MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Fotolia Ranking Significance  (Read 4467 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #25 on: April 26, 2017, 05:37 »
+4
No algorithm will be "fair" except the ones that put my pics at the top of course ;-). Different sites prioritize differently. If they are wise its to reflect their customer base.


« Reply #26 on: April 26, 2017, 11:37 »
+1
No algorithm will be "fair" except the ones that put my pics at the top of course ;-). Different sites prioritize differently. If they are wise its to reflect their customer base.


Not so!  you can very often see your own images right up front on page one thats no problem. However thats YOU!  when a buyer logs in and search he will most of the time see a completely different search and your shot might be on page 15 and add to that a geographical search and your picture might not even be there.

I've asked so many buyers that I know to purposely log in and have a look I've lost count.

« Reply #27 on: April 27, 2017, 01:42 »
+1
 "If they are wise its to reflect their customer base." which is why different customers see different images.

« Reply #28 on: April 27, 2017, 04:03 »
0
But they are not wise! :D  Adobe/ft will mimmic everything SS do but about a month later and then that boat is gone!

Btw are you uploading to both these?

« Reply #29 on: April 27, 2017, 04:07 »
0
But they are not wise! :D  Adobe/ft will mimmic everything SS do but about a month later and then that boat is gone!

Btw are you uploading to both these?
Yep for me Fotolia still not quite catching SS often come close but then SS chip in with the odd SoD. I guess SS would say they are wise whatever we think as they seem by far the most financially successful site (for them).

« Reply #30 on: April 27, 2017, 05:20 »
0
But they are not wise! :D  Adobe/ft will mimmic everything SS do but about a month later and then that boat is gone!

Btw are you uploading to both these?
Yep for me Fotolia still not quite catching SS often come close but then SS chip in with the odd SoD. I guess SS would say they are wise whatever we think as they seem by far the most financially successful site (for them).

I know what you mean!  no for me SS is still lightyears ahead of fotolia and giving the fact that none of them are really producing remarkable results nowadays.

« Reply #31 on: April 27, 2017, 09:42 »
+3
No algorithm will be "fair" except the ones that put my pics at the top of course ;-). Different sites prioritize differently. If they are wise its to reflect their customer base.

No, they must always put my pictures on top!  :) My new photos should be first when new to be seen properly, and my old should be first because they are old and have proven sales. Middle age files should be up front, because they need the advantage over the new files flood of others and they are surely better than some old files, not as good equipment or size, from years ago. My files should always be first because they came from me. [truth and sarcasm get no respect]

No algorithm is ever fair.

The best design is for company sales earnings and to put the best matching work in front of buyers. Notice, none of that has anything to do with us as individuals, our age, gender, location, commission level, work history or standing. It's all about making the most profit and pleasing the customers. New files get a boost everywhere I've seen on the upper sites. People who are active and keep uploading seem to get a boost on many sites. Old files with proven history are also more towards the front. The buyers see what will make the  agency most attractive and make the most money. It's a balance of all possible attractive files, to present them to the buyers.

Favoritism or special treatment, manipulation of the search to hide sellers or files, is not in the best interest of the agency.

« Reply #32 on: April 27, 2017, 10:00 »
0
At SS, my old good sellers are still on front pages. New files get a bit of boost. Old files with not so good sales get buried  ;D. Sometime I stopped uploading for a few months (creative block) but it did not affect the sales there at all.

« Reply #33 on: April 27, 2017, 10:28 »
+2
I agree I havent been uploading for some time and it doesnt have any effect on sales. its a fallacy. of course agencies want to make out that uploading all the time and sales comes in but its a fallacy
 the search still remains the same.
« Last Edit: April 27, 2017, 10:30 by derek »

« Reply #34 on: April 27, 2017, 12:36 »
0
I agree I havent been uploading for some time and it doesnt have any effect on sales. its a fallacy. of course agencies want to make out that uploading all the time and sales comes in but its a fallacy
 the search still remains the same.

So you are saying that Mat from Adobe is lying to us this week when he wrote we should upload for better placement?


Are you consistently uploading new content? That is the best way to ensure your portfolio stays near the top of the search results I have found. Adobe is working very hard to market Adobe Stock and as far as I can tell, we are increasing in volume at a rapid pace. There is strong potential to earn good revenue...it's entirely up to you to produce the content to take advantage of the opportunity.

Good luck!

Mat

Or maybe some places it matters and some it doesn't count as much? SS has written that upload full size for better sales, I find that minimum size sells just as well except a very seldom XL or XXL someplace.

At SS, my old good sellers are still on front pages. New files get a bit of boost. Old files with not so good sales get buried  ;D. Sometime I stopped uploading for a few months (creative block) but it did not affect the sales there at all.

I find the same. Old good sellers that haven't been replaced by better of the similar, are still on first page. Common old shots have gone back pages. Some best seller similar to others of mine, get sold over and over, I mean one set of 18 almost identical. There's something that pushes sold files to buyers over similar from same artist. Result is a good files makes many more sales than it's brothers and sisters.
« Last Edit: April 27, 2017, 12:40 by JimP »

« Reply #35 on: April 27, 2017, 14:31 »
0
I agree I havent been uploading for some time and it doesnt have any effect on sales. its a fallacy. of course agencies want to make out that uploading all the time and sales comes in but its a fallacy
 the search still remains the same.

So you are saying that Mat from Adobe is lying to us this week when he wrote we should upload for better placement?


Are you consistently uploading new content? That is the best way to ensure your portfolio stays near the top of the search results I have found. Adobe is working very hard to market Adobe Stock and as far as I can tell, we are increasing in volume at a rapid pace. There is strong potential to earn good revenue...it's entirely up to you to produce the content to take advantage of the opportunity.

Good luck!

Mat

Or maybe some places it matters and some it doesn't count as much? SS has written that upload full size for better sales, I find that minimum size sells just as well except a very seldom XL or XXL someplace.

At SS, my old good sellers are still on front pages. New files get a bit of boost. Old files with not so good sales get buried  ;D. Sometime I stopped uploading for a few months (creative block) but it did not affect the sales there at all.

I find the same. Old good sellers that haven't been replaced by better of the similar, are still on first page. Common old shots have gone back pages. Some best seller similar to others of mine, get sold over and over, I mean one set of 18 almost identical. There's something that pushes sold files to buyers over similar from same artist. Result is a good files makes many more sales than it's brothers and sisters.

No at SS I find that full size uploads sell better and sometimes much better in fact. At FT in my case it doesnt matter the slightest BUT thats in my case I cant speak for others.

Lets put it this way if an agency house 100 million files do you really believe another lets say 500 uploads is going to make any difference any dent at all.

« Reply #36 on: April 27, 2017, 15:04 »
+1
I agree I havent been uploading for some time and it doesnt have any effect on sales. its a fallacy. of course agencies want to make out that uploading all the time and sales comes in but its a fallacy
 the search still remains the same.

So you are saying that Mat from Adobe is lying to us this week when he wrote we should upload for better placement?


Are you consistently uploading new content? That is the best way to ensure your portfolio stays near the top of the search results I have found. Adobe is working very hard to market Adobe Stock and as far as I can tell, we are increasing in volume at a rapid pace. There is strong potential to earn good revenue...it's entirely up to you to produce the content to take advantage of the opportunity.

Good luck!

Mat

Or maybe some places it matters and some it doesn't count as much? SS has written that upload full size for better sales, I find that minimum size sells just as well except a very seldom XL or XXL someplace.

At SS, my old good sellers are still on front pages. New files get a bit of boost. Old files with not so good sales get buried  ;D. Sometime I stopped uploading for a few months (creative block) but it did not affect the sales there at all.

I find the same. Old good sellers that haven't been replaced by better of the similar, are still on first page. Common old shots have gone back pages. Some best seller similar to others of mine, get sold over and over, I mean one set of 18 almost identical. There's something that pushes sold files to buyers over similar from same artist. Result is a good files makes many more sales than it's brothers and sisters.

No at SS I find that full size uploads sell better and sometimes much better in fact. At FT in my case it doesnt matter the slightest BUT thats in my case I cant speak for others.

Lets put it this way if an agency house 100 million files do you really believe another lets say 500 uploads is going to make any difference any dent at all.

I get the point. No matter what someone says here, you will say the opposite. Now I know your game and I can ignore you.

« Reply #37 on: April 27, 2017, 15:29 »
+1
Nope. Does nothing at all. I'm an Emerald. Sales are horrible there for me.

Same here also Emerald and sales are almost non existant! I was earning far more three years back. The one and only reason I still stick with Adobe-Ft is because I cant really be bothered deleting or uploading. Theyre just there so to speak.

The key to success is to consistently upload which helps keep your content near the top of the search results. If you have stopped uploading, it's possible your existing content is being pushed back in the search as new, relevant content continues to flow in thus making it more difficult for customers to find your work.

-Mat

Thanks Mat!

and this is something people do not realize. Success is not a one way journey, its a circular path and one needs to keep on running. I have seen people complaining of no sale, terrible sale and accusing the agency... but hey are you really working and producing the right content needed?

There's a big difference between the hamster wheel expectation and "the right content".

« Reply #38 on: April 27, 2017, 15:33 »
0
I agree I havent been uploading for some time and it doesnt have any effect on sales. its a fallacy.

You can never know for certain - if you had continued uploading maybe your sales of existing images would be twice what they are.  There is never a way to objectively know about the path not taken unless you do an experiment with two identical portfolios.

I have stopped uploading for long periods of time and haven't seen too much of a dropoff, but I have no idea what might have happened if I had uploaded continuously since I didn't do it.

It's interesting that the poll now has FT ahead of iS and 50% of SS - that is not my experience but the trend is similar at least.

« Reply #39 on: April 27, 2017, 16:11 »
0
I agree I havent been uploading for some time and it doesnt have any effect on sales. its a fallacy. of course agencies want to make out that uploading all the time and sales comes in but its a fallacy
 the search still remains the same.

So you are saying that Mat from Adobe is lying to us this week when he wrote we should upload for better placement?


Are you consistently uploading new content? That is the best way to ensure your portfolio stays near the top of the search results I have found. Adobe is working very hard to market Adobe Stock and as far as I can tell, we are increasing in volume at a rapid pace. There is strong potential to earn good revenue...it's entirely up to you to produce the content to take advantage of the opportunity.

Good luck!

Mat

Or maybe some places it matters and some it doesn't count as much? SS has written that upload full size for better sales, I find that minimum size sells just as well except a very seldom XL or XXL someplace.

At SS, my old good sellers are still on front pages. New files get a bit of boost. Old files with not so good sales get buried  ;D. Sometime I stopped uploading for a few months (creative block) but it did not affect the sales there at all.

I find the same. Old good sellers that haven't been replaced by better of the similar, are still on first page. Common old shots have gone back pages. Some best seller similar to others of mine, get sold over and over, I mean one set of 18 almost identical. There's something that pushes sold files to buyers over similar from same artist. Result is a good files makes many more sales than it's brothers and sisters.

No at SS I find that full size uploads sell better and sometimes much better in fact. At FT in my case it doesnt matter the slightest BUT thats in my case I cant speak for others.

Lets put it this way if an agency house 100 million files do you really believe another lets say 500 uploads is going to make any difference any dent at all.

I get the point. No matter what someone says here, you will say the opposite. Now I know your game and I can ignore you.


opposite??  well sorry but it works in my case is there anything wrong with that?  it might also be a reason why SS in particular asks for full size uploads yes? your experience might be somewhat different I wouldnt know. End of story I recon.

« Reply #40 on: April 27, 2017, 21:09 »
+1
I agree I havent been uploading for some time and it doesnt have any effect on sales. its a fallacy.

You can never know for certain - if you had continued uploading maybe your sales of existing images would be twice what they are.  There is never a way to objectively know about the path not taken unless you do an experiment with two identical portfolios.

I have stopped uploading for long periods of time and haven't seen too much of a dropoff, but I have no idea what might have happened if I had uploaded continuously since I didn't do it.

It's interesting that the poll now has FT ahead of iS and 50% of SS - that is not my experience but the trend is similar at least.

No, we can never absolutely know what might have happened, but if you upload weekly for a number of years and then stop for a year, you have a pretty good base for comparison.

« Reply #41 on: April 28, 2017, 11:11 »
+2

I get the point. No matter what someone says here, you will say the opposite. Now I know your game and I can ignore you.


opposite??  well sorry but it works in my case is there anything wrong with that?  it might also be a reason why SS in particular asks for full size uploads yes? your experience might be somewhat different I wouldnt know. End of story I recon.

For example

Really??  well I am down about 50% since new year and I have a very high commercial value portfolio. Sorry but I dont buy that at all. Everyone I know with quality portfolios are down with the magical 40-50% and none of them are uploading including myself. Whats the point?
I agree I havent been uploading for some time and it doesnt have any effect on sales. its a fallacy. of course agencies want to make out that uploading all the time and sales comes in but its a fallacy
 the search still remains the same.

No effect?

For me with a portfolio of just around 3000 files Adobe is way up and it certainly makes up for the big 40% of SS drop in earnings. No complaints.
I know what you mean!  no for me SS is still lightyears ahead of fotolia and giving the fact that none of them are really producing remarkable results nowadays.

 ???


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
12 Replies
6296 Views
Last post December 18, 2006, 02:23
by beisea
3 Replies
3114 Views
Last post April 11, 2011, 06:32
by Lizard
4 Replies
1775 Views
Last post February 08, 2013, 20:28
by OM
25 Replies
6703 Views
Last post June 17, 2015, 19:47
by SLStudios
2 Replies
1530 Views
Last post July 09, 2015, 12:04
by Johnski2015

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors