I had two custom 0.32 sandwiched between whole bunch of custom 1.05;   haven't seen anything below 30 cents yet

There was an unwritten rule--- 1,000 images equaled $200 a month per site.

That is interesting metric.  On Alamy 2 yrs ago someone worked out  "1,000 images = 1 download/month" & this pretty much holds true for me.   Of course all such metrics depend on port type, number of similars, etc.

I was fairly late to the party (2017), but remember these times pancaketom refers to about SS levels,   25/33/36/38.   I was at 36 when they switched to "10 cents annual reset" & pretty much lost relatively positive vibe I had up to that point.  Right now only Adobe holds strong;  it is quite amazing that out of 5 agencies I contribute to (IS, SS, DT, Alamy, Adobe)   for first 20 days of Apr'24  Adobe earned more than other 4 combined (incl. couple of Alamy downloads and assuming usual IS average).    I wonder how long will they be able to hold this level, and will at some point be topic "What was Adobe like back in the day"

now we should calculate an RPD on Istock on annual basis so we can have a laugh!

Wanting to get that laugh, or just being curious, I tried to see.   But again, just like everything else on Archaic IS platform,  obtaining even simplest piece of info is extremely convoluted.  I calculated last 3 months

Dec '23:  0.59
Jan '24:  0.44
Feb '24:  0.19  (refunds included)

before giving up.   Maybe it would have been easier on Deep Meta, but why can't they have simple Web based interface that lets you get this piece of info with click of mouse;  like Adobe portal, just set  "From"  "To", click and voila:  Earning, Downloads.   

IMHO this is key reason of IS issues.   Whole system set up so poorly:  once a month reporting,  standalone desktop Deep Meta you have to import statements to,  convoluted submission process (managed keywords nonsense,  open ticket if you want to update something etc etc) list goes on.  No wonder reporting errors are common.   They should hire someone with knowledge of modern technology to revamp whole thing, starting with back-end which is from IT perspective likely one of biggest messes you will ever see.

Quote

"Super" keywords should NOT be what's is already in the Title.

Do you mean 'caption' rather than title?

Yes, Caption.   It's just one field at Alamy I sometime call it "Caption" sometime "Title".  But correct word is "Caption", sorry about that.

Answer to question is redundancy.  Let's say you have an image of Apple and Caption reads "Beautiful Big Red Delicious Apple".   All these 5 words have been indexed separately (not as phrase) and with highest weight.  Repeating any of them as super keywords is redundant and won't increase discoverability.  It doesn't hurt; it simply has no effect.  Instead your super keywords can be something like "healthy"  "food"  "snack"  "natural"   "organic"   and normal keywords say "eating"  "snacking"  "sweet"  "dessert"   etc.

Further, if both you and me have image of that apple, but you repeated words from Caption in keywords.  It won't make your image higher in search results.  Factor that determines that is  1)  Image sales history   - ie  if your apple sold twice, mine never  your apple will be higher   2) Contributor Alamy Rank - if my rank is higher than yours, then my apple is higher than yours, given that they both have same sale history.    What happens if my Alamy Rank is higher, but your apple sold more I am not sure - but I believe they periodically tweak these things in their algorithm.

My AS port is less than 2000 landscape/travel stills & can't compete with some of people here, but today was a nice surprise.  This is most likely same customer, interesting 2 downloads of same image within few seconds, first normal sub then probably something enhanced.   

Anyone interested, this is quite famous Mt. Robson and Berg Lake, one of most iconic back-country areas in Canadian Rockies

The question I have for the people that got heaps of refunds, were your earnings for November oddly high (by about the same amount as the refunds)?

Pretty shoddy on the part of Getty all around.

That's really good question.   Went and checked: Nov '23 was my 3rd best month last year on iStock, but nothing out of proportion.

Accounting certainly appears shady, but I don't think it's deliberate - whole system is set up in such a bad way it is easy for all kinds of mistakes to creep in.  Biggest thorn to me is 15% royalty which is downright disrespectful. 

Quote from: zeljkok on March 20, 2024, 17:30

This is all Uncle Pete fault for starting thread too early 

I gave that a plus! 

Always a good sport 

Seriously, this is not even so surprising.  iStock Platform is so inflexible and outdated.  Once a month reporting (anyone else doing that??) , bloated and completely unnecessary "managed keywords" system,  open a ticket if you want to modify keyword (?), standalone heavy "Deep Meta" (when everyone is doing lightweight Web Front End), List goes on.   It's like having an old car;  change brake pads, but now battery won't start.  Replace battery, but ignition fails.  Etc.  It's time for a new Car

You have to download statement, then drop into that archaic Deep Meta;  click on "Gross Royalty" column to sort ascending and negative will swim on top (see attachement)

Looks like Everybody got negative sales.  For me its all same amount, most in Nov '23 and same client (someone from Washington US)

IMHO whole iStock platform is so outdated, with unclear accounting practices and this is just another example.

But well, sometimes, not so bad surprises can happen, I just got 150� for an exclusive licence of an old image.

Well done.  I got EL on Shutterstock today, nowhere as good as 150� of course, but still positive surprise, almost forgot that was possible

I tend to agree with Liz.   In my view outstanding balance, be it 1 USD or 99 USD, should be paid out when contributor requests that his account is closed.

I find DT upload straightforward, but I upload 20-25 images / month at most.  Pop-up if description is less than 10 words ("Ooops ... Give yourself a chance") is bit annoying.  I think Caption /  Description being 2 separate fields is not necessary;  single field, like SS or Adobe do is better (and faster)

For me worst by margin is iStock, with that managed keyword concept.  "Landscape" is not recognized, but "Landscape - Scenery".  Or "Equirectangular Panorama" instead of "Panorama".   Etc.  Although their support told me once non-recognized keywords are still indexed, just not expanded into whatever managed mapping system does in the back end.  Don't know if this is true or not. 

For what it's worth:

I had "Photography Plan", billed monthly.   After redeeming contributor code, both plans were showing as active in my Profile;   first with redeemed code with 2025 expiration,  second with next monthly billing March 5th '24.   Both appeared identical in terms of features.

I went and cancelled monthly billing plan, it is now showing as invalid after March 5th. (You are offered 2 months free not to cancel btw).   Only unknown at this point is if Photoshop will get confused after March 5th.

SS used to be my best earner, now it's second last.  Freefall coincided with start of new payment scheme couple of yrs ago.   Oddly enough for Feb '24 SS is looking to be #1 (ahead even of Adobe).

I don't think SS is dead, or will be anytime soon, but certainly appears far from where it once was.