|
MicrostockGroup Sponsors
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.
Topics - gostwyck
1
« on: March 20, 2015, 15:53 »
2
« on: November 25, 2014, 12:26 »
... with some implications for contributors;
Dear Contributor,
As you may know, iStock has been operating as a separate business unit in the Getty Images family and all of iStocks customer and contributor relationships have been tied to iStockphoto LP, a Calgary-based company.
Over the past several years, we have been taking steps to integrate and operate as a unified business. The benefits of this unified approach are increased cross-selling to customers, increased cross-placement of content to maximize sales potential and a more efficient business allowing us to increase investment in customer-facing improvements. We are still early in realizing the benefits of this unification and are now ready to incorporate iStock into the Getty Images global legal structure to set the foundation for further progress.
How does this affect me?
On December 15, 2014, we will amend the Artists Supply Agreement (ASA) to change the Compensation section to reflect that you will no longer be required to request payments. The ASA amendment will be made available on the site for your review and acceptance at least 30 days in advance of any changes to the payment systems.
After the new ASA has taken effect (January 15, 2015), and once the ability to request payment has been removed (the last day to request payment will be January 21, 2015), account balances of $100 and over will be paid to contributors automatically on a monthly basis. Additionally, on January 31, 2015, your contributor agreement will be assigned by iStockphoto LP to Getty Images (US), Inc. All of the revised 2014 ASA terms will remain exactly the same except the agreement will be with Getty Images (US), Inc., not iStockphoto LP.
As a U.S. company, Getty Images (US), Inc. is required to follow Internal Revenue Service regulations, therefore withholding taxes may apply to your payments beginning in early 2015. As part of this change and to aid you with the transition, we will have an automated online interview process on iStock that will help determine the appropriate documentation each contributor should provide to Getty Images. Additionally, through this online interview process you can complete the appropriate forms and submit them. Links to this process will be available in the Contributor Tools section of your iStock profile starting January 22, 2015. 2014 payments will not be impacted by this change
What do I need to do now?
We recommend that you ensure that your mailing address and contact information are correct on your Profile page
We also recommend that you create an account with either PayPal or Payoneer if you do not currently have an account. This can be done directly on the PayPal or Payoneer websites. Skrill (Moneybookers) will no longer be a payment option once the ability to request payment has been removed.
We wanted to give you some advance notice about what is happening so you can be ready for the coming changes. We will provide you with additional details regarding payment and tax as we get closer to launch
In the meantime please take this opportunity to review the FAQs and make note of these important dates.
Sincerely,
The iStock Team
3
« on: November 07, 2014, 10:38 »
Something I've been meaning to so for a while. I find it useful to be able to quickly identify what year an image was uploaded in order to evaluate earnings/year.
Below is a list of reference file numbers that represent the start of each year;
2014 - 170M
2013 - 125M
2012 - 91M
2011 - 68M
2010 - 43.6M
2009 - 22.5M
2008 - 8.1M
2007 - 2.3M
2006 - 840K
2005 - 84K
It's not absolutely exact but it is pretty close.
Interesting to note that in the early days the library was growing much faster as a percentage than it is today. In 2005 for example it grew 10x. During 2006 it grew another 4x and then almost another 3x in 2007. That's a growth of over 100x in 3 years. By contrast the library only grew 36% in 2013.
5
« on: November 05, 2014, 18:27 »
... and so the slow, unverifiable list of our sales ... from over a month ago ... finally becomes published ... when then they can just about free the load on their servers to do so. Pathetic.
8
« on: September 17, 2013, 10:32 »
Read a summary of the changes here; http://www.shutterstock.com/buzz/terms-of-service-updatesHere's the details; At Shutterstock, one of our most important goals is to support your success by delivering healthy and reliable earnings to you. We do that by growing and investing in customer relationships. Over the years, that investment has led us to deliver record milestones of 750,000 customers, 300 million paid downloads, $150 million in contributor earnings, and royalties of up to $120 or more per download.
We also have goals to minimize changes and to be open and transparent when changes do have to be made. With the latter goal in mind, wed like to explain a few modifications to our Terms of Service. A summary of the most significant changes is below; please consult the Terms of Service for the full details.
1. If you decide to remove more than 100 items or 10% of your content, whichever is greater, Shutterstock has up to 90 days to accommodate the request. With over 29 million assets, were seeing record levels of content growth and contributor activity, but also record levels of customer activity. As we grow, there are new technical, workflow and customer realities that we need to accommodate. Ninety days gives us some time to make sure images come out of search results gracefully, as well as handle other administrative and technical tasks. In practice, we expect this to go faster.
2. Customers that have shown a commitment to licensing an image can convert their comp licenses into full licenses. Some of our most trusted large accounts request unwatermarked preview images (also called comp images) in exchange for paying higher rates and as a result of that, royalties when they purchase a license. If you choose to remove your images, but a customer has already signaled the intention to license an image, they can complete the transaction and well make sure that you get paid. This avoids any last-minute changes for customers when layouts have already been approved or a project is close to completion.
3. We can market your content via social media. We already market your content to customers through many different channels, and social media is one of the most powerful ways to drive customers to your work. This update formalizes our ability to use social media channels for marketing with the intention of growing sales for you.
4. Images used in commercial contexts related to tobacco use are now considered a type of sensitive use. Unlike many of our competitors who dont give you a choice, Shutterstock puts you in control of whether your images can be licensed for sensitive use. In reality, sensitive uses are rare and a very tiny percentage of image uses, but opting-in gives you access to higher royalties and the highest number of sales opportunities. This minor adjustment brings our licenses in line with those of competitors and industry standards.
In addition, if your image or your description of your image already depicts a sensitive subject, you acknowledge that its appropriate for sensitive use (for example, a model-released image clearly depicting drug abuse being used for a poster campaign against drugs).
For a full explanation of sensitive use, see here.
5. If you are paid by paper check, $500 is the minimum payout threshold. We want to spend the majority of our time driving sales and royalties for you. In a digital world, relatively few contributors get paid by paper checks. Were raising the payout threshold for paper checks to $500 to increase efficiency and decrease the amount of time we spend on paperwork.
6. Shutterstock has the option to control litigation and costs in the event of a legal complaint. To indemnify means to protect against damages. In this case, depending on which party has offered to protect the other from damages in a legal claim, theres mutual agreement to promptly let the other party know about the complaint. The protected party also agree to cooperate in defending against the complaint. This clause also contains specific language with regards to the obligations of each party, including financial obligations.
7. Confidentiality: We Protect And Respect Your Privacy. Please Respect Ours. As an artist at Shutterstock, youre in a position to acquire information that you would not otherwise receive outside of our platform. Your earnings information might sometimes contain data that can be used by our competitors to reverse-engineer our products and services. We work hard to both protect and respect your privacy; we respectfully ask that you do the same and keep specific information about your earnings private. General characterizations are fine.
These are highlights of the most important changes to our Terms of Service. Please consult the full document for additional details, and please let us know if you have any questions at [email protected].
Best Regards,
The Shutterstock Team
9
« on: September 16, 2013, 16:58 »
10
« on: August 19, 2013, 15:36 »
11
« on: August 01, 2013, 13:52 »
Obviously whilst SS do publish their financial details, Istock being a private company does not, however I believe we can make comparisons.
Following the recent price reductions at IS my income there is now less than half what it was before and clearly that will be reflected in the money that IS themselves make from my portfolio.
I'm on 18% at IS and roughly, for the sake of this comparison, an assumed 30% at SS (it might be less but that would only swing the numbers even further in SS's favour). Based on those percentages it would appear that SS made more than double the revenue from my portfolio last month than IS did. However in July 2012 both agencies made an almost identical amount from my port. That's a huge swing towards SS.
Yes, Istock have their exclusives and also the higher-priced collections, but exclusive contributors have been dwindling, along with the falling sales, for many months now. Are they enough to bridge the gap in earnings from independent contributors? I doubt it.
Istock's overall revenue must have been slashed by the price reductions and, based on my own sales numbers, I think it is quite likely that SS are now a bigger agency than IS in every respect, including total revenue.
Any thoughts?
12
« on: July 11, 2013, 14:31 »
14
« on: April 25, 2013, 16:55 »
From the latest Contributor Newsletter;
"Best Match Update - April 22, 2013
SearchFairy came into the forums to provide an update on Best Match. We've added the update below:
Now that we have our testing tools in place and are able to preview best match changes before taking them live on the site, there are a few changes coming up to Best Match this week that Ill describe, and explain the intent of the change.
The basic idea is that the influence of keyword-level relevance within Best Match can now be managed separately from image-level things like popularity and age (they were previously wound up in each other in various ways). I am going to increase the influence of keyword-level relevance, thereby decreasing the influence of image-level popularity. This will get those been downloaded in the past but not very relevant to this search images out of the top rows/pages where they have been ending up. The search results will look quite different after this change, and far more relevant to the search.
As for the other critical component of Best Match the influence of file age there will be subsequent adjustments. The initial change focused on improving relevance will initially continue the unpopular phenomena of not showing newer images in the top search results, because we will be prioritizing files with proven relevance and it takes awhile for a file to prove itself. The next step, therefore, is to help new images prove themselves regarding relevance. A few days after the initial change to Best Match (described above), we will begin to adjust the thresholds that regulate how a new image performs. The idea will be to find the perfect balance so that only proven images show up on the first few pages of results, but it is easier for an image to prove itself and make it to the top pages. We will find this balance gradually, by making a change and watching the impact of the change on customers.
Thanks for your patience as we move towards the right balance of relevant and fresh. If you have any questions or observations you will like to share come join the conversation."
It seems that Istock are taking a major step towards keyword relevance in their 'best match' algorithm, based on those actually used by buyers when choosing images. Essentially they are following SS's lead in this regard ... just a few years too late. It'll be interesting to see what difference it really makes.
Trouble is ... will Istock be able to stop themselves promoting their expensive collections and exclusive images in their supposed bid to provide accurate results? Can't see it myself. Greed and short-term targets are bound to get in the way of a good idea.
15
« on: January 13, 2013, 11:25 »
Interesting blog by Jon Oringer; http://jonoringer.com/2013/01/13/why-going-exclusive-as-a-microstock-photographer-doesnt-work/Good insight in this extract why SS appear to be winning the 'data war' over other microstock agencies; "No longer is content the only competitive advantage, data is also a large component. To some this may not seem intuitive. We sell creative assets and at first glance one would think that having exclusive assets would be an advantage. We add over 10,000 images each day to our library of over 20 million images. Weve sold over a quarter of a billion assets over the past 9 years. We have an incredible amount of data on these downloads. We know what search leads to what image, and at this point we can practically read the users mind in 14 different languages. Shutterstock is the volume leader, and therefore we are the data leader. In several languages we use the data we have to display the best search results for any given query. We obsess over search success and if we can reduce the time it takes to get from search to download by a tenth of a second, we win that day. We iterate over and over and use whatever data we have to continuously find the best image for the customer. The best image for a given search isnt one that another agency doesnt have, its the one that will get chosen and downloaded. Out of over 20 million images, with 10,000 more each day, were likely to have the image you need. We believe that if we can get the right product to the buyer the buyer the quickest, we win in the end. Having exclusive royalty free content is of no advantage when a buyer is going to choose where to buy a photo its getting a relevant photo the quickest. To see the user of this data in action, go ahead and try a search on Shutterstock and compare it the same search on our competitors sites."
16
« on: December 14, 2012, 08:47 »
I've just noticed that the PP earnings for November have started to trickle through on Istock stat's.
18
« on: November 16, 2012, 08:53 »
Must be over a month since any of my new uploads to SS have transferred over to BigStock. When the BtB first started I used to get an email everytime they transferred a batch. Then the emails stopped but the transfers still happened. Now they've stopped altogether.
Anyone else finding the same?
19
« on: November 13, 2012, 16:24 »
20
« on: October 30, 2012, 11:41 »
With the PP earnings almost through for September I have no recorded sales at all for the first 3 days of the month. I haven't had a zero sales day there since my port was transferred over so it seems strange to suddenly have 3 on the trot. Anyone else have sales recorded for 1st-3rd Sept?
21
« on: October 12, 2012, 16:12 »
Martyn Ashton takes his new $16K carbon road bike for an extreme spin around Britain. The bike, a Pinarella Dogma, was as ridden by Bradley Wiggins whilst winning the 2012 Tour de France. Cracking camera work too.
22
« on: June 16, 2012, 07:28 »
My Istock balance has updated several times this morning but no new sales are registering in the 'Last DL' column. Anyone else finding this?
23
« on: May 23, 2012, 09:03 »
24
« on: January 24, 2012, 04:55 »
Press release from Getty on The Wall Street Journal's 'MarketWatch' site; "NEW YORK, Jan. 19, 2012 /PRNewswire via COMTEX/ -- Getty Images, Inc. today announced the expansion of Thinkstock ( www.thinkstock.com ), an image subscription product that provides one of the most complete offerings available in the marketplace, to include 19 new image collections which now includes content from Purestock, Eyecandy Images, Ron Chapple Studios, TongRo Images, Fogstock, Wavebreak Media and Zoonar. With the addition of the new collections, Thinkstock has more than doubled the total amount of available images through their subscription service since launching in February 2010, to 7.7 million images, and is expected to reach 10 million images in early 2012. ......"Read the full spiel here; http://www.marketwatch.com/story/thinkstocks-image-offering-has-more-than-doubled-since-launch-2012-01-19What I find interesting about this PR is where they've chosen to release it __ to the financial world rather than to the image buying world. Is their real objective to advertise 'Getty the business' itself? Could this be the start of a series of good news stories as H&F attempt to offload Getty during 2012?
25
« on: January 14, 2012, 16:55 »
I've just noticed that there are now over 26K images from Corbis on Fotolia, priced from 25 credits for XS, rising to 655 credits for XXL and 930 credits for an EL. Here's the portfolio; http://en.fotolia.com/p/200993946I really don't see the point in starting a microstock agency and then filling it with images that are way beyond the price bracket of your main product especially when there is no discernible difference in quality. It's like trying to sell Aston Martins alongside Skodas. What's worse is that FT have acknowledged the price-sensitivity of their customer base on several occasions of late. Talk about playing straight into Shutterstock's hands. They'll be the only microstock agency left soon the way things are going. I do find it slightly curious that FT have entered into an arrangement with Corbis though. Could they be lining up to join forces or a sale to Corbis? Could it have already happened on the QT?
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
