I'm tired of Istock..... They've rejected so many of my pictures that are actually selling ok on SS and other sites...... Just got 85 pictures rejected some minutes ago.... And they've already been selling a fair bit on SS for some time now...... Count me in for a very small portfolio of only 33 pictures.

So far the Feb 2nd projected total of files being deactivated or deleted is 36,391+

Hi All,

 Thank you Sean for sharing where you got the post it was a big help when I spoke with Rick at Blend. I see so many different reasons on this post for why people are pulling their images from Istock but the one I see the most is " they aren't making me the money I used to " That unfortunately is what happens when there are more photographers then their are buyers, it is sad but true. I can all appreciate your concern for the loss of income, I lost 90% of my Macro income when Istock was 2 years into sales so I understand what it feels like to lose a great deal of your income from something you believe is a bad idea ( the reduction of average sales from $138 per image sold at Getty each to a dollar back when Istock started sales ) that was what took place when Micro hit the market but we had to evolve to survive and keep our families with food on the table.
 I would suggest that for the few that will pull their entire content and I say few because of the millions of images Istock has in it's collection, I admire anyone that stands by their beliefs enough to stop their families income and stop being exclusive that takes real strength to stick to your principles no matter what the cost. I know I would never pull my content from a company that can replace me overnight and put my family in financially jeopardy but that is me once again my hat is off to those that want to stand behind a belief and try to make a change.
 Unfortunately I don't think you pulling your content from Istock is going to hurt anyone but yourselves but once again I respect everyone's right to do as they choose and those that do pull their entire collection I applaud.
 I have spoken directly with Blend about our images that were used. They were from our Legacy collection images that have been with us from the start and are no longer making sales. For our company to sell 62 images that were no longer selling from our 100,000+ collection is a good gesture and a strong building block in our future relations with the biggest reseller of imagery in the world. Do I like the situation No, I would prefer it didn't happen this industry is under enough pressure already. I think it is business that needs to take place for Blend especially during such turbulent times in our industry to strengthen our relations with such a giant in the business for a small offering of 62 images sold for $12 each. If this was to continue further I would have great concern especially if it were images of mine that were making solid sales but for Blend this was not the case.
 I have no problem with the deal Blend made but that does not mean I agree with what took place elsewhere. If Istock pulled your top sellers for this deal then I can understand the issue but I cannot speak from the Micro side especially Istock. Please I am only the messenger here so keep that in mind. I like to share information at MSG but if I am attacked for my position I hope you understand why I will not reply, it just takes to long and doesn't resolve anything. Open questions and responses I would love feedback from all that have their finger on the true pulse of this matter. I have seen a lot of emotions get in the way of smart business decisions and I hope you are all thinking this through in great detail for what works best for you at this time for your own business.
 I wish you all the best on your decision and support everyone that chooses to do whatever they want I understand it is your income we are speaking of and that can be devastating so please think this through in great detail. As for people pulling a few hundred of your images from Istock I say either go for it and make your stand and leave Istock or just leave your images up. Taking a few hundred of your non sellers is not really supporting what is being asked of in this group support concept " to pull your entire collection from Istock".

Thanks for taking the time to read,
Jonathan

Jonathan Ross:

 "I see so many different reasons on this post for why people are pulling their images from Istock but the one I see the most is " they aren't making me the money I used to "

Cybernesco:

This is not the most popular reason anymore, did you not read about the latest Google Getty deal?

The Getty/Google deal controversy has become sufficiently notorious to merit an entry in Wikipedia:

"Controversy Over New Feature

Google Docs has partnered with Getty Images to release 6000 high quality, high resolution stock images for use in Google Doc products.[42] The images have been stripped of all meta-data and copyright information and clients may use them for any commercial purpose they see fit. This feature has been met with significant praise by those that use Google Docs. However, this move has proven controversial with the photographers who own the copyright to the images.[43] The complaints centre on two areas. The first is the fact that the for all intents and purposes the free re-distribution by Google has placed the images in the public domain and significantly if not totally devalued the copyright. The artists involved were compensated based on the lowest valuation for image use instead of the effective buy out of the rights this represented. The second issue involves images that required model releases. In this case the models, via the release, were assured that images would not be used in a defamatory way. However, Google has placed no such restriction on the re-use of the images in their Google Doc library."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Drive

Before this gets lost in some long reply. (which I am notoriously guilty of providing...)

It has also come to light that the $12 dollars paid to contributes was only for the initial images in the package. Images have later been added with a $6 payment to the photographer.

Really? Ouch!

Latest from Oldladybird;

"As I said, no new iStock content...that includes Thinkstock and Getty. Nothing to do with luck."

So they do have some ability to control which images Getty sells to Google ... and this process is very much in the present.

I'm sure that the D-Day campaign is having an effect.

http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=350613&page=24#post6827417

And again with the attitude that "microstockers took away trad photographers' livelihood when istock came about, it's only right that getty now takes your images from you." Forget that the market demanded the Micro model. It wasnt a spite-against-getty thing...it was to fulfill a big gap, and that market still remains.


And i am convinced that this attitude is exactly the party line being passed along to getty club members (on top of gettys need to steal images to make a fast buck). You bet i would love to see istockgetty go down. But even more important, i want to see every contributor protecting their ability to put food on the table for their families in the near future.

We don't know the extent of the getty-google deal.  In a year it might be 100,000 images... or maybe 1,000,000- 

We need an opt out now.

Hi JS,

 Thanks for the feedback. I did mention that in my post if you read it you will se that I said if it were my number one sellers and I didn't get a choice then I can understand the frustration with the deal. I get it, I am trying to live with what tomorrow will bring because If I try to fight today's battle today I am usually to late can garentee you it isn't going to be more money in the stock industry for individual photographers. The days of 7 figure returns are long gone and I think that photographers that want to stay in the business full time will have to diversify their options a great deal to pay the bills.
 Just like desk top publishers before the computer came out, those cut and paste folks were put out of business or had to adapt to survive very quickly. I am sorry to say that the best has come and gone but I do believe for those that are great at the craft of lighting, strong business skills as well as very strong people skills will be the ones with the best chance of making it.
 I have diversified a few years back seeing the writing on the wall. That was when my wife and I decided to start our own stock agency and do some investing. I was also speaking to another person that said " to survive today you must deversify outside of your own business " and I completely agree with his statement. The more you can put away for a rainy day and invest for long term while there are good investments available ( like property and several others in this down turned economy, must be long term at this point in the U.S. at least ) then I think your families security is even more assured.

Cheers,
Jonathan

I sometimes like to turn things upside down.

Now what if, we instead of clinging to our files, gave them away for free.
Since they are being given away anyway.
That would take the breath out of those pirating agencies.

Like shooting back with their own ammunition.

So I hereby declare, that if I ever find one of my files in these giveaway shows. Ill give it away from my homepage, in the original size and resolution.

What about that?

Google Drive want those files inside of Google Drive, but what if we threatened to publish them outside of Google Drive unless they made a deal with the content owners.
Same with istock, they have played fancy games with our content, the market value of their trades could easily be hollowed out.

Copyright means the right to copy and distribute. When we have produced an image it is only us and those we allow, who can distribute our files.

There is already a list of the involved files, it would be easy enough to upload them to a base somewhere.

I can't read this entire thread but has anyone considered the fact that now the Feb 2 deletion extravaganza has been announced that they have plenty of time to change their policy on deletions and also work on disabling deletion functionality? Keep in mind that GI.com doesn't allow deletions. It's likely only a matter for time before this trickles down to IS especially with the recent events.

They could be total bandits, but in theory they are supposed to give us 30 days notice of a change in the ASA. That would give us time to clear out our ports if they imposed some unacceptable new terms

When you deactivate a file, and it's already been sold to Google, will Getty deactivate it from Goog, or does it stay in the realm of worldwide free forever without hope of reclamation?