http://www.shutterstock.com/buzz/control-your-portfolio-opt-in-or-opt-out?sid=NOVNLS&utm_source=article2&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=NOVNLS

Looks like Shutterstock have woken up to what been happening at iStockphoto, I'm not sure how many serious exclusive contributors would be interested though.

It doesn't look like they are offering anything, but it does show that exclusives are leaving iStock doesn't it?

It doesn't look like they are offering anything, but it does show that exclusives are leaving iStock doesn't it?

Yes, they are offering exclusives a way to minimize financial loss during transition to non-exclusivity and surely this was something many exclusives weren't aware of..

... I'm not sure how many serious exclusive contributors would be interested though.

They say patience is a virtue (and SS seem to have it in spades). Judging by the traffic statistics a trickle now may turn into a flood in a few more months. When one or two of the big players (i.e. the BD's) drop their crowns it may well start a mass-exodus.

Genius! Reading it right now. Speaking as an exclusive that's getting ready to pack his bags, this kind of hand-holding and guiding will really make my decision easier. It's scary for sheltered noobs like us going into the wild. 

DT has this feature (albeit customer service has to do it for you). FT doesn't, but unless you've upset them, they may be willing to work with you.

Quote from: cidepix on November 16, 2011, 15:25

Quote from: traveler1116 on November 16, 2011, 15:19

It doesn't look like they are offering anything, but it does show that exclusives are leaving iStock doesn't it?

Yes, they are offering exclusives a way to minimize financial loss during transition to non-exclusivity and surely this was something many exclusives weren't aware of..

They have had this forever, as far as I know.  When I was on SS most images would only sell a lot when first uploaded so waiting 30 days with images not selling would have reduced your income by a ton.  Maybe they have changed their search since most popular (or Best Match or whatever it's called) was determined by sales/time online.

unless they have an account with SS, there is no chance exclusives would know this.. now they do!

This is really interesting.

If I could find a similar service at FT and DT I might well finally take the dreaded jump into independence.

It'll still take me months and months to upload thousands of images though.

If you have IPTC data embedded, uploading 1000 images on SS, DT and FT wouldn't take a day!

But no, good idea! Stay exclusive please

High ranking istock exclusives all have a lot files in the very successful Vetta collection. Unless someone else comes up with an offer to pay more for these files and promote them as heavily as istock does, I doubt any istock superstars will go independent.

At the microstock expo SS said, they had no plans to introduce a high end collection.

I don't know the answer but say someone had the same successful images on five sites, instead of the one site as Vetta, would they make more money from five standard downloads than each Vetta collection sale?

Say SS, DT, FT, 123RF and IS for example?

What do you think?

If you have IPTC data embedded, uploading 1000 images on SS, DT and FT wouldn't take a day!

Rubbish!

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on November 16, 2011, 17:21

Please, stop encouraging them, Gostwyck. It's better to leave them clinging to iS.

I don't necessarily see it that way. The market (the pie) should remain about the same size as Istock's buyers will simply move elsewhere. If Istock were to lose a lot of custom then it would certainly send a very severe warning to any other agency that attempted to be so greedy in the future. For independent contributors the losses and the gains from exclusives giving up their crowns would probably balance out with the added bonus of no single agency having such a massively dominant position in the market.

Well, that's an interesting theory. I really don't know, one way or the other. There would need to be a big increase in overall file sales, given that iS prices are so much higher than other agencies'. Otherwise we would be collecting 38c on SS for a sale that would have netted us $1.50 on iS. But it's not impossible that a lot of agencies would just spend the budget and buy more.

I actually might be the culprit behind that article.  I was a diamond exclusive at istock and recently dropped the crown.  During my 30 day notice period that istock requires to drop exclusivity, I submitted my first 10 to be accepted as a contributor on Shutterstock and got in within 24 hours.  Not only was I surprised that it happened so quickly, I also didn't know that my initial submission would be posted and for sale immediately.  At istock, you have to resubmit your initial submission.  When I found out, I immediately deleted the 10 images in my SS portfolio and resubmitted them after my 30 days were up.  I didn't know until after the fact when I contacted support about the feature SS pointed out in the article.  So maybe that's why - it's an important feature to know about.

Quote from: RacePhoto on November 16, 2011, 17:31

Quote from: cobalt on November 16, 2011, 17:06

High ranking istock exclusives all have a lot files in the very successful Vetta collection. Unless someone else comes up with an offer to pay more for these files and promote them as heavily as istock does, I doubt any istock superstars will go independent.

At the microstock expo SS said, they had no plans to introduce a high end collection.

I don't know the answer but say someone had the same successful images on five sites, instead of the one site as Vetta, would they make more money from five standard downloads than each Vetta collection sale?

Say SS, DT, FT, 123RF and IS for example?

What do you think?

I doubt it. Vetta files are artistic images that only sell in low volume. It is not typical stock. Many files that are now Vetta were on istock for years and didn�t sell, many even had zero sales although they were much cheaper than now. By promoting Vetta and combining them all in one collection, istock made it easy for customers looking for these files to find them. And this encouraged the artists to produce more of them and invest in expensive shootings for non generic files.

istock/getty have a lot of big customers with deep pockets. They pay for the time saved by having all these files preselected by the istock editors.

That's why I asked someone who knows, I don't have anything Vetta and don't know how they sell or for how much. If five low sales equal the one limited Vetta sale for a higher price, no loss.

The second part is all the rest of someones files. What percentage go to Vetta? Then all the rest are just standard files. People who lose Vetta aren't losing their whole collection at a higher price, just some exclusive very special images.

Back to the same question, or part two. If someone sells their entire portfolio on five agencies vs one, do they make more? That includes giving up better percentages on IS, giving up Vetta but adding four more sites.

On the side of Exclusives, there's also a small problem that's more recent. There's no guarantee that 100% of the files will be accepted on the new sites. Someone could risk leaving as an exclusive and then get only 40% accepted, in which case might be a problem. We can't assume that everything will be accepted or that  it will sell on the new other four sites. There's a fairly big risk in dropping the known for the unknown at this point. Popularity for new files, may not equal well establish similar images. New files that prefirmed well on IS could sit on the back pages of new sites.

Not everything is rosy and predictable.