MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: SS Search Surprise!  (Read 4793 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« on: November 10, 2018, 12:07 »
+3
Search changed in ten minutes, then changed back again. Look at the time of the screen captures. If anyone is looking at any moment, and sees the "Most Relevant" wait... it's going to change. So if anyone here is going to base anything on page placement or what's King Of The Hill for any search, guess what? It changes over and over, nothing is the same. Although I will say, after 20 minutes the search did return to the first capture.

Amazing?




Phadrea

    This user is banned.
« Reply #1 on: November 10, 2018, 12:26 »
+2
Its crap. In my image manager if I choose to display my images in order of sales it still gives me my most recent. Useless garbage of a system.

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #2 on: November 10, 2018, 12:44 »
+2
Its crap. In my image manager if I choose to display my images in order of sales it still gives me my most recent. Useless garbage of a system.

Sorry that's not the point.

Not about the top performers page, https://submit.shutterstock.com/earnings/top-performers?language=en - which shows by total earnings unless you are the only person in the world who gets them by date upload order? If you mean Catalog Manager, three choices in the drop down box, Best Match, Oldest, Newest. Nothing to do with sales. So tell me where are you looking for "image manager" in order of sales? I'd like to look at that page? Have a link please? I can't see anything that's image manager.

Now back to the search, 549,757 Sliced tomato stock photos just changed back to the bottom search again.  :)

The search changes between two different "Most Relevant" that's strange.

« Reply #3 on: November 10, 2018, 14:29 »
+2
Do you still don't believe in capping system? In reality, they just regulate which and how much of your files the buyers will see. #fact

« Reply #4 on: November 10, 2018, 17:30 »
+5
Its crap. In my image manager if I choose to display my images in order of sales it still gives me my most recent. Useless garbage of a system.

Sorry that's not the point.

Not about the top performers page, https://submit.shutterstock.com/earnings/top-performers?language=en - which shows by total earnings unless you are the only person in the world who gets them by date upload order? If you mean Catalog Manager, three choices in the drop down box, Best Match, Oldest, Newest. Nothing to do with sales. So tell me where are you looking for "image manager" in order of sales? I'd like to look at that page? Have a link please? I can't see anything that's image manager.

Now back to the search, 549,757 Sliced tomato stock photos just changed back to the bottom search again.  :)

The search changes between two different "Most Relevant" that's strange.
With all the different caps applied to different individuals by day, week and month along with the minimum income level that some have set for then clearly the search results will change minute by minute to meet all those competing targets....rather than the one about maximising income. Quite an achievement for an IT team that seem to struggle to actually keep the site stable.

« Reply #5 on: November 10, 2018, 19:19 »
+2
In their defense, they probably aren't the same bunch of people, the ones doing the database magic and the others working on frontend and functionality.

derek

    This user is banned.
« Reply #6 on: November 11, 2018, 02:43 »
0
Its crap. In my image manager if I choose to display my images in order of sales it still gives me my most recent. Useless garbage of a system.

Sorry that's not the point.

Not about the top performers page, https://submit.shutterstock.com/earnings/top-performers?language=en - which shows by total earnings unless you are the only person in the world who gets them by date upload order? If you mean Catalog Manager, three choices in the drop down box, Best Match, Oldest, Newest. Nothing to do with sales. So tell me where are you looking for "image manager" in order of sales? I'd like to look at that page? Have a link please? I can't see anything that's image manager.

Now back to the search, 549,757 Sliced tomato stock photos just changed back to the bottom search again.  :)

The search changes between two different "Most Relevant" that's strange.
With all the different caps applied to different individuals by day, week and month along with the minimum income level that some have set for then clearly the search results will change minute by minute to meet all those competing targets....rather than the one about maximising income. Quite an achievement for an IT team that seem to struggle to actually keep the site stable.

Hahaha!  is that what you think??  as quick as a flick of a switch!  thats what it takes according to Tech firm who used to be with another agency and spilled the beans!...wakey, wakey Paws this is 2018!

« Reply #7 on: November 11, 2018, 03:18 »
0
In their defense, they probably aren't the same bunch of people, the ones doing the database magic and the others working on frontend and functionality.
Being fair to SS a novel idea ;-).

« Reply #8 on: November 11, 2018, 06:46 »
0
the results change anytime, and it has sense in the theory of a monthly or weekly cap for anyone: if one has sold too much in that period of time, his pictures will go down.

I notice a cap only for pictures, not video, I'm earning the same amount of money (for pictures) every month for 1 year and a half, with a slight difference of 10% ... uploading 300/400 new pics every month constantly.

I wonder what will happen if I stop to upload for some months, but I'm afraid to test :)




Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #9 on: November 11, 2018, 08:41 »
+3
Apparently the cap has the tin foil patrol missing the point. What's new. The search results changed, and change back. There are at least two, alternating Most Relevant pages for this search. Remember the A-B testing? Somewhere someone at SS is saying, lets test this page, against that page, they are testing the algorithm to see which one gets the most downloads, A (lets say the top one) or B, the second one.

Nothing to do with capping, regulated income, limited downloads, blackouts, hiding our work from buyers, or any of that imaginary conspiracy theories. Just that there are at least two versions of Most Relevant and different images, get moved up or down the page.

ps None of these are mine, but I'm running out to the store after football, because if there are 550K sliced tomato images, it must be a best seller. I need to get into that market.  ;)

Here's today, see the change again? Hey look and illustration jumped in there too. Everyone talks about the changes, there are many more now, unlike the past where a page stayed the same for a month or more.



« Reply #10 on: November 11, 2018, 19:38 »
0
try to do some more test changing the IP of Chrome with this app:
https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/touch-vpn/bihmplhobchoageeokmgbdihknkjbknd

and deleting the cookies before.

SS could show different results in different countries

I see little different results from Italy for "sliced tomatoes"



« Reply #11 on: November 11, 2018, 21:41 »
+1
Do you still don't believe in capping system? In reality, they just regulate which and how much of your files the buyers will see. #fact

"Capping" contributors' revenue and "regulating" what buyers see are two totally different concepts.

One is false the other one is true.

farbled

« Reply #12 on: November 11, 2018, 21:54 »
+6
Why are you guys so upset that some contributors have different results than you do that makes them think there is something affecting their sales other than randomness?

Sheesh. Between the name calling and the other attacks all over the forums, small wonder discussions are generally limited to the usual suspects.



« Reply #13 on: November 11, 2018, 23:55 »
+2
Why are you guys so upset that some contributors have different results than you do that makes them think there is something affecting their sales other than randomness?

Sheesh. Between the name calling and the other attacks all over the forums, small wonder discussions are generally limited to the usual suspects.

Because, I'm sure you know it, there are many other valid reasons for poor sales performance, instead of conspiracies.

Sheesh!

« Reply #14 on: November 12, 2018, 00:34 »
+1
Do you still don't believe in capping system? In reality, they just regulate which and how much of your files the buyers will see. #fact

#fakenews

« Reply #15 on: November 12, 2018, 02:38 »
0
Do you still don't believe in capping system? In reality, they just regulate which and how much of your files the buyers will see. #fact

#fakenews
When someone says fact on the internet 95% of the time it isn't. Its an opinion  ::)

derek

    This user is banned.
« Reply #16 on: November 12, 2018, 02:47 »
0
Zero Talent!!  EXACTLY!!! spot on!...this is what we have been trying to tell people for years!  What WE SEE are totally different from the search that the buyers will see. A registered buyer will perhaps find your picture in question on page 15 where as we will see that same picture on page 2......this is to let us think we are high up in the search!

basically and again the searches are BS and for us of no use at all!


« Reply #17 on: November 12, 2018, 02:58 »
+1
Zero Talent!!  EXACTLY!!! spot on!...this is what we have been trying to tell people for years!  What WE SEE are totally different from the search that the buyers will see. A registered buyer will perhaps find your picture in question on page 15 where as we will see that same picture on page 2......this is to let us think we are high up in the search!

basically and again the searches are BS and for us of no use at all!
Are you being ironic?

derek

    This user is banned.
« Reply #18 on: November 12, 2018, 03:47 »
0
Zero Talent!!  EXACTLY!!! spot on!...this is what we have been trying to tell people for years!  What WE SEE are totally different from the search that the buyers will see. A registered buyer will perhaps find your picture in question on page 15 where as we will see that same picture on page 2......this is to let us think we are high up in the search!

basically and again the searches are BS and for us of no use at all!
Are you being ironic?

Good morning Paws!  lovely morning, sun and blue sky!  what a day for a search! :D

« Reply #19 on: November 12, 2018, 04:04 »
+3
Zero Talent!!  EXACTLY!!! spot on!...this is what we have been trying to tell people for years!  What WE SEE are totally different from the search that the buyers will see. A registered buyer will perhaps find your picture in question on page 15 where as we will see that same picture on page 2......this is to let us think we are high up in the search!

basically and again the searches are BS and for us of no use at all!
Are you being ironic?



Good morning Paws!  lovely morning, sun and blue sky!  what a day for a search! :D
I'm avoiding keywording as usual by engaging in pointless discussion. If its a nice day I might go out and shoot some random crap for SS they like that ;-).

derek

    This user is banned.
« Reply #20 on: November 12, 2018, 05:42 »
0
Zero Talent!!  EXACTLY!!! spot on!...this is what we have been trying to tell people for years!  What WE SEE are totally different from the search that the buyers will see. A registered buyer will perhaps find your picture in question on page 15 where as we will see that same picture on page 2......this is to let us think we are high up in the search!

basically and again the searches are BS and for us of no use at all!
Are you being ironic?



Good morning Paws!  lovely morning, sun and blue sky!  what a day for a search! :D
I'm avoiding keywording as usual by engaging in pointless discussion. If its a nice day I might go out and shoot some random crap for SS they like that ;-).

on that score you are absolutely right!  " random crap" good expression!

farbled

« Reply #21 on: November 12, 2018, 09:08 »
+2
Why are you guys so upset that some contributors have different results than you do that makes them think there is something affecting their sales other than randomness?

Sheesh. Between the name calling and the other attacks all over the forums, small wonder discussions are generally limited to the usual suspects.

Because, I'm sure you know it, there are many other valid reasons for poor sales performance, instead of conspiracies.

Sheesh!

Who said anything about poor performance? I didn't. I am just tired of seeing something different than some of you and being labeled as either stupid or a liar. That's what is being inferred. But hey, I guess if it doesn't happen to you specifically, then it must not exist.

And I agree, argued to death, but I should point out that there are a lot of posters who bring it up in a lot of threads derisively. So again, why is this such a problem for some of you? The vehement overreaction but some is worrisome.

« Reply #22 on: November 12, 2018, 09:22 »
+1
There are at least two different servers used to record earnings and if they get out of sync then the sales tally changes as we view it. We've seen that in practice in the past. So it's quite possible that there are different servers producing the tomato "best match" and they aren't in sync, particularly if there has been a recent change. Which one you hit when you make a search would probably be quite random.
My point is that there could be a lot of factors we don't know about, which makes obsessing about one interpretation/conspiracy theory or another quite pointless.

« Reply #23 on: November 12, 2018, 09:25 »
0
Just a thought, maybe they've changed the algorythm and it now works a bit like Alamy, based on views (in search results), clicks (zoomed view of the image) and sales. The more views, clicks and sales, the more it goes up in ranking, but if you've got lots of views and no clicks or sales, then you go down in ranking, so photos in the first results are actually the ones that buyers want.   ::)

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #24 on: November 12, 2018, 10:17 »
0
Just a thought, maybe they've changed the algorythm and it now works a bit like Alamy, based on views (in search results), clicks (zoomed view of the image) and sales. The more views, clicks and sales, the more it goes up in ranking, but if you've got lots of views and no clicks or sales, then you go down in ranking, so photos in the first results are actually the ones that buyers want.   ::)

I'll try to explain my point better, again?  :)

The search is always changing, daily if not every ten minutes, cycling. I'm not saying anything about sales, capping, restrictions, regulating, hiding or any manipulation. This is about the search.

Here's what I've seen in the past days: If you don't like the search, wait a few minutes, it will change.



I am a registered buyer, no I didn't clear the cookies. But I get different results in minutes and then hours and then the next day. What seems to be going on now is, presenting an every changing selection of images, mixed in with some total crap. Almost like (oops conjecture) they are making the better images interwoven with plain boring junk, to make the better ones IMHO stand out.

Whatever it is, the search is constantly changing, so next time someone says, they changed the search, my sales are down, please remember, the search is constantly changing for all of us, all the time.

My test search for a specific keyword, I'm still four of the top ten on the first page, as they have been since about 2010. Another subject - page one, I'm the first 43 results. Another subject, two pages, no one but me... hmm, I need more of those?  8) Yes I get downloads, no I'm not going to retire, these are common subjects, but they don't have mass demand.

When I look tomorrow, the images will be in a different order.

What did I say? The search is constantly changing for all of us, all the time. The days of, "they changed the search, my sales are down", should be recognized as, the search is never the same anymore.

That's all, this is about the search and some obvious observations. I don't know how it effects your sales or mine, just that it's happening.

« Reply #25 on: November 12, 2018, 10:32 »
+2


What seems to be going on now is, presenting an every changing selection of images, mixed in with some total crap. Almost like (oops conjecture) they are making the better images interwoven with plain boring junk, to make the better ones IMHO stand out.
[/quote]

That's what I also meant with change of algorithm  :-X

As the old adage says, ''one man's trash is another man's treasure'' or even 'Beauty is in the eye of the beholder'.

I think it's a good thing that it's always changing, it might give more views to buried content in the end.

« Reply #26 on: November 12, 2018, 10:33 »
+3
There's probably two things going on here.
The algorithm by its very design changes the search results to give buyers variation and reflect changing real time demand.
The algorithm itself is regularly changed in an attempt to maximise sales/income.





« Reply #27 on: November 12, 2018, 11:04 »
+1
They are 'churning' the images trying to push previously non/very low-selling/old files on customers. This is why they use the somewhat vague 'popular/relevant' instead of 'downloads', so they can change search to prefer, for example, offering old files on direct search result pages and in the "similars", which seem to be a very heavy preference now, or insert lot's of non/low sellers to make larger part of their stock commercially meaningful.

derek

    This user is banned.
« Reply #28 on: November 12, 2018, 12:14 »
+2
There are at least two different servers used to record earnings and if they get out of sync then the sales tally changes as we view it. We've seen that in practice in the past. So it's quite possible that there are different servers producing the tomato "best match" and they aren't in sync, particularly if there has been a recent change. Which one you hit when you make a search would probably be quite random.
My point is that there could be a lot of factors we don't know about, which makes obsessing about one interpretation/conspiracy theory or another quite pointless.

No its not conspiracy!  its a fact!  SS do tamper with our earnings!  you know this isnt the only forum! there are two private forums and the criteria for joining is that you are a full-time photographer!...at least 70 members joined SS between 2005-2007 and some have giant portfolios and special portfolios and every single one is down at least 60-70%, every one!! so its no coincidence!

Most members here who have only been with SS some 5 years or less havent gone through what we have experienced!  hence they find it impossible to believe any capping and controled earnings, theyre of course worried about their own future!

Anyway screw it!  who cares? I mean really! remember Gostwyck, Liza, myself, you etc, etc, when we all many years back agreed that everything good will come to en end!....well it has!

« Reply #29 on: November 12, 2018, 12:44 »
+3
Given the increased number of images over the last few years why would you expect incomes to do anything other than go down?

nobody

« Reply #30 on: November 12, 2018, 12:47 »
+2
There are at least two different servers used to record earnings and if they get out of sync then the sales tally changes as we view it. We've seen that in practice in the past. So it's quite possible that there are different servers producing the tomato "best match" and they aren't in sync, particularly if there has been a recent change. Which one you hit when you make a search would probably be quite random.
My point is that there could be a lot of factors we don't know about, which makes obsessing about one interpretation/conspiracy theory or another quite pointless.

No its not conspiracy!  its a fact!  SS do tamper with our earnings!  you know this isnt the only forum! there are two private forums and the criteria for joining is that you are a full-time photographer!...at least 70 members joined SS between 2005-2007 and some have giant portfolios and special portfolios and every single one is down at least 60-70%, every one!! so its no coincidence!

Most members here who have only been with SS some 5 years or less havent gone through what we have experienced!  hence they find it impossible to believe any capping and controled earnings, theyre of course worried about their own future!

Anyway screw it!  who cares? I mean really! remember Gostwyck, Liza, myself, you etc, etc, when we all many years back agreed that everything good will come to en end!....well it has!

You forgot Laurin in your group  8)


« Reply #31 on: November 12, 2018, 14:11 »
+2
There are at least two different servers used to record earnings and if they get out of sync then the sales tally changes as we view it. We've seen that in practice in the past. So it's quite possible that there are different servers producing the tomato "best match" and they aren't in sync, particularly if there has been a recent change. Which one you hit when you make a search would probably be quite random.
My point is that there could be a lot of factors we don't know about, which makes obsessing about one interpretation/conspiracy theory or another quite pointless.

No its not conspiracy!  its a fact!  SS do tamper with our earnings!  you know this isnt the only forum! there are two private forums and the criteria for joining is that you are a full-time photographer!...at least 70 members joined SS between 2005-2007 and some have giant portfolios and special portfolios and every single one is down at least 60-70%, every one!! so its no coincidence!

Most members here who have only been with SS some 5 years or less havent gone through what we have experienced!  hence they find it impossible to believe any capping and controled earnings, theyre of course worried about their own future!

Anyway screw it!  who cares? I mean really! remember Gostwyck, Liza, myself, you etc, etc, when we all many years back agreed that everything good will come to en end!....well it has!

You forgot Laurin in your group  8)

Not really. He just got a $120 sale. Conspiracists will not be able to count on him for a while. He is a happy camper boasting his achievements more than ever.

derek

    This user is banned.
« Reply #32 on: November 12, 2018, 14:24 »
+1
There are at least two different servers used to record earnings and if they get out of sync then the sales tally changes as we view it. We've seen that in practice in the past. So it's quite possible that there are different servers producing the tomato "best match" and they aren't in sync, particularly if there has been a recent change. Which one you hit when you make a search would probably be quite random.
My point is that there could be a lot of factors we don't know about, which makes obsessing about one interpretation/conspiracy theory or another quite pointless.

No its not conspiracy!  its a fact!  SS do tamper with our earnings!  you know this isnt the only forum! there are two private forums and the criteria for joining is that you are a full-time photographer!...at least 70 members joined SS between 2005-2007 and some have giant portfolios and special portfolios and every single one is down at least 60-70%, every one!! so its no coincidence!

Most members here who have only been with SS some 5 years or less havent gone through what we have experienced!  hence they find it impossible to believe any capping and controled earnings, theyre of course worried about their own future!

Anyway screw it!  who cares? I mean really! remember Gostwyck, Liza, myself, you etc, etc, when we all many years back agreed that everything good will come to en end!....well it has!

You forgot Laurin in your group  8)

He was only at the SS forum at that time!  but yeah he is probably one of them??

derek

    This user is banned.
« Reply #33 on: November 12, 2018, 14:26 »
0
There are at least two different servers used to record earnings and if they get out of sync then the sales tally changes as we view it. We've seen that in practice in the past. So it's quite possible that there are different servers producing the tomato "best match" and they aren't in sync, particularly if there has been a recent change. Which one you hit when you make a search would probably be quite random.
My point is that there could be a lot of factors we don't know about, which makes obsessing about one interpretation/conspiracy theory or another quite pointless.

No its not conspiracy!  its a fact!  SS do tamper with our earnings!  you know this isnt the only forum! there are two private forums and the criteria for joining is that you are a full-time photographer!...at least 70 members joined SS between 2005-2007 and some have giant portfolios and special portfolios and every single one is down at least 60-70%, every one!! so its no coincidence!

Most members here who have only been with SS some 5 years or less havent gone through what we have experienced!  hence they find it impossible to believe any capping and controled earnings, theyre of course worried about their own future!

Anyway screw it!  who cares? I mean really! remember Gostwyck, Liza, myself, you etc, etc, when we all many years back agreed that everything good will come to en end!....well it has!

You forgot Laurin in your group  8)

Not really. He just got a $120 sale. Conspiracists will not be able to count on him for a while. He is a happy camper boasting his achievements more than ever.

haha! been here since 2015!!  three years!  do me a favour turn some burgers or at least bake a cake or something, no offence pal! ::) ::)

« Reply #34 on: November 12, 2018, 14:29 »
+3
There are at least two different servers used to record earnings and if they get out of sync then the sales tally changes as we view it. We've seen that in practice in the past. So it's quite possible that there are different servers producing the tomato "best match" and they aren't in sync, particularly if there has been a recent change. Which one you hit when you make a search would probably be quite random.
My point is that there could be a lot of factors we don't know about, which makes obsessing about one interpretation/conspiracy theory or another quite pointless.

No its not conspiracy!  its a fact!  SS do tamper with our earnings!  you know this isnt the only forum! there are two private forums and the criteria for joining is that you are a full-time photographer!...at least 70 members joined SS between 2005-2007 and some have giant portfolios and special portfolios and every single one is down at least 60-70%, every one!! so its no coincidence!

Most members here who have only been with SS some 5 years or less havent gone through what we have experienced!  hence they find it impossible to believe any capping and controled earnings, theyre of course worried about their own future!

Anyway screw it!  who cares? I mean really! remember Gostwyck, Liza, myself, you etc, etc, when we all many years back agreed that everything good will come to en end!....well it has!

You forgot Laurin in your group  8)

Not really. He just got a $120 sale. Conspiracists will not be able to count on him for a while. He is a happy camper boasting his achievements more than ever.

haha! been here since 2015!!  three years!  do me a favour turn some burgers or at least bake a cake or something, no offence pal! ::) ::)
Which is exactly the kind of attitude that allows so called newbies to clean up while the old timers sit at their keyboards whining.

derek

    This user is banned.
« Reply #35 on: November 12, 2018, 14:33 »
0
There are at least two different servers used to record earnings and if they get out of sync then the sales tally changes as we view it. We've seen that in practice in the past. So it's quite possible that there are different servers producing the tomato "best match" and they aren't in sync, particularly if there has been a recent change. Which one you hit when you make a search would probably be quite random.
My point is that there could be a lot of factors we don't know about, which makes obsessing about one interpretation/conspiracy theory or another quite pointless.

No its not conspiracy!  its a fact!  SS do tamper with our earnings!  you know this isnt the only forum! there are two private forums and the criteria for joining is that you are a full-time photographer!...at least 70 members joined SS between 2005-2007 and some have giant portfolios and special portfolios and every single one is down at least 60-70%, every one!! so its no coincidence!

Most members here who have only been with SS some 5 years or less havent gone through what we have experienced!  hence they find it impossible to believe any capping and controled earnings, theyre of course worried about their own future!

Anyway screw it!  who cares? I mean really! remember Gostwyck, Liza, myself, you etc, etc, when we all many years back agreed that everything good will come to en end!....well it has!

You forgot Laurin in your group  8)

Not really. He just got a $120 sale. Conspiracists will not be able to count on him for a while. He is a happy camper boasting his achievements more than ever.

haha! been here since 2015!!  three years!  do me a favour turn some burgers or at least bake a cake or something, no offence pal! ::) ::)
Which is exactly the kind of attitude that allows so called newbies to clean up while the old timers sit at their keyboards whining.

Just gave you a like OK!  noobs are after lots of likes well you got the first one from me! happy?? bye, bye from me now!

« Reply #36 on: November 12, 2018, 14:39 »
+2
There are at least two different servers used to record earnings and if they get out of sync then the sales tally changes as we view it. We've seen that in practice in the past. So it's quite possible that there are different servers producing the tomato "best match" and they aren't in sync, particularly if there has been a recent change. Which one you hit when you make a search would probably be quite random.
My point is that there could be a lot of factors we don't know about, which makes obsessing about one interpretation/conspiracy theory or another quite pointless.

No its not conspiracy!  its a fact!  SS do tamper with our earnings!  you know this isnt the only forum! there are two private forums and the criteria for joining is that you are a full-time photographer!...at least 70 members joined SS between 2005-2007 and some have giant portfolios and special portfolios and every single one is down at least 60-70%, every one!! so its no coincidence!

Most members here who have only been with SS some 5 years or less havent gone through what we have experienced!  hence they find it impossible to believe any capping and controled earnings, theyre of course worried about their own future!

Anyway screw it!  who cares? I mean really! remember Gostwyck, Liza, myself, you etc, etc, when we all many years back agreed that everything good will come to en end!....well it has!

You forgot Laurin in your group  8)

Not really. He just got a $120 sale. Conspiracists will not be able to count on him for a while. He is a happy camper boasting his achievements more than ever.

haha! been here since 2015!!  three years!  do me a favour turn some burgers or at least bake a cake or something, no offence pal! ::) ::)
Which is exactly the kind of attitude that allows so called newbies to clean up while the old timers sit at their keyboards whining.

Just gave you a like OK!  noobs are after lots of likes well you got the first one from me! happy?? bye, bye from me now!
I'm sure with a bit of time you can come up with a suitable insult...have a nice evening


« Reply #37 on: November 12, 2018, 14:41 »
+2
There are at least two different servers used to record earnings and if they get out of sync then the sales tally changes as we view it. We've seen that in practice in the past. So it's quite possible that there are different servers producing the tomato "best match" and they aren't in sync, particularly if there has been a recent change. Which one you hit when you make a search would probably be quite random.
My point is that there could be a lot of factors we don't know about, which makes obsessing about one interpretation/conspiracy theory or another quite pointless.

No its not conspiracy!  its a fact!  SS do tamper with our earnings!  you know this isnt the only forum! there are two private forums and the criteria for joining is that you are a full-time photographer!...at least 70 members joined SS between 2005-2007 and some have giant portfolios and special portfolios and every single one is down at least 60-70%, every one!! so its no coincidence!

Most members here who have only been with SS some 5 years or less havent gone through what we have experienced!  hence they find it impossible to believe any capping and controled earnings, theyre of course worried about their own future!

Anyway screw it!  who cares? I mean really! remember Gostwyck, Liza, myself, you etc, etc, when we all many years back agreed that everything good will come to en end!....well it has!

You forgot Laurin in your group  8)

Not really. He just got a $120 sale. Conspiracists will not be able to count on him for a while. He is a happy camper boasting his achievements more than ever.

Do you actually believe anything he says? That guy is literally out of his mind.

derek

    This user is banned.
« Reply #38 on: November 12, 2018, 15:09 »
+1
There are at least two different servers used to record earnings and if they get out of sync then the sales tally changes as we view it. We've seen that in practice in the past. So it's quite possible that there are different servers producing the tomato "best match" and they aren't in sync, particularly if there has been a recent change. Which one you hit when you make a search would probably be quite random.
My point is that there could be a lot of factors we don't know about, which makes obsessing about one interpretation/conspiracy theory or another quite pointless.

No its not conspiracy!  its a fact!  SS do tamper with our earnings!  you know this isnt the only forum! there are two private forums and the criteria for joining is that you are a full-time photographer!...at least 70 members joined SS between 2005-2007 and some have giant portfolios and special portfolios and every single one is down at least 60-70%, every one!! so its no coincidence!

Most members here who have only been with SS some 5 years or less havent gone through what we have experienced!  hence they find it impossible to believe any capping and controled earnings, theyre of course worried about their own future!

Anyway screw it!  who cares? I mean really! remember Gostwyck, Liza, myself, you etc, etc, when we all many years back agreed that everything good will come to en end!....well it has!

You forgot Laurin in your group  8)

Not really. He just got a $120 sale. Conspiracists will not be able to count on him for a while. He is a happy camper boasting his achievements more than ever.

haha! been here since 2015!!  three years!  do me a favour turn some burgers or at least bake a cake or something, no offence pal! ::) ::)
Which is exactly the kind of attitude that allows so called newbies to clean up while the old timers sit at their keyboards whining.

Just gave you a like OK!  noobs are after lots of likes well you got the first one from me! happy?? bye, bye from me now!
I'm sure with a bit of time you can come up with a suitable insult...have a nice evening

and you mate! a nice evening!.....btw I'm just kidding around you understand, no harm meant ! :)

nobody

« Reply #39 on: November 12, 2018, 15:13 »
0
There are at least two different servers used to record earnings and if they get out of sync then the sales tally changes as we view it. We've seen that in practice in the past. So it's quite possible that there are different servers producing the tomato "best match" and they aren't in sync, particularly if there has been a recent change. Which one you hit when you make a search would probably be quite random.
My point is that there could be a lot of factors we don't know about, which makes obsessing about one interpretation/conspiracy theory or another quite pointless.

No its not conspiracy!  its a fact!  SS do tamper with our earnings!  you know this isnt the only forum! there are two private forums and the criteria for joining is that you are a full-time photographer!...at least 70 members joined SS between 2005-2007 and some have giant portfolios and special portfolios and every single one is down at least 60-70%, every one!! so its no coincidence!

Most members here who have only been with SS some 5 years or less havent gone through what we have experienced!  hence they find it impossible to believe any capping and controled earnings, theyre of course worried about their own future!

Anyway screw it!  who cares? I mean really! remember Gostwyck, Liza, myself, you etc, etc, when we all many years back agreed that everything good will come to en end!....well it has!

You forgot Laurin in your group  8)

Not really. He just got a $120 sale. Conspiracists will not be able to count on him for a while. He is a happy camper boasting his achievements more than ever.

Do you actually believe anything he says? That guy is literally out of his mind.

Many say the 'Cheese slid off his cracker' a long time ago  8)


« Reply #40 on: November 12, 2018, 16:13 »
+1

haha! been here since 2015!!  three years!  do me a favour turn some burgers or at least bake a cake or something, no offence pal! ::) ::)

Ha, ha! You're funnier than usual, Chris!

Whenever you will be able to make half of what I make from microstock, call me. I'll give you a free burger to keep your motivation up, pal!
 :P

« Reply #41 on: November 12, 2018, 16:38 »
0
Why are you guys so upset that some contributors have different results than you do that makes them think there is something affecting their sales other than randomness?

Sheesh. Between the name calling and the other attacks all over the forums, small wonder discussions are generally limited to the usual suspects.

Because, I'm sure you know it, there are many other valid reasons for poor sales performance, instead of conspiracies.

Sheesh!

Who said anything about poor performance? I didn't. I am just tired of seeing something different than some of you and being labeled as either stupid or a liar. That's what is being inferred. But hey, I guess if it doesn't happen to you specifically, then it must not exist.

And I agree, argued to death, but I should point out that there are a lot of posters who bring it up in a lot of threads derisively. So again, why is this such a problem for some of you? The vehement overreaction but some is worrisome.

I don't think my reaction was vehement, let alone an overreaction, was it?

No, you didn't say anything about poor performance, indeed. I said it.

It goes like this:
1. capping conspiracy implies that your sales are not as good as you think you deserve them to be.
2. when your sales are not as good as you think they should, it means your actual performance failed to reach your goals and expectations.
3. when you fail to reach your goals, it means you didn't perform. Or in other words: your performance was poor.

There are certainly shades of gray and nuances, but I'm sure you understand what I mean.

The problem I have with conspiracists is the following: while many sound minded forum members offer perfectly logical explanations for a given situation, conspiracists and cap theorists choose to ignore them all, to continue to believe that some evil algorithm took away from them, what the rightfully deserve. As far as I know, fearful feelings and thoughts often related to persecution, threat, or conspiracy have a name, but I'm not a psychologist and I'll leave it at that.

Unfortunately, these conspiracies are flourishing these days, in many aspects of life, not just in microstock.
« Last Edit: November 12, 2018, 16:43 by Zero Talent »

nobody

« Reply #42 on: November 12, 2018, 16:42 »
0

haha! been here since 2015!!  three years!  do me a favour turn some burgers or at least bake a cake or something, no offence pal! ::) ::)

Ha, ha! You're funnier than usual, Chris!

Whenever you will be able to make half of what I make from microstock, call me. I'll give you a free burger to keep your motivation up, pal!
 :P

are we talking a kobe beef burger? those can be expensive  :)

« Reply #43 on: November 12, 2018, 17:31 »
0
No its not conspiracy!  its a fact!  SS do tamper with our earnings!  you know this isnt the only forum! there are two private forums and the criteria for joining is that you are a full-time photographer!...at least 70 members joined SS between 2005-2007 and some have giant portfolios and special portfolios and every single one is down at least 60-70%, every one!! so its no coincidence!

Most members here who have only been with SS some 5 years or less havent gone through what we have experienced!  hence they find it impossible to believe any capping and controled earnings, theyre of course worried about their own future!

Anyway screw it!  who cares? I mean really! remember Gostwyck, Liza, myself, you etc, etc, when we all many years back agreed that everything good will come to en end!....well it has!

I'm a full-time photographer, may I join that forum group ?

I agree with you but it's all clear here: 
https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/SSTK/shutterstock/net-income

starting from January 2018, they have probably made something to keep more earning and share less with contributors, a 370 % increase year-over-year.

In my experience, the search algorithm now pushes the files of senior contributors higher, even when they have low resolution and low quality and have never sold 1 time.

probably we all have a rank number depending on seniority and the number of sales and online files, and that could be used to list the popular results...
but the down of 60-70% is because of the 370% of less earning on the table !
so the senior contributors probably have lost less than the newbies.

I'm in from 2015 with thousands of files and my loss is zero, just because I've doubled my portfolio in the last 18 months, so it would be 50% if I wouldn't upload anything.

the most senior contributors with a much bigger portfolio, build in 10 years, could not compensate just one year such loss, just uploading some new files, and so they have registered a big decreasing.
but we all have lost a lot.

did someone contact Shutterstock to complain about that ?

I hope that in 2019 they will balance it back, so it's important that we all report our loss to SS to convince them to roll something back.



















farbled

« Reply #44 on: November 12, 2018, 17:38 »
0

It goes like this:
1. capping conspiracy implies that your sales are not as good as you think you deserve them to be.
2. when your sales are not as good as you think they should, it means your actual performance failed to reach your goals and expectations.
3. when you fail to reach your goals, it means you didn't perform. Or in other words: your performance was poor.


Well there we go. We are both talking about completely different things. I have expressed what is happening with my situation far more than once, and many other chime in with the same story as mine. None of which is relatable to your fine points above.

Your argument is sound for people who see decreases or lower (or even higher) than normal sales. I am sure there are lots of threads about that. Mine is a different argument. So now I understand. You are complaining mainly about the word "cap" and your definition of it.  For your definition, and for those who experience decreases, increases, or whatever, I completely agree. Happy?


« Reply #45 on: November 13, 2018, 02:44 »
0
No its not conspiracy!  its a fact!  SS do tamper with our earnings!  you know this isnt the only forum! there are two private forums and the criteria for joining is that you are a full-time photographer!...at least 70 members joined SS between 2005-2007 and some have giant portfolios and special portfolios and every single one is down at least 60-70%, every one!! so its no coincidence!

Most members here who have only been with SS some 5 years or less havent gone through what we have experienced!  hence they find it impossible to believe any capping and controled earnings, theyre of course worried about their own future!

Anyway screw it!  who cares? I mean really! remember Gostwyck, Liza, myself, you etc, etc, when we all many years back agreed that everything good will come to en end!....well it has!

I'm a full-time photographer, may I join that forum group ?

I agree with you but it's all clear here: 
https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/SSTK/shutterstock/net-income

starting from January 2018, they have probably made something to keep more earning and share less with contributors, a 370 % increase year-over-year.

In my experience, the search algorithm now pushes the files of senior contributors higher, even when they have low resolution and low quality and have never sold 1 time.

probably we all have a rank number depending on seniority and the number of sales and online files, and that could be used to list the popular results...
but the down of 60-70% is because of the 370% of less earning on the table !
so the senior contributors probably have lost less than the newbies.

I'm in from 2015 with thousands of files and my loss is zero, just because I've doubled my portfolio in the last 18 months, so it would be 50% if I wouldn't upload anything.

the most senior contributors with a much bigger portfolio, build in 10 years, could not compensate just one year such loss, just uploading some new files, and so they have registered a big decreasing.
but we all have lost a lot.

did someone contact Shutterstock to complain about that ?

I hope that in 2019 they will balance it back, so it's important that we all report our loss to SS to convince them to roll something back.
Net income will include lots of reductions for various expenses write downs and various accountancy chicanery. You need to look at gross income vs the amount payed out which I think you will find remains pretty consistent.

« Reply #46 on: November 13, 2018, 03:52 »
0
Why are you guys so upset that some contributors have different results than you do that makes them think there is something affecting their sales other than randomness?

Sheesh. Between the name calling and the other attacks all over the forums, small wonder discussions are generally limited to the usual suspects.

Because, I'm sure you know it, there are many other valid reasons for poor sales performance, instead of conspiracies.

Sheesh!

Who said anything about poor performance? I didn't. I am just tired of seeing something different than some of you and being labeled as either stupid or a liar. That's what is being inferred. But hey, I guess if it doesn't happen to you specifically, then it must not exist.

And I agree, argued to death, but I should point out that there are a lot of posters who bring it up in a lot of threads derisively. So again, why is this such a problem for some of you? The vehement overreaction but some is worrisome.

I don't think my reaction was vehement, let alone an overreaction, was it?

No, you didn't say anything about poor performance, indeed. I said it.

It goes like this:
1. capping conspiracy implies that your sales are not as good as you think you deserve them to be.
2. when your sales are not as good as you think they should, it means your actual performance failed to reach your goals and expectations.
3. when you fail to reach your goals, it means you didn't perform. Or in other words: your performance was poor.

There are certainly shades of gray and nuances, but I'm sure you understand what I mean.

The problem I have with conspiracists is the following: while many sound minded forum members offer perfectly logical explanations for a given situation, conspiracists and cap theorists choose to ignore them all, to continue to believe that some evil algorithm took away from them, what the rightfully deserve. As far as I know, fearful feelings and thoughts often related to persecution, threat, or conspiracy have a name, but I'm not a psychologist and I'll leave it at that.

Unfortunately, these conspiracies are flourishing these days, in many aspects of life, not just in microstock.

The bolded part of the text is usually called being naive about the world around you. #justsaying And I did argument my capping "theory" with numbers. Did you done your work to argument your "logical explanation"?


« Reply #47 on: November 13, 2018, 04:16 »
0
Only by conspiracy theorists who will then go on to call people sheep and then follow some random unqualified person on the internet. As far as I can tell there is insufficient data to have "proof" either way. "In our calculation, we only included video footage. We also had subtracted the $1.50 sales which somehow arent in the capping system. " so results changed to "prove" your theory?
« Last Edit: November 13, 2018, 04:20 by Pauws99 »

derek

    This user is banned.
« Reply #48 on: November 13, 2018, 04:53 »
0
Paws!....sigh!...You are undermining the SS intelligence!..do you really think SS would be that stupid they would make a capping system that provided proof of capping??
No I dont think so, they have probably long ago cleared it with their legal dept etc, etc! and in other various ways!...besides capping or controled earnings whatever is nothing new in any business that provide royalty as an income!..Amazone is just one of them!

Here in this forum is but a few but there are thousands seeing the very same thing, thousands! and surely they cant be all wrong!...and isnt it quite a " coincidence" that the percentage they are down is almost the very same, 70%...give it some thought will you. One day in a few years time it might hit yourself!

« Reply #49 on: November 13, 2018, 04:57 »
0
$1.50 sales were excluded because it is an anomaly in the sales pattern. The same with images. Only pure basic cart sales and clip packs were included which are the core business for many years. These 1.50 sales are also strange in many ways. If I ever have time to spare, I'll look if 1.50 sales even help the clips get better exposure in the search results.

« Reply #50 on: November 13, 2018, 05:11 »
+1
Paws!....sigh!...You are undermining the SS intelligence!..do you really think SS would be that stupid they would make a capping system that provided proof of capping??
No I dont think so, they have probably long ago cleared it with their legal dept etc, etc! and in other various ways!...besides capping or controled earnings whatever is nothing new in any business that provide royalty as an income!..Amazone is just one of them!

Here in this forum is but a few but there are thousands seeing the very same thing, thousands! and surely they cant be all wrong!...and isnt it quite a " coincidence" that the percentage they are down is almost the very same, 70%...give it some thought will you. One day in a few years time it might hit yourself!
Thousands yeah right.......So is the above poster correct in your view its an annual cap or is it a monthly one or is it one that reduces earnings by 70% which the above hasn't experienced?
« Last Edit: November 13, 2018, 05:15 by Pauws99 »

« Reply #51 on: November 13, 2018, 05:18 »
+1
$1.50 sales were excluded because it is an anomaly in the sales pattern. The same with images. Only pure basic cart sales and clip packs were included which are the core business for many years. These 1.50 sales are also strange in many ways. If I ever have time to spare, I'll look if 1.50 sales even help the clips get better exposure in the search results.
Not an anomaly just normal randomness that doesn't fit your theory. Along with images which is where most people call a cap.

derek

    This user is banned.
« Reply #52 on: November 13, 2018, 05:26 »
0
Paws!  youre picking hairs now " above havent experienced"  well heck of course there is the odd one out!..if I was allowed to I could point you to a forum and if you read this about capping and how easy it really is I swear you wouldnt believe it!

Anyhow we can beat this to death and still there will be those affected and those that arent, those that are experiencing it and those that are not!

As I said one day you might have been with SS long enough for them to decide you have to give way to others or whatever weird concept they've cooked up!

best!

« Reply #53 on: November 13, 2018, 12:26 »
0
Its crap. In my image manager if I choose to display my images in order of sales it still gives me my most recent. Useless garbage of a system.


Where do I find order of sales in image manager on shutterstock. I can't find page for sales image manager.

« Reply #54 on: November 14, 2018, 08:52 »
0
Its crap. In my image manager if I choose to display my images in order of sales it still gives me my most recent. Useless garbage of a system.


Where do I find order of sales in image manager on shutterstock. I can't find page for sales image manager.

Hergs not going to answer because image manager doesn't exist. There is catalog manager by old, new or most popular. You can find tops performers page and with a little common sense and use brain, know whats best in order of sales or worst.

derek

    This user is banned.
« Reply #55 on: November 14, 2018, 08:54 »
0
Image manager this and that its all BS!  its not going to increase sales or anything. You can put up your best seller and it still wont sell!...there are no short cuts to SS sales.

« Reply #56 on: November 14, 2018, 18:29 »
0
Search result fluctuations have been having for months. There is no doubt that SS is experimenting with different search algorithms during the day. Sometimes, it's favorable, sometimes it's not, but if you look at the results, popular images (with a lot of downloads) don't go anywhere and stay put in the result, while less popular images get swapped out every now and then.

I've been looking at the search results for a while now. I believe they reserve the majority of the 1st page for popular images, while reserving a smaller portion of results that allow them to swap images on a weekly basis. This is how they're trying to keep the first page fresh, even if some of the image swaps are of low quality.


derek

    This user is banned.
« Reply #57 on: November 15, 2018, 02:26 »
0
Its a Psychopathic search! with the diagnosis of Borderline giving Bipolar results!....aimed at a very few selected!

« Reply #58 on: November 15, 2018, 11:29 »
0
Just checked a few requests in private tabs, with VPN, etc. All results are the similar. By the way, tomatos were very different.

« Reply #59 on: November 16, 2018, 03:44 »
+1
you click so much that we'll have on Shot list - most requested Sliced tomato, so I have already plan what to shoot  :D


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
44 Replies
16494 Views
Last post December 09, 2012, 09:29
by Poncke
1 Replies
2958 Views
Last post April 27, 2011, 01:40
by sharpshot
Surprise Surprise Blago

Started by RacePhoto Off Topic

1 Replies
1954 Views
Last post December 08, 2011, 16:03
by Carl
1 Replies
2137 Views
Last post January 16, 2012, 12:17
by mtilghma
65 Replies
10814 Views
Last post January 29, 2012, 20:05
by cmannphoto

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors