I am not sure how Photo+ slots work if by deleting a huge portion of your portfolio you have more Photo+ images than your "allowance". I'm guessing that they don't automatically remove them, probably 'cause they haven't written the software to make that happen. If you are deactivating and plan to leave some images there, I'd suggest using up your remaining P+ slots to lock in any images you plan to keep on site prior to starting the deactivation. No sense in leaving any money on the table for any images you  leave on the site.

From E+ I know files stay in there. You just don't get new slots until you have made enough uploads again to fill the quota.

170 this weekend. Not my bestsellers. Mostly new and better images that I put into E+ but would like to sell somewhere else soon.

Quote

When they are available for free to general public, is absolutely another.

So I'd guess you'd agree with me that the MS deal isn't actually fundamentally different. And who knows how many other, similar deals have already been made?

1. When the MS deal was started, it was about "including images in the MS clipart gallery" which meant as part of the Office products. I wasn't aware there was a website that anyone can go to and download the images. I am not sure that this was there when the deal started.

2. The deal was promotional in that next to the image it says "iStock" with a link and - at the time back then - included a referral code and a link to the image on iStock. So in case someone wanted a larger version of the image, he could get it. And for anyone signing up at iStock from clicking on the link at one of my images I would make $10 for the referral. Nowadays it doesn't work anymore since most of the links are broken and the old referral program was discontinued anyways...

I don't say any of this would have provided more money to the contributor in general. But given the three images they have chosen from my portfolio, I would certainly agree today to a deal with those conditions.

With the Google deal there is no promotion, there is no linking back, there is no way to find the image if I want it larger. So there is not even an option that you can add some earnings in addition to the $12 you got now.

Also it only includes images that are available on Getty and this - by definition - means from the perspective of an iStock contributor we are talking about the "premium content", Vetta and Agency. So it's not just a random file that would go away for a dollar or five dollars if sold. When the MS deal was made, most downloads would only make 30 or 80 cents. Given the odds how many of my files got more than 20 downloads at that time, I would have thought a guaranteed $12 plus the option to make more would have been acceptable.

This time it's about files that make 15 or 30 dollars for each single download on iStock. In comparison $12 for unlimited redistribution appears quite few money.

I think that does make a difference in the deal.

ETA:  Nevermind.  I have removed the letter because apparently picking it apart is considered, by some, to be a better use of their time than actually doing something about this situation.

I have removed 100 of my image tonight (and will remove more) which I plan to upload to some mid stock agencies soon. I spent more time on that than pointing out what I considered a factually wrong statement.

I wasn't wasting my time picking your letter apart. I was just pointing out that something (actually there were others) in your letter were factually wrong. If that's okay for you for the sake of getting a point across, you can go ahead. But I'd think providing pure facts would sound bad enough, it doesn't need any effort or unfortunate wording to make it look worse.

Use your iStock acceptance to learn about their technical standards. It will teach you a lot about photography, post processing etc. that you can make good use of in a later stage of your photography career. ;-)