MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Our maximum keyword limit has changed to 35 keywords per image  (Read 16544 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Microbius

« on: July 20, 2012, 03:28 »
0
"Our maximum keyword limit has changed to 35 keywords per image.
Excess keywords will be automatically removed during image processing."

what are sites like this thinking? like anyone is going to take the time to keyword specifically for Crestock when the industry standard is 50.
I guess they think maybe people will be more selective and careful with their keywording? in reality they are just going to get  a random 35 keywords when 15 of the 50 are stripped out automatically.


« Reply #1 on: July 20, 2012, 03:35 »
0
I'd have to agree here.  I see their point, wanting more specific keywords but like you say, no one is going to keyword specifically for Crestock.  I have 5000+ images there and I make almost 2x more every month on Shuttersock than i have made in my lifetime on Crestock (6 years).

Microbius

« Reply #2 on: July 20, 2012, 04:29 »
0
I'd have to agree here.  I see their point, wanting more specific keywords but like you say, no one is going to keyword specifically for Crestock.  I have 5000+ images there and I make almost 2x more every month on Shuttersock than i have made in my lifetime on Crestock (6 years).
Pretty much the same as me in terms of where my earnings are there compared to other sites.
Such a low earner would have to have something else going for it in a big way to justify anything other than a fire (/ftp) and forget attitude from contributors.

lisafx

« Reply #3 on: July 20, 2012, 12:42 »
0
Have to agree, I would not rekeyword specifically for Crestock.  However I am glad that they are automatically removing words, rather than having us have to remove them in the upload process.  I generally frontload the most important words anyway. 

« Reply #4 on: July 20, 2012, 13:20 »
0
I never frontload important keywords, so it is likely I will have most important keywords stripped.. This makes submitting to crestock pointless..

I won't be submitting to crestock anymore, unless they change this policy.. The only way this is a great idea is if every single agency decides to do it..

Tryingmybest

  • Stand up for what is right
« Reply #5 on: July 20, 2012, 13:33 »
0
"Our maximum keyword limit has changed to 35 keywords per image.
Excess keywords will be automatically removed during image processing."

what are sites like this thinking? like anyone is going to take the time to keyword specifically for Crestock when the industry standard is 50.
I guess they think maybe people will be more selective and careful with their keywording? in reality they are just going to get  a random 35 keywords when 15 of the 50 are stripped out automatically.

This is a pain in the rear. I keep my KWs alphabetical. It helps me QC more efficiently. Working through Adobe Bridge I have a developed a very nice workflow. Since I might have had 25 sales in 2 years, I guess it's no big deal. I think they need to do a little more to increase revenue than restrict KWs.  ???

« Reply #6 on: July 20, 2012, 14:42 »
0
With one policy change, crestock has guaranteed it's demise....

lisafx

« Reply #7 on: July 20, 2012, 16:04 »
0
With one policy change, crestock has guaranteed it's demise....

I would agree except that going from hardly any sales to absolutely no sales isn't much of a demise ;)

« Reply #8 on: July 20, 2012, 18:03 »
0
I don't currently contribute because I have not yet had the time for a low earner like this but this will ensure I won't.  My keywords are alphabetic, so I'd have to manually edit thousands of images.  Not going to happen for 3.2% of shutterstock.

« Reply #9 on: July 20, 2012, 18:11 »
0
Since Alamy went to their ridiculous 3 tier keywording system I haven't uploaded that much. It's too painful. What is the CRE in Crestock stand for?

THP Creative

  • THP Creative

« Reply #10 on: July 20, 2012, 21:46 »
0
Gave up on them long ago. Horrible reviews, terrible sales. Really struggle to believe they should even make it into the Poll Results to be honest.

« Reply #11 on: July 20, 2012, 22:26 »
0
I can't believe ANYONE is still uploading to Crestock.   They are the lowest of the low for me and I stopped uploading years ago.  I still have an open port, with a fair amount of pics that are great sellers on the real agencies, and I earn about $5 a month there.  I just keep the port open in case lightning strikes and they start doing well, but I can't see that happening, ever.

fujiko

« Reply #12 on: July 21, 2012, 03:22 »
0
Keyword things must be solved at search engine levels. Any agency that diverts from the standard number of keywords is creating more work for contributors.
If an agency is sure that keywords are an issue then they must keyword themselves.

Carl

  • Carl Stewart, CS Productions
« Reply #13 on: July 21, 2012, 05:49 »
0
I don't currently contribute because I have not yet had the time for a low earner like this but this will ensure I won't.  My keywords are alphabetic, so I'd have to manually edit thousands of images.  Not going to happen for 3.2% of shutterstock.

Ditto.

rubyroo

« Reply #14 on: July 21, 2012, 05:57 »
0
Ditto from me too.

This isn't the first time I've been amazed at the pulling power low-earning sites think they have.  I imagine they believe in their own hype, whilst we believe in our own results.

If I had a port there, I'd be pulling it now.

« Reply #15 on: July 21, 2012, 07:34 »
0
Ditto from me too.

This isn't the first time I've been amazed at the pulling power low-earning sites think they have.  I imagine they believe in their own hype, whilst we believe in our own results.

If I had a port there, I'd be pulling it now.

I had a port there and did pull it. 2300 images.  And I might add, if they are going to retroactively truncate existing files to 35, that will be a disaster.  Shooting themselves right in the balls.

« Reply #16 on: July 21, 2012, 08:05 »
0
0,25$ per subs...
Ouch!

« Reply #17 on: July 21, 2012, 11:42 »
0
I wrote them about this new limit (with link to this discussion).
It will be impossible for me to create separate set of keywords...
So if this limit stays, some important keywords will be automatically removed.
I am actually quite happy with sales there in recent months - I have around 4100
illustrations there.
(0.30 per subs. sales in my case).

Lev

« Reply #18 on: September 02, 2012, 10:18 »
0
crestock keeps proving they are all but business thinkers.

i've contacted them several moths ago with a proposal to upload approx. 30.000 of my new images via ftp. they had a special meeting in their office, discussed it and dicided they sill can't override 200 images per week limit they have. ;]

now this.

circus.

tab62

« Reply #19 on: September 02, 2012, 10:26 »
0
only 35 words to describe CreStock is allowed on this string...

« Reply #20 on: September 02, 2012, 10:49 »
0
Ill do it. If I have  shall we say... 35 dls pr image.

The era of microstock might be coming to an end.



tab62

« Reply #21 on: September 02, 2012, 11:19 »
0
If the era of microstock was based on CreStock it has long passed us like when the earth was created my friends...

Poncke

« Reply #22 on: September 02, 2012, 11:19 »
0
Did they listen to the advice and changed it back?

EmberMike

« Reply #23 on: September 02, 2012, 11:32 »
0
The era of microstock might be coming to an end.

Because of Crestock? What?


« Reply #24 on: September 02, 2012, 18:44 »
0
No, but because of their move. It suggests something.
To limit keywords to 35 has to do with limiting information entropy.
During the microstock bloom, the agencies have obtained a huge database of pictures. A commercial good made of zeroes and ones in the form of virtual images, stored on disks. Found and sold via searches through keywords.

When there are enough pictures, the pile becomes tall, and amounts of potential pictures are burried and never found, just because of the sheer amount of pictures.
Add to that, keyword spamming, and you have a pile of usless chaos.
Not to mention biased search engines.

The customer cannot find anything relevant is one thing.
The producer, is randomly awarded, that is worse.
There is no reason to produce fine images, if they are burried in chaos.

I think we are now entering the age of chaos in microstock: Pictures and  keywords get more and more chaotic, same with distribution, we dont even know if a picture is licenced legally or stolen.
Too much chaos, to much inpredictability, and continously falling commissions.
Seen from the contributers side... if you think you can get better sales by working harder , produce more or improve your image quality, you will continue.

If you are not rewarded, and if it is random if you are successful, there is a point where it becomes meaningless to deliver.
And we hear that all the time, people begin to bail out of the small agencies, where this mechanism is most obvious.
The "bail out limit" is individual, dependant on your potential. But it is there for everyone.

There is only one way to fight against it, and that is to limit the number of contributors.
Which is not in the agencies interest, since a part of ther earnings comes from accelerating number of contributors.
Thats the business model.
And it wont last.
Microstock will die in chaos, and diminishing returns.
The turnover rate of contributors will accelerate.


« Last Edit: September 02, 2012, 19:23 by JPSDK »


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
23 Replies
10978 Views
Last post February 02, 2020, 22:05
by kiankhoon
10 Replies
6250 Views
Last post April 03, 2008, 03:09
by Valaaami
5 Replies
4607 Views
Last post March 29, 2011, 12:53
by Pixart
26 Replies
9758 Views
Last post June 30, 2015, 15:44
by PixelBytes
17 Replies
4462 Views
Last post September 12, 2019, 08:45
by sam_444

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle