Author Topic: Is this the reason why so few new files are selliing?? (Read 4266 times)

jsmithzz · « **on:** August 17, 2013, 01:14 »

From Lobo...
"I've seen mention of how newer files are experiencing some weirdness with their similar offerings. This is entirely related to keyword order. However, as newer files have actions performed on them the keyword weight of the more relevant keywords will increase the relevancy of the similar files that are provided. We are going to put together an updated Keyword Guide for early September. In the mean time I would suggest people try and add their most relevant keywords before adding their more general keywords."

http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=355588&messageid=6927338

Lots of gripes about new files not selling, and I wonder if this is the culprit since it seems that the relevancy of certain keywords changes over time. For the large amount I upload, I depend on Deepmeta heavily for keywording, and it alphabetizes everything, so that would certainly explain a lot.

jsmithzz · « **Reply #1 on:** August 17, 2013, 01:24 »

And thanks to ShadySue for bringing this to everyone's attention. I would never have found this buried deep in the iStock forum otherwise.

ShadySue · « **Reply #2 on:** August 17, 2013, 03:56 »

I'm not sure if it's the reason why new files drop in the best match. I usually put my most important keywords first. The system is heavily favouring images with >10 sales - and apparently punishing new (since Sept) files which have a few dls.
Probably if you upload with DM, you're double-whammied, suddenly and with no warning.

Xanox · « **Reply #3 on:** August 17, 2013, 05:32 »

it would a risky move for an agency to change the keyword weight overnight, but then again istock thinks to be special.

wds · « **Reply #4 on:** August 17, 2013, 07:46 »

Quote from: jsmithzz on August 17, 2013, 01:14

From Lobo...
"I've seen mention of how newer files are experiencing some weirdness with their similar offerings. This is entirely related to keyword order. However, as newer files have actions performed on them the keyword weight of the more relevant keywords will increase the relevancy of the similar files that are provided. We are going to put together an updated Keyword Guide for early September. In the mean time I would suggest people try and add their most relevant keywords before adding their more general keywords."

http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=355588&messageid=6927338

Lots of gripes about new files not selling, and I wonder if this is the culprit since it seems that the relevancy of certain keywords changes over time. For the large amount I upload, I depend on Deepmeta heavily for keywording, and it alphabetizes everything, so that would certainly explain a lot.

The quote is interesting. Especially where it is said "...as newer files have actions performed on them..." not sales but "actions". As suspected in other threads, these actions probably include views. Perhaps in the past when there were many more views, that helped sort out the important keywords and that is what kept new files from quickly becoming lost and "unfindable" as they drifted down in the best match...the relevant keywords were sorted based on the many views and files could still be found even if they were not very high in the best match. Of course this seems obvious and one would think that iStock would have know this and rectified it....but who knows.

joyfnp · « **Reply #5 on:** August 18, 2013, 21:27 »

Quote from: jsmithzz on August 17, 2013, 01:14

...For the large amount I upload, I depend on Deepmeta heavily for keywording, and it alphabetizes everything, so that would certainly explain a lot.

I double checked several of my recent photos uploaded with DeepMeta and none of the keyword sets are alphabetized.

I should add that I keyword in lightroom not DeepMeta.

Anyka · « **Reply #6 on:** August 19, 2013, 05:00 »

Quote from: joyfnp on August 18, 2013, 21:27

Quote from: jsmithzz on August 17, 2013, 01:14

...For the large amount I upload, I depend on Deepmeta heavily for keywording, and it alphabetizes everything, so that would certainly explain a lot.

I double checked several of my recent photos uploaded with DeepMeta and none of the keyword sets are alphabetized.

I should add that I keyword in lightroom not DeepMeta.

I thought Lightroom always put the keywords in alphabetical order, automatically? That's the only reason I do NOT use Lightroom for keywording ...

gillian vann · « **Reply #7 on:** August 19, 2013, 05:39 »

out of my top 10 for July, 4 were "new" files. (I've been uploading pretty sporadically to iS this year, and more "stuff" rather than people images.) but then I've only been there for a year so i can't compare to the good old days. apparently I joined when it was bad (as opposed to now, when it's "beyond bad"?)

joyfnp · « **Reply #8 on:** August 19, 2013, 06:48 »

Quote from: Anyka on August 19, 2013, 05:00

Quote from: joyfnp on August 18, 2013, 21:27
Quote from: jsmithzz on August 17, 2013, 01:14

I should add that I keyword in lightroom not DeepMeta.
I thought Lightroom always put the keywords in alphabetical order, automatically? That's the only reason I do NOT use Lightroom for keywording ...

You're right, Anyka, all of the jpegs exported from Lightroom have alphabetical keywords...I will have to see if we can do keywords sorted by relevancy from within LR. But someone or something is rearranging keywords by the time the pics get to iStock.

goober · « **Reply #9 on:** August 19, 2013, 21:01 »

I had a look yesterday at my views and I have over 200 files that have never been viewed. I've got quite a few images with one view one download. Once it gets a download the views trend up significantly. So maybe it's a case of hard to get first sales and if the file shows promise it rises rapidly in the rankings.

ShadySue · « **Reply #10 on:** August 22, 2013, 18:36 »

Something really weird with search.
Even bracketing that the Display Settings > File Details disappears whenever I click from page to page, and the search sort is random, and seldom what it claims to be at the top of the page, and it takes a minimum of two extra clicks to get the sort you want, and then it changes from page to page, especially if you hit the back button.

Just out of curiosity, I wondered how 'businessman' recent uploads were selling. Must be one of the top sales terms.
So after a while I got what appear to the the most recent 'businessman' uploads. At least, none of them have any dls, so they can hardly be best match or Popular.
But the most recent was apparently uploaded in 15th August, then it's a whole batch from Yuri dated 15th May (sic). Are we really to imagine that no-one has uploaded any file keyworded 'businessman' since then?
I get the same result logged in in FF v23 logged in and in IE 10 logged out:

tickstock · « **Reply #11 on:** August 22, 2013, 19:13 »

ShadySue · « **Reply #12 on:** August 22, 2013, 19:33 »

Oh, OK,tx. I never imagined all his keywording lackeys all having months off at the same time. That explains why there are several hundred from the same date.

tickstock · « **Reply #13 on:** August 22, 2013, 19:43 »

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Is this the reason why so few new files are selliing?? (Read 4266 times)

jsmithzz

jsmithzz

ShadySue

Xanox

wds

joyfnp

Anyka

gillian vann

joyfnp

goober

ShadySue

tickstock

ShadySue

tickstock

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors