Another fiasco of which I am reminded as I race to upload some holiday pix and get them in front of customers' eyes in time for Christmas ... it takes several days for them to show up in searches, or even to show up in the private lightboxes to which they were added.  I know they've got millions of files and thousands of keywords to index, but what did they implement their DB with, freaking BASIC on Commodore 64's?

If Google was to buy IS that's a bug that would be fixed, pronto.  The proof: I just searched at google for [site:istockphoto.com <my keywords>] and they already found - as the 4th item in the text results - an image that I uploaded a few days ago and which is still not indexed at IS.

I wish they would fix this, but I'm not sure that they even recognize it as a bug which is hampering their sales and profits.  If seasonal images are not promptly indexed and made available for sales in time, then they are stuck storing them on their servers for almost a whole year before they will generate any revenue.

Notice from RogerMexico:
"They have been holding back doing the search update over the last few days to make sure that all the pushes and changes to the search didn't cause things to be missed when they did. They are now satisfied that it will update correctly and have turned it all back on. Images since Saturday will be available in searches soon."

Another fiasco of which I am reminded as I race to upload some holiday pix and get them in front of customers' eyes in time for Christmas ...

That would really be a waste of your effort.

If seasonal images are not promptly indexed and made available for sales in time, then they are stuck storing them on their servers for almost a whole year before they will generate any revenue.

Sorry, at this point, it's your fault for not getting them up in time.  I stopped uploading holiday stuff a couple weeks ago.

So it looks like they've changed the DL numbers under my images. Anything with 100 to 499 DLs says >100. It doesn't change until you get to 500 DLs then it says >500. My image with 1300+ DLs now says >1000. Talk about rounding down...

If you open the file to view, you can see the number of downloads as they were showed until a few days ago, an so, have a better information about the popularity of this file.

...
Sorry, at this point, it's your fault for not getting them up in time.  I stopped uploading holiday stuff a couple weeks ago.

The actual issue however is whether IS has what you would consider adequately fast computers and software to complete the keyword indexing and lightbox links for images after they have been approved and are otherwise retrievable.

Quote from: pet_chia on December 15, 2010, 16:27

Quote from: sjlocke on December 15, 2010, 15:42

...
Sorry, at this point, it's your fault for not getting them up in time.  I stopped uploading holiday stuff a couple weeks ago.

The actual issue however is whether IS has what you would consider adequately fast computers and software to complete the keyword indexing and lightbox links for images after they have been approved and are otherwise retrievable.

Note RM's explanation copied above.

I repeat:

Thanks for that.  But even when they aren't churning up their servers with updates it takes at least an extra day or two after file approval for it to appear in searches, no?

And if it takes a day or two under normal circumstances to make images available for searches and in lightboxes, is that acceptable, or do you think that more effort should be expended to speed this up?  Given the technology that is available and the apparent success of search engines like Google to quickly index a far greater number of objects with far more keywords involved.

Quote from: loop on December 15, 2010, 15:48

Quote from: cclapper on December 13, 2010, 19:43

So it looks like they've changed the DL numbers under my images. Anything with 100 to 499 DLs says >100. It doesn't change until you get to 500 DLs then it says >500. My image with 1300+ DLs now says >1000. Talk about rounding down...

If you open the file to view, you can see the number of downloads as they were showed until a few days ago, an so, have a better information about the popularity of this file.

Thanks, loop. I do understand that, but buyers can't see that number. I suppose in the grand scheme of all things hosed over there, this one is just minor. Someone made a good point about how people rush to copy you if they see an image that sells well. That is a good reason to get rid of the info, but from a buyer's perspective, I would think that number might factor in to the buying decision. If popularity isn't an issue for a project, no problem. If a buyer wants a fresh image that hasn't been seen everywhere, I would think the info would be relevant.

I really don't know the reason for this change... but the reason for te first change --if I remember well-- was the fact than posting the exact downloads allowed anyone with IT skills, competitor or not,  to monitor the daily total sales of istock. Just guessing, but maybe this new change intends to difficult eve more an approximate calculation.

I really don't know the reason for this change... but the reason for te first change --if I remember well-- was the fact than posting the exact downloads allowed anyone with IT skills, competitor or not,  to monitor the daily total sales of istock. Just guessing, but maybe this new change intends to difficult eve more an approximate calculation.

Yes, I guess it would be embarrassing for Getty to have some of their contributors who have better IT skills than their own employees get the daily sales numbers faster and more accurately. 

I also remember that explanation for the change to >10, etc. I wonder why they even bother keeping them at all then because the gap between >100 and >500 etc. is quite substantial, from a buying perspective.

Time for update... New search start rocks.

- F5 fiasco
- Logo program fiasco
- Agency collection start fiasco
- Business card eternal fiasco
- EL percentage reduction fiasco
- Agency search fiasco
- Magical mystery changing vector prices fiasco
- A old and good live stats fiasco
- Partner Program fiasco. Once you're in you will never get out.
- Support tickets long times to response fiasco.
- Search engine Agency pics fiasco.
- Vector dudes are second rate contributors now fiasco.
- XXXL size removals fiasco.
- Fixes Released Nov 24 fiasco
- Stockys fiasco
- Vetta sale prices for of December with RC bonus. Again, nothing for illustrators.
- New faceted search start fiasco.

Coming up soon...editorial fiasco.

Quote

Images since Saturday will be available in searches soon."

This is, surprise surprise, BS. Images are still not in portfolios after 4 or 5 days, anyone with any sense will deactivate recent uploads because the tech team at IS  basically don't know their ass from their elbow.

Och, I'm not sure. The current best match sinks new images like stones, so it won't make much difference.

Just wondering ... if they want to sell editorial content which is far more time-sensitive than generic stock images, won't they have to make indexing and lightbox links come up faster?  A multi-day delay like this would pretty much kill whatever business they were hoping to get from newsworthy photos.

Time sensitive "editorial" is not what they are interested in, if you read the announcement.

Quote from: pet_chia on December 16, 2010, 13:11

Just wondering ... if they want to sell editorial content which is far more time-sensitive than generic stock images, won't they have to make indexing and lightbox links come up faster?  A multi-day delay like this would pretty much kill whatever business they were hoping to get from newsworthy photos.

Time sensitive "editorial" is not what they are interested in, if you read the announcement.

OK ... so I'm not going to get a big speedup of indexing etc. when I'm late uploading seasonal stock images   

Quotes from two buyers in a row on IStock forum (posting here for SNP and loop)

"As a buyer, I see this new search as another step in a long, long trend here at iStock to continually increase the hostility of the user experience.

The idea that the search returns a "variety of price points" as a convenience or that they can't exclude vetta because of "issues on the back end" is just smoke and mirrors and to be honest, I'm a little insulted that it's being presented as a benefit to me, the buyer.

I imagine only positive feedback will be allowed to stick on this board, but I'll give it a shot anyway.
"


 
"
^^ "Hostility" seems to be an apt word. Who is the target audience for this site? Is it the contributors or the buyers? The agency and its contributors are more than happy to say how they think that things should be presented but many seem to forget the end users, your buyers. I know my budget for every project and when it allows for Vetta or Agency, you can bet that I search Vetta or Agency. Otherwise, if I am working on a weekly for example, you are wasting my time by not allowing me to either sort by price or exclude Vetta and Agency. I had to wade through a ton of images yesterday, even with filters, and I was unimpressed to say the very least.


A lot of folks will fool themselves into thinking that these are the opinions of one or two complainers who aren't afraid to post, but you need to understand that we represent many buyers who remain silent in their frustration and end up looking elsewhere. Seriously, quit making our jobs harder please.
 
"