$ 3.16 for me. Last month was $3.
It is almost getting better each month.

Actually I think it is good that DT is starting to get rid of some pictures. But I disagree in the way they do it.
The similars are in many cases not really the problem. Crappy images and nonsellers are the problem combined with a search engine which is not that good.

If DT would lets say delete images which have not sold within a year many problems would be solved. DT even does not have to go through all the similars anymore, because the buyer would decide. If there are similars which all get downloaded once in a while there would be no problem with them. If there are similars which are not interesting to the buyer, they would get disabled after a year. I have no idea why there is no one of the big angencies which implements s.th. like that. It would be the best for all of us.

Among my normal Subscription downloads I got an XL- Premium subscription download at the price of 2.3 Credits. Anyone else experienced that? Is there a new subscription offer?

There's nothing we can do. This is the new reality in microstock.

+1

Fotolia has the power to do so and probably was encouraged how the commission cut with iStock went through. Still this came as a surprise for me. WOW
Gold does not stay them same. It became the silver comission just when I am about to reach Gold..

Why do you need a flash? Even if the light is coming from behind the group just compensate by overexpose more.

Quote from: averil on September 27, 2010, 16:44

Yuri says he uses a monopod when shooting models because he can't guarantee to get the focus spot on if he hand holds the camera.

It's a shame he can't keep still, he's lucky to have models who can

I suppose if your focus is absolutely critical to within less than an inch, then using a tripod would halve the risk of error (only the model is swaying too and fro, not both the model and the photographer). However, a monopod doesn't reduce that problem, it still moves from side to side and back and forth with the photographer, so it would seem that Yuri is talking nonsense. Monopods are great for sports if you have a heavy set-up that you want to swivel too and fro, they are not for model shoots. Perhaps Yuri just wants to hamper all his potential rivals by persuading them to fix a stick to the bottom of their cameras.

I disagree, Monopods definately help to take sharper images with a slower shutterspeed. I know, because I have a monopod. Of course you still can move, but movement is less than hand holding. However if you are shooting reasonable wide open with a good prime or lets take the excellent Nikon 24-70 2,8 you usally do not need a tripod or a monopod if you have resonable light. Of course tripods and monopods help if you shoot at f8 at iso 100... All depends what you want to do.

I said from the beginning that istock was nothing special and everyone jumped down my throat.
I said from the beginning that istock was nuts and everyone jumped down my throat.
I said from the beginning that istock was on it's way out and everyone jumped down my throat.
I said from the beginning that istock spawned as much crap in the mix as any other photo stock agency and everyone jumped down my throat.

Now have a look at you all!  I have to admit, the 180 turnaround has been very entertaining but I do feel you guys especially exclusives.

pseudonymous, formally known as sunnymars  

In the beginning iStock was special 

I think this forum would have to stay more neutral/ unbiased than that.
Why not start with just the fair trade logo with clear criteria and see how that goes?

That would definately be a start.

never mind

With the exclusive content, CV and a good selection I don't know if buyers will care about what we are getting paid, any more than people will stop eating lettuce because it's picked by temp. workers from South of the border. Some people will never go to a Walmart, but their business isn't in trouble because of that. Some folks will boycott BP, but they also have to avoid CITGO and I'm sure there's a point where you have to buy gas for the car.

Exactly my thoughts. I defintely will not refer people anymore to iStock although I still think they have the best search by far and a very good selection. I am not really sure that buyers will care about our royalty. Some maybe, but the very majority not, I mean if they even would 99% probably have no clue what royalty we get. Wait a year and most contributors have resigned to their fate will continue uploading and their will be no really loss for Getty, no Getty will have more in their pockets. Sad but I think that will be the result and thats why the iStock HQ is so determined to not buldge, because they know they can get through with it.

I have had decent sales today at a couple of sites that are usually dead in the water - Canstock and Crestock.  And my Fotolia sales are up by about 50% over what they usually are on a weekday. 

It's probably way too soon to see a noticeable difference from customers moving, but it did seem unusual.  Anyone else experiencing the same? 

I experience the same for the last two days, but with iStockphoto 
Might be the season.

When I started out to do microstock seriously I was studying to become an engineer. In the first years there was a tremendous growth in income and I started playing with the thought of doing photography fulltime. Last year I finally decided to quit my studies and do photography as my main profession. With that step taken I started advertising to get a foot into wedding photography. Currently I have no more time to do microstock because I pretty much booked out with weddings.
My microstock income is slowly declining, there really is no long term future in microstock I believe. But microstock helped me to become a fulltime photographer, which I would never have been without microstock. I learned so much doing it and I am not sure if any degree in photography would have helped me to learn to do better pictures than I do because of microstock.
Oh and if you need a wedding photographer: www.janwillfotografie.net