Quote from: Pheby on October 19, 2010, 13:21

Ich glaube, Szakaly, Du bist dort, wo ich her bin. Und umgekehrt! 

Und wo bist Du urspr�nglich her, Eyedesign, wenn ich fragen darf?

Ich komme aus New York.

Ah ja, jetzt erkenne ich Dich auch wieder - ich kenne Dich aus dem deutschen istock-Forum. 

Deutschsprachig, in Deutschland, aber nicht deutsch! 

Quote from: Pheby on October 18, 2010, 01:53

Leaf, my link leads to an empty port, and I can't find the box where not to put "#". Or is this a different problem?

I'll save Leaf the trouble of answering but it's a small thing that you did wrong. You entered your user name instead of your user number.

Mmh. Daft question: Where do I see my user number? The url only contains my user name.

Leaf, my link leads to an empty port, and I can't find the box where not to put "#". Or is this a different problem?

Gosh! No, I don't go that far back with Fotolia...  
But I do still have the impression that there are many awful food pictures accepted, some from mass contributors that really spoil some of the search results. I wish they were stricter, even if it meant saying farewell to my acceptance rate.

They seem to love food, my acceptance rate there has been 99 % for a long time now.  And the one percent they do reject is mostly due to similars (where I find them even worse than dreamstime).

Neither is that the point of RM nor has it been gotten rid of.

Thanks for posting this, RacePhoto. And Thanks Mr. Locke for this paragraph in your blog, makes me feel a bit better but confirms me in my decision to leave istock in January at the same time.

"For Getty, who basically has no production costs to speak of, to steal 85% from people who wholly own their own content is just unbelievable.  I really wouldn�t blame all independents for pulling their work from iStock and concentrating on sites that pay you a fairer amount.  Because with the new collection taking up search return space and all, you�d likely make less anyways in the upcoming days.  I�m really sorry for my peers in this regard."

Istock's my second best agency, but the returns on Fotolia are 70 % of my income, paying me 31 % (if I were exclusive there it would be 49 % - completely different spheres compared to istock). The loss will be hard to make up for nonetheless.

Quote from: Pheby on September 29, 2010, 15:48

Interesting that you had Polylooks in your list, perry - they are closing at the end of the year. They sent out an email to contributors today (I'm not a contributor, so I can't post the text).

Yes... the Polylooks disaster was the thing that made me write my post...

oooops, it didn't sound to me as if you knew already. 

I've decided to pull my port by the end of december. I know that they won't notice that at all, but I just can't let an agency help itself to 84 percent of what my images sell for, and there's no way they will have me struggeling along to hit some obscure floating target that might give me 17 or 18 percent.

Yeah, Im awaiting a sneaky and greedy move towards the end of the year.

Mat, all the facts you have mentioned can be changed by fotolia within the wink of an eye, and we all know it. Other people were singing the same song as you are singing now about istock when fotolia came around the corner with the "You are great, and we are growing, so down goes your commission. But thank you, we are growing and you are great, if you do not like the changes, stuff it".