MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Just when you thought It couldn't get worse.  (Read 29846 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #125 on: July 15, 2016, 21:49 »
+22
I think the one subject that people are afraid to talk about... because it may hurt the feeling of some contributors is that not all portfolios are created equal and to further extend that, not all photographers and not all designers are equal. Some people use duration of time spend on something as a measure of skill and ability. It isn't.

It's been demonstrated time and time again that you don't need to spend 20 years or even 10 years on something to be good at it. It doesn't matter if someone is newbie. If they have the skills, they have the skills. I'm fortunate enough to be in a position to see young kids as young as 18 outperforming people with 20 years of experience in a number of fields. It's crazy to see, but it's reality. One reason is because they're optimistic and they open their mind to knowledge as opposed to cynicism developed over years of frustration and a closed mind because they think they know everything.

There is a reason why Zuckerberg is a billionaire and I'm not. There's a reason why Jon Oringer at age 42 (founded SS at the 'inexperienced' age of 29) is the billionaire owner of SS and people much older than him are not. There's a reason why some people's small portfolios are performing beyond expectations while others with large portfolios are barely performing. Sometimes an adjustment of mindset is all you need to become more successful at something. Telling someone to "up their game" may sound harsh, but it's also a brutally honest suggestion.
« Last Edit: July 15, 2016, 22:00 by Minsc »


« Reply #126 on: July 15, 2016, 23:42 »
+4
True dat. Like, some people are driving cars all their lives and yet, they still can't drive....

« Reply #127 on: July 16, 2016, 02:01 »
+9
I think the one subject that people are afraid to talk about... because it may hurt the feeling of some contributors is that not all portfolios are created equal and to further extend that, not all photographers and not all designers are equal. Some people use duration of time spend on something as a measure of skill and ability. It isn't.

................ Telling someone to "up their game" may sound harsh, but it's also a brutally honest suggestion.

I think you are totally missing the crux of the matter here.

No one is denying that there are some outstanding small portfolios that will outstrip many of the larger ones every day of the week, or that there are young and inexperienced 18 year olds oozing talent that some of us will only ever dream of - that's a given.

However, what you are failing to address here is that many of us are seeing sudden sales anomalies.

I measure the success of my portfolio by number of downloads achieved, and that has suddenly shifted, while my portfolio has remained 'equal'. Coming to this forum is to see if anyone has any tangible reasons that may explain this shift, is a sensible way to try and find either a solution or a method to address the problem, it is not about having a moan for the sake of it.

Telling people to 'up their game', whilst it may be 'harsh and brutally honest', is inappropriate in this set of circumstances.

« Reply #128 on: July 16, 2016, 02:03 »
+3
I think the one subject that people are afraid to talk about... because it may hurt the feeling of some contributors is that not all portfolios are created equal and to further extend that, not all photographers and not all designers are equal. Some people use duration of time spend on something as a measure of skill and ability. It isn't.

It's been demonstrated time and time again that you don't need to spend 20 years or even 10 years on something to be good at it. It doesn't matter if someone is newbie. If they have the skills, they have the skills. I'm fortunate enough to be in a position to see young kids as young as 18 outperforming people with 20 years of experience in a number of fields. It's crazy to see, but it's reality. One reason is because they're optimistic and they open their mind to knowledge as opposed to cynicism developed over years of frustration and a closed mind because they think they know everything.

There is a reason why Zuckerberg is a billionaire and I'm not. There's a reason why Jon Oringer at age 42 (founded SS at the 'inexperienced' age of 29) is the billionaire owner of SS and people much older than him are not. There's a reason why some people's small portfolios are performing beyond expectations while others with large portfolios are barely performing. Sometimes an adjustment of mindset is all you need to become more successful at something. Telling someone to "up their game" may sound harsh, but it's also a brutally honest suggestion.
Its a very hard thing to adjust to when something that has worked for you many years stops working. It happened to me and the choice was "up your game (do it our way)" or do something else you enjoy I chose the latter.

« Reply #129 on: July 16, 2016, 03:39 »
+2
theres been many factors why sales are dropping and cumulatively all these factors are hurting our earnings at SS. constant algorithm changes, more contributors, lowering of acceptance criteria, rapid increasing number of images, new competition from Adobe, lowering of royalties, you name it. and wanting the old days back is understandable, but never will happen, so really, accept it or move on. constantly ranting about is not going to help anyone, look at Paulie Walnuts, hes not ranting, hes changing his ways, and is now picking the fruits.

as for entitlement as cathyslife calls it, i dont think many people here think they are entitled. i certainly dont feel entitled to anything, the Op sounds entitled to me though. i dont respect people that think they are better than others, out with the old, in with the new, we need a change of guard in this business, its like bread, old bread goes stale, its not nice anymore, it needs to be fed to the ducks (pun intended)

PS: this communication from shutterstock explains some of why people see changes in their sales

Quote
Posted 11 September 2015 - 03:38 PM by vincent shutterstock

The search engine algorithm is proprietary, and there are numerous reasons why we are not going to share what it is. The algorithm is constantly tested and changed (several times a year, not just once every few years) with the simple goal of increasing downloads for all contributors.
 
Why and how we change the search engine algorithm is very simple: we test a new algorithm in a select market or on a random part of our customer base. If the new one gets more downloads we change it for all customers, if the new one does not result in more downloads we revert to the old one. We will always choose the algorithm that gets the most downloads.
 
Ultimately our goal is to keep it fresh and keep the customers interested (i.e. downloading) so an image showing on top of the search result for 8 years may be good for Laurin, but it is very bad for everyone else because customers do not want to see the same image every time for 8 years and will go elsewhere if it does as our tests have shown.
 
some links from our support center:
http://support.shutt...bat02/000006579
http://support.shutt...bat02/000006621

« Reply #130 on: July 16, 2016, 03:43 »
0
theres been many factors why sales are dropping and cumulatively all these factors are hurting our earnings at SS. constant algorithm changes, more contributors, lowering of acceptance criteria, rapid increasing number of images, new competition from Adobe, lowering of royalties, you name it. and wanting the old days back is understandable, but never will happen, so really, accept it or move on. constantly ranting about is not going to help anyone, look at Paulie Walnuts, hes not ranting, hes changing his ways, and is now picking the fruits.

as for entitlement as cathyslife calls it, i dont think many people here think they are entitled. i certainly dont feel entitled to anything, the Op sounds entitled to me though. i dont respect people that think they are better than others, out with the old, in with the new, we need a change of guard in this business, its like bread, old bread goes stale, its not nice anymore, it needs to be fed to the ducks (pun intended)

PS: this communication from shutterstock explains some of why people see changes in their sales

Quote
Posted 11 September 2015 - 03:38 PM by vincent shutterstock

The search engine algorithm is proprietary, and there are numerous reasons why we are not going to share what it is. The algorithm is constantly tested and changed (several times a year, not just once every few years) with the simple goal of increasing downloads for all contributors.
 
Why and how we change the search engine algorithm is very simple: we test a new algorithm in a select market or on a random part of our customer base. If the new one gets more downloads we change it for all customers, if the new one does not result in more downloads we revert to the old one. We will always choose the algorithm that gets the most downloads.
 
Ultimately our goal is to keep it fresh and keep the customers interested (i.e. downloading) so an image showing on top of the search result for 8 years may be good for Laurin, but it is very bad for everyone else because customers do not want to see the same image every time for 8 years and will go elsewhere if it does as our tests have shown.
 
some links from our support center:
http://support.shutt...bat02/000006579
http://support.shutt...bat02/000006621

Sums it up well that quote is interesting

« Reply #131 on: July 16, 2016, 04:22 »
+1
theres been many factors why sales are dropping and cumulatively all these factors are hurting our earnings at SS. constant algorithm changes, more contributors, lowering of acceptance criteria, rapid increasing number of images, new competition from Adobe, lowering of royalties, you name it. and wanting the old days back is understandable, but never will happen, so really, accept it or move on. constantly ranting about is not going to help anyone, look at Paulie Walnuts, hes not ranting, hes changing his ways, and is now picking the fruits.

as for entitlement as cathyslife calls it, i dont think many people here think they are entitled. i certainly dont feel entitled to anything, the Op sounds entitled to me though. i dont respect people that think they are better than others, out with the old, in with the new, we need a change of guard in this business, its like bread, old bread goes stale, its not nice anymore, it needs to be fed to the ducks (pun intended)

PS: this communication from shutterstock explains some of why people see changes in their sales

Quote
Posted 11 September 2015 - 03:38 PM by vincent shutterstock

The search engine algorithm is proprietary, and there are numerous reasons why we are not going to share what it is. The algorithm is constantly tested and changed (several times a year, not just once every few years) with the simple goal of increasing downloads for all contributors.
 
Why and how we change the search engine algorithm is very simple: we test a new algorithm in a select market or on a random part of our customer base. If the new one gets more downloads we change it for all customers, if the new one does not result in more downloads we revert to the old one. We will always choose the algorithm that gets the most downloads.
 
Ultimately our goal is to keep it fresh and keep the customers interested (i.e. downloading) so an image showing on top of the search result for 8 years may be good for Laurin, but it is very bad for everyone else because customers do not want to see the same image every time for 8 years and will go elsewhere if it does as our tests have shown.
 
some links from our support center:
http://support.shutt...bat02/000006579
http://support.shutt...bat02/000006621



I thank you for posting this, as I hadn't seen it before.

It gives me a reasonable explanation for why I see a sudden change, as opposed to gradual changes brought about by market factors. That was all I was asking for.

ngaga35

« Reply #132 on: July 16, 2016, 04:30 »
0
When they are playing we are loosing!!! Loosing big!!! And I don't think that that is good for both of us in long term!!!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
« Last Edit: July 16, 2016, 04:59 by Tara »

« Reply #133 on: July 16, 2016, 10:17 »
+2
There are three things you can do with frustration. Change it, accept it, or leave it.

There is a fourth thing that seems to be the choice of a few:  hang on to it, complain, bitch, rant, lament and blame.  :-[

I wonder how many positive things in photography could be done in the time one spends ranting. Particularly those who have experience, equipment and "know what they are doing". There's money to be made in photography, for those who are in a position to do so. Go and grab it.

« Reply #134 on: July 16, 2016, 10:28 »
+2
When they are playing we are loosing!!! Loosing big!!! And I don't think that that is good for both of us in long term!!!

"We" is not everyone. Just the contributors that have been fortunate to have good search visibility for a while, and now don't anymore. The sales just go to someone else. What is fair can be discussed in all eternity.

« Reply #135 on: July 16, 2016, 13:32 »
+1
I think the one subject that people are afraid to talk about... because it may hurt the feeling of some contributors is that not all portfolios are created equal and to further extend that, not all photographers and not all designers are equal. Some people use duration of time spend on something as a measure of skill and ability. It isn't.

................ Telling someone to "up their game" may sound harsh, but it's also a brutally honest suggestion.

I think you are totally missing the crux of the matter here.

No one is denying that there are some outstanding small portfolios that will outstrip many of the larger ones every day of the week, or that there are young and inexperienced 18 year olds oozing talent that some of us will only ever dream of - that's a given.

However, what you are failing to address here is that many of us are seeing sudden sales anomalies.

I measure the success of my portfolio by number of downloads achieved, and that has suddenly shifted, while my portfolio has remained 'equal'. Coming to this forum is to see if anyone has any tangible reasons that may explain this shift, is a sensible way to try and find either a solution or a method to address the problem, it is not about having a moan for the sake of it.

Telling people to 'up their game', whilst it may be 'harsh and brutally honest', is inappropriate in this set of circumstances.

Then I'll also suggest a solution. If your old images are not selling, consider updating the keywords. Nobody does it right the first time. If the algorithm changed and no longer favor your old images, then make some changes to the metadata. The system may see it as an updated image and re-sort its ranking. I've done it before and I've seen results.

While it may be boring, it's a lot cheaper and less time consuming than creating new content. If you have total confidence in your work, then it will rise up the rankings. I believe that the best will always rise to the top on SS. It's only a matter of time.

« Reply #136 on: July 16, 2016, 15:07 »
+3
Then I'll also suggest a solution. If your old images are not selling, consider updating the keywords. Nobody does it right the first time. If the algorithm changed and no longer favor your old images, then make some changes to the metadata. The system may see it as an updated image and re-sort its ranking. I've done it before and I've seen results.

While it may be boring, it's a lot cheaper and less time consuming than creating new content. If you have total confidence in your work, then it will rise up the rankings. I believe that the best will always rise to the top on SS. It's only a matter of time.


Thats a very good suggestion. Back in 2005, the word on the street was to include anything you could see in the photo. Since then, search algoritms have become more sophisticated and keywords need to be focused on the main subject of the image. I have been going back and looking at my keywords, and particularly the early ones have many extraneous keywords that are just interfering with a good search.

« Reply #137 on: July 16, 2016, 15:18 »
+1
Thats a very good suggestion. Back in 2005, the word on the street was to include anything you could see in the photo. Since then, search algoritms have become more sophisticated and keywords need to be focused on the main subject of the image. I have been going back and looking at my keywords, and particularly the early ones have many extraneous keywords that are just interfering with a good search.

This is different on every site. They all have different algorithms so you really have to do your research and do it differently for each agency if you want to maximize your SEO.

« Reply #138 on: July 16, 2016, 16:21 »
+1
I think the one subject that people are afraid to talk about... because it may hurt the feeling of some contributors is that not all portfolios are created equal and to further extend that, not all photographers and not all designers are equal. Some people use duration of time spend on something as a measure of skill and ability. It isn't.

................ Telling someone to "up their game" may sound harsh, but it's also a brutally honest suggestion.

I think you are totally missing the crux of the matter here.

No one is denying that there are some outstanding small portfolios that will outstrip many of the larger ones every day of the week, or that there are young and inexperienced 18 year olds oozing talent that some of us will only ever dream of - that's a given.

However, what you are failing to address here is that many of us are seeing sudden sales anomalies.

I measure the success of my portfolio by number of downloads achieved, and that has suddenly shifted, while my portfolio has remained 'equal'. Coming to this forum is to see if anyone has any tangible reasons that may explain this shift, is a sensible way to try and find either a solution or a method to address the problem, it is not about having a moan for the sake of it.

Telling people to 'up their game', whilst it may be 'harsh and brutally honest', is inappropriate in this set of circumstances.

Then I'll also suggest a solution. If your old images are not selling, consider updating the keywords. Nobody does it right the first time. If the algorithm changed and no longer favor your old images, then make some changes to the metadata. The system may see it as an updated image and re-sort its ranking. I've done it before and I've seen results.

While it may be boring, it's a lot cheaper and less time consuming than creating new content. If you have total confidence in your work, then it will rise up the rankings. I believe that the best will always rise to the top on SS. It's only a matter of time.

Good suggestion. I will take a look at a selection and monitor the results.

« Reply #139 on: July 16, 2016, 22:40 »
+8
Considering how often these sites change their search engine criteria,  I don't see any point in rekeywording or otherwise doing SEO on your port, unless there are real problems with the way you did it the first time.

« Reply #140 on: July 17, 2016, 01:54 »
+2
I would also suggest everyone spends lots of time reviewing their keywords on old images.

« Reply #141 on: July 17, 2016, 04:29 »
+6
Old images that I probably key worded badly seem to be the only ones selling for me with SS.  I used to like uploading new stuff for the boost in sales but that stopped years ago.  Not surprising seeing how many new images they get each week now.  Having seen how earnings can be almost switched off by istock and FT in the past, I'm relieved that most months SS has provided me with a fairly steady income.  This month is dreadful so far but its only half way through, so I'm not panicking yet.


PaulieWalnuts

  • On the Wrong Side of the Business
« Reply #142 on: July 17, 2016, 07:45 »
+3
I went back and looked at my stuff that's selling. They all have one thing in common. They're all somewhat difficult to get shots or have higher production costs. All of it is probably older than 2011 when I stopped shooting for micro.

It's interesting that even with buffet style subscriptions none of my old newbie snapshot stuff is getting downloaded. It's all stuff that probably would have been good as macro a few years ago.
« Last Edit: July 17, 2016, 08:55 by PaulieWalnuts »

« Reply #143 on: July 17, 2016, 08:40 »
0
For me this is a recent trend too. Not only in one agency.

« Reply #144 on: July 17, 2016, 09:51 »
+1
I went back and looked at my stuff that's selling. They all have one thing in common. They're all somewhat difficult to get shots or have higher production costs. All of it is probably older than 2011 when I stopped shooting for micro.

It's interesting that even with buffet style subscriptions none of my old newbie snapshot stuff is getting downloaded. It's all stuff that probably would have been good as macro a few years ago.

my old sellers still sell, but the large single earnings have disappeared.
and you are right, none of my new images are even getting a look-see,
it is almost as if i have them on Alamy, dreamstime, crestock,etc.. instead of ss, LOL

but like you say, if not for the regular sellers , images of 2011+-
i would be seeing zero days.

even more strange is that there are some strange downloads coming from images i forgot i had.
and although i welcome that sort of rotation,
i still feel this rotation of getting undiscovered images
are what is killing all of our portfolios.

ngaga35

« Reply #145 on: July 17, 2016, 12:56 »
+2
I don't think that is rekeywording will help!!! I did that with my images couple mounts ago and I didn't got results. And that is a very big job!! After 7 years and more then 14400 files it is almost impossible!!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

ShadySue

« Reply #146 on: July 17, 2016, 13:30 »
+3
The bottom line with all the open agencies is, "It can always get worse".

« Reply #147 on: July 17, 2016, 14:03 »
+2
The bottom line with all the open agencies is, "It can always get worse".
Except Yay unless they come round my house and rob me

ShadySue

« Reply #148 on: July 17, 2016, 14:11 »
0
The bottom line with all the open agencies is, "It can always get worse".
Except Yay unless they come round my house and rob me
;D ;D ;D

« Reply #149 on: July 18, 2016, 02:28 »
0


even more strange is that there are some strange downloads coming from images i forgot i had.
and although i welcome that sort of rotation,
i still feel this rotation of getting undiscovered images
are what is killing all of our portfolios.


Exactly.  Better images - which usually sell - are not selling....... because they are not being seen?
:( 


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
12 Replies
3400 Views
Last post June 17, 2008, 12:18
by Brian O'Shea
10 Replies
2473 Views
Last post August 10, 2010, 07:21
by Dreamframer
3 Replies
1931 Views
Last post October 25, 2011, 09:27
by Slovenian
2 Replies
1523 Views
Last post October 08, 2013, 02:34
by WindyTai
15 Replies
2146 Views
Last post July 13, 2019, 08:44
by Uncle Pete

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results