Author Topic: Shutter Shifted the Popular Images Today (Read 17998 times)

tavi · « **Reply #50 on:** January 15, 2013, 12:29 »

After a (very) good start of the year, with 2.01 beeing BDE in terms of no of sales(14) and then an EL in 04.02, now it is going down like mad. Today I have only 1 sale

Maybe my port is too little to judge, and maybe things will go better in the next days.
Weird thing, everyone here is complaining about low sales, when a shift in searches only means if I'm not selling, someone else will. Maybe the lucky ones do not write here.

CD123 · « **Reply #51 on:** January 15, 2013, 13:16 »

Quote from: tavi on January 15, 2013, 12:29

After a (very) good start of the year, with 2.01 beeing BDE in terms of no of sales(14) and then an EL in 04.02, now it is going down like mad. Today I have only 1 sale
Maybe my port is too little to judge, and maybe things will go better in the next days.
Weird thing, everyone here is complaining about low sales, when a shift in searches only means if I'm not selling, someone else will. Maybe the lucky ones do not write here.

I think the sales are now just spread over a larger base. So no individual has a substantial growth. Small growths for small contributors, medium loss/growth for middle sized ones and large losses for big ones.

gostwyck · « **Reply #52 on:** January 15, 2013, 13:31 »

Quote from: tavi on January 15, 2013, 12:29

After a (very) good start of the year, with 2.01 beeing BDE in terms of no of sales(14) and then an EL in 04.02, now it is going down like mad. Today I have only 1 sale
Maybe my port is too little to judge, and maybe things will go better in the next days.
Weird thing, everyone here is complaining about low sales, when a shift in searches only means if I'm not selling, someone else will. Maybe the lucky ones do not write here.

I think most of us are tired of saying the same thing over and over. As far as I'm concerned it's business as usual at SS. No dramatic changes to the way things work, just steadily improving sales. SS don't do dramatic changes. That's why the place works so well.

If you have a tiny portfolio then yes, your earnings are bound to be sporadic. You probably need 3K+ images to achieve reasonable stability but even then you'll still be subject to seasonal variations.

Poncke · « **Reply #53 on:** January 15, 2013, 13:46 »

Quote from: gostwyck on January 15, 2013, 13:31

Quote from: tavi on January 15, 2013, 12:29
After a (very) good start of the year, with 2.01 beeing BDE in terms of no of sales(14) and then an EL in 04.02, now it is going down like mad. Today I have only 1 sale
Maybe my port is too little to judge, and maybe things will go better in the next days.
Weird thing, everyone here is complaining about low sales, when a shift in searches only means if I'm not selling, someone else will. Maybe the lucky ones do not write here.

I think most of us are tired of saying the same thing over and over. As far as I'm concerned it's business as usual at SS. No dramatic changes to the way things work, just steadily improving sales. SS don't do dramatic changes. That's why the place works so well.

If you have a tiny portfolio then yes, your earnings are bound to be sporadic. You probably need 3K+ images to achieve reasonable stability but even then you'll still be subject to seasonal variations.

Smith and RInder wrote a book on stock and there initial number was 800, now on the forums they say 1500. You say its more like 3000. Ooof, I need to get another 2300 images online to make a dent. Wow, trying to get to 1000 in the next 3 months. And then I need to take it from there.

CD123 · « **Reply #54 on:** January 15, 2013, 13:57 »

Quote from: gostwyck on January 15, 2013, 13:31

Quote from: tavi on January 15, 2013, 12:29
After a (very) good start of the year, with 2.01 beeing BDE in terms of no of sales(14) and then an EL in 04.02, now it is going down like mad. Today I have only 1 sale
Maybe my port is too little to judge, and maybe things will go better in the next days.
Weird thing, everyone here is complaining about low sales, when a shift in searches only means if I'm not selling, someone else will. Maybe the lucky ones do not write here.

I think most of us are tired of saying the same thing over and over. As far as I'm concerned it's business as usual at SS. No dramatic changes to the way things work, just steadily improving sales. SS don't do dramatic changes. That's why the place works so well.

If you have a tiny portfolio then yes, your earnings are bound to be sporadic. You probably need 3K+ images to achieve reasonable stability but even then you'll still be subject to seasonal variations.

Perhaps "most of us" does not agree with "most of the others". Big, medium and small contributors have reported a drastic move of their top images to much lower positions. That is fact. Obviously it is business as usual with a site of the size and reputation of SS, with that part "most of us" agree, it is just each contributor's experience that might differ (no matter how many times you have to repeat yourself).

tavi · « **Reply #55 on:** January 15, 2013, 14:10 »

The problem is that I don't see a big shift on my images. The good ones were gone a little bit down in popular due to low sales I think, the niche subjects are in their places without dlds. I checked some of my images, not all port.

CD123 · « **Reply #56 on:** January 15, 2013, 14:56 »

Quote from: tavi on January 15, 2013, 14:10

The problem is that I don't see a big shift on my images. The good ones were gone a little bit down in popular due to low sales I think, the niche subjects are in their places without dlds. I checked some of my images, not all port.

Depends on how high the image was in the first place. One of mine which appeared 4th row from top under the wide search of "black and white" I can not now even find under the first few pages.

tab62 · « **Reply #57 on:** January 15, 2013, 15:02 »

I had a tennis photo that was ranked #27 out of 47,000 plus images and it doesn't even show up on the first 10 pages! Wipe out on the photos which used to sell on daily basis...

scottbraut · « **Reply #58 on:** January 15, 2013, 15:09 »

Hello Everyone,

Thanks for your detailed feedback...it has been very helpful.

We've been looking into this and we found an issue that started a few days ago with a normal refresh of our search records. The effect of the issue is that some older popular images are ranking higher than they should be. This was an issue with the normal refresh and not a change made to our search algorithms. The team has already identified and implemented a solution. Only a portion of the collection was affected and you should see the impact of the solution as early as today, though it may take a few days for everything to be 100% back to normal.

Thanks again for your help and patience as we resolve this.

Best Regards,

Scott
VP Content
Shutterstock

ClaridgeJ · « **Reply #59 on:** January 15, 2013, 15:15 »

Quote from: sharpshot on January 15, 2013, 06:16

Quote from: ClaridgeJ on January 15, 2013, 06:02
Quote from: sharpshot on January 15, 2013, 05:34
Quote from: ClaridgeJ on January 14, 2013, 15:12
Silly me! and I thought certain people here were applauding the new SS search? or.............. well its funny but just about everything seem to go weird after going public.
Actually my earnings have been good since the IPO. Whatever changes they make to the search, earnings seem to be quite stable. I've not uploaded much either. You seem to be fixated with the IPO changing things but that doesn't surprise me. If you said black was white, I'm sure you would never be able to accept you got it wrong You would rather insult people and then come back with a different name, so we don't recognise you for a few days. Then you can say you're not anonymous here, even though you've tried to be and you can attack people that are anonymous, even though anyone with a brain can usually work out who they are quite easily. It took me 2 minutes to work out who gostwyck was a few years ago. I don't agree with everything he says about SS either but at least he doesn't keep disappearing and coming back with a new name.

Are you Ok today? I dont seem to remember I said anything wrong in the above post? since you replied you must have read it.

Oh neer mind, time of the month isnt it. Or maybe you just wanted to score a few +++. Be my guest.

have a good day.
Funny how when you lose an arguement you resort to insults. I was just pointing out your hypocrisy. Hope you have a great day too

Youre sure you are Ok? I cant recall an argument with YOU? if you refer to somebody else I suggest you let them speak up for themselves. I.E: dont poke your nose where it dont belong.

CD123 · « **Reply #60 on:** January 15, 2013, 15:31 »

Quote from: scottbraut on January 15, 2013, 15:09

Hello Everyone,

Thanks for your detailed feedback...it has been very helpful.

We've been looking into this and we found an issue that started a few days ago with a normal refresh of our search records. The effect of the issue is that some older popular images are ranking higher than they should be. This was an issue with the normal refresh and not a change made to our search algorithms. The team has already identified and implemented a solution. Only a portion of the collection was affected and you should see the impact of the solution as early as today, though it may take a few days for everything to be 100% back to normal.

Thanks again for your help and patience as we resolve this.

Best Regards,

Scott
VP Content
Shutterstock

Wonderful to see a representative of SS here and knowing that you guys are actually interested in our communication! The feedback is appreciated. I am sure all concerned will supply adequate feedback here.

CD123 · « **Reply #61 on:** January 15, 2013, 15:44 »

Quote from: ClaridgeJ on January 15, 2013, 15:15

Quote from: sharpshot on January 15, 2013, 06:16
Quote from: ClaridgeJ on January 15, 2013, 06:02
Quote from: sharpshot on January 15, 2013, 05:34
Quote from: ClaridgeJ on January 14, 2013, 15:12
Silly me! and I thought certain people here were applauding the new SS search? or.............. well its funny but just about everything seem to go weird after going public.
Actually my earnings have been good since the IPO. Whatever changes they make to the search, earnings seem to be quite stable. I've not uploaded much either. You seem to be fixated with the IPO changing things but that doesn't surprise me. If you said black was white, I'm sure you would never be able to accept you got it wrong You would rather insult people and then come back with a different name, so we don't recognise you for a few days. Then you can say you're not anonymous here, even though you've tried to be and you can attack people that are anonymous, even though anyone with a brain can usually work out who they are quite easily. It took me 2 minutes to work out who gostwyck was a few years ago. I don't agree with everything he says about SS either but at least he doesn't keep disappearing and coming back with a new name.

Are you Ok today? I dont seem to remember I said anything wrong in the above post? since you replied you must have read it.

Oh neer mind, time of the month isnt it. Or maybe you just wanted to score a few +++. Be my guest.

have a good day.
Funny how when you lose an arguement you resort to insults. I was just pointing out your hypocrisy. Hope you have a great day too

Youre sure you are Ok? I cant recall an argument with YOU? if you refer to somebody else I suggest you let them speak up for themselves. I.E: dont poke your nose where it dont belong.

What a sad state of affairs at MSG that an unnecessary mud slinging contest can be more important than the topic relevant, income influencing and rare feedback directly from our no. 1 agency.

leaf · « **Reply #62 on:** January 15, 2013, 15:52 »

Quote from: scottbraut on January 15, 2013, 15:09

Hello Everyone,

Thanks for your detailed feedback...it has been very helpful.

We've been looking into this and we found an issue that started a few days ago with a normal refresh of our search records. The effect of the issue is that some older popular images are ranking higher than they should be. This was an issue with the normal refresh and not a change made to our search algorithms. The team has already identified and implemented a solution. Only a portion of the collection was affected and you should see the impact of the solution as early as today, though it may take a few days for everything to be 100% back to normal.

Thanks again for your help and patience as we resolve this.

Best Regards,

Scott
VP Content
Shutterstock

Thanks for the update Scott. It's great to hear the facts.

Mantis · « **Reply #63 on:** January 15, 2013, 16:01 »

Quote from: Poncke on January 15, 2013, 13:46

Quote from: gostwyck on January 15, 2013, 13:31
Quote from: tavi on January 15, 2013, 12:29
After a (very) good start of the year, with 2.01 beeing BDE in terms of no of sales(14) and then an EL in 04.02, now it is going down like mad. Today I have only 1 sale
Maybe my port is too little to judge, and maybe things will go better in the next days.
Weird thing, everyone here is complaining about low sales, when a shift in searches only means if I'm not selling, someone else will. Maybe the lucky ones do not write here.

I think most of us are tired of saying the same thing over and over. As far as I'm concerned it's business as usual at SS. No dramatic changes to the way things work, just steadily improving sales. SS don't do dramatic changes. That's why the place works so well.

If you have a tiny portfolio then yes, your earnings are bound to be sporadic. You probably need 3K+ images to achieve reasonable stability but even then you'll still be subject to seasonal variations.

Smith and RInder wrote a book on stock and there initial number was 800, now on the forums they say 1500. You say its more like 3000. Ooof, I need to get another 2300 images online to make a dent. Wow, trying to get to 1000 in the next 3 months. And then I need to take it from there.

You have to consider how big the collection was when these guys came up with that number. When the SS collection was, say, 5,000'000 then 800 images may have worked to generate a more or less consistent income. With something like 20,000,000 images today you need to have a much higher number. I'd agree with gostwyk that 3k is a good number, but also you must consider what you shoot. Some peeps are very specialized and do well with only 800 images or illustrations in a 20mil collection, so it's not all volume based, it's content based as well.

ClaridgeJ · « **Reply #64 on:** January 15, 2013, 16:03 »

Thanks Scott! kind of you to loook in . Appreciate it.

:

ruxpriencdiam · « **Reply #65 on:** January 15, 2013, 16:22 »

Yes thanks for the heads up update.

gbalex · « **Reply #66 on:** January 15, 2013, 16:36 »

Months ago I noticed images that had earned thier way via merit to the popular position in the fist rows and then continued to stay in those positions over a number of years dropping position.

A few days ago they began selling in normal numbers once more. I was happy to see that SS was once again letting the customer choose by voting to buy images they want via earned popularity keyword searches.

Sad to see that in reality they are in fact trying to bury them.

Poncke · « **Reply #67 on:** January 15, 2013, 16:45 »

Quote from: scottbraut on January 15, 2013, 15:09

Hello Everyone,

Thanks for your detailed feedback...it has been very helpful.

We've been looking into this and we found an issue that started a few days ago with a normal refresh of our search records. The effect of the issue is that some older popular images are ranking higher than they should be. This was an issue with the normal refresh and not a change made to our search algorithms. The team has already identified and implemented a solution. Only a portion of the collection was affected and you should see the impact of the solution as early as today, though it may take a few days for everything to be 100% back to normal.

Thanks again for your help and patience as we resolve this.

Best Regards,

Scott
VP Content
Shutterstock

Well, I prefer the 'issue' then because I was positively affected. Today its back to low sales again. Whatever that issue was, it was for sure getting me sales on older files.

luissantos84 · « **Reply #68 on:** January 15, 2013, 17:40 »

this change is very prejudicial for me, my most popular file that was very stable between the 10th and 15th result during almost 2 years jumped to 400th, then 900th, 1400th, 2400th and NOW at 2700th

Scott said here that they are fixing it and I am happy about that but I have some questions that I would to make and would love to understand once for all

- Popular are the files that have the most downloads?
- Relevant is a mix between new uploads and files with some downloads?

Poncke · « **Reply #69 on:** January 15, 2013, 17:44 »

Quote from: luissantos84 on January 15, 2013, 17:40

this change is very prejudicial for me, my most popular file that was very stable between the 10th and 15th result during almost 2 years jumped to 400th, then 900th, 1400th, 2400th and NOW at 2700th

Scott said here that they are fixing it and I am happy about that but I have some questions that I would to make and would love to understand once for all

- Popular are the files that have the most downloads?
- Relevant is a mix between new uploads and files with some downloads?

I think popular is also mixed with views and how fast it first sells after coming online

sharpshot · « **Reply #70 on:** January 15, 2013, 17:53 »

Quote from: ClaridgeJ on January 15, 2013, 15:15

Quote from: sharpshot on January 15, 2013, 06:16
Quote from: ClaridgeJ on January 15, 2013, 06:02
Quote from: sharpshot on January 15, 2013, 05:34
Quote from: ClaridgeJ on January 14, 2013, 15:12
Silly me! and I thought certain people here were applauding the new SS search? or.............. well its funny but just about everything seem to go weird after going public.
Actually my earnings have been good since the IPO. Whatever changes they make to the search, earnings seem to be quite stable. I've not uploaded much either. You seem to be fixated with the IPO changing things but that doesn't surprise me. If you said black was white, I'm sure you would never be able to accept you got it wrong You would rather insult people and then come back with a different name, so we don't recognise you for a few days. Then you can say you're not anonymous here, even though you've tried to be and you can attack people that are anonymous, even though anyone with a brain can usually work out who they are quite easily. It took me 2 minutes to work out who gostwyck was a few years ago. I don't agree with everything he says about SS either but at least he doesn't keep disappearing and coming back with a new name.

Are you Ok today? I dont seem to remember I said anything wrong in the above post? since you replied you must have read it.

Oh neer mind, time of the month isnt it. Or maybe you just wanted to score a few +++. Be my guest.

have a good day.
Funny how when you lose an arguement you resort to insults. I was just pointing out your hypocrisy. Hope you have a great day too

Youre sure you are Ok? I cant recall an argument with YOU? if you refer to somebody else I suggest you let them speak up for themselves. I.E: dont poke your nose where it dont belong.

This is an open forum and I'll post whatever I want. I thought you were being a bit of a hypocrite and I still do. Then you insult me, and now you just can't let it go. That's not my problem, it's yours.

tab62 · « **Reply #71 on:** January 15, 2013, 17:55 »

Okay, enough! Time out for both you

leaf · « **Reply #72 on:** January 15, 2013, 17:58 »

you two need to knock it off. Perhaps it would just be easiest to remove your entire banter....

Poncke · « **Reply #73 on:** January 15, 2013, 18:04 »

I dont think thats banter

Noun
The playful and friendly exchange of teasing remarks.

sharpshot · « **Reply #74 on:** January 15, 2013, 18:07 »

Quote from: leaf on January 15, 2013, 17:58

you two need to knock it off. Perhaps it would just be easiest to remove your entire banter....

That fine by me. I'm done, I'll just put him on ignore if he winds me up again.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Shutter Shifted the Popular Images Today (Read 17998 times)

tavi

CD123

gostwyck

Poncke

CD123

tavi

CD123

tab62

scottbraut

ClaridgeJ

CD123

CD123

leaf

Mantis

ClaridgeJ

ruxpriencdiam

gbalex

Poncke

luissantos84

Poncke

sharpshot

tab62

leaf

Poncke

sharpshot

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors