MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: best match have changed... How about the sales?  (Read 23060 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #50 on: October 11, 2008, 12:56 »
0
So it seems like most of the comments are about downloads dropping. I wonder if the people with increased downloads aren't posting or IS' sales are down overall from the new best match.
My sales are up, but I don't have a large portfolio so it doesn't really represent anything.


« Reply #51 on: October 11, 2008, 13:23 »
0
This latest change seems to have actually helped me marginally, although with new files selling instead of the ones that used to sell.

vonkara

« Reply #52 on: October 11, 2008, 14:10 »
0
OK so it's moving a bit here with a comment from JJRD

Best Match is a secret topic, so as much as we are listening and reading each and every comment in this thread, as much as we are compiling each and every comment that is brought to our attention from Contributor Relations, we are simply not willing to commen in public, it's as simple as that.

But, given the importance of the subject and given the obvious need for an official comment, I will say the following at this point, and I will try to be as graphic as I possibly can:

As planned, on Thursday, October 9th, starting at 10am and lasting many hours, a meeting took place at HQ. Bruce was there, Kelly was there, Aaron was there, I was there. Were also present the people behind what constitutes Best Match. At this meeting, I made sure to present each and every facet of this community of artists' concerns.

Opinions were exchanged, decisions were taken... and best match team probably started to prepare some tweaks.

Again, as I said earlier in this thread, I for one am not in the know as far as what is best match, how best match works... but I know who to contact when the going gets tough.

Here, I simply want to state, again, officially, in the name of iStockphoto, that we are listening... and that we are not willing to comment on that subject.

It's as simple as that.

Thank you so very much indeed.

« Reply #53 on: October 11, 2008, 14:38 »
0
The problem (for IS) with changing the best match is that no matter what they do, some people will always be affected negatively, while others will be affected positively.  Many of those that are affected negatively will react and complain, while most of those that are affected positively will not say a word (and enjoy their new bounty).

I understand why IS (or any other microstock site) changes the best match on a periodic basis - because it gives customers a fresh look at images that they might not have ever seen before and probably increases sales somewhat.

We just have to learn to roll with the flow...

« Reply #54 on: October 12, 2008, 00:50 »
0
I had 9 dls at IS yesterday.  A year ago my average was about 40 a day and a good day was 60 to 80.  I always used to check my stats constantly at IS now I hardly bother.  They have fallen behind SS, DT and FT and last month StockXpert caught up. I used to really love IS and was seriously thinking about going exclusive but I am so dissapointed. Images that are getting downloaded 100's of times at other sites are almost impossible to find at IS :(

Agreed. 

I have seen slowdown across several sites this month (not DT or SS) but the effect of images dropping out of sight is almost exclusively istock.  I sell a good mix of new and older images on other sites.  Even those from 2005 and 2006 still sell elsewhere but almost never on istock.

When images have such a short shelf life at IS it is a big disincentive to exclusivity.   


I'm exactly in the same situation. Had 500 to 600 dowloads in october 2006, same in 2007.
Seems that I will have no more than 150 this month....have always liked istock and  I have no complain about keywording rejection, max dowload etc...but I feel like as IS non exclusive, I'm getting slowly pushed out, which I regret very much. It might be an impression only as more and more contributors are joining, but when looking at the threads, it seems to me that those contributors having significant decreases in sales are Non Exclusive with more that 2000 pictures or so....

IS we love you, why dont you love us!!!!!

jean

PaulieWalnuts

  • We Have Exciting News For You
« Reply #55 on: October 12, 2008, 07:29 »
0
Jean, I'm not sure being exclusive is the answer. I've seen posts by plenty of high volume exclusives who have seen a big drop.

« Reply #56 on: October 12, 2008, 08:05 »
0
In October 2006 I had over 1200 dls.  If this month carries on the way it started I will end up with about 320 dls, one quarter of the dls I had 2 years ago. Yesterday for the first time since my first weeks there I had 0 dls.
Thank goodness SS, DT and FT and even StockXpert these days are making up for it.
« Last Edit: October 12, 2008, 08:07 by fotografer »

« Reply #57 on: October 12, 2008, 08:06 »
0
double post

« Reply #58 on: October 12, 2008, 09:18 »
0
Jean, I'm not sure being exclusive is the answer. I've seen posts by plenty of high volume exclusives who have seen a big drop.

Thanks Paul, it is a pity than.... in a way feel better to know this is not an non exlusive problem...and hope IS team will fix this pb soon!

jean

« Reply #59 on: October 12, 2008, 10:00 »
0
Maybe it's too easy for non-exclusives, when seeing a drop in sales blame it too best match exclusives favouristism. There are non exclusives reporting better sales and some exclusives reporting a fall. While I think that exclusives deserve a help in best match placement, there are many other factors. Size, for instance. Or upload date, even stronger. Of my 200 firts best match results for my follder about 190 are pics uploaded in 2008.

Anyway, they have said in the forums that they will change the best match again, so...

« Reply #60 on: October 12, 2008, 16:10 »
0
The problem (for IS) with changing the best match is that no matter what they do, some people will always be affected negatively, while others will be affected positively.  Many of those that are affected negatively will react and complain, while most of those that are affected positively will not say a word (and enjoy their new bounty).

Indeed, but if they could only establish a reasonable algorithm...  I agree that it is good to show fresh images and not just the same old ones, so age factor should be taken in account.  Also sales/views should be an important factor.  Exclusivity may also be a factor, no matter how us non-exclusives may dislike it.  Then there is the limitation of images per contributor, which apparently was recently dropped, but avoided showing basically different images of the same series.

And best match for me should take into account if the search terms appear in the description and title fields also. 

Regards,
Adelaide

« Reply #61 on: October 12, 2008, 21:04 »
0
Also sales/views should be an important factor.
I've read this before, but I've never read the reason for it. Why should sales/view influence search results? I don't really have an opinion on this other than I can't see how a low or high value of this stat should relate to its result in the best match search.

charlesknox

  • www.charlesknoxphoto.com
« Reply #62 on: October 12, 2008, 21:32 »
0
My sales are down about 50 percent this month :( oh well part of the game i guess

« Reply #63 on: October 12, 2008, 22:34 »
0
Also sales/views should be an important factor.
I've read this before, but I've never read the reason for it. Why should sales/view influence search results? I don't really have an opinion on this other than I can't see how a low or high value of this stat should relate to its result in the best match search.

I think it could help rank images that already match by the keywords. If two images were seen 100 times, but one was downloaded more than the other, it may be better than the latter. It is more relevant than age or total downloads, I believe.

Regards,
Adelaide

« Reply #64 on: October 13, 2008, 05:18 »
0
Sales are down at dizzy speed  :o :o

Review time is going at snail pace  ;D ;D
« Last Edit: October 13, 2008, 05:25 by Gimmerton »

bittersweet

« Reply #65 on: October 13, 2008, 08:12 »
0
Also sales/views should be an important factor.
I've read this before, but I've never read the reason for it. Why should sales/view influence search results? I don't really have an opinion on this other than I can't see how a low or high value of this stat should relate to its result in the best match search.

I think it could help rank images that already match by the keywords. If two images were seen 100 times, but one was downloaded more than the other, it may be better than the latter. It is more relevant than age or total downloads, I believe.

Regards,
Adelaide

But with the loupe feature, it is not necessary to actually click on an image in order to see the full size thumbnail. I rarely click on an image until I'm ready to purchase it. If others use this practice, it would give a huge boost to any download at all, and create a loop where sales beget sales and the same few files get stuck at the front again. Isn't this part of what everyone is complaining about?

vonkara

« Reply #66 on: October 13, 2008, 13:31 »
0
But with the loupe feature, it is not necessary to actually click on an image in order to see the full size thumbnail. I rarely click on an image until I'm ready to purchase it. If others use this practice, it would give a huge boost to any download at all, and create a loop where sales beget sales and the same few files get stuck at the front again. Isn't this part of what everyone is complaining about?
Only downloads could help the best match, because everybody can click on the images. Also the first complaints I heard was about the disparition of the slot system. With the slot system, contributors wasn't able to have more than like 5 images in front. When it was sorted by downloads per month and the slot system, barely nobody was complaining on the IS forum

« Reply #67 on: October 13, 2008, 16:20 »
0
But with the loupe feature, it is not necessary to actually click on an image in order to see the full size thumbnail. I rarely click on an image until I'm ready to purchase it. If others use this practice, it would give a huge boost to any download at all, and create a loop where sales beget sales and the same few files get stuck at the front again. Isn't this part of what everyone is complaining about?

No statistics is perfect. On average, an image with few views but high downloads is more popular - it's more attractive, technically superior, whatever, people prefer it over others. That's what dlds/view means to me. It may be old, it may be new.

Dlds/mo is also an interesting number and IS uses/used it a lot, but I have observed in my own images a trend that, once an image is quickly downloaded, it remains with a high dld/mo number. The number may decrease along the time, but is stays relatively higher than others.  I've seen that with images in a series uploaded close to each other. And if an image doesn't get downloaded soon, it stays forever in the end of the line.

Of course, my portfolio is small enough not to prove significant trends.

Regards,
Adelaide

lisafx

« Reply #68 on: October 13, 2008, 16:25 »
0
Also sales/views should be an important factor.
I've read this before, but I've never read the reason for it. Why should sales/view influence search results? I don't really have an opinion on this other than I can't see how a low or high value of this stat should relate to its result in the best match search.

My problem with the sales/views ratio affecting the best match is that people seem to be gaming it.  Views from fellow contributors should not count in the best match.  Since views have been revealed as part of the best match algorithm, lots of folks, including me, have experienced a surge of dozens of views as soon as a file is approved. Since it is a relatively new phenomenon, it is hard not to assume there is an attempt at gaming going on.   
« Last Edit: October 13, 2008, 16:27 by lisafx »

vonkara

« Reply #69 on: October 13, 2008, 16:42 »
0
I hope they do something with the best match quickly. My port doesn't came back to what it was before. I still have a file with 75 or so downloads who was in front of my port and who is still back a bit today. The problem is that newer files are in front and I didn't uploaded better images than what my best sellers was. Gosh! I can't do always better than my last best performance was, it's annoying a bit!

PaulieWalnuts

  • We Have Exciting News For You
« Reply #70 on: October 13, 2008, 20:26 »
0
I hope they do something with the best match quickly. My port doesn't came back to what it was before. I still have a file with 75 or so downloads who was in front of my port and who is still back a bit today. The problem is that newer files are in front and I didn't uploaded better images than what my best sellers was. Gosh! I can't do always better than my last best performance was, it's annoying a bit!

This actually brings up an interesting point. The more successful one of my images was the further back it seems to be in best match now. And the best match before seemed to be heavily tied to the views/downloads ratio. Now it seems to be age/views/downloads.

The old best match seemed to start new images 5-10 pages back which gave them a shot to be seen and move up or down based on buyer demand. The bestsellers still stayed at the front. New images seem to be starting higher and quickly disappearing if the don't start to immediately sell.

So this new best match seems to reward those who upload their new best saleable images consistently(?)

« Reply #71 on: October 13, 2008, 20:57 »
0
I think it could help rank images that already match by the keywords. If two images were seen 100 times, but one was downloaded more than the other, it may be better than the latter. It is more relevant than age or total downloads, I believe.
Your example is a straight comparison of downloads after a comparison of views, not a comparison of DLs/views. Holding all other things constant I think you could be right, but unfortunately there are a lot of other variables that could call this into question (see example below). I don't believe that a photo with a photo with a higher DL/view ratio is necessary a better match.

Take for example the ubiquitous bikini model with santa hat that is being uploaded constantly right now. Lets say you have photo A, ugly bikini santa model, that has been up for a while so it has more downloads than newly uploaded photo B. Photo B has a few downloads and has 10x as many views as photo A. The more views of photo B would likely mean that the photo is of a prettier model, but because of the nature of the photo most of the views wouldn't be buyers. Conversely, Photo A's high DL/view ratio would be a result of it being up on the site longer when there wasn't as many gorgeous bikini Santa models. So you'd be punishing the photographer of photo B for having a prettier model. In effect, there is a time or age component to the DL/view ratio.

DL/view is also effected by the design of the site itself. When a photo first appears on the site it is only visible in the new uploads section and hasn't been indexed in the search. Contributors are more likely to browse the new uploads than serious buyers because buyers are going to use the search engine. So if you're given two identical photos, C & D, and they are uploaded on the same day. There view counts will be effected by when they appear in the new uploads box. Should the photo that appears in the new uploads during the most visited time of the day be penalized for its higher view count? This also applies to what day of the week a photo first appears in the new uploads section.

I've been thinking about this and have other reasons for not including views as a variable, but I'm having a hard time seeing a reason for including it as a component to the algorithm because I don't see it as representative of a photo being either better or worse than another photo.

« Reply #72 on: October 13, 2008, 22:11 »
0
Take for example the ubiquitous bikini model with santa hat that is being uploaded constantly right now. Lets say you have photo A, ugly bikini santa model, that has been up for a while so it has more downloads than newly uploaded photo B. Photo B has a few downloads and has 10x as many views as photo A. The more views of photo B would likely mean that the photo is of a prettier model, but because of the nature of the photo most of the views wouldn't be buyers. Conversely, Photo A's high DL/view ratio would be a result of it being up on the site longer when there wasn't as many gorgeous bikini Santa models. So you'd be punishing the photographer of photo B for having a prettier model. In effect, there is a time or age component to the DL/view ratio.

I understand your point, but maybe it's more an exception than a rule.  I believe ANY woman in bikini get many views, despite not from true buyers, so they would probably be leveled.  :)

But I still prefer it to dlds only, because this clearly benefits older images. Dlds/month maybe would be a better option to pure total dlds, but, as I said, my experience says that once an image is "luckily" uploaded soon, it remains at a high dlds/mo ratio.

Regards,
Adelaide

CofkoCof

« Reply #73 on: October 14, 2008, 04:18 »
0
This actually brings up an interesting point. The more successful one of my images was the further back it seems to be in best match now. And the best match before seemed to be heavily tied to the views/downloads ratio. Now it seems to be age/views/downloads.
What you say is probably true, but it has some additional tweaks. Example: a file with 8 downloads in 118 views (14.5 views per download) uploaded on 08/11/08 comes infront of a file with 21 downloads 204 views (10.1 views per download) uploaded on 08/18/08. The later file has more downloads, better views/download ration, better dl/month ratio, is newer,... but is still behind the first file  ???

j2k

« Reply #74 on: October 14, 2008, 07:57 »
0
All I can say is that my portfolio is bleeding badly. Sales are waaay down. I'd say over 60% down. :(. I still have a small portfolio on istock with a limited number of well selling photos, so I'm probably getting hit a bit more than someone with a 1000+ diversified photos.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
24 Replies
9398 Views
Last post November 29, 2006, 14:37
by Lizard
2 Replies
3024 Views
Last post March 31, 2008, 10:53
by ann
11 Replies
5018 Views
Last post July 18, 2008, 13:23
by vphoto
10 Replies
5626 Views
Last post July 15, 2009, 13:46
by Moonb007
11 Replies
4869 Views
Last post August 28, 2016, 14:02
by Minsc

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors