Cathy I just reported the violation with my Deviantart account, pointing to your level 5 image on DT, and this thread. His deviation is totally crap and he probably got it from HeroTurko or so. So I did what I could.

He had 2 downloads today, so he is redistributing.

Good idea!

I reported it too, and pointed to original image at Istock.

I hope they remove it soon.

Most people think they can rake in the cash....for example my Aunt wanted the names of all the photography websites I'm on so she could put her photos on them to sell as well. I told her you need more than a 4mp camera and can't use your camera phone and explained to her that she would need model realeases for the people and property releases for the properties she photographs. she still insisted I give them to her so I did. Maybe she found out she couldn't get on them because I haven't heard her say anything else about it. I hate to put down my Aunt, but the biggest majority of her pictures weren't even in focus, but I didn't want to tell her that.......maybe the microstock agencies did it for me.....

It's better that way.  Maybe now your aunt will show some more respect for your work and will stop thinking that photography is simply pushing a button.

Based on a gross credit value of $1.50 USD, IS royalties are now the following (according to my calculations):
                     
Image Size              xs            s           m          l          xl         xxl        xxxl
Non-exclusive        0,30      0,90      1,80      3,00      4,50      6,00      7,50
Bronze Exclusive    0,75      1,88      3,75      5,63      7,50      9,38      11,25
Silver Exclusive      0,90      2,25      4,50      6,75      9,00      11,25   13,50
Gold Exclusive        1,05      2,63      5,25      7,88      10,50   13,13   15,75
Diamond Exclus      1,20      3,00      6,00      9,00      12,00   15,00   18,00
                     
It's clear that the difference between exclusives' and non-exclusives' earnings are bigger now.

The most important thing to study now (for me at least) are  the effects on the number of downlods for exclusives and non exclusives.   Will exclusives keep selling as they have so far? Will they sell more? Or less?   Will non exclusives have more sales now that their images are cheaper?

As for me, I have decided to wait and see before making any decision about becoming IS exclusive...

The iStock credits/image price change has taken place.

Let's now see the effects of the new credit/image prices for exclusives and non exclusives.

... While I can see the benefits for contributors of higher royalties - the canister shifts are really nothing but a profit share grab by a company that is already the most profitable in the industry. ...

My thoughts exactly.

To me, IS response to the question "Why are you changing canister levels?" is an insult to anyone's intelligence:

"We have grown far beyond anyone's expectations since the original canister levels were set. The current system just isn't sustainable. We must increase the canister levels in order to maintain current royalty rates."

 

Yup, 11, very nice!

11 ELs ? 

Quote from: Digital66 on January 03, 2010, 14:47

And i wonder... what about those accounts which can be closed at any time (like SS)?  Must you show documentation by Jan 11 that you have requested SS account removal? If so, you would lose SS income and still would not receive any raise from IS because you still have obligations with Dreamstime...    

I wrote to IS support about this, and the answer seemed to be, yes. You must request removal of all content by Jan 11, even if you cannot (or do not) become exclusive until Aug.

I find that position to be unfair and unprofessional. It's one thing to ask for a commitment of exclusivity, but it's quite another to ask that we give up 6 months of income while we are waiting to become exclusive.

BOO to IS.      I feel their promise of grandfathering exclusives was mostly an empty one.

Thank you for the confirmation KB.

... if porn or erotica is where the OP wants to concentrate, they would be better off starting their own erotica site, instead of settling for a few pennies per dl, doncha think?

Why?  if we accept pennies for other images, why not for images of nudes? What's the difference?

... Along with this document, we will require that you attach documentation as evidence showing that the request to remove the content has been made. This can be a screenshot or an email showing that you have completed this process. Please note, all obligations with different agencies must be met prior to August 1, 2009

And i wonder... what about those accounts which can be closed at any time (like SS)?  Must you show documentation by Jan 11 that you have requested SS account removal? If so, you would lose SS income and still would not receive any raise from IS because you still have obligations with Dreamstime...   

Quote from: modellocate on January 02, 2010, 11:23

Looking for the best place to sell nude, not whether or not to sell nudes.

Not microstock, since what product or service could nudes promote? Probably RM is much better for this kind of content.

Come on!  There are many products and services (which have nothing to do with prostitution) which could be promoted with a nude image. 

Shutterpoint unfortunately seems to attract a lot of buyers for nude, even porn in fact.

Unfortunately?  Why?  It's just another niche in the photography business.   And... Porn?  I've never seen porn in SS.

...there are far more than 100 inspectors around the world nowadays, so any hope of one inspector to be able to limit competition to their own portfolio would be a waste of time since they won't be able to control 99% of the incoming images anyway.

According to the info at http://www.istockphoto.com/article_view.php?ID=147 the total number Istock inspectors is only 40 around the world.  That's a very small number.

... they have editors who are uploading their stuff ;-) Editor should be someone who knows what is needed to sell - not to fill in with his own pictures!

I've always thought this is something Istock should change.  Contributors SHOULD NEVER be editors.   

Otherwise, sometimes the reason by which editors accept or refuse an image could be biased, unreasonable, and unfair.

Feliz Navidad !