Mat,

In addition to my previous unanswered question I ask another one:

When will the EPS upload be fixed?

Hi Mat,

Please tell us when are you going to fix the EUR/GBP rate at Adobe Stock? The rate is wrong for around 1 year already. Isn't it enough time to fix the rate?

Quote from: TG1112 on March 16, 2017, 17:28
With Britain outside the EU ... Unemployment and porness increases.

Porness? What does it mean? Porn + happiness?

P.S.
Freudian slip, my friend. Freudian slip. If you think about ... too much you'll shows it in your words.

Quote from: MochaStock on March 07, 2017, 03:23We offer exclusive ... contracts

Is it a joke?  Are you trying to tell us that your unknown photostock can pay more $ to photographers than ShutterStock+Adobe+20 other stocks do?!

Sounds like a crook.

Quote from: Justanotherphotographer on March 04, 2017, 13:19

Quote from: Sammy the Cat on March 04, 2017, 10:07

Quote from: Pauws99 on March 04, 2017, 09:08

Quote from: Artist on March 04, 2017, 08:12
looks like they messed up everything

It takes real skill to mess things up so comprehensively. If they ever pull the same stunt on the buyers side they will be history.

If iS tried to organize a piss up in a brewery they'd lose the brewery and the beer 

They tried, it didn't go well.

https://www.gofundme.com/thank-you-from-istock-exclusives

I guess the plan was to invite the iStock workers to a party and then torture them. But they declined the invitation. There is a saying: "This cat knows whose meat it ate."

Can anyone, please, explain me how to calculate the amount earned ("file purchase"+subscriptions+"partner program"+whatever) in December 2016? And January 2017, please. At the old website
www.istockphoto.com/user_stats.php?id=000000&Offset=-1&DownloadsGraphFileType
I see "file purchase"+subscriptions for December 2016, and "file purchase" for January 2017 (no subscriptions for some reason). Where can I see the "partner program", "G.I. Connect" etc. at ESP website? Where can I see the subscriptions for January 2017?

Is there an explanation at iStock/Getty forums somewhere?

Quote from: MircoV on February 06, 2017, 16:34
Anyway i dont think that anything is dying. Agencies are making more revenue than ever. So contributors should also.

Wrong. Amazon makes more and more money, but their workers are crying. For example read what do Amazon Logistics drivers say. This Christmas season (November + December) they work from 6:00am to 21:00 with no time to eat, 6 days a week, having 120 to 140 (!) parcels to deliver every day. And if some driver did not deliver some parcels today then Amazon will not pay for the next day and will count it as a "holiday".

If some company earns more it does not mean its workers (or contributors) make more.

Quote from: McNcM on February 10, 2017, 00:21
Map is too small, it should be on the first page (on the top of it, not somewhere on the bottom).

Modern programming languages and frameworks allow to easily create responsive websites with movable page parts. It is simple to allow users to drag a map (or "top earners" or whatever) to the top of the page and rearrange all other parts as they wish. But this applies only for those website where developers care about the users.

Quote from: karakoram on February 10, 2017, 20:12
My email didn't show the unique link either, but when I looked on the top of the image, I saw this:

"If you're having trouble viewing this email, read the online version."

And I click on the online version, it took me to the right email content with the right link.
I hope you all can check again successfully!

Tried this. It shows the same email _without_ the unique link.

Guys, I've read this thread from the start to the end, but I still do not understand how/where to see the monthly earnings at iStock.

At the 'Financials' tab I see: 'Total Earnings:' and 'Account Balance:'.

Account Balance = December earnings + unpaid November earnings (partner program)

But where are the total earnings for November?

'Payout Report' shows US and non-US sales, but again without monthly earnings breakdown.

Please do not resend that link to contributors.gettyimages.com, I can not log in to that forum anyway.

@MatHayward:

Mat,

2 months ago (on October 28th) you said:

QuoteWe are keeping an eye on currency fluctuations, and if there is a major and sustained trend in currency conversion rates we take action to adjust.

The GBP/USD rate dropped down 6 months ago (on June 26th, the proof: http://finance.yahoo.com/quote/GBPUSD=X?p=GBPUSD=X ). It is obvious that GBP/USD and EUR/GBP rate is not going to return back to its "before Brexit" state. This trend is definitely sustained.

Please tell us when is Adobe going to fix the rate on Fotolia? It is still "1 credit = £0.75" now and must be corrected.

Thanks.

Quote from: cathyslife on December 16, 2016, 11:39
THEY DONT CARE!

I think you are talking about the petition(s). Ok, I understood, they do not care. What can we do apart from petition?

Ok. What is our community going to do to prevent such cases in future? Any ideas? You see that even the portfolio size does not matter. You can have 150'000 photos and 10 years old contributor account but still will be treated as a slave with no respect at all, no phone number to phone contributor support team and get a ban from some bot.

One more petition at change.org? Any better ideas?

Or "swallow it and move on"?

I think SS just uses some automated system for such cases now. A kind of a bot parsing DMCA requests and turning off accounts automatically. But then you need to contact their "human support" team to turn your account back on. And that team is overloaded with requests, as usually. It is cheap to use bots and expensive to pay salary to humans.

Recently I had a problem with Amazon and it is an awful and irritating experience. Amazon is now using bots and AI (Artificial Idiots) everywhere and if some bot makes a mistake or there is a system (or network) error or humans can not work as fast as AI expects them to ... then things go totally wrong and nobody can fix them, even Amazon supervisors. It took almost 3 weeks to fix a simple issue and it was finally fixed only because I sent 2 emails to Amazon UK CEO!

And all this hassle is because bots do not get any salary and the corporations like this fact a lot.

Quote from: Minsc on November 24, 2016, 21:28
I understand their dilemma and why they hesitated.

What dilemma?

Quote from: Shelma1 on November 22, 2016, 20:32
What a despicable company you work for, tickstock.

What company?

Quote from: MatHayward on November 22, 2016, 17:23
@Pureart, the Adobe Stock search engine is different from Fotolia.

Thanks. Should we still move the most important keywords to the beginning of the list?

attn Mat Hayward:

Mat, does Adobe Stock use the same search engine as Fotolia? Or you created the new one?

Quote from: Rose Tinted Glasses on November 21, 2016, 17:26
did you read the original email from IS?

Yes, of course, I did.

Quote from: Rose Tinted Glasses on November 21, 2016, 17:26
They made it very clear that non-exclusives got a bad deal.

Yes, they made. And this is the reason to create the petition.

But why should the petition have any words about the "exclusives"?! This petition is going to be sent to the iStock management. They do know what they wrote in their letter. Should we copy the whole text? Should we copy all their terms and policies as well?

Quote from: Rose Tinted Glasses on November 21, 2016, 16:25

Quote from: Shelma1 on November 21, 2016, 16:07
Sign the petition that's up and write a comment with more details. Or write a petition of your own. Or offer more concrete information. For example, the percentage of exclusive contributors who (might) keep making the same amount vs. the percentage who'll have their royalties slashed. Got stats?

Here is a stat for you, this is not what IS/GI is offering all "photographers' and illustrators'". It's pretty clear to me that they have chosen to create a divide in royalties for those who choose to remain exclusive versus those who choose to remain non-exclusive and the petition should reflect as such. As much as I don't like  the offering, the petition is full of holes. And that is not good if you are trying to make a point especially if you insist on getting major media involved. It comes across as a childish rant based on??? You are a big girl, surely you can see this.

Ok, it is clear to you, as you said. But did iStock tell that to us? No, they did not. It is just your guess. And if it is just a guess (not confirmed by iStock) then why should we write it in the petition?!

Quote from: Rose Tinted Glasses on November 21, 2016, 16:25It would give you a lot of credibility.

Filling the petition with guesses does not make it better. This way we will lose the credibility. Is this what you want?

Quote from: Alamy on November 18, 2016, 15:51
Our contributor tools are currently being updated and the roll-out will begin soon. This should make it easier to get images annotated with us quickly - aside from a whole bunch of improvements, there will be less mandatory fields to fill in and only one keyword box.

Will your new engine be able to search for plurals? Or we'll still need to duplicate each and every keyword like "car", "cars"?

Quote from: Rose Tinted Glasses on November 18, 2016, 23:14
I did not sign because the petition is somewhat misleading presuming that it has cut all photographers' and illustrators' royalties, and that simply is not the case. I am also baffled where the 40% royalty rate as an industry standard evolved from. I think retaliation is the least of your worries, I'd be more concerned with signing something that does not really reflect accuracy and clarity.

No problem at all, just create your own petition: accurate and full of clarity. People will sign it too.

Quote from: sharpshot on November 18, 2016, 13:11

Quote from: PureArt on November 18, 2016, 09:57

Quote from: sharpshot on November 17, 2016, 22:53
... all we have ever needed is a site majority owned by contributors and if that's not possible ...

Why do you think it is not possible? Because SymbioStock community is so small and their search engine is pitiful? Or the problem is not in the engine? Is it about SEO?

Symbiostock isn't one site, everyone has to pay for their own site.  I never liked that idea.  Why have so many people spending money on hosting and having to constantly work on their sites when that time and money could be used on one site for all of us?  Lots of individual sites is a pain for buyers as well.

Ok. How do you see "owned by contributors" in the reality? Owned by Microstock Authors Association? Owned by some company where all the shareholders are photographers and illustrators? And its CEO is a photographer?

Quote from: sharpshot on November 17, 2016, 22:53
... all we have ever needed is a site majority owned by contributors and if that's not possible ...

Why do you think it is not possible? Because SymbioStock community is so small and their search engine is pitiful? Or the problem is not in the engine? Is it about SEO?

rjung, I do understand you, but what is the selling point of your service? Now it is a free beta, but when it becomes a paid service you need some advantages. StockSubmitter team promised to do the "cloud upload" feature too and they asked some people to test it as beta testers. (I did not check if they already created it or not, just because I have a fast fiber broadband and can easily and fast upload to multiple stocks from my PC.) But if they have that "cloud upload" feature now or will have it soon then why should people select your service?