MicrostockGroup
Agency Based Discussion => Stocksy => Topic started by: Don McGillis on February 15, 2013, 12:11
-
For those who have supplied email addesses to Stocksy, has anyone heard back from Bruce? If so, what was the response? No rush really, just wondering.
-
I had no reply, not even a auto-reply.
-
its another "agency" guys, why would they be fast this time? ;D
-
From what I've read, they were overwhelmed.
-
Not yet.
-
Disappointing, nothing yet. For my taste the silence is a little bit to long. Yes there's always the secrecy tactic to build hype. But you can not play this game forever.
-
They accepted my first 3 and now I'm uploading the rest of my portfolio. Sold 42 so far at an average of $92. Would be nice wouldn't it?
I haven't heard a thing and don't expect to for a while.
-
I guess I didn't inquire, but I wouldn't expect to hear anything if I did. They seem to be still getting organized and ready. Give it some time. These things don't get built overnight.
-
.
-
Stocksy has peaked my interest. Will it be the next be thing? It could be as most of us have it on our radars. I guess we just have to wait and see what it will be about.
-
Stocksy has peaked my interest. Will it be the next be thing? It could be as most of us have it on our radars. I guess we just have to wait and see what it will be about.
sorry but the next thing here is dinner ;D
-
Stocksy has peaked my interest. Will it be the next be thing? It could be as most of us have it on our radars. I guess we just have to wait and see what it will be about.
sorry but the next thing here is dinner ;D
Of course...but can we have some Stocksy for dessert?
-
Curious.....absolutely! Heard anything?.....Nope. Facebook group....Nope.
Obviously, I realize this will take a bit to get Stocksy off the ground sales wise but I would like to know more of the details as it may (or may not) affect some of my business decisions and planning going forward depending on whether I want to be part of this or not. Come on Stocksy, spill the beans! :)
-
Boy, I've seen this picture before.
Everyone is getting sooooooo excited, but then . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
-
Stocksy. Great name. Memorable, short, easy to say and hard to misspell. If you look at the list of agency names on the right side of this page, stocksy is probably the best one.
Is there room for a new agency startup? One which has learned from the mistakes of others and has some creative ideas about doing microstock licensing in a better way?
-
Stocksy. Great name. Memorable, short, easy to say and hard to misspell. If you look at the list of agency names on the right side of this page, stocksy is probably the best one.
Is there room for a new agency startup? One which has learned from the mistakes of others and has some creative ideas about doing microstock licensing in a better way?
It's alright. Kind of a keyword poor name, but that doesn't pose a huge disadvantage. I'm sure they'll get plenty of word of mouth.
-
Stocksy. Great name. Memorable, short, easy to say and hard to misspell. If you look at the list of agency names on the right side of this page, stocksy is probably the best one.
Is there room for a new agency startup? One which has learned from the mistakes of others and has some creative ideas about doing microstock licensing in a better way?
It's alright. Kind of a keyword poor name, but that doesn't pose a huge disadvantage. I'm sure they'll get plenty of word of mouth.
I think Stocksy is a perfect name, much better than most I see in the column on the right.
How about Dreamstime? That name has never made sense to me.
-
I doubt that they were expecting the coverage they got through Sean's unexpected ousting from iStock. Give them time, even though I'm as eager as everyone else to know the details, it's in none of our interests to have them rushed into releasing information before they're ready.
-
If the person who invented the wheel announced they had made a new invention, you'd be very intrigued and buy shares in the idea. Question is, will it better the original?
I'm not particularly curious in so far as this new business is a million miles away from putting money in my bank account yet...
Oh the harsh realities...
-
If the person who invented the wheel announced they had made a new invention, you'd be very intrigued and buy shares in the idea. Question is, will it better the original?
I'm not particularly curious in so far as this new business is a million miles away from putting money in my bank account yet...
Oh the harsh realities...
So how does a new company achieve enough success to put money in our pockets without content to grow the company?
If we never support any new companies, we're going to be stuck with the companies we've got forever.
It drives me nuts that we all sit around here complaining about pay cuts, diminishing earnings, etc. And then when companies come along who are willing to pay us better, we don't want to bother supporting them.
I'm not saying jump on board with everyone who comes along offering 50%, but in some cases it's in our own best interests to do it. And when it's done by someone who knows the business, and has a proven record of success, I don't see how we can't want to be a part of this.
-
Haven't heard anything and certainly don't expect to anytime soon, if ever.
If given the chance I would most likely contribute but I suspect it will be by invitation only for awhile and I'm nothing but a very small player in this game.
It will take alot of $, alot of time, alot of good planning to make it successful. Sure hope they can pull if off but I'm reluctant to regard Stocksy as the next Top Tier champ in the forseeable future.
-
My opinion ? they will expect contributors to bring buyers into Stocksy, which is a "viral marketing" concept not too far from what the PoD sites do already, see FAA, Zazzle, RedBubble, etc
Unfortunately it's never easy to live just on buyers coming via word of mouth, Stocksy could be a booming success or a complete disaster.
all we can do is to wait and see.
-
I'm not so excited, it will take a lot of time before they become operative. For now I see it as an early marketing, words but no explanation.
When they will be ready to begin we know for sure, there will be an official announcement.
I hope for all (us and them); only few things, simple and clear terms and conditions, great website platform for MR, upload, category etc.
Lastly I expect that they want only exclusive pictures.
-
My opinion ? they will expect contributors to bring buyers into Stocksy, which is a "viral marketing" concept not too far from what the PoD sites do already, see FAA, Zazzle, RedBubble, etc
Unfortunately it's never easy to live just on buyers coming via word of mouth, Stocksy could be a booming success or a complete disaster.
You cannot compare POD with stock. A typical POD customer would buy just 1 thing or at most several products to decorate their home. A stock customer who is a designer will have a constant demand for images, depending on their business volume.
Also, there is a group of contributors who are also media buyers. I think most of these buyers would switch entirely to a co-op site once it has a sufficient library for their needs.
-
I'm pumped about stocksy (amongst other reasons) because it is a co-op. To me, that is huge and very exciting. People have talked on here many many times about starting a co-op, now someone has finally had the ambition to do something about it.. and really, it was the perfect person / group of people to do so.
-
Even if it fizzles, I am willing to try. I submitted my email id there on the page. Let's see what we hear back from there.
Recently, I read http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-57569639-93/istockphoto-founder-re-enters-the-market-with-stocksy/ (http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-57569639-93/istockphoto-founder-re-enters-the-market-with-stocksy/) . I wonder, recent episode of Sean Locke may be related to istocksy. It is a perfect reason to become afraid for other agency. In the same news, Rob Sylvan is also mentioned for the exit from the agency.
It has already been talked about lot. No harm in trying the venture. I am waiting for invitation absolutely with open arms and open mind.
-
I'd love to hear from someone who is not interested in Stocksy describe a startup that they would be interested in.
-
I'd love to hear from someone who is not interested in Stocksy describe a startup that they would be interested in.
Exactly. I'll say it again. While I may not have the privilege of being part of Stocksy, I am excited for those of you who will, and therefore wish them all the success in the world. And in the medium term, perhaps they will have a model that is a good fit for me. In the meantime, i will keep shooting and building my port.
-
I'd love to hear from someone who is not interested in Stocksy describe a startup that they would be interested in.
Everything that Stocksy appears to be but that is open to anyone based on portfolio review. I'm getting the impression based on the secretive nature of it so far that Stocksy will only be open to a select few.
Having said that I hope Stocksy is a huge success and kicks some serious butt as it relates to certain other agencies.
-
I'd love to hear from someone who is not interested in Stocksy describe a startup that they would be interested in.
Everything that Stocksy appears to be but that is open to anyone based on portfolio review. I'm getting the impression based on the secretive nature of it so far that Stocksy will only be open to a select few.
Having said that I hope Stocksy is a huge success and kicks some serious butt as it relates to certain other agencies.
I believe that their silence is simply that they don't have the strategy well defined yet. I personally think that they put up the FB page and "give us your email if you're interested" to test interest levels. And that was overwhelming. So while we assume we're not aligned to the strategy (me included), we'll just have to wait and see.
-
I believe that their silence is simply that they don't have the strategy well defined yet. I personally think that they put up the FB page and "give us your email if you're interested" to test interest levels. And that was overwhelming. So while we assume we're not aligned to the strategy (me included), we'll just have to wait and see.
I think the FB group went up as a response to the public "outing" of the site, so there'd be somewhere to answer what questions they could.
-
I believe that their silence is simply that they don't have the strategy well defined yet. I personally think that they put up the FB page and "give us your email if you're interested" to test interest levels. And that was overwhelming. So while we assume we're not aligned to the strategy (me included), we'll just have to wait and see.
I think the FB group went up as a response to the public "outing" of the site, so there'd be somewhere to answer what questions they could.
You'd know better than me! ;)
-
I believe that their silence is simply that they don't have the strategy well defined yet. I personally think that they put up the FB page and "give us your email if you're interested" to test interest levels. And that was overwhelming. So while we assume we're not aligned to the strategy (me included), we'll just have to wait and see.
I think the FB group went up as a response to the public "outing" of the site, so there'd be somewhere to answer what questions they could.
You'd know better than me! ;)
Sean may not be willing to disclose where he is going next. There are lot of people waiting to follow him. Sean has good market and I think will be welcome everywhere. for Stocksy, It seems to be going along the market strategy. They are in pre-launch mode. The preview mode is for testing the POC and showing investors how it is going to work. Invitation only, is a strategy which works.
-
Didn't Sean setup a Ktools site (accordstock?) to link to his istock port? He should just close that link asap and start his own agency. Like you said.. people are waiting to follow him. I'd follow him, esp if it damages Getty.
-
sorry guys.
even Digital Railroad had VCs, investors, backers, and money to invest and their slogan was "Photographer = Hero!".
But it didnt worked and it wasnt enough for buyers to jump ship.
Buyers are money conscious, they MUST BE !
Where's the tangible benefit for them if Stocksy is a co-op and pays fair prices to photographers ?
Clients all around the world are cutting budgets, all they need is even cheaper prices for photography and design, this is the trend everywhere including RM and assignments.
Stocksy will pay 50% but of what exactly ? selling cheaper than SS and IS so that you end up with 50% of nothing ?
-
I must say it makes me giggle: i can't help but equate this to Fair Trade - we are being offered a fair wage for our labour, which is not something that happens often in First World Countries.
Buyers may get some feel good vibes knowing they are supporting a company that supports artists.
-
I must say it makes me giggle: i can't help but equate this to Fair Trade - we are being offered a fair wage for our labour, which is not something that happens often in First World Countries.
Buyers may get some feel good vibes knowing they are supporting a company that supports artists.
I agree with you in that buyers, some anyhow, will migrate to Stocksy. However, if they only allow in high-end contributors, then the collection will be somewhat specialized, attracting only those buyers who have a need for that kind of content. Eventually, if Stocksy is going to get a big piece of share, they will have no choice but to broaden their collection to other not so special images.
-
.
-
I was actually rejected. Sounds like I am the only one who heard back? 8)
Oh well. I'm just waiting for SS to put in a BigStock style commission structure, and then I can finally close down all microstock accounts and be done with it. I've made my money but I think I've had enough of agencies.
-
Well if you got rejected there is little hope for a lot of people. Makes me less enthusiastic about it. Just being honest here. Great for the people that get accepted, but so many people were hoping for something new will be disappointed.
Sorry to hear about Warm Picture. Good luck for the future. Its a shame Google killed another business.
-
I am really excited about the possible success of stocksy.
It's a bit ironic how istock was created in response to Getty's closed door policy allowing the select few in. Now it seems that stocksy will start off that way in which i agree is the right approach. I am just speculating at this point.
-
I was actually rejected. Sounds like I am the only one who heard back? 8)
Oh, that's a shame. How did you hear? Did they email you? Do you know if they had viewed any of your photos anywhere? I've not heard anything, but then I only submitted my email address a few days ago. I doubt I stand much chance though, my portfolio is tiny. My motivation seems to have died over the last few years having to deal with all of the cr*p at iStock. It would be good to have a new agency to revitalise my motivation.
Sorry to hear about Warmpictures. As others have said, it all seems a bit cut-throat at the moment. I hope we can find some light at the end of the tunnel somewhere.
-
I was actually rejected. Sounds like I am the only one who heard back? 8)
Oh, that's a shame. How did you hear? Did they email you? Do you know if they had viewed any of your photos anywhere?
They emailed me. I had actually submitted 10 photos to them per their invitation. It was a standard application, like with SS or IS. I gave them several best sellers and a few colorful images which I liked, but they apparently fell flat. That's the way the cookie crumbles. :P
-
I was actually rejected. Sounds like I am the only one who heard back? 8)
What did you do? Send them a link to your port?
All I did was send them my email addy - I didn't see any way of doing anything else.
Ah, you answered while I was typing the above. I wonder how they picked the people to reply to. I fully expect that my port isn't what they want, but I didn't realise they were that far on. I just wanted more info on what their plans are.
-
Didnt even get an invitation, lol
-
@Sue - In my case the turnaround time from application to decision was probably 8 to 12 days. Not sure how long it takes to go from an email request for info to an application, however.
My port is pretty weak honestly. I didn't expect to get in, but I figured I had better try because a lot of other options are falling apart fast. Once it hits the fan with SS, the whole industry will be an utter waste of time for most of us.
-
At least you heard back. Sorry it was a no. Your work is great IMO, but maybe they plan to go for a particular niche or market?
I haven't heard back, but hadn't expected to until they are a bit further along.
-
Vector folks, don't expect to hear anything any time soon. I've been told that the illustration part of the site isn't even being worked on for a couple more months.
But they are going to be taking vectors. Just not right away.
-
Will they be taking video? Anybody knows?
-
No plans for video, afaik. Currently.
-
No plans for video, afaik. Currently.
Editorial, maybe? *fingers crossed*
-
I was actually rejected. Sounds like I am the only one who heard back? 8)
Oh, that's a shame. How did you hear? Did they email you? Do you know if they had viewed any of your photos anywhere?
They emailed me. I had actually submitted 10 photos to them per their invitation. It was a standard application, like with SS or IS. I gave them several best sellers and a few colorful images which I liked, but they apparently fell flat. That's the way the cookie crumbles. :P
that sounds a little odd, actually.
are you sure it was Stocksy? sounds like they are only having beta testers and not evaluating portfolios.
-
At least you heard back. Sorry it was a no. Your work is great IMO, but maybe they plan to go for a particular niche or market?
I haven't heard back, but hadn't expected to until they are a bit further along.
You are not alone. It looks like this is animal farm "co-op" situation for now where "all animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others". The key phrase is "founding photographers". You can be way above black diamond IS and be told "no thanks" from what I hear. Which means the "founding photographers" will be given certain advantages.
-
You are not alone. It looks like this is animal farm "co-op" situation for now where "all animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others". The key phrase is "founding photographers". You can be way above black diamond IS and be told "no thanks" from what I hear. Which means the "founding photographers" will be given certain advantages.
How can you be "way above black diamond IS"? Last time I checked that was the highest ranking possible.
The "certain advantages" that founding photographers might enjoy would probably include stumping up a lot of their own cash as start-up capital and giving much of their time for free, working behind the scenes.
-
Vectors will be accepted?
-
How can you be "way above black diamond IS"? Last time I checked that was the highest ranking possible.
There's a fair number of people, I think who've far exceeded the 200K needed for Black Diamond. I'm pretty sure that's what's meant here.
-
Vectors will be accepted?
Yes, eventually.
-
I thought leaving our email addy on the site at this stage was just to receive a bit more info about them.
If they invite you do they give you any information at all? Do they tell you how it will all work? Do they show you the terms of use and licencing details etc.?
So far it's all exciting and it all sounds great but there will be people like me who don't allow certain licencing terms. For example, I don't sell on sites that offer a print licence that allows reselling on PODs like CafePress or Zazzle (because I sell there and don't want others competing against me).
Anyone know a bit more detail about them?
I'm really excited about this site. Even if they didn't accept me or if I couldn't join for the reason above, I will still be very supportive of them.
-
I think everyone who is accepted get to invite up to 5 other people, this people need to pass inspection/curation before they get accepted.
They are NOT looking for regular stock photos. they are looking for "Vetta" and "Agency" type only, more or less.
Artsy photos also work.
-
I don't see me as having a snowball's chance in hell in getting in then. But I wish them the best of luck.
-
I think everyone who is accepted get to invite up to 5 other people, this people need to pass inspection/curation before they get accepted.
They are NOT looking for regular stock photos. they are looking for "Vetta" and "Agency" type only, more or less.
Artsy photos also work.
The great thing about that is it will give people who are not exclusive with IS somewhere to put those images. Sounds like a great opportunity :)
-
I think everyone who is accepted get to invite up to 5 other people, this people need to pass inspection/curation before they get accepted.
They are NOT looking for regular stock photos. they are looking for "Vetta" and "Agency" type only, more or less.
Artsy photos also work.
If that is the case then Stocksy will be ruling out 95%+ of contributors and/or their portfolios (and most probably same percentage of potential buyers too). It certainly has little or no chance of making a significant contribution to current microstock earnings with that plan. Most of the money spent on stock imagery is via simple images that illustrate their subject well rather than fancy 'photographic masterpieces'. There is a market for such stuff, especially at premium prices __ it's just a relatively small one.
-
A couple photos posted on Instagram @stocksyunited of filming something with Bruce today...
-
I think everyone who is accepted get to invite up to 5 other people, this people need to pass inspection/curation before they get accepted.
They are NOT looking for regular stock photos. they are looking for "Vetta" and "Agency" type only, more or less.
Artsy photos also work.
If that is the case then Stocksy will be ruling out 95%+ of contributors and/or their portfolios (and most probably same percentage of potential buyers too). It certainly has little or no chance of making a significant contribution to current microstock earnings with that plan. Most of the money spent on stock imagery is via simple images that illustrate their subject well rather than fancy 'photographic masterpieces'. There is a market for such stuff, especially at premium prices __ it's just a relatively small one.
Gostwyck, you are so wrong.
-
(http://distilleryimage0.instagram.com/0a4c2f387bbf11e2bf5322000a9f38c3_7.jpg)
http://instagram.com/p/V-SQCFTajM/ (http://instagram.com/p/V-SQCFTajM/)
-
If and when they accept me, I will upload images. If they sell some, I will upload more. If they don't accept me, I will not do anything.
-
If and when they accept me, I will upload images. If they sell some, I will upload more. If they don't accept me, I will not do anything.
that was deep, have you written it yourself? ;D
-
If that is the case then Stocksy will be ruling out 95%+ of contributors and/or their portfolios (and most probably same percentage of potential buyers too). It certainly has little or no chance of making a significant contribution to current microstock earnings with that plan...
There's a site called ClipartOf, which is a highly selective vector graphics and clipart agency. Selective in terms of "portfolios that fill a need/niche" and not necessarily just who's the best. They have a very small number of contributors, and don't take on new ones. I've tried to get in there, many times, without any luck. Although that's probably due in part to a little forum fight Jamie and I got into a while back.
Anyway, from what I hear, artists there do very well. Some people have earnings there that rival their earnings at SS.
Just because something is done in a system that's counter to what we're used to, that's never an indicator that something will fail. In fact, I'm kind of surprised that the method of doing things differently isn't embraced more around here. It's almost like the only thing people will get on board with is something that's exactly like something else they already know. Don't we have enough of that already?
I don't know if Bruce and his team will have an interest in my work, but regardless, I say good for them for doing it their own way. I'd love to be a part of it, but if I'm not a good fit, I get it and I will still watch with great interest to see where they take things in the coming months and years.
-
If that is the case then Stocksy will be ruling out 95%+ of contributors and/or their portfolios (and most probably same percentage of potential buyers too). It certainly has little or no chance of making a significant contribution to current microstock earnings with that plan...
There's a site called ClipartOf, which is a highly selective vector graphics and clipart agency. Selective in terms of "portfolios that fill a need/niche" and not necessarily just who's the best. They have a very small number of contributors, and don't take on new ones. I've tried to get in there, many times, without any luck. Although that's probably due in part to a little forum fight Jamie and I got into a while back.
Anyway, from what I hear, artists there do very well. Some people have earnings there that rival their earnings at SS.
Just because something is done in a system that's counter to what we're used to, that's never an indicator that something will fail. In fact, I'm kind of surprised that the method of doing things differently isn't embraced more around here. It's almost like the only thing people will get on board with is something that's exactly like something else they already know. Don't we have enough of that already?
I don't know if Bruce and his team will have an interest in my work, but regardless, I say good for them for doing it their own way. I'd love to be a part of it, but if I'm not a good fit, I get it and I will still watch with great interest to see where they take things in the coming months and years.
I'm one of those people at Clipartof. It is a great site, and the earnings have been strong. I wish there were more sites out there like it. Not just for me, but for others. It's an interesting concept of keeping the site with a limited number of contributors that fill a particular need on the site.
People talk about being exclusive to agencies, but don't mention that maybe the agencies should be somewhat exclusive to them as well. There are a lot of interesting concepts out there for micro sites, and hopefully more new sites will step outside the box to explore those. With so many contributors, there is probably no one method that is going to work best.
-
The key phrase is "founding photographers". You can be way above black diamond IS and be told "no thanks" from what I hear. Which means the "founding photographers" will be given certain advantages.
If I was Bruce I would say 'no thanks' to all contributors, included black diamonds, posted all "exited" "F5" "great news" in iStockapocalypse thread. Is simply disgusting. How these people could participate to this masquerade after what has been done to SjLocke (aka Robin Hood)?
-
I think everyone who is accepted get to invite up to 5 other people, this people need to pass inspection/curation before they get accepted.
They are NOT looking for regular stock photos. they are looking for "Vetta" and "Agency" type only, more or less.
Artsy photos also work.
If that is the case then Stocksy will be ruling out 95%+ of contributors and/or their portfolios (and most probably same percentage of potential buyers too). It certainly has little or no chance of making a significant contribution to current microstock earnings with that plan. Most of the money spent on stock imagery is via simple images that illustrate their subject well rather than fancy 'photographic masterpieces'. There is a market for such stuff, especially at premium prices __ it's just a relatively small one.
Gostwyck, you are so wrong.
That's what you told me when you went exclusive __ only to change your mind a couple of years later! Time will tell, as usual.
-
How these people could participate to this masquerade after what has been done to SjLocke (aka Robin Hood)?
Because he's no Robin Hood.
I'm 100% with Getty on this story.
You can not blackmail the company who's feeding you.
You signed a contract, if you dont like it move elsewhere or start your own agency.
-
I think everyone who is accepted get to invite up to 5 other people, this people need to pass inspection/curation before they get accepted.
They are NOT looking for regular stock photos. they are looking for "Vetta" and "Agency" type only, more or less.
Artsy photos also work.
If that is the case then Stocksy will be ruling out 95%+ of contributors and/or their portfolios (and most probably same percentage of potential buyers too). It certainly has little or no chance of making a significant contribution to current microstock earnings with that plan. Most of the money spent on stock imagery is via simple images that illustrate their subject well rather than fancy 'photographic masterpieces'. There is a market for such stuff, especially at premium prices __ it's just a relatively small one.
I disagree. Do you think there's any point in having yet another site with images that look the same as all the others? That's part of the problem with the istock exclusive collection, lots of it is very similar to non-exclusive images on other sites. I've not used many niche sites but I have seen people reporting that some of them do quite well. If they have a smaller collection of images, they wont need too many buyers to keep their contributors happy. That's another big problem with new sites, they get swamped with images and then never attract enough buyers, the sales get spread too thin.
I think a significant number of buyers would like an exclusive Vetta style site, without having to wade through millions of images that they've seen everywhere else. Of course lots will be happy with what they have already and anyone starting a new site has a big task but I'm pleased to see that this one has a USP.
-
I'm just a bit confused as to why they called it 'Stocksy' if they want more artistic stuff. Why didn't they call it 'Artsy' instead? :)
But anyway... if the first submissions are rejected, and if there's enough information in the rejections and emerging galleries for us to learn from and create work that's a better 'fit', we can just do that can't we?
If some shooters have no background in arts and/or struggle to find a more artistic eye, then they can work on developing that. If it's worth it and they want it enough, people can learn and adapt.
-
How is the invite sent? From other photographers or from the Stocksy only?
I think I'm not qualified for their wish levels, I didn't even get an invite. :0(
-
If you scroll down on this page, you can enter your email address to be added to their list. I've only heard of one person so far that's had an actual reply though. Most are still waiting.
http://www.stocksy.com/ (http://www.stocksy.com/)
-
I have already done that, anyway thanks for the tip. ;0)
-
Oops! Sorry. I misunderstood. :)
-
Is that it? Stock-Artsy=Stocksy? Therefore V+A style images?
-
Aha! You may have a great point there! :)
-
How these people could participate to this masquerade after what has been done to SjLocke (aka Robin Hood)?
Because he's no Robin Hood.
I'm 100% with Getty on this story.
You can not blackmail the company who's feeding you.
You signed a contract, if you dont like it move elsewhere or start your own agency.
In no way was what Sean did 'blackmail'. It's called whistle-blowing. He told contributors that Getty was selling their images contrary to contract, especially as there were no restrictions on the use of model-released images, contrary to the model release and the terms and conditions of use from the agency they were first issued to.
-
How these people could participate to this masquerade after what has been done to SjLocke (aka Robin Hood)?
Because he's no Robin Hood.
I'm 100% with Getty on this story.
You can not blackmail the company who's feeding you.
You signed a contract, if you dont like it move elsewhere or start your own agency.
CONTRACT IS TWO PARTIES AGREEMENT !!!
-
Plus, its not because something is stated in a contract that its automatically valid by the law. They might just as well put in it they'll kill our firstborns, doesn't make it valid.
-
In no way was what Sean did 'blackmail'. It's called whistle-blowing. He told contributors that Getty was selling their images contrary to contract, especially as there were no restrictions on the use of model-released images, contrary to the model release and the terms and conditions of use from the agency they were first issued to.
And actually, initially, I was asking about it, because I wouldn't have thought such a dumb agreement would have been something set up by our Agent, and that Google was stealing the images or doing something illegal.
-
A bad move from Stocksy would be to refuse too much contributors. They don't want a bunch of frustated photographers to talk against them, specially in the beginning.
Being picky on images selection is something acceptable, but being picky on photographers is a no-no ...
The more photographers they will have, the bigger the social network and free publicity that goes with it will be...
-
A bad move from Stocksy would be to refuse too much contributors. They don't want a bunch of frustated photographers to talk against them, specially in the beginning.
Being picky on images selection is something acceptable, but being picky on photographers is a no-no...
According to who? They have no obligation to satisfy some minimum acceptance rate you believe to be fair. They don't own you anything, nor do you have any right to expect anything from them.
If you aren't asked to join, are you going to whine about it here?
-
A bad move from Stocksy would be to refuse too much contributors. They don't want a bunch of frustated photographers to talk against them, specially in the beginning.
Being picky on images selection is something acceptable, but being picky on photographers is a no-no ...
The more photographers they will have, the bigger the social network and free publicity that goes with it will be...
Couldn't agree more. Istock's success was built on a platform of 'crowd-sourcing' and accepting everyone who could pass the entry test. A huge number of contributors are also image buyers and/or highly influential in which agencies that those lucrative corporate accounts are opened.
-
Maybe it would be 'acceptance by connections', then. 8)
-
A bad move from Stocksy would be to refuse too much contributors. They don't want a bunch of frustated photographers to talk against them, specially in the beginning.
Being picky on images selection is something acceptable, but being picky on photographers is a no-no...
According to who? They have no obligation to satisfy some minimum acceptance rate you believe to be fair. They don't own you anything, nor do you have any right to expect anything from them.
If you aren't asked to join, are you going to whine about it here?
Well, if they are my competitor, I just might... and not just here.
-
How is the invite sent? From other photographers or from the Stocksy only?
I think I'm not qualified for their wish levels, I didn't even get an invite. :0(
If your name is not on their radar, then you will not get a response. It really goes back to your relationship to the founder and the small group that has been formed. Very few will be "founding photographers". As far as an artsy type place that is not in line with Sean's great commercial work.
-
A bad move from Stocksy would be to refuse too much contributors. They don't want a bunch of frustated photographers to talk against them, specially in the beginning.
Being picky on images selection is something acceptable, but being picky on photographers is a no-no ...
The more photographers they will have, the bigger the social network and free publicity that goes with it will be...
Couldn't agree more. Istock's success was built on a platform of 'crowd-sourcing' and accepting everyone who could pass the entry test. A huge number of contributors are also image buyers and/or highly influential in which agencies that those lucrative corporate accounts are opened.
+1 for both
ps: just because I agree at a comment in a topic doesn't mean I will agree on everything Buzz will say, anyway you guys can bring minus, not worried!
-
I don't think anyone should take a non-acceptance as an indication you didn't have enough nights out with someone.
-
A bad move from Stocksy would be to refuse too much contributors. They don't want a bunch of frustated photographers to talk against them, specially in the beginning.
Being picky on images selection is something acceptable, but being picky on photographers is a no-no ...
The more photographers they will have, the bigger the social network and free publicity that goes with it will be...
Couldn't agree more. Istock's success was built on a platform of 'crowd-sourcing' and accepting everyone who could pass the entry test. A huge number of contributors are also image buyers and/or highly influential in which agencies that those lucrative corporate accounts are opened.
Until the details of what Stocksy is (or isn't) are made public, this is all conjecture. Bruce is known for coming up with great ideas that are not the same as the 'status quo.' How you become a part of Stocksy may have to do with your image style, your time in the industry, your acceptance rate or the amount of money in your bank account. No one knows right now (except the Stocksy founders doing the planning). To start jumping in and saying what they are doing right or wrong is just silly given that none of their business plan has been made public.
-
Let's be realistic:
How many exclusives (that were not kicked out) will be interested?
- Not much, hey, they don't have any sales after all, and it could take a couple of years before they see any relevant ones. I don't see anyone leaving exclusivity just for them right now (i'm exclusive).
How many independants?
- If they want "files exclusivity", independants will have to give them exclusive files, and take the chance of losing money they would have made, with these files, on others sites.
- If they don't care about exclusivity, they will have to compete against Shutterstock pricings, ouch...not good !!
-
Well if you got rejected there is little hope for a lot of people. Makes me less enthusiastic about it. Just being honest here. Great for the people that get accepted, but so many people were hoping for something new will be disappointed.
Sorry to hear about Warm Picture. Good luck for the future. Its a shame Google killed another business.
Blaming Google search is a poor excuse. There are 800 more small sites, did Google kill them to?
-
I don't see anyone leaving exclusivity just for them right now (i'm exclusive).
You are assuming it is RF. Suppose they introduce a single or limited use self service RM licence.
-
I don't see anyone leaving exclusivity just for them right now (i'm exclusive).
You are assuming it is RF. Suppose they introduce a single or limited use self service RM licence.
You're right. But still, I would not put my best files there as RM, when I know they would probably sell more on Istock.
-
.
-
- If they don't care about exclusivity, they will have to compete against Shutterstock pricings, ouch...not good !!
yep SS sucks, what is good anyway? ;D
-
...If you aren't asked to join, are you going to whine about it here?
Well, if they are my competitor, I just might... and not just here.
Wow. That's really petty.
I always was impressed by the fact that we're all competitors and yet we all still choose to share information and help each other in this forum. Thanks for the reminder that some folks around here are still always looking to stick a knife in someone's back just because someone might have success where they can't.
-
...If you aren't asked to join, are you going to whine about it here?
Well, if they are my competitor, I just might... and not just here.
Wow. That's really petty.
I always was impressed by the fact that we're all competitors and yet we all still choose to share information and help each other in this forum. Thanks for the reminder that some folks around here are still always looking to stick a knife in someone's back just because someone might have success where they can't.
At different levels, we all do.
Just like you and me ...
-
I don't think anyone should take a non-acceptance as an indication you didn't have enough nights out with someone.
It would be nice to believe this, but I know how cliquish istock was at its founding. What is the reason for not accepting a world class stock photographer at this stage.
-
I don't think anyone should take a non-acceptance as an indication you didn't have enough nights out with someone.
It would be nice to believe this, but I know how cliquish istock was at its fouding. What is the reason for not accepting a world class stock photographer at this stage.
If I was at their place I would accept every conttributors without any test. It would raise quickly the site access rating on Alexa and Google. They can always be picky on images....
Just like Facebook did..
-
I don't think anyone should take a non-acceptance as an indication you didn't have enough nights out with someone.
It would be nice to believe this, but I know how cliquish istock was at its fouding. What is the reason for not accepting a world class stock photographer at this stage.
who?
-
If I was at their place I would accept every conttributors without any test. It would raise quickly the site access rating on Alexa and Google. They can always be picky on images....
Just like Facebook did..
Facebook only opened up gradually to the public. At first it was a clique.
-
If I was at their place I would accept every conttributors without any test. It would raise quickly the site access rating on Alexa and Google. They can always be picky on images....
Just like Facebook did..
Facebook only opened up gradually to the public. At first it was a clique.
Maybe not like Facebook then... like Istock....lol
-
I don't think anyone should take a non-acceptance as an indication you didn't have enough nights out with someone.
It would be nice to believe this, but I know how cliquish istock was at its fouding. What is the reason for not accepting a world class stock photographer at this stage.
If I was at their place I would accept every conttributors without any test. It would raise quickly the site access rating on Alexa and Google. They can always be picky on images....
Just like Facebook did..
With a smaller team, it may be easier to use the contributor level as a gatekeeper, then trying to pick through images to find what fits, if you know what I mean.
-
I don't think anyone should take a non-acceptance as an indication you didn't have enough nights out with someone.
It would be nice to believe this, but I know how cliquish istock was at its fouding. What is the reason for not accepting a world class stock photographer at this stage.
If I was at their place I would accept every conttributors without any test. It would raise quickly the site access rating on Alexa and Google. They can always be picky on images....
Just like Facebook did..
With a smaller team, it may be easier to use the contributor level as a gatekeeper, then trying to pick through images to find what fits, if you know what I mean.
I know what you mean, but easier doesn't always mean better... sometime that hard way is the right one.
-
I know what you mean, but easier doesn't always mean better... sometime that hard way is the right one.
True, not always, but easier is very often better.
Not that I'd be expecting an invite from these guys now or ever, but we have to consider that they have credentials in the business and are not stupid. In order to succeed they are going to have to come up with an approach that is very different to what is there already (or it will be just another low earning startup) and that difference can't really depend solely on the content. It will be interesting to see what happens.
-
I'm just curious how they would be able to identify various photographers from their e-mail address alone? Purely speculation, but I'd think they would send a questionnaire to everyone who expressed an interest and sent in their e-mail address. Carefully crafted questions could easily and quickly identify those individuals whom they would be interested in looking at further. Perhaps request a link to their portfolios on other sites to get a flavor of their technical and artistic abilities as well as their breadth of experience. Only after this "pre-screening" would an invitation be sent to those whom they wished to include on the site.
-
In no way was what Sean did 'blackmail'. It's called whistle-blowing. He told contributors that Getty was selling their images contrary to contract, especially as there were no restrictions on the use of model-released images, contrary to the model release and the terms and conditions of use from the agency they were first issued to.
And actually, initially, I was asking about it, because I wouldn't have thought such a dumb agreement would have been something set up by our Agent, and that Google was stealing the images or doing something illegal.
But they're not your agent, are they? They're your distributor and you agreed to that. From a relationship and legal point of view, it changed everything.
I'm still quite shocked that people signed the new ASA. I know their lawyer there convinced everyone that changing their position from 'agent' to 'distributor' was a formality by telling everyone in that Q&A forum that the relationship won't change. Still... how did people trust them after years of them proving they're untrustworthy? There should have been a huge backlash then with people refusing to sign it and pulling their ports. D-Day should have happened then.
The majority of contributors are too trusting. I remember a while ago in this forum, I had people here calling me a liar when I said that I go over each agent's legal docs with a fine tooth comb before making a decision to join them... it was the main reason why I didn't join IS. People were responding with comments like "come on, who really reads the terms and conditions?" lol. I was surprised that so many people were so gullible. What iStock did with Google Drive was appalling but still... I would have expected that they would pull something like that as a distributor.
I'm not defending iStock but I do put some of the blame back onto the contributors who defended them for years despite there being loads of signs that they didn't have their best interests in mind. So many of you (including you, Sean) believe that they're incompetent rather than malicious... even now. How can you believe that after Google Drive and after they booted you for complaining about it?
-
I don't think anyone should take a non-acceptance as an indication you didn't have enough nights out with someone.
....I could catch up with some nights out...drinks for accounts!!! 8)
But seriously...I think we are speculating waaay too much! We have NO real information at hand. Only a bunch of Contributors that dig through the psychological process of digesting a potential rejection or non-response (me included) vs. the hope for infinite economic success on a new site. Lets give em some time to come public with some presentation.....
-
I've just read the T&C of the current favourite agency, and just like iStock, there are clauses in there which look fairly innocent, but could be interpreted just like iS chose to interpret their contract, to the surprise of those who chose it.
I'd expect that most contracts are sufficiently broad and vague on the agency side so that they can do whatever they right, while tight and rigid about what the contributors have to agree to.
-
But they're not your agent, are they? They're your distributor and you agreed to that. From a relationship and legal point of view, it changed everything.
Sorry, I meant the capital "A" as a bit of sarcasm. If pushed, I doubt a legal entity would find that we common folk would know any difference between the terms.
-
I don't think anyone should take a non-acceptance as an indication you didn't have enough nights out with someone.
It would be nice to believe this, but I know how cliquish istock was at its fouding. What is the reason for not accepting a world class stock photographer at this stage.
With a smaller team, it may be easier to use the contributor level as a gatekeeper, then trying to pick through images to find what fits, if you know what I mean.
Really, that is why I have to go with the clique on this one!!
-
But they're not your agent, are they? They're your distributor and you agreed to that. From a relationship and legal point of view, it changed everything.
Sorry, I meant the capital "A" as a bit of sarcasm. If pushed, I doubt a legal entity would find that we common folk would know any difference between the terms.
Perhaps however you're out of luck there too since they noted the difference in the same Q&A forum. Still think they're incompetent? I reckon they knew exactly what they were doing. They relied on your (not yours personally) loyalty. They knew contributors would be relaxed about the new ASA. I'm baffled as to why they were, though. I doubt any of them would be that lax about signing any agreement which involved any other large asset they own... like their house.
Contributors are generally too trusting and loyal. Even now with Stocksy... why are people wanting to get in the door without knowing what they're about, without seeing their legal terms? So far they sound great but how do we know if they're worth joining? Are people just trusting Livingstone because he's the founder of iStock? Hasn't any learnt anything after iStock? Don't trust anyone. It's business... look after your side of it and read and understand the contracts before agreeing to anything.
-
.
-
Perhaps however you're out of luck there too since they noted the difference in the same Q&A forum. Still think they're incompetent? I reckon they knew exactly what they were doing. They relied on your (not yours personally) loyalty. They knew contributors would be relaxed about the new ASA. I'm baffled as to why they were, though. I doubt any of them would be that lax about signing any agreement which involved any other large asset they own... like their house.
Contributors are generally too trusting and loyal. Even now with Stocksy... why are people wanting to get in the door without knowing what they're about, without seeing their legal terms? So far they sound great but how do we know if they're worth joining? Are people just trusting Livingstone because he's the founder of iStock? Hasn't any learnt anything after iStock? Don't trust anyone. It's business... look after your side of it and read and understand the contracts before agreeing to anything.
You realize that the choice was take it or leave it, just like it says in Shutterstock's terms. " IF YOU DO NOT AGREE WITH ANY OF THE CHANGES PLEASE REMOVE ALL OR THAT PORTION OF YOUR SUBMITTED CONTENT TO WHICH YOU DO NOT WISH THE CHANGES TO APPLY FROM THE SHUTTERSTOCK WEBSITE." People "agreed" to the terms because they wanted to keep licensing their content on Istock, simple as that. Like you said this is about business, not loyalty, trust or agreeing with everything in the contract.
Of course I realise it. They chose to stay, they agreed to everything in the contract. They took the risk and got shafted. That's exactly my point... they have to accept some responsibility for staying on.
-
Contributors are generally too trusting and loyal. Even now with Stocksy... why are people wanting to get in the door without knowing what they're about, without seeing their legal terms? So far they sound great but how do we know if they're worth joining? Are people just trusting Livingstone because he's the founder of iStock? Hasn't any learnt anything after iStock? Don't trust anyone. It's business... look after your side of it and read and understand the contracts before agreeing to anything.
I think that you're simplifying things a little. It's all very well to tell people to stop dealing with a company if you don't like their terms and conditions, and in an ideal world we all would. But this is reality, and the reality was that many contributors there had thousands of images exclusively with iStock, and relied on them as their sole source of income. It would have been a huge financial burden for them to pull those images and start all over again with other agencies (who probably also have some dubious term and conditions of their own). So many made the choice to stay and see what happened. OK, they may have been caught out this time, but from my point of view, my iStock earnings are so much more than I'd get at the other agencies, that it was certainly a gamble worth taking.
-
Perhaps however you're out of luck there too since they noted the difference in the same Q&A forum. Still think they're incompetent? I reckon they knew exactly what they were doing. They relied on your (not yours personally) loyalty. They knew contributors would be relaxed about the new ASA. I'm baffled as to why they were, though. I doubt any of them would be that lax about signing any agreement which involved any other large asset they own... like their house.
Contributors are generally too trusting and loyal. Even now with Stocksy... why are people wanting to get in the door without knowing what they're about, without seeing their legal terms? So far they sound great but how do we know if they're worth joining? Are people just trusting Livingstone because he's the founder of iStock? Hasn't any learnt anything after iStock? Don't trust anyone. It's business... look after your side of it and read and understand the contracts before agreeing to anything.
You realize that the choice was take it or leave it, just like it says in Shutterstock's terms. " IF YOU DO NOT AGREE WITH ANY OF THE CHANGES PLEASE REMOVE ALL OR THAT PORTION OF YOUR SUBMITTED CONTENT TO WHICH YOU DO NOT WISH THE CHANGES TO APPLY FROM THE SHUTTERSTOCK WEBSITE." People "agreed" to the terms because they wanted to keep licensing their content on Istock, simple as that. Like you said this is about business, not loyalty, trust or agreeing with everything in the contract.
So, leave it. Dont sign it if because you dont want to lose the money, but then complain when the crap hits the fan. Sorry, but that just a lame excuse.
You signed it, you live by it. Take it or leave it.
But its money, people. Money creates greed. People dont want to give up the money and sign it, even tho it will bite them in the ass. Its the power of money.
-
Contributors are generally too trusting and loyal. Even now with Stocksy... why are people wanting to get in the door without knowing what they're about, without seeing their legal terms? So far they sound great but how do we know if they're worth joining? Are people just trusting Livingstone because he's the founder of iStock? Hasn't any learnt anything after iStock? Don't trust anyone. It's business... look after your side of it and read and understand the contracts before agreeing to anything.
I think that you're simplifying things a little. It's all very well to tell people to stop dealing with a company if you don't like their terms and conditions, and in an ideal world we all would. But this is reality, and the reality was that many contributors there had thousands of images exclusively with iStock, and relied on them as their sole source of income. It would have been a huge financial burden for them to pull those images and start all over again with other agencies (who probably also have some dubious term and conditions of their own). So many made the choice to stay and see what happened. OK, they may have been caught out this time, but from my point of view, my iStock earnings are so much more than I'd get at the other agencies, that it was certainly a gamble worth taking.
Those are the magic words, they took the gamble. And they lost. You cant blame ANYONE but yourself.
-
.
-
And when one of your agencies chooses to use some clause in their contract in a way you never foresaw, will you be so happy?
Bear in mind, Getty undeniably broke their side of the agreement by selling released photos from iStock contributors using iStock releases, on Google without any protection for the models. They broke the terms and conditions.
-
Perhaps however you're out of luck there too since they noted the difference in the same Q&A forum. Still think they're incompetent? I reckon they knew exactly what they were doing. They relied on your (not yours personally) loyalty. They knew contributors would be relaxed about the new ASA. I'm baffled as to why they were, though. I doubt any of them would be that lax about signing any agreement which involved any other large asset they own... like their house.
Contributors are generally too trusting and loyal. Even now with Stocksy... why are people wanting to get in the door without knowing what they're about, without seeing their legal terms? So far they sound great but how do we know if they're worth joining? Are people just trusting Livingstone because he's the founder of iStock? Hasn't any learnt anything after iStock? Don't trust anyone. It's business... look after your side of it and read and understand the contracts before agreeing to anything.
You realize that the choice was take it or leave it, just like it says in Shutterstock's terms. " IF YOU DO NOT AGREE WITH ANY OF THE CHANGES PLEASE REMOVE ALL OR THAT PORTION OF YOUR SUBMITTED CONTENT TO WHICH YOU DO NOT WISH THE CHANGES TO APPLY FROM THE SHUTTERSTOCK WEBSITE." People "agreed" to the terms because they wanted to keep licensing their content on Istock, simple as that. Like you said this is about business, not loyalty, trust or agreeing with everything in the contract.
So, leave it. Dont sign it if because you dont want to lose the money, but then complain when the crap hits the fan. Sorry, but that just a lame excuse.
You signed it, you live by it. Take it or leave it.
But its money, people. Money creates greed. People dont want to give up the money and sign it, even tho it will bite them in the ass. Its the power of money.
There is a big difference between someone with a couple hundred images making 50 bucks a month choosing to delete their portfolio and someone making 300,000 dollars with 10,000 images choosing to delete 95% of their income. It's very easy to choose for some people and nearly impossible for others. I guess money isn't very important to you so whenever you disagree with something at work you can quit and when you don't like the terms of a stock site you can just quit that too without giving it a second thought, you are in a different position than many of us.
It is important to me, money, and I would sign the thing as well. But I am greedy. And I am complaining as well, but I know I can only blame me. Thats the point.
By the way, if I dont like my job, I leave, have done it twice and only worked in my advantage. I wont do anything I dont like. But I am sure people stick a few minuses on this post. People are afraid of people who take their fate in their own hands. I do what I like, I work to live. Scary, isnt it.
-
Those are the magic words, they took the gamble. And they lost. You cant blame ANYONE but yourself.
What makes you think that I've lost anything? I've lost nothing at all. None of my images were used in the Google deal and, so far, I haven't been chucked off the site.
However, I do have sympathy for those that have had this happen to them and, from my point of view, it is now a gamble that is no longer worth taking. The odds have changed, that's all.
-
Those are the magic words, they took the gamble. And they lost. You cant blame ANYONE but yourself.
What makes you think that I've lost anything? I've lost nothing at all. None of my images were used in the Google deal and, so far, I haven't been chucked off the site.
However, I do have sympathy for those that have had this happen to them and, from my point of view, it is now a gamble that is no longer worth taking. The odds have changed, that's all.
I have sympathy for everyone that got hurt one way or another as well. I am just giving you my thoughts on the matter.
Seriously, how can you sign a contract and then complain afterwards?
I signed a contract with my new employer, and there is a few things in there I dont like, but I signed it and will deal with it.
-
And when one of your agencies chooses to use some clause in their contract in a way you never foresaw, will you be so happy?
Bear in mind, Getty undeniably broke their side of the agreement by selling released photos from iStock contributors using iStock releases, on Google without any protection for the models. They broke the terms and conditions.
No I wouldnt be, but I wasnt talking about that. That whole getty deal was just about shafting people. Everyone is in their right to complain about a contract being broken.
-
I have sympathy for everyone that got hurt one way or another as well. I am just giving you my thoughts on the matter.
Seriously, how can you sign a contract and then complain afterwards?
I signed a contract with my new employer, and there is a few things in there I dont like, but I signed it and will deal with it.
I haven't been complaining. I have stated that I'm unhappy with what they done, both with the Google deal and by giving Sean and Rob the boot. So, I'll look to move on soon.
I don't want to spend my life reading legal documents, trying decipher them and then thinking of the worst case scenarios that could possibly develop. If things look ok, then I'll trust that they are ok. If something comes to light which shows that the agreement is being abused in any way, then I'll reassess. That's the situation I'm in now.
Getting this back on thread, I'd do exactly the same with Stocksy or any of the other sites - trust them until they show they're not to be trusted. Why cut yourself out of things over something that may never happen?
-
I Wasnt talking about you specific but in general.
But if you dont have time to read through a contract...
and I doubt reading a contract will take up all your time in life. How long does it take to read a contract? 15 minutes.
Anyhoo, enough off topic rambling, I am off to bed. My sister and my nephew are visiting me in Dublin tomorrow for the weekend.
Cheers.
-
Contributors are generally too trusting and loyal. Even now with Stocksy... why are people wanting to get in the door without knowing what they're about, without seeing their legal terms? So far they sound great but how do we know if they're worth joining? Are people just trusting Livingstone because he's the founder of iStock? Hasn't any learnt anything after iStock? Don't trust anyone. It's business... look after your side of it and read and understand the contracts before agreeing to anything.
I think that you're simplifying things a little. It's all very well to tell people to stop dealing with a company if you don't like their terms and conditions, and in an ideal world we all would. But this is reality, and the reality was that many contributors there had thousands of images exclusively with iStock, and relied on them as their sole source of income. It would have been a huge financial burden for them to pull those images and start all over again with other agencies (who probably also have some dubious term and conditions of their own). So many made the choice to stay and see what happened. OK, they may have been caught out this time, but from my point of view, my iStock earnings are so much more than I'd get at the other agencies, that it was certainly a gamble worth taking.
I didn’t say it was an easy decision to make but if you sign on company as your agent to handle your income producing asset and they then turn around and say ‘hey, I will no longer be your agent, I will now be your distributor and the contract of your images will be between iStock and the buyer’, shouldn’t that ring alarm bells to at least protest about it?
I do, I get it... this is about contributors’ greed. They decided to stay on and take the risk hoping they’ll continue to get a higher return. What I’m saying is... don’t complain when iStock make business decisions based on greed when you yourself base your business decisions on greed. Don’t complain if the investment flops and you luck out (I don't mean you personally, I'm talking about the ones complaining). If you invest your entire [financial] stock portfolio into one single company that offered the highest return and then one day their stocks plummeted, from the investor’s point of view, who’s fault would that be, the company’s alone?
I’m not saying that the decision to stay was necessarily a bad one because for the large exclusive contributors, they made a killing. What I’m saying is, you have to accept some responsibility for taking the risk with iStock. Like you said (and what I’m saying) it was a gamble and you all thought it was worth it. Do you still think it was worth it, knowing they can now add your files in Google Drive (possibly legally) for up to a year after you leave them... that you could lose your entire portfolio? Was it really worth making all that money just to possibly end up losing everything? I’ll say yes, it was worth it, right until they changed the ASA and stopped being your agent... the risk to stay on after that was far too great. But you know how it goes... people ignore the disaster waiting in the distance when they have dollar signs flashing before their eyes.
I still feel for all iStock contributors but if they don’t realise that they F'ed up, they’ll likely make the same mistake with the next ‘agent’.
-
So which companies have the contracts that can't be interpreted to suit their evil ends, should they wish to do so?
The ones which are in plain, unambiguous language?
-
Forget it Sunny Mars, you are only allowed here to follow the masses. If you are not sheep you get banned and minussed, even tho whatever you are saying makes sense.
-
So which companies have the contracts that can't be interpreted to suit their evil ends, should they wish to do so?
The ones which are in plain, unambiguous language?
Not one, and I signed them all. ;-)
-
I do, I get it... this is about contributors’ greed.
No, for some it was about being able to continue feeding their family and putting a roof over their heads.
-
Those are the magic words, they took the gamble. And they lost. You cant blame ANYONE but yourself.
What makes you think that I've lost anything? I've lost nothing at all. None of my images were used in the Google deal and, so far, I haven't been chucked off the site.
However, I do have sympathy for those that have had this happen to them and, from my point of view, it is now a gamble that is no longer worth taking. The odds have changed, that's all.
How do you know that you haven't lost anything? This is the thing, meldayus, no one knows what's in there and what's terrible is that they can continue to add files for 12 months after you leave. You're not even in a legal position to demand to know what's in there because the legal agreement of the files on GD is between Google and iStock. How do you know that some other deal like Google Drive doesn't exist? As your distributor, they don't legally even have to tell you... basically, from a legal standpoint, it's none of your business anymore. You all agreed to this.
Honestly, I feel sick to my stomach knowing the power that you've given them. It makes me feel sick knowing how badly this will effect people's livelihoods. I just wish I could go back in time and slap some sense into some of you for agreeing to the new ASA.
Really, I'm on your side. I just want people to acknowledge that they were responsible for signing the new ASA so that they don't make the same mistake with Stocksy or any other 'agent'. I'm just begging people to read any contract carefully before agreeing to anything. That's all.
-
I do, I get it... this is about contributors’ greed.
No, for some it was about being able to continue feeding their family and putting a roof over their heads.
Yeah, sorry, I don't buy that. There are lots of ways to feed families and put a roof over their heads.
Anyway, just read and make sure you understand the friggen contracts before signing anything... cause if you don't, your families might end up starving one day... that's all :)
-
Dont you dare have a mind of your own here. Where is this place hosted, North Korea?
-
Anyway, just read and make sure you understand the friggen contracts before signing anything... cause if you don't, your families might end up starving one day... that's all :)
I repeat:
Which companies have the contracts that can't be interpreted to suit their evil ends, should they wish to do so?
The ones which are in plain, unambiguous language?
-
.
-
I just wish I could go back in time and slap some sense into some of you for agreeing to the new ASA.
Really? Some people rely on the money they make from stock, they have children in college, they have mortgages, they need insurance, they have medical problems and cutting out tens of thousands of dollars a year could jeopardize any number of very important things. You think the possibility of a few images on Google Drive years in the future is worth giving up your house? Maybe you can make your stand against a bad ASA that may one day may come back to bite you or maybe not by taking your child out of college? Someone needs some sense...
There are a zillion other ways to make money with a camera. Are you all suffering from Stockholm Syndrome or what?
Calimero, ever heard of him? I is small and them are big, and thats not fair.
I am really sorry but you sound like there is no other way on this planet to make money other then with Istock.
Honestly, its the same as changing jobs, everyone does it. So why cant you?
Someone needs some balls.
-
Anyway, just read and make sure you understand the friggen contracts before signing anything... cause if you don't, your families might end up starving one day... that's all :)
I repeat:
Which companies have the contracts that can't be interpreted to suit their evil ends, should they wish to do so?
The ones which are in plain, unambiguous language?
True Sue, a lot of them are ambiguous but they pointed out the difference between an agent and a distributor. They pointed out to you guys that when an image is licenced the contract is between the buyer and iStock. As an agent they had fiduciary duties to you and so legally had to look after your best interests. As your agent, it didn't matter how ambiguous their contract was... they still had to abide by the law. But now, geez, I don't even want to think about what they can do now.
Like I said, I'm still on your side. If they were your agent, I'd still be here everyday tweeting, raising awareness on Facebook like I was before. I was under the impression they were your agent and broke the law... but now I'm not so sure. All I can do now is hope that a small meteor slams into iStock's servers or wherever they store your files.
All I'm saying is just be careful what you sign up for... wait to see the contract terms from Stocksy before agreeing to anything or uploading files. Like most people, I have a gut feeling they're going to be great, but I wouldn't act on a gut feeling... now when it comes to business.
-
I just wish I could go back in time and slap some sense into some of you for agreeing to the new ASA.
Really? Some people rely on the money they make from stock, they have children in college, they have mortgages, they need insurance, they have medical problems and cutting out tens of thousands of dollars a year could jeopardize any number of very important things. You think the possibility of a few images on Google Drive years in the future is worth giving up your house? Maybe you can make your stand against a bad ASA that may or may not come back to bite you one day by taking your child out of college? Someone needs some sense...
lol you just don't get it do you? I'm not talking about risking 'some' files in Google Drive. You could potentially lose EVERY file to Google Drive. It's possible that you already have... you don't even know what's in there or what's about to go in there... or anywhere else for that matter.
If you rely on the income from iStock THAT much, wouldn't it make sense to stop risking losing that amount of income, plus all future income by staying there?
Seriously, if you stay there now, after all this and knowing what they can do to you... and your family, well... I'm not even going to say it...
Good luck to you Pal :)
-
I think everyone who is accepted get to invite up to 5 other people, this people need to pass inspection/curation before they get accepted.
They are NOT looking for regular stock photos. they are looking for "Vetta" and "Agency" type only, more or less.
Artsy photos also work.
If that is the case then Stocksy will be ruling out 95%+ of contributors and/or their portfolios (and most probably same percentage of potential buyers too). It certainly has little or no chance of making a significant contribution to current microstock earnings with that plan. Most of the money spent on stock imagery is via simple images that illustrate their subject well rather than fancy 'photographic masterpieces'. There is a market for such stuff, especially at premium prices __ it's just a relatively small one.
Gostwyck, you are so wrong.
Gostwyck, you are so right. No kidding!
-
had an email from Stocksy just now they are launching soon :)
-
Ooooh, exciting!
-
had an email from Stocksy just now they are launching soon :)
:)
-
I am really sorry but you sound like there is no other way on this planet to make money other then with Istock.
You can change "Istock" by "microstock" and the meaning is exactly the same
The fact is that Istock is still financially rewarding for many. That's what some people, maybe because of having small, recent portfolios, don't fully realise. 8-9 dollars RPD is hard to beat adding small quantities from another sites. Subjective, yes, but for me is the best option. If next thing is better for contributors, don't doubt, I will be there. It's not blind loyalty, no matter how much some like to believe in this fantasy by unknown reasons, maybe to feel smarter, who knows.
Some talks of eggs of baskets. I prefer to talk of hens. Of course I have other sources of income. Maybe if I should spent time uploading to many sites I wouldn't have the time to make these other sources --not related at all with microstock-- so productive.
-
had an email from Stocksy just now they are launching soon :)
Same here :)
-
had an email from Stocksy just now they are launching soon :)
Me Too!
"Thank you for your interest in Stocksy. We're getting closer to our launch date on March 25th, 2013 and we can't wait to show you what we've got."
-
had an email from Stocksy just now they are launching soon :)
Me Too!
"Thank you for your interest in Stocksy. We're getting closer to our launch date on March 25th, 2013 and we can't wait to show you what we've got."
No email here :(
-
too bad I have bills to pay before March 25th, bummer ;D
-
I guess there's two levels of being ignored - one as a contributor and the second with the "launching soon" e-mail :) No e-mail for me.
-
I guess there's two levels of being ignored - one as a contributor and the second with the "launching soon" e-mail :) No e-mail for me.
I just found out that there is a buyer email and a seller email, I think I signed up for the buyer email twice, lol. I just signed up for seller email
-
I just found out that there is a buyer email and a seller email, I think I signed up for the buyer email twice, lol. I just signed up for seller email
Am I correct that that option is new? I noticed it yesterday but I really don't think it was there before. No idea whether I submitted an email as a buyer or contributor but either way I think its doubtful they'd be interested in my work.
-
I guess there's two levels of being ignored - one as a contributor and the second with the "launching soon" e-mail :) No e-mail for me.
I just found out that there is a buyer email and a seller email, I think I signed up for the buyer email twice, lol. I just signed up for seller email
I wonder if that box (Curious?) arrived just a few days or if it is there since "day 1"
-
No, I think it's new, I'm sure it wasn't there a week or so ago, and then it was when I checked back a couple of days ago.
-
No, I think it's new, I'm sure it wasn't there a week or so ago, and then it was when I checked back a couple of days ago.
That's what I thought, it was just one writable field for 'more information'.
I haven't have an email, but wouldn't expect them to be interested in my work; nevertheless I'm still curious. ;)
-
It's new. Here's the original page:
(http://i826.photobucket.com/albums/zz187/rimglow/stocksy_zpse5b3a1f3.jpg)
-
forget about it guys, the raw agency just opened 8)
-
Got the email and sent a link to a selection from my portfolio. Hope that will get me in but I wont be surprised if it doesn't.
-
It's new. Here's the original page:
([url]http://i826.photobucket.com/albums/zz187/rimglow/stocksy_zpse5b3a1f3.jpg[/url])
is this going to be only celebrity photos?
why does he have Billy Bob Thornton on his landing page?
-
It's new. Here's the original page:
([url]http://i826.photobucket.com/albums/zz187/rimglow/stocksy_zpse5b3a1f3.jpg[/url])
is this going to be only celebrity photos?
why does he have Billy Bob Thornton on his landing page?
the other day Chase Jarvis posted a blog, Billy in the end
http://blog.chasejarvis.com/blog/2013/02/legendary-celebrity-photog-chris-buck-musical-guest-hey-marseilles-on-cjlive-wed-february-20th/ (http://blog.chasejarvis.com/blog/2013/02/legendary-celebrity-photog-chris-buck-musical-guest-hey-marseilles-on-cjlive-wed-february-20th/)
-
forget about it guys, the raw agency just opened 8)
Glad I was not drinking anything when I read this. :)
-
had an email from Stocksy just now they are launching soon :)
:)
Will we see some superman stock appearing on 3/25? ;D
-
You get the mail even if you used the old submit form. I used 2 mails both get it.
Thank you for your interest in Stocksy. We're getting closer to our launch date or March 25th, 2013 and we can't wait to show you what we've got.
If you're interested in being a contributing artist, please reply to this email with a link to your portfolio (500px, flickr, etc) and we might send you an invitation.
Sincerely,
Bruce Livingstone, CEO
-
Got the email, sent my links
-
I did not understood only exclusive pictures will be accepted?
-
i must confess, the "we might" bit is a touch arrogant, but I guess v much in keeping with the industry.
-
i must confess, the "we might" bit is a touch arrogant, but I guess v much in keeping with the industry.
I don't think that is arrogant. They are obviously just going to start with select people and that is just warning you that the fact that you send a link doesn't mean that you will be accepted. I will be gutted if they don't accept me but that's life. Their site, their rules.
-
i must confess, the "we might" bit is a touch arrogant, but I guess v much in keeping with the industry.
I don't think that is arrogant. They are obviously just going to start with select people and that is just warning you that the fact that you send a link doesn't mean that you will be accepted. I will be gutted if they don't accept me but that's life. Their site, their rules.
ok, not arrogant. and you don't need to preach to me, I am from a small business family, so I get it (the whole "millions of unpaid hours to start your own business"). I'm not a supporter of Aussie Industrial Relation laws that seem to win/lose each election, I'm all for the entrepreneur calling the shots to their own business (in start-up as well as 10 years later)
however, even me - married to a Sth African! - found that wording a touch arrogant.
-
I am curious.. have you noticed that they want to see portfolios on non-microstock sites? What did you send them? Portfolios on microstock sites or 500px/flickr?
-
I have sent them FAA and SS so that they can see what I am up too as SS has more stocky photos and FAA has more concepts.
-
I have sent them FAA and SS so that they can see what I am up too as SS has more stocky photos and FAA has more concepts.
same, sent SS and my own website which has my commercial work; corporate shoots to fashion. I've shot some famous ppl here in Aus too, not that they'll know it.
-
is this another microstock agency?
-
I guess there's two levels of being ignored - one as a contributor and the second with the "launching soon" e-mail :) No e-mail for me.
Nobody is getting ignored as a contributor, because the e-mail asks for a link to one's portfolio. So they don't even look at your images before sending the e-mail. Are you sure you sent a working e-mail address without typo's when you hit the "I am curious" button?
-
I am curious.. have you noticed that they want to see portfolios on non-microstock sites? What did you send them? Portfolios on microstock sites or 500px/flickr?
I sent them links to SS and my personal website. SS is my biggest monthly earner, and I wanted them to see how successful I am there. Of course, if they are only interested in exclusives, then I'll have to pass.
-
I got the email this morning, just sent them my link to SS portfolio. They probably won't be taking vector files but still sent them the link anyway. You never know ;)
-
I got the email this morning, just sent them my link to SS portfolio. They probably won't be taking vector files but still sent them the link anyway. You never know ;)
They are taking vectors, but not for a couple of months. The vector part of the site isn't even in-progress yet and they are launching with photos only.
-
I got the email this morning, just sent them my link to SS portfolio. They probably won't be taking vector files but still sent them the link anyway. You never know ;)
They are taking vectors, but not for a couple of months. The vector part of the site isn't even in-progress yet and they are launching with photos only.
Thanks for that, I thought they might just start off with photos. Maybe we'll be lucky to get in when the vector part is ready to go eh.
-
No email here, I wait in hope
-
Have you checked your spam folder? Mine went in there.
-
Apparently, Sean was unavailable for comment. ;D
http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-57569639-93/istockphoto-founder-re-enters-the-market-with-stocksy/ (http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-57569639-93/istockphoto-founder-re-enters-the-market-with-stocksy/)
-
.
-
Are they going to give any information about the site before it goes live?
I'm pretty sure they have a couple videos up their sleeve which perhaps they'll release soon
https://twitter.com/stocksyunited
-
Got my email today and sent them the link to my site.
Now just waiting to see if I make the cut.
-
Got my email today and sent them the link to my site.
Now just waiting to see if I make the cut.
WOW! Nice portfolio. I think you'll make the cut.
-
Got my e-mail this afternoon. Like so many others I doubt I've much chance, but it never hurts to try. If I don't, it's a guaranteed no go. I'll use my SS link. I've got some good images on other sites that are not on SS, but overall the SS portfolio is both the strongest and most diversified.
-
i would like to know more about Stocksy. they have given us nothing other than Bruce worship. if i knew more i "might" be interested. as it stands right now this whole Stocksy thing is rather unilateral.
-
If I'm exclusive to iStockphoto, do I need to drop the exclusivity before apply for Stocksy?
-
i would like to know more about Stocksy. they have given us nothing other than Bruce worship. if i knew more i "might" be interested. as it stands right now this whole Stocksy thing is rather unilateral.
Actually, nobody's pushing Stocksy very much at all - its really the anticipation and speculation in this forum that's feeding that. Given there's nothing more than a splash page and a couple twitter/instagram posts, I'd say they're just gonna let everyone know on March 25 what the deal is.
-
If I'm exclusive to iStockphoto, do I need to drop the exclusivity before apply for Stocksy?
Unless iStock has decided to change the rules without notice (entirely possible...), then exclusives should be fine if they simply create an account with another agency. You could even contribute RM images. Its only when you contribute RF that you'd run into a problem.
-
If I'm exclusive to iStockphoto, do I need to drop the exclusivity before apply for Stocksy?
Unless iStock has decided to change the rules without notice (entirely possible...), then exclusives should be fine if they simply create an account with another agency. You could even contribute RM images. Its only when you contribute RF that you'd run into a problem.
The current paradigm at Stocksy is RF, so you wouldn't be able to contribute and be IS exclusive without some sort of wrangling.
-
The current paradigm at Stocksy is RF, so you wouldn't be able to contribute and be IS exclusive without some sort of wrangling.
That's good to know - I guess I'm out then. Thanks!
-
i would like to know more about Stocksy. they have given us nothing other than Bruce worship. if i knew more i "might" be interested. as it stands right now this whole Stocksy thing is rather unilateral.
One of the things Bruce has always been good at is getting everyone to pay attention. This was one of the factors in Istock's early success. Look at some of the other recent attempts announced here to launch an agency - everything up-front, done by people with little marketing skill.
Your right, most of us don't know much about Stocksy, but boy, we sure are talking about it! That buzz comes more or less free to Stocksy and it is worth its weight in gold.
-
The current paradigm at Stocksy is RF, so you wouldn't be able to contribute and be IS exclusive without some sort of wrangling.
That's good to know - I guess I'm out then. Thanks!
Count me out as well. oh well at least I don't have to worry about "might" be invited. too funny.
-
I feel like the only way this place can really generate good income for photographers is if they do an image / photo set exclusivity deal - very different from being totally prohibited from selling at other places. The reality is that when you have thousands of photographers tossing images across a ton of sites, all they can really compete on after a while is better pricing. If all the agencies have exclusive images, they don't have to engage in price wars. I'm hoping they have enough sense to figure this out...
-
Say for instance you're with iStock or Shutterstock and all your releases for previous work is on an iStock or Shutterstock release form... can you use the same release for a new agency? I read through some of my releases here and it doesnt say anything about signing over to the company just the photographer. The only link is the letterhead is IS...
-
Yes, but most stock agencies require you to remove the name of the competitor, so just remove the name. And when the name is mentioned in the body of the legal text, I replaced it with "stock agencies"
-
I feel like the only way this place can really generate good income for photographers is if they do an image / photo set exclusivity deal - very different from being totally prohibited from selling at other places. The reality is that when you have thousands of photographers tossing images across a ton of sites, all they can really compete on after a while is better pricing. If all the agencies have exclusive images, they don't have to engage in price wars. I'm hoping they have enough sense to figure this out...
As I understand it, that is exactly the approach stocksy is taking. Image exclusivity, but not artist.
-
I feel like the only way this place can really generate good income for photographers is if they do an image / photo set exclusivity deal - very different from being totally prohibited from selling at other places. The reality is that when you have thousands of photographers tossing images across a ton of sites, all they can really compete on after a while is better pricing. If all the agencies have exclusive images, they don't have to engage in price wars. I'm hoping they have enough sense to figure this out...
As I understand it, that is exactly the approach stocksy is taking. Image exclusivity, but not artist.
And what's the use of that? Everyone goes off and shoots all the same old stock motifs, all the pictures are original and exclusive but overall the collection looks exactly the same as everyone else. Or are you going to tell me that nobody is going to submit a jumping goldfish or a handshake this time?
-
I feel like the only way this place can really generate good income for photographers is if they do an image / photo set exclusivity deal - very different from being totally prohibited from selling at other places. The reality is that when you have thousands of photographers tossing images across a ton of sites, all they can really compete on after a while is better pricing. If all the agencies have exclusive images, they don't have to engage in price wars. I'm hoping they have enough sense to figure this out...
As I understand it, that is exactly the approach stocksy is taking. Image exclusivity, but not artist.
And what's the use of that? Everyone goes off and shoots all the same old stock motifs, all the pictures are original and exclusive but overall the collection looks exactly the same as everyone else. Or are you going to tell me that nobody is going to submit a jumping goldfish or a handshake this time?
As long as buyers like it, who cares? I don't know if it will work but it has to have a better chance than all the other new sites that have exactly the same images as everyone else.
-
I'd love to be a fly on the wall at Getty and the other sites who are wondering how Stocky's ultimate deliverable will impact them.
-
With image exclusivity, Stocksy has the advantage that every single image in the collection can only be found at Stocksy. But on the other hand it also means that their collection will grow very slowly. I cannot imagine that many independents will cancel their accounts, or delete a large part of their (best) files in order to move them to Stocksy. I do expect they will send Stocksy lots of good new stuff, simply because its easier. But if most contributors only send new stuff, it will take quite a while before Stocksy reaches its first million images.
What will buyers do? Even if they really believe in the co-op concept, they will not just cancel their account(s) with their old agency(ies) and jump over to Stocksy, simply because Stocksy does not have all subjects covered (yet). Hopefully they will put Stocksy on top of their list, start every search there.
-
The trouble, Anyka, is that I will still need to supply my main outlets while I find out if Stocksy can go anywhere. I can't afford to put all my work into one new site and neglect the others. Am I going to put my best work on a site with no track record as an exclusive offering or am I going to put the best stuff at the proven money-makers and put second-rate stuff with stocksy?
Maybe they really want to source everything from flickr and from a new crop of artists. Perhaps that's why they asked for flickr links, not stock site links. All will become clear eventually
-
I can't imagine that Bruce et al wouldn't have considered this and believe that they have a good chance of attracting enough contributors at an early stage to make it feasible. I assume that they've been working hard behind the scenes to get some established contributors on board and will open with a broad range of subjects. Either that, or they anticipate having such unique imagery that buyers will be happy to use 2 agencies as a matter of course - Stocksy for the really high quality stuff (if that's the market they're going for) and whatever other agancy for everything else.
I've sent a link to my portfolio, but like most others, don't hold out much hope....it's hard to try and align yourself to what they're looking for when we don't yet know what that is!
-
If March 25 is the launch date then the crowns and badges will be coming off this week ?
-
If March 25 is the launch date then the crowns and badges will be coming off this week ?
Indeed, it would be interesting to be a fly on the wall at iStock this week.
-
The trouble, Anyka, is that I will still need to supply my main outlets while I find out if Stocksy can go anywhere. I can't afford to put all my work into one new site and neglect the others. Am I going to put my best work on a site with no track record as an exclusive offering or am I going to put the best stuff at the proven money-makers and put second-rate stuff with stocksy?
That's indeed the trouble BaldricksTrousers, but it's not just YOUR (or my) trouble, it's also Stocksy's problem. If they want unique photos and a high volume collection, they need to find a way to attract people like you, make you want to send your best stuff even before they become a big success.
-
Exclusive image is a trouble, but I think that this is the right way. Stocksy needs some big players with good images first of all. The big and famous microstocker ensure both number of images and quality. The portfolio will growth slowly but what care contributors are earnings. So as always the other important thing is to have customers.
With all the agencies that have over 15 milions of pictures, the exclusive images doing the difference. Next years I think that all the agencies get this path, not exclusive photographer, but exclusive images. If we thinks that even now the exclusive is reward, is easy to understand that this is only a steph forward. Photolia and Dreamstime accept exclusive images and provide them benefith in search, in istock exclusive contributor are advantaged, not exclusive files within a few years will disappear from the first ten pages of search.
-
If March 25 is the launch date then the crowns and badges will be coming off this week ?
Indeed, it would be interesting to be a fly on the wall at iStock this week.
Notifications will be this week, crowns will disappear the week of Mar 25.
I think if Bruce is going to be successful, and I sure hope he is, now is the right time to do this. With iStock in a tailspin as buyers flee the scene and contributor confidence and patience waning I imagine there will be several big name crowns biting the dust. Will be very interesting.
-
The trouble, Anyka, is that I will still need to supply my main outlets while I find out if Stocksy can go anywhere. I can't afford to put all my work into one new site and neglect the others. Am I going to put my best work on a site with no track record as an exclusive offering or am I going to put the best stuff at the proven money-makers and put second-rate stuff with stocksy?
That's indeed the trouble BaldricksTrousers, but it's not just YOUR (or my) trouble, it's also Stocksy's problem. If they want unique photos and a high volume collection, they need to find a way to attract people like you, make you want to send your best stuff even before they become a big success.
I'm sure Bruce recognises what he needs, which is why I doubt whether the assertion that it is going to be an image exclusive agency is right. I don't think anyone has had any details at all, have they?
And I also think that any exclusive who handed in a crown this week without knowing exactly what Stocksy is and how it will work would be as mad as a hatter.
I'm waiting for details and to see if they want me as part of it. If they do, then I'll almost certainly join but then I don't have to sacrifice anything to do so.
-
I don't think exclusivity should be an issue. I submitted to a small agency in California that required exclusive images. Unfortunately, we found after a while that the work I do isn't a good fit with the agency (my decision) but they were doing some pretty exciting stuff and images were being licensed at surprisingly high values.
I'm curious about the contributor agreement for Stocksy. I would not mind submitting new imagery, or even pulling some existing imagery from other agents in order to give them a shot provided the terms of the agreement are reasonable.
-
It's funny to see the reaction of SS and IS/getty to this start up. Jon says being exclusive is bad for (photographers and the industry). While getty boots out anyone who is known to be involved with stocksy.
What does that tell you about the top two agencies.
It says Jon got paid $400 million convicing you not to be exclusive with IS. And getty says "oh crap" we cannot compete and have to buy our competition and load them up with old getty owned junk at very high prices. And both don't want to pay you much for your work.
I can't believe as a artist you would not run to stocksy if they become as good as the Bruce owned IS was with a larger payout.
The way a co-op works is they pay you a split of the profits that come based on how much you sell. While paying you 50% of the sale price of an image. Didn't getty say paying us 40 and 20 percent was unsustainable?
It would expose getty/SS and who ever esle for the rip offs they are.
-
.
-
It's funny to see the reaction of SS and IS/getty to this start up. Jon says being exclusive is bad for (photographers and the industry). While getty boots out anyone who is known to be involved with stocksy.
What does that tell you about the top two agencies.
It says Jon got paid $400 million convicing you not to be exclusive with IS. And getty says "oh crap" we cannot compete and have to buy our competition and load them up with old getty owned junk at very high prices. And both don't want to pay you much for your work.
I can't believe as a artist you would not run to stocksy if they become as good as the Bruce owned IS was with a larger payout.
The way a co-op works is they pay you a split of the profits that come based on how much you sell. While paying you 50% of the sale price of an image. Didn't getty say paying us 40 and 20 percent was unsustainable?
It would expose getty/SS and who ever esle for the rip offs they are.
There are a few things wrong with this. First, Stocksy is not meant to compete with Istock, they have already said that and judging from the people they have turned down it seems clear that they want different content. Second, there are a few sites that already pay 50% like Pond5 or Alamy.
SS didnt have a response to the Stocksy start up either.
-
It's funny to see the reaction of SS and IS/getty to this start up. Jon says being exclusive is bad for (photographers and the industry). While getty boots out anyone who is known to be involved with stocksy.
What does that tell you about the top two agencies.
It says Jon got paid $400 million convicing you not to be exclusive with IS. And getty says "oh crap" we cannot compete and have to buy our competition and load them up with old getty owned junk at very high prices. And both don't want to pay you much for your work.
I can't believe as a artist you would not run to stocksy if they become as good as the Bruce owned IS was with a larger payout.
The way a co-op works is they pay you a split of the profits that come based on how much you sell. While paying you 50% of the sale price of an image. Didn't getty say paying us 40 and 20 percent was unsustainable?
It would expose getty/SS and who ever esle for the rip offs they are.
I'm not sure they are actually worried, but new small sites like this have the potential to eat into their contributor base. How many 100% royalty Extended Licenses would you have to sell before you decide you don't want to sell ELs anywhere else? You don't necessarily have to sign an exclusive contract to be exclusive at agencies. It just has to be so much better than the rest that you decide you don't want to submit to those other places anymore.
-
There are a few things wrong with this. First, Stocksy is not meant to compete with Istock, they have already said that and judging from the people they have turned down it seems clear that they want different content. Second, there are a few sites that already pay 50% like Pond5 or Alamy.
In that case they're not going to attract many current exclusives. They'd have to give up exclusivity, but not to be able to port over any of their current stock files, which would then earn much less on iS, especially if they've currently got a lot of good-selling Vetta or Agency files. Then they'd have to create new, different stuff (currently unknown) to put onto Stocksy.
Won't matter to me, I haven't even had the email yet; but it would be a big thought to those who might have been involved, particularly if Stocksy was going to be RM, or partly RM. That way exclusives could keep their work at iStock on a higher %age for the interim while they and Stocksy build up steam.
Although they say they don't want to be like the other stock sites, have they said what they do actually want? Have they described their price point/s for sale? Subs and/or single sales?
-
.
-
judging from the people they have turned down it seems clear that they want different content.
Who have they turned down? I've missed anyone being turned down.
-
getty boots out anyone who is known to be involved with stocksy.
Well this is clearly not the case.
I am definitely curious and looking forward to seeing it launch. I am expecting it to be stylish and influential given what is public.
-
judging from the people they have turned down it seems clear that they want different content.
Who have they turned down? I've missed anyone being turned down.
I only remember Dan from http://www.warmpicture.com (http://www.warmpicture.com)
-
.
-
I must admit that, if I was invited and the terms were favorable, I'd give iStock the boot in favour of Stocksy. I don't have a big portfolio at IS, but it brings in a reasonable amount of money - however, I'm less and less happy about leaving my images there.
I've looked at the other microstock sites, and I'm really not that keen. A lot of them seem to be going down a similar route and I think that the photographer is going to end up being squeezed, whatever site they're with. At the moment I'm averaging well over $10 a download on IS and I'm really not that keen to hand them over to the other microstock sites to sell them for a lot less. For me personally, I'd rather cut my losses at IS, and put my content with a site which valued it's contributors and paid them a fair commission, even if it would take a while to build up sales. OK, I'd have to have confidence that the site could build up those sales by attracting customers, and for once I feel like we may have found that with Stocksy.
If I'm invited, of course, which I'm not overly hopeful of.... ???
-
As I understand it, that is exactly the approach stocksy is taking. Image exclusivity, but not artist.
Is this confirmed? Or are we just speculating...
-
I feel like the only way this place can really generate good income for photographers is if they do an image / photo set exclusivity deal - very different from being totally prohibited from selling at other places. The reality is that when you have thousands of photographers tossing images across a ton of sites, all they can really compete on after a while is better pricing. If all the agencies have exclusive images, they don't have to engage in price wars. I'm hoping they have enough sense to figure this out...
As I understand it, that is exactly the approach stocksy is taking. Image exclusivity, but not artist.
And what's the use of that? Everyone goes off and shoots all the same old stock motifs, all the pictures are original and exclusive but overall the collection looks exactly the same as everyone else. Or are you going to tell me that nobody is going to submit a jumping goldfish or a handshake this time?
I understand what you're saying. If they are serious about Stocksy, they will need to be far more selective about what they take and only a small group of photographers will be accepted for submitting content.
-
Can someone be kicked out or Getty/Istock for being a "founder/owner" on Stocksy?
That would means if you get accepted, you might just be kicked out like Sean was...
You won't be just contributors, but owners since it's a co-op..
-
As I understand it, that is exactly the approach stocksy is taking. Image exclusivity, but not artist.
Is this confirmed? Or are we just speculating...
Confirmed.
-
Confirmed.
Thanks!
-
and its time for a nice cup of tea hmmmm green for today! ;D
-
and its time for a nice cup of tea hmmmm green for today! ;D
That's a great idea, Ill be right back..........
-
Can someone be kicked out or Getty/Istock for being a "founder/owner" on Stocksy?
That would means if you get accepted, you might just be kicked out like Sean was...
You won't be just contributors, but owners since it's a co-op..
Possibly. But really it should only be if you're exclusive and you're actually selling images when the site goes live. Expressing an interest and being accepted shouldn't get you kicked off, as far as I'm concerned - you might not like their terms, etc and not ever submit any content. If you're not exclusive at IS, then you should be able to do what you want, without penalty. However, in the end IS can do what they want, as they've already shown.
-
Can someone be kicked out or Getty/Istock for being a "founder/owner" on Stocksy?
That would means if you get accepted, you might just be kicked out like Sean was...
You won't be just contributors, but owners since it's a co-op..
Possibly. But really it should only be if you're exclusive and you're actually selling images when the site goes live. Expressing an interest and being accepted shouldn't get you kicked off, as far as I'm concerned - you might not like their terms, etc and not ever submit any content. If you're not exclusive at IS, then you should be able to do what you want, without penalty. However, in the end IS can do what they want, as they've already shown.
I doubt you'll hear from any iStock exclusive saying that they have joined up with Stocksy until after Mar 25. I wouldn't be surprised if Getty does some head hunting over the next few weeks.
-
Add me to the list - sent links in, not optimistic given my level of experience but I figure it can't hurt to try (well, except a bruise to the ego, but I'll cope!). What I know of the ethos of Stocksy is right up my alley and something I want to support.
Exciting times, huh?
-
So it looks I'm the first one that was rejected..:S ->
Your Stocksy application was declined. Our Editors felt that your images weren't what we were looking for in our collection.
It was a difficult decision because you are obviously a very talented artist.
We wish you the best in your future endeavours and we would be happy to look at your portfolio again next year.
I've submitted 10 images, technically perfect
-6 people(yoga,tablet..)
-2 technology
-1 3d
-1 food
I really don't know what are they looking for;)
Good luck to everyone that applied;)
-
Life goes on . . . . . . .
-
So it looks I'm the first one that was rejected..:S ->
Your Stocksy application was declined. Our Editors felt that your images weren't what we were looking for in our collection.
It was a difficult decision because you are obviously a very talented artist.
We wish you the best in your future endeavours and we would be happy to look at your portfolio again next year.
I've submitted 10 images, technically perfect
-6 people(yoga,tablet..)
-2 technology
-1 3d
-1 food
I really don't know what are they looking for;)
Good luck to everyone that applied;)
:( :'(
It's strange they're not saying what they want, other than 'not traditional stock' so that people can curate their submission accordingly.
-
Next year is a long time to wait to apply again. They should really give people a chance after they've launched and we can see what they do want. But I suppose it could take a year for them to establish themselves and it might not be worth getting in now anyway.
-
Is there some submission process other than "send us a link to your portfolio"?
Are they talking about some boutique, niche, premium-price agency, or are they talking about a microstock site? I'm somewhat confused.
-
The only submission process so far is sending a link to your portfolio or images on flickr etc.
It looks like it will be a small collection of high quality exclusive images with a Vetta like style but that's just my guess as the sites not launched yet. Doesn't look like they want to have another typical microstock site.
-
You can also get invites from certain people that are already part of it.
-
Hmmm, it isn't sounding promising that many people will get accepted. The only thing to bear in mind is that those who are accepted may not be able to say so until the site goes live. So, in the meantime, we may hear of lots of rejections and no acceptances.
-
We will see on 25. what they want. ;D
I've applied because currently the IS situation is... So If I would get in this it would be the sign to drop the crown and start independent and img. excl. with stocksy.
Apparently my images are not what they want.
@BaldricksTrousers Yes there is an submission process you receive an invitation email.
On the welcome page there is a Bruce's welcome video, formula for the % etc etc..
The "inside" is really clean and fresh..(design,drag and drop upload..)
I agree with you sharpshot they will need some time to get on the market but for now I have an really good feeling that they know what they are doing;D
My opinion is that they want outstanding photos, conceptual, artistic I don't see any other reason for my photos to be declined really not. I burned my opportunity...:S
-
Thanks for letting us know a little about your experience, sorry you didn't get in.
-
thanks for the info m-studio. Can't say I'm wildly hopeful if it's a vetta-type gallery.
-
So it looks I'm the first one that was rejected..:S ->
Your Stocksy application was declined. Our Editors felt that your images weren't what we were looking for in our collection.
It was a difficult decision because you are obviously a very talented artist.
We wish you the best in your future endeavours and we would be happy to look at your portfolio again next year.
I've submitted 10 images, technically perfect
-6 people(yoga,tablet..)
-2 technology
-1 3d
-1 food
I really don't know what are they looking for;)
Good luck to everyone that applied;)
Why did you submit 10 images instead of sending a link to your portfolio ?
-
When you send them the link they will send you(if your portfolio promising) the invitation to sign-up and upload 10 photos...
In this way they invite who they want..
-
Can someone be kicked out or Getty/Istock for being a "founder/owner" on Stocksy?
That would means if you get accepted, you might just be kicked out like Sean was...
You won't be just contributors, but owners since it's a co-op..
That's a worrying thought. I'm beginning to think it might be better wait until after the launch and look at this when their requirements and their contract details are clearer. I also wouldn't want to be blocked from applying for a whole year due to lack of information.
-
m-studio, sorry to hear, how long it took since the portfolio link was sent? looks like they are working fast
-
I think we've heard but two of many forthcoming "thanks but no thanks" responses. But if Stocksy is indeed very specialized, then I wouldn't worry too much about them influencing sales on the other micros. Without that broad mix of images, their buyer base will be just as niche as their collection.
-
@luissantos84 actually I've got an invitation by a "member" so I can't give you the answer...
The 10 photos review took 3 days I think.
Folks don't get down on my rejections maybe were just my pics not suitable and yours will be.. ;)
-
I think we've heard but two of many forthcoming "thanks but no thanks" responses. But if Stocksy is indeed very specialized, then I wouldn't worry too much about them influencing sales on the other micros. Without that broad mix of images, their buyer base will be just as niche as their collection.
Just what I've been thinking. Maybe their target isn't going to be advertising bulk sales at all - maybe they are looking for something more like wall art for hotels and corporations.
-
@luissantos84 actually I've got an invitation by a "member" so I can't give you the answer...
oh man.... not much we can say to that :o
-
@luissantos84 actually I've got an invitation by a "member" so I can't give you the answer...
So you were 'invited' and then rejected? That doesn't bode well...
-
I think we've heard but two of many forthcoming "thanks but no thanks" responses. But if Stocksy is indeed very specialized, then I wouldn't worry too much about them influencing sales on the other micros. Without that broad mix of images, their buyer base will be just as niche as their collection.
If Sean Locke is going to be one of their contributors, they don't sound very "specialized" to me. Other than the fact that he is one of the top stock photographers in the business.
-
If you are not trying to be accepted as a "founding photographer" then there is no way would I let them judge me without seeing what they are about. I would rather wait a month or two instead of being banned for a year.
IS had 600,000 files when I joined them. Monkey business started in 2009 and dominated IS. I am in no hurry but I do hope this becomes something great for the artist.
-
If you are not trying to be accepted as a "founding photographer" then there is no way would I let them judge me without seeing what they are about. I would rather wait a month or two instead of being banned for a year.
IS had 600,000 files when I joined them. Monkey business started in 2009 and dominated IS. I am in no hurry but I do hope this becomes something great for the artist.
Good advice. Unless you know the types of images they are after - you are probably better off waiting to apply until you do know.
-
I think we've heard but two of many forthcoming "thanks but no thanks" responses. But if Stocksy is indeed very specialized, then I wouldn't worry too much about them influencing sales on the other micros. Without that broad mix of images, their buyer base will be just as niche as their collection.
If Sean Locke is going to be one of their contributors, they don't sound very "specialized" to me. Other than the fact that he is one of the top stock photographers in the business.
I am not sure I've heard that Sean is a player yet other than he is pals with their key peeps, signed up for FB connect, etc. I just don't see him putting in his huge collection as exclusive to an unproven model, but that's just my opinion. With the two rejected so far, both of whom have terrific ports, tells me that Sean may play a limited role as a contributor, putting in newly shot stuff. I think his work is better than MOST, NOT ALL,others who shoot what he does.
-
If you apply now, you are going blindfold... wait one or two month after opening.
I would wait to see the kind of images they want, and see what stupid thing the Getty team might do against contributors.
-
Is Stocksy going to be all royalty free or will they include rights managed?
-
I think that applying now or in a few months will not change the way somebody shoot or the quality of images in the portfolio drastically...
Sure it could help...
-
Is Stocksy going to be all royalty free or will they include rights managed?
http://www.microstockgroup.com/stocksy/stocksy-are-you-curious-response/msg300901/#msg300901 (http://www.microstockgroup.com/stocksy/stocksy-are-you-curious-response/msg300901/#msg300901)
-
.
-
If you are not trying to be accepted as a "founding photographer" then there is no way would I let them judge me without seeing what they are about. I would rather wait a month or two instead of being banned for a year.
IS had 600,000 files when I joined them. Monkey business started in 2009 and dominated IS. I am in no hurry but I do hope this becomes something great for the artist.
Good advice. Unless you know the types of images they are after - you are probably better off waiting to apply until you do know.
Assuming they remain open to new contributors once they launch... We’ve heard about founding members who might get a better deal. My paranoid mind can imagine them not accepting new members for a time once they launch to give Stocksy even more of an elite feel.
That would not be very "co-operative"....
-
If you are not trying to be accepted as a "founding photographer" then there is no way would I let them judge me without seeing what they are about. I would rather wait a month or two instead of being banned for a year.
IS had 600,000 files when I joined them. Monkey business started in 2009 and dominated IS. I am in no hurry but I do hope this becomes something great for the artist.
Good advice. Unless you know the types of images they are after - you are probably better off waiting to apply until you do know.
Well Im screwed then ;-) Now I wish I had waited, lol
-
I think that applying now or in a few months will not change the way somebody shoot or the quality of images in the portfolio drastically...
No it won't, but if you don't know what they want, as you pointed out earlier, and you have a diverse portfolio, then maybe worth waiting a bit.
Bruce joined saatchi online after he sold IS. Worth checking out. Could be a clue!
-
It will be interesting if Stocksy becomes a niche player with "artsy" (get it?) images like the old Tony Stone stuff but at a mid-tier RF price point. But often the production costs of those images can get high which is not good for microstock.
I guess we will know on 30 days.
OX
...pondering
-
I think that applying now or in a few months will not change the way somebody shoot or the quality of images in the portfolio drastically...
No it won't, but if you don't know what they want, as you pointed out earlier, and you have a diverse portfolio, then maybe worth waiting a bit.
Bruce joined saatchi online after he sold IS. Worth checking out. Could be a clue!
I hope not, can't find many people talking about good sales with Saatchi online. I wonder how many internet entrepreneurs only have one successful venture and never really achieve much with anything else? Hopefully Stocksy has a chance but I'm not going to get too excited about it.
-
To me this all looks encouraging. My best stock photo earnings come from the most exclusive collections I contribute to. I think microstock helped improve a lot of photographers technically, but there is no sign that I can see that it has helped improve the visual aesthetics of those same photographers work. A huge swath can now shoot technically perfect white isolations of people, or even location photos, etc... but only a small percentage can actually direct the model, cast the right face, choose the right wardrobe, props, etc.... The technical details are the baseline. It's the all the other stuff that separates people. I see a lot of technically sound lifestyle work in stock, but hardly any of it is well directed - too many stilted looking models who are clearly posing for the camera for example pretty much kills it for a certain segment of customers.
-
I'm in. Great collection of images so far. Sean is there as well. Did he ditch the crown or have I missed something?
-
I'm in. Great collection of images so far. Sean is there as well. Did he ditch the crown or have I missed something?
yes, I'd say you missed some stuff... :)
http://www.microstockgroup.com/istockphoto-com/sjlocke-was-just-booted-from-istock/ (http://www.microstockgroup.com/istockphoto-com/sjlocke-was-just-booted-from-istock/)
-
For those of you that got the invitation to join, can you direct me to the part that states image exclusivity?
I am not a native english speaker so this might have been lost on me reading through the agreements.
Thanks!
-
I'm in. Great collection of images so far. Sean is there as well. Did he ditch the crown or have I missed something?
I bet that you are just trolling ;D
-
For those of you that got the invitation to join, can you direct me to the part that states image exclusivity?
I am not a native english speaker so this might have been lost on me reading through the agreements.
They said so in the Facebook group before it was taken private. The site itself is not open to the public yet.
-
I'm in. Great collection of images so far. Sean is there as well. Did he ditch the crown or have I missed something?
The crown ditched him.
But if you're there and he's there, you should be able to find out more about that.
-
I got the invitation and looking through the contributor aggreement, i dont see image exclusivity mentioned anywhere.
-
Hey guys.
Did anyone of you notice this Don`t go thing on istock web site ? :D
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/22380919/dz-lu/is-dontgo.jpg
-
I have just sent my 10 pictures last night and got a negative answer this morning too, "Your Stocksy application was declined. Our Editors felt that your images weren't what we were looking for in our collection. It was a difficult decision because you are obviously a very talented artist. We wish you the best in your future endeavours and we would be happy to look at your portfolio again next year.
" .
So, I don't know what they are looking for because I've sent very different types of photos.
-
Good to see some initial reports from people who had been accepted by Stocksy. However, I'm having trouble seeing how this is going to work if it's RF only. Most iStock exclusives won't drop their crowns to sign up with Stocksy. High end RM artists will stay with their macro agencies... That leaves independent microstockers. I'm sure there are many of you who can create at the required quality, but I don't see that being enough to take significant market share from iStock/Getty.
Wouldn't it be more promising if Stocksy offered RM too? Then iStock exclusives could take part, and slowly migrate over. Once their RM income is proven, then the decision to move over RF as well would be easier. But even that would not be without problems, as it would leave the question of what to do with lower quality, bread-and-butter stuff that sells in microstock. With iStock exclusivity gone, the only way to maintain that income would be to spread the work around, not something many exclusives want to do. Still, with an RM option available, exclusives could take part and delay the tough decisions for later.
-
Stocksy announced they will go live on the 25th of March. Big splash or little puff of smoke?
-
Hey guys.
Did anyone of you notice this Don`t go thing on istock web site ? :D
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/22380919/dz-lu/is-dontgo.jpg
Ah, yes, people leaving by car .... and by balloon. And the main character is obviously cheesed off. Very meaningful!
-
I have just sent my 10 pictures last night and got a negative answer this morning too, "Your Stocksy application was declined. Our Editors felt that your images weren't what we were looking for in our collection. It was a difficult decision because you are obviously a very talented artist. We wish you the best in your future endeavours and we would be happy to look at your portfolio again next year.
" .
So, I don't know what they are looking for because I've sent very different types of photos.
It seems that most of us expect an agency like all the others what pays better.
It seems also that Stocksy has an other concept. High Quality pictures for those who need them was also a concept by veer. The hype was the same the result was not the best.
Bread and butter sells the most, lately SS offered companydata, if i had invest all of my earnings in 2012 at SS-Stocks i had gained 100%.
It looks like actors in this business are "arty" orientated or by profit.
I see a big gap in the middle … who will fill this out?
If i was a leader in stile, i never ever need to join a microagency ... I'm able to be stylish in any needed way...
btw. i get an invitation, but how to react without none information about the concept?
-
I have just sent my 10 pictures last night and got a negative answer this morning too, "Your Stocksy application was declined. Our Editors felt that your images weren't what we were looking for in our collection. It was a difficult decision because you are obviously a very talented artist. We wish you the best in your future endeavours and we would be happy to look at your portfolio again next year.
" .
So, I don't know what they are looking for because I've sent very different types of photos.
It seems that most of us expect an agency like all the others what pays better.
It seems also that Stocksy has an other concept. High Quality pictures for those who need them was also a concept by veer. The hype was the same the result was not the best.
Bread and butter sells the most, lately SS offered companydata, if i had invest all of my earnings in 2012 at SS-Stocks i had gained 100%.
It looks like actors in this business are "arty" orientated or by profit.
I see a big gap in the middle … who will fill this out?
If i was a leader in stile, i never ever need to join a microagency ... I'm able to be stylish in any needed way... but i'm a follower, not a leader in this business. I'm proud to fullfill the needs of my customers ... i'm no artist.
btw. i get an invitation, but how to react without none information about the concept?
-
I got the invitation and looking through the contributor aggreement, i dont see image exclusivity mentioned anywhere.
I can't imagine it not being image exclusive. If, by the very nature of a co-op, a contributor is essentially a part-owner why would you compete with yourself by having your same images elsewhere?
-
I got the invitation and looking through the contributor aggreement, i dont see image exclusivity mentioned anywhere.
I can't imagine it not being image exclusive. If, by the very nature of a co-op, a contributor is essentially a part-owner why would you compete with yourself by having your same images elsewhere?
I allways prefered the exclusive Image concept. I started by FT what had them. I prommissed them to gain marked shares, but FT kicked this concept. When i started there was no need to distribute to others, only with crap. But then FT lowered Comissions and as an add on lowers good selling pictures by price/comission.
For posting against this concept i was kicked out of the forum.
In the last months SS gain the same profit than FT for me with 2/5 the images + all other agencys added on... so i ask myself why FT is doing something stupid?
After 3 years in this business i know two things: picture regret textes make non sense.
Agencys communication is the same …
The GAP between someone who gains millions and the people who constribute was never higher, but bouth have to learn, what will take time.
Good for the players in this game, bad for the i…
-
I got the invitation and looking through the contributor aggreement, i dont see image exclusivity mentioned anywhere.
I can't imagine it not being image exclusive. If, by the very nature of a co-op, a contributor is essentially a part-owner why would you compete with yourself by having your same images elsewhere?
Not sure how this makes the artist work more valuable. Portfolios are like fingerprints. The work is distinguished by all the factors that make creative artist. I can see very simular traits in porfolios as long as they have one shooter. How would it be image exclusive if it is not subject, location, model, concept, "100 more words could go here" exclusive. To me that would not work. How would Yuri's site be doing if he yanked all his work on other sites before launch.
-
I got the invitation and looking through the contributor aggreement, i dont see image exclusivity mentioned anywhere.
I can't imagine it not being image exclusive. If, by the very nature of a co-op, a contributor is essentially a part-owner why would you compete with yourself by having your same images elsewhere?
There are more levels of part-ownership....and the lowest category seems to be just being a contributor with a revenue split at end of the year. The higher ones have more responsibilities....
-
Stocksy announced they will go live on the 25th of March. Big splash or little puff of smoke?
regardless (of my, unlikely, acceptance) I think : big!
-
I send link to my portfolio, but it's just vectors. I got no feedback yet. Does anyone know if they will work with vectors?
-
I send link to my portfolio, but it's just vectors. I got no feedback yet. Does anyone know if they will work with vectors?
"just" vectors? I've always considered you vector guys/girls as true artists (compared to us humble photographers) ...
-
I send link to my portfolio, but it's just vectors. I got no feedback yet. Does anyone know if they will work with vectors?
"just" vectors? I've always considered you vector guys/girls as true artists (compared to us humble photographers) ...
Yeah, me too. They really "create" things while we Photographers just compose existing elements...
-
^ is that all we do?
-
^ is that all we do?
That's what I was thinking. In the illustration world everything is as new and perfect as the illustrator wants to make it. They don't have to be concerned about the weather, models, directing and a host of other issues that have be managed together with an element of luck. They can even go back and quickly change the elements of an illustration around if the results aren't exactly as hoped for. It's a bit late after the shoot for photographers. Must be nice sitting in a comfy chair 'illustrating' on a tablet whilst catching up with the TV.
-
Ah, but illustration requires an innate talent. I reckon I could teach most people to be competent photographers, even if not amazing, but you've got to be able to draw to illustrate and you can either do that or you can't.
I shall now hide in the traitor's cellar.
-
Sorry I started this. I just wanted to say I admire the vector guys/girls. Probably because I can't draw and I envy them. We photogs are not less talented, but our talents are completely different, and sometimes the grass is a bit greener on the other side of the fence. I would LOVE to be able to draw and make vectors (but I also love photography).
-
^ is that all we do?
That's what I was thinking. In the illustration world everything is as new and perfect as the illustrator wants to make it. They don't have to be concerned about the weather, models, directing and a host of other issues that have be managed together with an element of luck. They can even go back and quickly change the elements of an illustration around if the results aren't exactly as hoped for. It's a bit late after the shoot for photographers. Must be nice sitting in a comfy chair 'illustrating' on a tablet whilst catching up with the TV.
And here I thought it was all photographing beautiful models at the beach while sipping margaritas while I sit like a bug-eyed hermit at my computer in some sweatpants slugging coffee.
-
My grade 1 teacher suggested I take up photography when she discovered my innate inability to color inside the lines :-\
And here I thought it was all photographing beautiful models at the beach while sipping margaritas
That too 8)
-
I know it's probably a little early, but has anyone heard back since submitting a link to their portfolio in reply to Bruce's email the other day? I'm talking about the email which invited interested contributors to reply with a link to their portfolio, not the email which invited submission of 10 files which people who were contacted earlier seem to have got.
-
I know it's probably a little early, but has anyone heard back since submitting a link to their portfolio in reply to Bruce's email the other day? I'm talking about the email which invited interested contributors to reply with a link to their portfolio, not the email which invited submission of 10 files which people who were contacted earlier seem to have got.
I havent heard back yet.
-
I know it's probably a little early, but has anyone heard back since submitting a link to their portfolio in reply to Bruce's email the other day? I'm talking about the email which invited interested contributors to reply with a link to their portfolio, not the email which invited submission of 10 files which people who were contacted earlier seem to have got.
I havent heard back yet.
+1
-
I know it's probably a little early, but has anyone heard back since submitting a link to their portfolio in reply to Bruce's email the other day? I'm talking about the email which invited interested contributors to reply with a link to their portfolio, not the email which invited submission of 10 files which people who were contacted earlier seem to have got.
I haven't heard back yet.
Same here.
-
After submitting my 10 the night before last I was just rejected :-[
-
Bad luck Mat. :(
It seems that they are getting back to the people who have submitted the 10 pics quite quickly. But I wonder how many people have submitted links to their portfolios in response to Bruce's email, and how long it will take to get through all of those. I suppose it could be thousands of submissions and we might have quite a wait.... :-\
-
"Bruce Livingstone and the inventor of microstock, Bruce Livingstone, invite you to be part of a brave, new idea. Stocksy is a co-operative digital licensing business, owned by its members. Together we are changing the nature of our industry — creating a sustainable marketplace, invested participation through ownership and the full distribution of all profits to our members.
We pay a 50% royalty on every transaction and at the end of each year, we pay out all the profits to our members.
See, told you it's a new idea. Come shape the future with us."
And then an option to accept the invitation
-
Woohoo! Congrats! ;D
-
a photographer (I guess) told here that was invited also and then rejected
-
Aw man. I thought I was in.
Guess I have to go through another round of inspection. (10 images)
-
Yes, it seems like certain people who are already 'in' can send invites to other contributors. These aren't actually invites to join the site, but to submit 10 files for consideration. Some have been rejected after this. That's my understanding anyway, someone please correct me if I'm wrong.
-
Aw man. I thought I was in.
Guess I have to go through another round of inspection. (10 images)
Oh no! Did you receive the invite out of the blue, or did you submit your email to the Stocksy website and then reply to Bruce's email with a link to your portfolio?
-
Aw man. I thought I was in.
Guess I have to go through another round of inspection. (10 images)
Oh no! Did you receive the invite out of the blue, or did you submit your email to the Stocksy website and then reply to Bruce's email with a link to your portfolio?
They sent an email asking for a link to my portfolio, and then they sent me a link to submit 10 images :)
-
They sent an email asking for a link to my portfolio, and then they sent me a link to submit 10 images :)
OK, well if they've already seen your portfolio, that must be quite positive....I assume that maybe they want to check the quality of the files close up.
-
Wow, it's all way too complicated...
-
Or maybe he needs only 10 "partner" contributors...
-
The fact that they look your portfolio means nothing, after, they ask you to upload 10 pictures and you are not sure to be accepted.
I wonder what they looking for ...I've sent landscape, studio people, studio object, architecture, nature, food and they rejected me.
So, if it's not the technical level, what is it??
-
I guess they're after the Vetta collection look? I sent them a link to my portfolio and haven't had a response yet. If I do get an invite, I'll probably spend some time doing some research and do 10 photos just for them. I've no idea if Stocksy is going to be worthwhile but it would still be nice to get in.
-
If you sent link to your portfolio, and have google analytics on, just checked them. I saw a visit from BC, CA on Monday. But since then no new mail, no response. But my portf is kinda basic, I dont think I will get in. Have to work on my techniques. :)
-
I didn't apply; can't stand rejection. 8)
Good luck to all who get in, it's sure to be an interesting and hopefully exciting venture.
-
For those who have the request to see 10 images, I wonder if we should ask what sort of material is expected for review? Ask if they are reviewing technical only or if they are also critiquing subjects.
-
Seems a little counterproductive to keep people in the dark about what kind of images they're looking for. The contributors who've been rejected may have very well had images in their portfolio that met the required criteria, but the secrecy surrounding that criteria may have ultimately led to rejection. Doesn't make sense to me.
-
Seems a little counterproductive to keep people in the dark about what kind of images they're looking for. The contributors who've been rejected may have very well had images in their portfolio that met the required criteria, but the secrecy surrounding that criteria may have ultimately led to rejection. Doesn't make sense to me.
+1 I like games, but not playing with people, it's very arrogant. I guess the contributor list is already done in advance and everything around is a masquerade.
-
Me either. But I suspect they are taking a quick look at them and getting an idea of fit, then sending out the "send me 10" of your best email as a formal decision making action. Some of us may never hear back from them at all I suspect.
-
A few days ago i was contact to send the links to my portfolios.
This morning I received an invitation with a link to stocksy to send 10 images.
I've send some lifestyle, sport and beauty frames, i don't know what are they looking for...
Also need to put some personal information and credit card details.
Just sent the pictures, now I'm waiting for news.
Greetings and good luck to all.
-
You know what, my stock friends,
after reading all Your posts,
I will think twice if I send 10 pics at all.
Maybe not now.
Maybe after march 25th.
Maybe never.
Today I am singing:
Enjoy Yourself, Louis Prima ( Lastminute.com advert ) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Up_G3lxdyP0#)
-
I agree with leaf - instead of shotgunning, you may want to wait until after the 25th to have a better idea, and it should be pretty clear then, I'd think.
-
Looks like to be a people specialty shop.
-
Looks like to be a people specialty shop.
If you mean solely a lifestyle collection, I don't think I'd say that.
-
For me they have already the core people&photos it will be impossible to open in a month otherwise...
-
Seems a little counterproductive to keep people in the dark about what kind of images they're looking for. The contributors who've been rejected may have very well had images in their portfolio that met the required criteria, but the secrecy surrounding that criteria may have ultimately led to rejection. Doesn't make sense to me.
Agreed. All seems a bit "cloak and dagger" to me. I'll hold off trying to get in until I know what they are looking for. Doubt they'd want me anyway. I'm not an "artist". I mostly just have boiler plate stock.
-
For those who have the request to see 10 images, I wonder if we should ask what sort of material is expected for review? Ask if they are reviewing technical only or if they are also critiquing subjects.
Any word on the final use of the 10 images? Are they for inspection only? If accepted, do they go on to the site? If on to the site, then there might be exclusivity problems with other sites if you are exclusive at other sites.
-
I agree with leaf - instead of shotgunning, you may want to wait until after the 25th to have a better idea, and it should be pretty clear then, I'd think.
Hey leaf quoted me in saying that!
It is your choice to submit in the dark. If your porfolio is not the best work, then I would question people saying that stocksy does not know what they are doing by judging it to be a contributor.
-
Just got accepted as contributor based on 1o images submitted for review in less than a day. Im shooting mainly niche, underwater images...
-
Just got accepted as contributor based on 1o images submitted for review in less than a day. Im shooting mainly niche, underwater images...
Congratulations!
-
Just got accepted as contributor based on 1o images submitted for review in less than a day. Im shooting mainly niche, underwater images...
Congrats!
How long after you made the initial inquiry did they contact you?
I gave my email a little over a week ago and haven't heard back.
-
Congratulations Zeamonkey! Hope you do really well there. :)
-
For those who have the request to see 10 images, I wonder if we should ask what sort of material is expected for review? Ask if they are reviewing technical only or if they are also critiquing subjects.
Any word on the final use of the 10 images? Are they for inspection only? If accepted, do they go on to the site? If on to the site, then there might be exclusivity problems with other sites if you are exclusive at other sites.
The images will be added to your portfolio but you can deactivate them after if you want.
-
I'm guessing this is a good indication of what they'd like to see:
http://pinterest.com/stocksyunited/ (http://pinterest.com/stocksyunited/)
-
I'm guessing this is a good indication of what they'd like to see:
[url]http://pinterest.com/stocksyunited/[/url] ([url]http://pinterest.com/stocksyunited/[/url])
Interesting. Apparently they want images of roses laid out to spell the "C" word.
http://pinterest.com/stocksyunited/art-illustration/ (http://pinterest.com/stocksyunited/art-illustration/)
-
.
-
My guess is they want niche and artsy stuff, not so much the girl holding a blank sign, the fruit basket and travel photos. Not that they don't want ordinary stuff, just that they probably have chosen them already and don't want a million variations of the same thing. This is just a wild guess. Denis
-
I'm guessing this is a good indication of what they'd like to see:
[url]http://pinterest.com/stocksyunited/[/url] ([url]http://pinterest.com/stocksyunited/[/url])
If thats their niche then they are not aiming to become the next stock site. Not by a long shot, thats very conceptional arty imagery. I dont think that stuff will be downloaded by the millions, not be because its not good, but because its very conceptional. Its not going to be about a handshake or a businesswoman.
-
Ah, all this (or almost similar) are already on other stocks.
Nothing new.
I agree with poncke and cybernesco: artsy, vetta like...
-
Stock and artsy: Stocksy, pretty simple, isn't it?
-
Guys, You are all hearted from me :)
-
I'm guessing this is a good indication of what they'd like to see:
[url]http://pinterest.com/stocksyunited/[/url] ([url]http://pinterest.com/stocksyunited/[/url])
Oh dear. I'm starting to lose enthusiasm.
-
I guess submiting something "isolated on white" is a big no-no....hahaha
-
Stock and artsy: Stocksy, pretty simple, isn't it?
The best things are, right?
-
Stock and artsy: Stocksy, pretty simple, isn't it?
The best things are, right?
I'm wondering, what percentage of your portfolio will fit their criteria?
-
I'm guessing this is a good indication of what they'd like to see:
[url]http://pinterest.com/stocksyunited/[/url] ([url]http://pinterest.com/stocksyunited/[/url])
Oh dear. I'm starting to lose enthusiasm.
Isn't this what the file of the week on IS always looked like. Some low selling artsy farts photo that had very limited comercial use while the photo that eventually got 15000 downloads never started out as image of the week.
-
So if I open up a new gallery and desaturate everything and throw in some lens flare there is hope?
-
So if I open up a new gallery and desaturate everything and throw in some lens flare there is hope?
right... we have already FAA for that ;D
-
That's out of my league, oh well it's still a great idea for those who get accepted.
-
I'm guessing this is a good indication of what they'd like to see:
[url]http://pinterest.com/stocksyunited/[/url] ([url]http://pinterest.com/stocksyunited/[/url])
Looks like straight out of the camera stuff. Very little post processing. Definitely not micro.
-
? no post processing? ha. so many have a lomo/vintage feel to them, love love love the look they're after.
Nice to see it looking real, as opposed to those overly bright images with impossibly good looking Nordic families.
-
if thats the stuff they want why dont they just troll facebook, flicker and maybe 50px for content, like getty does?
i got the invite a while ago but have not sent the 10 cause...i just did not know what they wanted. so i was going to wait (like u guys say) till they open shop so i can look at wht they want.
but all this cloke and dager stuff makes them look kinda snooty, as if they are looking down on us mer microstockers.
makes me (atleast) have a distatest for the way they are going abt it?
not the best way to start a company right off the bat.
-
Much of it does appear to me to have little post processing. Not all of it. I do agree that's it's a refreshing change.
-
YES, i like the artsy stuff. Just why dont they come out and say thats what they are looking for!?
-
Looks to me that they are taking a direct shot at getty collection and vetta. Not looking to take out rf micro, they want the top end of the market.
-
If thats their niche then they are not aiming to become the next stock site. Not by a long shot, thats very conceptional arty imagery. I dont think that stuff will be downloaded by the millions, not be because its not good, but because its very conceptional. Its not going to be about a handshake or a businesswoman.
You took the words right out of my mouth. Looks to me like they are going for highly conceptual stuff, with a different look and feel other than shiny, happy, brightly lit.
-
Bruce sent you the "portfolio link" already ;D
(just got another email saying if I want to be a contributor send link etc)
-
.
-
I am actually thinking I might have a chance when they check my FAA portfolio.
-
I for one am not afraid to admit that I am really bummed to have been rejected. I wish I would have seen that Pinterest gallery before I chose the 10 I sent. I picked images that were nothing like any of those though I have work that would fit that profile including celebrity portraits and the like. I have a gut feeling this site is going to be a pretty big deal and would love to be in on the ground floor.
Psst....Bruce, if you are checking this thread....gimme another chance man! I can do better!
;D
Mat
-
I honestly like their look. A lot. What`s bothering me is that they don`t have (yet) a clear statement towards Contributors. Many may just submit the usual Microstock material even if they have more "Artsy" stuff just because they do not feel well informed about the concept. I too have various art concepts in my Port, but it only makes about 5% of my total. Reason: Microstock is what makes me a living and I have to produce what sells in volume. It is my only source of income.
I like their concept of building up a different Agency which is not so "Microstock", but I think they should give People a Chance to adjust - what they will probably do. Also remember: many Companies started out with very strict approval processes, being picky etc., then, after a while, things got more real and it got easier too for the Photogs to get in.
-
so I just got a provide link reply...
I was thinking it will be for a link of portfolio at some stock site but it says " (500px, flickr, etc) "
So I guess link to SS or IS or something is not what they want ?
If one is not using flickr or those etc sites now I have to set a portfolio on some of them ?
How many images would one throw on it , i know it depend but generally speaking hit me with a number please ?
-
I love the look of the shots on Pinterest, at least the travel and nature boards which are the kind of thing I'm aspiring too (when I'm not photographing for stock, which is a relatively new concept for me). I do wish I'd sent them a link to my FAA site though. Some of that type of stuff of mine is on flickr, but very little on SS which was the other link I sent.
Ah well, time will tell.
-
...I was thinking it will be for a link of portfolio at some stock site but it says " (500px, flickr, etc) "
So I guess link to SS or IS or something is not what they want? ...
I think they're trying to give us the hint that they're not looking only for stock imagery, in the usual sense. Or at least they don't want applicants to feel limited to their existing stock portfolios when it comes to what they present.
People are more likely to have some more experimental or "non-stocky" stuff on 500px or flickr, and it seems like that may be what they are more interested in.
-
Oh so you think its good to send a link to lets say SS portfolio + another to somewhere we have 500pix plus more artsy and unconventional stock stuff.
I just make that flickr account , maybe I can send links to my stolen images other people offer in their portfolios...they got quite a few positive comments as bonus and they are wanted good because many ask for higher res version ;)
Uh i dont like nothing on that flickr , I think i will go to deviantart...
-
I have gotten the invitation to provide the links, but have not heard from them since.
Then I took a look at the link:
http://pinterest.com/stocksyunited/ (http://pinterest.com/stocksyunited/)
That is very istock inspired, like the artsy side of istock.
In my eyes very New Yorkish.
Of course that is where those people come from. They might be a serious competitor to istock, and that is good.
BUT, but, where is the aspiration to capture market shares in the global market?
Where is BRIC? Brasilia, India and China? The emerging markets? Yellow and green colours for Brazil, Red for India and China?
Are they not going global?
And what about Europe.
I feel that European pictures are forgotten
-
oh the food shots!
with - OMG -
*shadows
*contrasty blackness
*uneven vignettes
* cool colour temps
*grunge boho overtones
love it! and yes, wish they'd hint that this was their style.
Looks like Frankie or Peppermint (Australia) magazines.
-
why not be upfront about this whole process, the secrecy is a real turn off and a bit arrogant.
-
why not be upfront about this whole process, the secrecy is a real turn off and a bit arrogant.
Oh, part of this is a carry over from the old iStock days of "dont' ask, don't tell" about how to become an inspector, etc. and part of it is the simple fact that they haven't launched yet. I tend to think that word got out a bit earlier than they'd have liked so that's bred more speculation than would've otherwise happened. I think all should just wait until they really launch and see what's what before making decisions and getting all worked up.
-
why not be upfront about this whole process, the secrecy is a real turn off and a bit arrogant.
Oh, part of this is a carry over from the old iStock days of "dont' ask, don't tell" about how to become an inspector, etc. and part of it is the simple fact that they haven't launched yet. I tend to think that word got out a bit earlier than they'd have liked so that's bred more speculation than would've otherwise happened. I think all should just wait until they really launch and see what's what before making decisions and getting all worked up.
ditto that. it's like a wanna be boys club. not sure why anyone would get worked up about something they know nothing about. the mystique seems to be a desperate attempt to get attention. i sure won't rush into it.
-
I sent them my SS link after they invited me. Then I waited for the invitation for 10 pics, but today I recieved another mail with the invitation to send the link to my port. The only difference is that the first was maned "stocksy" and the other "stocksy call to artists".
Have no idea what to do.
-
Just got accepted as contributor based on 1o images submitted for review in less than a day. Im shooting mainly niche, underwater images...
Congrats!
How long after you made the initial inquiry did they contact you?
I gave my email a little over a week ago and haven't heard back.
Was a few weeks after i submitted my email. After that, all done in less than a week. And Thanx everyone!
-
The more I see and hear the more probable I think it is that they are not interested in microstock at all, that it will be wall art, maybe gallery supplies or bulk sales to interior decor chains.
Bruce spotted a hole in the market first time round, if he's hunting out market holes again then microstock is not the place to look.
-
The more I see and here the more probable I think it is that they are not interested in microstock at all, that it will be wall are, maybe gallery supplies or bulk sales to interior decor chains.
Bruce spotted a hole in the market first time round, if he's hunting out market holes again that microstock is not the place to look.
Based on what I've seen on the pinned images I'd agree with you.
-
Bruce, enjoying reading this ?
Yes ? OK ( new fetish ? )
No ? Than, give us a clue, what do You looking for and help to stop this bizzare thread.
Thank You in advance.
;)
-
The Pinterest shots are interesting, fun to look at and great for starting the conversation. But I doubt Stocksy is looking to build an entire web site around this. Just do what you do best.
...BTW, how the heck would you keyword that kinda stuff? Just sayin...
-
The more I see and here the more probable I think it is that they are not interested in microstock at all, that it will be wall are, maybe gallery supplies or bulk sales to interior decor chains.
Bruce spotted a hole in the market first time round, if he's hunting out market holes again that microstock is not the place to look.
Based on what I've seen on the pinned images I'd agree with you.
yes he sure did spot a hole in the market "free images" progressing to incredibly cheap stock photos. i suppose that was the thing to do back then and regrettably is changed the stock industry by creating a rapid decline in the valuation of photography. the rest is history. now it is the norm to sell images for a few bucks.
-
The more I see and here the more probable I think it is that they are not interested in microstock at all, that it will be wall are, maybe gallery supplies or bulk sales to interior decor chains.
Bruce spotted a hole in the market first time round, if he's hunting out market holes again that microstock is not the place to look.
So essentially undercutting FAA, AllPosters et al? (but selling RF for customers to do their own printing, mounting etc.?)
Don't like the mystery.
If they weren't ready to launch, or to explain what they wanted, they shouldn't have welcomed applications.
Sorry for all those who submitted 'blind' and now have a long wait before they can reapply.
-
The more I see and here the more probable I think it is that they are not interested in microstock at all, that it will be wall are, maybe gallery supplies or bulk sales to interior decor chains.
Bruce spotted a hole in the market first time round, if he's hunting out market holes again that microstock is not the place to look.
I don't believe that the old microstock label is particularly useful in this context since it really only addresses price and distribution. The work I am seeing they have liked is in line with the sort of stuff I see in use daily both on the web and in print. It's about indie, aesthetics, style, production values etc. It's also often pictures which tell bits of stories.
I think it is the same thing he did before again but at a higher level. Once upon a time digital cameras and fast internet meant that it was possible for anyone to get into the market for handshakes and tomatoes isolated on white. Now sites like 500px are bringing together people who are producing content which looks every bit as good as the stuff you will see in private galleries (then in adverts) or the pages of a bank prospectus and magazines like Monocle etc.
How I see it, Bruce and his friends have set us a challenge to make better, more thoughtful and intelligent work. Or maybe reminded us why we like pictures. I think what they do will be very influential whether or not we all rush to try to join. So yes. I'm curious.
-
I wonder why no one has mentioned 1X.com in comparison with Stocksy. If there is any site out there with superb conceptional images of the highest artistic quality its 1X.com.
-
I wonder why no one has mentioned 1X.com in comparison with Stocksy. If there is any site out there with superb conceptional images of the highest artistic quality its 1X.com.
Boy, talk about your unwatermarked large images...
-
I wonder why no one has mentioned 1X.com in comparison with Stocksy. If there is any site out there with superb conceptional images of the highest artistic quality its 1X.com.
Boy, talk about your unwatermarked large images...
Yep, but the imagery is fantastic.
-
If you shot the album cover for "the head and the heart" from 2010 you are golden.
-
I wonder why no one has mentioned 1X.com in comparison with Stocksy. If there is any site out there with superb conceptional images of the highest artistic quality its 1X.com.
Boy, talk about your unwatermarked large images...
Yep, but the imagery is fantastic.
I visit that site several times a year for inspiration. Love much of the imagery.
-
the images are interesting, some very beautiful. but browsing 1X is a PITA
-
I'm guessing this is a good indication of what they'd like to see:
[url]http://pinterest.com/stocksyunited/[/url] ([url]http://pinterest.com/stocksyunited/[/url])
If thats their niche then they are not aiming to become the next stock site. Not by a long shot, thats very conceptional arty imagery. I dont think that stuff will be downloaded by the millions, not be because its not good, but because its very conceptional. Its not going to be about a handshake or a businesswoman.
The people who want that content are willing to pay more for it. I don't see anything saying that Stocksy is a micro style agency either. They might be trying to cull all the best talent that got into micro during a time when places like Getty either wouldn't sign new artists or only offered Photographer Choice style pay to play placement options.
-
yes he sure did spot a hole in the market "free images" progressing to incredibly cheap stock photos. i suppose that was the thing to do back then and regrettably is changed the stock industry by creating a rapid decline in the valuation of photography. the rest is history. now it is the norm to sell images for a few bucks.
I wonder why everyone blames microstockers for the decline of stock. What about the camera manufacturers who have, in essence, put a pro-type camera in everyones hands. Like Bill Gates put a computer on everyone's desk and now everyone is a graphic or web designer or can post-process images in Photoshop. Like the phone companies now have cameras in cell phones that take better pictures than some of the point-and-shoots and even some DSLRs. I'm pretty sure Livingstone didn't do all that single-handedly. Please...give credit where credit is due. ;) If he hadn't done it, someone else sure would have. Small to mid-sized companies were SCREAMING for a more budget-minded solution to stock photography, he was just the lucky one to have gotten there first.
-
yes he sure did spot a hole in the market "free images" progressing to incredibly cheap stock photos. i suppose that was the thing to do back then and regrettably is changed the stock industry by creating a rapid decline in the valuation of photography. the rest is history. now it is the norm to sell images for a few bucks.
I wonder why everyone blames microstockers for the decline of stock. What about the camera manufacturers who have, in essence, put a pro-type camera in everyones hands. Like Bill Gates put a computer on everyone's desk and now everyone is a graphic or web designer or can post-process images in Photoshop. Like the phone companies now have cameras in cell phones that take better pictures than some of the point-and-shoots and even some DSLRs. I'm pretty sure Livingstone didn't do all that single-handedly. Please...give credit where credit is due. ;) If he hadn't done it, someone else sure would have. Small to mid-sized companies were SCREAMING for a more budget-minded solution to stock photography, he was just the lucky one to have gotten there first.
exactly! in a few "months" mobile networks will complain about skype, people like to complain and drop guilt on other, if it is not working maybe its time for them to change no? microstock is changing since day one and most have been dealing with it quite well
-
Hi everyone.
I got accepted yesterday.
I'm uploading several images by now, some ones got accepted and some others don't.
The "inspection" seems very good, with comments in human language. like one that i get,
"Love the image, but can you remove the white line in the middle? Please republish this file, really liked"
Better than a simply rejection with no explanation.
By now it seems more like a social network with a lot of chat and blogpost.
Some really amazing galleries of photographers that i didn't know until now, very inspiring.
Uploading, Keywording, MR, finally a great usable user interface for a MS website.
And that's all i know by now, will keep uploading until 50 photos or so, and wait until 25th to see what happen.
Saludos!
-
Hi everyone.
I got accepted yesterday.
I'm uploading several images by now, some ones got accepted and some others don't.
The "inspection" seems very good, with comments in human language. like one that i get,
"Love the image, but can you remove the white line in the middle? Please republish this file, really liked"
Better than a simply rejection with no explanation.
By now it seems more like a social network with a lot of chat and blogpost.
Some really amazing galleries of photographers that i didn't know until now, very inspiring.
Uploading, Keywording, MR, finally a great usable user interface for a MS website.
And that's all i know by now, will keep uploading until 50 photos or so, and wait until 25th to see what happen.
Saludos!
Congrats. Really looking forward to seeing the new site.
-
Hi everyone.
I got accepted yesterday.
I'm uploading several images by now, some ones got accepted and some others don't.
The "inspection" seems very good, with comments in human language. like one that i get,
"Love the image, but can you remove the white line in the middle? Please republish this file, really liked"
Is that really the language used on the rejection text? "Really liked" ??? That's what it really said?
-
I'm in. 8)
-
Hi everyone.
I got accepted yesterday.
I'm uploading several images by now, some ones got accepted and some others don't.
The "inspection" seems very good, with comments in human language. like one that i get,
"Love the image, but can you remove the white line in the middle? Please republish this file, really liked"
Is that really the language used on the rejection text? "Really liked" ??? That's what it really said?
Uh, it's people talking. Not an automated email.
-
Hi everyone.
I got accepted yesterday.
I'm uploading several images by now, some ones got accepted and some others don't.
The "inspection" seems very good, with comments in human language. like one that i get,
"Love the image, but can you remove the white line in the middle? Please republish this file, really liked"
Is that really the language used on the rejection text? "Really liked" ??? That's what it really said?
Why shouldn't it?
Back in the day I've had (very occasional) personal comments from iS inspectors urging me to resubmit a pic once I'd fixed it, and once even a regretful note about liking my pic even though they felt it couldn't be salvaged for iS.
-
I think he is pointing out the grammar not the fact that someone liked the image.
-
I think he is pointing out the grammar not the fact that someone liked the image.
"Really liked" sounds grammatically fine to me... :-\ A bit nitpicky, really, to be dissecting response e-mails.
Let me preface this comment by saying I am not "in", and with the stuff I shoot may not ever be, but I hope we don't see a lot of sour grapes directed at Stocksy when the rejections start coming.
-
I don't expect to be accepted by Stocksy, and I'm okay with that. I wish them well. I hope they shake things up.
-
I agree. If they are as successful as I suspect they will be, it will benefit many of us who don't become members.
-
Me too. I haven`t got an invite so I think I`m out, but I wish them the best. I think their concept could work and stir everything a bit up in the industry. Probably some will be able to join later or the Stocksy construction gets a role model and other coops follow.....
-
Be patient and optimistic.
They have a lot to review, so nothing is lost...
-
I think he is pointing out the grammar not the fact that someone liked the image.
"Really liked" sounds grammatically fine to me... :-\ A bit nitpicky, really, to be dissecting response e-mails.
Let me preface this comment by saying I am not "in", and with the stuff I shoot may not ever be, but I hope we don't see a lot of sour grapes directed at Stocksy when the rejections start coming.
I wasnt nitpicking on the email nor the grammar. That was someone else.
-
I haven't heard back from them, but then I don’t care to belong to any club that will have me as a member, anyway ;D
-
I haven't heard back from them, but then I don’t care to belong to any club that will have me as a member, anyway ;D
LOL :D
-
I haven't heard back from them, but then I don’t care to belong to any club that will have me as a member, anyway ;D
Dating yourself? a quote from Groucho Marx
-
I think he is pointing out the grammar not the fact that someone liked the image.
"Really liked" sounds grammatically fine to me... :-\ A bit nitpicky, really, to be dissecting response e-mails.
Let me preface this comment by saying I am not "in", and with the stuff I shoot may not ever be, but I hope we don't see a lot of sour grapes directed at Stocksy when the rejections start coming.
I wasnt nitpicking on the email nor the grammar. That was someone else.
I knew that. I only reposted the last comment on the matter for the sake of brevity, not because I thought it was you criticizing. Sorry if that was not clearer.