As I have had some refunds that are for 5 months ago, I am beginning to wonder if these are not refunds, but a way for 123RF to take more revenue from everyone, basically fraud.

If they are doing this across a whole load of Portfolio�s it could add up to a substantial amount.

They do not say who these people are who ask for a refund months after downloading a picture.

I cannot believe that a design/advertising agency would ask for a refund on such a small amount of money, having worked in many design and advertising agencies they just do not operate like this.

This doesn�t seem right at all.

The Vector sales over time will go down due to the new rule changes, of producing vast files of up to 100 MB for download, plus the restriction on the design limiting creativity and saleability.

If they are crazy enough to implement this completely wacky set of new uploads for Vectors, what else are they up to.

They obviously have some people working for them that have no idea what they are doing, this will effect sales in the long term.

Its the usual low commission rate of 15% on a $200 sale, simply appalling greed from Getty, I think I may well shut my Portfolio down with them.

On the Shutterstock Forum it looks like Shutterstock are either in denial or ignoring their contributors.

I am beginning to believe that this maybe a deliberate policy to restrict the number of EPS uploads to Shutterstock, maybe they are not interested in anything but photography.

It is a change that really is so out of the ball park and utterly nonsensical, that maybe the owner and his team have taken what they think is a strategic decision to do away with Vector Illustrations and this is just the first phase in stopping illustrators from uploading.

If you look on the Shutterstock Forum there is no one answering any of the questions.

You don't mind paying Getty's loans when you have plenty to pay them with, not a moral or ethical choice then.

What makes you think that.

Your comment is pathetic, I always minded, the problem is that the site has got worse over the years, when it was iStock it was fair.

Again you are pathetic, come up with a decent comment or not at all.

The really big problem in MicroStock is that the business model has changed over recent years, it used to be about a partnership with the Agencies to sell our work.

What has happened is that the wealthy shareholders (the people who don't pay tax) have moved into the market financializing the companies by issuing shares to these people.

This has caused a ever need, to constantly increase dividends to these people, which basically means that most of them (except Adobe) have cut our commission rates.

Essentially by not putting up the commission rates they are exploiting artists.

What's needed is a new big player in the Market, funded by the artists and able to wipe the floor with these companies, just how to achieve this, I really don't know at the moment.

Microstock originally existed to help photographers sell there work across the World, using a low priced volume business model. It started as a partnership with the Agencies, the crucial point is, it was a partnership with fair commission rates.

What has happened is the wealthy in the guise of big business, have moved in and subverted this business model suckin g the life out of the suppliers of the content and in the case of Getty mortgaging not only the companies future but the talent that supply that content.

The reality is the wealthy are double winners, as not only do they own the shares in the hedge funds that have owned Getty but they will also own the companies that supplied the loans, it's a win, win for them, paying themselves vast dividends on the backs of the talent that supply Getty.

These people who have perpetrated this on the creative talent in Microstock are the same people that have moved in to most internet based companies, a great many of them were originally set up to facilitate an easier way of working while getting paid a fair commission.

The likes of Amazon and Uber operate similar models, it is all about driving down the rates paid to the supplier and increasing the shareholder dividend.

What is really needed is a law to ban shareholder participation in these companies, this will take some defining, but you could certainly make a start with platform based business like Microstock.

Will Adobe Stock phaseout the Fotolia Ranking System, there is no mention on the Adobe Site of a Ranking System, this could seriously cut our revenue.

I reckon there is a good chance they will get rid of the ranking system and we will end up with a flat rate for everyone.

Perhaps someone from Adobe can answer this point.

I noticed that I have quite a few days, sometimes a whole week, when I sell nothing in America, my sales used to be half America and then the rest of the World.

Their algorithm seems to be deliberately manipulated, which is just plain wrong.

Essentially they are keeping the rest of the World out of the American market, they are supposed to be a global platform for our work and they take a commission for this, it seems to me that like Getty/istock, that they have got hold of the wrong end of the stick.

I would like to think I am wrong, but the data seems to point otherwise.

Personally I believe that all these Microstock companies should publish facts and figures, like how many files where sold in Italy and in which Country those file were created, this should be on a monthly basis.

Then we need clarity on the financial side, so we can see how much money was made in each Country and which Country received the commission.

At the moment too much information is opaque.

I am sure all these Companies have this data and we are the Creatives producing the work that they are selling for us.

It has to be because Getty dont want us to have this information, there can be no other reason, all the other sites provide up to date stats.

The question should be, Why does Getty not want this information to be available?

DeepMeta Statistics Activity section are not accurate, they dont tally with the actual sales for each month and when can we see which files are selling.

Sorry if this is a bit abrupt, but every other Agency shows real time, down loads.