Anyone else noticed that they changed May sales report?
On 18th I got one report with less sales, now I downloaded the report again to find it almost doubled.
The payment notification email got me confused so I had a look at the report again.

I�ve been submitting pics directly to microstock agencies like SS, Adobe and Alamy for a year now.

I recently signed a contract with easyfotostock (part of agefotostock) in Spain and now discovered they sell my pictures on Alamy using their own pseudonym as photographer to be credited. Meaning my name will not be credited on those sales, although I have the copyright.

I didn�t know they use affiliate programmes and I couldn�t choose any of the affiliates as well. I also can�t delete my pictures on their site.

I want to sell my pics directly not through that agency and I will terminate my contract now.

Is this common? Do agencies sell pictures they don�t have the copyright on under their own name with no credits or mentioning the copyright holder?

I always thought I own my copyright and have to be mentioned when selling through stock angencies.... Am I wrong?

I wrote to Alamy about that subject but they responded I have to talk about that with agefotostock, they use the pseudonym given with the photo.

http://www.selling-stock.com/Article/age-launches-easyfotostock

Example:
my picture with my name
https://www.alamy.de/panorama-der-alpinen-seebersee-see-mit-dem-hohen-anstieg-der-berge-der-texelgruppe-im-hintergrund-in-der-nahe-der-timmelsjoch-alpine-strasse-in-image331811536.html

And this is how they sell it
https://www.alamy.de/panorama-der-alpinen-seebersee-see-mit-dem-hohen-anstieg-der-berge-der-texelgruppe-im-hintergrund-in-der-nahe-der-timmelsjoch-alpine-strasse-in-image338042263.html

I'm not sure why are you bothered by it, you are into microstock to make money, not to stick your name to things, that's what galleries are for.
Buyers are not obliged to display your name when they use photos, thou some do sometimes. Imagine if all the designs that include photos were slapped on with credits.
That's really a common thing, take Wirestock or any random factory on microstock, everyone gets their money in the end and that's the only thing that matters, not making a name, you just hyper-supply goods, you are not building a trademark, and buyers couldn't care less anyway. The copyright remains yours at all times, a simple credit couldn't possibly reinforce that anyway.

Quote from: qunamax on May 13, 2021, 17:06

Just had 0$ sale on the sidebar, in sales it's 0.10, I get what?

.03 cents.  These are their distributor sales that you have to opt out of, but you can only opt out in April of each year.

Woohoo, guess it's time for a new lens then...
I'm not sure I want to opt out, I had good distributor sales in the past.

Finally they got reviewed, after months, IS must be watching these forums 

Yes, just now.

Strong month, about four times more than SS (with a bit bigger portfolio).
I see a rising trend constantly, probably thanks to new uploads. Most importantly it drives my will to upload.

Quote from: qunamax on April 21, 2021, 10:56

Why were they deactivated Pete?

Because the evil agency... 

Just kidding. When Getty took over, around the time of ESP and when all of our images were changed to the Getty servers, they had a policy change. In simple terms, sports and editorial, news, entertainment,  those kinds of things, that isn't from Getty, would no longer be sold by iStock. I can understand their reasoning, I just don't like it. Tough luck? Business is business.

Getty pays people to go to these events and take photos. They are sold and branded as Getty Images, I'm sure we've all seen those on news, current entertainment events and sports stories. Standing next to their hired guns, at the same events, is little me, who uploaded my work to iStock. Getty owned iStock and iStock was competition. Easy answer, eliminate the completion. Eliminate Pete.

Audio they signed an exclusive contract with a different provider, no more in house uploads from us contributors. Phased out.

So just take this as whining and complaining about something that's expected and standard business. I don't make much or sell much on IS now because first off, I didn't have that much that wasn't editorial. I also got tired of the system, where I could upload things and get accepted and a week later, the release wasn't right. I'd finally get one that was approved, or hit and miss, and then the new one was not suitable. The processing, the CV and the torture, I gave up. So lets say much of the problem with low sales is created by myself.

Good images will sell, and the people here who still earn on IS are proof. But in fact, I've been stabbed, then shot and finally hung, of course I'm a little bitter, because I barely make $5 a month now. 

So they didn't remove my images because I was a PITA or did something wrong. Just policy changes.

I wasn't aware of that, I don't do such work, very sorry. Wondering if that kind of images would be rejected now if submitted?

Anyway, here we go again:

I was hoping when I wake up the statement would be ready, but it's still spinning. Told you, it's either early or it's late.

One from 3-4 days ago showed up finally, thou a lot more waiting in line...
Guilty too, as alternative to starving.

Interested to know your thoughts if you believe that there's any reason to be optimistic in regards to the future of the microstock photography industry as a viable business opportunity.

https://brutallyhonestmicrostock.com/2021/03/18/7-reasons-why-microstock-photography-is-probably-a-waste-of-your-time/

Just checked my February 2021 iStock earnings results making me even more pessimistic.

Looking forward to a fruitful discussion.

Best regards,

Alex

Well checking my February IS earnings just made me optimistic, they are constantly rising month after month, moving my new uploads, currently they are by far my best earner. That's it from me about IS right now.

Quote from: qunamax on March 13, 2021, 07:48

Not to open a completely new thread, can anyone tell me what is the Wirestock take on uploading similars/photos from the same series that I already have uploaded through my accounts?

Duplicates are not allowed, and will be rejected.
As far as I know, similars/other content from the same series are fine, but whether it's a good idea to do that is subject of discussion.

Maybe uploading image A from a series to your personal account using your own keywording and uploading image B from that shoot to Wirestock using their keywording service might be a strategy to consider. Just don't stretch similarity, and make sure there's a distinctive difference between the two images.

That's what I was thinking, as an experiment, I would surely avoid submitting bestsellers, but for additional shots from series - never uploaded, it might be a good idea to give it a go, to see how would they do in a more exposed portfolio.
Thanks.

Quote from: Uncle Pete on March 11, 2021, 13:53

Before I deleted the email, I noticed this.

Briefs are moving home! Soon you will be able to browse briefs and submit your content, all in ESP. And we�re not stopping there� later in the year we will be introducing a new, simpler look to the ESP website, so stay tuned!

Maybe [idle speculation] too many people were opting out of the briefs emails, or ignoring them.

Count me in, I don't even know what "briefs" are.

Upgrading to 4k equipment isn't necessarily a steep investment. You can pick up a second hand Panasonic G7 for pretty cheap if you keep looking.

Don't forget the computer, power and storage, I can edit and export 1080p in a blink of an eye, 4K throws me back into Cyrix6x86L era.