pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: how istock search algoritm favors exclusives  (Read 11976 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

bittersweet

« Reply #25 on: December 10, 2008, 14:38 »
0
Why everybody's eager to prove it like it's some kind of bad deed?

That's the favorite hobby around here: try to convince everyone that istock is evil.  :D


« Reply #26 on: December 10, 2008, 14:57 »
0
If istock wishes to be an exclusive only agency, why don't they just say so and stop wasting the time of non-exclusives? Their current policy allows non-exclusives to upload but ensures that they will have very few sales by giving very poor exposure. Non-exclusives then have to consider whether it's worth the effort to continue with them. No doubt istock prefers to keep us on a string so that they can make something from us if their exclusives can't cover a particular image request. However it means we have to invest considerable time and effort for very little reward. Of course, istock could change their policy tomorrow, so no one wants to risk writing them off. I think if exclusives had to work so hard for so little on istock they might have second thoughts too.

« Reply #27 on: December 10, 2008, 15:11 »
0
If istock wishes to be an exclusive only agency, why don't they just say so and stop wasting the time of non-exclusives? Their current policy allows non-exclusives to upload but ensures that they will have very few sales by giving very poor exposure. Non-exclusives then have to consider whether it's worth the effort to continue with them. No doubt istock prefers to keep us on a string so that they can make something from us if their exclusives can't cover a particular image request. However it means we have to invest considerable time and effort for very little reward. Of course, istock could change their policy tomorrow, so no one wants to risk writing them off. I think if exclusives had to work so hard for so little on istock they might have second thoughts too.
They don't want to be exclusives only, I thought it's pretty evident. Otherwise they wouldn't let you submit stuff. But why they should give you an edge over lets say SJ or Lise or DNY or whatever? Of course all these guys have the priority in best match.
The rest of the whining I'm not willing even to comment on, if you think that you put more effort then you're paid for then just quit submitting to IS.

lisafx

« Reply #28 on: December 10, 2008, 18:01 »
0

They don't want to be exclusives only, I thought it's pretty evident. Otherwise they wouldn't let you submit stuff. But why they should give you an edge over lets say SJ or Lise or DNY or whatever? Of course all these guys have the priority in best match.


I have never, ever read any independent contributor asking to have an edge over Lise, Sean, DNY, or any other exclusive.  Ever. 

Asking for fair placement according to relevance and popularity of images is not asking for preferential treatment - unless you think that some of the top, most talented artists on istock could not compete in a level playing field?!  I think that is selling the quality of exclusive work short.

I'm not sure how long you have been on istock, so forgive me if you already know this, but istock's exclusivity program has been in effect almost four years.  Until the last few months the best match was relatively evenhanded about showing a mix of exclusive and non-exclusive work. 

The vague "increased exposure" phrase in the exclusivity agreement was never interpreted to mean better best match placement during most of the four years the exclusivity program has existed.  In fact a bit over a year ago Bitter said publicly that exclusives were not advantaged in the best match search. 

That has obviously changed lately, and as a result many independents are doing just as you suggest and have quit submitting to istock or at least putting their highest quality work on sites where it will get exposure and make money. 

I really hope you or one of the others who keep suggesting that independents stop uploading there will explain to me how that benefits istock in the long term because I can't see it....

jsnover

« Reply #29 on: December 10, 2008, 18:26 »
0
The rest of the whining I'm not willing even to comment on, if you think that you put more effort then you're paid for then just quit submitting to IS.
Why don't you take that attitude and dispose of it - it's not polite or helpful.  Whining is a highly pejorative term and serves no other purpose than to stir up bad feelings.

I'll grant you the discussion here tends to totally ignore the substantial number of exclusives who have been hosed by the last few months' lurches in the best match algorithm, but there is no reason to dismiss as whining the complaints independents have when a best match lurch has caused their sales to dip at IS.

« Reply #30 on: December 10, 2008, 18:32 »
0
If istock wishes to be an exclusive only agency, why don't they just say so and stop wasting the time of non-exclusives? Their current policy allows non-exclusives to upload but ensures that they will have very few sales by giving very poor exposure. Non-exclusives then have to consider whether it's worth the effort to continue with them. No doubt istock prefers to keep us on a string so that they can make something from us if their exclusives can't cover a particular image request. However it means we have to invest considerable time and effort for very little reward. Of course, istock could change their policy tomorrow, so no one wants to risk writing them off. I think if exclusives had to work so hard for so little on istock they might have second thoughts too.
They don't want to be exclusives only, I thought it's pretty evident. Otherwise they wouldn't let you submit stuff. But why they should give you an edge over lets say SJ or Lise or DNY or whatever? Of course all these guys have the priority in best match.
The rest of the whining I'm not willing even to comment on, if you think that you put more effort then you're paid for then just quit submitting to IS.
I'm a very small player. However I have put a lot of time and effort into learning 3D techniques, and will start producing significant amounts of stock worthy material fairly soon. I won't be wasting my time uploading to istock however. If istock loses market share due to the increasing amount of material not available there, guess who will suffer the most...

« Reply #31 on: January 01, 2009, 11:02 »
0
Quote
Both file are almost similar.  If we run a search on IS with the keywords red + pink + rose + isolated and sort it by most downloads, those 2 files are n1 and 2.

But if we sort it by best match, liliboas file is still first, mine drops to place 50 of 466 files. some other observations :

- only 2 non-exclusives in the top 50
- many files with even 0 downloads, all exclusives

it seems they DID change the best match results.  My file is at place 17 now instead of 50.  First non-exclusive is at place 5.  0 downloads are still there, but the are behind me.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
9 Replies
6379 Views
Last post November 25, 2006, 10:26
by kosmikkreeper
62 Replies
18776 Views
Last post February 17, 2008, 04:55
by rjmiz
35 Replies
16868 Views
Last post November 23, 2008, 12:11
by hali
16 Replies
8376 Views
Last post December 01, 2009, 21:48
by RacePhoto
54 Replies
22803 Views
Last post April 07, 2011, 17:22
by cathyslife

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors