|
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 - thesentinel
Pages: 1 ... 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14
301
« on: November 24, 2007, 04:31 »
I'd say out of all the ideas I've seen thrown up this is by far the most subtle, make sure you punt it in the current lead thread on this, I don't recall seeing it there. I've been appalled by this situation a real kick in the teeth for anyone who dares to do well in a given niche. I know my idea will get lost in the IS thread but here is how I'd fix the problem:
Algorithm: For the first month the image is available for download you make the value given to the dl/mo variable equal to the corresponding value on an exponential growth curve. So the first download would be worth 0, second 1, third 2, forth 4, fifth 8, etc. This value would have to be normalized according to whatever value you give to other secret variables in the best match algorithm.
The algorithm would make it cost prohibitive to download the image enough to game the system, while allowing truly good images to shine. After the first month the algorithm could go back to what it was before. Criticisms welcome.
302
« on: November 17, 2007, 15:27 »
See ! 
303
« on: November 17, 2007, 15:05 »
Oh lordy, as one thread gets locked elsewhere over here comes the wagon of circus hype 
304
« on: November 17, 2007, 14:39 »
I think you'd have been better off using the time making more images. I suspect that most people that look at public lightboxes are other contributors, you will probably get lots of sitemails asking you to include images, and it's hard to discern what criteria you have used to stock them in the first place. Look at what I got myself into...
Hopefully the portfolio exposure will increase my sales. 99.9% of the files in these lightboxes are not mine. I will frequently be posting lightboxes on the Lightbox blog page, which is great advertisement. As the top thing says... add me to your creative network and I will scan your portfolio for images that fit into a lightbox. ([
305
« on: November 11, 2007, 12:20 »
Ultimately it's YOUR back that they are protecting so just grin and bare it.
306
« on: November 10, 2007, 12:09 »
sez who? I'm pretty sure they still have an influence on best match searches
Look at how many of the most popular by ratings actually have many downloads... very very few.
307
« on: November 06, 2007, 10:42 »
On a daily basis she is now outsold by Yuri on iStock alone, so with all his other sites just sit back in awe at the money his team makes.
308
« on: November 05, 2007, 12:04 »
Well just have a look at how few of the most rated files of the week actually have ANY downloads these days! The view and rating per downloads ratio for those files seems to show that manipulation, if it did ever really work, is a busted flush. OTOH, a bunch of us over at the Yahoo Microstock group decided to do some testing to see what was driving the search engine and one thing we came up with was a new submission that got a lot of ratings stayed on top of Best Match for quite some time. Hence the ratings gangs that rove IS rating each other images. I really need to get into one of these to boost my earnings...
309
« on: November 03, 2007, 16:25 »
I'm sure that the biggest use for that section is by contributors for 'inspiration', I doubt many customers use it.
It also shows how Best Match is a self feeding function.
310
« on: October 11, 2007, 13:59 »
A remarkable portfolio, sorted by age he hardly ever has any images with no downloads  Check out no. 142, Andrew Johnson, a mamber since February 2006. He was in the race to silver with me starting January this year, so he has gone from bronze to diamond inside a year. Could be heading up the list quite quickly.
http://www.istockphoto.com/AndrewJohnson
And he finds time to waste posting lots in the forums.
311
« on: October 11, 2007, 13:23 »
Maybe they are doing it rather than talking / moaning about it.
312
« on: September 19, 2007, 14:26 »
My experience is the EXACT REVERSE of yours and the past fortnight I have had a series of best days ever. Something I'm noticing is that folks who had a surge in sales after they started tweaking the search are now finding themselves in the dumps. My sales nearly doubled January (while many declined), and now nine months later I'm back on par with November/December. My BME was in March, and this month my projected earnings are 77% lower.
Whatever is happening, one of my friends who has always been exclusive is feeling it, too, and is considering going with multiple sites.
313
« on: September 18, 2007, 14:09 »
Had you checked the sticky at the top of the main forum you could have read the pitiful reason as to why! Although I've had several downloads today on IS, the downloads today number still shows 0. The money is adding to the account balance. Is anyone else having this problem?
314
« on: September 04, 2007, 13:06 »
I see no inspectors icon, she'd be losing money not taking pictures. Perrush - there's one other factor you forgot to include...she's also an image inspector which means her income is actually higher than that 
315
« on: August 24, 2007, 15:43 »
Hats off to you for leaving so much money on the table, Yuri seems to put up with the hassles though, with 12,000 downloads there this month so far. Thanks, actually no good reason, just a personal hatred of everything IStock  Way back when, when I was submitting there, they rejected > 50% of my work with "Not suitable for stock" rejection. With that many rejections combined with their tedious upload process and their 20% commissions, and their preferntial treatment for exclusives in the Best Match algotithm, it was really an easy decision to stop uploading there. My intuition is that as time goes on, things for non-Exclusives are going to get worse and worse there. Life has been so much more pleasant not having to deal with their BS.
316
« on: August 21, 2007, 08:32 »
Then there's at least 2 of us !
317
« on: August 04, 2007, 10:23 »
IMO the whole of the mountain/sky edge looks to have the effects of edge sharpening with a defined white outline at 100%.
It doesn't bother me that much and at smaller sizes it would add to the sense of crispness, but that transition is not natural looking.
318
« on: July 22, 2007, 02:04 »
I think he had a serious motorbike accident, and in his absence one way or another things changed. By the way there is arrogant peebert is he still on their forums?
319
« on: July 17, 2007, 02:38 »
This is visibly untrue. Whilst there are some 'hooray henrys' there are also a great deal of active members that do not fit your characterisation, who are not banned or ignored and do a great deal to get things improved after each bodged iteration of some new feature. If there's one thing worse than the rejections at IS, it must be their forums. If you don't know how to spell "Hallelujah", you're simply not welcome.
320
« on: July 17, 2007, 01:58 »
Don't bother! Not only are ratings barely, if at all, now used in the 'best match' search due to major 'gaming' by 'ratings rings', but having lots of views of a file without them being downloaded, caused by your friends viewing and rating them is a positive disadvantage as it dilutes one of the metrics that does get used in the best match.
There are still 'ratings rings', but look through the most popular section by ratings. One in the last month for example has 72 reviews, 255 views and NO downloads !
This is in contrast to a situation last year when well orchestrated ratings could catapult a file into top of best match within days.
321
« on: June 27, 2007, 01:20 »
Yes indeed, I posted your website link above. Despite the different spellings I can see possible market confusion, even enough for the newcomer to be considered to be 'passing off'? I am interested in this post... are you aware of the members based site called Geckoimages (www.gekkoimages.com www.geckoimages.com.au). This site has been servicing members of over 3 years and is growing very strongly both locally and internationally. You might want to check it out.
Adrian
322
« on: June 26, 2007, 11:05 »
On the contrary to everyone else here, last week was my best ever week at fotolia and this week is no different so far, hope it keeps that way or better.
A glitch that favors a top contributor, who'd have thought
323
« on: June 26, 2007, 03:55 »
Apple doesn't apply to computers Orange doesn't apply to mobile phones Virgin .......... I only have two comments....about the name?
And you all think Lucky Oliver is a name that applies to photography....outside the little microstock circle?
324
« on: June 26, 2007, 00:59 »
Good luck Richard.
Is there some logic behind the name Gecko?
Maybe the same logic that has already been applied here? http://www.gekkoimages.com.au
325
« on: June 25, 2007, 13:09 »
I'm sure they'll have plenty content when the UPS parcels of dvds arrive there from iofoto, yuri, andresr etc!
]\[*--
Pages: 1 ... 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
