studio is all about his own workarounds and homemade reflectors and tricks he has picked up in his experience.
I love the AB ring flash unit. Only criticism is that it isn't easily portable.
472
« on: August 15, 2011, 17:28 »
Sales patterns have been very strange in the last few weeks. My concern is that there is a bug in reporting sales, particularly due to the big drop-offs that seem to periodically happen at the moment. Of course there's never a real way of verifying any of these things.
You could always organise a group of contributors with similar concerns, pool a few dollars, buy some credits and do some test purchases from each others' portfolios at suspicious times. You'd soon find if there was any bugs in the reporting system.
you may find I'm overly cautious but I wouldn't do this and I'd be careful recommending it. it could be construed as gaming the system, obviously not for malicious purposes, but I wouldn't take the chance. I agree Holger that it's almost as though there was a delay in reporting. to go 15 hours with nothing and then boom, my regular pattern of dls coming in, odd.
473
« on: August 15, 2011, 16:30 »
@SNP
same here, completely shutdown
weird sales patterns. who knows. hope yours pick up too. mine are more normal again as of 2pm. maybe a fluke, but it seems too much of a contrast.
474
« on: August 15, 2011, 14:12 »
there is something going on today or my sales are just dried up and that's that. seriously, my sales literally stopped last night. I'm doing my best not to freak out. I'm down by 60% for this time of day and number of dls...unbelievable.
Welcome on board. I'm on this sinking boat since 8th of August.
I'm sorry to hear that. I don't wish sales angst on anyone. bizarrely my dls are now popping in regularly like they usually do....so I have no idea what happened between 11pm last night and 2pm today. hoping everyone else is seeing sales coming in again too.
475
« on: August 15, 2011, 13:13 »
I've just had two dls, one agency....so that helps. but my numbers are way below where they would normally be and I'm getting very similar reports from contributors who I tend to keep tabs with. they're not just down, they are in a dl desert today like me....I'm sure it isn't true for everyone, it never is. and I don't wish it on anyone! thanks for the feedback all...
I got only my third dl of the day but it was an EL 
enjoy! should cover a nice bottle of wine....and maybe postage to Canada for another bottle of wine
Pages: 1 ... 14 15 16 17 18 [19] 20 21 22 23 24 ... 54
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
