|
MicrostockGroup Sponsors
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - RalfLiebhold
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14 15
201
« on: February 10, 2023, 14:29 »
Shutterstock disabled the forum on October 15th.
And all the trolls came here to ruin this forum. I just noticed most of the long time MSG regulars are gone.
Diana, I am also one of these Shutterstock trolls, which has fled here at some point in this forum  But I don't want to leave you alone with your impression. But this has imo nothing to do with Shutterstock or their forum itself. When I started here, the MSG-forum - there are of course always exceptions - has a very pleasant, partly very familiar personal community touch with good discussions also outside of stock. At some point, for example people like Thijs or Martha (who gave the forum a certain soul) were badly bullied out of here. Others stopped posting here as a result. I miss these people in this forum. Those who caused this now continue to post here quite dominantly. But what I found more frightening from observation is that no one from the long-established MSG regulars intervened - they simply didn't care. Sounds a bit pathetic now: But this forum has lost its soul and seems somehow only factually sterile. I also find that a pity. Internet forum psychology is already very special.
202
« on: February 10, 2023, 13:42 »
Some search engines will also include pictures where Paris is only in the title, but not all do that and it would be stupid to rely on that. Even if an image shows up, when the search term is only in the titles, you would have no guarantee that it stays that and also the image may get a better search placement when the word is in the title and the keywords, instead of only in the title or only the keywords.
Only in the title? Where and then why do we worry so much about keywords if they are irrelevant? Maybe I don't understand, but using the Paris example, why would some search ignore the keywords?
True about title and keywords, we know that Alamy and Adobe do that, as their assumption is, we put the most important words in both. Or maybe I should say, we should recognize that only the most important words, should be in both?
Title/Description: Blue sky with clouds Paris France street scene. Might be better found if it just said Paris France, Street Scene as the sky is usually blue and clouds aren't anything remarkable.
But the question is, where do you find a search that only uses Title or Description?
And along with the thread, my main question wouldn't be what keywords do I have in my images, but what keywords do buyers actually search for. I think too much goes into, creative finding of many words, instead of finding the useful words that buyers actually use. As in the blog post, paraphrased, 50 words may be too many and 18 might be the perfect number.
That all goes back to, if I'm looking at an image, what words would I use to describe it and what's actually in the image? I say those are good keywords. All the similar, related and different definitions are a waste of time, because almost no one, uses those words to find an image. I'm not buying into the what if someone uses that word, because 98% of the time, no one does and no one will, so why is it worth the time and effort to add something that's ineffective and unnecessary?
Pete, the problem with irrelevant keywords is that you can't tell beforehand for sure if they are irrelevant to the buyer. My best selling wheat grain field was allways found by keywords "Celiac disease"
203
« on: February 10, 2023, 12:53 »
The typical mistake everybody are doing - batch-editing pictures and considering keywording "boring" directly trumps your sales.
I can absolutely underline that and thank you for your article. However, I understand very little of the rest with all the technical terms. Therefore, a question for normal unmathematical contributors like me: Have you been able to noticeably increase your downloads through your analyses?
204
« on: February 09, 2023, 12:40 »
Ouch, you have a fan.
Sadly it's not against Shutterstock's rules. Back in the old SS forum there were people who told about similar cases and said they reported it to SS, but SS did not consider it stolen, no matter how close it was to the original. It's still worth a try to report it, but I would not expect much.
It's sad actually - The art from the person who steals your work isn't bad, there is certainly some talent there - but apparently 0 own creativity skill.
Yes I know there were similar cases. Also, this is not a first time that someone makes copies of my images. Most of time I remain silent, few images wasn't big deal, so I did not report them. But this case is different. This contributor have hundreds of the images almost identical as mine, same style, same color schemes, same texts, same drawing technique, composition etc.
For example - this is my illustration of pizza - https://www.shutterstock.com/image-vector/homemade-pizza-vintage-decoration-sign-kitchen-1819431905
and this is his illustration - https://www.shutterstock.com/image-vector/italian-pepperoni-pizza-vector-illustration-2259565975
Identical style! Yes, he rearranged the elements, makes different shapes, but actually it is the same pizza. It took years for me to develop the way I drawing and this fellow got everything on a silver plate overnight.
But like I said, the biggest problem for me is the quantity of my work that has been copied, and this trend continues day after day.
You're right to be pissed and everyone here on the forum can see that some guy is imitating your work and stealing your ideas. I don't think you need to convince anyone here. The problem is how the agencies deal with it. They don't care in the end whose pictures they sell. I keep my fingers crossed that you can achieve something. This is really very annoying.
205
« on: February 09, 2023, 05:14 »
In my experience, individual agency recommendations are problematic. My personal agency ranking, for example, does not match the survey result on the right at all - without me really being able to explain it.
iStock doesn't work for me at all, on the other hand Dreamstime and Depositphotos together bring in several hundred Euros a year without a lot extra work. So they are worth it in my case.
At 123rf (which went well in the beginning), with constantly decreasing revenues, at some point it was no longer worth it to me to upload here and I deleted my account.
In my opinion, you won't get around uploading your complete portfolio to the appropriate agency to see then if it works in your individual case or not.
206
« on: February 07, 2023, 14:50 »
Shutterstock is dead  . Almost all sales are 0.10 cents per sale.
I am not sure is dead, it was my #2 for 2022, maybe dead for some contributors, but no dead for sure
Outside the window is 2023. 
Here we have year 2023 too: In terms of revenue, shutter is still number 1 for me. I climbed to level 4 pretty quickly again. We should perhaps agree that agencies can run differently depending on the portfolio. Second place for me is Alamy and then comes Adobe. But that's not why I'm constantly ranting about Adobe.
207
« on: February 07, 2023, 14:40 »
Double post 
208
« on: February 05, 2023, 16:49 »
image in the link is a nogo (imho)
people as main subject, no news content, father with minor in swimwear-
you are not allowed to even display this in the internet in europe.
No newspaper would dare to print this (and if, dont forget they have a legal department)
As for VIPs maybe, but arent their kids protected?
I don't really understand where the problem lies for you with this picture. The people are not in the foreground and are hardly recognizable even in the enlargement. There is nothing really offensive about the picture either. If that was my son in the picture, I would have no problems with it. An unasked secret close-up of an underage boy in swim trunks, on the other hand, would of course be completely unacceptable, editorial or not. And I can think of numerous uses as editorial for this image. By the way, editorial is not the same as news content.
209
« on: February 03, 2023, 13:22 »
Mat, a question.
My paid subscription has now started, Adobe has debited the first monthly payment for February.
Do I need to cancel the subscription or is it enough to just enter the new code?
Thank you
210
« on: February 03, 2023, 12:54 »
Thanks Mat, that's good news. I guess I'll have to apologize for the harsh criticism of Adobe first. Next year I'll keep my mouth shut for the time being
211
« on: February 01, 2023, 13:02 »
Thanks again Alexandre for your interesting insights.
About the Alamy Legal Complaint.
We had this discussion once in a German forum. On all affected pictures somewhere the logo/lettering of the German tabloid BILD could be seen. So the problem doesn't seem to be magazines in general and also only affects Alamy at the moment.
212
« on: January 27, 2023, 17:57 »
Any news on this Mat? My free subscription runs out next week.
If not free, how about a deeper discount for contributors?
Reimar, I think we will have to accept that there will be no more free subscription. That was a really nice extra that we have no right to if Adobe decides to do it that way. But it's a shame they don't make an official statement about it, that would at least have been respectful and honest and would have spared us such (unworthy) discussions here. No big crap lying explanations, just we don't do it anymore would have been enough for me. Because of the free usage, I put my other photo editing programs aside and put a lot of work and energy into Photoshop. The program is very good and I don't know what other program I could use to edit my photos in the way I'm used to. So I bit the bullet and pay for it from next month. However, it is very disappointing that the suspension of the program takes place at a time when every cent counts for stock contributors. In the end, the bland aftertaste remains that the agencies are not our partners - even Adobe.
213
« on: January 21, 2023, 09:56 »
And back to the part I was commenting on, percentage of sold images from anyone's portfolio, will also go down the harder we work and the longer we add new images.
That too, for me, is going up, not down. But I think that's mainly because my old photos were crap and I did not have a good understanding what sells well when I started out. But the more data from my own port I had, the more conclusion on what sells and what doesn't I could draw and the better I got at photography, the more I could produce content that sells and therefore the percentage of sold images is going up and not down.
Impossible unless your % of new images sold is 100% and I doubt that. % of all images, sold from your entire collection will always go down if you upload new images. If somebody stops uploading your % of images that have sold at least one time, could go up.
I am completely with Firn in terms of experience. Both the time frame and our upload behavior seem quite comparable and I notice a steady, if not spectacular, increase in downloads. I don't think you can just generalize that. Those who care more about current topics or lifestyle are likely to be affected by the decline in downloads faster than someone with timeless images. Nothing is impossible
214
« on: January 14, 2023, 04:50 »
What kind of a * mess is this now from Shutterstock?
I am not a newbie, have over 12,000 images online there. This is the first time I get this message.
What the h*** is the submission limit now 
This is not new. I don't know whether it has always been there as it never affected me, but I heard people mentioning it the old SS forum the first time around 3 years ago.
Contributors can submit up to 500 images and up to 100 video clips during a 7 day period.
Ok, thank you. That is possible. Had a submission marathon yesterday due to rejection of complete batches.
215
« on: January 13, 2023, 17:54 »
What kind of a * mess is this now from Shutterstock? I am not a newbie, have over 12,000 images online there. This is the first time I get this message. What the h*** is the submission limit now
216
« on: January 02, 2023, 13:45 »
In the meantime, I have reworked several hundred images that were lying around unsold at the agencies, in particular replacing unattractive skies, and have thus produced significantly more sales and even some bestsellers in direct comparison.
In my experience, this definitely makes sense and noticeably increases the chances of sales.
For example second one no sales in 3 years, first one several sales per week
217
« on: December 17, 2022, 04:35 »
Found that this morning in fund table
218
« on: December 03, 2022, 11:24 »
and on with the good news
received for a video
How do you create such a display of statistics in your account? At the beginning, the amount, then the date, and it's all there. Or did you write the amount, date and make a screen yourself? This is how sales are not displayed in my account - the amount and the date next to it.
Make another screen where it will be clear that this is really a screenshot from the shutterstock account.
Yes, and I don't know of any such deductions now. For 4K? They would also provide a screenshot of the video.
Dashboard
There is no such thing there.
Dashboard
219
« on: December 01, 2022, 03:47 »
Christmas photos have now been "released" from being glued to the back of our ports, so the deadline apparently is December 1st.
Still not ranking anywhere as high as they should according to my sales.
With me too, my picture has moved to the top of page one today.
220
« on: November 30, 2022, 09:25 »
I have no idea, Annie. Only the suspicion that the AI or the selection team suspects keyword spamming behind it because it doesn't associate the image with Christmas.
Or I'm listed as a contributor incapable of providing saleable Christmas images.
I will delete it again, remove the word christmas and upload it again.
How is that a Christmas image?
Well, I could definitely see these embellishments being used for Christmas wrapping, Christmas cards, invitation cards, gift certificates, decorations and the like.
Wilm, the same thing has happened to me now with a new picture. A shopping center in Paris with the terms Christmas tree and decoration is now in last place on Shutter in the search of this center
221
« on: November 10, 2022, 12:07 »
I can give more than one
I'm waiting for a link. Or are you a liar!
Someone's education has definitely failed - throwing around accusations and insults like 'liar' should actually be enough for a ban, shouldn't it?
Have a nice day@All
Michael, I wouldn't take that too seriously. If the only person here, who apparently has all day time to flood the forum with contributions, receives zero approval for it and then calls all others trolls - that speaks volumes. Annoying just a bit to read here. Is at the moment somehow groundhog day here: stoker2014, stoker2014 .....
222
« on: November 08, 2022, 10:14 »
But when I search for this file within my portfolio, it is on the last page as the last image.
That's usually the case, unless you sort by "Fresh image". Then it should be the first image.
Until now, the new images within the portfolio appeared on page 1 or 2, but never on the last page.
And if it also ends up on the last page in the general search, it is absolutely worthless. Then I might as well delete it again.
Wilm, after your posting here I checked my new submissions of the last days and searched Shutterstock sorted by popular. The result was completely inconsistent. With an average of 10.000 - 15.000 hits I found some of my new images on pages 1 - 3, with others I gave up with the search after 10 pages.
Ralf, the last image I uploaded before this is shown as number 1 in my portfolio. And the new one now ranks 1319 out of 1319 images.
That makes no sense to me.
Ok, then I misunderstood your problem, that actually makes really no sense. This has not occurred with me so far.
223
« on: November 08, 2022, 06:38 »
But when I search for this file within my portfolio, it is on the last page as the last image.
That's usually the case, unless you sort by "Fresh image". Then it should be the first image.
Until now, the new images within the portfolio appeared on page 1 or 2, but never on the last page.
And if it also ends up on the last page in the general search, it is absolutely worthless. Then I might as well delete it again.
Wilm, after your posting here I checked my new submissions of the last days and searched Shutterstock sorted by popular. The result was completely inconsistent. With an average of 10.000 - 15.000 hits I found some of my new images on pages 1 - 3, with others I gave up with the search after 10 pages.
224
« on: October 15, 2022, 15:56 »
OK I went and joined and had some fun. I've used all my free credits already.
Personal conclusion, it doesn't do very good with making descriptions into useful images, but it does some interesting and can be fun for wild imaginary scenes. The final images lack realism much of the time and have distortions and flaws. It does better as creating something that can be converted into an illustration kind of project.
I tried uploading my own images, only a few, and some of them, it gave back the same image except some warped bees and small changes. That's my input and maybe other images, I might have gotten better results and variations.
I think it crops too tight many times and it does have issues with wheels and circles.
It's fun and I'm impressed. Triple cheeseburger, with lettuce, tomato, onion, pickles.
Pete, I did the same thing today. I signed up and spent my 50 credits. My enthusiasm is very limited. Pretty much all the results were crap quality and looked artificial, much like your burger. For photography I don't see any serious competition at this point, for illustration it might be different - here I had some interesting results.
225
« on: October 04, 2022, 11:31 »
Keywords seems to have become a necessary evil, with most submitters putting in all 50 keywords just to maximise chances of a view.
This is clear in the kind if results stock sites show up even for very specific queries. So it'll be interesting to kmow how buyers are actually searching for stuff. Is it a word, aeries of words, an actual sentence etc
In my opinion, the Alamy Zoom statistic gives a very good overview of how and with which terms buyers search for images. Some of the searches here are very complex. If you then come across search queries such as "OMEGA 3 AND RED FRUITS", "Fried chicken breast and fresh salad" or "16th century farm house", it makes sense from my point of view to use as many meaningful keywords as possible. But that is somehow also a question of faith.
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14 15
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
