726
General Stock Discussion / Re: Yuri Hits 1,000,000 at iStock
« on: November 24, 2010, 10:22 »
amazing stuff, Yuri! congrats! very deserving for someone who is so passionate about his work and helps out so many as well.
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. 726
General Stock Discussion / Re: Yuri Hits 1,000,000 at iStock« on: November 24, 2010, 10:22 »
amazing stuff, Yuri! congrats! very deserving for someone who is so passionate about his work and helps out so many as well.
727
iStockPhoto.com / Re: Here we go again!« on: November 23, 2010, 16:02 »I'd like to throw it out there that, in spite of Christian's image which appears to have been rejected in error, I still find Istock inspectors overall to be very consistent. As is said often, it is a human process, and there will be differences of opinion. I would have to agree with this as well. 728
iStockPhoto.com / Re: The Stockys Another Fiasco?« on: November 23, 2010, 12:31 »It's just me or view and vote process via Stockys site is a pain experience? +4 729
iStockPhoto.com / Re: Here we go again!« on: November 23, 2010, 10:25 »I think that photo is outstanding, Christian. Can't see any reason it should have been rejected. it's my understanding, at least at iStock, that new inspectors do not work on the queue files until they complete their training. But I do understand that new inspectors still have a lot of experience to build under their belt. ![]() 730
iStockPhoto.com / Re: iStock ELs not paying properly?« on: November 20, 2010, 18:19 »I just don't know why it is taking so long to fix. 950 is all? crazy. I feel the same as you and didn't submit anything either. 731
iStockPhoto.com / Re: iStock ELs not paying properly?« on: November 18, 2010, 16:07 »My support ticket did get closed - very politely and empathetically but still closed. I hope you get your money. Don't feel bad for holding them accountable for what they owe you. Of course it's not her fault, but it is her job. They are paid employees and this is their job. It's not like you're being snotty about it, you're only asking for what is rightfully yours and they should be working to clear up the mess and get you what is yours. I see nothing wrong with that. 732
iStockPhoto.com / Re: How do you keep motivated?« on: November 16, 2010, 17:47 »
I can't keep looking at the stats. I learned a long time ago that obsessing over the stats is just too much for me. I'm too A.D.D. for that sort of thing. Don't get me wrong, seeing my sales jump and the dollars are a great motivation, but when I'm feeling a bit down and wondering why I haven't gotten a download in the last 4 hours (or day, or whatever) I change my thinking to what can I do to improve. In other words, right now I am concentrating on working with new a different lighting techniques. At first I really just needed to learn lighting- period. Now I'm pretty good at the basics and am exploring sculpting and creating light effects. Nothing dramatic, but it is stuff I want to learn to improve my craft.
Learning - always learning, that's what really motivates me - and the money ain't too bad either. ![]() 733
iStockPhoto.com / Re: iStock ELs not paying properly?« on: November 16, 2010, 11:41 »Were you banned as well cclapper? November usually sucks big time for me. After dropping exclusivity in mid-october, I had been expecting a very dismal November. However, surprisingly my downloads have really not slumped much at all. I'm down in earnings only because of the percentage drop when I left exclusive, but number of downloads appears to be fairly stable. 734
iStockPhoto.com / Re: iStock ELs not paying properly?« on: November 15, 2010, 17:19 »Double ditto. and.. just to vent, because I can here -- the double-standard of being able to have a "woo yay" thread all to yourself while others (mostly newbies) are shunned to the colossal woo-yay thread of the quarter (or season or whatever), annoys me as well. If you're going to have a rule that all "woo-yays" belong in one thread, then stick to it. - okay, vent over.The wooyaying and koolaid syndrome nauseates me, can't take too much of it. 735
General Stock Discussion / Re: Upset model« on: November 09, 2010, 11:00 »
just have the model go after the hair-loss company. He can prove that they are using false and misleading advertising by doctoring an image and not using a real client. Just the thread of exposing them will probably cause them to cease and desist.
736
iStockPhoto.com / Re: Uploads disabled?« on: November 08, 2010, 15:00 »
from 4 to 24 hours? geez.. I guess that gives them some 'wiggle-room' eh? just seems like a large timeframe estimate.
737
iStockPhoto.com / Re: Awesome "Stockys" giveaway - $20,000 down the drain...« on: November 05, 2010, 13:14 »I think it has. The woo-yays didn't need winning over. It's the rest of us this stuff is targeted at winning over. well you can count me as another one who it did NOT work for. I won't even go into that thread because the whole thing just gets my blood pressure up on how stupid the whole contest is what with iStock being 'unsustainable' and all. so glad that royalty cut is paying for 10 people (out of thousands) to win. Anyhow, glad that the wooyayers have a thread to stay in. personally, too much sugar-loaded koolaid makes me throw-up. 738
iStockPhoto.com / Re: Unannounced (accidental?) vector price hike!?!« on: October 29, 2010, 13:14 »Leads me to wondering how much else they change on the site on a regular basis without anyone noticing... Maybe this was a test of the communities observation skills? not much of a test, since it was done so stealthly. If I was a buyer who purchased during the 'phantom' price increase time I'd be bit pissed that now the prices appear to be back down. stupid way to run a business. "Just keep quiet and maybe they won't notice." who's running that ship anyway? 739
iStockPhoto.com / Re: iStock changing royalty structure« on: October 26, 2010, 14:45 »I think Risamay is referring to a post I made in the locked oh-shut-up!-no?-ok-complain-in-here thread about why the contest wasn't a neutral thing to do, IMO. yes, that is definitely a great post. 740
General Stock Discussion / Re: Dilemma - should I drop iStock exclusivity« on: October 26, 2010, 10:44 »
If you already signed up at Stockfresh, it sounds like you already made up your mind.
![]() dont be afraid. I dropped exclusivity after 6.5 years. My 30 days was up just last week and I have absolutely no qualms about it. I'm excited to have new avenues for my work. iStock was a great place to learn and grow but that was then, this is now. I am gold and just about a month away from diamond. But come January 1, I drop down to 25% commission. Talk about getting royally screwed! iStock doesn't care about me, they only care about their bottom line. In this industry you have to look out for number one (yourself) first. Don't expect that any company will be looking out for your best interest. In the end, it is, of course, your decision based on your own numbers. For me, going Independent was the best choice. I may look back in a year and see things differently, but for now, I know I made the right choice for me at this point. 741
iStockPhoto.com / Re: Awesome "Stockys" giveaway - $20,000 down the drain...« on: October 22, 2010, 11:18 »mucky b*stards, they really think they can buy people off by a pittance of their own money back at them after robbing them. this just about pisses me off to a whole new level. Someone posted this in the "where do we go .." thread regarding this latest development, and I have to say that it pretty much describes it: "Panem et circenses" 742
iStockPhoto.com / Re: Submitting to Istock is a pain« on: October 21, 2010, 13:24 »A thread was started on this same topic yesterday. You might find some helpful pointers there. try using Deepmeta. I think it will make your life a little easier when it comes to uploading at istock. 743
iStockPhoto.com / Re: Upload to IS a time consuming job!« on: October 21, 2010, 10:26 »
my personal workflow I use Adobe Bridge to select the best images from my shoot, then I edit the IPTC to add the keywords, title and description. then I edit in photoshop, save as JPG, and finally upload.
744
iStockPhoto.com / Re: iStock changing royalty structure« on: October 20, 2010, 15:14 »
hahahah! I was thinking the exact same thing! 745
iStockPhoto.com / Re: iStock changing royalty structure« on: October 20, 2010, 11:29 »New mail from IS. Learn all about collections. They say "Agency Collection photos cost from 55 to 200 credits. " XXXL images cost 250 credits but I guess that's not meant to mislead anyone, just a typo. They also say vetta "cost between 30 and 125 credits. " XXXL Vetta is 150, another typo? They also say "Exclusive photos can cost between 2 and 25 credits" not exactly an E+ XXXL costs 35 credits, maybe it's a typo too? journalism and copy editing are lost arts it seems. 746
iStockPhoto.com / Re: Upload to IS a time consuming job!« on: October 20, 2010, 11:28 »Even though I use Deep Meta to upload to IS (because their site upload has been so broken so often I got fed up) I always put all the keywords into the IPTC data in the file. I did that as an independent because it really streamlined multi-site uploading, but I still do it as an IS exclusive. yeah, I wish I had learned the IPTC keywording task sooner! now I'm going back and adding that in as I start my adventure as an Independent. It really does make life easier, even with Deepmeta. ![]() 747
iStockPhoto.com / Re: iStock changing royalty structure« on: October 20, 2010, 11:25 »How are people's sales going at iStock this month? October is generally very good for me and this one is no exception. I expect it will slow down now that my exclusivity with istock is done (effective yesterday) - however sales don't seem too bad at the moment. Nov/Dec usually suck big time for me - I have very few seasonal images for that time of year. 748
iStockPhoto.com / Re: Buyers Bailing on Istock« on: October 19, 2010, 15:27 »
great posts, Lisa.. here are a few 'tweets' just from today:
@schachin: OMGOSH. @istock have you LOST your MIND! $50 for a web use stock photo. you are not GETTY even if they own you. #FAIL @istock mixing in really $$$$ images does not help your brand. Makes you look overpriced & waists my time. If I want Getty I go to Getty. @timmooredesign: Thank you. @istock for continually gouging your loyal customers. You frustrate me greatly with your ridiculous price hikes. @INBEDINT: IN DA FACE istock! You're too darn expensive, I can get ur pix for free on Googleimages! lmao! #evilltellya! @catapultdigital: So I know there's been big economic changes but still not happy istock wants us to pay 1.15 for images that used to cost us less than $1 @JULIAREICH: seeking quality royalty-free stock illo sites that are NOT istock. lately I've been seeing a lot of posts like these on twitter. 749
iStockPhoto.com / Re: Buyers Bailing on Istock« on: October 18, 2010, 22:42 »
now that Agency is filling up the searches, buyers are not happy and voicing it.
check out this thread at iStock http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=266081&page=1 I wonder how many upset buyers this one post represents since we all know that many buyers do not frequent the forums (or probably even know they exist). 750
iStockPhoto.com / Re: iStock's Agency Collection Pricing« on: October 18, 2010, 21:16 »
thanks everyone. Didn't mean to drag this off topic.
![]() |
|