|
MicrostockGroup Sponsors
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - jsmithzz
126
« on: April 12, 2011, 23:46 »
One interesting fact is that iStock has not grown in membership since January 36,892, Today 36,895. (I keep a spreadsheet on the numbers from http://istockcharts.multimedia.de/ ) When I look at the numbers, only the Base Level is decreasing, all other levels are increasing. Which says there has not been a new member this year.
The exclusive numbers have risen back up from Decembers Peak with December 5872, January 5399, Today 5479....Dec/Jan had a huge bailout due to the best match, I wonder what will happen in the next week or two.
Has the dust settled, no, its just the eye in the storm................
"Just the eye of the storm"?? Oy vey.  As for iStockcharts, it was my understanding that all users were added manually by users and for a while it wasn't even possible to add new users so I'm not sure how reflective it truly is of how many new contributors have joined the site. I have a hard time believing that only 3 newbies have joined our ranks.
127
« on: April 12, 2011, 19:18 »
have any of you actually performed test searches? it doesn't sound like it. I've searched on all my test search terms. each search has returned a solid MIX of files. in fact 'business' under best match sort order has only three Agency files and one Vetta file on the whole first page with 200 results.
I've done the same type of search on a number of random terms, some big, some drilled down and I'm not seeing anything flooded with V or A with the excpetion of the 'fish' search....which was given as an earlier example. that returns a large number of Vetta and Agency....who knows why. some of the terms I searched on that returned 'normal' results so that you can try them yourselves are:
business
woman
man
family
child
urban
teamwork
team work
house
for sale
I'm not commenting on the validity of the new best match, but it doesn't seem as V/A heavy as is being 'reported'.
I have done a few searches. Try 'hotel room' and see what comes up. When I did it the first 50 images were all Vetta and Agency files with one file that was in the main collection but a best seller. Also, it seems that search results may be regional and I've heard that different users are getting different results depending on where they are.
128
« on: April 12, 2011, 18:36 »
What makes us happy is our clients getting the most relevant possible results.
That's actually open to interpretation. What constitutes relevant? Relevant to whom? If it meant "most relevant to the clients' needs" then they wouldn't be happy packing the front of the search with files that people apparently don't want. But he now thinks that the major, necessary shake-up has taken place.
If the quote means "most relevant to our profit margins".... well... that may be different (though in the long-run its hard to see how iStock's best interests can be different from their clients' interests).
By placing all the V's and A's in the front it's anything but relevant. iStock's customer base is sensitive to prices from what I've seen over the years, and placing the high priced files in the front tells me they don't know their customers. They're just alienating buyers at our expense in my opinion.
129
« on: April 12, 2011, 11:07 »
No Im not exclusive, no vettas or agency files. BTW; Are you new here on the forum?? best. [/quote] I just joined back in January but have been on iStock for about 5 years.
130
« on: April 12, 2011, 10:33 »
Actually its picking up! yesterday and today, so far, its brillant! hope it stays this way.
anybody else?
After months of downward trend - starting mid-2010 - sales for me are now slightly better since a few weeks, but still way below what they used to be
I am not sure if it's the best match or just a general economic trend in conjunction with traditionally good months of the year (March-April)
Out of curiousity, are you exclusive and if so, are the files that are selling for you vetta or agency files?
131
« on: April 11, 2011, 21:40 »
Today is not a good day for me, after they changed the best match again.
However, I have come to the realization that a bad day for me may just be a BDE for someone else. Since January, every month has been a BME, even though the increase has not been a huge jump.
Normally I would agree with what you said. But in this case buyers just think that iStock has jacked up prices and are leaving for other sites as some have mentioned in the forums. I need to start thinking about my exit plan.
132
« on: April 11, 2011, 19:50 »
Getty has no idea who their customers are at iStock. And when they do figure it out, I'm afraid it'll be too late. The horse is already out of the barn. Just my 2 cents.
Talking about 'horse': the best match search for horse is back again to Vetty with agency sprinkled through.
However, a photos only search on 'young adult' is totally different, clearly favouring high-selling images (which is how 'horse' was at the weekend only).
I'm still not sure they would be doing all these best match things if the bottom line wasn't higher. They're bound to be able to judge that over a few hours of a normal workday.
Shady, my concern is that the bottom line will be higher at the expense of all of us contributors who don't have a lot of these files and at the expense of customers who will leave for other agencies. They're putting greed before people for sure. In the short term their profits may be higher, but in the long run customers and contributors won't stand for it and will leave in droves and will kill any profits they've tried to gain.
133
« on: April 11, 2011, 19:37 »
Has the best match dust settled? I sure as hell hope not. Looks like everyone's sales are totally tanking. I know mine have. The only thing that has propped up my sales this month is an EL for $100 earlier this month. What I don't understand is why iStock is continuing to alienate its customers that have made iStock what it is by pushing these high priced Vetta and Agency files. Don't get me wrong, I like getting a Vetta/Agency sale now and then, but the bulk of my income comes from non-Vetta and non-Agency files. Customers are clearly upset and are leaving. It almost seems like Getty purchased iStock and is now summarily killing off its former competitor at its own expense and has turned it into a mid-stock agency. iStock scared the pants off of Getty at one time by offering low cost, quality imagery. Don't they learn? Prices for photos are being driven down by the glut of content on the internet. Most (not all), but most people aren't going to pony up tons of money for Vetta/Agency files after years of paying reasonable prices on iStock. They're just going to take their business elsewhere. Getty has no idea who their customers are at iStock. And when they do figure it out, I'm afraid it'll be too late. The horse is already out of the barn. Just my 2 cents. ETA: Looks like it's being discussed here... Very grim. http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=323102&page=1
134
« on: April 11, 2011, 00:32 »
Polls like this don't generate enough info to be useful. You need more details, ie) number of images online, how long they have been there, etc... and even then its still not very decent since there are thousands of topics that can be shot.
I agree that this doesn't paint a complete picture. Was thinking of doing something a little more comprehensive for iStock contributors if there's interest. Here are some of the questions I was thinking of asking amonth others: 1) How much do you earn per month? 2) Are you exclusive? 3) What is your average RPI per month? 4) How many files do you have uploaded? etc.
135
« on: April 09, 2011, 06:45 »
About a year ago, give or take, I posted a message in the IS forum that was mildly critical of how bulky and time-consuming the upload and keywording process is there (I only have video clips on that particular site). Shortly afterward, I received a message telling me that they will no longer accept submissions from me. Something about they didn't think my work was progressing / developing like they thought it should..., blah, blah, blah. The material that was already in my catalog is still available and continues to sell, and I still have access to my account. I thought about trying to get in as a still photographer, but subsequent events such as restructuring and commission reductions have led me to believe that it would be a waste of time. I find it rather amazing that a critical post in the forum would result in being banned from uploading. I recommend that current contributors avoid it, and post complaints here on MSG instead.
Wow, in all the years I've been on iStock I don't think I've ever heard of anyone getting such a message, especially after a critical post. Maybe I haven't been hanging out in this forum though long enough to know of other instances. Unbelievable given the fact I've seen far worse posts in the iStock forums than what you said you wrote.
136
« on: April 08, 2011, 21:48 »
I would totally agree with Kone about the use of WB in a studio setting. Setting your WB for sunlight or whatever pre-set you choose will ensure you get consistent results for your entire shoot. If you're doing work-for-hire for a client especially, they will expect this. Having to readjust in post production to get all of the images to have the same WB is time consuming.
137
« on: April 08, 2011, 21:07 »
What a stupid question form newbee OP?!
Question is in class how many times you have sex with wife eg per day week month, or for what you vote for or whats you income...
Sorry, and what's wrong with taking an unscientific poll of what people are earning on iStock? I think it's something people are curious about which is why I posted it. Interesting that 27 people on this site have chosen to ignore you. No wonder.
138
« on: April 08, 2011, 10:22 »
So Thursday was double Wednesday, but given that Wednesday was about 10% of a good day, that still leaves Thursday at 20% of a good day and today's not looking any better so far.
I think it's "Sudden Portfolio Death" syndrome as Mike noted earlier.
If this is how things are going to be from now on, the decision to move to independence makes itself. Dropping 80% to 90% of your sales is a big push out the door - which is perhaps what they're after anyway. Mid-level folks like me are just expensive - they want Sean's and Yuri's and lots of cheap newbies...
I had a couple of days where my sales stopped completely midweek which hasn't happened in over a year. I seriously am beginning to think about turning in my crown and looking elsewhere to sell photos. While my income has been relatively steady, drops like this are a bit much for me to handle. What's to say my best sellers won't get shuffled to the back of the line with no notice from iStock? The only constant at iStock is that nothing is constant. I have a feeling this is going to continue to be a year of ups and downs for everyone. Enjoy the ride.
139
« on: April 08, 2011, 10:02 »
If the past couple of weeks turns into a trend I will be going down a level ! In which case plan b and then, probably, plan c.
Exciting times.
Not fun. No matter how much I upload, it seems as if my earnings have hit a plateau. They haven't gone up much in the last 2 years. I'm stuck in the 500-1000 doldrums with occasional dips down into the 100-500 range. What are plan B and C for you?
140
« on: April 08, 2011, 10:00 »
Is there anyway to change a vote? I read it as stock earnings not istock earnings and put my earnings over all sites?
Sorry about that. I thought I'd made it so you could go back and edit your vote but looks like I didn't. Unfortunately there's no way to go back and switch it.
141
« on: April 08, 2011, 05:31 »
I don't expect people to post their iStock specific salaries in here but was curious to see how much people were making on average per month via a poll and whether or not it was enough to support you as a full time gig where you live as cost of living varies widely around the world.
ETA: My income varies wildly from about $300 a month to as much as $1,000 but I usually average round $500 or so. Where I live it definitely helps with paying the rent but not much more than that.
142
« on: April 04, 2011, 22:52 »
Given the overall lack of competence in iStock's IT crew, I don't think they could implement a contributor-specific targeting scheme even if they wanted to.
In spite of my negative opinion of iStock's recent behavior, I don't think they would try to retaliate against vocal critics. I do think the clubby atmosphere around Vetta (an "in" group that has way more Vetta images than seem warranted) has created an oligarchy that is why we don't see the ability to filter out Vetta and Agency, but that's not the same thing as shuffling problem contributors to the back.
I've seen lots and lots of best match shifts and it can be very tempting to read more into what's happening than is really there.
The big, big worry is that in their lust for soaking the customers they'll drive too many of them away. I don't think they're currently presenting a good mix of results, but I'm hoping they'll keep "tweaking" some more and improve it.
I really hope they keep tweaking because my sales have shriveled up to zilch. I used to get 15 or sales a day.
143
« on: April 04, 2011, 18:34 »
Really great idea! Thanks so much for sharing this!
I might suggest only contacting BBB with specific complaints though. If they are suddenly flooded with all sorts of complaints along the lines of "they suck", I think they may not take them as seriously.
I completely agree. As far as reputation is concerned, iStock has already done a fantastic job of shooting themselves in the foot many times over. But for e-mails and requests that go unanswered for weeks (I've always had a pretty decent turnaround time for my support tix), the BBB is definitely the way to go to get things moving if all else fails.
144
« on: April 03, 2011, 21:39 »
Looks like someone "restarted" best match and it probably needs some activity to get going. At least, I hope this is whats happening. I just dont understand why they dont let contributors now "Hey guys, we are pushing some software buttons this week-end". Just so that we know what is going on.
For many here istock is a considerable income and with all the issues people are jittery enough already. A little understanding can go a long way.
They've always been poor at communicating things and managing the firestorms that erupt in the forums. After 10 years you think they would've gotten a clear communication strategy hammered out. I guess not.
145
« on: April 03, 2011, 18:27 »
Is what they fail to appreciate (and I don't care how many times they say otherwise), is that many peoples' livelihoods are tied to iStock. I don't rely on the site for 100% of my income but know a couple that do. With the site wackiness, callous i-don't-give-a-crap comments from lobo, it's looking more and more like Getty, iStock or whoever just doesn't care. The entire site is broken. How can anyone effectively manage their photo business when their agent shifts the playing field every 5 days on a whim or if an IT person fat fingers the best match algorithm? You can't.
146
« on: March 31, 2011, 22:56 »
No marketing = no business. Good grief.....I may have asked this before but do they have a salesforce working the phones to drum up new business?
A couple of months ago, they advertised for a marketing specialist and that job is not currently being advertised, so they may have hired same, or decided not to bother.
They also seem, for the first time in four years, no currently to be looking for "someone who can break our system".
This is their current list of vacancies:
Berlin
Country Specialist, Spain (G-BER 11045)
Berlin, DE
Designer (G-BER 11051)
Berlin, DE
Calgary
Accounts Payable Specialist (G-CAL 11096)
Copywriter (G-CAL 10359)
Marketing Database Analyst (G-CAL 11072)
Project Coordinator (G-CAL 10356)
Windows Systems Administrator (G-CAL 11037)
User Experience Designer (G-CAL 10358)
Milan
Director, Country Operations, Italy (G-MIL 11075)
Sao Paulo
Country Director, Brazil (G-SP 11076)
I hope that whatever IT people they hire are more competent than the current sorry lot.
147
« on: March 30, 2011, 18:55 »
At an average of $10 per image sold that would be a $310 million turnover which would be about a 10% of the global stock imagery turnover
Which is probably right and makes you wonder why they have Kelly running something that valuable.
Yes, have you noticed that his title is COO? He's never gotten the CEO title and certainly hasn't earned it the way things have been going.
148
« on: March 30, 2011, 18:52 »
I also wondered how location was determined and also noticed that my DL's seem to go up during European "prime time" and fall off when Americans are at work. I'm based out of the U.S. so am scratching my head as to why my images are selling to European buyers when they seem to have sold so well during American work hours in the past.
149
« on: March 27, 2011, 22:10 »
My guess is that most people don't even know what the slider is let alone where to find it.
As far as sales, I had a couple scary days of zero DL's straight and then things started to get back to normal though like others, I'm having stuff sell that hasn't sold in the last few years.
150
« on: March 23, 2011, 18:18 »
Reducing marketing = conserving cash
Cutting commissions and bonuses = boosting profits
conserving cash and boosting profits = ......................
Exactly. It's fairly obvious that they have been operating for profit rather than growth for months now. Can't imagine why though.
Well summed up Paulie.
I am thinking this is still about an impending sale?
Bingo!
I would also agree with this as well. My bet is that they are looking to sell Getty and their entire family of photo sites as one entity.
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
