|
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 - zeljkok
26
« on: February 18, 2024, 14:03 »
SS used to be my best earner, now it's second last. Freefall coincided with start of new payment scheme couple of yrs ago. Oddly enough for Feb '24 SS is looking to be #1 (ahead even of Adobe).
I don't think SS is dead, or will be anytime soon, but certainly appears far from where it once was.
27
« on: February 17, 2024, 14:17 »
This morning I had a nice surprise too
Very nice! Alamy is totally unpredictable. I had good run first half of last year, then like someone just pulled the plug in 2nd half. Alamy Rank is super important there, and CTR has big impact on the rank. My CTR plunged since July/August and this can't be a coincidence. It's now rebounding again, we'll see what happens. Rkz91: Alamy shows gross sale amount. What you get paid depends on the tier you are in. Most people that have semi regular sales will be in 40% tier nowdays
28
« on: February 16, 2024, 22:07 »
$$$$ sale, 2 years ago
Wouldn't you like to find that one in use? Seems like an installation on a business/commercial property or public site.
Thought crossed my mind more than once. It says in usage field "Indoor, Wall Decor". But old Canon 6D image was taken with is just 20 Megapixel, can't make very large print out of it. So it's bit of mystery. Perhaps it has some sentimental factor because of that "Trail adopted by John Tomlinson" table, which is not there anymore. I fully expected it was a mistake and there would be a refund. But it cleared within a month. Interesting enough, photo was simple point and shoot, taken for documentation of my hiking exploits. At the end I didn't even use it for hiking page https://autumnsky.zenfolio.com/usa/san-diego/iron-mountainUsed different shot I thought was better (1st in gallery) which was uploaded for stock too, never got even 10 Shutterstock cents. So you never really know much in this business
29
« on: February 15, 2024, 16:13 »
30
« on: February 01, 2024, 15:13 »
For DT Title / Description Fields are of largest importance. Whenever customer search phrase is reported for me it's almost always something I had there. This approach promotes accurate description of the asset, so it might be worth spending bit extra time. Not all agencies index text fields though. To my knowledge Alamy does, but IS, SS and AS don't.
31
« on: January 25, 2024, 14:53 »
Mine is now ultra fast too. Last night uploaded 6 (3 editorial, 3 non-editorial). All 6 accepted by the morning
Maybe algorithm is pushing down the queue ports with more/recent QA failures? Alamy has something similar in place with their "QA Rating"
32
« on: January 25, 2024, 14:47 »
Doesn't work for me, it shows the Featured Collections.
Scroll down, it's below Featured Collections. It's way easier than manually manipulating URL. Firefox, Mac
33
« on: January 24, 2024, 15:22 »
or just click on "Contributor Account" on Top Menu Bar, then "See my Public Profile" which will open in new Tab.
Sorting is interesting (in Public Profile View): Not most downloads, not Chronological but something third
34
« on: January 24, 2024, 15:11 »
For what it's worth my DT experience is similar; low earner, but keeping steady and not declining. I also find them friendly, with these contests and very simple upload interface. SS on the other hand is in a freefall ever since new payment scheme started few yrs ago.
35
« on: January 23, 2024, 22:05 »
Can you see images in your contributor portal? Sort by Date not Downloads
Possible reason why you don't see them in external search: Engine decides sometimes you have a typo in search term and retrieves results based on what it thinks you really meant.
I am able to reproduce this issue by typing "Cuyamaca Prairie Grassland" search term; Engine doesn't like "Cuyamaca" word (California State Park Name) and returns results for "Catamarca Prairie Grassland" - which doesn't have my images. But after I click "Did you really mean Cuymaca", it will correctly return my images.
36
« on: January 22, 2024, 03:02 »
These are great points.
This is one of my level 5 photos; 30 downloads. Look right - all 0.35. It's like that all the way to 1st DL except just one at Level 4, 2.96, 16 credits
Levels concept sounds great in theory, but appears to have little practical benefit
37
« on: January 22, 2024, 00:55 »
My understanding is that levels are for a la carte downloads (Non Subscription); so for higher levels buyer has to spend more credits & contributor payout will be higher. But I agree with you; I've been on DT over 5yrs & have some images level 5 but don't see difference. 0.35 standard sub (0.38 during Covid) most of the time. Occasional 2.00 Sub, super rare EL never more than 17.
38
« on: January 18, 2024, 00:30 »
You mean the inaccurate data claiming some photo was hot or not, when some of mine that sold best, were not ranked high and some with no sales, had been marked as interesting or climbing in popularity.
I also didn't think much of that feature & it's probably good it's gone. But let me tell you what I think is the reason behind these frequent interface changes. SS IT Department is too big. They need raison d'etre, so they invent things. It doesn't particularly bother me but they introduce bugs. In this last one I simply couldn't submit image with keyword they thought it was invalid, even after I checked "Yes, this is right" & had to switch to legacy. Maybe it's fixed now. Compare this to minimalist AS Interface which has been static more or less since day 1 as they probably think time is better spent elsewhere. Like many others here for me AS, with smaller port, is far outpacing SS. First 17 days of Jan AS = SSx7, incl. EL the other day. The only thing right now in favour of SS is that it's still possible to get $$$ sale, although very rare. On AS largest I had was 26.40, on SS 103.86
39
« on: January 14, 2024, 22:37 »
Tool appears useful, but there are bugs
First: editorial images are not retrieved in results
Second: It insists at min 2 photos. But if search returns exactly 1, it won't let me proceed. It should generate / display keywords from that single result
Both issues can be easily replicated by searching for "Embry Riddle". I recently uploaded several images taken at Embry Riddle Aeronautical University in Prescott, Arizona. All but one are editorial. And if you search for "Embry-Riddle" (with dash instead of space, proper name and keyword in editorial photos) you get zero results. Search for same keyword on Shutter, Adobe, etc will return multiple results.
40
« on: June 05, 2023, 22:56 »
Other than editorial images, where I simply could never really understand Adobe's rules, and photos with objects isolated on white I never had any issues with rejections on Adobe.
Same here. They changed review process, not necessarily criteria. I am certain they reject whole group (batch) without even looking at the rest if single photo is flagged. In other words like Alamy. I also believe AI does pre-processing and if it flags a file, human QA doesn't even look at anything. Try to submit rejected photo as single. Just upload 1 photo, keyword, submit, before uploading another. I had rejected photos approved this way. (btw I also never fully understood their Editorial criteria. I don't think most of their QA reviewers do either, so rejections are random, depending who you run into)
42
« on: June 09, 2022, 02:06 »
Because the system in the back end does not capture them. Could it be implemented? Absolutely. But it probably considered not worth, or low priority.
I find it very hard to believe that the system will not capture downloads in the free section. That would also be pretty dumb from Adobe because they could not tell how succesful it is or not. If somebody told you this then it's probably more a lame excuse not to give us these statitistics. But I'm pretty sure Adobe has them.
I don't think they do, at least not directly linked to individual image/contributor port. If this was real not cyber world, I'd wager you a beer 🍺. But we might not find out, it might be too internal. One thing for sure, it would be very useful to have this data public
43
« on: June 09, 2022, 00:15 »
Mat will correct me where I am wrong, but here are the answers to your questions:
why can't we have statistics about the files involved in this operation, during and after this operation?
Because the system in the back end does not capture them. Could it be implemented? Absolutely. But it probably considered not worth, or low priority. Assuming you're not going to give us these numbers in the end anyway (and that's not a good thing), will their value still be calculated in the rankings?
If free downloads are not captured, there can not have impact to the rankings Do they exist, these rankings?
Absolutely, and it is likely the heaviest weight in search algorithm. I am also guessing time plays significant factor, i.e recent downloads versus old ones, etc. But you will not ever get specifics of algorithm implementation itself, as it is company proprietary (as it should be) It would be very useful for us to have this data.
Agreed 100%. But again it is likely not going to happen Second question:
in what "many ways" (apart from any initial flat rate remuneration) should contributors benefit from this operation? Could you list them explicitly? 
Main one is probably portfolio exposure. I.e. if customer downloads free image & likes it, there is link to contributor portfolio so he/she might go there and get something else, bookmark it etc etc.
44
« on: June 07, 2022, 20:08 »
unpredictability is one constant of this business it seems. Today I had mid $$ on Alamy, double digit SOD on Shutter (is that even possible anymore??) and quite a few photos nominated by Adobe that will translate into triple digits even with 10% rate
45
« on: June 07, 2022, 20:03 »
you're assuming that 10 free DL would have translated to 10 paid DL
Yes, and that is big 'if'. But it would give insight how certain assets are doing & help decide if they can make more than 5 dollars over 12 months
46
« on: June 07, 2022, 17:06 »
[Downloads in the Free collection do not count toward your statistics.
-Mat Hayward
That would be my suggestion for improvement. Of course, free DLs should not count towards free subscription, but it would be helpful to know the stats. I.e I nominated photo last yr, got 5 credits, and now I see that photo had 10 free DLs over last 12 months. So maybe I would not re-nominate same photo this time around estimating it has potential to earn more as "not free". On the other side, photo with 0-5 DLs in free collection is probably good candidate for re-nomination.
47
« on: June 06, 2022, 22:41 »
Thanks for info Mat and repeated fair and transparent treatment. It's pleasure to work with Adobe
48
« on: June 04, 2022, 00:55 »
Hi, since yesterday I keep selling by Adobe the same image. At the moment there are 26 sales. Happy but quite unusual.
Stop at 126
Time for new trip to the deli store! Don't forget a camera 
49
« on: May 28, 2022, 14:07 »
I was seeing new design for few days, but now it's back to old ?
I didn't actually think new look was too bad, although I still prefer old. But main point is - why doing it? Why fixing something that was not broken & worked well? Answer: Need to give IT department something to do, so "improvement" was invented. It was far better in my opinion to invest effort & resources in fixing horrendous QA or doing something about unfair compensation structure
50
« on: May 25, 2022, 17:29 »
To me this is one of great examples of all the nonsense AI brings. Chances are this image was never seen by human being during initial acceptance, or this subsequent removal.
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
