What is it with you people? You really think I got no rights because I put it on a free site? There are more restrictions on SXC than on all the commercial sites!
Look what is written right under the image:

Quote

Standard restrictions apply and Gregor909 must be notified and credited when using the photo for any public work.

That would mean that they should have asked me for permission, and that I would not have give them permission without a proper payment. And if I would have give my permission, they also had to give me credit, which they didn't either!

In real life that is legally weak, and almost impossible to enforce.

Not true. The cake with the 2009 candles is a clear concept for New Year (more being New Year something that no has a phisic form). An isolated book never can be a relevant concept for "school". A school is a school, and has walls, furniture, clasrooms etc. It's just blatant spam. "Indoors" is spam as well, and more if you put "isolated" in the list. "Studio shot" woul be the correct term, in any case. Textbook is relevant and education, well, it's a stretch.

About the rest of your discurs... exclusivity is an open option. All this beligerance that you see against non-exclusive is just, in my humble opinion, a kind of dellusion. Exclusives also have rejections and the same uploading process. Limits are best, ok, but we just upload to istock, not to seven or ten sites. In any case nobody forces anybody to be or not to be exclusive, nor to stay as non-exclusive at istock.

Not the best month at Istock, I got the wrong end of the best match change. Others have had big increases. I'm not going to lose one minute complaining, I'm already doubling my shooting time, to got 300-400 quality uploads a month, broading my natural spectrum and covering as many themes (specially new ones for me) as possible. I'm thinking too in accpeting the offer of a free-lance photoshopper to discharge some of the reotuching work. Hard work, true, but that's my work and, after all, I love it.

I have about 100 (big portfolio), with normally minimun payout for the size bougth, average income of about 1.70 &/dl, and a pair or three of "more than regular dl download", the last one 2.04 for an XS.

Why it doesn't work? It defines exactly the capacity of making money for you of every agence.  Following your reasoning, I could also say "Hey, IS is the best and miles ahead from FT, DT, SS or wathever, because I'm exclusive at istock and don't have any single file at these other agencies".

They (NASA) allow to use these images privately and comercially and they state it very clearly in their site. They just aks that is forbbiden to suggest that NASA endorses in any way the products publicited with the help of the images.

And some sites  have put a restraint to the possibility of uploading such images unless creatively worked in some context.

That's what a designer, a buyer for a great company told me: "I only look at two sites: Istock and another one, no matter what. Once I'checked the "another one" I know I will find the same stuff for my keywors at every microsite, and that only at Istock I will be able to find new and good stuff".

Having exclusive images is nice but how many of them are significantly different to what is available on the other sites?  All those photos of smiling business people, handshakes and goldfish jumping out of their bowl look similar to me.  Perhaps exclusive images are not as important as it might seem?

That's a good point - the truth is we complain all the time when people "are inspired" by our more successful images - but in terms of exclusivity and IS it means that a successful image by one of their exclsuive contributors is quickly "copied" and made available on the other sites ...

the big exception is the vector illustrations - istock still has the best portfolio of vector artists with some great work without doubt ... the other sites' portfolios are not nearly as good ... but I would argue that the other sites are absolutely on par/equal with IS on the photgraphy side ... 

DOn't agree. There are great photographers at other sites, but they lack the 300 or 400 thousand really great images that can be foung among the 1,5 milion exclusive files.

In my opinion, you'll have to work very hard, and pass the "realistic" point to reach the far away point where it will be impossible to tell if it's a real person or a 3D. Publicity has a need of "real truth and emotion" (or it's appearance) that nothing perceived as "artificial" can't achieve.

guys and gals, we re getting it up the ass here and until the bigger ports start making more noise adn I aint jus talking bout 1 or 2, yall can grease yr butts some more.
All those deleted ports are little people and even if the big guns start burning some bridges it still wont make no diff. So what if they allow open discussion? thats just pouring water on the outrage they knew would come. See if what you say makes a sheeit of a diff. they is still going ahead with whatever they planning.
Sooner the better yall realise that the reason we get treeted like crap is because we sell our stuff for crap. protest all u want, we create these sites when we spread our stuff all over lik confeti and then complain when things get messy.

It makes a BIG difference. And now, I'm talking as a buyer, not as a seller. And, after all, StockXpert is a small site, number 4, 5, 6 for many people in earnings, and deleting portfolios doesn't do so much harm. Maybe IS or SS coul get away with that (or maybe not), but for StockXpert it's a dangerous move, because thet can lose a gret percentatge of their best content, both at StockXpert and at phots.com.

I wonder what will happen when some customer that has paid 200 $ for a XL photo discovers that was available in another site of the same brad for 10$. ANgry customers are bad for business.

Month is going on par with June, that fell a 15% from May. Second half of July was far better for me than first half in past years, so I hope at the end, July witl be somewhere between May and June.

"When I read that thread (yes, all 11 pages of it) I see more anti-exclusive comments coming from independents than the other way around. "

... And you will see this pattern in any forum, no matter what other people can say. It's plain obvious. And useless, because, there's no point in an animosity exclusives/non exclusives.