Quote from: vlad_the_imp on February 10, 2011, 02:20

Quote

Yeah, I wonder why they don't just kill it off and be done with it, whatever the problems were.

I'm told they planned to launch with 10,000 logo's and they don't even have half that. I'm amazed anyone is actually bothering to upload still as it's about 15 months behind schedule on the launch date.

This is interesting since today they said they planned to launch editorial with 5k files.  Why so many for logos?

logos are a different monster as they are a one time sale and then they are gone.  with the editorial it's like the rest of the images - they are for sale over and over again. 

Quote from: jamirae on February 16, 2011, 16:47

Quote from: mtkang on February 16, 2011, 15:35

it got a huge tax 30% on some countries...for US sales.

So for Dash for Cash, i got 30% gone..and it seems the major customers are US..so i got almost 99% sales are US sales..

it is like whenever i make $100, i only got $70.. too bad.

I dont think I understand what this means, but if I'm in the US does it matter to me?

No.

cool thanks.

Quote from: jjauregui on February 16, 2011, 03:47

I can care less about the acceptance rate. Our agency just cares about quality. Companies are willing to spend the money for the right photo.
Let me show you some examples of some garbage:
http://www.dreamstime.com/royalty-free-stock-image-creative-work-image10178466
http://www.dreamstime.com/royalty-free-stock-photos-what-s-the-problem--image10178178
I just searched with the keywords, "laptop, man". Now tell me, if you cant tell the difference between istock and the other agencies than you don't have an eye for design. If I were a student or a freelancer with a low budget, then I would consider using canstock, dreamstime, shutterstock�etc.

So these are examples to show that Istock has the superior images and other sites' reviewers need to step up?

As others have said, there is crap on all sites (including Istock). Sometimes the same crap (including Istock).

Maybe Istock reviewers need to step up too... 

that's funny. I guess it just goes to show that you need to do your homework and get the facts before you post - especially around here! 

Kind of seems as if it is unfashionable here to be positive or even neutral about iStockphoto But surely it's more useful to be neutral. I'm neutral. I think there are some other great sites too. I also love flickr. So there. Despite the economy it's still a vibrant market.

Caspixel says she uses the site for various reasons - one being that it has the content she wants at lower prices. That's useful buyer info. There is someone who is quite definitely not an iStockphoto cheerleader saying something which seems to very much contradict the idea that people would be 'bailing' because it is too expensive etc.

That's anecdotal feedback worth not ignoring. Even though it seems to contradict the meme being propagated here. So there are obviously lots of issues. But it seems that the rumour that iStockphoto is necessarily more expensive is potentially bogus.

I think you mis-read her post.  here is the follow-up she posted:

Quote from: bunhill on February 15, 2011, 13:26

So people saying that iStockphoto is too expensive but actually you're shopping there because it's less expensive.

No, I'm not saying they are less expensive than other agencies. In general they aren't, because the credits are across the board more expensive than at other agencies. What I am saying is that the non-exclusive files are less expensive than the exclusive one.

See my previous post that clarifies how I might purchase an image.

BTW, one of the main reasons I also don't want to pay a lot for stock is because I don't really buy images that require big studio set-ups and models. Mostly I buy a lot of textures and things like that. I don't see a need to plunk down a hundred bucks for stuff like that. When things were really tight last year (and iStock's prices kept rising) I actually just started making my own background textures.

it seems to me that istock has some excellent marketing.  with that they have built a large, loyal buyer and contributor base.  I would venture to guess that many folks have been convinced from some really good marketing that iStock has the best images without actually downloading and reviewing files from other sites.  It's kind of like the microsoft v. apple or canon v. nikon -- both are good in their own right and people will believe what they want to believe.   

I don't think that the likes of Yuri, MonkeyBusiness and LisaFX only upload their best stuff to iStock and their crap work (if they actually had any!) to the other sites.  If a buyer wanted to find quality images on other sites I am sure they will find them.

perhaps the inspections at other sites (non-istock) had lower standards sometime back, but in my recent experience, I would say they are pretty much on par with istock.  I've had images rejected from the other SS, DT and FT that were accepted by iStock. 

i know I am beating a drum we have all heard; but if you drop exclusive, be prepared for a ton of work to get your port. on other sites.  i just drop excl. at DT and it is a ton of work to get the port. on the other sites.  Even with lightburner, it is still a ton of work.  Yes, some of the sites are a breeze but most are a royal pain, like BigStock and Panther.

This is my full-time job so must suck it up and work the long hours to get the port developed across the entire system.  Excl. is not an option at IS as I am only allowed 18 uploads a week and it would take years to get my port their.

Acceptance is going well, most sites well over 90%

I guess it depends on the sites.  I've not had much problem with the ones I'm submitting to - but I'm sticking with the top tier mostly, except for StockFresh, which I am holding out hope for.  I am at IS, DT, SS, FT, Stockfresh, Alamy and am waiting for an acceptance to Veer.  I find the process fairly painless as long as my images have the metadata before I upload them with the FTP. 

Quote from: caspixel on February 15, 2011, 12:56

On the rare occasion that I might happen to purchase from iStock, I would only buy from non-exclusives at this point. I'm glad there are still other people who buy from exclusives, because I don't have anything against them, I just don't care for the greedy corporate attitude and constant price hikes coming out of HQ.

Yeah, that'll show 'em.  Buy the images where they get to keep the most, instead of supporting the people who get to keep a higher percentage.  Good thought process!

if you're referring to "where iStock (they) get to the keep the most" - technically you're right - istock keeps a higher percentage BUT it is of a lower dollar amount so istock actually makes less money off of the non-exclusive content then they do off of the exclusive content. 

well what do you want them to say?  I agree to the extent that perhaps they should have at least sent something to acknowledge that they had responded to your request to close your account.  But you asked for them to close it so they did.  If you were looking to have a dialog to discuss why your images were rejected, then asking to have your account closed seems to me to end that dialog. 

Perhaps you could have instead waited to get a response if you were interested in finding out why the rejection rate was so high.  It is a new site and yes, I've had a few questionable rejections myself, but I just move on as the rejected images are still for sale elsewhere.  I am assuming they are putting most of their efforts into the building and marketing of the site.

Anyone else thinking that this could be another one of istock's "tests" to see how we react before making a more permanent policy change? They test price increases before launching them officially. Maybe they're testing out a policy on fraudulent charges.

DT already does this, charging all fraudulent purchases back to the contributor. istock might be looking at this as another way to get a few more bucks out of us on a regular basis.

interesting theory but I seriously doubt that.  Too large of amounts to be a "test" 

Quote from: vlad_the_imp on February 09, 2011, 14:33

The Getty badmouthing IS has been heard before, it's not new.

Quote

Also, I would say at least once every other month I get a "Can we buy from you outside of istock" email from buyers.
   

I have sold  a lot of images and I have never had this, I'm amazed you get it every 2 months.

I'm surprised. I would think more people would have this happen. I had one today, but it wasn't quite the same. It is "Can I buy this from you, since Istock doesn't allow me to resell t-shirts with this design?" OBVIOUSLY, not quite the same as I mentioned before, and I will just refer them back to istock customer relations to discuss licensing options.

Apprently people find me to be very emailable???

is it email or sitemail? perhaps a lot of photogs dont publish their emails on their istock portfolio page.  It doesn't automatically get listed there anyhow, does it?  at least mine is not there, but my website link is.

Quote from: ShadySue on February 09, 2011, 12:59

I guess the reps are desperate to earn commission, and it wouldn't be the only industry in which commission-based reps lie to boost their own income.

I totally understand why a rep would lie to get a commission (not that I agree with it).  That's salesmanship 101.  What is surprising to me is that they would tell lies that trash part of their own company.  

Sadly I don't find this too surprising.  if you've ever worked a commission job with pushy sales co-workers you'll find that some of these people will trash their own mother if they felt it would get them the sale and no one else. 

^^^ I note that even though the poster clearly wishes to remain anonymous, having deliberately avoided the question once, Lobo continues to press for his (or hers) identification.

yeah, first thing I noticed too.  interesting lobo added that "you can chose to remain anonymous" .. okay, so why ask the person again? 

Did anyone else see this post in the Independence Day forum that Brigit (StockCube) has?  Apparently there is a backlog and people who have cancelled their IS exclusivity have been waiting OVER the 30 day mark?  some are at 45 days and counting and IS has not changed their status yet.

http://the-independence-day-forum.983074.n3.nabble.com/iStock-mucks-up-the-works-td2444013.html