|
MicrostockGroup Sponsors
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - jamirae
Pages: 1 ... 22 23 24 25 26 [27] 28 29 30 31 32 33
651
« on: December 28, 2010, 11:51 »
I do think IS site is hacked.
I don't think the hacker hacked a credit card account or some real money transaction thingy.
The hacker should have hacked into the system of IS, and increase his credits to perhaps a million, and quickly use those credits to download all the Vettas.
Like some other forumers said, with a collection of Vettas, he can easily print CDs with those and sell at China for $10 a piece.
Or maybe upload to Hotfile.
this makes the most sense to me. I was thinking the same thing.. they just hacked in and gave themselves unlimited credits.
652
« on: December 27, 2010, 15:50 »
no one has yet said they are false. seems too good to be true, yes, but until there is confirmation from iStock one way or the other, these are sales that have been made and credited to contributors' accounts.
Making it so that the maximum credit bundle you can buy ATM is 120 indicates that, at the least, they're regarding events as 'suspicious'. Also if it were clear that there isn't a problem, they could easily say so. Or ask MichaelJay to say so, at least.
indeed. good point.
653
« on: December 27, 2010, 15:04 »
no one has yet said they are false. seems too good to be true, yes, but until there is confirmation from iStock one way or the other, these are sales that have been made and credited to contributors' accounts.
654
« on: December 27, 2010, 12:27 »
oh yeah, and dont' forget that iStock is doubling all RC's on vetta images during the Vetta Sale. So all those exclusives who got these downloads just got a major boost!
655
« on: December 27, 2010, 12:23 »
just saw this on iStock's face book page.. maybe this is an isolated incident, or maybe not: Katie Bourn posted 12/23/10: Hi iStock - I'm in a bit of a panic to update my website for the New Year, I need to purchase 5 more images. Trouble is, every time I download an image, double the correct number of credits is deducted from my account. I really don't understand why. I only have 8 credits left this month (I have a corporate account) ...so in an effort to be careful, I'm only downloading images worth one or two credits each. However I've just purchased an image worth two credits and my total shrank by four! I purchased an image worth one credit and two disappeared, arrggh! I know that my corporate account total and my own allocation are different, but it's my own figure at the bottom of my screen that keeps shrinking at such an alarming rate. I've no idea how to get all the images I need before 1 Jan  Can you explain, credit back the credits I've been unfairly deducted please? and then there's the iStock twitter contest: Win iStock Credits on Twitter
Celebrate 12 Days of Vetta and you could win. On each business day from December 1531 (excluding December 24) well be giving away 50 free iStock credits to one lucky winner. To be entered in the draw, simply Tweet or Retweet:
Bring Vetta home for the holidays during iStocks Vetta Sale. Retweet to win iStock credits! http://istockpho.to/vettasale #12daysofvetta
Also, everyone who plays will be entered into a draw for 500 free iStock credits, to be drawn and announced early in the new year. yeah, 12 days at 50 credits each only amounts to 600 credits going on - so that is not close to the amount reportedly being spent/purchased - but i was just trying to find something to explain the mystery. maybe there's some weird error going on with purchases and then add that to some people winning credit packs and that may have something to do with it. maybe... maybe it's a reach. 
656
« on: December 27, 2010, 12:03 »
From reading the iStock forum it appears the only ones affected by this are exclusive contributors since they are the only ones reporting these strange sales in the forum. Lisa mentioned yesterday she had some strange sales also so maybe it isn't just exclusives. Has any one else had strange sales that are not exclusive here? I know I haven't.
Nope
not me. gee.. had I known the 'iStock fairie" was going to make an appearance to boast RCs for (mostly) exclusives around Christmas, I may have waited to drop my crown. ha! 
657
« on: December 27, 2010, 11:04 »
Maybe they see the little indentation under the hole in the zipper and think it is a logo??
EDIT: Maybe the logo they are referring to is on the key board. They must zoom in at 200%
Indeed, there is the Windows key, although it looks unclear, everyone knows the Windows key is there. I may clone it out. Nobody ever bothered about it, but anyway....
I've had rejects on other sites for the windows key even when it wasn't real visible. I haven't even tried getting on StockFresh yet.
me too, I'd say it's the windows key -- I always clone that out now, even if it looks like a blob on the key - I just make it look blank. as for the parka image.. there is some mark on the zipper thing - that may be it. too bad they dont do a quick screen shot or tell you where to look.
658
« on: December 27, 2010, 10:53 »
GI= Getty Images sales maybe?
659
« on: December 27, 2010, 10:26 »
You know, when a contributor converts earnings to credits it is exactly $1 each. Perhaps it is a contributor using some of their earnings to purchase images from some of their favorite istock artists.
Could just be someone using up credits for the end of the year.
I don't know any contributor that keeps $60,000 in their account just to suddenly buy images from other contributors.
Note, they are now buying images at higher credit prices, since the credit packs above 120 ($1.46/per) credits have been removed.
oh yeah, good point. Conspiracy Theory suggests that maybe its just iStock is trying to be sure that the "right people" have enough RCs for the new year. Seems to be mostly exclusives who are affected, right? or perhaps someone just trying to be sure that the Kelly's statement about the 50% of all sales coming at the end of the year holds true.
660
« on: December 27, 2010, 10:18 »
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=286152&page=1
Just keep an eye on your downloads from IS today. Someone is rampantly downloading large sized files at a $1 per credit price.
By the way, none of my rampant large sized downloads were at $1 a pop or less. They all averaged around $7-$9, depending on size. Although, the royalties do seem lower than what they normally would be on downloads of the XXL and XXXL file sizes.
The price reported was exactly $1 per credit, not per sale.
You know, when a contributor converts earnings to credits it is exactly $1 each. Perhaps it is a contributor using some of their earnings to purchase images from some of their favorite istock artists. Could just be someone using up credits for the end of the year.
661
« on: December 23, 2010, 10:41 »
I don't know what do you mean with "the long term", but I had read comments like yours five and six years ago. By luck, I didn't listen. Now I'm earning at IS 15x what I was earning then.
You must have a much better memory than I do. I've been doing this for 6 years, and from what I can remember, the only people trashing Istock were the trad stock photographers whose lunch we were all eating.
To the best of my recollection, Istock's contributors were generally happy, enthusiastic, and optimistic about the future of the site and the industry. Yes, there were always complaints about new upgrades that didn't go well (V8, disambiguation), but mainly I think the community as a whole felt like Istock was a big success and we were happy and lucky to be along for the ride.
This widespread discontent and cynicism among exclusives, independents, and buyers, seems like a new phenomenon that started this year. For buyers the grumbling seems to start when there were multiple price raises and the collection was broken into a variety of price points early in the year. For contributors it seemed the panic button was triggered with Kelly's announcements in the beginning of September. What is amazing to me is how fast the destruction has spread.
But no, I definitely don't remember worries and pessimism like we are seeing now before the last year.
ETA: I also don't remember anyone EVER having reason to question Istock's accurate paying of contributors before the last couple of months.
exactly what I was thinking, except that I think the widespread discontent and cynicsim among contributors started brewing with the canister change fiasco -- then they backed off on that and just when everyone starting feeling okay, WHAM! the RC announcement.
662
« on: December 22, 2010, 14:32 »
What's next step? iStockVector brings you "Vendetta Collection"? 
hahahahaha! 
663
« on: December 21, 2010, 23:12 »
The logo program is still MIA. Still no official launch date. Not even a "soon". Not even an indication that it might be launched in 2011. I wonder how many submissions they are still getting. Is anyone even applying to the program anymore?
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=234232&page=1
I think there aren't going to be anymore customers left by the time they get the thing launched at the rate they are going.
yeah.. I was wondering about that too. I am in the program, but only submitted one logo awhile back and it was rejected because I didn't follow the directions. (duh ).. anyhow, I never resubmitted and now it doesn't really seem there is much incentive to do that anyway.
664
« on: December 21, 2010, 15:34 »
I don't think the search thing is a purposeful fail, I think they just executed it really, really poorly and are now paying a huge price that they certainly will never admit to.
I see your point. Brings to mind the quote by Napoleon: "Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence"
OTOH, I think I like Heinlein's take on it: "Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity, but don't rule out malice."
ha! hadn't heard the Heinlein version, love it! I think you are right on there!
665
« on: December 21, 2010, 15:16 »
Just curious - are the search functions at Getty Images, and at Thinkstock still working? Maybe that should tell us something...
good point. but aren't they all separately programmed? As in they have their own groups of programmers working on their website or is the search engine something different?
Yeah, you're right Jami. I am sure they have separate programmers. I just find it a bit hard to believe that they can't seem to get Istock running as well as the other sites in the "Getty Family", and it makes me wonder if this could be part of an effort to drive traffic to their higher, and lower end sites, rather than mid-range Istock.
Probably just conspiracy oriented rambling on my part. But the difficulties they have having with their search engine seem to defy rationality, IMO.
"defy rationality" seems to be the MO these days at iStock. anyhow.. I understand you're thinking but I would think that would contradict all the steps they've been actively taking to move Getty content onto iStock. such as the ingestion of the Agency stuff, the instant exclusivity status for those new Agency artists and the dropping of the separate Getty upload program/process for iStock artists. I don't think the search thing is a purposeful fail, I think they just executed it really, really poorly and are now paying a huge price that they certainly will never admit to.
666
« on: December 21, 2010, 12:35 »
from srjmarketing:
Wow. This site is an utter mess. Time for me to move on to a new stock site. Too many problems with iStock this past year and I only foresee worse problems for 2011. Good luck guys. I'm moving on and not waiting around for you to fix your "issues".
Just curious - are the search functions at Getty Images, and at Thinkstock still working? Maybe that should tell us something...
good point. but aren't they all separately programmed? As in they have their own groups of programmers working on their website or is the search engine something different?
667
« on: December 21, 2010, 12:33 »
the good news is that my port on SS is beginning to take off and I still dont have all my stuff on there.
This is great news! Happy your non-exclusivity is working out so well for you
thanks, me too! I'm still trying to figure out how it happened so quickly that iStock to tumbled down this road so hard and so fast.
I felt the same way about the economy and the housing market. One day, people were employed and enjoying their homes and family. Seems like the next day, BOOM, people are losing their jobs and their houses. I think it does have to do with greed and that it has been happening for awhile, but money got shifted around to cover the shortfalls and then one day, , guess what, there's no more money to be found to cover the shortfalls and then the company management starts raiding the worker bees.
^^ Absolutely! It has been shocking to watch our economy implode the way it has. And it's doubly stressful to watch it happening in microcosm at Istock. It seems like bomb Kelly Thompson dropped in September has just continued to grow and destroy like some sort of mushroom cloud!
yep. totally agree.
668
« on: December 21, 2010, 10:30 »
Me too Cas
me three. yeah, I'm still waiting for my first sale at StockFresh, but for just having a small portion online at the other big 4, my sales have been doing well. back on topic... I, too, believe that the Agency and Vetta filter thing is at the very bottom of the "to be fixed" list and doubt that it will ever happen. In the meantime more and more buyers get pissed and leave. As a buyer I wouldn't put up with that crap either and wouldn't even waste my time bitching about it in the forum. I'd just voice my opinion with my wallet - close it and leave the place. I'm still trying to figure out how it happened so quickly that iStock to tumbled down this road so hard and so fast.
669
« on: December 20, 2010, 22:38 »
Does anyone else think the Lobo pie flirt is getting old?
me. totally. the good news is that my port on SS is beginning to take off and I still dont have all my stuff on there.
670
« on: December 20, 2010, 11:57 »
By the way, how about sales after start of new search engine? Mine are almost dead.
me too, but hard to tell if it's the seasonal down time (which is usual for me) or the new search.
671
« on: December 20, 2010, 10:48 »
More buyers unhappy that you can't filter out Vetta & Agency:
iStock don't seem to be interesting in smaller, low-budget customers.
They seem to be wooing big customers who get heavily discounted credits.
It's that difference between profit and profitability, which I don't understand and no-one has yet explained.
I agree. iStock appears to be making a sharp turn in the clientele that it wants for customers. I'd venture to guess that while the smaller, low-budget clients are what built iStock, istock is now turning its back on these customers in order to woo the big spenders.
672
« on: December 17, 2010, 10:13 »
My impression is that IS's success was based on (a) crowd sourcing (b) low prices, (c) simple and easy to use for customers.
SNIP
...they're trying as hard as they can to make it (a) elitist, (b) high priced, (c) confusing and unreliable for customers.
Very well stated! I never thought about it quite like that, but you are right!
I don't think pump and dump is an alternate theory BTW. They seem to be doing both simultaneously. 
yep, I was thinking the same thing! +1
673
« on: December 16, 2010, 13:56 »
Images since Saturday will be available in searches soon."
This is, surprise surprise, BS. Images are still not in portfolios after 4 or 5 days, anyone with any sense will deactivate recent uploads because the tech team at IS basically don't know their ass from their elbow.
I would suppose that it depends on their definition of "soon"
674
« on: December 14, 2010, 16:54 »
great analogy!
Not really. It would be more apt if the employee came back in with a mustache and beard and started yelling at the customer service desk that the place sucks and she can't find anything, so she is leaving. Then she goes out and takes off the disguise and heads in to work.
It's more that everyone that is responding to the person doesn't know they are dealing with our good friend Bob the contributor, even though Bob thinks everyone might know.
Anyways, it sounds like the poster is part of a work group that uses the account, so it may be a ranting co-worker. I don't know how they track all that stuff.
I suppose you could be right, but we are not talking about someone trying to do this covertly. Even when someone admits to being a contributor and buyer they should be allowed to raise concerns from the buyer point of view. I dont recall reading anything blatantly obnoxious from the poster anyhow. of course I didn't read all the threads, but then I think the point that is trying to be made here is that iStock should show more tact and respect with all of its customers - whether that customer is a buyer or a contributor.
675
« on: December 14, 2010, 16:10 »
... he just added to it by pulling the old buyer/contributor/worthlessness card out of his sleeve ...
Methinks that you'd better listen to the buyer+contributor criticisms, when they are offered. Since he/she has more skin in the game, a buyer/contributor is more likely to care about the company and is more likely to offer constructive criticism or advice.
Someone who's ONLY a buyer is a lot less likely to care enough to spend time trying to correct the problems. I don't bother telling anyone at Walmart if I find that their little kitchen gadgets or pet supplies or whatever are not what I wanted, I just walk out and go to another store.
Imagine if at a Walmart employee meeting, one of the workers says that she thinks the displays of Christmas ornaments are messy and disorganized, and really confusing to the customers, for example she tried to buy a lighted reindeer and couldn't find one at a good price so she went down the road to get one at Home Depot. Would the manager roll his eyes and explain to the others, well, never mind, because you see she's disingenuous, she's not only a customer but she's an EMPLOYEE TOO.
great analogy!
Pages: 1 ... 22 23 24 25 26 [27] 28 29 30 31 32 33
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
