Quote from: sharpshot on August 06, 2016, 10:57
50% for everyone and a $50 payout threshold would be simple and I don't think it would put anyone off using GL.  Being grandfathered in at 52% is nice but if 40% and a $100 payout threshold puts new contributors off, GL wont be as competitive as other sites and wont attract as many buyers.

Great wisdom, Sharpshot. I just wish the agencies would pay attention to the veterans! 

Quote from: jamiehooper on August 01, 2016, 20:12
Sounds like I'm not alone. I usually make my min. about halfway through the month; but this July I barely squeeked under the wire at the last minute.

Yep. I never missed a monthly payout since July 2008, but last month I wondered if I was going to miss payout for the first time in 8 years!

Wow. My July SS payout was the lowest since Sep 2007! 

Maybe it had something to do with:

http://www.microstockgroup.com/general-stock-discussion/payment-earning-email-address-changed/msg452998/?topicseen#new

Have you checked your payout address?

What about strays? If I shoot a pic of a stray alley cat, do I need to get the cat's signature?

Quote from: Karen on December 03, 2015, 09:47

Quote from: Chichikov on December 03, 2015, 06:21
I think that their next step will be to accept any crap, like did iStock about one year ago...

You mean this crap?
http://www.shutterstock.com/portfolio/search.mhtml?gallery_landing=1&gallery_id=1256674&page=1&safesearch=1&sort_method=newest

How could he get 39,000+ like those accepted? Must know (or be) someone on the inside. OY!!

Google can get away with that and running driverless cars all over creation, and no one from Google gets in real trouble. What about you and I trying those things?

Quote from: SnowDog on February 14, 2015, 14:30

Quote from: heywoody on February 14, 2015, 12:32
That seems to be it ok - not an EL, not even a sale.  Why . then, is it reported as such?

It might just be remotely possible that there is somehow, somewhere, a tiny bug in iStock's generally bullet-proof code. 

Gasp!

Quote from: Sean Locke Photography on June 03, 2014, 19:37

Quote from: Pickerell on June 03, 2014, 18:55the two things GI has that nobody else has: 1. The best images in the world. 2. The best editors in the world.

Lol, ok.

You sound sarcastic.

Maybe we should take this seriously, considering the giant strides IS+GI have made in the microstock business.........

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on May 22, 2014, 20:13
I rather think you are jumping to conclusions when  you have very little evidence indeed. TS must have a very considerable turnover to deliver the returns that it has been doing. Perhaps they have just decided not to push it on Getty because they've found it is counterproductive to push GI customers over there.  Their marketing logic has been very mysterious for a long time.

Marketing logic?  WHAT logic??

Quote from: Sean Locke Photography on May 13, 2014, 21:50
Desperate, eh?

Probably.  Something smells rotten in the state of Denmark (and, no, it's not Yuri).

Quote from: Jo Ann Snover on May 13, 2014, 04:40
Customers are noticing the "missing" images - more than a few tweets like these over the last 10 days:

https://twitter.com/DollarPhotoClub/status/465744399767707648

https://twitter.com/DollarPhotoClub/status/465770470558937088

Verrrry nice. Thanks, Jo Ann!

Would be great if everyone posted comments they find like those mentioned above.

ETA:  I love the question that one of those posters asked, "Why are so many images being deleted from the site?"   Duh......

Just started another thread before I saw this one. I can't login, though I can get to the website and login page. Keeps rejecting my login info.

Leaf, you can delete this. Submitted just after another thread was started about the topic.

When you get Stockholm Syndrome towards Lobo.

Quote from: gostwyck on February 15, 2013, 01:43

I'd regard Oringer as an excellent agent over the last 8 years, especially over the last two, and so far he has never let me down. I am more than prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt until otherwise proved. Let's see what actually happens before we all get hysterical.

Wholeheartedly agree about JO---he has managed to keep the good ship SS on an even keel for a long time. Unfortunately, the game there has changed and will continue to "evolve" as the shareholders become more and more powerful, talks of a profitable sell-off begin to happen, and Jon is gently distanced from his current position of power. Jon won't be able to hold back the steamroller that is Wall Street. It will happen as it always does in these situations, always becoming an issue of pure unadulterated greed. I give SS maybe 2 years max before the first major cracks in the dike begin and things start crumbling like IS, as far as contributors are concerned. We'd best make the most out of SS while while the sun still shines. I think DT will be the next to succumb to big business one way or the other. Sad times.

Sean, thanks for helping show us Getty's true colors. Apparently you revealed a WHOLE LOT MORE than they wanted anyone to see. I sincerely say "Congratulations!" You will be much better off without the chains of GI. And they're worse off for their stupid decision (waah).

Just hope he doesn't hire Peebert.

Quote from: lisafx on February 07, 2013, 16:15

Quote from: dbvirago on February 06, 2013, 00:26
Per one of my non-photo clients who pays through Paypal, they have resolved the issue for the future, but there are still payments that were sent by the vendor, but never delivered by Paypal. I was actually double paid by one. Paypal definitely has some problems. One of my clients is looking for other options for payment.

Looks like this may have been the issue.  Fotolia has spent the last couple of days looking into this and last night I got the payment. 

I am pleased they took this issue seriously and were able to fix the problem and pay me in a reasonable time frame. 

Thanks for the update!  Good to know that FT is actually doing something to help their contributors.

All from around 01/28:

http://support.envato.com/index.php?/News/NewsItem/View/20/paypal-outage---280113

http://forums.ebay.com/db2/topic/Paypal/No-Notice-Paypal/5100132484

http://www.zetaprints.com/blog/2013/01/28/paypal-issues-web-to-print-orders-are-not-paid/

Let's hope their issues have actually been resolved for future payments!!

A couple of other non-stock sites I deal with have had problems in the past week or so with masspay payments not going through. Could be FT was affected by this? Haven't heard if those problems have been resolved---it's hard to find any news about the situation.

(ETA -- I did find comments and notices at various sites about the problem, seems to be worldwide with some payments going thru ok, but no explanation offered by paypal yet.)

Are these Google Drive downloads?

Istock professionalism at its finest!

.

Quote from: Anyka on January 26, 2013, 07:56
I have a practical question for February 2nd :

I am not planning to reactivate anything afterwards, not even if Getty would give in and create an opt-out, but the few images I already deactivated (14th Jan) are still on Thinkstock.

I heard different experiences on that topic :  some say it takes 30 days, others (Jsnover) have the luck to see them disappear immediately, and still others talk about cases where they stay on TS "forever" and you need to contact support to have them removed.

Now suppose I am in group 3 and after 30 days, I still see my deactivated stuff on Thinkstock.  How should I inform support?  I don't mean which e-mail address to use, but what info do they need?  Should I just say "please delete all deactivated images from TS", or do they need every Istock number, or even worse : will they be asking for the TS numbers?

As I plan to deactivate 500 (or more) (already mentioned in a previous post, so don't add this up in the total amount), I would prefer to know if I should make a list.  Sean's script is absolutely great, but it does not send reports with TS numbers afterwards 

Did any of you contact Support to have TS images deleted (after deactivation), and if yes, what was their reaction?  Did they ask for file numbers, and if yes, did they need the IS file numbers or the TS numbers?

I contacted Contributor Relations through the IS website about a week ago, gave them a list of the file numbers of my deactivated files, and asked if they would please delete those files from the IS partner-program. The files were deleted in less than a week, and I received a reply from IS confirming so.