Author Topic: "Quality" rating of accepted images (Read 6135 times)

NYTumbleweeds · « **on:** January 20, 2009, 20:19 »

I just noticed that when you view all of your accepted images here you can search by the "quality" of your images (the quality being either excellent, good or ok). Certain images have been rated probably by the reviewer when they were accepted. Anybody know how this relates to a buyers search results? Considering this potentially is just the individual reviewers opinion I'd hate to think this puts your images back in a search result??

It appears that this is not consistently done on every accepted image

KB · « **Reply #1 on:** January 20, 2009, 22:38 »

I'd noticed this before, but never paid any attention to it.

I just checked and found that 0% of my images are rated as "excellent".

That's a real confidence-booster.

87% are "good", and 13% are "ok".

Here's the most interesting part. 29% of my "good" images have at least 1 DL, but only 13% of my "ok" images have a DL.

Is the lower performance of the "ok" files because of their rating, or is it because the rating is accurate?

Phil · « **Reply #2 on:** January 21, 2009, 05:46 »

i really never looked at it, like you said not much of confidence booster, bit like editors picks at DT

13 excellent

2707 good
304 ok

not one of my 'excellent' stuff would I consider my best stuff, only 1 image in there that I really like. however there is some I really like in 'ok' including one of my best sellers and an image chosen as image of the day at crestock. just goes to show that everyone has different tastes

it doesnt seem to relate to how 'stocky' it is, there is a whole 7 downloads for the 13 images. 44 of my 304 'ok's have downloads although it drops to 1 download each very quick. I would guess it affects search engine but by how much is anyones guess.

Phil

sharpshot · « **Reply #3 on:** January 21, 2009, 06:16 »

12 excellent (I don't agree with 7 of them)
3,061 good
332 ok (some of my best here)

Iriz · « **Reply #4 on:** January 21, 2009, 06:50 »

Quote from: sharpshot on January 21, 2009, 06:16

12 excellent (I don't agree with 7 of them)
3,061 good
332 ok (some of my best here)

Sounds suspiciously to me like they're using the same reviewers at Photocase.com

sharpshot · « **Reply #5 on:** January 21, 2009, 07:04 »

Quote from: Iriz on January 21, 2009, 06:50

Quote from: sharpshot on January 21, 2009, 06:16
12 excellent (I don't agree with 7 of them)
3,061 good
332 ok (some of my best here)

Sounds suspiciously to me like they're using the same reviewers at Photocase.com

I don't think I would get 96% acceptance with photocase.com

Lcjtripod · « **Reply #6 on:** January 21, 2009, 07:31 »

Quality does not mean quality! It means the reviewers oppionion of the image and it does determine its order in the search! Excellent in front and OK to the back.

If you was a buyer would you buy any of the Good or OK images if they were all the same price as the excellent ones? Not me! And they are all the same price. It's like offering fresh eggs or rotten eggs to a buyer and the price is the same! Stupid!

This image was rated "Excellent"

Five or six days later I uploaded 5 more with different wording otherwise exactly the same quality. (Image quality) They were rated "OK"
A little later I uploaded 6 more and they were rated "Good"

So the Quality rating does not mean image quality, it is only the oppinion of the reviewer and in my oppionion hurts BigStock sales. The rating can stay if they want it but it should not be part of the search, so that you or I cannot see it.

Complaints to BigStock fall on deft ears.

2 1/2 years a BigStock member,
-Larry

RT · « **Reply #7 on:** January 21, 2009, 07:35 »

My guess is:

Excellent = I'll put that into my lightbox to copy later

Good = Part of a series, I'll only have to check one of them

OK = I can't believe they took a photo of that, but as I can't find anything technically wrong with it I'll let it through.

NYTumbleweeds · « **Reply #8 on:** January 21, 2009, 10:33 »

Oh well... apparently not too significant! Thanks for the feedback

Lcjtripod · « **Reply #9 on:** January 21, 2009, 10:50 »

Quote from: NYTumbleweeds on January 21, 2009, 10:33

Oh well... apparently not too significant! Thanks for the feedback

The search order is significant!
-Larry

NYTumbleweeds · « **Reply #10 on:** January 21, 2009, 11:33 »

Quote from: Lcjtripod on January 21, 2009, 10:50

Quote from: NYTumbleweeds on January 21, 2009, 10:33
Oh well... apparently not too significant! Thanks for the feedback

The search order is significant!
-Larry

Of course it is! I hereby declare I want mine at the top!!

Tuilay · « **Reply #11 on:** January 21, 2009, 12:02 »

Just wondering how many of your "excellent" had DLs. Betcha the reason why majority is OK means reviewer(s) thought, "These images are awesome, too much competition for my own and my buddies."
If not, I guess BigStock reviewers much prefer OK quality to Excellent (read as Excellent gets rejected by a certain reviewer).
Yet another reason to not waste time with BigStock.

sharpshot · « **Reply #12 on:** January 21, 2009, 12:17 »

Quote from: Tuilay on January 21, 2009, 12:02

..Yet another reason to not waste time with BigStock.

They are my 6th highest earning site, so I don't care too much about minor issues.

NYTumbleweeds · « **Reply #13 on:** January 21, 2009, 12:55 »

Quote from: Tuilay on January 21, 2009, 12:02

Just wondering how many of your "excellent" had DLs. Betcha the reason why majority is OK means reviewer(s) thought, "These images are awesome, too much competition for my own and my buddies."
If not, I guess BigStock reviewers much prefer OK quality to Excellent (read as Excellent gets rejected by a certain reviewer).
Yet another reason to not waste time with BigStock.

Most of my excellents have downloads but my oks also have downloads.

madelaide · « **Reply #14 on:** January 21, 2009, 16:55 »

Only 5 or my 395 are excellent. Only one I would consider excellent.

30 are OK. One of them is my bestseller in BigStock. Others are good sellers elsewhere but never sold in BigStock.

Regards,
Adelaide

MikLav · « **Reply #15 on:** January 21, 2009, 17:03 »

I didn't notice that before. Objectionable splitting indeed... Some of my "Excellent" have 0 Dls, some of "Good" have tens of dls... All "OK" have 0-2 dls but some of my best pics are among "ok" - so it seems buyers might be paying attention to that.

Tuilay · « **Reply #16 on:** January 21, 2009, 17:08 »

Quote from: MikLav on January 21, 2009, 17:03

I didn't notice that before. Objectionable splitting indeed... Some of my "Excellent" have 0 Dls, some of "Good" have tens of dls... All "OK" have 0-2 dls but some of my best pics are among "ok" - so it seems buyers might be paying attention to that.

not sure if i understand MikLav. how would it be that buyers are paying attention? you just said your EXCELLENT have ZERO dl. if buyers take the rating seriously, would you not be getting the most DL from the ones rated EXCELLENT?

stormchaser · « **Reply #17 on:** January 22, 2009, 13:48 »

I looked at mine for the heck of it. One of the "excellent" picks was a vector I did n about 5 minutes that I didn't even think would be accepted anywhere. It was sort of a test of the waters for a certain technique. Go figure. The ratings do seem quite arbitrary.

Fred · « **Reply #18 on:** January 22, 2009, 15:04 »

This is so open to abuse it is pitiful. I can just see reviewers giving their friends and other reviewers plenty of excellent ratings. Don't see how you could control it without some pretty close monitoring.

From the published numbers I can find the overall rating for the entire database is something like:

excellent     89,463    3%
good      2,314,937   85%
ok        336,552   13%

I've got 187 imagese with NO excellent ratings. If I were average I should have at least 5 on a port that size. Maybe this is why I have not sold a single image in over 2 months. Getting close to saying good-bye to these guys.

fred

tan510jomast · « **Reply #19 on:** January 22, 2009, 15:33 »

Hey cheer up, I don't even have one rated Excellent

I'm mostly OK . I guess I will forget about submitting to BigStock from here on. They don't think too much of my images

Tuilay · « **Reply #20 on:** January 22, 2009, 15:46 »

Quote from: tan510jomast on January 22, 2009, 15:33

Hey cheer up, I don't even have one rated Excellent
I'm mostly OK . I guess I will forget about submitting to BigStock from here on. They don't think too much of my images

from where i see it, you're doing well with DT even for a small portfolio. tan, i would concentrate on DT where the sales are coming for you.

tsmarkley · « **Reply #21 on:** January 22, 2009, 16:15 »

1 excellent (less than 1%)
359 good (62.2%)
217 OK (37.6)

The one excellent really surprised me.

KB · « **Reply #22 on:** January 22, 2009, 16:25 »

Quote from: Fred on January 22, 2009, 15:04

This is so open to abuse it is pitiful. I can just see reviewers giving their friends and other reviewers plenty of excellent ratings. Don't see how you could control it without some pretty close monitoring.

From the published numbers I can find the overall rating for the entire database is something like:

excellent     89,463    3%
good      2,314,937   85%
ok        336,552   13%

I've got 187 imagese with NO excellent ratings. If I were average I should have at least 5 on a port that size. Maybe this is why I have not sold a single image in over 2 months. Getting close to saying good-bye to these guys.

fred

If it makes you feel any better, I have more than 2x as many images as you, and still not a single "excellent" rating. I should have over a dozen based on the "average" stats. I do have the 13% "ok" images, though!

hali · « **Reply #23 on:** January 22, 2009, 16:34 »

IT'S HIGHLY SUBJECTIVE. Don't worry be happy! Reviewer is probably myopic

MikLav · « **Reply #24 on:** January 22, 2009, 17:15 »

Quote from: Tuilay on January 21, 2009, 17:08

Quote from: MikLav on January 21, 2009, 17:03
I didn't notice that before. Objectionable splitting indeed... Some of my "Excellent" have 0 Dls, some of "Good" have tens of dls... All "OK" have 0-2 dls but some of my best pics are among "ok" - so it seems buyers might be paying attention to that.

not sure if i understand MikLav. how would it be that buyers are paying attention? you just said your EXCELLENT have ZERO dl. if buyers take the rating seriously, would you not be getting the most DL from the ones rated EXCELLENT?

I don't see a contradiction. What I mean is that (I suppose that) buyers always select "Excellent" or "Good" in their search and simply ignore "ok". What they buy is a different story, that's why even "Excellent" might have 0 dls.