I guess it depends on what kind of knowledge you share.  Many share model lighting techniques or something along these lines but when you actually try to use it, failure.  That's because there's so much more to nailing that image, including equipment, settings, "the touch" and other intangible visual aides that are likely not to be shared.  Even if they are shared, he uses Canon and you use Nikon.  He uses Photomax and you use Elichrome. He has an all white studio you have a garage.  Just a few reasons why sharing is safe under many conditions.

Quote from: aeonf on June 23, 2011, 18:23

Why should I assist Getty in taking business from Shutterstock which pays me a better rate?

Because Getty will always have customers no matter how well Shutterstock does.  And because of the critical mass concept there will always be enough contributors at Getty to support their collection. So why not have your images there? I know the idealogs will tell contributors not to sell their stuff there because it is a disservice to the whole industry but, like I said, that critical mass momentum will simply crush that ideology.  It can't be stopped or greatly influenced by a few pulling out.  You will never convince everyone to pull out.  Human nature (money) dictates that.  So knowing that one can make $50 or $100 or $200 a month extra in a system where ideology will never mean squat is incentive enough in my opinion.

It'll be interesting to see how sales change, if at all.  I know that since the day they turned it on my sales DL's are 50% compared to the last couple of months.  So I've gone from 20 a day pre-best match  tweak, to 12 after and now 4-6 each day over the last three days.  Not enough data I know but just sayin.  Give it a month then we'll start a DL discussion

High-priced prize collections, hey??  well maybe back in the dark ages. Today, browsing the GI site, well its almost impossible to find one single image, RM or RF, that the big four Micros can not match.

Well, I wasn't speaking about quality, just the perception of quality based on the brand.  But I agree with you on that one for sure.

Quote from: Mantis on June 18, 2011, 19:31

Well I'm no rocket scientist but isn't the strategy for car manufacturers to attract the broadest buyer base possible by targeting their range of cars to varying demographics?  They don't crap on the "small buyers" and just target the heavy spend ones...mostly anyhow.  But even Mercedes and BMW have price points that span the breadth of consumer spending behavior.  I can't imagine that IS would isolate themselves like this unless they choose to squeeze the juice of life out of their business and close the doors.  Just sayin.

They want the plebs to go to Thinkstock, but of course the subscription model doesn't suit everyone.
Plus many pictures in the DollarBin are actually excellent quality, just fell foul of the best match at some point. But it's not easy to find the Dollar Bin if you're a newbie.
But 'spreading your offerings to different market sectors isn't used in all industries. Some target high spend users only, some budget buyers only.
My issue is that by not telling us, the contributors, what the Plan is (probably for business reasons, as was suggested the last time I mentioned this) it's not allowing us to make medium-term plans accordingly. E.g if the Plan is to dump all lower sellers, or all work from lower selling contributors onto Thinkstock, which I suspect, I'd be shooting/submitting more for Alamy.

Yes, indeed there are products/services targeted to specific demographics and price points.  I guess I am confused a tad because isn't Getty supposed to be the "premium" high price point collection and Istock the Fords and Yugo's of the world?  I too wish I knew more about their medium term intent (even as a non) but their forum silence tells me we'll never know.  I feel for the exclusives though and Joan is a perfect example of the expected behaviors that are forthcoming (I believe, anyway).   

Well I'm no rocket scientist but isn't the strategy for car manufacturers to attract the broadest buyer base possible by targeting their range of cars to varying demographics?  They don't crap on the "small buyers" and just target the heavy spend ones...mostly anyhow.  But even Mercedes and BMW have price points that span the breadth of consumer spending behavior.  I can't imagine that IS would isolate themselves like this unless they choose to squeeze the juice of life out of their business and close the doors.  Just sayin.

Quote from: Mantis on June 18, 2011, 07:30

My TS is constant at $20 a month.  Doesn't matter that I had 1500, then 2000 and now 3000 images, still 20 bucks.  Just doesn't see legit to me.

we are talking here about StockXpert, it doesn�t go up or down at least in term of files online
 

Please let us know if you hear back from these folks.

What continues to be disturbing is the silence from Istock....almost admitting they could care less about bailing buyers. Very strange.

Wow.  At least you navigated that one, but how many others were lost is the bigger question.

While I think Yuri will take on contributors, my hunch would be that it's going to be invitation only. Top talent that can expand the range on offer. I certainly don't think he'll play by the established "rules" of the business - it's time to innovate. That said, it's anything but clear whether he has the vision to succeed. His announcement, on second look, has holes you could drive a truck through. Namely, you don't attract the best professionals on a freelance and part-time basis.

Will it be a factor of who has the best isolated tomato or apple on white?

FWIW, I just uploaded 30 images and 6 were rejected for LCV....80% acceptance on that batch.  Maybe I am stretching here, but it seems to me that they are rejecting on purpose (not for real LCV) just to send a message to contributors that "content quality" now all of a sudden matters.  However, since their inspectors are not all designer experts, we all know what's accepted and rejected has mostly nothing to do with LCV.  There is a different reason they are doing this but SS is not being transparent as to what constitutes acceptable CV in their eyes.