MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Most photos - new "midstock" site!  (Read 56972 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #75 on: October 18, 2007, 14:00 »
0
[In theory, I agree with all you said.  But my experience in SP is that some people, when they find a place they can upload whatever they want with a chance to sell it, they do upload crap.  This is one huge problem in SP, because if you search for something you get a lot of substandard images (you get great ones too).  I have rated images below any level of quality, and they are not removed by the photogs.  And the more you make it look like "this is a place where you give and receive critique", more people think it's ok to upload anything to get advice.

The idea is nice for a photog community, a message board.  But when it's about business, I prefer more quality control.  It doesn't have to be like Crestock when it comes to rejections, but a minimum level of quality must be kept.  At least for signing up, I think it would be advisable to ask for samples of images (that's what I have asked SP staff for ages, and unfortunately never saw). 

I'll take a look at the site, but this "community" feel doesn't really attract me in a selling outlet. 

Regards,
Adelaide

I know that the MP admins have advised the users to delete pictures themselves when the pictures have recieved a sufficient number of votes and have an average vote under 3 or something like that. I, personally, wouldn't mind if they made this removal automatic when the picture has recieved,  say 15 votes or so. That would clean out a lot of substandard pictures from the database in the future when it gets larger.


« Reply #76 on: October 18, 2007, 19:25 »
0
The problem with a voting system is that there will be "vote spamming", like we see on other sites. On iStock, we know that it's organized, and no images get other than "5" nowadays. It's only a question of time before groups (like ourselves) start promoting each other's photos.

« Reply #77 on: October 18, 2007, 21:20 »
0
moori wrote:
I know that the MP admins have advised the users to delete pictures themselves when the pictures have recieved a sufficient number of votes and have an average vote under 3 or something like that. I, personally, wouldn't mind if they made this removal automatic when the picture has recieved,  say 15 votes or so. That would clean out a lot of substandard pictures from the database in the future when it gets larger.

Completely insane. Rule #1; a photo is determined "good" or "bad" by the potential buyer, not the spammers or the home owner's association of the web site (aka fan club). Rule #2; As a seller, I truly could not give a  dribble about what anyone thinks about my work, except the folks buying it. Rule #3; if you're going to remove images, base it on lack of sales (you're saying that an image with a "3" or lower rating will be booted even if it sells 50 copies). Rule #4; search engines should search by "relevance", not voting (doesn't serve the buyer, only the photog).

I like the layout of the site and the potential that it might hold, however, at current rate it will wind up just like Shutterpoint and that simply is sub-par... sorry moori...
« Last Edit: October 18, 2007, 21:24 by anonymous »

« Reply #78 on: October 19, 2007, 01:22 »
0
By opening the gates for all images that meet our simple technical requirements we simply concentrate to become The BIGGEST place for easy access, affordable images on the internet.
....
Further more we predict that microstock will have serious problems ahead. More and more people compete over the same pennies.

And this will be different in the future because ... ?  How does raising the price not have more and more people competing over the same pennies.  In fact, you have more people competing for less sales, especially if you are "opening the gates".

sjlocke:
This can very well become the future for the Microstock business photographers - but not for individuals that evolve and protect their trademark (their name and photos). Mostphotos have not raised the prices - we have determined our nisch - on the other hand other competitors accuse us of lowering the price. I have been doing sales calls to about 60 ad-agencies and other graphic businesses and do you know how many that have raised price-issues against MP? One! ( a Istock customer ) and he was forced to accept that did not allways find the right image at Istock. If every customer was focusing on price nobody would drive BMW or Mercedes in the world - our streets would just be flooded with VW Beetles. By "opening the gates" MP only state that every image has potential - but some images just have more potential than others. MP don't determin which image is bad - we let the customers determid - and they do it by buying or not.

Regarding "How does raising the price not have more and more people competing over the same pennies.  In fact, you have more people competing for less sales, especially if you are "opening the gates".
- I don't understand what you mean by "less sales" - the market is not static, the sales is determined by how many customers MP attracts and how much of their budgets they determind to spend on MP. There is no business in the world (that i can think of right now anyway) that  have decided that the market is full and stopped producing their products They simply adjust or evolve their products to fit their customers demand and get back in to the business again.

Best regards

« Last Edit: October 19, 2007, 02:27 by Suvakov »

« Reply #79 on: October 19, 2007, 01:42 »
0
the "country, city, and state" drop boxes don't even populate, can't make a selection, thusly cannot even get in to the site (7:45 am CST 101807)...
once you guys get that fixed, please drop the stupid "rating" system...you've got a lot of troll whores throwing 1 point ratings at good images...it's pointless and obnoxious.

- The drop menu will be fixed in some way, maby with a alternative field or something else. We need to know your home location for several reasons. For one, we have to deal with national tax issues. The other reason is that in a near future our customers will have the possibility to contact photographers with special requests from a geographical standpoint.

- Regarding the "1 point throwing trolls" they are already taken care of by the system. Throwing around 1 pointers (or even 10 pointers) will have no effect - apart from embarrassing yourself to other members AND minimizing the impact of your votes (to zero)
Please stop worrying about the voting system - it is completely unique - and it works fine!

-The most serious problem is however that you cant get into the site. I can only regret the fact that you have problems connecting - we do followups on the server status and communications -  and must conclude that it is a result of relayproblems to our servers. Hopfully we will be able to station servers in the U. S. sometime in 2008.

Best regards

« Reply #80 on: October 19, 2007, 01:44 »
0

Rule #3; if you're going to remove images, base it on lack of sales (you're saying that an image with a "3" or lower rating will be booted even if it sells 50 copies).


No, sorry I forgot to mention that. My suggestion applied only to pictures that haven't sold at all over a period of time and recieved low votes by a sufficient number of people. Pictures that sells should never be removed.
Note that this is not MP's suggestion. Just my thoughts on the rating system.

« Reply #81 on: October 19, 2007, 02:00 »
0
The problem with a voting system is that there will be "vote spamming", like we see on other sites. On iStock, we know that it's organized, and no images get other than "5" nowadays. It's only a question of time before groups (like ourselves) start promoting each other's photos.

- I prefer the average vote of 50, 100, 1000 or 10.000 members/customer over a one individual ( examiner) decision.
I can also see signs on MP that the votes are becoming more in balance with reality,  In our case i think the members have evolved in their judgement and are not longer easily impressed with flower, kids, pets and bug images no more. I find it positive.
By starting and participating in "spamming groups" you will revealed by the system, warned and if continuing finally excluded from the site because of violation of the User Agreement. You can try it - i simply dont recomend it.
« Last Edit: October 19, 2007, 02:29 by Suvakov »

« Reply #82 on: October 19, 2007, 02:24 »
0
Anonymous wrote:

"Completely insane. Rule #1; a photo is determined "good" or "bad" by the potential buyer, not the spammers or the home owner's association of the web site (aka fan club). "

- True, thats why we NEVER reject or remove images from MP! If it is not in vialation with the User Agreement of course.
But however we recommend that you as a photographer take a closer look at a image with a 3 or less average vote that has been uploaded for a long period of time. Is this really a image that stand up to YOUR standard? If it is - good for you! Don't  delete it.
As a matter of fact i myself check and delete some of my images regularly. But if a image have low rating that i like - i just ignore it!
It is a matter of "kill your darlings" - then you are a real professional!

"Rule #2; As a seller, I truly could not give a  dribble about what anyone thinks about my work, except the folks buying it. "

- True and that is the right way - the votes are simply inputs to you - if you choose to ignore it - fine! That is allright!
(Thats what i do to sometimes =)

"Rule #3; if you're going to remove images, base it on lack of sales (you're saying that an image with a "3" or lower rating will be booted even if it sells 50 copies). "

- NOT TRUE, that is  why we NEVER remove images from MP! We dont have to. Either the image is being removed by the photographer or we just get more diskspace ;-)

"Rule #4; search engines should search by "relevance", not voting (doesn't serve the buyer, only the photog)."

- True, thats why the search engines mainly consider the searchwords and it is also why the system remove irrelevant search words overtime. (Yes, it does remove irrelevant search words- haven't you been reading the thread carefully? ;-)

"I like the layout of the site and the potential that it might hold, however, at current rate it will wind up just like Shutterpoint and that simply is sub-par... sorry moori..."

- Not true - i hope ;-)

// Suvakov
« Last Edit: October 19, 2007, 04:26 by Suvakov »

« Reply #83 on: October 19, 2007, 07:37 »
0
Suvakov,


What about the possibility of someone "opting out" of the popularity voting?

« Reply #84 on: October 19, 2007, 09:02 »
0
Suvakov,


What about the possibility of someone "opting out" of the popularity voting?

- i´m not sure if i am familiar with the expression "opting out"- remember that I'm Swedish ;-) but if you mean the possibility of someone cheating the system there is always a possibility as in all systems created by man. But it is much smaller today then four weeks ago. But why don´t you try and see if your voting have a significant impact on any images? But do i quickly because as the site grows bigger your individual vote will have less and less impact.

Lets leave the voting for a minute because its significance is overestimated regarding the MP-index.

What more can i do to attract more photographers to the site except a referral system for photographers AND customers, payouts via Paypal and Moneyboker, 10 euro min payout (one image), 18 USD for every sold image, 2 for one- offer to customers?

//Suvakov
« Last Edit: October 19, 2007, 09:07 by Suvakov »

« Reply #85 on: October 19, 2007, 09:30 »
0
This whole voting thing is a joke. On iStock there are gangs of people that vote on each other's photos to boost their standing in the search engine. It won't work because people will abuse the system. We proved that voting on images on istock does boost your rating in the best match search.

« Reply #86 on: October 19, 2007, 10:06 »
0
This whole voting thing is a joke. On iStock there are gangs of people that vote on each other's photos to boost their standing in the search engine. It won't work because people will abuse the system. We proved that voting on images on istock does boost your rating in the best match search.


But does Istocks system deal with that abuse at all? Mostphoto's have thought about this issue and claim that they have built in a control in the system that will reveal cheaters and deal with it.
I have to agree with Radde, you guys are putting way too much focus on the rating system. Look at the other things they are offering you.
Have you even tried the site or are just giving it a pass because of your feelings about a user controlled rating system?
The voting is only a PART of the images MP-index. Sales, views, relevant keywords and many other things are more important in the images total rating.
Feels like Im repeating myself here, dont really know why I put energy in promoting MP.
Hopefully some people use my referral link and make me some bucks.
I have seen in my ref. account that some of the people joining with my ref link have started to make sales.  ;D
I dont really care how they rate their ther images as long as they look out for the photographer and give good cashback.
LO, snapvillage  and the other newbies have a different system and might have good reviewers and all, but they haven't produced any real money for me so far, MP has has. The cashback on every image is WAY higher that the others.
To me THAT's whats important.
Im in the process of quitting a lot of the smaller agencies outside the big 5 at the moment if they don't pick up. It's just not worth the time and efforts. Scand stock, New darkroom and a few other has already been canned and more will go the same way. I will only keep submitting to the agencies that gives good payouts or the ones that I really believe will start to pick up in the year to come. MP is one I'm keeping.

My ref link--> www.mostphotos.com 



« Reply #87 on: October 19, 2007, 14:44 »
0
- im not sure if i am familiar with the expression "opting out"-
Suvakov,

It means choosing (opting) not to have our images rated.

I would insist that people should be approved as member by showing some quality work.  This doesn't mean that by being approved I won't upload some crap, but it's less likely to happen than in the case of someone who can not show some decent work to begin with.

In case you don't do that, you really risk becoming another SP, with the advantage (for the photographer) that you don't charge for storage.  Many people sign up to SP because of the feedback, seeing the site as a learning place.  Unfortunately, too many people...  Gladly there are some awesome members there, and many average ones like me, to balance it.

Regards,
Adelaide

dbvirago

« Reply #88 on: October 19, 2007, 15:00 »
0


What more can i do to attract more photographers to the site except a referral system for photographers AND customers, payouts via Paypal and Moneyboker, 10 euro min payout (one image), 18 USD for every sold image, 2 for one- offer to customers?

//Suvakov

Make us money.

We will tell others. T

hat means marketing.

When people ask which sites to join, the anwer is always the same. The ones listed are the ones that make money.

« Reply #89 on: October 19, 2007, 17:34 »
0
I tried to sign up but my city is not listed.  I live in Holtsville, New York, USA.  Also when I went to select a state there are many selections that are wrong and not states. I think it would be much easier to type where you live then to select a city. So I could not sign up. Help would be appreciated. Thanks

« Reply #90 on: October 19, 2007, 19:31 »
0
Suvakov,


What about the possibility of someone "opting out" of the popularity voting?

- Thank you for the explanation on "opting out" ;-) Im sorry to inform you that there is no such plans for the moment. But i dont understand why you would want to opt out? I have been looking at your images and the members votes will doubtless be advantageous for you.

« Reply #91 on: October 19, 2007, 19:46 »
0
"This whole voting thing is a joke. On iStock there are gangs of people that vote on each other's photos to boost their standing in the search engine. It won't work because people will abuse the system. We proved that voting on images on istock does boost your rating in the best match search"

I'm sorry you feel this way, but the voting is no joke to me. Over the past three months i have seen some amazing evolution by some photographers, some in their images and some in how they look and comment images - and this is no joke either.
Further more i wouldn't refer to Istock as a joke but a very competent competitor, some 50 milion reasons says that Istock is not a joke but a success - ask Getty I'm sure they agree with me.
The best match search on Mostphotos is mainly based on relevant search words and not votes.

We also have photographers that do not antisipate in voting at all and they still make sales - simply because quality never goes out of style. No votes can change that.

Best regards

« Last Edit: October 19, 2007, 19:50 by Suvakov »

« Reply #92 on: October 19, 2007, 19:52 »
0
I tried to sign up but my city is not listed.  I live in Holtsville, New York, USA.  Also when I went to select a state there are many selections that are wrong and not states. I think it would be much easier to type where you live then to select a city. So I could not sign up. Help would be appreciated. Thanks

We are on it - ill get back to you as soon we have a fix on the issue.

« Reply #93 on: October 19, 2007, 20:06 »
0


What more can i do to attract more photographers to the site except a referral system for photographers AND customers, payouts via Paypal and Moneyboker, 10 euro min payout (one image), 18 USD for every sold image, 2 for one- offer to customers?

//Suvakov

Make us money.

We will tell others.

That means marketing.

When people ask which sites to join, the answer is always the same. The ones listed are the ones that make money.

Well of coarse - that is obvious ;-) But from what i hear the up and comming are not as up and comming as one would expect. A few of them have been active for a while but still do not meet their expectations and the majority of microstock photogs still continue to upload?
That means that there is something else that attracts other than just money?

Mostphotos.com has only been released some six weeks ago so significant sales cant be expected with only some 35.000 images (yet).

Very well, we don't plan to launch any major functionalities - just some small ones. Our conclusion is that the site is set and we are now focusing on marketing and sales.

//Suvakov

« Last Edit: October 19, 2007, 20:10 by Suvakov »

gbcimages

« Reply #94 on: October 19, 2007, 21:00 »
0
Are you having problems with other from the US logging on? I tried open your page and after 2.5 min I quit .

« Reply #95 on: October 19, 2007, 21:06 »
0
Not only U S - i cant log on and im just 60 miles from the server. Yes something is definitely wrong - i have alerted my webmaster (but its 04.00 am here in Sweden) Hope to be on line soon again!

//Suvakov
« Last Edit: October 19, 2007, 21:09 by Suvakov »

« Reply #96 on: October 20, 2007, 03:27 »
0
Why do the photographers only receive 50%?  Sites that pay for reviewers pay around 50% and their costs must be a lot higher than Most Photos.

I still don't understand how a site can work with no quality control.  Wont it just fill up with images that are rejected from other sites?  Surely the buyers will be annoyed when they purchase a file that looks OK on the screen but has problems at a larger size.

Who wants to wade through page after page of low quality images?  I have seen some of the junk that reviewers have to look at and I don't see how filling up a site with that can be a good idea.

The buyers are going to be annoyed at downloading images with technical problems and they are paying more for them than at sites with good quality control.  It just doesn't make sense to me.

« Reply #97 on: October 20, 2007, 04:18 »
0
MP is up and running again. Waiting for the report to see what caused the interuption.

//Suvakov

« Reply #98 on: October 20, 2007, 05:21 »
0
Why do the photographers only receive 50%?  Sites that pay for reviewers pay around 50% and their costs must be a lot higher than Most Photos.

I still don't understand how a site can work with no quality control.  Wont it just fill up with images that are rejected from other sites?  Surely the buyers will be annoyed when they purchase a file that looks OK on the screen but has problems at a larger size.

Who wants to wade through page after page of low quality images?  I have seen some of the junk that reviewers have to look at and I don't see how filling up a site with that can be a good idea.

The buyers are going to be annoyed at downloading images with technical problems and they are paying more for them than at sites with good quality control.  It just doesn't make sense to me.

Sharpshot:
Designing and  programing a site with functionality from scratch is very costly, as well as costs for software and hardware. We also have av referral program that not all others have. Further more i feel you are comparing cents with euros. The average micro pays about 30-50 cents/ image - we pay 18 USD.

Secondly what i can see you have already raised the quality issue in a previous post and the answer is the same. MP current problem is not junk images.

Nobody have to wade trough low quality images. Our search engines display the most popular images first. You are very focused on technical quality, my impression is that the customers in general are not.
All images can be inspected closer before any purchase.

Further more you seem to presuppose that images in our gallery is off poor technical quality - which is not true. What annoys customer more is that they see the same images over and over on allmost every microstock site.

There is no evidence of Mostphotos is being filled with rejected images from other sites nor signs that it will be in the future. Don't bother submitting images with low commercial or technical quality on MP - they wont sell any better here than on other stock sites and they will finally be displayed in the bottom of the search results (way, way down).

On the contrary we give all photographer a chance to resubmit images that have been rejected but that you feel that the image have selling potential. Beccause reviewers can not really guarantee if a image will sell or not, chances are you are right and they are wrong regarding the image potential.
Chances are you might just find a really good seller!
Wouldn't that feel nice - make a lot of bucks on a "rejected" image? =) (20 downloads on MP = 360 USD)
Not bad for any reject ;-)

Someone even suggested to upload the rejected images on MP and reserve the admitted to other stocksites - what is the logic in that?
Reserving "good" images to sites that pays 50 cent per download and withold them from a site that pays 18 USD for the same download??
I really hope that i have misunderstood this due to translation - if not i will feel really confused.

Best regards

//Suvakov
« Last Edit: October 20, 2007, 05:32 by Suvakov »

« Reply #99 on: October 20, 2007, 05:44 »
0
Microstock sites pay more than you think.  Most of my EL sales are over $18 and I now get them a few times each month.  Most of the sites pay me 50% for these and they have the added cost of reviewers.

I know the quality of photos is subjective but I did a search for "London" and I thought a lot of the photos were poor quality.  Some of them are near the top of the page.  I know that some sites reject too many images and the customer should have more choice but I think there should be some form of quality control, even if it is just one person deleting the images that look appalling.

Another issue for me is the big preview images with no visible watermark.  I refuse to upload to other sites that don't have visible watermarks.

I do like the look of mostphotos and if there was some quality control and watermarks, I would upload some photos there.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
10 Replies
5302 Views
Last post April 16, 2008, 14:30
by sharply_done
1 Replies
2904 Views
Last post June 07, 2008, 18:16
by madelaide
9 Replies
7003 Views
Last post May 05, 2021, 08:21
by Uncle Pete
16 Replies
6896 Views
Last post May 05, 2010, 04:59
by leaf
5 Replies
4090 Views
Last post March 14, 2015, 18:15
by Niakris

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle