|
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.
Messages - jamirae
Pages: 1 ... 28 29 30 31 32 [33]
801
« on: September 16, 2010, 22:03 »
they actually tweeted the discount offer- use code REDEEM10 for 10% off credit packs of 50 or more (for one week only). so that July one is different. wonder what contributors get as a "gift" for the outage... oh wait.. nevermind.
Well that explains it. I don't follow iStock twitter...or any twitter for that matter.  Doesn't really matter for me though, as I will not be buying a 50 credit pack there.
so... where are you buying credits from these days? (am I allowed to ask that? okay if you prefer to keep that to yourself, of course). I'm working on building ports elsewhere soon as my exclusivity contract is canceled. 
802
« on: September 16, 2010, 19:07 »
They're offering 10% off prices for minimum 50 credit packs for the next week as an apology for today's outage. Is that normal? Or is it a sign of other concerns?
If you read the fine print, that expired in July...or was there yet another outage where they changed the message, because this is the one I saw: To reward your patience, get 15% off your next purchase of 50 credits or more next time you visit by using promo code UPGRADE. But use it fast it's only good for a little while (offer expires July 10, 2010).
In other news, I was just discussing stock photos with a colleague and told her I am phasing out iStock as my stock site and gave her the names a couple other sites. She said she did not know they existed, but was relieved to know there are others out there, because she is seeing all the Vetta images and was beginning to get outraged about the prices. And then I told her about the commission fiasco and she was appalled. She is no longer going to be shopping at iStock.
^^ Great news, thanks for the support. That is the only way things are going to change.... with the customers
they actually tweeted the discount offer- use code REDEEM10 for 10% off credit packs of 50 or more (for one week only). so that July one is different. wonder what contributors get as a "gift" for the outage... oh wait.. nevermind.
803
« on: September 16, 2010, 15:03 »
This just came up in the forum at IS
http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-2623466-twin-girls-dressed-in-men-s-clothes.php
http://www.canstockphoto.com/twin-girls-dressed-in-mens-clothes-0484750.html
Same contributor! I cant wait to see the outcome of this 
Wow. Nice find.
I always wondered if some exclusives somewhere might try to cheat on their exclusive agreement. But even so, this is shocking. And a Vetta, no less?!
I can't keep up and I can't keep off the * forums - I have other work I need to do. I think this is uneffingbelievable. I'm sure they will come back and say it was some oversight or their account was hacked or something lame like that. an INSPECTOR for f-sake! what?! If iStockers weren't pissed before, this should really top it. I can't possibly see any reasonable explanation for this.
804
« on: September 16, 2010, 10:50 »
iStockphoto is getting some upgrades
To improve iStockphoto's performance we're doing a little site maintenance.
The site will be down Saturday, June 26 from 8:00 a.m. to 11:30 a.m. MST. and then again from approximately noon to 4:00 p.m. MST
JUNE 26? seriously! lol! there was some issue about a bunch of files getting pulled in to the fancy new "Agency Collection" but there were a bunch of rejects in there that supposedly weren't supposed to be there. So maybe they are trying to fix that - but one would think the whole site doesn't need to be down. Unless, of course, the traffic of people trying to see the crappy images that were supposed to be so wonderful cause the server to crash. I saw a huge flutter of messages across Twitter about the bad images. when I was able to get in earlier there were some forum threads about it and iStock was busy removing all the images.
805
« on: September 15, 2010, 16:00 »
It's the same old "divide and conquer".
Of course, and there's always someone who'll step in and take the place of someone who steps down. It's a hungry world out there. I know of one exclusive who gave up her exclusivity. She is now back in the IS fold, 9 months and considerably poorer later. Nobody who is a good seller on IS now is going to give up exclusivity unless they are completely mad.
I dont know if I'd be considered a "good seller" or not at iS, but I must be completely mad. I'll be cancelling my exclusivity at istock this weekend and starting the 30 day countdown. I think I can get a good start at a few other agencies with the port I have and port I'm building. I'll let you know in 9 months how I'm doing as an independent.
806
« on: September 15, 2010, 15:23 »
my guess is that we'll all see some form of concession.
If there were to be some form of concession, it will be thanks to David and the others who are taking action to show their displeasure. Not thanks to the Getty apologists who are telling us we should just shut up and go away
As for "benefit of the doubt" - there is NO DOUBT.
after 3 posts from Kelly on the subject, and not one budge or movement, I am going to go out on a limb here and say that this time there will be very little, if any, concessions made. I think this time they have put their foot down and are going to let the chips fall where they may. The only change I see coming in this new policy will come when they re-evaluate the redeemed credits levels next year. Just my opinion, of course.
807
« on: September 15, 2010, 10:52 »
actually I calculated it out. and with the lower credit costs for non-exculsive images at iStock, iStock will actually be making LESS off my images when I cancel exclusivity.
...
Yes, that's known by anyone who's taken the time to examine the ins-and-outs of iStock. I think it's even been mentioned a few times on this forum - guess not everyone was paying attention.
But what everybody leaves out of the equation: This is only true if you assume the same number of images is bought irrespective of price.
If, OTOH, image buyers are working on a fixed budget it looks different - they may buy more for cheaper prices.
As Istock has mentioned themselves in the announcements (or what I read out of it), their concern is the average commission paid out for the total sum of sales they are making. In that respect, cancelling exclusivity (but leaving the portfolio for sale on Istock) is 100% in line with Istock's goals.
yes, you could be right. at this point I dont know what iStock's goals are other than exactly what they write. We can conjecture to the end of time, but the only facts I have are what they have written. Add that to the past few years of raising prices, increases credits, the partner program, and whole canister change fiasco (which is now moot) and I have several factors that effect my decision. I'm making my decisions based on what is right for me, not on some vendetta to get back at iStock. maybe, in opting to leave my port on iStock and go independent, I'm being selfish and not altruistic but at this point there's really no incentive for me, personally, to stay as an iStock exclusive but there is still enough to leave my port there and let it continue to earn some money. altho it will be significantly less I think I stand a good chance of making it and even building it up through other avenues of distribution.
808
« on: September 14, 2010, 22:48 »
...
1) Leaving exclusivity
...
Lisa, did you consider the fact that if an exclusive drops exclusivity, that he/she will play into iStock's hands?
Even though the contributor will be able to upload everywhere else, the same images on iStock will create a higher percentage for iStock than being exclusive.
It would only make sense as an exclusive contributor to drop exclusivity and leave the agency altogether like the OP is doing.
This of course can ONLY make sense if you can sustain (I hate that word by now) your lifestyle without your exclusivity-income. Now the question is, how many exclusives can afford that...?
actually I calculated it out. and with the lower credit costs for non-exculsive images at iStock, iStock will actually be making LESS off my images when I cancel exclusivity. I put together a spreadsheet to check all the numbers - I used hypothetical 1 credit = 1 dollar (because that was simpler to deal with) and I only have images up to xlarge so the larger sizes don't really matter. attached is a screenshot to show what I mean. feel free (though it probably goes without saying ) if anyone sees any errors in my calculations here.
809
« on: September 14, 2010, 18:47 »
Well done Jami!
I have never been on Facebook and, other than this forum, I pretty much stay away from "social media", but this situation makes me realize what valuable tools Facebook, Twitter, etc. can be.
yes, The Twitter is all a rage still about the iStock issue. some good, some bad, some misleading. It's very interesting to see the wide variety of perspectives out there.
810
« on: September 14, 2010, 16:46 »
I dont know if this means she is bailing or not, but when I posted on my Facebook page last week that I may be joining other stock agencies a designer/buyer friend of mine quickly responded to me asking me to be sure to let her know what other agency (or agencies) I join so that she can add that to her image sources. Don't think she would drop iStock completely but if she needs to purchase one of my images and can find it cheaper elsewhere, I am sure she will go there. I would guess she may continue to find other images on another site if she found it cheaper with just as much variety and quality as istock.
811
« on: September 14, 2010, 13:54 »
in any case, we're all in it together...whether it seems like it or not. the agencies and contributors combined make one big ecosystem, and that's the biggest concern.
I agree 100% with the above. I can't speak to anyone else's motivations, but for myself, I am making the biggest stink possible for one reason - to try and benefit the entire ecosystem, not just my own tiny part of it.
This isn't just about istock, this is about a precedent in the industry. The 20% barrier has been broken. The "protect our exclusives" barrier has been broken.
This doesn't just affect us on istock. The other sites are watching.
If we don't protest this in the strongest terms, and do whatever we can to show istock this will hurt their financial bottom line, the other sites will quickly follow suit. Then independents will be completely screwed and so will exclusives, because if you should find you are getting a raw deal at istock, you will no longer have the safety net of going independent to recover your income. If istock succeeds and profits from shafting its contributors this way, very soon there won't be any place to do to get a better deal.
very well said. I couldn't agree with you more. As for a comment about independents pulling your portfolio from iStock, I say don't do it. just leave it, you don't have to upload more, but iStock actually will be making less money off of independents when the new royalty structure takes effect. Their incentive will be to keep people exclusive because that is where they will make the most money. So keep your port there, at least you'll benefit from some sales, even it is smaller, but it would be better than no sales. but then again, I completely understand if you want to pull it due to the principal of the whole thing.
812
« on: September 14, 2010, 11:23 »
... but sending buyers away from a site is just plain stupid. talk about shooting off your entire leg.
I'd say that sending buyers away from the site that'll pay me 17% and directing them to the site that will pay me 50% is more like getting a fancy new shoe and pair of pants for that leg. Fancy pants, with all that extra income from every single sale.
LOL! good analogy!
813
« on: September 13, 2010, 14:12 »
Well, I was taking a break during the summer slump. Now I see what all is going on.. so no more uploads there for me. If they would pay me the monies in my account, I would even pull my port just to save me and them some time. I am done with Istock but I do want what I am owed.
Tehy will. Just contact support - I just did it.
If you get your money.. Please let me know. I dont want to pull for nothing.
they have already openly stated that if you have money in there and it's not up to the $100 payout minimum, you will still get your money. They will give you the money you have earned they aren't going to punish you for closing your account.
814
« on: September 13, 2010, 11:24 »
All we have to do is stop uploading. all of us. Just for a week perhaps, like a strike! continue downloading, fine. It will stop Gettys business in its tracks. yet not adversely affect us or take any effort.
We Just need to pick a date and inform everyone. How? Anyone?
stopping uploads will only reduce the size of the queue, I don't think it will really do much. If exclusives became independent then it would start making a dent in their pocket - money may not matter to us artists (as Kelly, iStock COO wrote), but it sure as hell matters to them. You don't even need to remove your portfolio, just dropping exclusiveness will drop the prices of your files and will result in less money for iStock. yes, they take a higher percentage, but it's a higher precentage of less money and thus, less money. They make more money off exclusive files than they do off of indendents. I"m also curious - and this may be purely anecdotal - but did any of you independents see an increase in downloads at iStock when the price of exclusive files went up? I'm wondering if buyers are actively searching for files "without the crown" in order to find the cheapest price. I know I've done that when looking for files some non-profit work I was doing. I wanted the cheapest file so when I had a choice, I selected a non-exclusive file. Yes, I felt a little like I was letting down my fellow iStockers, but in the end, it really is about the money.
815
« on: September 13, 2010, 10:43 »
By the way, Getty's new business model reminds me alot of Sam Walton's. He has the same basic principle...pay suppliers nothing. They will be clamoring to do business with me because I am the biggest.
I was totally thinking the same thing! The only difference is that Walmart often does have the lowest price, whereas Getty and iStock do not. I spent a good portion of the weekend going over my position at iStock wrt exclusiveness and where these changes will put me. I'm only a few months away from 40% (diamond status) but the changes will drop me from 35% down to 25%. If I go independent not only will my earnings drop even more, but so will iStock's - at least what the earn off me. I won't pull my portfolio from iStock if I go independent. Granted, I'm just a small drop in the bucket for them - but dropping exclusivity also drops the prices on all my images - including the 5 or so that made it into the much-hyped Vetta collection. That means less money for them off the top as well.
816
« on: September 11, 2010, 21:16 »
I'm not a top contributor, and am in the same boat with regards to the fact that I was looking forward to moving up to diamond before the end of the year and getting 40%. As it stands now I am seriously considering going Independent. I was sick to my stomach when they announced the canister changes and thought I'd never reach diamond, then they made the "grandfather" provision. Now this news and the whole canister thing is pointless. I really feel betrayed, to be honest with you. I was naive to believe that loyalty meant something. I realize it's a business and they have to make money. Well, I need to do the same and I know that I won't be part of the Agency collection and I can't seem to figure out what the formula is to get into Vetta, so my "redeemed credits" won't be hitting close to the mark to even maintain my current status.
Those who are in Vetta and the 'Agency' collection will be getting higher redeemed credits. It's pretty clear that these are the people that iStock wants to cultivate. the rest us are good base income for them, but nothing special.
817
« on: September 11, 2010, 21:05 »
Has anyone else noticed a sharp and unusual increase in their rejections at IS all of a sudden? Like anyone who has been active on this forum?
For the past several weeks leading up to this I have had 100% approval rate. My overall rate there is over 90%. Just today, all of a sudden I had more than a third of images submitted in my last batch rejected. The reasons listed were things like artifacts and/or purple fringing. No attachments were included to show the "problem" areas, and I can't see them on my monitor. Plus images from the same shoots were accepted 100% without exception over the last several weeks.
Very hard not to view this as some sort of retaliation from speaking out here in the forums.
I stopped uploading to IS a while ago, so I can't say whether you are seeing retaliation. Nothing would surprise me, but another thing to consider is that maybe it's just a bad batch of reviewers. We just had a holiday and all, maybe there were substitute reviewers?
I sure hope this is more just a new inspector or some else. I find it hard to believe that any inspector or company would retaliate like this. to retaliate by rejecting images would be unprofessional and childish, and as pissed off as I am about the changes, I would find it hard to believe that some inspector at istock would drop to that level. I've had that kind of crazy batch of rejections happen after new inspectors came on board. Although, to be honest, I've not uploaded anything in some time due to personal issues and a general lack of time to do it.
818
« on: September 10, 2010, 10:36 »
@Loop,
Oh, please. Baldrick is right.
There are a lot of exclusives who don't give a d*** about what happens to independents. Not only that, but deep down they harbour this lovely hope that independents get crushed further and further - commissions, best match - search position, exposure, collections access - , give nothing to independents, let them rot.
This is OUR site, We built it, We deserve every perk, it's US, the Exclusives who should get all the rewards. Independents are kindly invited to bear the blows and rot in hell.
It's a common attitude and one of the main reasons I never wanted to be part of the 'crowned' group. Not cool. At all.
Of course Baldrick is right. And don't ask me to cut and paste, it's stupid, but I might well do it.
That doesn't mean that every exclusive is guilty.
And it's definitely not a subject we should be discussing right now.
What bothers me right now is this - how far is too far?
How many independents are willing to take the cut and submit their images for 15 % commission? Probably most of them.
I strongly belive that there's no such thing as 'going too far' in the world of microstock photographers. 10% commission is fine, and so is 5.
0.25 cents is better than nothing and the race is on.
that's pretty harsh. I've always been with iStock and I'm an exclusive (at the moment) but I have NEVER had ill feelings towards anyone for being an independent. I know many of my friends who are exclusive at istock have always felt the same way. please don't lump "most of us" into this hateful category. Sadly it seems the negative people who feel that way are usually the loudest ones that get heard or that post in the forums. I'm sorry if you were treated poorly, and I hope that you don't hate me just because (at the moment) I am an iStock exclusive. each stock agency is built by the artists who contribute their work, whether they choose to contribute solely to one agency or not. I can't blame an agency for offering perks to those who exclusively contribute to one agency over all others. However, I totally agree that the tiny 15% commission that iStock is going to for Independents is obnoxious and a slap in the face. personally, I'd think that while the exclusive images like Lise Gagne may define a site like iStock, it's the total contributor base, most of which are independents (for any site, I would guess) that really build the agency.
819
« on: September 09, 2010, 18:14 »
Looking at your portfolio you better stay exclusive!
why do you say that?
I might be wrong, but I think it was a back-handed compliment in reference to the idea of your work being released onto other sites = stiff competition.
oh haha... could be! I'm a little slow today.
820
« on: September 09, 2010, 17:57 »
This time next year, I'd love to see StockFresh in the Big Four, with iStock in the Middle Tier.
Let's do whatever we can to make that happen.
This is a worthy goal Mike, and I agree with you completely. I am on SF already and have very high hopes for its success. Only problem is that SF is not ready for us yet, and most people here don't have their images there. So redirecting buyers there is going to leave the vast majority of disaffected istockers out in the cold.
I suggest sending buyers to FT or DT, both of which give us a fair % and both of which are fully up and operational with a collection that's able to rival istock's for scope and quality.
is FT Fotolia? I'm researching my options - plan to go Independent the first of the year. Might as well, I'm screwed if I stay exclusive at iStock.
Looking at your portfolio you better stay exclusive!
why do you say that? I have both photo and vectors in my port. I currently am "gold" level which means 35% royalty on each download. The new structure will split my photo and vector work. trying to best estimate my "redeemed credits" level I don't see myself making it to even 30% for the new structure in 2011 so I'll be dropped down to 25%. which really sucks as I am just a few months away from hitting diamond or 40% if the current structure were to stay in place. If I go independent I realize that I would drop even lower to 16% at istock, but I am hoping I can offset that by building portfolios at other agencies. I'm still evaluating, but right now I'm leaning strongly toward dropping my exclusive status at iStock come the first of the year. I've been with iStock since 2004, when I first got into photography and microstock. When they started the exclusive program, I jumped on board. I've even hosted a minilypse event and helped coordinate and attended several others. My heart has been there since the beginning. But sadly, it's grown beyond what it used to be and now I see that I'm nothing special to them, although iStock was always special to me and I'll always be grateful for what I have learned from there. I just know that it's time for me to re-evaluate my position and do what is right for me. iStock is not doing what is right for me, they are a business and are doing what is right for their business - at least in their eyes.
821
« on: September 09, 2010, 14:17 »
This time next year, I'd love to see StockFresh in the Big Four, with iStock in the Middle Tier.
Let's do whatever we can to make that happen.
This is a worthy goal Mike, and I agree with you completely. I am on SF already and have very high hopes for its success. Only problem is that SF is not ready for us yet, and most people here don't have their images there. So redirecting buyers there is going to leave the vast majority of disaffected istockers out in the cold.
I suggest sending buyers to FT or DT, both of which give us a fair % and both of which are fully up and operational with a collection that's able to rival istock's for scope and quality.
is FT Fotolia? I'm researching my options - plan to go Independent the first of the year. Might as well, I'm screwed if I stay exclusive at iStock.
822
« on: September 07, 2010, 22:39 »
So I was expecting to make it to diamond and 40% by the end of the year or early next year. Now I will only receive 30% under this new plan. That is a difference of 10 percentage points, but in terms of real money, 30 is 75% of 40. So I will be making 25% less than I was expecting to make next year, and 14.3% less than I am actually making this year.
I am in this same boat. really excited to be so close to that diamond level and now what's the point? this sucks.. big time. I've not contributed in this forum or been here since I created an account months ago. but after today's announcment I decided I needed to get myself out and see what's going on in the rest of the microstock world. yea, I started at iStock in 2004 and have too much going on to work with multiple sites and istock always treated me well so I stayed there all "fat and happy" - until the last year with the price increases, the big canister level shift scare (then the 'grandfather' in to compromise for us loyals) and now this BS. Yep, I was an istock cheerleader, but now I will most likely be an independent come January when this takes effect. I really don't see them backing off of this. I have seen the writing on the wall, so to speak, and it's getting clearer and clearer. so... what is there a thread around here that can give advice on becoming independent?
823
« on: June 07, 2010, 17:58 »
....
- crown is something that gives you discount there by all means ;-)
....
Not true. Having a crown means that you should pretty well know what iStock standards are and be able to upload to those standards. There are 'perks' associated with the crown but that has nothing to do with acceptance rate. True, I've gotten questionable rejections at times from iStock, but usually if I spend the time to go back to the file and check it out, I understand why the rejection (most times, not all ). They have tough standards, but buyers know that, too. They know that an image from istock will be technically good as well as aesthetically good. I can't speak for other stock sites since I've never contributed to any other.
Pages: 1 ... 28 29 30 31 32 [33]
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
