There is plenty of useful commentary in the critique forum for those who ask.  Same for any of the technical forums, like photography, etc.

Believe it or not, some people are actually excited about new developments, and are not just * up to a company.  And some aren't, and you can find those too.

Some of the biggest Micro makers in the business don't have one clever idea in their heads. That is part of the reason they surf these sites to see what they can steal. I am already seeing people from this site start to try to incorporate my look into their newest uploads.  Then they have the audasity to take jabs at me every time I post. Don't worry the world is full of takers it doesn't mean they possess your skills.

Well, I don't know if you can really own a "look", but I think you've just proven my point about putting too much trade information out there.

Geez, December is always off from November, and most months of the year.  Don't ring the bell yet.

Only the one, actually, thanks.  But I bet it corners the market.

There is a difference between using a 3d character in a scene, and duplicating the pose, position and camera angle, which is what this seems to be.

I had someone almost exactly duplicate one of my 3d images on iStock, and I was able to have it removed.  This is one reason I don't do a lot of 3d anymore.

All this shows that micro images are short lived.  And if you want to enjoy them for a little longer then normal, make images that can hardly be reproduced.

All it shows is that images with a yearly date are short lived

Ahhh, Russia.  They're so cute sometimes.

Yeah, I protested it when I started doing 3d, but since it's allowed, there you go.  Good models are expensive though.

Hi All,

 Legally can Yuri transfer his copyright to her and then have her be exclusive with images he shot. Is there anything that is in writing to stop this from taking place or can he run his work through her name as long as legally she is the owner of the image. Does someone know where Istock stands on this and if they have a link to a post or part of their contract that points this out. Not saying this is happening at all I am sure they are her images. I just thought after seeing the post if others might work this way with Istock or if it is an option that is sort of unspoken. Any advice would be appreciated.

Thanks,
AVAVA

I imagine this would violate the spirit of what iStock is trying to accomplish.

Is that wrong?  What better way to see if a keyword is valid for an image, than if a buyer spent money on an image after finding it through that keyword?

This change is about adding in the relevancy factor.  Nothing was stated about changing anything else, although they normally do.  However, if a conscious exclusive/independent weighting was made, I don't see why they'd tweak it too much, especially since they want us to be happy about the new collection.

The fact of the matter is that best match can hurt a contributor just as easily as it can help them. No doubt, this next best match shift will hurt some people, including some of the same folks who are applauding and cheering "Go istock!" over this announcement. While we all hope the best match change will help everyone in a positive way, we also need to be a little more realistic and not be so surprised when next month there is another thread about best match killing sales with posts by some of the same people who are cheering for istock in today's thread.

I don't see this as a best match change.  This isn't factoring newness from 21% to %30 or something.  This is a fundamental change.  They're incorporating other buyers' satisfaction with a keyword/image relationship to present future buyers with the images that may actually best suit their needs.  It's a relevancy factor, and that hasn't been there before.  I don't think the minority of sales from people who search for "cow" but actually decide to buy a picture of a cookie for some reason, will throw things off too much.

The point is to show the buyers the best results with a relevancy factor, and that saves them time.  Those who save time are happy, and come back, and buy more. 

That's how I see it.  It's what we've been asking for forever.