MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: What is happening to iStock?  (Read 28272 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #75 on: August 23, 2015, 18:45 »
+1
Yep that's how it works.  Until you get sales or maybe views the first keywords are given extra relevancy, you have to make sure to put the relevant ones first.
My point is that even if you do put the relevant keywords first, iStock changes them on acceptance (particularly in the new view), making the similars dissimilar.
QED.


« Reply #76 on: August 23, 2015, 18:46 »
0
That's not exactly what's happening.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #77 on: August 23, 2015, 18:49 »
+1
That's not exactly what's happening.
What, exactly, is happening?
I've seen this on so many of my own files, as well as some others which have been pointed out to me as having egregious similars, that I have a pretty strong theory.

« Reply #78 on: August 23, 2015, 20:21 »
+2
That's not exactly what's happening.
That is exactly what is happening, at least to my files. If it's not happening to your files then good for you but I and many others have complained about this in the iStock forums and we just get stone walled, being told it doesn't happen and everything is rosy in the garden and working as it should.
I got so fed up with this a while back that I raised a support ticket and was told that the popularity of keywords can affect the display order, which is absolutely crazy because you can put your four least relevant keywords last and have them immediately sent to the front because they happen to be popular in the searches, ruining the similars and best match relevancy.
The whole keywording system is so fundamentally flawed it's as if iStock are deliberately trying to lose sales.

« Reply #79 on: August 23, 2015, 21:08 »
0
That's not exactly what's happening.
That is exactly what is happening, at least to my files. If it's not happening to your files then good for you but I and many others have complained about this in the iStock forums and we just get stone walled, being told it doesn't happen and everything is rosy in the garden and working as it should.
I got so fed up with this a while back that I raised a support ticket and was told that the popularity of keywords can affect the display order, which is absolutely crazy because you can put your four least relevant keywords last and have them immediately sent to the front because they happen to be popular in the searches, ruining the similars and best match relevancy.
The whole keywording system is so fundamentally flawed it's as if iStock are deliberately trying to lose sales.
Keywords move up as your file is downloaded, buyers should be determining the relevancy not an algorithm or some editor.

« Reply #80 on: August 23, 2015, 21:11 »
+3
That's not exactly what's happening.
That is exactly what is happening, at least to my files. If it's not happening to your files then good for you but I and many others have complained about this in the iStock forums and we just get stone walled, being told it doesn't happen and everything is rosy in the garden and working as it should.
I got so fed up with this a while back that I raised a support ticket and was told that the popularity of keywords can affect the display order, which is absolutely crazy because you can put your four least relevant keywords last and have them immediately sent to the front because they happen to be popular in the searches, ruining the similars and best match relevancy.
The whole keywording system is so fundamentally flawed it's as if iStock are deliberately trying to lose sales.
Keywords move up as your file is downloaded, buyers should be determining the relevancy not an algorithm or some editor.

In my experience what SHOULD be happening and what IS happening at Istock are two very different things.

« Reply #81 on: August 23, 2015, 21:23 »
+3
When the keyword relevancy thing was introduced a few years ago it worked fine.  It worked fine because it counted both sales and views.  Also, back in those days, sales and views had high volume.  With that high volume the 'most important or relevant' words made their way quite quickly to the top of the list.  It was actually rare to see a problem, and most files had a very accurate relevance order.

In September 2012 when all the big changes to search were made, the 'views' part of the equation was taken away.  And more recently (as admitted and accepted by Lobo) the subs sales have not been linked to keyword order.  All that's left for relevancy is normal credit sales, which for most people are very small compared to several years ago.

So when the system was first designed it worked swimmingly, because high volume naturally made relevant words float higher.  The problem now is that there is no volume.

In addition, the changes made by Searchfairy in September 2012 placed a much higher emphasis on the first few keywords, and a much lower emphasis on the others.  Nowadays only the first half dozen or so words are considered to be 'sufficiently relevant' (see keywords forum couple of years ago for this discussion).

« Reply #82 on: August 23, 2015, 21:24 »
0
Duplicate post

« Reply #83 on: August 23, 2015, 21:24 »
0
That's not exactly what's happening.
That is exactly what is happening, at least to my files. If it's not happening to your files then good for you but I and many others have complained about this in the iStock forums and we just get stone walled, being told it doesn't happen and everything is rosy in the garden and working as it should.
I got so fed up with this a while back that I raised a support ticket and was told that the popularity of keywords can affect the display order, which is absolutely crazy because you can put your four least relevant keywords last and have them immediately sent to the front because they happen to be popular in the searches, ruining the similars and best match relevancy.
The whole keywording system is so fundamentally flawed it's as if iStock are deliberately trying to lose sales.
Keywords move up as your file is downloaded, buyers should be determining the relevancy not an algorithm or some editor.

In my experience what SHOULD be happening and what IS happening at Istock are two very different things.
That is how it works.  When there is no data (sales or views) you get a boost in your first keywords set by the contributor.  Nothing is determined by an editor's subjective thoughts or an algorithm that guesses what the subject is.

KB

« Reply #84 on: August 23, 2015, 23:08 »
+7
That's not exactly what's happening.
That is exactly what is happening, at least to my files. If it's not happening to your files then good for you but I and many others have complained about this in the iStock forums and we just get stone walled, being told it doesn't happen and everything is rosy in the garden and working as it should.
I got so fed up with this a while back that I raised a support ticket and was told that the popularity of keywords can affect the display order, which is absolutely crazy because you can put your four least relevant keywords last and have them immediately sent to the front because they happen to be popular in the searches, ruining the similars and best match relevancy.
The whole keywording system is so fundamentally flawed it's as if iStock are deliberately trying to lose sales.
Keywords move up as your file is downloaded, buyers should be determining the relevancy not an algorithm or some editor.

In my experience what SHOULD be happening and what IS happening at Istock are two very different things.
That is how it works.  When there is no data (sales or views) you get a boost in your first keywords set by the contributor.  Nothing is determined by an editor's subjective thoughts or an algorithm that guesses what the subject is.
Are you sure you don't work for iStock/Getty? I've read conspiracy posts from others who have suggested that, and always mentally belittled the idea. But now I am confronted with posts from you that seem 100% as if they were written by iStock staffers: Totally ignoring both the evidence that is clear to everyone else, as well as posts made by ShadySue, crispy, and hatman12 that clearly state what we all (but you) have seen.

I'm sorry, you can reiterate the company line ad infinitum (whether you are or are not staff is irrelevant), but that will not make the facts of what is actually happening any less true.

« Reply #85 on: August 23, 2015, 23:20 »
0
That's not exactly what's happening.
That is exactly what is happening, at least to my files. If it's not happening to your files then good for you but I and many others have complained about this in the iStock forums and we just get stone walled, being told it doesn't happen and everything is rosy in the garden and working as it should.
I got so fed up with this a while back that I raised a support ticket and was told that the popularity of keywords can affect the display order, which is absolutely crazy because you can put your four least relevant keywords last and have them immediately sent to the front because they happen to be popular in the searches, ruining the similars and best match relevancy.
The whole keywording system is so fundamentally flawed it's as if iStock are deliberately trying to lose sales.
Keywords move up as your file is downloaded, buyers should be determining the relevancy not an algorithm or some editor.

In my experience what SHOULD be happening and what IS happening at Istock are two very different things.
That is how it works.  When there is no data (sales or views) you get a boost in your first keywords set by the contributor.  Nothing is determined by an editor's subjective thoughts or an algorithm that guesses what the subject is.
Are you sure you don't work for iStock/Getty? I've read conspiracy posts from others who have suggested that, and always mentally belittled the idea. But now I am confronted with posts from you that seem 100% as if they were written by iStock staffers: Totally ignoring both the evidence that is clear to everyone else, as well as posts made by ShadySue, crispy, and hatman12 that clearly state what we all (but you) have seen.

I'm sorry, you can reiterate the company line ad infinitum (whether you are or are not staff is irrelevant), but that will not make the facts of what is actually happening any less true.
If you understand how the keywording works you'll be able to fix most of the issues you're having.  Not that the system works perfectly just that there are ways to get around it and make it work reasonably well.  While you guys are looking for things to complain about I try to figure out solutions.
« Last Edit: August 23, 2015, 23:30 by tickstock »

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #86 on: August 24, 2015, 03:32 »
+6
If you understand how the keywording works you'll be able to fix most of the issues you're having.  Not that the system works perfectly just that there are ways to get around it and make it work reasonably well.  While you guys are looking for things to complain about I try to figure out solutions.
So - are you just going to keep the solutions to yourself smugly?
At the moment, and for at least a couple of years, probably more, iStock changes the order of your keywords as soon as they hit the database, or before. Nothing to do with views or sales, contrary to the mantra they keep repeating, despite the evidence.

Note that, inexplicably, the keywords are re-ordered differently in the classic view than in the new view, and the reordering is worse in the new view, which seems to trigger the similars. Obviously although I've checked several of my own files, and some from others, it's only a tiny section of the entire collection, and I've only checked newer files. As Hatman said, keywording / best match worked better prior to the unfixable disaster that happened in Sept 2012.

I haven't done it recently, but when I discovered the keywording reordering issue way back, I tried re-ordering my keywords manually, but it made no difference.

The only other way I can see would be to leave out generics such as location (where it's not absoutely crucial, but still relevant - e.g. a buyer might want to see all that's available of European birds or flowers etc. rather than American ones, or vice versa) or e.g. 'nature', 'outdoors' or 'happy' etc etc.

If you've found a way of circumnavigating the issues, you could share it rather than just saying "If you understand how the keywording works you'll be able to fix most of the issues you're having. " It doesn't work they way they say it should, and manually fixing doesn't help.
As you said "Keywords move up as your file is downloaded, buyers should be determining the relevancy not an algorithm or some editor." Indeed, that's what they say should be happening, but as demonstrated above and complained about often by many people, the keywords are being changed with no downloads, and no recorded views, often as soon as they hit the database.
(I know they have said they keep changing the way views are recorded. Interestingly, that girl with pony file, which had 0 views less than 12 hours ago, now has 4.)

If you don't want to share the solution, why even mention it?

It would be better if they fixed it themselves rather than force contributors into a secret workaround, but that would be too much to hope for.
« Last Edit: August 24, 2015, 03:40 by ShadySue »

« Reply #87 on: August 24, 2015, 04:14 »
+5
I dont see why I should have to rearrange my keywords. It is the job of software to handle that and they have enough data from views, sub sales etc...to make it work.


« Reply #88 on: August 24, 2015, 04:15 »
+12
The fact that it clearly doesn't work properly, the fact that the search has been crippled by the changes made in Sept 2012, and the nonsense of two and three keyword searches throwing up pages of files with zero downloads, are all factors that have contributed to istock's disastrous financial performance since 2012.  Customers are fed up and have left.  That's the only proof needed.

According to the Moody's financial reports, istock's gross revenue declined 7% in the year Sept 2012 to Oct 2013.  It then declined a further 7% in the following year.  Then, following the decision to radically change the pricing schedule in September 2014, gross revenue fell a further 17% in the final quarter.  Now, in their latest bulletin, Getty has announced that the 'decline has stopped' because revenue 'only fell another 3% in the second quarter of 2015'.  Gross revenue started out in the $350 million area in 2012, fell 7%+7%+17+3% or a drop of $120 million or so (annualised).

These are the plain facts.  The search is awful, the keyword relevancy is questionable, the web site is plagued with problems, the redesign is cumbersome.  The numbers speak for themselves.

Personally I would like them to sort out all the problems, get new management, get a new technology team, and get back on a growth track.  But unfortunately they constantly deny that anything is wrong.  And while this 'head in the sand' attitude continues, none of the problems discussed here will be resolved, customers will continue to leave, and istock's market share will continue to decline.

« Reply #89 on: August 24, 2015, 04:23 »
+12
The culture of denial is something I associate with Getty. Unless it is replaced with a culture of facing reality, they wont recover. Whoever the new CEO will be, he or she has incredible work to do.

How do you change a companies DNA and corporate culture? Usually these companies get swallowed by a competitor who replaces everything with their own successful team.

How will they pay a high quality CEO? And where will the money for new technology come from?


madman

    This user is banned.
« Reply #90 on: August 24, 2015, 06:11 »
0
is there anyone know who was the old CEO?
« Last Edit: August 25, 2015, 12:45 by madman »

« Reply #91 on: August 24, 2015, 08:53 »
+8
The culture of denial is something I associate with Getty. Unless it is replaced with a culture of facing reality, they wont recover. Whoever the new CEO will be, he or she has incredible work to do.

How do you change a companies DNA and corporate culture? Usually these companies get swallowed by a competitor who replaces everything with their own successful team.

How will they pay a high quality CEO? And where will the money for new technology come from?

More of that denial and a culture of deniability where nobody wants to take responsibility or look forward. Write to support, it takes months to get an evasive answer or nonresponse reply. Write about a problem and they answer, we have no intention of changing this policy. I think more people work in fear of losing their jobs and don't make decisions. Just do what they are told and fill a cubical. No progress, no body cares, a plan for failure.

No new CEO because he would come in with hands tied following the same path of failure. No body smart will take the job.

madman

    This user is banned.
« Reply #92 on: August 25, 2015, 12:35 »
0
What could be the reason for their insistence on such a failure?

Apparently, they do not want to earn money anymore so they don't want to earn their contributors, too.

So then, what's the purpose?  :-\

Strange things happening into istock and getty, folks, deep matters keep going on so that we dont understand.
« Last Edit: August 25, 2015, 12:38 by madman »

stock-will-eat-itself

« Reply #93 on: August 25, 2015, 14:08 »
+2
It's definitely still declining, I just checked my stats and they're down around 35% $ compared to 2014.
Shame really, it could mark the end of decent credit sales across the board.

madman

    This user is banned.
« Reply #94 on: August 25, 2015, 14:17 »
0
It's definitely still declining, I just checked my stats and they're down around 35% $ compared to 2014.
Shame really, it could mark the end of decent credit sales across the board.

me was the same, too, thats fantastic failure, really fantastic, I believe that moments will be recorded in history, this declining trend will newer end to forever.  :P

« Reply #95 on: August 25, 2015, 14:34 »
+1
They said many months ago that the mixed up order of keywords in the new UI was simply a 'display issue' and that the 'correct' keyword order could be seen by switching to the old UI.  Unfortunately that was a long time ago and nothing appears to have been done to solve the problem.  One would have thought that if it was just a 'display issue' it would have been a relatively simple thing to resolve.

If the search actually changes to the 'new' keyword order, then that will probably be disastrous for sales as the order shown in the new UI appears to be nonsense.

If, as ShadySue implies, the similars thing is based on the new keyword order then that of course would explain why that function also seems unable to work properly.

Unfortunately all of this is 'par for the course' at istock.  Their technology people appear to be incapable of completing tasks without screwing lots of things up, which usually results in a negative impact on sales.

It really is quite extraordinary that they cannot implement a similars display.  Nearly all retail web sites do it in some form, yet here we are (again) with istock seemingly incapable of introducing a function that should be quite straightforward.  They just don't seem to be prepared to spend money on good technology people (or they are not allowed to because the money has to be given to the venture capitalists).

Edit:  well I think I need to stand corrected on this one.  I've just looked at my last five sales, and the keyword order shown on both old and new UIs is the same.  So it looks like that problem has been solved, at least for those few files.  If it's still screwed up for other files, perhaps it is something that will be gradually implemented.

Also, the similars links appear to be reasonable.  Not perfect, but not outrageously poor.  Some files have a 'same series' display, others don't.

How simple it would of been to just leave the similars links that many of us spent countless hours creating for them on the display page.

« Reply #96 on: August 26, 2015, 04:05 »
+5
My fourth month on Istock (June 2010) I made more money than August 2015. It's that bad.

madman

    This user is banned.
« Reply #97 on: August 26, 2015, 05:26 »
+2
everyone has the same issue.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #98 on: August 26, 2015, 06:08 »
+4
In a glorious irony, I got 15% more subs in July than June, but actually earned less for them.
Way to go, iStock.  >:(
(That's only my experience. I know others got rising $$ from subs sales.)
Whatever, I hate 'cheap subs', and can't get my head round uploading files to get 75c, followed by a demotion for not selling as a credit sale and earning 34c.
« Last Edit: August 26, 2015, 06:31 by ShadySue »

« Reply #99 on: August 26, 2015, 13:18 »
+1
In a glorious irony, I got 15% more subs in July than June, but actually earned less for them.
Way to go, iStock.  >:(
(That's only my experience. I know others got rising $$ from subs sales.)
Whatever, I hate 'cheap subs', and can't get my head round uploading files to get 75c, followed by a demotion for not selling as a credit sale and earning 34c.

Don't be so sure you earned less for them, maybe they are pocketing heaps from the subs program even if very little makes it to your pockets.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
5 Replies
5262 Views
Last post April 08, 2007, 20:36
by rjmiz
16 Replies
8975 Views
Last post June 19, 2007, 02:24
by snem
what's happening?????

Started by yecatsdoherty iStockPhoto.com

7 Replies
4648 Views
Last post June 12, 2008, 00:08
by yecatsdoherty
228 Replies
52303 Views
Last post October 13, 2013, 15:15
by heywoody
55 Replies
17679 Views
Last post September 18, 2019, 16:31
by Hoodie Ninja

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors