MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: FT rank  (Read 109788 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

OM

« Reply #375 on: September 09, 2012, 06:11 »
0
The more I try out their search the more convinced I become that there is a 'club'. It's quite a big club, I am definitely not in it and I haven't a clue about how one gets in it. The algorithm or whatever seems programmed to promote certain contributors who are from very diverse levels and pricing but their images keep cropping up time and time again on the first pages of default search. Had another one yesterday where the last 10 or so shots on page 1 were a series, all by the same contributor, none had been downloaded and most had not even been viewed but they were on page 1 (that series was also not relevant to my search topic either and it continued on page 2).

When half of the first page is taken up by images from one contributor and you've waded through the gratuitously inserted 'infinity collection' images (in which I wouldn't be interested anyway because I came to FT for microstock pricing), then there's not a lot of space left for anyone else's images.

Unlike SS, for which I find the search quite good, FT takes no account of the title (description) of the image in its search placement. For those in the 'club' it takes almost every keyword and inserts that contributor's image(s) at every search opportunity on the first pages. And some images have longevity despite their lack of sales, they still appear high in search after even 2-3 weeks.



« Reply #376 on: September 09, 2012, 07:56 »
0
I wouldn't rule out that theory but am struggling to see how FT would benefit.  It might be an impact of the sorting of keywords by relevance on submission - some might, some might not and some may do it better than others but impossible to compare because they are just displayed in alphabetic order.

OM

« Reply #377 on: September 09, 2012, 09:52 »
0
I wouldn't rule out that theory but am struggling to see how FT would benefit.  It might be an impact of the sorting of keywords by relevance on submission - some might, some might not and some may do it better than others but impossible to compare because they are just displayed in alphabetic order.

Tested that too a while back. FT says, place the 6 most important keywords first and one contributor's image that came up repeatedly in the first 2 pages did that with 15 of their keywords (out of around 20) when a single keyword from that images' keywords was entered into default search. It's almost as if the search algorithm gets stuck at a certain point and just goes round in circles on a small number of contributors/images.

I can't say that I would know how to construct an algorithm that is relatively fair to both established sellers whilst introducing new work on the early pages but to show more than half of the images on the first page (that are new and often without downloads) from a single contributor, I find unfair both to contributors as well as buyers.

« Reply #378 on: September 09, 2012, 17:14 »
0
Is there a way to see how other people have sorted their keywords - I looked a some images as a result of your post and thay seem just straight alphabetic?  You could easily be right though, maybe there is a logic flaw in the algorithm that causes the search to loop and that might account for what your seeing.

« Reply #379 on: September 09, 2012, 17:46 »
0
Just had an 'out of mind' experience with FT search. Searched 'bread' and got 26 shots on the first page all from the same contributor, just uploaded and all (except one) with zero views and one download ( the exception had one view and one dl)! Went to page two and there's another 3 there (at the top of P2) from the same contributor.
Looks to me like, get a mate to buy a sub and start downloading everything that the guy/gal submits!
A bit daft really cos the shots will probably never be bought by real buyers.......funny desaturated colour to all!

Good spot. Such tactics have been tried before (strangely, also by East Europeans) and resulted in the account being promptly suspended on IS. Relatively new contributor (or 'account' anyway) who is unlikely to survive for too much longer.

« Reply #380 on: September 09, 2012, 18:47 »
0
Unlike SS, for which I find the search quite good, FT takes no account of the title (description) of the image in its search placement.

This is new for me. SS using title/description for it's search algorithm. Is this true?

WarrenPrice

« Reply #381 on: September 09, 2012, 19:03 »
0
Unlike SS, for which I find the search quite good, FT takes no account of the title (description) of the image in its search placement.

This is new for me. SS using title/description for it's search algorithm. Is this true?

Really... does anyone know?  I think DT uses Title and Description.  Do any others?


OM

« Reply #382 on: September 10, 2012, 07:11 »
0
Just had an 'out of mind' experience with FT search. Searched 'bread' and got 26 shots on the first page all from the same contributor, just uploaded and all (except one) with zero views and one download ( the exception had one view and one dl)! Went to page two and there's another 3 there (at the top of P2) from the same contributor.
Looks to me like, get a mate to buy a sub and start downloading everything that the guy/gal submits!
A bit daft really cos the shots will probably never be bought by real buyers.......funny desaturated colour to all!

Good spot. Such tactics have been tried before (strangely, also by East Europeans) and resulted in the account being promptly suspended on IS. Relatively new contributor (or 'account' anyway) who is unlikely to survive for too much longer.

It gets even weirder. I log into my contributor account at FT UK, enter 'bread' in search and I still get almost half a first page of THAT contributor's images. Now, a couple have views and more sales.....the power of promotion eh!!

If I then log out of FT UK, go to private browsing with Firefox and use Yahoo search to bring up Fotolia, I go to FT.com (US site) and the search 'bread' comes up with a completely different first page which has good variation of images (lot of hamburgers!) both old and new, with not a single sighting of FTUK-Algofave.
Staying in private browsing, I go to the UK site again and the same first page comes up as I had when logged into my account.
It's almost as if the en.FT site has a bug/corrupted algo but FT.com doesn't.

Of course, this does mean that for folks in the US logging into FT there, they must think I'm a total loony and that I'm seeing things that are a figment of my imagination. :)

OM

« Reply #383 on: September 10, 2012, 07:32 »
+1
Unlike SS, for which I find the search quite good, FT takes no account of the title (description) of the image in its search placement.


This is new for me. SS using title/description for it's search algorithm. Is this true?


I'm a new entrant to SS and I tried to get as much info about submitting before I took the 'plunge'.

Perhaps I did see the submitter guidelines from 2009 in which it is stated that titles are NOT searchable:
http://submit.shutterstock.com/newsletter/137/article1.html

However, I also looked through Shutterbuzz before submitting my initial 10 for review and found this from June 2012:

http://www.shutterstock.com/buzz/stock-image-descriptions-for-seo

Quote
Youve spent time and effort to make great content for Shutterstock. Now how do you make sure that your work gets discovered (and downloaded)?

Wed like to share one simple tip for applying search engine optimization (SEO) to your Shutterstock image descriptions: Above all, write a good description.

Creating accurate, precise and easily understood descriptions for your images and footage is absolutely essential to getting them seen and bought. Why? Because good descriptions help customers find your images and footage on search engines like Google, which can be the first place potential customers look when theyre ready to buy an image or clip.

Heres a step-by-step example of how accurate and relevant descriptions can increase the chances that a customer will find your content through a search engine
.


So, perhaps for SS search the title still does not count but many images are now found through Google and other search engines........so it does/can make a difference.

estionx

  • adrianphotonunez.com

« Reply #384 on: October 06, 2012, 13:26 »
0
spectacular your positions in the ranking!

Overall Rank: 51000
Last 7 days: 10400

 ;D ;D ;D

Poncke

« Reply #385 on: October 06, 2012, 13:28 »
0
I ve gone up on FT ranking... yay me

« Reply #386 on: October 23, 2012, 10:25 »
0
overall rank: 8920
7 day rank: 3210

My portfolio: http://en.fotolia.com/p/201963974

« Reply #387 on: October 24, 2012, 03:08 »
0
Mine 7 day rank is 124 at the moment. A bit worried that being so close to the top100 gets you so little money ;)


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
21 Replies
9066 Views
Last post May 27, 2007, 22:31
by Whiz
17 Replies
7635 Views
Last post September 04, 2007, 19:18
by dbvirago
2 Replies
3308 Views
Last post February 09, 2012, 03:47
by nicku
Fotolia rank reset and DPC

Started by EmberMike « 1 2  All » Adobe Stock

31 Replies
12992 Views
Last post May 20, 2014, 06:46
by Mantis
Fotolia Rank

Started by Uncle Pete « 1 2  All » Adobe Stock

33 Replies
14625 Views
Last post June 12, 2016, 07:45
by roede-orm

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle