This is a real joke,, shame on them, they just want it all, and the worst part is the so called “The Agency Collection” they are just going to dump all the shit they can’t sell anymore at ridiculous prices over Getty and sell over iStock, because they own the content the won’t have to pay royalties, some of those collections are owned by Getty. and the worst part…. I bet that “The Agency Collection” will show first in the BM….

ain’t going to stop here, they’ll keep going if they can, they don’t give a shit about the community of contributors that help them to become who they are, without contributors, there are no content, without content there is no iStock… I just hope that their competitors capitalize this moment and send them to hell.

I think there are a lot of people like me, who are loyal to istock and are exclusive and also clients who purchase images. I have had nothing but nice things to say about istock even as we watched decreases in downloads since Getty took over year after year. Now they have the balls to flood our site with other images and decrease our royalties. Yuck, I think many of us will soon be ex-contributors and ex-clients.

Getty’s fight has always been with microstock. We are just seeing how little regard they have for this part of the industry and for the people making a crust from it. It’s disgusting behavior. Shame on Getty and shame on iStock!

Hi Matt,
15% is really demotivating… I don’t know how they can write “would not change most contributors’ total compensation”… is maybe 20 = 15 for example ?!
Cheers,
R.

Hi! From my stats I get around 3$ for a L sale so 30%.. Now will go to 15%… Even top non exclusive won’t reach the 20% (need 93K sales per year).. LOL I hope other agencies do something big and good..

@Daniel “I bet that “The Agency Collection” will show first in the BM….” I’m pretty sure most people agree with this – they will be at the top of BM because they’re “premium” and of course Getty/IS wants to sell them. I think it was a very, very bad day for IS-reliant photographers.

@Cole “I think many of us will soon be ex-contributors and ex-clients.” I honestly think that is the only way they’re going to fix anything. I don’t think small contributors like me have any power. Buyers do. And contributors like Lise, Sean and Nicolesy do. But they could lose thousands of the rest of us and not feel a blip.

@Dave “We are just seeing how little regard they have for this part of the industry.” This has always been Getty’s stance, hasn’t it? Microstock killed them 6+ years ago so they’re fighting back now. The goal seems to be to kill the micro industry but i don’t think they can. They may kill IS but what about Shutterstock and Dreamstime and even Fotolia? Those agencies are going to be the same thorns in Getty’s side iStock was originally. People aren’t going to go back to paying $$$$ for licenses with things like Shutterstock and Google Images around now.

@Rob 15% is definitely de-motivating. I have a ton of images to push through to iStock and for what? Pennies? I mean, not even microstock pennies but a fraction of what those images were worth yesterday? They can’t be serious. But again, who cares what I do? It only matters what buyers and big contributors do.

@Luis – I think the consensus is Yuri will be the ONLY non-exclusive to get 20%. EVERYONE gets it today which means every non-Ex loses starting 1/1/11. I don’t know that Yuri will get there but I think he will. Nobody else will. As far as the 45%, I’d guess under 20 people for sure. Maybe not even 5 will get there. 45% isn’t even AMAZING (it’s good, but not GREAT!) and you have to bring in literally $200,000+ in business for the privilege of earning not quite half of that. WHAT?

Hi Matt – totally agree with you! I am currently exclusive on iS, but have just written asking them to cancel it. This announcement is appalling – I will take my chances elsewhere from now on. Unlike you I had a great deal of loyalty and affection for iStock, it is very sad to see what is being done to a once-great company.

Bravo Bridget. I wish I was exclusive so I could mail their crown back to Seattle. As a non-exclusive, I don’t believe I have a gesture that is as powerful as what you have done!

i am highly considering distributing art to all the sites now, screw istock. they have really made bad choice.

I can see this on CNN )

It all sounded quite good until I got to the 15%

I do think its interesting they are planning to sell what sounds line a full priced macrostock collection on there, its all very much like veer but approached from the opposite starting point. I really hope for the sake of buyers they put a ‘sort by price’ on the results

Drop their royalty from 20% to 1x%, IS make a very severe precedent,I thought maybe some other agencies will follow later.

http://blog.photocase.com/en/2010/09/08/1-4-million-euros/

@Bridget – Good for you, standing up for what you believe. I’m sorry I don’t have more affection and loyalty for iStock but since I wasn’t there 10 yrs ago they’ve always made it difficult to “catch up” which frustrates me. Now, they’ve simply made it undesirable to catch up. *shrug*

@Lorraine – I don’t have anything as powerful as hers either. This blog post and the follow up above have received over 2500 hits in 2 days, though, so at least people are getting the message.

@amdandy – I don’t blame you. It is a terrible choice for almost everyone (and I think they failed math!)

@Ayesha – that would actually not be a bad idea. It would get istock publicity which helps sales but would be BAD pub so maybe they’d change things to where we need them.

@Steve – exactly. I don’t mind the new structure but start non-ex at 20% and go UP don’t penalize us, reward us. And make the targets realistic.

@Rodho – I think other agencies are rubbing their hands in GLEE at this. Either so they can drop commissions later or they can steal all the exclusives who leave. lol Either way it’s been a great week for Shutterstock, Dreamstime and Fotolia.

All I know is I’ve been predicting this for some time. All the agencies will race to the bottom, to the lowest commission level that contributors will bear. My bet is we have to get a lot closer to zero for all the whiners to put their money where their mouths are and pull their portfolios and give up microstock altogether.

I’m just glad it’s a hobby for me, and a lucrative one at that. I’ll continue to upload to iStock, not that I’m happy with the changes, but because my monthly revenue there is just too high to turn my back on. Even going from 20 to 17%, I expect to make a lot more in 2011 than I do in 2010 (currently about $1,000/mo.)

Matt, you’re just being silly to say that you’re glad you haven’t been submitting to iStock. You’ll get a heck of a lot closer to your million dollar goal, if that’s still a realistic shot for you, if you figure out how to get as many shots accepted on iStock as quickly as possible than you will with all the other tiny players combined.

You’re at, what, $20,000 after about five years? I’m at $46,000 after less than two years. My strategy embraces iStock, analyzing every acceptance and rejection and adjusting my upload strategy every day. The results don’t lie.

Disgusting behavior by iStock. I’m a non-exclusive there and am glad that I sell my videos elsewhere. Pond5 gives contributors 50% and their prices are lower… contributors and buyers should go there. I hope Getty comes to regret this move, but have a feeling its part of a bigger plan to change the shape of the stock world and squeeze the micro agencies.

I think this is unfair to do this to their contributors who helped make istock what it is today, but one can always “jump ship” and join another site. I am exclusive with Fotolia, and have seen an increase with my sales since doing so.

@microstocker – we’ve been down this path before. I don’t put in the hours to be at $46,000. I know that – I understand it would take iSuck to pick up for me before I did *very* well at micro. I just simply don’t care. There’s not enough incentive in the world to make me want to go through their torture every week. I have gotten most of my last 60 images accepted at iSuck. I think 43/60 – it’s not that I can’t do it. It’s that it’s simply the worst upload process on any site, it’s low money for me with my 150 images up…

(It’s tough to say who’s doing better, no? I have 150 images on iSuck and I’ve made $20k. Do you have more than 300? LOL)

Thanks for the 3D studio link! Great site : )

This site has been raising prices and lowering commissions to its contributors since being purchased by Getty in 2006.
It no longer represents good value to either image shoppers or photographers selling work, offering commissions as low as 15%, the worst by far in the industry.
Do the artists a favour and buy their work from elsewhere!

As a stock photographer with a history of contributing to traditional stock photo outlets, it is hard not to follow this development and conclude that this was an inevitable outcome. In my estimation, the microstock model does not provide adequate compensation for content creators using any percentage payout. The prices paid by commercial buyers are just too low, and far too much has been given away in the interest of attracting new customers. It is my hope that some sanity will return to the marketplace and that images will actually be regarded as having some value. I know a the “genie” is out of the bottle, but commercial buyers are still spending fair money ( hundreds to thousands of dollars per-image ) to buy traditional stock photos, regardless of the fact that there are millions of images available for $10 or less. How can that be?