pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Is Fotolia Tanking for anyone else?  (Read 22502 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #75 on: October 14, 2012, 11:45 »
0
You might as well get used to the idea of FT income falling anyway. They are losing the game, quite comprehensively, to SS and not without reason. Their search engine is painfully unsophisticated and that is compounded by their relaxed attitude to keyword spamming. They are also making the same mistake as IS in trying to push high-priced 'collections' down customers' throats except that FT's pretentious 'Infinity' offerings are generally of a lower standard than the 'uninifity collection'. Ridiculous.

As opposed to ShutterStock?  Keyword spamming on SS is horrific and certainly no better than on FT.  The only site doing anything about that is iS and their DA approach doesn't work effectively.  This is a huge problem on all the sites not just FT.  I agree with the rest of what you're saying, although for me as a small timer FT is doing better lately.

Yes indeed __ as opposed to Shutterstock. The contributors at SS might be just as bad keywood spammers (as at FT and anywhere else) however, and most importantly, SS's default search mode promotes the keywords used when the image is bought. That ensures that the buyers are presented with relevant images on the Popular seach results as all the cr*p gets filtered to the back pages. As you say IS have a similiar system but it relies on their ridiculous CV. FT's algorithm appears to be incredibely crude and gives no weighting to specific keywords (even though they claim that they do).
« Last Edit: October 14, 2012, 11:47 by gostwyck »


« Reply #76 on: October 14, 2012, 11:57 »
0
FT's algorithm appears to be incredibely crude and gives no weighting to specific keywords (even though they claim that they do).

So ur saying putting the 7 most important keywords on top doesn't help?

« Reply #77 on: October 14, 2012, 11:59 »
0
You might as well get used to the idea of FT income falling anyway. They are losing the game, quite comprehensively, to SS and not without reason. Their search engine is painfully unsophisticated and that is compounded by their relaxed attitude to keyword spamming. They are also making the same mistake as IS in trying to push high-priced 'collections' down customers' throats except that FT's pretentious 'Infinity' offerings are generally of a lower standard than the 'uninifity collection'. Ridiculous.

As opposed to ShutterStock?  Keyword spamming on SS is horrific and certainly no better than on FT.  The only site doing anything about that is iS and their DA approach doesn't work effectively.  This is a huge problem on all the sites not just FT.  I agree with the rest of what you're saying, although for me as a small timer FT is doing better lately.

Yes indeed __ as opposed to Shutterstock. The contributors at SS might be just as bad keywood spammers (as at FT and anywhere else) however, and most importantly, SS's default search mode promotes the keywords used when the image is bought. That ensures that the buyers are presented with relevant images on the Popular seach results as all the cr*p gets filtered to the back pages. As you say IS have a similiar system but it relies on their ridiculous CV. FT's algorithm appears to be incredibely crude and gives no weighting to specific keywords (even though they claim that they do).

I didn't realize that - thanks.  Learned something new today.  That certainly is an improvement and good to know.  It isn't perfect - a lot of totally irrelevant images still come up in searches - but would definitely make it better.

« Reply #78 on: October 14, 2012, 12:34 »
0
FT's algorithm appears to be incredibely crude and gives no weighting to specific keywords (even though they claim that they do).

So ur saying putting the 7 most important keywords on top doesn't help?

It doesn't appear to have any effect whatsoever. Experiment with it yourself, with images from the same series, and test if it makes a difference from where the images appear within the default sort order

« Reply #79 on: October 14, 2012, 12:46 »
0
I wonder if perversely reducing the key word limit to say 10 would improve search results by ensuring only truly relevant and focussed words were used?

CD123

« Reply #80 on: October 14, 2012, 12:51 »
0
I wonder if perversely reducing the key word limit to say 10 would improve search results by ensuring only truly relevant and focussed words were used?
Wonder if that is what the infamous Crestock is trying with their 30 keyword limit?
« Last Edit: October 14, 2012, 12:58 by CD123 »

lisafx

« Reply #81 on: October 14, 2012, 14:45 »
0
I wonder if perversely reducing the key word limit to say 10 would improve search results by ensuring only truly relevant and focussed words were used?

This idea has been floated periodically over the last few years.  While it might appear to be a solution, it tends to penalize contributors who shoot more complex concepts.

For example, ten keywords would more than adequately describe an isolated apple, or a handshake on white.  It would be impossible to to describe an image of lets say 5-10 people, of varying professions, together in a group, even isolated, much less in some sort of location. 

Not to mention that the subject of this discussion, Fotolia, does not have a search engine that includes plural versions of words automatically (even though it is so simple to program that my own tiny Ktools site can do it).  So for example, you can't keyword "girl" and expect it to also turn up "girls".  Both plural and singular versions of keywords have to be included on FT, when applicable.   

« Reply #82 on: October 14, 2012, 14:57 »
0
Not to mention that the subject of this discussion, Fotolia, does not have a search engine that includes plural versions of words automatically (even though it is so simple to program that my own tiny Ktools site can do it).  So for example, you can't keyword "girl" and expect it to also turn up "girls".  Both plural and singular versions of keywords have to be included on FT, when applicable.   

Same with DT __ you need to include plurals if appropriate. I suspect that is a deliberate policy though, intended to help with the relevancy of search results.

microstockphoto.co.uk

« Reply #83 on: October 14, 2012, 15:00 »
0
I wonder if perversely reducing the key word limit to say 10 would improve search results by ensuring only truly relevant and focussed words were used?
This idea has been floated periodically over the last few years.  While it might appear to be a solution, it tends to penalize contributors who shoot more complex concepts.

Interesting idea. And interesting objection.

Different levels of keywords as Alamy uses may be a solution (2 levels instead of 3 are probably enough), but it's too time consuming. If we could agree upon a common IPTC extension...

lisafx

« Reply #84 on: October 14, 2012, 15:48 »
0

Different levels of keywords as Alamy uses may be a solution (2 levels instead of 3 are probably enough), but it's too time consuming. If we could agree upon a common IPTC extension...

This would be a good solution, I agree. 

Still think Shutterstock's solution of giving heavier weight to the words actually used to buy the images is the simplest and best solution though.   Nothing else addresses the problem of deliberate keyword spam as well.  There's no foolproof way to eliminate intentional spam but SS's search engine simply makes it irrelevant.   

OM

« Reply #85 on: October 14, 2012, 17:39 »
+1
Unlike SS where plurals are unnecessary, entering a singular or plural at FT brings up a different set of results on the first page. On FT UK try entering eg. golf ball or golf balls.

Another peculiarity of FT (UK) is that some images come up on page 1 of search with every single keyword entered. Have some time on your hands and want to try entering these 17 keywords separately? I started with 'cheese' but found that one image appeared somewhere on P1 for each of its keywords entered.........not even spammed keywords for this one!

alcohol, appetizer, beverage, camembert , cheese, dairy, dairy products, dinner, drink, food, fresh, freshness, glass, red, wine, wine, wineglass

 

« Reply #86 on: October 15, 2012, 02:53 »
0
Unlike SS where plurals are unnecessary, entering a singular or plural at FT brings up a different set of results on the first page. On FT UK try entering eg. golf ball or golf balls.

Another peculiarity of FT (UK) is that some images come up on page 1 of search with every single keyword entered. Have some time on your hands and want to try entering these 17 keywords separately? I started with 'cheese' but found that one image appeared somewhere on P1 for each of its keywords entered.........not even spammed keywords for this one!

alcohol, appetizer, beverage, camembert , cheese, dairy, dairy products, dinner, drink, food, fresh, freshness, glass, red, wine, wine, wineglass

 
This is what makes me suspect that some people are favoured in the searches and some of us are purposely put back. Maybe I'm just being paranoid though.  Is the particular image a new image? If it isn't then definitely something very strange is going on.

« Reply #87 on: October 15, 2012, 03:22 »
0
Unlike SS where plurals are unnecessary, entering a singular or plural at FT brings up a different set of results on the first page. On FT UK try entering eg. golf ball or golf balls.

Another peculiarity of FT (UK) is that some images come up on page 1 of search with every single keyword entered. Have some time on your hands and want to try entering these 17 keywords separately? I started with 'cheese' but found that one image appeared somewhere on P1 for each of its keywords entered.........not even spammed keywords for this one!

alcohol, appetizer, beverage, camembert , cheese, dairy, dairy products, dinner, drink, food, fresh, freshness, glass, red, wine, wine, wineglass

 
This is what makes me suspect that some people are favoured in the searches and some of us are purposely put back. Maybe I'm just being paranoid though.  Is the particular image a new image? If it isn't then definitely something very strange is going on.

I must be one of the people at the back. For me Fotolia earns 1/8th what it does at shutterstock.

« Reply #88 on: October 16, 2012, 13:56 »
0
Well 6 days later guess what I have in my Account now???    $17.70   Like WHAT!!!  I lost $0.30 in 6 days and did not make any money!

I think I might just delete all my images!

:(

« Reply #89 on: October 16, 2012, 14:26 »
0
Well 6 days later guess what I have in my Account now???    $17.70   Like WHAT!!!  I lost $0.30 in 6 days and did not make any money!

I think I might just delete all my images!

:(

thats shocking, the only explanation is really in the searches that is connected to the regular uploading which for them isnt enough in your case, I dont think that 150 images in a year is low but I believe FT is really wanting a few files every week even if those dont sell much, pretty much that will somehow get you a better placement in terms of searches...

your latest file is from the end of January 2012
« Last Edit: October 16, 2012, 14:30 by luissantos84 »

« Reply #90 on: October 16, 2012, 16:22 »
0
I am doing on FT quite fine!
Last several days have been very good on Depositphoto...
But, DT is tanking for me, every day more and more!

OM

« Reply #91 on: October 16, 2012, 17:12 »
0
Well 6 days later guess what I have in my Account now???    $17.70   Like WHAT!!!  I lost $0.30 in 6 days and did not make any money!

I think I might just delete all my images!

:(

thats shocking, the only explanation is really in the searches that is connected to the regular uploading which for them isnt enough in your case, I dont think that 150 images in a year is low but I believe FT is really wanting a few files every week even if those dont sell much, pretty much that will somehow get you a better placement in terms of searches...

your latest file is from the end of January 2012

It may indeed be the number of recent uploads that helps get you pole position in searches. In the example I quoted above where every keyword produced a position on p1 for that one image, I noticed that the contributor uploaded/had approved 290 images in the last week and 1,300 in the last month. Wow! Seems to work for them too. I counted 1,000+ downloads for those 1,300 images submitted in the last month. Per ardua ad astra an all that stuff but I'm afraid I'm not joining in that sort of competition........I prefer my own pace.

velocicarpo

« Reply #92 on: October 16, 2012, 22:18 »
0
Well 6 days later guess what I have in my Account now???    $17.70   Like WHAT!!!  I lost $0.30 in 6 days and did not make any money!

I think I might just delete all my images!

:(

thats shocking, the only explanation is really in the searches that is connected to the regular uploading which for them isnt enough in your case, I dont think that 150 images in a year is low but I believe FT is really wanting a few files every week even if those dont sell much, pretty much that will somehow get you a better placement in terms of searches...

your latest file is from the end of January 2012

My observation too. And beyond that I do think that 150 images a year is vey little. Nowadays we compete with lots of volume suppliers. Its not like in the old days anymore where you could comfortably produce a handfull of good quality images and get the income to fly with that...

« Reply #93 on: October 17, 2012, 03:29 »
0
I am doing on FT quite fine!
Last several days have been very good on Depositphoto...
But, DT is tanking for me, every day more and more!

This was the way earlier in the year for me also (relatively speaking of course) but FT have died back a lot and DT has come back to the sort of levels I'd expect and a clear #2 after SS.

Yuri_Arcurs

  • One Crazy PhotoManic MadPerson
« Reply #94 on: October 17, 2012, 12:54 »
0
Down almost 40% in 8 months. Increase in portfolio size is proportionally as always. I get a lot of 404 and 504's. (Error pages). Fotolia needs a new platform. I just don't understand it. I track error pages on peopleimages.com like a maniac and google reported 3 out of 80000 doing the last couple of months, which basically means "never". I just don't get why this is not a concern to them. :(

« Reply #95 on: October 18, 2012, 03:39 »
0
I am doing on FT quite fine!
Last several days have been very good on Depositphoto...
But, DT is tanking for me, every day more and more!

This was the way earlier in the year for me also (relatively speaking of course) but FT have died back a lot and DT has come back to the sort of levels I'd expect and a clear #2 after SS.

Maybe they are all connected! ::)

rubyroo

« Reply #96 on: October 18, 2012, 03:44 »
0
The first sale I ever had in microstock came from FT.  Oh the joy of that moment!  I had tears in my eyes and everything....

It's pretty much been downhill at FT ever since (LOL)

microstockphoto.co.uk

« Reply #97 on: October 18, 2012, 10:50 »
0
The first sale I ever had in microstock came from FT.  Oh the joy of that moment!  I had tears in my eyes and everything....

Same here... I started at FT in early 2007, uploaded a few pictures and almost forgot about it. When I came back in mid 2007 and found 56 pence in my account, all of a sudden stock photography looked like a real job opportunity for me.
« Last Edit: October 18, 2012, 10:53 by microstockphoto.co.uk »

« Reply #98 on: October 18, 2012, 11:52 »
0
Oposite here: sales this month are 150% of the sales for september. Acceptance of new files seems fair to me.

« Reply #99 on: October 18, 2012, 14:38 »
0
Oposite here: sales this month are 150% of the sales for september. Acceptance of new files seems fair to me.

+1
BME there for me so far this month, 10% better than last BME with 13 days still to go.  Monthly average sales this year are twice last year and four times the year before that - better growth than any other agency.  Of course I was starting from a very low point and even this month they are still only about 33% of what I'm making on SS.  Currently #3 this month and might beat iS for #2 if sales keep up (I've probably just jinxed it).


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
Fotolia V.2

Started by leaf « 1 2 ... 10 11 » Adobe Stock

269 Replies
65002 Views
Last post July 30, 2007, 09:32
by jsnover
3 Replies
5826 Views
Last post June 01, 2007, 11:34
by bbettina
14 Replies
8556 Views
Last post August 01, 2007, 22:01
by sharply_done
5 Replies
4379 Views
Last post November 26, 2007, 03:50
by Smithore
188 Replies
30572 Views
Last post November 23, 2012, 11:38
by xerith

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle