pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Shutterstock Search Algorithm  (Read 4607 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

RAW

« on: September 04, 2018, 09:21 »
+1
Hi,

Shutterstock definitely has a search algorithm where they control a contributors earnings.

Can anyone tell if it is based on the number of sales?

I am thinking of deleting all my photos and just having videos with which I earn more.

Maybe the photos should be in a different account.

Any thoughts?


nobody

« Reply #1 on: September 04, 2018, 11:42 »
+3
Hi,

Shutterstock definitely has a search algorithm where they control a contributors earnings.

Can anyone tell if it is based on the number of sales?

I am thinking of deleting all my photos and just having videos with which I earn more.

Maybe the photos should be in a different account.

Any thoughts?

Cap theory? We have beat this one to death and each time we end the topic without any solid proof of this cap.  Does SS change their search engines- absolutely.  I don't see any benefit of separating your videos from your stills.


steheap

  • Author of best selling "Get Started in Stock"

« Reply #2 on: September 04, 2018, 11:44 »
+13
I was going to say that it is a great idea to delete your photos - especially if they are good and compete in the same categories as mine.

derek

    This user is banned.
« Reply #3 on: September 04, 2018, 12:05 »
+4
Absolutely! delete all stills! no point in having them there, SS is just a photo agency!...theres no cap, no control. Its the most honest company on the globe! they go to church every Sunday as well!

« Reply #4 on: September 04, 2018, 13:49 »
+4
Absolutely! delete all stills! no point in having them there, SS is just a photo agency!...theres no cap, no control. Its the most honest company on the globe! they go to church every Sunday as well!

They also donate all their profits to help little children in need and Jon Oringer hand feeds orphan kittens and puppies :)

God bless them in their mighty tower of love!  :-*

Brasilnut

  • Author Brutally Honest Guide to Microstock & Blog

« Reply #5 on: September 04, 2018, 16:38 »
+2
Quote
Shutterstock definitely has a search algorithm where they control a contributors earnings.

Do you have any proof?

« Reply #6 on: September 04, 2018, 16:52 »
+6
Quote
Shutterstock definitely has a search algorithm where they control a contributors earnings.

Do you have any proof?

I do but Jon told me to keep it to myself ;)

« Reply #7 on: September 04, 2018, 17:52 »
+5
Quote
Shutterstock definitely has a search algorithm where they control a contributors earnings.

Do you have any proof?

Don't you know by now that we live in a post truth world where facts and even alternative facts have been superseded by belief regardless of any evidence to the contrary.  Paranoia is but a symptom of this world. 

RAW

« Reply #8 on: September 04, 2018, 19:58 »
+2
Quote
Shutterstock definitely has a search algorithm where they control a contributors earnings.

Do you have any proof?

yes

nobody

« Reply #9 on: September 04, 2018, 22:15 »
+1
as usual another 'Cap Theory' that really has no value whatsoever. Maybe Trump is behind all of this for what we know  8)


derek

    This user is banned.
« Reply #10 on: September 05, 2018, 02:10 »
+2
Quote
Shutterstock definitely has a search algorithm where they control a contributors earnings.

Do you have any proof?

I do but Jon told me to keep it to myself ;)

Haha! Oh yes! we must not forget that it just might be Putin and Trump behind all this!...in a moment and you wait and see all these " oh no! theres no cap" brigade will come out of the woodworks with their "honest" theories! :)

« Reply #11 on: September 05, 2018, 09:54 »
+2
Quote
Shutterstock definitely has a search algorithm where they control a contributors earnings.

Do you have any proof?

I do but Jon told me to keep it to myself ;)

Haha! Oh yes! we must not forget that it just might be Putin and Trump behind all this!...in a moment and you wait and see all these " oh no! theres no cap" brigade will come out of the woodworks with their "honest" theories! :)

Well Jon told me to keep quiet while we were having lunch with Donald and Vladimir


RAW

« Reply #12 on: September 05, 2018, 13:53 »
+1
. . . . well thanks for all that. . very useful.

« Reply #13 on: September 05, 2018, 14:11 »
+1
. . . . well thanks for all that. . very useful.

If you really want a serious answer to a stupid question I would think twice about that if I were you.  Lots of things go into search algorithm, one might be your acceptance ratio like Fotolia where it drops when you delete media, who knows if Shutterstock do the same?  Besides, they might lower your safety net if you delete items.

« Reply #14 on: September 05, 2018, 15:24 »
+1
. . . . well thanks for all that. . very useful.

.....  ;D

nobody

« Reply #15 on: September 05, 2018, 19:51 »
0
"Well Jon told me to keep quiet while we were having lunch with Donald and Vladimir"


Now I am wondering what they had for lunch?

« Reply #16 on: September 05, 2018, 21:15 »
+1
"Well Jon told me to keep quiet while we were having lunch with Donald and Vladimir"


Now I am wondering what they had for lunch?

A bucket of KFC and some coke, what else?
Maybe a BigMac for desert. ;D

This is how the capping history has been written.
« Last Edit: September 05, 2018, 21:19 by Zero Talent »


derek

    This user is banned.
« Reply #17 on: September 06, 2018, 02:36 »
0
"Well Jon told me to keep quiet while we were having lunch with Donald and Vladimir"


Now I am wondering what they had for lunch?

A bucket of KFC and some coke, what else?
Maybe a BigMac for desert. ;D

Jokes apart! well DT for one have admitted they want a " fair" game giving new contributors a fair chance to earn money!....how do you think they mastermind that? if not by some sort of capping??  taking from the rich to give to the poor thingy you know or pushing newbies right up front in the search and thereby pushing down some established!

Either way its a form of capping no matter how you look upon it!


This is how the capping history has been written.

derek

    This user is banned.
« Reply #18 on: September 06, 2018, 02:38 »
0
"Well Jon told me to keep quiet while we were having lunch with Donald and Vladimir"


Now I am wondering what they had for lunch?

A bucket of KFC and some coke, what else?
Maybe a BigMac for desert. ;D

Jokes apart! well DT for one have admitted they want a " fair" game giving new contributors a fair chance to earn money!....how do you think they mastermind that? if not by some sort of capping??  taking from the rich to give to the poor thingy you know or pushing newbies right up front in the search and thereby pushing down some established!

Either way its a form of capping no matter how you look upon it!


This is how the capping history has been written.

something went wrong with the text here?

« Reply #19 on: September 06, 2018, 13:17 »
0
"Well Jon told me to keep quiet while we were having lunch with Donald and Vladimir"


Now I am wondering what they had for lunch?

A bucket of KFC and some coke, what else?
Maybe a BigMac for desert. ;D

Jokes apart! well DT for one have admitted they want a " fair" game giving new contributors a fair chance to earn money!....how do you think they mastermind that? if not by some sort of capping??  taking from the rich to give to the poor thingy you know or pushing newbies right up front in the search and thereby pushing down some established!

Either way its a form of capping no matter how you look upon it!


This is how the capping history has been written.

something went wrong with the text here?

I don't know what went wrong with your quote, but I know what went wrong with your logic: this is not a DreamsTime thread, but a Shutterstock thread.

Major difference, don't you think? One is very successful, the other one is struggling hard to compete. Don't you wonder why*?

*Hint: keep wondering why free market economies have always outperformed socialist economies, based on wealth redistribution.

« Reply #20 on: September 06, 2018, 17:10 »
0
Well, the cap theory is a feasible scenario of which there is no evidence for or against. But just thinking about that bothers many contributors and whenever they talk about it on the forum, most of the comments are hateful and violent.
« Last Edit: September 06, 2018, 17:17 by Mrblues101 »

derek

    This user is banned.
« Reply #21 on: September 07, 2018, 03:07 »
+2
"Well Jon told me to keep quiet while we were having lunch with Donald and Vladimir"


Now I am wondering what they had for lunch?



A bucket of KFC and some coke, what else?
Maybe a BigMac for desert. ;D

Jokes apart! well DT for one have admitted they want a " fair" game giving new contributors a fair chance to earn money!....how do you think they mastermind that? if not by some sort of capping??  taking from the rich to give to the poor thingy you know or pushing newbies right up front in the search and thereby pushing down some established!

Either way its a form of capping no matter how you look upon it!


This is how the capping history has been written.

something went wrong with the text here?

I don't know what went wrong with your quote, but I know what went wrong with your logic: this is not a DreamsTime thread, but a Shutterstock thread.

Major difference, don't you think? One is very successful, the other one is struggling hard to compete. Don't you wonder why*?

*Hint: keep wondering why free market economies have always outperformed socialist economies, based on wealth redistribution.


Well DT was just an example of that agencies can gear the search the direction they want to!  and NO I'm not wondering why. I know the people at DT very, very well and they are not trying to compete with SS, they run their own race so to speak.

Trying to compete with SS nowadays means you have to accept every tom, dick, harry with a smartphone into the agency just to fill up with gazillions of files and just for the sake of it, nothing else!...few years back it was an achievement to get into SS, people had to prove themselves. Today? haha! just look at it like a giant Flea-market!

« Reply #22 on: September 07, 2018, 03:17 »
0
Well, the cap theory is a feasible scenario of which there is no evidence for or against. But just thinking about that bothers many contributors and whenever they talk about it on the forum, most of the comments are hateful and violent.
There is no single cap theory but many variations some more plausible than others. Similarly there are varying degrees of evidence. Everyone has made up their mind now and unless Shutterstock confirm its existence no one is going to change their minds and if SS did announce a cap it would make no difference.

« Reply #23 on: September 07, 2018, 03:51 »
0
I am always amazed to see how much controversy arises from discussions about agencies capping earning.
Maybe I will do a video about it: from time to time a bit controversy can be great fun :-)

« Reply #24 on: September 07, 2018, 18:45 »
0
"Well Jon told me to keep quiet while we were having lunch with Donald and Vladimir"


Now I am wondering what they had for lunch?



A bucket of KFC and some coke, what else?
Maybe a BigMac for desert. ;D

Jokes apart! well DT for one have admitted they want a " fair" game giving new contributors a fair chance to earn money!....how do you think they mastermind that? if not by some sort of capping??  taking from the rich to give to the poor thingy you know or pushing newbies right up front in the search and thereby pushing down some established!

Either way its a form of capping no matter how you look upon it!


This is how the capping history has been written.

something went wrong with the text here?

I don't know what went wrong with your quote, but I know what went wrong with your logic: this is not a DreamsTime thread, but a Shutterstock thread.

Major difference, don't you think? One is very successful, the other one is struggling hard to compete. Don't you wonder why*?

*Hint: keep wondering why free market economies have always outperformed socialist economies, based on wealth redistribution.


Well DT was just an example of that agencies can gear the search the direction they want to!  and NO I'm not wondering why. I know the people at DT very, very well and they are not trying to compete with SS, they run their own race so to speak.

Trying to compete with SS nowadays means you have to accept every tom, dick, harry with a smartphone into the agency just to fill up with gazillions of files and just for the sake of it, nothing else!...few years back it was an achievement to get into SS, people had to prove themselves. Today? haha! just look at it like a giant Flea-market!

Their own race? On a different planet, or what?
In case you didn't realise it yet: they are competing for the same customers and they are racing against SS & Co, since inception.

Reality is that SS is very succesful at it, while DT, with their fair share wealth re-distribution socialistic strategy is struggling, big time, to stay afloat.

If by any chance, you really know them, it doeasn't play in their advantage.

Besides, it is the other way around, DT has always accepted everything, no question asked, while SS has relaxed their acceptance criteria much recently. If SS is a flea-market, then the whole market si a flea-market.
Better accept it and move on, instead of ranting non-stop about it with your Q cult worshipers  :P
« Last Edit: September 07, 2018, 22:04 by Zero Talent »

derek

    This user is banned.
« Reply #25 on: September 08, 2018, 01:19 »
0
"Well Jon told me to keep quiet while we were having lunch with Donald and Vladimir"


Now I am wondering what they had for lunch?



A bucket of KFC and some coke, what else?
Maybe a BigMac for desert. ;D

Jokes apart! well DT for one have admitted they want a " fair" game giving new contributors a fair chance to earn money!....how do you think they mastermind that? if not by some sort of capping??  taking from the rich to give to the poor thingy you know or pushing newbies right up front in the search and thereby pushing down some established!

Either way its a form of capping no matter how you look upon it!


This is how the capping history has been written.

something went wrong with the text here?

I don't know what went wrong with your quote, but I know what went wrong with your logic: this is not a DreamsTime thread, but a Shutterstock thread.

Major difference, don't you think? One is very successful, the other one is struggling hard to compete. Don't you wonder why*?

*Hint: keep wondering why free market economies have always outperformed socialist economies, based on wealth redistribution.


Well DT was just an example of that agencies can gear the search the direction they want to!  and NO I'm not wondering why. I know the people at DT very, very well and they are not trying to compete with SS, they run their own race so to speak.

Trying to compete with SS nowadays means you have to accept every tom, dick, harry with a smartphone into the agency just to fill up with gazillions of files and just for the sake of it, nothing else!...few years back it was an achievement to get into SS, people had to prove themselves. Today? haha! just look at it like a giant Flea-market!

Their own race? On a different planet, or what?
In case you didn't realise it yet: they are competing for the same customers and they are racing against SS & Co, since inception.

Reality is that SS is very succesful at it, while DT, with their fair share wealth re-distribution socialistic strategy is struggling, big time, to stay afloat.

If by any chance, you really know them, it doeasn't play in their advantage.

Besides, it is the other way around, DT has always accepted everything, no question asked, while SS has relaxed their acceptance criteria much recently. If SS is a flea-market, then the whole market si a flea-market.
Better accept it and move on, instead of ranting non-stop about it with your Q cult worshipers  :P

It is! the whole market is a flea-market only some fleas are more expensive then others like the RM-flea! yeah we're burning black candles in the Q cult, didnt you know! :P
« Last Edit: September 08, 2018, 04:30 by derek »

« Reply #26 on: September 08, 2018, 04:36 »
0
Hey Derek shall we invite Zero Talent (a good and relevant name) to this weekend's sabbat?

I get first call on the goat this time :D

Don't forget we need more black candles  ;D

As above, so below

All hail Baphomet!


« Reply #27 on: September 08, 2018, 09:52 »
0
It is! the whole market is a flea-market only some fleas are more expensive then others like the RM-flea! yeah we're burning black candles in the Q cult, didnt you know! :P

Good news, Derek!

Your idol and chief conspiracy theorist, grand master of the "Q"Anon cult, has announced a big campaign against "rigged search results"

https://youtu.be/Jaozo0vfcsw

Lol.

It sucks to suck, indeed, both politically and on selling photos!

 ;D

« Last Edit: September 08, 2018, 09:58 by Zero Talent »

« Reply #28 on: September 08, 2018, 09:56 »
0
It is! the whole market is a flea-market only some fleas are more expensive then others like the RM-flea! yeah we're burning black candles in the Q cult, didnt you know! :P

Good news, Derek!

Your idol and chief conspiracy theorist , grand master of the "Q"Anon cult, has announced a big campaign against "rigged search results"

https://youtu.be/Jaozo0vfcsw

 ;D
I will have to tell him how my perfect example of an isolated red tomato is being suppressed SS need to be very very careful.

derek

    This user is banned.
« Reply #29 on: September 08, 2018, 14:06 »
+1
It is! the whole market is a flea-market only some fleas are more expensive then others like the RM-flea! yeah we're burning black candles in the Q cult, didnt you know! :P

Good news, Derek!

Your idol and chief conspiracy theorist, grand master of the "Q"Anon cult, has announced a big campaign against "rigged search results"

https://youtu.be/Jaozo0vfcsw

Lol.

It sucks to suck, indeed, both politically and on selling photos!

 ;D


Hahaha!  I give it to you, thats a good one!!  cheers!  ;D ;D

« Reply #30 on: November 07, 2018, 12:28 »
0
Hi,

Shutterstock definitely has a search algorithm where they control a contributors earnings.

Can anyone tell if it is based on the number of sales?

I am thinking of deleting all my photos and just having videos with which I earn more.

Maybe the photos should be in a different account.

Any thoughts?

Do you mean that Shutterstock tries to decide how many money we can earn in a month?

if you mean that, this could be possible, I notice something similar about minimum earnings I have every month on the picture sales.
This could be fair for everyone, to give to each contributor its piece of cake, depending on his commitment.

everyone can tell if their earnings have a linear trend with a "minimum guarantee" or it's totally random ?




« Reply #31 on: November 07, 2018, 13:35 »
0
Hi,

Shutterstock definitely has a search algorithm where they control a contributors earnings.

Can anyone tell if it is based on the number of sales?

I am thinking of deleting all my photos and just having videos with which I earn more.

Maybe the photos should be in a different account.

Any thoughts?

Do you mean that Shutterstock tries to decide how many money we can earn in a month?

if you mean that, this could be possible, I notice something similar about minimum earnings I have every month on the picture sales.
This could be fair for everyone, to give to each contributor its piece of cake, depending on his commitment.

everyone can tell if their earnings have a linear trend with a "minimum guarantee" or it's totally random ?

How do they set the minimum? Derek says it's one number, somebody else another, some higher some lower, not by number of pictures. If that's random it should change not be capped or the same. Or maybe we earn by the quality of our work and there is no cap.

« Reply #32 on: November 07, 2018, 17:18 »
0
I think that each contributor has a rank, depending of some variables like: number of files, acceptance rate and sales.

the "minimum guarantee" of earning can be influenced by the search algorithm, to set your pictures in first page or not.

obviously, they can only influence it to help you to reach a minimum cap, but it cannot be for sure,
 anyway for my pictures: I see a constant earning for many months with a slight increase in earning, increasing the uploads.

for my videos they are not constant, each month is very different in sales.


« Reply #33 on: November 07, 2018, 17:22 »
0
So now we have moved into "minimum caps"?

farbled

« Reply #34 on: November 07, 2018, 18:41 »
+1
Or maybe we earn by the quality of our work and there is no cap.
Agreed. Not a cap at all, just random sales that coincidentally give me the same earnings every month all year long. No higher, no lower. At least it makes budgeting easier.



 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
10 Replies
2213 Views
Last post August 12, 2013, 06:21
by ajt
45 Replies
11797 Views
Last post May 05, 2016, 12:08
by Minsc
1 Replies
1727 Views
Last post August 16, 2017, 09:10
by YadaYadaYada
3 Replies
1166 Views
Last post August 17, 2017, 07:38
by JimP
20 Replies
2491 Views
Last post September 29, 2018, 15:59
by nobody

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors