No views, no sales

[hofhoek]

I don't want to whine but I am truly very curious if most of you notice too that new uploads have no views and that sales are bad? Of my 26 latest uploads (since may 27th) I have had one view on one image. My sales have dropped seriously with 75%! If I am the only one then there is something suddenly wrong with my portfolio because it has been days since I've sold anything. I work with them now since late 2006 and have a bit more than 1000 images and this is totally new for me. Anyone care to elaborate? Thanks, Patricia

[kapsyl]

Well, I can't compare with your portfolio since I only have 26 images on Dreamstime so far.
But it sounds like there's something wrong. I've had views on my latest images and have even sold two this week...

Send them an e-mail and ask if there's anything technically wrong with your portfolio.

/P

[Magnum]

Your link to Dt doesn�t work to start with...

[hofhoek]

Well, the link works but my portfolio doesn't show. I don't know what you get when you try the link but I get my home page with info about the money I earned (not much this month) and the amount of uploads I have but no portfolio. That's strange.

[oboy]

Change your profile settings here at MG for DT. The information for DT should be your user name. It looks like you put in a number.

[stockastic]

Starting in January, I've gotten about 80 images onto Dreamstime and was making some sales. About a month ago they made some changes that caused the sales to fall way off, and new images no longer get any views.  Once in a while an old image still sells. 

[WarrenPrice]

Starting in January, I've gotten about 80 images onto Dreamstime and was making some sales. About a month ago they made some changes that caused the sales to fall way off, and new images no longer get any views.  Once in a while an old image still sells. 

I've noticed some changes for the worse.  My sales in April were really good, May was going okay until the 23d.  After the 23d, NADA, no sales and no views.  NOTHING.
There was a long thread on DT about changing the Views algorithm but total denial that it affected the sales.  Something did.  And, I don't think it can be blamed completely on the season.

[kingjon]

My views seem about normal for the new files (last uploaded mid may). My sales are about average (I had a BME last month).

[etienjones]

With a small port (181) my last download on May 26, with only one view since then . . . .  this is really a deterioration from past experience.

[hofhoek]

Thanks for the replies. Suddenly after this posting I got 3 views but that was it. I used to sell at least 4 or 5 a day but the last week was a very sad zero in total.
I'll just wait . I guess it is the algorithm then. Nothing to do about that. And @ Oboy: I added these links a long time ago and have no clue whatsoever how to change it...

[GeoPappas]

DT has a thread on their forums (http://www.dreamstime.com/forumm_17374_pg1) where Achilles states:

"It is not a search engine update. We removed the counter for non-authenticated guests, at least for a while. The traffic is huge and the number not really useful. Views are still counted for members.

If we find out this is a vital resource, we will add it back. However, we need to optimize and to direct most resources to the important areas. You know them, the ones that lead to more sales. "


He also states later in the thread:

"... views are not a factor within the ranking."

[redo]

for me DT works better and better. BME after BME.

[fotografer]

Same for me.

for me DT works better and better. BME after BME.

[oboy]

And @ Oboy: I added these links a long time ago and have no clue whatsoever how to change it...

Click in the top menu here at MG on Profile - then on the left side on Forum Profile Information - now write in the Dreamstime field your Dreamstime user name and click on the Change Profile button.

[gaja]

There has been an announcement about a algorithm change too. It's in the thread about prize change. They changed it in favour of "quality", which basically means old pics with a lot of sales. Before this change there was a short spell where exclusives where heavily favoured. I'm probably seeing the effects of that period now, since I already have my BME this month.  I think that most of my sales are from lightboxes, since the pictures that are bought usually are on page 13-14 on the saleday, but where on page 1-2 a week or two earlier.

May was horrible for me, but I think that is because much of my portfolio is oriented towards Scandinavia, and we have different holidays all through May.

I don't mind the cahnge in view counting, since many of the old viewers were non-buyers. But I would have liked to know how many of my pics have been added to lightboxes.

[stockastic]

Yes, 'quality'.  In other words, they want to keep selling what's been selling in the past.  New images from new contributors go nowhere.   

It seems to me that's self-defeating in the long run, but I'm obviuosly biased.

[Lcjtripod]

Yes, 'quality'.  In other words, they want to keep selling what's been selling in the past.  New images from new contributors go nowhere.   

It seems to me that's self-defeating in the long run, but I'm obviuosly biased.

Is that why my sales went from nearly everyday and sometimes 5 or 6 sales a day to nothing in the last week?
Perhaps I should focus my attention to a different site.

-Larry

[null]

Perhaps I should focus my attention to a different site.

For some reason, DT un-favors recent images. The most recent I sold is from end February. All the others are 1-3 years old. The "recent" sale was found without keywords. That means it's the result of a buyer wandering off in your port and reverting to visual search. The message is upload, and ... wait.

[null]

Yes, 'quality'.  In other words, they want to keep selling what's been selling in the past.  New images from new contributors go nowhere.

New images from old contributors too 

[qwerty]

My last 5 files I uploaded have 0 views, the 6th most recent has 40 something views. Sales are a bit down, something changed for my portfolio exposure.

[stockastic]

Roughly the same thing happened at SS at roughly the same time.  For my first 3/4 months on SS, my new images did well, many sales in the first few days (for purposes of this discussion I'm calling a token payment of 25 cents a "sale").  That ended a few weeks ago. My "old" images going back to January continue to sell. My most recent group hasn't made a single sale in 2 weeks.  

Apparently all these sites have recently had the insight that they could make more money by pushing past sellers to the front.   The big question, of course, is whether new images now have any chance of becoming viable 'old' images, or just go in the dumpster.

I've quit submitting, waiting to see if my last group ever makes any sales.  If it doesn't there's no point in continuing.

[Dreamframer]

My sales dropped

[puravida]

sales and views are down at most of the other Big 6 , so why do you expect Dreamstime to be immuned?
buyers already have a garageful of excess images that they bought with subscription. they don't need to buy too much more.

[Freedom]

People are not talking about the usual slow time. Did you see that the OP has over 1000 images and have been a long time DT contributor?

DT has been exceptionally slow for me too, and most sales are under $1.00. Very disappointing.

sales and views are down at most of the other Big 6 , so why do you expect Dreamstime to be immuned?
buyers already have a garageful of excess images that they bought with subscription. they don't need to buy too much more.

[puravida]

People are not talking about the usual slow time. Did you see that the OP has over 1000 images and have been a long time DT contributor?

DT has been exceptionally slow for me too, and most sales are under $1.00. Very disappointing.

sales and views are down at most of the other Big 6 , so why do you expect Dreamstime to be immuned?
buyers already have a garageful of excess images that they bought with subscription. they don't need to buy too much more.

No I was not talkig about usual slow time either. I said because of subscription buyers already took what they need , more than they can use. So obviously now they don't buy nothing.

[shutterdrop]

All new images that were approved after May 17 have had zero view and zero sales.

It looks like DT has changed their search engines.

[stockastic]

Maybe they should rename it the "hide" engine.

[gostwyck]

All new images that were approved after May 17 have had zero view and zero sales.

That's not my experience. I've had 12 sales and over 200 views on images approved since 17th May.

[willie]

Hate to admit it but Dreamstime has been horrible on my newly approved images. I have a trinkle of downloads mostly subs, and all are of really old images.
Am now wondering if it's worth uploading any more new images if they are not getting any views.
Echoes of IS and StockXpert. Hmm, wonder if Getty has already bought over Dreamstime 
maybe CONSTANTIN, CARMEN, and ACHILLES just forgot to announce it   

[stockastic]

This business has been tossed into a blender.  Getty is busily bulldozing things, and the (remaining) independents are constantly fiddling with their search priorities.

At DT and SS is my new images stopped selling, starting a couple of weeks ago. I believe both sites have stated they reduced the boost for new images.

It's been pointed out more than once that views don't matter - just sales.  So if meaningless views are reduced but sales remain, fine.  

But - the question remnains - if an image gets no views while it's new, does it "die" for good, or can it still sell later?  I don't know yet, but so far, it does not look good.

As always, it certainly would be nice of the people running these sites would be a little more open and straightforward with contributors. They don't want the competition to know the inner workings of their search functions - I get that.  But how about something simple, like "yes, new images still have a chance - we want them" or "no, it's over, stop submitting unless you have something really hot and current".  

Why would they want to spend money reviewing new images that will never sell?

[willie]

This business has been tossed into a blender.  Getty is busily bulldozing things, and the (remaining) independents are constantly fiddling with their search priorities.

At DT and SS is my new images stopped selling, starting a couple of weeks ago. I believe both sites have stated they reduced the boost for new images.

It's been pointed out more than once that views don't matter - just sales.  So if meaningless views are reduced but sales remain, fine. 

But - the question remnains - if an image gets no views while it's new, does it "die" for good, or can it still sell later?  I don't know yet, but so far, it does not look good.

As always, it certainly would be nice of the people running these sites would be a little more open and straightforward with contributors. They don't want the competition to know the inner workings of their search functions - I get that.  But how about something simple, like "yes, new images still have a chance - we want them" or "no, it's over, stop submitting unless you have something really hot and current". 

Why would they want to spend money reviewing new images that will never sell?

Good points all. I like to know too.
Further to what you said, DT has been approving majority of my new images. But if they push these new images away , why approve them. I assume they think they are good enough to sell.
Again, to echo you, But if they can't find them, how do you sell them?

I too like a little more transparency with Dreamstime and SS. If not a public announcement, at least an email to say, "Oi, we like your stuff but hang on to them and submit them later.Or if you like, let it sit in abeyance for review. we won't review them until we need these new stuff".
Or something like that.

Anyway, I will spend more time drinking my Guinness and stop uploading to these sites until they move their priorities back to boost the new images . Also, I will just upload to the one(s) that 's been selling my new stuff really fast.

Makes sense, no? 

[stockastic]

It's a weird one-sided sort of "partnership" isn't it? Where the answer to every significant contributor question is "guess".

I've stopped shooting and uploading for now.  I want to see if my last few images ever sell. If they don't, there's no point anymore.

[bad to the bone]

@ puravida
how funny is this opinion, you realy think anyone can have some thousends of images and will be prepared for any case.
Any time i need a picture i search again and mostly i didn't get what i'm searching ... meanwhile i have a big pool of images i sold but never ever i take someone twice.
Microstocks are overloaded with copys of copys from pictures what sells but if you search images you need, you can detect a lot of wholes in any agencys portfolio.
I have a long list of images that doesn't exist.
Sales go down this time because it's summer, again, like every year, how unestimated it seems like, it happens every year.

[Achilles]

June-Aug are very slow months, but strangely, it's not the case this year and overall the sales are UP.
I've been posting these on various forums, but here we are again. Yes, the engine algorithm got tweaked; it shows better images now from more users. It takes some time to qualify an image as "better" though I wouldn't call them old. And although you have a good point, we have plenty ways to identify the good images from the newly submitted ones.

[WarrenPrice]

Is there someway we can see which pictures are "better?"  Does it take time for them to be better?  If age is not a factor, maybe I can make mine "better" too. 

[willie]

For some reason, DT un-favors recent images. The most recent I sold is from end February. All the others are 1-3 years old. The "recent" sale was found without keywords. That means it's the result of a buyer wandering off in your port and reverting to visual search. The message is upload, and ... wait.

Well explained FlemishDreams. I was wondering how my trinkle of sales of recent images got found with no specific keyword used. Cheers for providing me with the answer.

June-Aug are very slow months, but strangely, it's not the case this year and overall the sales are UP.
I've been posting these on various forums, but here we are again. Yes, the engine algorithm got tweaked; it shows better images now from more users. It takes some time to qualify an image as "better" though I wouldn't call them old. And although you have a good point, we have plenty ways to identify the good images from the newly submitted ones.

Good to see you here Achilles with some explanation.
I loved to have my "better" images keep selling. However, I prefer that also my recently approved images get found and sell too. Or else, a year down the road, you will only be having a collection of "old" images from us, as you are scaring us away with no views, no sale, to our recently approved images. Which by then, would have all these unviewed unsold images be buried and not seeing the light of day.
If your algorithm keeps doing that, what is the point of us continuing to upload to Dreamstime?

[stockastic]

My interpretation of this is that in the past, new images got automatic exposure and buyers decided whether they were "good".  Now, new images do not get exposure unless DT,  using methods or criteria they do not disclose, decides they are "good".   As a result, some contributors who used to think their images were "good" (because they sold) now find out that DT does not agree.  So their new images no longer get exposure, or sales.

[Pixart]

You can't forget that buyers do have a choice in their searches.  If they want the freshest they can search by most recent.  If they want the most popular they can search by most downloads.  They can reverse the orders if they want the most obscure.  When I buy photos I usually search other than by the site's default.

[CCK]

My sales remain the same.

[WarrenPrice]

You can't forget that buyers do have a choice in their searches.  If they want the freshest they can search by most recent.  If they want the most popular they can search by most downloads.  They can reverse the orders if they want the most obscure.  When I buy photos I usually search other than by the site's default.

So, Achilles' reference to "better" images is only applicable to the default search???

[Achilles]

Yes, it refers to the default search only.

I don't think we will have a collection of old images, although that is a very valid concern. We all want to avoid that.

The new ones still have their ways to make it to the top, just see how many of your images are downloaded based on visual search. Add to that buyers who sort by date.

It's true, things should be balanced and we will continue to keep an eye on them. In the past fresh images were much too favored. Not only that, but contributors uploading series were occupying lot of exposure. Buyers may have downloaded one image, but most often not more of them. So, we're giving that space to more users now.

Sometimes, those images were not the most relevant and certainly not the best (although don't get me wrong, many were very good). This is part of the reason why some members experience a dramatic decline while others see a sharp increase.

Sorry for being offtopic after all. This thread was about no views. I stress once again that not counting the views has no connection to this. The algorithm changed many weeks before that anyway.
Not seeing as many views as before, doesn't mean they are not seen (by both guests and members). I personally believe that the views counted this way will allow users to make more educated guesses about them. The views we count now are more targeted than ever.

[willie]

Yes, it refers to the default search only.

I don't think we will have a collection of old images, although that is a very valid concern. We all want to avoid that.

The new ones still have their ways to make it to the top, just see how many of your images are downloaded based on visual search. Add to that buyers who sort by date.

It's true, things should be balanced and we will continue to keep an eye on them. In the past fresh images were much too favored. Not only that, but contributors uploading series were occupying lot of exposure. Buyers may have downloaded one image, but most often not more of them. So, we're giving that space to more users now.

Sometimes, those images were not the most relevant and certainly not the best (although don't get me wrong, many were very good). This is part of the reason why some members experience a dramatic decline while others see a sharp increase.

Sorry for being offtopic after all. This thread was about no views. I stress once again that not counting the views has no connection to this. The algorithm changed many weeks before that anyway.
Not seeing as many views as before, doesn't mean they are not seen (by both guests and members). I personally believe that the views counted this way will allow users to make more educated guesses about them. The views we count now are more targeted than ever.

Awesome, and thanks again Achilles.
What you mentioned is uplifting and good enough for me to continue as usual.
But the para. that sold me that you are aiming to be more fair to ALL contributors is this para you wrote:
Not only that, but contributors uploading series were occupying lot of exposure. Buyers may have downloaded one image, but most often not more of them. So, we're giving that space to more users now.

Yes, that is one of the most disturbing situation I am sure many contributors were unhappy about...
ie. giving one contributor with series dominating the search, flooding the pages with that one contributor's work, and burying the rest onto page 20, 30, even 100.

Look forward to see more change to give everyone a level playing field. Cheers Achilles.

[madelaide]

You can't forget that buyers do have a choice in their searches.  If they want the freshest they can search by most recent.  If they want the most popular they can search by most downloads.  They can reverse the orders if they want the most obscure.  When I buy photos I usually search other than by the site's default.

True, but I wonder how many buyers use anything other than defaults.

[GeoPappas]

You can't forget that buyers do have a choice in their searches.  If they want the freshest they can search by most recent.  If they want the most popular they can search by most downloads.  They can reverse the orders if they want the most obscure.  When I buy photos I usually search other than by the site's default.

True, but I wonder how many buyers use anything other than defaults.

Not many from my experience.

[Microstock Posts]

You can't forget that buyers do have a choice in their searches.  If they want the freshest they can search by most recent.  If they want the most popular they can search by most downloads.  They can reverse the orders if they want the most obscure.  When I buy photos I usually search other than by the site's default.

True, but I wonder how many buyers use anything other than defaults.

Not many from my experience.

I occasionally buy images. Instinctively, I want to see what's new. If the search engine is not on new images as a default, It's so simple to change it. I'm sure other buyers have the time and the awareness to make that extra click.  

[Lcjtripod]

On DT 17 of my last 20 sales were from the use of key words, 20 sales before that was 16 sales from key words. So if the search is by key words the buyers will  find your images ..... if you used the correct key words.

As an ex buyer of images, I always used key words to find an image.

I'm new on DT and found the site to be user freindly and it took me exactly 4 months from day one to reach the payout. (yesterday)

-Larry

[null]

visual search

Visual search is a very neglected concept in our thinking about how buyers buy our images. Keywords can describe an image only marginally. It's the visual "click" that makes a buyer buy.

DT facilitates visual search a lot by the side-image series "similar images" from other's portfolio, and "more images from your portfolio" or "more images with this model". Neither SS nor IS have that.
What's more, by the "buyer searched after" (keywords), one can get very valuable strategic info about keywording and what's found by visual search (n/a).

The most important factor that contributors are in control of is portfolio diversity. This will lure more buyers (with varying needs) into visually search of your portfolio. Nature, urban, people, industrial, business, transport, isolated, editorial... anything that drags a buyer into your port enhances the chance on a sale, sometimes of a totally different image the buyer searched for initially. One way of working your way to the front page is participating in the assignments. Even if the assignment image doesn't sell, you'll get exposure and a chance of trapping a buyer in your port.

In short, there are many ways to beat the blind search engine.

[null]

As an ex buyer of images, I always used key words to find an image.

I like to wander off in portfolios too.

[willie]

One way of working your way to the front page is participating in the assignments. Even if the assignment image doesn't sell, you'll get exposure and a chance of trapping a buyer in your port.

but don't you have to make your assignment entries exclusive? this would restrict your images potential eearning elsewhere, IF they did not win?

[puravida]

On DT 17 of my last 20 sales were from the use of key words, 20 sales before that was 16 sales from key words. So if the search is by key words the buyers will  find your images ..... if you used the correct key words.

As an ex buyer of images, I always used key words to find an image.

I'm new on DT and found the site to be user freindly and it took me exactly 4 months from day one to reach the payout. (yesterday)

-Larry

woa, excuz me if I misread something. But june 16 you said you were unhappy with DT and was contemplating concentrating on some other site, now you say DT is great.  how is it possible the in 4 days you went from unhappy to ecstatic? pls let me in on the secret

[Lcjtripod]

On DT 17 of my last 20 sales were from the use of key words, 20 sales before that was 16 sales from key words. So if the search is by key words the buyers will  find your images ..... if you used the correct key words.

As an ex buyer of images, I always used key words to find an image.

I'm new on DT and found the site to be user friendly and it took me exactly 4 months from day one to reach the payout. (yesterday)

-Larry

woa, excuz me if I misread something. But june 16 you said you were unhappy with DT and was contemplating concentrating on some other site, now you say DT is great.  how is it possible the in 4 days you went from unhappy to ecstatic? pls let me in on the secret

At that time I had a sudden drop in sales and I thought it was due to new search results. It was a 7 day period with no sales and then it picked right back up as before. So now I am happy again.

So I should say Whoooops!

-Larry

[rene]

visual search

One way of working your way to the front page is participating in the assignments. Even if the assignment image doesn't sell, you'll get exposure and a chance of trapping a buyer in your port.

But don't forget that your image will be trapped for 12 months.

[null]

visual search

One way of working your way to the front page is participating in the assignments. Even if the assignment image doesn't sell, you'll get exposure and a chance of trapping a buyer in your port.

But don't forget that your image will be trapped for 12 months.

And exclusive. In return you get a better positioning in the search engine and instant level 5. You also get the halo effect which I was mentioning. I don't care if it's "trapped" since I have no intention to leave DT. As far as I can see, there are only 2 reasons to remove an image(s) from microstock: (a) exclusive buyout, but only DT has it, so it's not applicable, or (b) going exclusive somewhere.

[puravida]

And exclusive. In return you get a better positioning in the search engine and instant level 5. You also get the halo effect which I was mentioning. I don't care if it's "trapped" since I have no intention to leave DT. As far as I can see, there are only 2 reasons to remove an image(s) from microstock: (a) exclusive buyout, but only DT has it, so it's not applicable, or (b) going exclusive somewhere.

THis special treatment you get only if your image wins the assignment. It doesn't mean every one who submits to the assignment get this better position,  instant level 5,etc

[fotografer]

Every image that gets approved for the assingment get raised to level 5 whether they win or not.

THis special treatment you get only if your image wins the assignment. It doesn't mean every one who submits to the assignment get this better position,  instant level 5,etc

[null]

THis special treatment you get only if your image wins the assignment. It doesn't mean every one who submits to the assignment get this better position,  instant level 5,etc

No, the level 5 is acquired, whether you win it or not. That's the trick. Plus the extended exposure on the front page of course. Buyers can be trapped in "more of this port" or "more of this model" by visual search. I got a bunch of sales (sadly, most of them subs) the past 4 days [after I entered 2 images in the assignment] of shots that never sold at DT. "Sacrificing" (exclusivity) one or two pictures from a series is a good investment for these halo sales.

My point was basically that you have to play on the visual search mechanism too on DT, apart from proper keywording of course.

[Freedom]

I had to delete my assignment entried after the exclusive terms expired. Like Flemish said, my assignment photos were also sold as subs only and never had any real Level 5 sales. I don't enter assignments anymore.

[fotografer]

Here's my last sales on my most recent assingnment file.   Seems well worth it to me.
11 credits (2008) $6.60 medium
9 credits (2008) $4.82 extrasmall
14 credits (2008) $6.72 maximum (upsized) ,
11 credits (2008) $5.50 medium (RF) ,
13 credits (2008) $6.96 extralarge (RF)
13 credits (2008) $7.08 extralarge (RF)
subscription $0.42 extralarge (RF)
subscription $0.42 extralarge (RF)
6 credits (2007) $3.60 medium
10 credits (2008) $5.02 small

[iclick]

Here what you are saying....

I have been at Dreamstime a good few years and it has performed well in the past however sales have tanked of late (more so since the search change) and with new images not performing for me there and the ever changing stat of the microstock industry had to ask myself what is the point in tying myself to this Agency for 6 months with little reward so stopped uploading. Shame but just think it is rather important to keep options open round about now especially with the Getty strokes and SS less than its usual dependable self

[Squat]

awesome.
 thanks to Flemish and fotographer .
I've been following your comments on Assisgnment . I was not aware of this.
 Early this month I had an image approved, and got a note about Assignment.  I didn't know what it was. I thought Assignment was just another comment from someone. (lol newbie of one year, uninformed).
With your comments here, I realise what this is. For that,  I just submitted my first assignment entry a moment ago.
Only thing is I also like to submit the one that was approved recently. How do I do this? Do I need to resubmit the image and delete my approved one? Will it be rejected if I did that?

[Pixart]

Tan, before you go through the trouble - did you send the photo or any from the series elsewhere?  They must be exclusive for the assignment.

[gaja]

Only thing is I also like to submit the one that was approved recently. How do I do this? Do I need to resubmit the image and delete my approved one? Will it be rejected if I did that?

http://www.dreamstime.com/thread_16757

I'm having my BME on DT now. No views, but plenty of sales. Tripple the number from May (which was very bad). Yes, yes, tiny portfolio, no good for statistics, etc,  but very nice on a personal level.  

[Squat]

Tan, before you go through the trouble - did you send the photo or any from the series elsewhere?  They must be exclusive for the assignment.

Yes, I know that much for the assignment. The one I submitted was shot just for the assignment, and therefore exclusive. I understand it stays that way for 12 months from today.
As for the one in my portfolio, yes too. It is an exclusive image.
I have other newly approved images that are quite appropriate for this assignment, but I cannot submit them as I already sold one on Fotolia the same day it got approved.
Thanks Pixart for asking.

Only thing is I also like to submit the one that was approved recently. How do I do this? Do I need to resubmit the image and delete my approved one? Will it be rejected if I did that?

http://www.dreamstime.com/thread_16757
 

Thanks gaja for the thread. I found your question which was similar to mine. ie. submit an existing image from your port, then disable it when it gets approved for the assignment.

[gaja]

Thanks gaja for the thread. I found your question which was similar to mine. ie. submit an existing image from your port, then disable it when it gets approved for the assignment.

A pity they haven't done what the thread asked for and made the rules clearer in a FAQ or on the page where you go to upload for assignment. I think they would get many more exclusive images that way. Easily obtainable information is always important if you want to appear open and user friendly.

[gbcimages]

no views on new images and no sales for six days now. I don't know what's going on over there but it's not good.

[stockastic]

I think that for new images, the bar has now been raised so high - and the returns are so low - that it may no longer be worth submitting here unless you can somehow produce a high volume of very "stock worthy" images at no cost to yourself. 

[Squat]

I am thinking maybe it 's best to disable the files that have not be viewed after so long. Do you think it's a good idea.

[stockastic]

From my own selfish point of view, sure.  But I'm not sure that would be fair to the original contributors.  It would make more sense to purge low-quality photos, but that takes work (i.e. money).

Newer isn't always better. 

[Squat]

stockastic, no, I don't mean DT disable the images. I mean myself, disable my own new images that have no views for so long

[stockastic]

Um, it might make sense, if the site uses some overall portfolio 'performance' metric in ranking your photos -  in other words, if their search engine rates you higher according to the percentage of good sellers in your portfolio.    I have no idea if that is actually happening though.

There is perhaps an advantage in weeding out your portfolio for the benefit of buyers who might just be browsing through it, not keyword searching. 

[puravida]

I am thinking maybe it 's best to disable the files that have not be viewed after so long. Do you think it's a good idea.

stockastic, no, I don't mean DT disable the images. I mean myself, disable my own new images that have no views for so long

If you disable your own new photos, what difference would it make? You will still get no views.
Unless they are exclusive Dreamstime files, then maybe you could disable them and give them to the other Big 5 , in hopes that they will get better views and therefore better chances of downloads.
But for the non-exclusive files, I don't see the point.

[Squat]

Um, it might make sense, if the site uses some overall portfolio 'performance' metric in ranking your photos -  in other words, if their search engine rates you higher according to the percentage of good sellers in your portfolio.    I have no idea if that is actually happening though.

There is perhaps an advantage in weeding out your portfolio for the benefit of buyers who might just be browsing through it, not keyword searching. 

Ya, I was thinking of what sharply_done said in another thread about someone else uploading more new images . Stephen pointed out that if your current images are not getting views or downloads
adding new images will actually make it worst for your portfolio.  Or something like that.

[gaja]

On my front page of "new images" I have now 20 pics with 0 views, except this one that's got 3 views and 1 sale: http://www.dreamstime.com/children-ready-to-race-thumb9628528.jpg

When I clicked on the keywords the buyer used, it was clear that (s)he had changed to newest first, cause the picture is nowhere to be seen on the regular search, while on newest it was no.3.

I don't know what other people should do, but I'll keep trying to improve keywords and pictures. I wouldn't mind if you all deleted all your files and gave me monopoly, but I don't really see the logic in why anybody would do that.

[Squat]

On my front page of "new images" I have now 20 pics with 0 views, except this one that's got 3 views and 1 sale: http://www.dreamstime.com/children-ready-to-race-thumb9628528.jpg

When I clicked on the keywords the buyer used, it was clear that (s)he had changed to newest first, cause the picture is nowhere to be seen on the regular search, while on newest it was no.3.

I don't know what other people should do, but I'll keep trying to improve keywords and pictures. I wouldn't mind if you all deleted all your files and gave me monopoly, but I don't really see the logic in why anybody would do that.

Well, I think I'll try to cull some of my new images to deselect them, and see if it improves my views on the latest uploads. If not, I will deselect some of those  new images that sell for me on the other site very quickly. No point to upload more if it makes it worst for me.

[PixelBytes]

I have views on some new images in the first couple of pages.  Not the majority of them, but the better ones.   Sales are pretty good at DT for me.

[puravida]

On my front page of "new images" I have now 20 pics with 0 views, except this one that's got 3 views and 1 sale: http://www.dreamstime.com/children-ready-to-race-thumb9628528.jpg

When I clicked on the keywords the buyer used, it was clear that (s)he had changed to newest first, cause the picture is nowhere to be seen on the regular search, while on newest it was no.3.

I don't know what other people should do, but I'll keep trying to improve keywords and pictures. I wouldn't mind if you all deleted all your files and gave me monopoly, but I don't really see the logic in why anybody would do that.

Well, I think I'll try to cull some of my new images to deselect them, and see if it improves my views on the latest uploads. If not, I will deselect some of those  new images that sell for me on the other site very quickly. No point to upload more if it makes it worst for me.

*gaja, give you monopoly ? of no views? 
*tan,  So  new images on other site sell very quickly . Then you must have buyers watching for your new  uploads. It's indication you should upload more there. Don't ignore the chances, they don't come around often.

[gbcimages]

I've decided to not upload any more for awhile,I have 13 images waiting for review. I'll just sit back a wait.
 

[bad to the bone]

it's June > sales start to go down it you haven't summer pictures, then came July > sales go down even if you have summer pictures, then...you wouldn't believe but it happens every year, came august and sales slow down again at an unbelieveral rate.
It's bad because no reviewers and no agencies concept can be punished for this...its just the way how advertysing-business work. It's not 9 to 5 and not Januar to December. Better you call your lawyer to make them work every day, every month like every secretary.

Ups...and not to forget: just as an idea of an humbleness rookie who never ever would like to lift his head over anyone like lisa or puravida, who are the rulers here.

[davey_rocket]

I haven't had a sale at DT in almost two weeks (granted I have a tiny port.) but I'm already at BME (almost twice as much as second highest) at SS and I haven't uploaded a thing to them in almost a month.  Seems kind of backwards to me.

[Squat]

I haven't had a sale at DT in almost two weeks (granted I have a tiny port.) but I'm already at BME (almost twice as much as second highest) at SS and I haven't uploaded a thing to them in almost a month.  Seems kind of backwards to me.

No, based on the info here, it's obvious that new contributors and old images of established contributors get the downloads. I was thinking of not uploading anymore as my recent images have no views, but I am getting downloads. albeit mostly subs on older images and repeat sales.
This, I shouldn't complain as a dl is still a dl regardlessly.
Instead of not uploading, I am just uploading them to the edit box, save it till maybe later to finalize and submit. Maybe by summer's end when sales slowdown ends, I will then put all these abeyance images into my portfolio. So, it's not a protest against Dreamstime, but more so, adapting my submission schedule to fit to the way it works.