Same everywhere 

Quote from: luissantos84 on September 28, 2013, 19:57

Quote from: cmannphoto on September 28, 2013, 19:13
This might explain a couple "Partner Portal" listed under my GI sales the last couple months.

can you link us? what page are you visiting?

That was from my GI Sales page with Martin's GM Script

http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=352385&page=1

This might explain a couple "Partner Portal" listed under my GI sales the last couple months.

This is from the May OP

UPDATE: JULY 22, 2013

We applied a fix on Friday that would have impacted all PP payments from May 20-May 31. This fix will have to be applied to the first two thirds of the May PP payments BUT we are going to let the June payments complete before push said fix.

CLARITY: The MAY 1-19th royalty adjustments will be be addressed as soon as we have completed the June PP sales. I will have an another update mid-day Tuesday July 23, 2013.

Quote from: Anyka on July 18, 2013, 20:37

Quote from: lisafx on July 18, 2013, 18:00
As if there isn't enough to worry about on Istock, so far this morning I have had 40 images from the same series sell in a row, all at large or XL size.   

I should be happy for the windfall, but last time this happened it turned out to be fraud. 

Anyone else notice similar?

A few days ago :  4 EL's of 7$ for images on the same subject.  I didn't think of fraud, I was just annoyed because the EL's were only 7 dollars a piece.  But you're right, 40 is really weird.

I too had 4 ELs on Tuesday with very low per credit values of the same subject matter in a short period of time. A fifth one a little earlier that day at a high credit amount but different EL license but same subject matter. 

Paypal payout request deadline is less than 30 minutes away and I have had NO PP added to my balance over the weekend. Just sad.

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on June 27, 2013, 13:29

Quote from: cobalt on June 27, 2013, 13:16
Only if the files are in the higher priced collections. But for files that get moved to main, you would be stuck with a 7% difference with no option to make up for it by sending the files elsewhere.

For S and above the difference will be more than the % makes it appear, I agree.

But those rates still wouldn´t look attractive to me.

Are exclusive files going into "main"? I tried to find some and I couldn't, everything on the search I looked at seemed to be inde at the lowest price point.

I had 409 moved to the Main Collection and have sold a couple from there in the past week.

Jennifer Borton posted this a couple hours ago

There's no-one at the office at the moment, but when the last people left the building (about an hour ago) it was still fine. HQ is near the Saddledome and Stampede grounds but it's on much higher ground. Fingers crossed!

http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=354490&page=1

Quote from: ShadySue on June 03, 2013, 23:53

Quote from: WarrenPrice on June 03, 2013, 23:26
Did You Know?
Next time you share a link you could earn $20 USD, 20 Credits or 20% Commission. Learn More

I stumbled across this while browsing the iStock site.  The "Learn More" led me to info about the referral program.
Can someone please explain more about the "share a link" part of the above?

I guess if you share a link and someone uses it to buy credits you get the earnings.
The current referral scheme has a pretty bad rap.

And we are still waiting for an update, see this thread

http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=351339&page=1

Quote from: pieman on May 30, 2013, 13:37
Oh, well that makes way more sense. So what do you image those comments mean? It  behooves me to ask as it seems like you are under the impression that due to the comments left by the seller they are in discussion with iS and that we had cleared him to utilize the site in this way.

Sorry if I gave the impression that I believed in those comments.

For the record, I think those comments are outrageous, false and misleading.

Quote from: pieman on May 30, 2013, 13:18

Quote from: cmannphoto on May 30, 2013, 13:04
Have you read the comments at the bottom?

This is illegal. Read istockphoto TOS. You cannot resell the images you have bought as you don't have this right. Not to mention that you buy an image once and sell it later to several people. If you haven't been sued until now, you can bet you will be now.

http://www.istockphoto.com/help/licenses

"License restrictions
Here is what you cannot do with either a Standard or Extended license:
Sub-license, give away, share or otherwise transfer stand-alone images/files"


Reply;

    hoaiphong (100% | $10.3K)   Date:4 hours ago

I am understand, however now we resolve all problems and you can run it without any problem about license. As I note before, istockphoto contact me and now all are ok.

And you believe everything you read on the internet? Hrmm.

I can assure you we have a team of people working to get them removed from ISPs as soon as they change up. This latest endeavor isn't something we aren't aware of either.

No Lobo, I do NOT believe everything I read on the internet.

All I did was ask if people saw the comments.

Have you read the comments at the bottom?

This is illegal. Read istockphoto TOS. You cannot resell the images you have bought as you don't have this right. Not to mention that you buy an image once and sell it later to several people. If you haven't been sued until now, you can bet you will be now.

http://www.istockphoto.com/help/licenses

"License restrictions
Here is what you cannot do with either a Standard or Extended license:
Sub-license, give away, share or otherwise transfer stand-alone images/files"


Reply;

    hoaiphong (100% | $10.3K)   Date:4 hours ago

I am understand, however now we resolve all problems and you can run it without any problem about license. As I note before, istockphoto contact me and now all are ok.

Quote from: sjlocke on May 30, 2013, 03:04
So they just changed his username?  Bizarre.

Yet, I saw new uploads today to his old username.

Why 2 accounts?

Quote from: jsnover on May 30, 2013, 02:51
Look at the caption on this image of "Urilux"

http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-1251598-happy-young-man-swimmimg-in-a-lake-outdoor-vacation.php?st=53d489f

Young man in a boat on the water. Yuri Arcurs in 2009.

Yet it was Uploaded on:    01-29-06 © Urilux

Quote from: tickstock on May 15, 2013, 17:12

Quote from: cmannphoto on May 15, 2013, 16:24
This is the reason the best match is so screwed up, IS ingested over 18,000 images in the past week from this Getty Contributor.

I just clicked on the first two keywords for the first file mentioned and sorted the results by photos and best match.  That file is not in the first 200 results in fact in each of the two searches only one Agency file showed up in the first 200 results. 
I just did another search and no Agency files show up in the first 200.  How is it messing up the Best Match?

This has happened before with a large ingestion of Getty Images into IS. Here is one example posted in the best match thread.

http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=353233&messageid=6886281

This is the reason the best match is so screwed up, IS ingested over 18,000 images in the past week from this Getty Contributor. 

Quote from: lisafx on May 14, 2013, 00:58
I think this will be a good thing for high performing indies.  I nominated my images for P+ based on sales criteria and uniqueness.  If these continue to be the criteria then I don't expect too many of them will be dropped down.  Access to higher priced collections, plus the prospect of getting files on Getty means that indies are likely to see an income rise. 

I also don't see this as a negative for high performing exclusives.  If the quality of their files merits it, they will continue to have better access to the higher priced collections, and will benefit from the higher percentages and visibility they get over indie files. 

The people this will most likely hurt are the exclusives who have been coasting by, producing mainly mediocre work.  Those are the ones that Istock doesn't really care if they drop the crown.  Those are also the ones with the least option to go indie, as a lot of their back catalogue of work would not be accepted on other sites by today's higher standards.  Those folks will have to up their game or they are pretty much screwed.

I will add one thing to this. With the influx of Getty content into the Agency Collection and a lot of that does not sell, with this new system they can now move that content to other collections so it can earn them some money.

I would post in the appropriate thread, win/mac, in the tool/app forums. Franky is always very helpful with issue with his program.

http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_threads.php?forumid=77&page=1

Can you see the images on your "My Uploads" page on iStock?

Getty has sent thousands of photos over from their various collections which have bypass the "inspection standards" and will continue to do so.

This in nothing new.

Just to be clear, what Sue posted in her photo ( blue box) is a GreaseMonkey script that was created by a contributor and is NOT part of IS.

You can see other scripts here

http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_threads.php?forumid=77&page=1

IS has too many other bugs to fix before adding neat stuff like that for contributors. 

As far as IS goes you go to http://www.istockphoto.com/my_uploads.php

Click on "Last DL" to sort the list by the latest DL, but that is all you will get.

IS does not provide any other information on the licensing of your file.

Quote from: toots on February 20, 2013, 12:41
Yeah, I deactivated all images except for one and I'm seeing my commissions rise almost everytime I refresh the page.

I checked thinkstock and there is only that one image there, all the rest have gone, so how come all of a sudden I'm getting downloads from the pp on just one single image - weird.

BTW that image has never had any sales on IS.

I had luckily already cashed out before I deactivated and only had around 3$ in my account, now it's up to almost 9$ just for that one image 

When did you deactivate your files?

This is the January payout

Quote from: fotografer on February 16, 2013, 19:21
Just got over 40$ one day on just 3 files. Does anybody know what that could be?  I thought that it was just a straight 25c per sale or are there ELS or something?

I received an EL today from Thinkstock for $27.59, Extended License Image Pack 25.
You can check the amounts against the Royalty Schedule here, click on Partner Program
http://www.istockphoto.com/help/sell-stock/rate-schedule

@ Jo Ann, yours looks to be a Thinkstock Extended License Image Pack 10

I remember reading that there was an issue with names on PP sites.

There is this in the Partner Program Sticky

http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=344185&messageid=6681347