MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: really starting to hate your "ratings" system  (Read 10425 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #25 on: February 29, 2008, 08:04 »
0
moori, I think it's fair to say that the people here like the site and would like to help make it successful, it's in all of our interests! I assume that MP want us to contribute - the site is advertising here. The rating system isn't working and it is annoying a lot of people. There are now many pornographic or near pornographic images appearing because they are not checked. How many female buyers are going to take offence with that? Sorry but I don't have the time to report each of these!


« Reply #26 on: February 29, 2008, 10:42 »
0
moori, I think it's fair to say that the people here like the site and would like to help make it successful, it's in all of our interests! I assume that MP want us to contribute - the site is advertising here. The rating system isn't working and it is annoying a lot of people. There are now many pornographic or near pornographic images appearing because they are not checked. How many female buyers are going to take offence with that? Sorry but I don't have the time to report each of these!

Of course they want you to contribute! Im not a spokesperson for MP in any way, I'm just talking out of my own ass :)

I couldn't agree more what you are saying about the near "pornographic images"! I read in the recent newsletter from MP that they are working on some kind of adult filter which will be released soon. I hope it will work well because some of these images will surely scare away some female (and male) buyers. They have also put in "Pornographic or any offensive photos may not be uploaded on Mostphotos" in the upload agreement. That was not there before (I think).

FlemishDreams : I contribute to Featurepics too and I do like that site. The upload is smooth and painless. It doesn't seem to generate a lot of sales though. (or maybe its just my work) One difference between these are that featurepics doesn't do any marketing. You are supposed to do that yourself if I understand it correctly?? MP is at least doing a lot of marketing in its primary market Scandinavia and will hopefully do more in the future. And btw the RF price at MP is 25 EUR, not 50  ;)

« Reply #27 on: February 29, 2008, 13:32 »
0
The rating system has a basic flaw. The greatest picture in stock can be uploaded at a time when lots of people are uploading at once. It is pushed very quickly five or six pages back in the lastest uploads search, and so gets no ratings. It will appear to someone in the unrated pictures search, get a single rating, and disappear from view.
In the meantime, an average picture that was uploaded when no-one else was uploading, stays on the lastest images first page for ages, and gets loads of ratings. It rises in the searches, and  stays near the top.
The pictures that rose to the top early on in the life of the site, appear in the Toprated search, and continue to get more and more ratings, keeping out some very good pictures. and making the site appear almost static.
I asked in their forum for another search option to appear under the menu, but it has not happened yet. Maybe soon?
We are continually told that the ratings are only a small part of the criteria taken into account in the buyer search. When the site reaches a million pictures or more, a tiny shift can have a drastic effect in placement, and so become very important. When a site reaches a million or more pictures, a shift of only 0.25% can mean being pages back in the search results, and an image never selling.

« Reply #28 on: February 29, 2008, 14:42 »
0
When the site reaches a million pictures or more, a tiny shift can have a drastic effect in placement, and so become very important. When a site reaches a million or more pictures, a shift of only 0.25% can mean being pages back in the search results, and an image never selling.

Yap, my analysis too. It's the battle for page 1 and I wrote an article about it. Once your down the drains, no way to come out. It's a bit like the Flickr approach: upload daily but just 5 shots, so you will fly high in the radar beam. It's the basic flaw of political sites were network-rating drives popularity. I saw some tecnically bad shots on top of MP, and once buyers find out that MP has no real QC, they will hesitate to lose 25 Euro.

« Reply #29 on: February 29, 2008, 17:19 »
0
Remember that there is a market out there for different images. Images that is not "microperfect". There a buyers out there who wants to find different images then what they can find on every other micro.
I agree with that, and a site doesn't need to be so picky as some microstock ones are, and that there's room for not-so-perfect images.  Relying on peer review could be a good thing, but as it happens in SP, there is abuse.  What could exist to minimize site inspection was a sort of "thumbs down" button. Once you see a bad image, you click on this button and site management will check it, and eventually delete it.

But peer rating should not be used for searches, at least not as a default.

Regards,
Adelaide

« Reply #30 on: March 01, 2008, 07:47 »
0
With all due respect to "perfect images" - but images are not being used at 100% magnification. Sure, a decent level of quality is a must, but a lot of images rejected due to "artifacts" print perfectly OK at 12"x8" size. There is a lot more to an image than pixel peeping and looking for "jaggies" at 100%. Particularly, when in a lot of cases "jaggies" and "artifacts" are just part and parcel of digital imaging - this is to say that they are not what they are called, but just normal effects due to the fact that the image is built from individual pixels. OK, I am awaiting flaming now  ;D

« Reply #31 on: March 01, 2008, 08:34 »
0
Its not the artifacts that concern me as much as the large number of images that are just not in focus, or lack any attempt at composition. The top rated images are nearly all 'pretty' thumbnails, but not a lot of use to a designer.

« Reply #32 on: March 01, 2008, 10:00 »
0
With all due respect to "perfect images" - but images are not being used at 100% magnification.

1. Some are, for instance for posters or large calendars. I had an EL end last year on DT of a nature shot, and in the nex hour, the buyer (?I guess?) came back for more EL's of other nature shots, all full-size. I bet that wasn't for a 300px blog. With a price of 25Euro, customers pay in fact for an EL and when they find out that MP is a noise factory, they will go elsewhere.

2. Designers sometimes like to crop a detail, for instance with people shots or for banners.

3. Good isolations are essential for a designer's workflow. There are many sloppy isolations around, even on established sites. I once bought an "isolated" image from LO and when I wanted to make a composite with it, I found out the shot was full of non-255/255/255 in the "white" area. I had to do it all over. I made a naughty comment about on that image on LO, but what the heck... the comment is gone. I wouldn't dare to comment on any MP image since I don't want to be flooded with 1's.

4. Looking at some MP top images that show great on thumb but bad at 100%, I can just wonder why those people don't use their gear properly, and amongst that gear is PhotoShop. Most of those flaws are very avoidable.

5. It's your (?) site of course and your(?) choice. I just hope that your(?) customers won"t find out they can find perfect shots elsewhere for 5$ instead of unwarranted shots for 25Euro. Sometimes ignorance is a bliss (for the photographer).

6. I have some slightly out-of-focus images too, and even noisy. For noise there is a bag of tricks in Photoshop and I don't mean the overall NR that makes the image plastic. In that case, I just do all the patching at 10MP, then resize to 4MP (when it looks perfect), and upload the 4MP version.

7. Dedicated photogs don't have time to comment in a Flickerish way. We all started like that probably but found out it's a gigantic waste of time. Better invest that time in enhancing your skills. If I want to hang out socially, I go to a disco or to a dinner with friends ;-)
« Last Edit: March 01, 2008, 10:09 by FlemishDreams »

« Reply #33 on: March 01, 2008, 13:19 »
0
I agree with somebody's suggestion (Adelaide's?) to offer a flagging system/button to pick out really bad pictures and incorrect ratings that clearly try to abuse and play the system.

You can do it the way they do reviews in tennis: say each photog gets five "flags" to flag any pictures they don't like or think should be re-reviewed with a brief explanation (one picture one flag0 - then reviewers will check those flagged images, and then, if they agree that there is a problem - the number of "flags" will remain at five, if they disagree - the number of flags will go down to four (per each "incorrect" flag). Over time, you can even start rewarding "correct" flaggers by giving them more (in a graduated manner) flags. This way you'll have a peer-reviewed site, you won't have to hire reviewers to review ALL images, your members will help you figure out which ones need review, you will have a site with some quality control and with a possibility to filter out abuse of the system.  These flags may be for pointing out really bad or inappropriate photos, and / or mismatches bw photos and ratings.  And the system will teach flaggers to figure out "real" problems and not to abuse  the system...

Here's a recent example that I believe (and i have nothing against a photog, but I don't believe that stuff should be on MP and somebody gave it a rating of 10 for both "stock" and artistic ratings... HUH?) is a good example of what could be flagged:

http://www.mostphotos.com/view.php?imgid=150035&offset=31&thumbnailsize=large&displayinformation=standard&reflections=on&imagetype=all&orderby=imgdate&periodlimit=-1&category=all&usage=all&shape=all&querytype=latest&search=1
« Last Edit: March 01, 2008, 13:21 by ChasingMoments »

« Reply #34 on: March 01, 2008, 13:31 »
0
i ask my self sometimes why spend my valuable time to write comments for the same agencies which don't generate any or not good money for me...
So i make up my mind. i prefer to invest my time to shoot for agencies which returns money for my images.
Maybe all of us have to ask ourselves that question.

PS: of course this is out of question for those trying to promote these agencies and some times pretend they are contributors...
« Last Edit: March 01, 2008, 13:36 by fotoxalia »

« Reply #35 on: March 01, 2008, 13:33 »
0
I am new at MS but my first impression about rating system is also quite negative. Most pictures just stay un-noticed i.e. without any marks; and I have no doubts that any perfect picture will not stay long on top (if it ever get there) because it will receive a lot of not-perfect rating.

Flagging system by peers - with final decision made by MS staff members sounds to me as much better idea.

P.S. No inspection at all means so much crap images submitted :( I have serious doubts whether it will work successfully in a long term

gbcimages

« Reply #36 on: March 01, 2008, 13:43 »
0
I'm not impressed with MP even though I have photos on the site. I'll leave them there for awhile

« Reply #37 on: March 01, 2008, 13:45 »
0
i ask my self sometimes why spend my valuable time to write comments for the same agencies which don't generate any or not good money for me...
So i make up my mind. i prefer to invest my time to shoot for agencies which returns money for my images.
Maybe all of us have to ask ourselves that question.


in general, i agree, i never rate and only very rarely leave comments, no time. i only upload and that's it, and that's what i'd prefer to do. BUT, occasionally i'll look at the "latest" page, or browse through the collection to see what images there are from the same series as mine... whatever the reason - from time to time, even raaaarely we all do it.. and in those cases, when i see a bad or poorly rated image, i'd prefer to have a flagging option, and i will only "cost" me five-ten seconds to type a brief sentence about the problem. i like the flagging system on dt, i've only used it may be one time - when i was browsing for a certain keyword and saw an image that had absolutely nothing to do with my keyword - it cost me half a second to "flag" it and move on with my life. and i believe that whereas it's our job to shoot, it's also our responsibility to - if we have half a second - press the 'flag' button if we know it'll help our stock-site-agents to sell our work.... mew.

« Reply #38 on: March 01, 2008, 21:15 »
0
With a price of 25Euro, customers pay in fact for an EL and when they find out that MP is a noise factory, they will go elsewhere.

One positive aspect in MP for the buyer is the 100% zoom.  They can easily scan the whole image.  Were I a buyer, I would use that (SP also has a similar tool), especially for one of those special applications you've mentioned.

I think what really hurts a site are images with very obvious quality issues - lighting, color balance, composition.  I don't browse MP but I know what I see in SP - some people don't even bother rotating vertical images to the right position!  I would easily delete 5-10% of what's submitted there just by the thumbnails. 

Another common mistake that happens in SP and may occur in MP is image uprezzing - and I'm talking about making a 6MPix image out of a 2MPix one...  Even at smaller ratios, if the original is not really sharp the resulting image is so poor. Yet people think this is a good thing because people can print larger.

Regards,
Adelaide

« Reply #39 on: March 02, 2008, 14:40 »
0

One positive aspect in MP for the buyer is the 100% zoom.  They can easily scan the whole image. 


The "Zoom" feature stopped working for me about 6 weeks ago. Nothing on MY end changed... (sigh).


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
2 Replies
4653 Views
Last post June 11, 2007, 07:55
by Bateleur
1 Replies
4142 Views
Last post July 06, 2007, 19:41
by HughStoneIan
5 Replies
2883 Views
Last post October 28, 2008, 09:25
by hali
0 Replies
2186 Views
Last post March 31, 2011, 15:58
by jcpjr
5 Replies
3879 Views
Last post September 30, 2014, 17:47
by chromaco

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle