Quote from: JamesGdesign on September 24, 2010, 21:06

Well I'm banned from the forums & sitemail haha! Called a trolls response pathetic & responded to Lobo saying I wouldn't be intimidated by his bullish behaviour and thinly veiled threats to me on sitemail.

It would appear somone is a tad insecure in their authority... go figure.

How many others have felt the light touch of the wiffle hammer?

Anyhoo - had to register somewhere and voice my displeasure at censorship. Carry on all! (and hello all on these forums!)

I think it's too funny that they ban you from sitemail too. What is the point of that? The whole banning thing seems rather childish and vindictive anyway, especially considering the random nature of the whole thing. I see people on there who have posted much more than my 10 or so posts and have been way more critical and insulting and they apparently still have their posting privileges.

As a buyer who is taking my business elsewhere now, I still get the last laugh though.

I agree.  I can understand banning someone or giving them a "time out" from posting for a bit if they are being unproductive and just picking fights and calling people names.  banning from sitemail may be so that the person can't then start blasting everyone on their CN with their rants.  that would be the only logical thing to me about the sitemail.

but yep, you do get the last laugh.  In the long run I think this one announcement will be the point where iStock took a major turn in it's reputation.  they've done many things in the past to make people angry with them, but this is by far the largest, if you ask me.  When the new collection arrives and start showing up at the top of searches right there with the Vetta stuff, I think more buyers will begin looking elsewhere.

Quote from: gostwyck on September 24, 2010, 11:38

^^^ Rob leaving now, 2 weeks after this bombshell, is a bit too much of a quinky-dinky for me __ whatever the offical line might be. Maybe Rob will pop in here to explain things.

Rob is also a big-time contributor, no? Everyone has always said he is a good guy, so maybe he's had it up to his eyeballs with the whole thing, too.

Rob is diamond level, yes, but has a relatively small portfolio (around 260images), but some fabulous work that sells well -- plus he's pretty much been there since the beginning - 2002. 

oh, and FWIW - he may not be gone completely, I see from his profile page that he still has the Admin and Moderator badges.  I would think once he leaves those positions and the privileges are removed, those will be gone as well.

Quote from: jamirae on September 23, 2010, 15:58

I think all the posts that would get me ignored never made it past the "Post" button.  I tend to read, respond, then re-read and think about it before I hit the "Post" button.  I have abandoned many 'knee-jerk' snipey replies that way. 

Don't supress those feelings __ let's hear them loud and clear! It is only an internet forum, not the United Nations or something.

okay, tho actually if I can find a better way to respond to something then I do post it if I feel it will contribute to the conversation. 

Quote from: hawk_eye on September 22, 2010, 14:01

I don't know who said it above, but I don't think any exclusive should be comfortable with dls numbers decreasing as long as income is increasing. I already said this once, but that is a fairly short-sighted, destructive way to manage your business. after 2008 when dl numbers fell for everyone pretty much, I started watching my numbers increase steadily. granted, money is increasing exponentially while dl number are creeping up slowly....but both are moving upward and that's what I want to see.

I agree - I am not comfortable with dls decreasing, even though income may be increasing. If iStock hadn't increased prices so significantly, this would not be the trend for many of us. Though, of course, as more images come online into any given collection, there is potential for one's dls to fall.

I also agree with the person who posted that it seems like iStock is migrating (or being migrated) toward a leader in "midstock". I wish them the best of luck with that. But I think I'd have far more sales if it remained a leader in the microstock market. Even in periods when I've not been uploading consistently. That's my hunch, anyway.

All I know is that the new model they're moving to does not inspire me to work more. If fact, it has the opposite effect. With goals that change from year to year and seem generally, vastly unattainable (if you want to move up the ladder), I don't see the point in knocking myself out as I'm guaranteed nothing for my efforts. I'm familiar with a few other iStockers ports that are small, but smashing. And even as they turn out new and wonderful work, their dls hardly tick up, and often continue to dwindle. So, just because one is producing consistently and of a high quality guarantees nothing. You could remain at your current commission level and never go up, or, go down. To me that seems like a lot of effort for random rewards.

Which is why going un-exclusive and spreading my work around makes more sense. At least for me and my portfolio and type of work. And also, given that I have a day job that allows me little time to hamster-wheel for any agency.

I couldn't agree more with all of this. +1 (to both posts!)

Quote from: jsnover on September 22, 2010, 22:17

It is indeed a bit rowdy at times, but these forums have been enormously helpful in dealing with all sorts of issues when they come up. Although there is no Lobo riding shotgun, be aware (if you do start submitting to other sites) that there are one or two who will (and have) retaliated against contributors for things said in this forum. That's why there are a number of independents here who don't use their regular name so they don't face their account getting terminated if they speak out about things that need to be addressed.

Just try to stay out of the bar fights and you should be fine

All good to know. Much appreciated! Thank you

ETA: I see from my profile that I've already been "ignored" by 1 member. How exciting!

great info!

what does that mean to be "ignored"?  they can't see anything you post or you just can't sitemail them?

Quote from: KB on July 31, 2010, 12:00

The new Japan lypse that was just announced requires that all images taken there that are uploaded also be sent to TS. Getty's strong-arm tactics at work?

How is that possible?  If the lypses are for IS exclusives and they can't put anything newer than 18 months in the PP??

ETA:

Just caught up with that thread.  WOW!  You are absolutely right KB.  Among the MANY rules laid out in the Japan Lypse thread is that all images have to be on both the partner sites and IS.  So then the 18 month rule is on its way out.  Sooner than I had expected...

I have never been to a lypse before, but I have read the threads detailing people's experiences in the past.  It always sounded like a fun, relaxed trip, full of socializing and the opportunity to shoot and learn at whatever pace you want. 

This one sounds like WORK.  They are choosing "assignment" photographers?  Special privileges for a select few and all sorts of rules and restrictions on everybody.  From what I am reading this is a lot more Getty and a lot less Istock.

I used to feel bad that I couldn't travel and go to the lypses.  Not anymore.  No thanks.

to comment on the 'lypse - the big iStockalypses I have never attended.  This Japan one has too many rules for me so I totally agree with you on this.

On the other hand, the "minilypses" that are NOT put on by iStock staff but rather by photographers who do all the work themselves are great.  They are definitely a great place to meet other stock photographers, share, learn and socialize - not to mention get a lot of great photos.  Independents can attend these for sure, the only requirement is that the photos taken at the minilypse are only uploaded to iStock.  I think you sign a release to that effect.  iStock, in the past, used to provide some funding to help out with these along with some Swag (tshirts, lanyards, etc).  These days they don't fund them (as far as I know) but they still provide swag and have specific model/photographer/property release forms that help expedite the release process.  I've attended 5 of them - coordinated one myself and helped with several others.  The friendships I gained at these and the things I learned working with other photographers were well worth it. 

-- so I just had to add that bit -- now back to the upload limits topic at hand

I dont understand their logic for who is banned and who is not. I think it very well could be more about a history of postings rather than one in particular.  But then, Sean has been protesting/disagreeing and so have several others and yet they did not get banned.   I posted my decision to cancel exclusiveness at iStock and I was not banned. 

Quote from: Eireann on September 19, 2010, 19:02

Likewise, he banned you - and the others, because he was told to do it.
Lobo is the guy who gets told. Ordered around, a peon.

I'm quite sure no one told him to ban me. He pretty much told me via sitemail that he does not like me. Such a nice thing to say to someone who frequents your business as a purchaser.

talk about what sauce... !   <<<--- ETA haha.. I guess this forum replaces "w-tee-efff" with "what"  hee hee

I dont get it. what's so offensive?  there was a lot more in that thread then this.  guess I need to go catch up. havent read any of that since last nite.  sleep and spend time doing housework and I miss all the excitement!

I just canceled my exclusive contract with iStock.  I'm now in the 30 day waiting period.  I opted to not wait until January because:

 + I don't see myself hitting the "diamond" level by then, and even if I do, it would be a short lived 40% royalty before I drop to 25% on both my photos and vectors (split portfolio is a killer under the new rules)
 + I wanted to get a start on building my portfolios on other sites before the change takes effect and, as an independent, the royalty goes even lower - I dont have much holiday images and November/December always are down for me at iStock
 + with the new Agency Collection going online soon, and only 5 "Vetta" images I feel that even as an exclusive my photos will be buried deeper in search results soon

those are my personal reasons, aside from the fact that I've lost all respect and trust in iStock - and it started with the proposed canister changes and has gone downhill since, even with their "grandfather clause" on that fiasco (and now canisters don't really mean anything - nor does the 'crown' if you read the latest monster thread at iStock).

I've posted in my blog that I will be removing my portfolio from IS if the 20% minimum royalty is not restored. It's not financially workable for me to make less on an image than I would make with SS.

I've also stopped uploading, removed myself from all programs that I can opt out of, and started to delete images. Most are dollar bin images that weren't getting sales anyway. I don't want to be to rash so I'm giving them amble time to correct their mistake. If the mistake is not corrected by my next payout then I will call for a payout and to close my account.

"their mistake"  -- I don't think it's a mistake. they were serious about that.  I really don't see them backtracking on this one.