I am very sorry to see this!

I don�t blame you though. RC levels still haven�t been announced, lots of unresolved site issues, simple searches that return over 90% v/a in the first 1000 images, if you click "no people" you still get Hulton archive or V/A images with people in them,  and the biggest problem: very little communication or guidance from our agent.

If the next monthly sales thread are simlilar to April, there will be many more exclusives leaving. If they really want V/A to be the new essence of istock and attract mostly photographers who prefer fewer sales for more money, then many in the "middle tier" will have to decide what they want to do. Move up or move out, seems to be the message.

I still hope they come round or that somehwere down the road there really is a solid marketing plan that will bring millions of new buyers. The market is there, they just have to go after it.

" I think they see image in terms of commodities and markets (the patterns and trends I mean)."

I absolutely and totally hope the approach is completely market based!

But sometimes companies come up with a plan what the customers "should" do and only when it gets really painful and the damage is done, will they refocus. Just like Getty missed the original change that came with the internet and had to buy istock to keep up with the times.

The internet demands huge amounts of daily changing images. Millions of new buyers are coming into the stock market because more countries have economies that are recovering or their countries are moving up economically (China,India). However, I doubt that these very, very large markets can be reached with images where the lowest price is 55 Dollars. Same for daily web use.

Shutterstock has existed for a long time and maybe Thinkstock will bite into it�s market share, but most agencies are offering pay as you go models, which is probably the easiest way to reach a large number of buyers.

As a contributor I have fully embraced the volume model. My studio and work are designed to produce generic images with a wide appeal, not artistic photography.

If istock has changed it�s direction towards midstock/less generic/expensive then I will have to change my business plan. Of course I can do that, but I will need to find a new niche and new buyers.

Back to the camera...

I am quite shocked that the search results give such extreme preference to expensive images. istock has in effect then become a midstock site.

Getty has many midstock sites - punchstock, jupiterimages, getty itself etc...but istock was always a place for images that sell in high volume.

I love V/A, absolutely fantastic stuff, but they are usually too specific to be sold in high volume.

Instead of encouraging the buyers to leave, why not offer them a good visual solutions, like the one Hillaryfox suggested.

If the main purpose of istock now is to become a showstore for expensive images, this will alienate a lot of buyers who just need normal images for daily webdesign or powerpoint presentations.

As a buyer you don�t want to work with many different agencies, you want one place to fill all your needs, like amazon or ebay. istock has all the images for daily work plus the "luxury sports car" for the special occasion. But to keep your buyers interested respect their time and give them options to find quickly what they want.

If Juanmonino is right, then it would be very sad, because it means istock is actively encouraging the buyers to leave.

I just don�t understand the logic behind this?

Lovely pictures!

You can do a search on istock and see how the other animal photographers are doing.

I always think of globalp

http://www.istockphoto.com/user_view.php?id=902692

But he does them mostly on white.

If you go exclusive with istock, then any images that get accepted into the Vetta collection will be mirrored on Gettyimages.



Your pictures are excellent examples what can be done with animal photography.

istock had a system like that for the dollar bin. They moved files there that didn�t sell after several years and once in the dollar bin they had a "30 day clock" ticking. Every time an image was bought in the dollar bin, the clock was reset and the file had another 30 days to go. If it wasn�t bought a single time then after 30 days it was deleted.

It was a great system and many files started getting noticed and flaming there.

At the moment the clocks have been stopped and no new images are being put in the dollar bin. They say they want to do something special with the bin, but we have no idea when.

many photographers now delete older files from istock but put them on the partner program. so you can do your own spring cleaning but the files can still have a life somwhere. Like the dollar bin, many files that didn�t sell at all on istock are now popular in the PP.

Sorry about losing those images elena, only 3 months old and a lovely series. Very bizarre decision.

"I agree, but isn't stopping uploading, telling customers to shop elsewhere and focusing on other sites DOING something."

It is doing something yes. And if you feel better about it emotionally then again yes, maybe for some contributors this alone is good reason to do it. And if enough contributors or the right contributors stop uploading maybe you can negotiate a higher rate.

But if you just stop uploading, is it a good financial move? What will the buyers do when you leave? Will they follow you? Will they even notice?? Some contributors may have such a unique style that buyers will follow them. But in most cases all your sales will just go to your competitors on istock.

To the copycats.

They will take over your best match positions (even if they fluctuate), replace your images in the lightboxes of buyers, and really enjoy some good money if you introduced a new image concept.

You can�t stop them, there are to many artists out there.

Now, let�s assume you have stopped uploading to istock, have "broken the chain" and are now feading the beasts of other agencies. I am exclusive, so I haven�t been follwoing all the news here, but from what I read, the other sites aren�t perfect are they? Their managements also make decisions that enrage contributors. They mess up, they can be greedy, you feel betrayed, probably with good reason.

Imagine that this summer there is a hypothetical crisis at Dreamstime or Bigstock or...agency XYZ- what will you do? You also stop uploading to say - XYZ. Again slowly delete your portfolio.

Now you are avoiding two agencies.

Then the next agency messes up...

...

So this is why I don�t believe these boycotts make financial sense longterm.

The only thing that would make sense is to sell from your own site. You get 100% Royalty, that is unbeatable.

But you have to do a lot to attract traffic, just like any other internet business or webshop. Just like setting up a webstore to sell kitchenware. You�ll make it if you work hard. maybe team up with artists that have a complementing portfolio, not direct competition, but not unrelated content either.

The other thing is what people are doing already - balance stock with assignment work.

Perhaps there are other solutions or business concepts, I don�t know.

But if you want your horse to run, you have to feed it.

I would like to see his istockportfolio as well. There are loads of 1 image trolls with opinions...

From what I read on the forum they are now processing submissions from Middle of March. Mine are from the 30 March and haven�t been processed. Their queue is probably overwhelmed because some contributors have a library with thousand of editorial files that they want to upload.

I just keep uploading, I don�t think there is a big rush. Most buyers aren�t yet aware of the exclusive collection.

As a buyer you don�t care about all this exclusive/non exclusive stuff. You don�t look at the names of the photographers, you very often don�t realize they are real, single artist putting up their files for sale. When I started buying I more or less assumed it was all produced by the stock agency itself, just like a software product.

Sourcing images is a tedious task and you anyway have no time. The deadline is looming and you just need to get your work done. So for stock you go to your one stop shop for images, just like you would buy all your music from the itunes store and not shop around the internet to see if the song is a little cheaper on Amazon or other outlets.

When you go shopping on the internet how many times are you interested in the story behind the product?

 

Quote from: cobalt on April 05, 2011, 18:23

JJRD just confirmed that Vetta/Agency files are not going to Thinkstock. They are mirrored on Getty, but won�t go elsewhere.

That sounds like good news, assuming you are one of the people who still believes everything you are told by the admins.

Well, not so long ago I used to be an admin...so, let�s say I believe this statement. ;-)

You will always be our hero Sean ;-)

Quote from: cobalt on April 04, 2011, 18:20

I know this place is as negative as can be about istock and I also know that in the last months has mucked up a lot but sometimes I wonder....

When you have any business that has one massive screw up after another for many months, coupled with terrible communication (or none at all) , it creates a fertile environment for conspiracy theories. 

I agree with that, I certainly wish for better communication. Just wanted to add my 2 cents.

I don�t like the current best match either, mostly because the search results look strange. V/A is very beautiful but there is a reason why it is sold in small quantities, it is just not generic enough. And many bestsellers have dissappeared, so the buyers are not really getting a Best Match.

I am confident they will improve it, or the system will swing back to normal, I don�t know how these software things work.

Looks like someone "restarted" best match and it probably needs some activity to get going. At least, I hope this is what�s happening. I just don�t understand why they don�t let contributors now "Hey guys, we are pushing some software buttons this week-end". Just so that we know what is going on.

For many here istock is a considerable income and with all the issues people are jittery enough already. A little understanding can go a long way.