MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Another Massive Best Match Shift  (Read 246873 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

WarrenPrice

« Reply #200 on: December 24, 2011, 15:17 »
0
Seems like a lot of noise over nothing.  I'm independent and making sales.  Just had two ... one for nine cents and one for 22 cents.   :P

With sales like that why shouldn't we look forward to 28 cent sales at Thinkstock?  ??? ??? ??? ;D


lisafx

« Reply #201 on: December 24, 2011, 20:26 »
0
I do pay my models, but they aren't agency models, nor do I fly them in from anywhere, and most of the time they do their own makeup.    Locations costs a couple of hundred, or trade for images.  Props are reused as much as possible.  I don't travel to shoot - I don't see the need.  I'm intent on keeping my costs down so my net is as large as possible.  I'd say my costs are around %5 or so of my gross.  I'm sure Lisafx is the same as well as many of the others here.  Lise uses her husband for a lot of her stuff - her locations used to be her apartment.  If I wanted to work a lot more and make a lot less, I'd follow a different model.

My expenses run around 15% of my gross.  I suspect that is because my gross is a lot less than Sean's, Lise's etc.  Even so, my accountants are consistently flabbergasted by such a low overhead.  I'm not complaining :)

I would absolutely hate to do this the way Yuri does, even if I would make more money.  I am a control freak, so I like to do everything myself.  Not to mention that I would rather spend my limited creative energy on taking and editing photos, rather than managing staff.  Hats off to Yuri though, for having that much energy!

ETA:  I agree with Balderick though about spreading images out.  I haven't seen it hurt my "brand" any.  Any overall decreases in income I've seen over the past year seem to be the result of the law of diminishing returns, combined with royalty cuts at several of the largest agencies. 
« Last Edit: December 24, 2011, 20:32 by lisafx »

lagereek

« Reply #202 on: December 25, 2011, 02:48 »
0
In spreading around files as much as possible. Are we not then contradicting ourselves a bit, to a few years back when we, here in this forum came to the conclusion that a too much spread was exactly what was clogging up files, etc, and with irrelevant material, followed by more spamming, etc. I remember some here went as far as to say, it was our own fault. So what has changed?
Me?  I see very little point, if any,  to have files floating around lets say beyond page,10-15, in any search and I see even less point in having tons of material just "being" there for the sake of it all.
Now, if this was run properly and files were given search placings after merit, i.e. earn their place in a search ( the way it should be) then we wouldnt have this mega problem. Instead we are sitting here getting totally whacked because some agencies manipulate their search on the basis of exclusivity, no matter what rubbish it is.

CarlssonInc

« Reply #203 on: December 25, 2011, 03:58 »
0
In spreading around files as much as possible. Are we not then contradicting ourselves a bit, to a few years back when we, here in this forum came to the conclusion that a too much spread was exactly what was clogging up files, etc, and with irrelevant material, followed by more spamming, etc. I remember some here went as far as to say, it was our own fault. So what has changed?
Me?  I see very little point, if any,  to have files floating around lets say beyond page,10-15, in any search and I see even less point in having tons of material just "being" there for the sake of it all.
Now, if this was run properly and files were given search placings after merit, i.e. earn their place in a search ( the way it should be) then we wouldnt have this mega problem. Instead we are sitting here getting totally whacked because some agencies manipulate their search on the basis of exclusivity, no matter what rubbish it is.

If you don't want to spread the files around why then be independent? Being exclusive at iStock gives me the opportunity to have my images at a microstock library with "highish" prices that sell quite well. I can still sell images "normal" RF through all collections at Getty, as well as RM via both Getty and Alamy, as well any other if I choose to do so and more importantly direct sales that I negotiate myself.

The only microstock library I feel is missing and that would really be of interest would be Shutterstock, but hey you can't have it all. I rather supply fewer places to feel more in control, easier workflow, thus more time for actually working.

Also, images buried deep in a search do sell - all images can't be home-runs. Some suddenly float to the top, some sink. I rather have them available for those occasional sales, in total they are considerable.

« Reply #204 on: December 25, 2011, 05:22 »
0
"Also, images buried deep in a search do sell - all images can't be home-runs. Some suddenly float to the top, some sink."

Most sink if they are weighted to the bottom of the search from day one. Some of the stuff that floats to the top through best match is sh*t. Understandable really!

wut

« Reply #205 on: December 25, 2011, 06:17 »
0
I searched for roadtrip yesterday, photos only. Not only, I got lots of really bad photos in front of me (mostly zero sales too), at least half of them were illustrations. Which you can't turn off. Results were so messy, getting most of the file types you didn't want and don't need and the other third or so, that was of the right type, were mostly worthless. I really don't know how some ppl can still say IS's search engine is not just OK, but good, even the best. It doesn't even work. And I've seen lots of times the inability of their search engine to filter out illustrations. I think that's a big problem over there. I, as I contributor get an allergic reaction because of that, I really can't imagine how frustrating it must be for the buyers.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #206 on: December 25, 2011, 06:22 »
0
I searched for roadtrip yesterday, photos only. Not only, I got lots of really bad photos in front of me (mostly zero sales too), at least half of them were illustrations. Which you can't turn off.
Unfortunately CSA_illustrations is hogging all the searches in which they feature. However, as they are all Vetta, you can lower the slider to exclude them. And filter by Photography (image type). It is unfortunate that you still have four almost identical pictures of a road rather than a road trip on the top line, but that's spamming for you.
What would you expect to see in a 'road trip' picture anyway? A cartoonish family stuffed into a car with buckets and spades? Thelma and Louise?

KB

« Reply #207 on: December 25, 2011, 10:25 »
0
Getting rid of the stupid CSA files, I don't see any real difference in the relevance of the search results on iStock vs. SS. Both have some files that do seem relevant to the term (e.g., people in a car on a road), and both have files that are completely irrelevant (e.g., a waterfall! or an isolated car tire).

While I think the IS best match results used to be a lot more relevant when they were weighing keywords, it still isn't too bad -- except for the CSA files. Those (and similar pollution from other Getty collections) ruin the results.

wut

« Reply #208 on: December 25, 2011, 11:34 »
0
I searched for roadtrip yesterday, photos only. Not only, I got lots of really bad photos in front of me (mostly zero sales too), at least half of them were illustrations. Which you can't turn off.
Unfortunately CSA_illustrations is hogging all the searches in which they feature. However, as they are all Vetta, you can lower the slider to exclude them. And filter by Photography (image type). It is unfortunate that you still have four almost identical pictures of a road rather than a road trip on the top line, but that's spamming for you.
What would you expect to see in a 'road trip' picture anyway? A cartoonish family stuffed into a car with buckets and spades? Thelma and Louise?

As I said, photos only results (so I have already used the photo filter). I'd not only like to see the photos you mentioned and similar, but also photos of better quality on the first page, not mostly rubbish. As the DL counter also proves, you can call it the objective measurement (my opinion that most photos are of course isn't).

KB

« Reply #209 on: December 25, 2011, 12:26 »
0
As I said, photos only results (so I have already used the photo filter). I'd not only like to see the photos you mentioned and similar, but also photos of better quality on the first page, not mostly rubbish. As the DL counter also proves, you can call it the objective measurement (my opinion that most photos are of course isn't).
How many DLs do the SS results have? Oh, wait, you can't tell.

Removing the CSA files, the iStock best match search returns files with > 10, > 40, > 30, > 70, 2, 3, and > 5600 results as the first 7 results. After that are a bunch of files that have been newly UL'd, so many haven't yet sold. Would you expect those to have dozens of sales already? It doesn't usually work that way on iStock.

I don't see a quality difference between the two sites' results. They both have mostly relevant results. And perhaps my level of quality is lower than yours, but most of them to me don't appear to be "rubbish" on either site.

wut

« Reply #210 on: December 25, 2011, 13:31 »
0
You can filter the CSA file out only by using the price slider. Apparently you must have a pretty advanced knowledge in using filters and be pretty resourceful at the same time. And we, contributors are on that site every day, many times, know it well, so I wonder how bad it really is for the buyers, who use the site only when they need to buy something. And that is really problematic. On SS, filtering works, the search is super easy (no stupid sliders no one is using, that was comfirmed by IS as well) and effective. As a whole, IS is a buggy mess of a site, SS just works. In 2 years I've seen a few hours of downtime at SS (and that was only at the contributor side, so it doesn't really matter), IS has constant problems and they are giving discounts to the buyers, so we earn even more at the end. I think SS offers a much better user experience for the buyers. At contributors site, the two sites aren't even comparable, UL process simple and fast at SS, payments are on time all the time, there are no refunds etc etc. IS is just the opposite of all of that.

IMO the results are better at SS, more relevant and of better quality. Sure SS has those irrelevant tyre shots, but IS also has maps with pins, road signs, hotel signs and a Hertz sign. Oh yeah, you can filter editorial out as well. Joy oh joy this site... :s

BTW, we obviously don't see the same results at IS, this is what I see (the first 7):

Sort byPer Pageundefined
12345of 55
Above view of a couple driving in car.
PhotoExclusiveAdd to lightbox
#17957623
Above view of a couple driving in car.
skynesher
Downloads: > 10
Road Trip
PhotoExclusiveAdd to lightbox
#16290573
Road Trip
ZargonDesign
Downloads: > 10
mojave desert highway
PhotoExclusiveAdd to lightbox
#16761568
mojave desert highway
rappensuncle
Downloads: > 10
Traveling With Kids
PhotoExclusiveAdd to lightbox
#17812653
Traveling With Kids
dejanristovski
Downloads: > 10
Happy Woman in a Car
PhotoExclusiveAdd to lightbox
#18082765
Happy Woman in a Car
eucyln
Downloads: 3
Tourists on the ferry boat
PhotoEditorialExclusiveAdd to lightbox
#18521596
Tourists on the ferry boat
brytta
Downloads: 1
Above view of a couple driving in car.
PhotoExclusiveAdd to lightbox
#18660394
Above view of a couple driving in car.
skynesher
Downloads: 0
« Last Edit: December 25, 2011, 13:32 by wut »

KB

« Reply #211 on: December 25, 2011, 14:31 »
0
You're right, we are getting different results. Two of the ones you see in the first 7 (your #6 and #7) appear as #8 and #9 in my results (I show 7 across, so those are in my second row of results).  Your results are missing two more shots of an empty road (very similar framing to the "mojave desert highway" one that is in your results). One of those is the flame with > 5600 sales. The other difference is I used the more accurate numbers for DLs that appears on the file's page, rather than the ones shown in the search results.

I didn't see a hotel sign or hertz sign in the first 200 IS results, but I did see one motel (Route 66 -- relevant, IMO) and a Cafe sign (not relevant, IMO) in SS's first 100 results. Also a strangely irrelevant "We fly to the south!" poster about migration of birds. I'd say the majority of the first 100 results on SS are the empty road shots, while the IS results have quite a few more with people in cars.

Maybe it's my biased opinion, but I now think that iStock's results produce more relevant returns than SS's, if what you're looking for are people traveling in a car. If you want an empty road to represent a road trip, then SS's results are better. (And perhaps that is what buyers want, because if you sort iStock's results by downloads, all of a sudden the first seven are nothing but empty roads.)

Nothing to discuss about the stability of iStock's site. It sucks, 100%. They should have fired the IT team years ago, and brought in people who actually know what they're doing.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #212 on: December 25, 2011, 16:11 »
0
. And I've seen lots of times the inability of their search engine to filter out illustrations. I think that's a big problem over there. I, as I contributor get an allergic reaction because of that, I really can't imagine how frustrating it must be for the buyers.
Sadly, though, "that's not a fault, it's a feature".
But you can add photography (image) to your search and that should get rid illos.
They really do need to think about that CSA ingestion, though. They're fouling up too many searches.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #213 on: December 25, 2011, 16:17 »
0
You can filter the CSA file out only by using the price slider. Apparently you must have a pretty advanced knowledge in using filters and be pretty resourceful at the same time. And we, contributors are on that site every day, many times, know it well, so I wonder how bad it really is for the buyers, who use the site only when they need to buy something. And that is really problematic.
Probably the site is difficult for a tiny proportion of buyers, but let's be realistic. Most of the buyers will be used to using Photoshop and/or Illustrator and/or InDesign and/or e.g. WordPress, which IMO is pretty confusing (compared to basic HTML) if you want to do anything non-standard. They will therefore be very able to work out a few tick boxes or sliders.
In the real world, in the UK at least, supermarkets and other shops are always changing their layouts for whatever reasons. After a groan, most of us can usually cope and find what we want. Only a tiny minority will give up and leave. Presumably the shops are willing to put up with the loss of a few buyers for whatever nefarious benefit they get from the frequent changes.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #214 on: December 25, 2011, 16:22 »
0
You're right, we are getting different results. Two of the ones you see in the first 7 (your #6 and #7) appear as #8 and #9 in my results (I show 7 across, so those are in my second row of results).  Your results are missing two more shots of an empty road (very similar framing to the "mojave desert highway" one that is in your results). One of those is the flame with > 5600 sales. The other difference is I used the more accurate numbers for DLs that appears on the file's page, rather than the ones shown in the search results.

There's been a big change since I posted last. Then (after you had filtered out Vetta/CSA) there were four very similar from a series in the top row. Now only one is there and the others have dropped considerably.
In fact, the whole best match search for 'road trip' looks totally different from nine hours ago.

wut

« Reply #215 on: December 25, 2011, 16:35 »
0
You can filter the CSA file out only by using the price slider. Apparently you must have a pretty advanced knowledge in using filters and be pretty resourceful at the same time. And we, contributors are on that site every day, many times, know it well, so I wonder how bad it really is for the buyers, who use the site only when they need to buy something. And that is really problematic.
Probably the site is difficult for a tiny proportion of buyers, but let's be realistic. Most of the buyers will be used to using Photoshop and/or Illustrator and/or InDesign and/or e.g. WordPress, which IMO is pretty confusing (compared to basic HTML) if you want to do anything non-standard. They will therefore be very able to work out a few tick boxes or sliders.
In the real world, in the UK at least, supermarkets and other shops are always changing their layouts for whatever reasons. After a groan, most of us can usually cope and find what we want. Only a tiny minority will give up and leave. Presumably the shops are willing to put up with the loss of a few buyers for whatever nefarious benefit they get from the frequent changes.

Then how come they're getting rid of the slider (or so I've read) ?

BTW, I don't think the proportion is so tiny. There are newspaper editors, bloggers or small time buyers such as a friend of mine, who is buying stock photos for her company's online store (probably just once a season and no more than 10-20 images, but still).

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #216 on: December 25, 2011, 16:42 »
0
Then how come they're getting rid of the slider (or so I've read) ?
I missed that announcement. Have you got a link?
If it's true, I hope they'll be introducing something else to do the same thing. Buyers constantly asked for a way of filtering out more expensive files.

wut

« Reply #217 on: December 25, 2011, 17:27 »
0
Then how come they're getting rid of the slider (or so I've read) ?
I missed that announcement. Have you got a link?
If it's true, I hope they'll be introducing something else to do the same thing. Buyers constantly asked for a way of filtering out more expensive files.

I can't, since I'm not sure wether it was an official announcement, post from a staffer or just someone saying it over here. I guess I'm taking in way too much info regarding MS :s

« Reply #218 on: December 26, 2011, 09:13 »
0
It might just be PP results trickling in at the end of the month, since they're usually late... but it seems that my sales have picked up a bit after this new best match.

But indeed, my old and popular files that I've checked are sure enough shoved towards the back.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #219 on: December 26, 2011, 09:19 »
0
It might just be PP results trickling in at the end of the month, since they're usually late... but it seems that my sales have picked up a bit after this new best match.

But indeed, my old and popular files that I've checked are sure enough shoved towards the back.

You can easily check PP sales by looking at your stats page, and any PP sales are a sort of mossy green at the top of any normal 'blue' bars on the top two charts. Apparently they just started to come in for November, so check your November stats, not your December ones. Any PP sales will of course, increase your balance $$.

« Reply #220 on: December 26, 2011, 09:40 »
0
Then how come they're getting rid of the slider (or so I've read) ?
I missed that announcement. Have you got a link?
If it's true, I hope they'll be introducing something else to do the same thing. Buyers constantly asked for a way of filtering out more expensive files.

I've never seen any announcement that they're getting rid of the slider. They did say that most people don't see/use it.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #221 on: December 26, 2011, 09:52 »
0
Then how come they're getting rid of the slider (or so I've read) ?
I missed that announcement. Have you got a link?
If it's true, I hope they'll be introducing something else to do the same thing. Buyers constantly asked for a way of filtering out more expensive files.

I've never seen any announcement that they're getting rid of the slider. They did say that most people don't see/use it.

Isn't it a pity they don't do more real world user testing before introducing features?
OTOH, maybe most people don't need to filter out higher prices. And maybe people don't realise that that would be a way of filtering out CSA's cartoons if they want to see only photos (though it would also filter out any real Vetta photos in that search).
« Last Edit: December 26, 2011, 09:55 by ShadySue »

lagereek

« Reply #222 on: December 26, 2011, 11:36 »
0
Unbelievable they would think people would actually use this stupid little thing,  looks like a kiddies Lego set.

« Reply #223 on: December 26, 2011, 11:59 »
0
This best match shift to 100% exclusive content smells like a desperate move to keep exclusives from feeling the full effect of downward spiraling market share. Interesting that any attempt to discuss it in the iStock forum gets snuffed out by Lobo.

They have painted themselves into a corner with this. If they keep this best match long enough, independents will stop uploading and competition will pull ahead. That`s not going to happen because they need to keep feeding Thinkstock. On the other hand, this artificially boosted exclusive perk will now become the baseline with exclusives for measuring normal sales, and if the best match switches back to allowing some independent exposure then exclusives will get hit with declining sales due to best match shift + declining sales due to sliding market share. IMO, no happy ending for iStock here.
« Last Edit: December 26, 2011, 12:18 by imageegami »

lagereek

« Reply #224 on: December 26, 2011, 12:25 »
0
This best match shift to 100% exclusive content smells like a desperate move to keep exclusives from feeling the full effect of downward spiraling market share. Interesting that any attempt to discuss it in the iStock forum gets snuffed out by Lobo.

They have painted themselves into a corner with this. If they keep this best match long enough, independents will stop uploading and competition will pull ahead. That`s not going to happen because they need to keep feeding Thinkstock. On the other hand, this artificially boosted exclusive perk will now become the baseline with exclusives for measuring normal sales, and if the best match switches back to allowing some independent exposure then exclusives will get hit with declining sales due to best match shift + declining sales due to sliding market share. IMO, no happy ending for iStock here.

Exactly!  but even so, it has not done the slightest dent to increase exclusives revenues, heard this through the grapevine actually, its all for nothing, the place is a graveyard.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
25 Replies
20997 Views
Last post February 26, 2011, 04:42
by ShadySue
120 Replies
39272 Views
Last post May 11, 2011, 16:22
by Jo Ann Snover
240 Replies
58308 Views
Last post September 24, 2011, 10:24
by nataq
69 Replies
28514 Views
Last post November 15, 2011, 08:17
by ShadySue
Best Match shift 27 Jan 12

Started by michealo « 1 2  All » iStockPhoto.com

48 Replies
32127 Views
Last post February 02, 2012, 16:03
by StanRohrer

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors