pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Has SS Changed Most Popular Algorithm?  (Read 12217 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: July 13, 2012, 00:04 »
0
Looked at my port (sorted by most popular) by clicking the "your image gallery" link and the last two days it's been all jumbled up.  Other than the top 10, none of the pictures on the first page should be there.  Some have never sold even after a couple of years.  Results from yesterday and today are completely different but sill don't make sense.

My sales have been pretty typical but I noticed older files selling more than usual.  Not sure if this is a general search order change or what.  I don't like what I'm seeing--hope it's not permanent.


Lagereek

« Reply #1 on: July 13, 2012, 00:31 »
0
No!  still the same here.

Microstock Man

  • microstockman.com

« Reply #2 on: July 13, 2012, 02:14 »
0
Theres a thread on the SS forum about this. I've noticed for a few weeks now, if you sort your portfolio by most popular, and then go to the last page of your port (presumably, should be the least popular images), it's not correct, plus it changes every hour or so. Files that have never sold are above files that do, files that are brand new are below old files with 0 or 1 sale etc.

rubyroo

« Reply #3 on: July 13, 2012, 02:24 »
0
Yes, mine went topsy-turvy over a month ago, and now it's had another flip around.

I'm glad to know I'm not the only one!

Paulo M. F. Pires

  • "No Gods No Masters"
« Reply #4 on: July 13, 2012, 03:24 »
0
Big change here.... just 4 top sellers on first page. All others images are from same "new" batch's, including one entire serie of 10 images ( Editorial ), all without any sale so far.

Regarding sales, I've notice that:

- Regularly I sold old files ( one was  the first images I got accepted LOL )
- Between best sellers daily sales, ii'm getting sales over news files, but sequentially by batch date.

I think that such change is a good way to ensure that, all files, have a higher chance to get sales ...  ::)

« Reply #5 on: July 13, 2012, 03:43 »
0
My first page is mostly old best sellers in the same order they've been for a while now.  There's only 3 relatively new images on the first page.  Might be because I'm not uploading much and what I'm uploading isn't as commercial as my older stuff.

« Reply #6 on: July 13, 2012, 04:21 »
0
My first 50 or 60 images look as they should be with a couple of odd ones mixed in further down the page.

« Reply #7 on: July 13, 2012, 06:03 »
0
It looks like they group similar keyword shots together. Also editorials with the same date are grouped.

« Reply #8 on: July 13, 2012, 12:24 »
0
no, still the same

« Reply #9 on: July 13, 2012, 12:29 »
0
its same with me too...

w7lwi

  • Those that don't stand up to evil enable evil.
« Reply #10 on: July 13, 2012, 20:57 »
0
First couple of rows are fine.  After that there's no rationale to anything.  Totally mixed up.

ruxpriencdiam

    This user is banned.
  • Location. Third stone from the sun
« Reply #11 on: July 13, 2012, 21:42 »
0
The current Popular search is completely BS and wrong as of sometime yesterday if not before!

I now have images that have never sold that are now the most "Popular" and they are three years old and were some of the ones i used to get approved.

For instance number 22 of my most popular has never sold and is three years old so how can that be "Popular"?

And a bunch of my what used to be most "Popular" are now more then 5 pages into my port?

Sales have dropped while this has happened and yet before this everything was fine!

My first page of most popular has more than 75% of the images from my last page of images from three years ago that were the first ones i submitted!

So why is this happening?

My what used to be my most popular top three are now #3 / #4 and #11???

What was my #1 most popular has dropped to #4 and my #2 is now #3 in front of my what used to be #1 and my #3 is now #11????

Searching the site by keyword for one of my most popular that has always maintained number four status it is now number 61 so why the sudden drop?

It is all EFFED up!

« Reply #12 on: July 15, 2012, 21:48 »
0
I'm still seeing this same weird ordering.  My sales are still pretty typical in quantity but mostly older files selling.

ruxpriencdiam

    This user is banned.
  • Location. Third stone from the sun
« Reply #13 on: July 15, 2012, 23:53 »
0
Well my ports most popular has changed?

As has the sites most popular search by keyword?

So i take it it is a revolving popular?

what?

RacePhoto

« Reply #14 on: July 16, 2012, 00:38 »
0
no, still the same

But the popular myth algorithm has new data?  ;)

Wim

« Reply #15 on: July 16, 2012, 04:56 »
0
Seems so, less exposure on new but more sales on older images for me. Some are grouped according to keywords.

My income isn't negatively affected by this but I sure hope they know what they are doing and it's not because of bugs and what not.
One bug that does negatively affect my sales is the dissapearance of my latest approved work.
I received email notifications but the images do not show up in port or search.

Happy times!  :P

« Reply #16 on: July 16, 2012, 09:57 »
0
no, still the same

But the popular myth algorithm has new data?  ;)

my most popular havent change a bit


WarrenPrice

« Reply #17 on: July 16, 2012, 10:15 »
0
Something Ain't Right.  My "Popular" search option reminds me that my port contains some crap.  Several are being shown in the first ten and have NEVER sold.

"Most Relevant" displays what I would expect from "Popular" search.

"New" is not displaying the last ten image that were accepted.

And ... again, new images are not being displayed -- and ongoing bug that keeps getting temporarily fixed.  ??? :-\

Lagereek

« Reply #18 on: July 18, 2012, 06:12 »
0
After seeing the results the last 3 days,  well, maybe they have changed their alogarithm and drastically as well. I wonder, is their search also geographically engineered? i.e. showing differant searches in differant parts of the world?  like IS do.

Seems a bit slow actually, hop its summer slowdown.

« Reply #19 on: July 18, 2012, 09:45 »
0
After seeing the results the last 3 days,  well, maybe they have changed their alogarithm and drastically as well. I wonder, is their search also geographically engineered? i.e. showing differant searches in differant parts of the world?  like IS do.

Seems a bit slow actually, hop its summer slowdown.


It is more likely based on previous searches and social graphs of the sites buyers visit. However I suppose geo locations could be a factor as well. I think those who have a larger percentage of HCV images will see more of a change.  I know that my best sellers have dropped in the first page search results recently and as a result so have their sales.

Has anyone ever wondered why the cookies that the various micro sites load onto our systems keep getting fatter and fatter and each year more third party sites are involved in the process?  The sites use those cookies to gain info and track our activities on other sites, etc. They increasingly use that info to serve content and to manipulate resources (our images) to increase their own bottom line.  

I posted an old job listing for a SS search engine programmer earlier on this site a few months ago.  Now they are not going to publicly post sensitive search info in the job listing, but they do give us a few clues as to what the future holds as far as searches.

I know that various sites including SS change out third party cookies at different times of the year. Right now there are only a few cookies associated with third party data gathering services on many of the sites, but a few months ago the sites were using quite a few third party sites to track our activities as buyers.

http://www.shutterstock.com/jobs.mhtml?nl=1&jvi=o46KVfwz,Job&jvs=Indeed&jvk=Job
"Among other great benefits, Shutterstock offers competitive salaries, health and dental plans, 401k, company equity, daily breakfasts, weekly massages, discounted gym memberships"

http://www.shutterstock.com/jobs.mhtml?nl=1&jvi=oIjWVfwC,Job&jvs=Indeed&jvk=Job
"Job Posting for SS Search Engineer

We have a lot of challenging problems ahead of us, including:

    Helping customers find the images theyre looking for as fast as possible.
    Providing recommendations based on a customers searches, social graph, and other factors.
    Developing a framework to support rapid development of dynamic ranking algorithms.
    Creating a massively parallelized and real-time indexing process.
    Tracking search analytics and automatically acting on the results.

Our search engine is built on Perl and Solr.  Ideally you will have previous experience working with Solr and programming in Java. Being a JVM or Perl guru is an added bonus.  All candidates should have experience working on search engines and solving problems with large datasets."
« Last Edit: July 18, 2012, 09:47 by gbalex »

Lagereek

« Reply #20 on: July 18, 2012, 09:56 »
0
After seeing the results the last 3 days,  well, maybe they have changed their alogarithm and drastically as well. I wonder, is their search also geographically engineered? i.e. showing differant searches in differant parts of the world?  like IS do.

Seems a bit slow actually, hop its summer slowdown.


It is more likely based on previous searches and social graphs of the sites buyers visit. However I suppose geo locations could be a factor as well. I think those who have a larger percentage of HCV images will see more of a change.  I know that my best sellers have dropped in the first page search results recently and as a result so have their sales.

Has anyone ever wondered why the cookies that the various micro sites load onto our systems keep getting fatter and fatter and each year more third party sites are involved in the process?  The sites use those cookies to gain info and track our activities on other sites, etc. They increasingly use that info to serve content and to manipulate resources (our images) to increase their own bottom line.  

I posted an old job listing for a SS search engine programmer earlier on this site a few months ago.  Now they are not going to publicly post sensitive search info in the job listing, but they do give us a few clues as to what the future holds as far as searches.

I know that various sites including SS change out third party cookies at different times of the year. Right now there are only a few cookies associated with third party data gathering services on many of the sites, but a few months ago the sites were using quite a few third party sites to track our activities as buyers.

http://www.shutterstock.com/jobs.mhtml?nl=1&jvi=o46KVfwz,Job&jvs=Indeed&jvk=Job
"Among other great benefits, Shutterstock offers competitive salaries, health and dental plans, 401k, company equity, daily breakfasts, weekly massages, discounted gym memberships"

http://www.shutterstock.com/jobs.mhtml?nl=1&jvi=oIjWVfwC,Job&jvs=Indeed&jvk=Job
"Job Posting for SS Search Engineer

We have a lot of challenging problems ahead of us, including:

    Helping customers find the images theyre looking for as fast as possible.
    Providing recommendations based on a customers searches, social graph, and other factors.
    Developing a framework to support rapid development of dynamic ranking algorithms.
    Creating a massively parallelized and real-time indexing process.
    Tracking search analytics and automatically acting on the results.

Our search engine is built on Perl and Solr.  Ideally you will have previous experience working with Solr and programming in Java. Being a JVM or Perl guru is an added bonus.  All candidates should have experience working on search engines and solving problems with large datasets."


Oh well then I might apply for: chief in command search civil-engineer then :D  jokes apart, I started to notice a slow-down after last Friday, not just at SS but also at DT, FT. Funny it should all start on the same day/date. :)

« Reply #21 on: July 18, 2012, 11:43 »
0
After seeing the results the last 3 days,  well, maybe they have changed their alogarithm and drastically as well. I wonder, is their search also geographically engineered? i.e. showing differant searches in differant parts of the world?  like IS do.

Seems a bit slow actually, hop its summer slowdown.


It is more likely based on previous searches and social graphs of the sites buyers visit. However I suppose geo locations could be a factor as well. I think those who have a larger percentage of HCV images will see more of a change.  I know that my best sellers have dropped in the first page search results recently and as a result so have their sales.

Has anyone ever wondered why the cookies that the various micro sites load onto our systems keep getting fatter and fatter and each year more third party sites are involved in the process?  The sites use those cookies to gain info and track our activities on other sites, etc. They increasingly use that info to serve content and to manipulate resources (our images) to increase their own bottom line.  

I posted an old job listing for a SS search engine programmer earlier on this site a few months ago.  Now they are not going to publicly post sensitive search info in the job listing, but they do give us a few clues as to what the future holds as far as searches.

I know that various sites including SS change out third party cookies at different times of the year. Right now there are only a few cookies associated with third party data gathering services on many of the sites, but a few months ago the sites were using quite a few third party sites to track our activities as buyers.

http://www.shutterstock.com/jobs.mhtml?nl=1&jvi=o46KVfwz,Job&jvs=Indeed&jvk=Job
"Among other great benefits, Shutterstock offers competitive salaries, health and dental plans, 401k, company equity, daily breakfasts, weekly massages, discounted gym memberships"

http://www.shutterstock.com/jobs.mhtml?nl=1&jvi=oIjWVfwC,Job&jvs=Indeed&jvk=Job
"Job Posting for SS Search Engineer

We have a lot of challenging problems ahead of us, including:

    Helping customers find the images theyre looking for as fast as possible.
    Providing recommendations based on a customers searches, social graph, and other factors.
    Developing a framework to support rapid development of dynamic ranking algorithms.
    Creating a massively parallelized and real-time indexing process.
    Tracking search analytics and automatically acting on the results.

Our search engine is built on Perl and Solr.  Ideally you will have previous experience working with Solr and programming in Java. Being a JVM or Perl guru is an added bonus.  All candidates should have experience working on search engines and solving problems with large datasets."


Oh well then I might apply for: chief in command search civil-engineer then :D  jokes apart, I started to notice a slow-down after last Friday, not just at SS but also at DT, FT. Funny it should all start on the same day/date. :)


Sounds like a good plan to me.  My sales are down as well, in comparison to previous years at this time of year.

« Reply #22 on: July 18, 2012, 12:50 »
0
Something Ain't Right.  My "Popular" search option reminds me that my port contains some crap.  Several are being shown in the first ten and have NEVER sold.

"Most Relevant" displays what I would expect from "Popular" search.

That's what I've been seeing for about a month now...and the images change order once in a while in "Popular" and after a few pages in "Most Relevant."

ruxpriencdiam

    This user is banned.
  • Location. Third stone from the sun
« Reply #23 on: July 18, 2012, 16:06 »
0
Well my most popular has changed once again and this time all of my new stuff is now on page one of my most popular so there definitely is something going on!

Lagereek

« Reply #24 on: July 18, 2012, 17:14 »
0
Best match, most relevant, etc,  is all crap!,  these searches dont work, have never worked and will never work. Reason why? these kind of searches are there to produce money for the governor, not the contributor, I.E.  total and utter, completely meaningless, idiotic, coning, burglary rubbish. nothing else. A scam!

Popular searches is what most buyers wants to see, reason for that: buyers of micro have very little in demand, just a webb shot will do.
« Last Edit: July 18, 2012, 17:27 by Lagereek »

« Reply #25 on: July 18, 2012, 19:32 »
0
Best match, most relevant, etc,  is all crap!,  these searches dont work, have never worked and will never work. Reason why? these kind of searches are there to produce money for the governor, not the contributor, I.E.  total and utter, completely meaningless, idiotic, coning, burglary rubbish. nothing else. A scam!

C'mon man, don't beat around the bush - tell us what you think :-)

My naive speculation is that buyers always look at 'popular'  to be assured they're choosing something that has worked in the past - an easy, safe choice that won't get them in trouble.   But the agency knows this, and therefor is tempted to load that search with whatever they'd really like to sell at that time. They might do what IS did and push higher priced images, or they might push new images from new contributors whom they don't have to pay as much, or there might be any number of other schemes or forms of corruption in play.  I doubt that 'popular' ever has a simple, direct, statistical meaning in today's microstock world.
  
« Last Edit: July 18, 2012, 19:36 by stockastic »

« Reply #26 on: July 18, 2012, 20:35 »
0
I don't mind the occasional screwy search, because sometimes they end up bringing up old images that never had many sales.  I have one at SS that had only sold a handful of times in two years, and it's sold three times in the past two days.  That's a good thing.  And my other sales haven't been impacted at all.


« Reply #27 on: July 18, 2012, 20:47 »
0
Maybe we should think of it as a ginormous compost pile that they turn over once in a while.

Lagereek

« Reply #28 on: July 19, 2012, 03:55 »
0
Best match, most relevant, etc,  is all crap!,  these searches dont work, have never worked and will never work. Reason why? these kind of searches are there to produce money for the governor, not the contributor, I.E.  total and utter, completely meaningless, idiotic, coning, burglary rubbish. nothing else. A scam!

C'mon man, don't beat around the bush - tell us what you think :-)

My naive speculation is that buyers always look at 'popular'  to be assured they're choosing something that has worked in the past - an easy, safe choice that won't get them in trouble.   But the agency knows this, and therefor is tempted to load that search with whatever they'd really like to sell at that time. They might do what IS did and push higher priced images, or they might push new images from new contributors whom they don't have to pay as much, or there might be any number of other schemes or forms of corruption in play.  I doubt that 'popular' ever has a simple, direct, statistical meaning in today's microstock world.
  

Sure! but I dont see any change in the search?  my stuff is where its always been, right up on in front, etc. no problem there! still, its gone very quiet. Best-Match, Random and relevant, are the kind of searches that really does not work, reason being that they depend only on keywording and the downfall is ofcourse all the spamming. Worst example ever is the IS-best match.

ShadySue

« Reply #29 on: July 19, 2012, 04:01 »
0
Best match, most relevant, etc,  is all crap!,  these searches dont work, have never worked and will never work. Reason why? these kind of searches are there to produce money for the governor, not the contributor, I.E.  total and utter, completely meaningless, idiotic, coning, burglary rubbish. nothing else. A scam!

Popular searches is what most buyers wants to see, reason for that: buyers of micro have very little in demand, just a webb shot will do.

So you're saying that the best match/most popular works for the buyer and the site but not the contributor?
Two out of three would be considered a result in many contexts, especially when the third is impossible (favour one contributor, penalise another).

Lagereek

« Reply #30 on: July 19, 2012, 04:34 »
0
Best match, most relevant, etc,  is all crap!,  these searches dont work, have never worked and will never work. Reason why? these kind of searches are there to produce money for the governor, not the contributor, I.E.  total and utter, completely meaningless, idiotic, coning, burglary rubbish. nothing else. A scam!

Popular searches is what most buyers wants to see, reason for that: buyers of micro have very little in demand, just a webb shot will do.

So you're saying that the best match/most popular works for the buyer and the site but not the contributor?
Two out of three would be considered a result in many contexts, especially when the third is impossible (favour one contributor, penalise another).

Hi Sue!  well what Im trying to say is, best match, relevant and random, are searches too much dependant on contributors keywording and spamming is something we will never get rid of, its impossible. Remember some years back? at IS, when we had to re-keyword every single file, for correct keywording?  that was then. Can you imagine today with some agencies housing 20 million files? nightmare.

ShadySue

« Reply #31 on: July 19, 2012, 05:13 »
0
Best match, most relevant, etc,  is all crap!,  these searches dont work, have never worked and will never work. Reason why? these kind of searches are there to produce money for the governor, not the contributor, I.E.  total and utter, completely meaningless, idiotic, coning, burglary rubbish. nothing else. A scam!

Popular searches is what most buyers wants to see, reason for that: buyers of micro have very little in demand, just a webb shot will do.


So you're saying that the best match/most popular works for the buyer and the site but not the contributor?
Two out of three would be considered a result in many contexts, especially when the third is impossible (favour one contributor, penalise another).


Hi Sue!  well what Im trying to say is, best match, relevant and random, are searches too much dependant on contributors keywording and spamming is something we will never get rid of, its impossible. Remember some years back? at IS, when we had to re-keyword every single file, for correct keywording?  that was then. Can you imagine today with some agencies housing 20 million files? nightmare.


Certainly agree that spamming is a major problem at all agencies, though the search is often better at SS.
I was going to post an example, but it backfired.
In the Good Old Days when I wikied a lot, one of my regular wikis was 'duck', because a lot of people don't seem to know the difference between duck and goose, or deliberately keyword both on their files (at least you won't give me that American 'looks like a duck, quacks like a duck' cr*p!) But also a lot of people don't DA properly, so cooked duck, rubber ducks and carved duck/decoys show up in a search narrowed down to duck (freshwater bird) and duck (saltwater bird):

SS doesn't DA, but you can exclude keywords in a search, so I excluded rubber duck and got:

So, despite you not being remotely interested in ducks, we can both agree that both searches need a lot of work.

« Reply #32 on: July 19, 2012, 05:19 »
0
In all fairness to SS, if you search for "duck" and substract all results that contain "rubber" or "duck", you'll rightly end up with nothing. Either put "rubber duck" as a phrase, or exclude just "rubber" - both queries give 32.990 results...

ShadySue

« Reply #33 on: July 19, 2012, 05:43 »
0
In all fairness to SS, if you search for "duck" and substract all results that contain "rubber" or "duck", you'll rightly end up with nothing. Either put "rubber duck" as a phrase, or exclude just "rubber" - both queries give 32.990 results...

Tx.
I guess no site can allow for user idiocy, or assuming that two sites search in remotely the same way.  ;)

So rather than scuppered by spamming, some people have missed relevant keywords like 'cooked' or 'isolated'.
On iStock, you need to know to exclude by using NOT, not -. E.g. if you search on something then add - isolated in the side keyword search window, you get only isolations.

Lagereek

« Reply #34 on: July 19, 2012, 05:56 »
0
Best match, most relevant, etc,  is all crap!,  these searches dont work, have never worked and will never work. Reason why? these kind of searches are there to produce money for the governor, not the contributor, I.E.  total and utter, completely meaningless, idiotic, coning, burglary rubbish. nothing else. A scam!

Popular searches is what most buyers wants to see, reason for that: buyers of micro have very little in demand, just a webb shot will do.


So you're saying that the best match/most popular works for the buyer and the site but not the contributor?
Two out of three would be considered a result in many contexts, especially when the third is impossible (favour one contributor, penalise another).


Hi Sue!  well what Im trying to say is, best match, relevant and random, are searches too much dependant on contributors keywording and spamming is something we will never get rid of, its impossible. Remember some years back? at IS, when we had to re-keyword every single file, for correct keywording?  that was then. Can you imagine today with some agencies housing 20 million files? nightmare.


Certainly agree that spamming is a major problem at all agencies, though the search is often better at SS.
I was going to post an example, but it backfired.
In the Good Old Days when I wikied a lot, one of my regular wikis was 'duck', because a lot of people don't seem to know the difference between duck and goose, or deliberately keyword both on their files (at least you won't give me that American 'looks like a duck, quacks like a duck' cr*p!) But also a lot of people don't DA properly, so cooked duck, rubber ducks and carved duck/decoys show up in a search narrowed down to duck (freshwater bird) and duck (saltwater bird):

SS doesn't DA, but you can exclude keywords in a search, so I excluded rubber duck and got:

So, despite you not being remotely interested in ducks, we can both agree that both searches need a lot of work.


Totally agree with you! I suppose we will probably never see a close to perfect search and with all these gazillions of files, and if there was, the agencies themselves would most likely find a way to ruin it anyway.

« Reply #35 on: July 19, 2012, 10:41 »
0
...best match, relevant and random, are searches too much dependant on contributors keywording and spamming is something we will never get rid of, its impossible. Remember some years back? at IS, when we had to re-keyword every single file, for correct keywording?  that was then. Can you imagine today with some agencies housing 20 million files? nightmare.

Exactly - even a 'big' agency like SS can't possibly afford to clean up that mess. And this should be an opportunity for new agencies, starting fresh, with good keywording standards combined with better search strategies.  Shouldn't it?

ruxpriencdiam

    This user is banned.
  • Location. Third stone from the sun
« Reply #36 on: July 19, 2012, 11:05 »
0
My popular has been rearranged once again!?


« Reply #37 on: July 20, 2012, 07:37 »
0
It looks to me now that Relevent shows most popular images. Still not sure what to think of the Popular order though.

« Reply #38 on: July 23, 2012, 15:33 »
0
Don't know about details, but after change I stopped selling at SS.

Lagereek

« Reply #39 on: August 04, 2012, 13:03 »
0
Well folks! stop your grinning and drop your linnen because we are about to get whalloped! I didnt believe it but somebody pointed it out to me. They have changed their default to "relevancy"  and after doing some 20 searches in various fields I have to say. It is everything but "relevant", it is really, really bad with some really amateurish imagery right up front.
I dont know if this is an experiment or not, they were going to try it out, werent they and if buyers liked it, they would keep it?  well the only type of buyer who would like this, is the type of buyer an agency and contributor simply dont need.
I find it totally meaningless uploading to a search such as this.
Im afraid with this search we are back to square one, back to the IS best-match fiasco.
« Last Edit: August 04, 2012, 13:10 by Lagereek »

ruxpriencdiam

    This user is banned.
  • Location. Third stone from the sun
« Reply #40 on: August 04, 2012, 14:10 »
0
http://submit.shutterstock.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=124172

Quote from: moderator
Quote from: ruxpriencdiam
Ok so here is what another Moderator said about how the Popular works!

Quote from: moderator
Popular looks primarily at the number of times an image has been downloaded. Relevant is a more sophisticated algorithm that considers a mix of factors.


So which one is right?


Quote from: VincentJansen
Hi everybody,

The search results in "Popular" are based on one of Shutterstock's most complicated algorithms. This algorithm takes many different variables into account, including, but not limited to, the total number of downloads. If an image has more downloads than others it does not always mean it will be placed higher in "Popular". It is also very normal for images to move up and down "Popular" regardless of the number of times that image has been downloaded.
Forums are dead time to stir the pot.

--

Hello ruxpriencdiam,

The quote you reference was accurate at the time of posting. The newer post is also accurate, at this time.

Stay transparent with your posts.

Sincerely,
Anthony Correia
Director, Content Operations
Shutterstock|Bigstock



Quote from: ruxpriencdiam
Quote from: moderator
Quote from: ruxpriencdiam
Thank you Anthony so i take it this is normal then.

--
Hello ruxpriencdiam,

If you are referring to how we do our best to ensure your portfolio gets in front of as many customers as possible, then the answer is yes, this is quite normal. Stay relevant and accurate with your keywords/titles and we will do the rest.

Sincerely,
Anthony Correia
Director, Content Operations
Shutterstock|Bigstock
Thanks again now we know it isn't a bug like some of us including me thought.

And we can put this to rest.

Lagereek

« Reply #41 on: August 04, 2012, 14:34 »
0
Jeez!  what in actual fact are you or the moderator trying to say?  that the majority should be happy with less sales and then put it to rest? ::) ::) ::)

lisafx

« Reply #42 on: August 04, 2012, 14:35 »
0
Wow, I just sorted my port by "relevant" and it was like a trip down memory lane.  Couldn't find anything I had uploaded in the past several years.  If you took a snapshot of my most popular images 4 years ago it would look exactly like the relevancy search today.  

Any point in shooting and uploading new stuff there?!!

« Reply #43 on: August 04, 2012, 14:36 »
0
Well folks! stop your grinning and drop your linnen because we are about to get whalloped! I didnt believe it but somebody pointed it out to me. They have changed their default to "relevancy"  and after doing some 20 searches in various fields I have to say. It is everything but "relevant", it is really, really bad with some really amateurish imagery right up front.
I dont know if this is an experiment or not, they were going to try it out, werent they and if buyers liked it, they would keep it?  well the only type of buyer who would like this, is the type of buyer an agency and contributor simply dont need.
I find it totally meaningless uploading to a search such as this.
Im afraid with this search we are back to square one, back to the IS best-match fiasco.
I just checked, using a browser that didn't have me logged in and the default was "popular".  The search doesn't seem to of changed much.

Lagereek

« Reply #44 on: August 04, 2012, 14:46 »
0
Wow, I just sorted my port by "relevant" and it was like a trip down memory lane.  Couldn't find anything I had uploaded in the past several years.  If you took a snapshot of my most popular images 4 years ago it would look exactly like the relevancy search today.  

Any point in shooting and uploading new stuff there?!!

Hi Lisa!  nope, shouldnt think so, uploading new stuff with the relevancy search is pointless, ends up somewhere in Timbuktu. See? it was only a matter of time before things derailed at SS as well.

What surprises me is the choice of "relevancy" its old stuff, was used among all the hanging files in the old film-agencies, untill the librarian found out that photographers were handwriting totally irrelevant keywords and then typed it into that days gigantic computers, its a tried and tested search and ofcourse it never worked.

Lagereek

« Reply #45 on: August 04, 2012, 14:47 »
0
Well folks! stop your grinning and drop your linnen because we are about to get whalloped! I didnt believe it but somebody pointed it out to me. They have changed their default to "relevancy"  and after doing some 20 searches in various fields I have to say. It is everything but "relevant", it is really, really bad with some really amateurish imagery right up front.
I dont know if this is an experiment or not, they were going to try it out, werent they and if buyers liked it, they would keep it?  well the only type of buyer who would like this, is the type of buyer an agency and contributor simply dont need.
I find it totally meaningless uploading to a search such as this.
Im afraid with this search we are back to square one, back to the IS best-match fiasco.
I just checked, using a browser that didn't have me logged in and the default was "popular".  The search doesn't seem to of changed much.

remove your cookies and it will change. :)

ruxpriencdiam

    This user is banned.
  • Location. Third stone from the sun
« Reply #46 on: August 04, 2012, 14:55 »
0
Jeez!  what in actual fact are you or the moderator trying to say?  that the majority should be happy with less sales and then put it to rest? ::) ::) ::)
I have been arguing and complaining about this for months with many forum members and no one ever would tell us anything so i lured Anthony out to explain what was going on and now from what i see there is nothing we can do about it so that is why i said put it to rest meaning the arguing back and forth with everyone on SS. :) ;D 8)


Lagereek

« Reply #47 on: August 04, 2012, 15:26 »
0
Jeez!  what in actual fact are you or the moderator trying to say?  that the majority should be happy with less sales and then put it to rest? ::) ::) ::)
I have been arguing and complaining about this for months with many forum members and no one ever would tell us anything so i lured Anthony out to explain what was going on and now from what i see there is nothing we can do about it so that is why i said put it to rest meaning the arguing back and forth with everyone on SS. :) ;D 8)


Ok! sorry! I didnt get that at first. Oh well then if theres nothing we can do, fine. Just that at this moment and I think Lisa would agree, uploading fresh material is a waste of time, pitty to see it all burried and gone.

best.

« Reply #48 on: August 04, 2012, 15:40 »
0
Wow, I just sorted my port by "relevant" and it was like a trip down memory lane.  Couldn't find anything I had uploaded in the past several years.  If you took a snapshot of my most popular images 4 years ago it would look exactly like the relevancy search today.  

Any point in shooting and uploading new stuff there?!!

I'd assume that the 'Relevant' algorithm would only work when you searched using actual keywords rather than just clicking on your own gallery (i.e. 'relevant' to what?).

I can find no evidence that the default search has changed anyway.

lisafx

« Reply #49 on: August 04, 2012, 15:49 »
0
Just that at this moment and I think Lisa would agree, uploading fresh material is a waste of time, pitty to see it all burried and gone.

Checking back over my sales these first few days of the month, I have sold some new images.  I guess some people are sorting by age?  Or else, as Gostwyck says, maybe the search hasn't changed that much?

I do wish there was a bit more emphasis on newness in the relevancy search, though.  It's rewarding to see recent efforts pay off.  

Oddly enough, it is FT that seems to be skewed toward newer images lately.  

« Reply #50 on: August 04, 2012, 17:19 »
0
Well folks! stop your grinning and drop your linnen because we are about to get whalloped! I didnt believe it but somebody pointed it out to me. They have changed their default to "relevancy"  and after doing some 20 searches in various fields I have to say. It is everything but "relevant", it is really, really bad with some really amateurish imagery right up front.
I dont know if this is an experiment or not, they were going to try it out, werent they and if buyers liked it, they would keep it?  well the only type of buyer who would like this, is the type of buyer an agency and contributor simply dont need.
I find it totally meaningless uploading to a search such as this.
Im afraid with this search we are back to square one, back to the IS best-match fiasco.
I just checked, using a browser that didn't have me logged in and the default was "popular".  The search doesn't seem to of changed much.

remove your cookies and it will change. :)
I didn't have any cookies because I used chrome and I never visit SS with chrome.  I get the "popular" search by default with chrome and "relevant" with Firefox.  I was using Firefox with cookies disabled.

« Reply #51 on: August 04, 2012, 20:12 »
0
I just deleted cookies for all my browsers.

IE Default Search Setting = Relevant

Chrome Default Search Setting = Popular

FF Default Search Setting = Popular

I just did a search for some of my most popular images that have shown up in the first row of the most popular search for years.  

About half of them show up, the other half are no where to be found.  Last week different best sellers were missing from the popular search so they must demote them to the nether regions based on some type of rotating algorithm that changes frequently.

Unfortunately most of my best sellers do not show up at all using the relevant search. That being the case even though those images have been time tested and proven to have relevant keywords; by buyers who frequent use those keywords to find them often enough that they have end up in the first row of the popular search for years. I don't know what indices could be more relevant, the images certainly have had time to drop from the ranks, had they not been in demand by SS's buyers.

As a buyer I left IS because they insisted on serving me content I did not need or want, I will not hesitate to do the same if SS continues with these algorithms.
« Last Edit: August 04, 2012, 20:13 by gbalex »

« Reply #52 on: August 04, 2012, 20:31 »
0
For me, the relevant sort returns the same list/order of my photos under the 25/day tab (essentially number of downloads - EL's & OD's).  On the popular sort I have photos on first page that I don't even remember selling on SS!

Lagereek

« Reply #53 on: August 05, 2012, 00:19 »
0
I just deleted cookies for all my browsers.

IE Default Search Setting = Relevant

Chrome Default Search Setting = Popular

FF Default Search Setting = Popular

I just did a search for some of my most popular images that have shown up in the first row of the most popular search for years.  

About half of them show up, the other half are no where to be found.  Last week different best sellers were missing from the popular search so they must demote them to the nether regions based on some type of rotating algorithm that changes frequently.

Unfortunately most of my best sellers do not show up at all using the relevant search. That being the case even though those images have been time tested and proven to have relevant keywords; by buyers who frequent use those keywords to find them often enough that they have end up in the first row of the popular search for years. I don't know what indices could be more relevant, the images certainly have had time to drop from the ranks, had they not been in demand by SS's buyers.

As a buyer I left IS because they insisted on serving me content I did not need or want, I will not hesitate to do the same if SS continues with these algorithms.

I agree with you 100%. Imagine whats it like for us contributors with large ports, its totally derrogative to upload fresh material since its going to get wasted with this Relevancy search. I believe this is supposed to be an experiment to see if buyers prefer this search, well, hard to believe they are going to prefer a search with tons of irrelevant material, isnt it?  so hopefully it gets back to normal and one can resume work.
Im sitting here with about 200, fresh files from one of the biggest shipping industries in the world,  uploading this right now and its all just wasted. :)
« Last Edit: August 05, 2012, 00:31 by Lagereek »

Lagereek

« Reply #54 on: August 05, 2012, 12:00 »
0
Well folks! stop your grinning and drop your linnen because we are about to get whalloped! I didnt believe it but somebody pointed it out to me. They have changed their default to "relevancy"  and after doing some 20 searches in various fields I have to say. It is everything but "relevant", it is really, really bad with some really amateurish imagery right up front.
I dont know if this is an experiment or not, they were going to try it out, werent they and if buyers liked it, they would keep it?  well the only type of buyer who would like this, is the type of buyer an agency and contributor simply dont need.
I find it totally meaningless uploading to a search such as this.
Im afraid with this search we are back to square one, back to the IS best-match fiasco.
I just checked, using a browser that didn't have me logged in and the default was "popular".  The search doesn't seem to of changed much.

remove your cookies and it will change. :)
I didn't have any cookies because I used chrome and I never visit SS with chrome.  I get the "popular" search by default with chrome and "relevant" with Firefox.  I was using Firefox with cookies disabled.

Well I think youre getting it wrong, somehow, everyone I know and thats plenty are getting relevancy, believe me, I can even hear its relevancy by the loud noise theyre making. :)

« Reply #55 on: August 05, 2012, 12:51 »
0
Well folks! stop your grinning and drop your linnen because we are about to get whalloped! I didnt believe it but somebody pointed it out to me. They have changed their default to "relevancy"  and after doing some 20 searches in various fields I have to say. It is everything but "relevant", it is really, really bad with some really amateurish imagery right up front.
I dont know if this is an experiment or not, they were going to try it out, werent they and if buyers liked it, they would keep it?  well the only type of buyer who would like this, is the type of buyer an agency and contributor simply dont need.
I find it totally meaningless uploading to a search such as this.
Im afraid with this search we are back to square one, back to the IS best-match fiasco.
I just checked, using a browser that didn't have me logged in and the default was "popular".  The search doesn't seem to of changed much.

remove your cookies and it will change. :)
I didn't have any cookies because I used chrome and I never visit SS with chrome.  I get the "popular" search by default with chrome and "relevant" with Firefox.  I was using Firefox with cookies disabled.

Well I think youre getting it wrong, somehow, everyone I know and thats plenty are getting relevancy, believe me, I can even hear its relevancy by the loud noise theyre making. :)

Are you signed on as a buyer?

Lagereek

« Reply #56 on: August 05, 2012, 14:44 »
0
Well folks! stop your grinning and drop your linnen because we are about to get whalloped! I didnt believe it but somebody pointed it out to me. They have changed their default to "relevancy"  and after doing some 20 searches in various fields I have to say. It is everything but "relevant", it is really, really bad with some really amateurish imagery right up front.
I dont know if this is an experiment or not, they were going to try it out, werent they and if buyers liked it, they would keep it?  well the only type of buyer who would like this, is the type of buyer an agency and contributor simply dont need.
I find it totally meaningless uploading to a search such as this.
Im afraid with this search we are back to square one, back to the IS best-match fiasco.
I just checked, using a browser that didn't have me logged in and the default was "popular".  The search doesn't seem to of changed much.

remove your cookies and it will change. :)
I didn't have any cookies because I used chrome and I never visit SS with chrome.  I get the "popular" search by default with chrome and "relevant" with Firefox.  I was using Firefox with cookies disabled.

Well I think youre getting it wrong, somehow, everyone I know and thats plenty are getting relevancy, believe me, I can even hear its relevancy by the loud noise theyre making. :)

Are you signed on as a buyer?

No, I am a contributor, photographer but I know plenty of buyers, and btw, just for a laugh, theyre all having trouble with every single search in every single agency, so its not just here, its everywhere.


« Reply #57 on: August 05, 2012, 14:47 »
0
Well folks! stop your grinning and drop your linnen because we are about to get whalloped! I didnt believe it but somebody pointed it out to me. They have changed their default to "relevancy"  and after doing some 20 searches in various fields I have to say. It is everything but "relevant", it is really, really bad with some really amateurish imagery right up front.
I dont know if this is an experiment or not, they were going to try it out, werent they and if buyers liked it, they would keep it?  well the only type of buyer who would like this, is the type of buyer an agency and contributor simply dont need.
I find it totally meaningless uploading to a search such as this.
Im afraid with this search we are back to square one, back to the IS best-match fiasco.
I just checked, using a browser that didn't have me logged in and the default was "popular".  The search doesn't seem to of changed much.

remove your cookies and it will change. :)
I didn't have any cookies because I used chrome and I never visit SS with chrome.  I get the "popular" search by default with chrome and "relevant" with Firefox.  I was using Firefox with cookies disabled.

Well I think youre getting it wrong, somehow, everyone I know and thats plenty are getting relevancy, believe me, I can even hear its relevancy by the loud noise theyre making. :)

Are you signed on as a buyer?

No, I am a contributor, photographer but I know plenty of buyers, and btw, just for a laugh, theyre all having trouble with every single search in every single agency, so its not just here, its everywhere.

The cookies on the buyer side are slightly different than the submitter side and they affect search results as well as search default settings.

I do agree with you, the searches are a mess as a result of the sites trying to serve us content to fatten their bottom line.

Batman

« Reply #58 on: August 05, 2012, 21:01 »
0
I just deleted cookies for all my browsers.

IE Default Search Setting = Relevant

Chrome Default Search Setting = Popular

FF Default Search Setting = Popular

I just did a search for some of my most popular images that have shown up in the first row of the most popular search for years.  

About half of them show up, the other half are no where to be found.  Last week different best sellers were missing from the popular search so they must demote them to the nether regions based on some type of rotating algorithm that changes frequently.

Unfortunately most of my best sellers do not show up at all using the relevant search. That being the case even though those images have been time tested and proven to have relevant keywords; by buyers who frequent use those keywords to find them often enough that they have end up in the first row of the popular search for years. I don't know what indices could be more relevant, the images certainly have had time to drop from the ranks, had they not been in demand by SS's buyers.

As a buyer I left IS because they insisted on serving me content I did not need or want, I will not hesitate to do the same if SS continues with these algorithms.

I agree with you 100%. Imagine whats it like for us contributors with large ports, its totally derrogative to upload fresh material since its going to get wasted with this Relevancy search. I believe this is supposed to be an experiment to see if buyers prefer this search, well, hard to believe they are going to prefer a search with tons of irrelevant material, isnt it?  so hopefully it gets back to normal and one can resume work.
Im sitting here with about 200, fresh files from one of the biggest shipping industries in the world,  uploading this right now and its all just wasted. :)

If new pictures get a boost you complain if new photos don't get a boost you complain, if best sellers get first place you complain if best sellers don't get first you complain. No making anybody happy with any search. Popular gives old pictures and not best sellers a chance now you complain.

Lagereek

« Reply #59 on: August 06, 2012, 00:32 »
0
I just deleted cookies for all my browsers.

IE Default Search Setting = Relevant

Chrome Default Search Setting = Popular

FF Default Search Setting = Popular

I just did a search for some of my most popular images that have shown up in the first row of the most popular search for years.  

About half of them show up, the other half are no where to be found.  Last week different best sellers were missing from the popular search so they must demote them to the nether regions based on some type of rotating algorithm that changes frequently.

Unfortunately most of my best sellers do not show up at all using the relevant search. That being the case even though those images have been time tested and proven to have relevant keywords; by buyers who frequent use those keywords to find them often enough that they have end up in the first row of the popular search for years. I don't know what indices could be more relevant, the images certainly have had time to drop from the ranks, had they not been in demand by SS's buyers.

As a buyer I left IS because they insisted on serving me content I did not need or want, I will not hesitate to do the same if SS continues with these algorithms.

I agree with you 100%. Imagine whats it like for us contributors with large ports, its totally derrogative to upload fresh material since its going to get wasted with this Relevancy search. I believe this is supposed to be an experiment to see if buyers prefer this search, well, hard to believe they are going to prefer a search with tons of irrelevant material, isnt it?  so hopefully it gets back to normal and one can resume work.
Im sitting here with about 200, fresh files from one of the biggest shipping industries in the world,  uploading this right now and its all just wasted. :)

If new pictures get a boost you complain if new photos don't get a boost you complain, if best sellers get first place you complain if best sellers don't get first you complain. No making anybody happy with any search. Popular gives old pictures and not best sellers a chance now you complain.

Well....... you know,  show me somebody that never complains and I show you a nerd :) seriously, isnt it a matter of finding a balance in a search?  mixing old with new and with best sellers? etc. A search doesnt have to go all out, slaughtering only to show some new stuff. Its about finding a suitable balance, isnt it. That cant be too hard for these computer-gurus,  only, the search changes is purely an excuse for experimenting to increase profits, nothing else.

RacePhoto

« Reply #60 on: August 06, 2012, 00:49 »
0

Well....... you know,  show me somebody that never complains and I show you a nerd :) seriously, isnt it a matter of finding a balance in a search?  mixing old with new and with best sellers? etc. A search doesnt have to go all out, slaughtering only to show some new stuff. Its about finding a suitable balance, isnt it. That cant be too hard for these computer-gurus,  only, the search changes is purely an excuse for experimenting to increase profits, nothing else.

If it increases their profits, doesn't it also increase our profits?

I'm always confused when someone says the search is hurting all of us. It has to move someone up, if it's moving someone else down? Someone gets more sales? Otherwise how would increasing our profits be a bad thing?

Lagereek

« Reply #61 on: August 06, 2012, 01:07 »
0

Well....... you know,  show me somebody that never complains and I show you a nerd :) seriously, isnt it a matter of finding a balance in a search?  mixing old with new and with best sellers? etc. A search doesnt have to go all out, slaughtering only to show some new stuff. Its about finding a suitable balance, isnt it. That cant be too hard for these computer-gurus,  only, the search changes is purely an excuse for experimenting to increase profits, nothing else.

If it increases their profits, doesn't it also increase our profits?

I'm always confused when someone says the search is hurting all of us. It has to move someone up, if it's moving someone else down? Someone gets more sales? Otherwise how would increasing our profits be a bad thing?

Only, it never seems to increase our profits, does it? rather decrease if anything, hence all the complaints in every single forum. You know I dont understand some answers in this thread and some comments? I can only put it down to lack of knowledge, really.

Millions of buyers all over the world, have got one single tool to find our pictures, just one tool, the SEARCH!  thats it. Some weeks back I spoke to a long term friend, known the guy for 20 years and hes right up among the top 10 people in the entire Getty hierarchy.
He said to me, the search, any search, is the very heart of an internet based business, especially photo-agencies, in changing a search it is absoloutely vital to still show the sellers, since thats what brings in the money, the rest can be on an experimental level but you must still include the bread and butter sellers or else its going down.
Surely, you dont have to be an Einstein, to grasp this. :)

best.

« Reply #62 on: August 06, 2012, 03:16 »
0
Lucky Oliver had a sidebar for people that had sold over 100 image there.  It was great, they let us pick the images that went in to it, so I put some of my new uploads in and they would hit the front page.  They had a chance of selling on that low selling site.  It would be great if the big sites had something like that for their big selling contributors, that make the most money for them.  Then they could mess around with the search and still keep their main contributors happy.  I also think it would be good for the buyers to see some new content from the biggest sellers on the first few pages.  SS could do this for anyone who's sold over 100,000 images.  I'm not there yet but it would be a big incentive to get there.

OM

« Reply #63 on: August 09, 2012, 18:57 »
0
I'm not sure but I think the algo has been changed back to 'popular' as default.

http://www.microstockgroup.com/16594/16594/msg267002/#msg267002

RacePhoto

« Reply #64 on: August 09, 2012, 20:09 »
0

Well....... you know,  show me somebody that never complains and I show you a nerd :) seriously, isnt it a matter of finding a balance in a search?  mixing old with new and with best sellers? etc. A search doesnt have to go all out, slaughtering only to show some new stuff. Its about finding a suitable balance, isnt it. That cant be too hard for these computer-gurus,  only, the search changes is purely an excuse for experimenting to increase profits, nothing else.

If it increases their profits, doesn't it also increase our profits?

I'm always confused when someone says the search is hurting all of us. It has to move someone up, if it's moving someone else down? Someone gets more sales? Otherwise how would increasing our profits be a bad thing?

Only, it never seems to increase our profits, does it? rather decrease if anything, hence all the complaints in every single forum. You know I dont understand some answers in this thread and some comments? I can only put it down to lack of knowledge, really.

Millions of buyers all over the world, have got one single tool to find our pictures, just one tool, the SEARCH!  thats it. Some weeks back I spoke to a long term friend, known the guy for 20 years and hes right up among the top 10 people in the entire Getty hierarchy.
He said to me, the search, any search, is the very heart of an internet based business, especially photo-agencies, in changing a search it is absoloutely vital to still show the sellers, since thats what brings in the money, the rest can be on an experimental level but you must still include the bread and butter sellers or else its going down.
Surely, you dont have to be an Einstein, to grasp this. :)

best.

True and it doesn't take Einstein or Blaise Pascal to look at the bottom line and My Sales Are Up! It also doesn't take Nostradamus or Freud to understand that when people complain, others will see the same connections and complain and if I believed what I read on Internet Forums, I'd be the dumbest person on Earth!  :D

Sorry I don't know anyone at Getty personally (to name drop or pretend I'm important and connected), so I can't quote the obvious. I'll make up my own... "People search for images and buy what they need by visual content."

You can lead a horse to water but you can't teach it to do the backstroke. People won't buy what they don't want and don't need. They actually have a mind and can think and make decisions. Your assumptions are rude and closed minded, assuming that buyers are idiots and shallow, their image buying is controlled by the search.

What's happening is the obvious, bets sellers, old images, most viewed and most popular aren't first anymore. It's opening doors and making more sales for some images that used to languish in the cellars of the searches. Yes I like it... all the way to the bank!


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
11 Replies
3540 Views
Last post October 19, 2008, 01:36
by Randomway
142 Replies
24988 Views
Last post November 01, 2008, 00:00
by bittersweet
55 Replies
9252 Views
Last post October 27, 2011, 23:59
by daveh900
5 Replies
2209 Views
Last post August 26, 2015, 00:13
by Sebastian Radu
45 Replies
12721 Views
Last post May 05, 2016, 12:08
by Minsc

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results