MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Envato Elements

Author Topic: SS change the photo search algorithm?  (Read 7682 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: November 30, 2014, 22:24 »
+2
SS change the photo search algorithm?

Two new things I found in the recent month:
1)   Most of the download from the elder photo.new upload very limited sales compared with before situation
2)   Even lately uploaded photo can be show in the top hot image in my portfolio. It is impossible in the past


« Reply #1 on: December 01, 2014, 03:40 »
+1
SS change the photo search algorithm?
2)   Even lately uploaded photo can be show in the top hot image in my portfolio. It is impossible in the past
What do you mean with "top hot image"? Most relevated images?  Most popular images? Sure, they change their search algorithm. But this issue is not really new and so do all agencies.

« Reply #2 on: December 01, 2014, 04:05 »
+3
They mean that even new images with no sales at all appear in the top of the "popular" search.

"Popular" is a bit of a joke in SS these days

« Reply #3 on: December 01, 2014, 05:48 »
0
There was a change, but now it's reverted... at least in some searches.

And I know because I do weekly searches for my niche and Nov was completely random, now it's back to "normal".

« Reply #4 on: December 01, 2014, 13:51 »
+4
They're always tweaking it - I see my newer files are selling more, so figure that's good.

« Reply #5 on: December 03, 2014, 07:04 »
0
My question is - where are my newest images? Few days ago I uploaded around 80 files and see only 17 of them in "new". Where's the rest of accepted batch? Searched next 10 pages and didn't find...

« Reply #6 on: December 03, 2014, 07:52 »
0
My question is - where are my newest images? Few days ago I uploaded around 80 files and see only 17 of them in "new". Where's the rest of accepted batch? Searched next 10 pages and didn't find...

Same thing happening here at least last 2 weeks( when I noticed first time) , only 1/3 accepted of the last batch have showed up in my gallery and in searches.

Also in search there are many new images already there so when my images finally show up they are already buried.

 

« Reply #7 on: December 03, 2014, 08:28 »
0
Same here. Looks like they split batches and queue show up

Uncle Pete

« Reply #8 on: December 03, 2014, 15:57 »
0
Try refreshing your cache next time, and see what happens. Did you see the bug report for the French and Spanish versions, files not showing, but in the English version they are all there? (it was page ten and after, but who knows)

Same here. Looks like they split batches and queue show up

How very strange Lizard the OP says the new files are showing first on the artists - popular - page. I know mine do too. What search are your new images "already buried"? Or do you mean in a search of the keywords, with all other files of everyone else?

Or did you mean other new images are dropping you down so fast, that if you had anything on the first page, it was bumped before people could see them?

SS uses FIFO (first in first out) for reviews. That means, no one gets ahead and no one gets pushed to the back. If you are pages down before the servers sync. It means that many newer images got accepted for the same search, after yours.

Must be a popular search term if that many are flooding in at the same time as yours?

Also in search there are many new images already there so when my images finally show up they are already buried.

« Reply #9 on: December 03, 2014, 16:39 »
+2
I have images accepted yesterday morning - like 6 am eastern time - that still aren't visible in search either newest, most popular (very specific keywords) etc. or in my port. Others (submitted later) accepted at the same time are visible in both now. I presume that by the time they are indexed they will be at least somewhat buried.

update - one more just showed up, at least it is obscure enough that it will show up if ever searched for.

Uncle Pete

« Reply #10 on: December 04, 2014, 04:13 »
+1
Interesting since the reviews are by order of submission. Something happens after acceptance and is changing during indexing? That might be interesting to watch.

I'll assume you are using file numbers for the determination of what's submitted after yours, but appearing first. Also should be same file type, meaning there are four file types: photo, video, editorial and illustration. Those are not the same and have different review orders.


I have images accepted yesterday morning - like 6 am eastern time - that still aren't visible in search either newest, most popular (very specific keywords) etc. or in my port. Others (submitted later) accepted at the same time are visible in both now. I presume that by the time they are indexed they will be at least somewhat buried.

update - one more just showed up, at least it is obscure enough that it will show up if ever searched for.

« Reply #11 on: December 04, 2014, 10:46 »
+1
Interesting since the reviews are by order of submission. Something happens after acceptance and is changing during indexing? That might be interesting to watch.

I'll assume you are using file numbers for the determination of what's submitted after yours, but appearing first. Also should be same file type, meaning there are four file types: photo, video, editorial and illustration. Those are not the same and have different review orders.


I have images accepted yesterday morning - like 6 am eastern time - that still aren't visible in search either newest, most popular (very specific keywords) etc. or in my port. Others (submitted later) accepted at the same time are visible in both now. I presume that by the time they are indexed they will be at least somewhat buried.

update - one more just showed up, at least it is obscure enough that it will show up if ever searched for.

I think it was a glitch in indexing. I am basing this only on my own images (except for the ones doing the burying). The last 2 images that were missing are there this morning, but were not visible late last night. Images I submitted after them showed up in my port 2 full days before they did (all reviewed at the same time though). I have never seen this before, although I have seen periods of time where there was an extended delay in indexing.

« Reply #12 on: December 04, 2014, 10:51 »
+3

« Reply #13 on: December 04, 2014, 11:00 »
0
Interesting since the reviews are by order of submission. Something happens after acceptance and is changing during indexing? That might be interesting to watch.

I'll assume you are using file numbers for the determination of what's submitted after yours, but appearing first. Also should be same file type, meaning there are four file types: photo, video, editorial and illustration. Those are not the same and have different review orders.


I have images accepted yesterday morning - like 6 am eastern time - that still aren't visible in search either newest, most popular (very specific keywords) etc. or in my port. Others (submitted later) accepted at the same time are visible in both now. I presume that by the time they are indexed they will be at least somewhat buried.

update - one more just showed up, at least it is obscure enough that it will show up if ever searched for.

I think it was a glitch in indexing. I am basing this only on my own images (except for the ones doing the burying). The last 2 images that were missing are there this morning, but were not visible late last night. Images I submitted after them showed up in my port 2 full days before they did (all reviewed at the same time though). I have never seen this before, although I have seen periods of time where there was an extended delay in indexing.

I have consistently had this issue with my uploads for at least 3 years. I do belive you are correct that it is an indexing glitch; a problem shutterstock has either been unable to solve or are unwilling to address.

As for SS claim of first in first out reviews, it is easy to see that shutterstocks claim is patently false by making a dozen upload tests. Upload one single image and then watch where that image number shows up in the new image page for its most important keywords.
« Last Edit: December 04, 2014, 11:02 by gbalex »

« Reply #14 on: December 04, 2014, 11:13 »
+2
Don'T know it that's relate, but today it's the first day I have no download with SS !!! Usually have 10-15 download, at least 5-6 at this time of the day

« Reply #15 on: December 04, 2014, 11:26 »
0
Try refreshing your cache next time, and see what happens. Did you see the bug report for the French and Spanish versions, files not showing, but in the English version they are all there? (it was page ten and after, but who knows)

Same here. Looks like they split batches and queue show up

How very strange Lizard the OP says the new files are showing first on the artists - popular - page. I know mine do too. What search are your new images "already buried"? Or do you mean in a search of the keywords, with all other files of everyone else?

Or did you mean other new images are dropping you down so fast, that if you had anything on the first page, it was bumped before people could see them?

SS uses FIFO (first in first out) for reviews. That means, no one gets ahead and no one gets pushed to the back. If you are pages down before the servers sync. It means that many newer images got accepted for the same search, after yours.

Must be a popular search term if that many are flooding in at the same time as yours?

Also in search there are many new images already there so when my images finally show up they are already buried.

Yes under keywords search sorted by new...

Normally that majority of images that were not showing in my gallery didn't show in searches also...

Even more interesting part is that those from that batch that did show in gallery also came out in the keyword search, but they were not showing under some keywords and combination of few that I included in tags while on sme other keywords or combination of few they showed up normally.
 
I checked about 20 pages or so and not a trace from them while on page 11 were already images with newer serial number than mine.

Really I wasnt paying attention for long time but last large 2 batches were acting strange.

 

« Reply #16 on: December 04, 2014, 11:32 »
0
Don'T know it that's relate, but today it's the first day I have no download with SS !!! Usually have 10-15 download, at least 5-6 at this time of the day

same here. When i click on your SS acoount link it is down. Perhaps an explanation for that.


« Reply #17 on: December 04, 2014, 11:50 »
0
OMG  I don't know why !!! Got to fix this !

is this link work ? http://shutterstock.com/g/juliedeshaies 


thank you

« Reply #18 on: December 04, 2014, 11:51 »
0
OMG  I don't know why !!! Got to fix this !

is this link work ? http://shutterstock.com/g/juliedeshaies 


thank you


It works

« Reply #19 on: December 04, 2014, 11:56 »
0
OMG  I don't know why !!! Got to fix this !

is this link work ? http://shutterstock.com/g/juliedeshaies 


thank you


worked.

« Reply #20 on: December 04, 2014, 12:07 »
0
OMG  I don't know why !!! Got to fix this !

is this link work ? http://shutterstock.com/g/juliedeshaies 


thank you


Yes that link works Julie but not the SS link at the bottom of your posts. Check that you have your User ID NUMBER in your forum profile here (not your UserNAME). It's a common mistake which a lot (including me) have made here. I once had a bad few minutes when someone emailed me to say my SS account had dissapeared :o
Some of the port links require the number and some your name!
Regards, David.

« Reply #21 on: December 04, 2014, 12:09 »
0
Don'T know it that's relate, but today it's the first day I have no download with SS !!! Usually have 10-15 download, at least 5-6 at this time of the day


Your SS-Account seems to be unavailable, when I checked the attached SS-button in your posting.
Uuups - to late 8) ;D

Uncle Pete

« Reply #22 on: December 04, 2014, 12:37 »
0
Wow this is a new bug, just like the new search algorithm? (humor alert) seems it's even older and been going on for 3-4 years, where the search change is only a couple years buggy.

Thanks for looking at the results and yes, it appears to be indexing. I suppose when one location is processed before another, there could be some jumping forward or out of order numbers.

Same for sales. Doesn't anyone else see the DLs appear in groups and batches, not one smooth stream, all day? Is that just me imagining that I see DLs on the map before the Earnings sometimes.

45 million images, servers around the world, updating the database, seems to be a fairly large project in my imagination. It's can't be "flip the switch" and done.  :)

Now someone type slower and explain the keywords search and how things are showing or not showing? I don't think I understand? This part, I don't understand: "Upload one single image and then watch where that image number shows up in the new image page for its most important keywords."

Most important keywords on the new image page?

ps I swear I looked at some of my keywords, in a search, "one pair" in particular because I've been adding them. I wasn't more than a few on page one, I did another search, clicked back and What The Heck, now I was all over the first page search.

I'm beginning to think searches relate, similar images to other searches. Maybe even artists. (or I need some better grade of Whiskey)  ;D Or maybe I clicked Undiscovered by accident?

Two word search I have 73 of the first page 100 spots when looking at "Popular" whatever that means. I'm 96 of 100 for "Undiscovered" same search.


http://submit.shutterstock.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=143629

Read the 2nd post from Vincent
« Last Edit: December 04, 2014, 12:41 by Uncle Pete »

« Reply #23 on: December 04, 2014, 18:18 »
0
my sales disappeared today on SS, yesterday was low, today is worse, sales should be high at least to 17-18 december,  i fall on august levels this week, excpet tuesday was only normal.

Uncle Pete

« Reply #24 on: December 04, 2014, 19:43 »
+1
Just singing the good old Microstock Blues,
T-Bone Walker knew it was coming, a long time ago....

They call it stormy Monday,
Tuesday's just as bad,
Wednesday's worse,
Thursday, oh so sad.

Yes, the eagle flies on Friday, and Saturday I go out to play
Sunday I go to church, I get down on my knees and pray


my sales disappeared today on SS, yesterday was low, today is worse, sales should be high at least to 17-18 december,  i fall on august levels this week, excpet tuesday was only normal.

« Reply #25 on: December 05, 2014, 03:52 »
-3
Pete if you spent less time discounting and marginalizing what folks post and more time actually reading what they write you would have fewer questions and better understanding of the challenges some people have been facing.

The bug forum @ shutterstock would be a good place to start. The various bug patterns are longstanding and frequent.

Uncle Pete

« Reply #26 on: December 05, 2014, 11:03 »
-1
Ah good point, don't answer the question and sink to personal attacks. That's appropriate? Oh I forgot, I'm writing to someone who's anonymous and hides behind some fake ID here. Credibility vacuum.

Here's the question. What Does This Mean?

"Upload one single image and then watch where that image number shows up in the new image page for its most important keywords. "

What are most important keywords on the new image page? Maybe an example or a link would be helpful?



Pete if you spent less time discounting and marginalizing what folks post and more time actually reading what they write you would have fewer questions and better understanding of the challenges some people have been facing.

The bug forum @ shutterstock would be a good place to start. The various bug patterns are longstanding and frequent.


« Reply #27 on: December 06, 2014, 01:51 »
-3
Ah good point, don't answer the question and sink to personal attacks. That's appropriate? Oh I forgot, I'm writing to someone who's anonymous and hides behind some fake ID here. Credibility vacuum.

Here's the question. What Does This Mean?

"Upload one single image and then watch where that image number shows up in the new image page for its most important keywords. "

What are most important keywords on the new image page? Maybe an example or a link would be helpful?



Pete if you spent less time discounting and marginalizing what folks post and more time actually reading what they write you would have fewer questions and better understanding of the challenges some people have been facing.

The bug forum @ shutterstock would be a good place to start. The various bug patterns are longstanding and frequent.

Pete my experience with you here is that you do not ask questions so that you can understand our point of view. You ask them so that you can invalidate our viewpoints.  Therefore I have found it fruitless to spend time answering your passive aggressive challenges hidden in the forum of friendly questions.

As I recall the last time I answered one of your query's you seriously questioned my intelligence. I would hardly call that friendly banter.
« Last Edit: December 06, 2014, 01:54 by gbalex »

« Reply #28 on: December 06, 2014, 09:23 »
+7
In some retail circles they call it "shaking the snow globe" - rotating the stock so that everything has a chance of being monetized. Suppliers generally insist on it and will pay a premium to get it done - we as suppliers don't have that influence.

Some lose out. Some win. And it will never stop happening. In general though, customers will keep buying what they like which is why there are other factors, usually a superior or very similar product appearing on the shelves in droves, when best sellers sales start to decline. So, you keep inventing new and different product or you wait patiently until the snow globe gets a shake.

Uncle Pete

« Reply #29 on: December 06, 2014, 12:50 »
+2
Ah so you can't tell me what "new image page for its most important keywords. " is because you didn't like a different post? Sounds like you just can't answer. Maybe someone else will tell me how to search the new image page for most important keywords for a single image.

Yes Red Dove, I think that's a good part of it. No one is turned off, just that someone else is turned up.

In some retail circles they call it "shaking the snow globe" - rotating the stock so that everything has a chance of being monetized. Suppliers generally insist on it and will pay a premium to get it done - we as suppliers don't have that influence.

Some lose out. Some win. And it will never stop happening. In general though, customers will keep buying what they like which is why there are other factors, usually a superior or very similar product appearing on the shelves in droves, when best sellers sales start to decline. So, you keep inventing new and different product or you wait patiently until the snow globe gets a shake.

Ah good point, don't answer the question and sink to personal attacks. That's appropriate? Oh I forgot, I'm writing to someone who's anonymous and hides behind some fake ID here. Credibility vacuum.

Here's the question. What Does This Mean?

"Upload one single image and then watch where that image number shows up in the new image page for its most important keywords. "

What are most important keywords on the new image page? Maybe an example or a link would be helpful?



Pete if you spent less time discounting and marginalizing what folks post and more time actually reading what they write you would have fewer questions and better understanding of the challenges some people have been facing.

The bug forum @ shutterstock would be a good place to start. The various bug patterns are longstanding and frequent.

Pete my experience with you here is that you do not ask questions so that you can understand our point of view. You ask them so that you can invalidate our viewpoints.  Therefore I have found it fruitless to spend time answering your passive aggressive challenges hidden in the forum of friendly questions.

As I recall the last time I answered one of your query's you seriously questioned my intelligence. I would hardly call that friendly banter.

« Reply #30 on: December 06, 2014, 12:56 »
-2
Pete give up, you will not be successful into goading me into pointless discussion.

You will have find egocentric entertainment at someone else's expense. 

Uncle Pete

« Reply #31 on: December 06, 2014, 13:06 »
0
Thanks for spouting words that mean nothing and then blaming me because you can't answer some gibberish about most important keywords. It wasn't a trick question was it?

And the part about I should read the bug reports I did post that the images not appearing was a three year old bug and the search appearing to have changed was a two year old subject. But you chose to attack me?

I know you are challenged, because unlike us peasants and low life, we didn't lose our place on the first page of searches like you elite and wonderful people. That's kind of arrogant to say to everyone here, wasn't it? You lost your unfair advantage and you are bitter. Just admit it and move on.

 
Pete if you spent less time discounting and marginalizing what folks post and more time actually reading what they write you would have fewer questions and better understanding of the challenges some people have been facing.

The bug forum @ shutterstock would be a good place to start. The various bug patterns are longstanding and frequent.

Pete give up, you will not be successful into goading me into pointless discussion.

You will have find egocentric entertainment at someone else's expense.

« Reply #32 on: December 06, 2014, 19:54 »
-3
Thanks for spouting words that mean nothing and then blaming me because you can't answer some gibberish about most important keywords. It wasn't a trick question was it?

And the part about I should read the bug reports I did post that the images not appearing was a three year old bug and the search appearing to have changed was a two year old subject. But you chose to attack me?

I know you are challenged, because unlike us peasants and low life, we didn't lose our place on the first page of searches like you elite and wonderful people. That's kind of arrogant to say to everyone here, wasn't it? You lost your unfair advantage and you are bitter. Just admit it and move on.

 
Pete if you spent less time discounting and marginalizing what folks post and more time actually reading what they write you would have fewer questions and better understanding of the challenges some people have been facing.

The bug forum @ shutterstock would be a good place to start. The various bug patterns are longstanding and frequent.

Pete give up, you will not be successful into goading me into pointless discussion.

You will have find egocentric entertainment at someone else's expense.

To be clear I could easily discuss my comment in lieu of the "straw man arguments" you consistetly thow up as a way of avoiding civilized and rational discussion. I would be more than happy to discuss the comment with anyone who is resonable and sincere.  I can offer a valid method to either rule out or verify shutterstocks claims of "first in first out reviews"

However I refuse to discuss any topic with someone who conducts himself in the way you have in previous theads, not to mention this thread.

Uncle Pete

« Reply #33 on: December 07, 2014, 12:10 »
+1
You're right I'll give up trying to understand this false and specious claim attacking SS.

As for SS claim of first in first out reviews, it is easy to see that shutterstocks claim is patently false by making a dozen upload tests. Upload one single image and then watch where that image number shows up in the new image page for its most important keywords.

« Reply #34 on: December 07, 2014, 17:44 »
-2
A rational, fair minded, critical thinker would be willing to verify that the information deceminated via shutterstock representatives is indeed factual before they repeatedly parrot or pass that same information on to their fellows. 

It would be exceedingly easy to accurately prove or disprove shutterstock's claim that they perform "first in first out reviews by participating in a structured contributor test which has been carefully designed to offer accurate information.

A contributor lacking critical thinking skills as well a fair minded integrity, would be unwilling to perform due diligence to determine or verify whether the information that has been provided by shutterstock is factual; before they pass that unconfirmed information on to a large number of contributors.

I will leave it to you to determine by your actions, in which camp you ultimately reside.

Uncle Pete

« Reply #35 on: December 07, 2014, 19:13 »
+3
I agree and look forward to the results and data from such a test.

A rational, fair minded, critical thinker would be willing to verify that the information deceminated via shutterstock representatives is indeed factual before they repeatedly parrot or pass that same information on to their fellows. 

It would be exceedingly easy to accurately prove or disprove shutterstock's claim that they perform "first in first out reviews by participating in a structured contributor test which has been carefully designed to offer accurate information.

A contributor lacking critical thinking skills as well a fair minded integrity, would be unwilling to perform due diligence to determine or verify whether the information that has been provided by shutterstock is factual; before they pass that unconfirmed information on to a large number of contributors.

I will leave it to you to determine by your actions, in which camp you ultimately reside.

Rinderart

« Reply #36 on: December 08, 2014, 10:59 »
0
Just singing the good old Microstock Blues,
T-Bone Walker knew it was coming, a long time ago....

They call it stormy Monday,
Tuesday's just as bad,
Wednesday's worse,
Thursday, oh so sad.

Yes, the eagle flies on Friday, and Saturday I go out to play
Sunday I go to church, I get down on my knees and pray


my sales disappeared today on SS, yesterday was low, today is worse, sales should be high at least to 17-18 december,  i fall on august levels this week, excpet tuesday was only normal.

Bobby Bland.


Uncle Pete

« Reply #37 on: December 08, 2014, 12:10 »
+1
"Call It Stormy Monday (But Tuesday Is Just as Bad)" - is a song written and recorded by American blues electric guitar pioneer T-Bone Walker

Or did you mean later pop version? In which case, I'll post my version on Youtube and you can add my name?  :)

ps almost... No One disagrees that the algorithm changed sometime in 2012. That's where this started.

Sometimes people have different opinions of how it changed and what the effects are. One person suggested that a rolling implementation may have been used to start with older accounts and move to newer.

Some say that lower level artists get better search placement, because the company makes more.

Any of these are very possible, but except for the fact that there has been a change, most of the theories have no evidence to back them up.

The "popular" is closer to a little bit of random new images, mixed with latest sales and best sellers. Even if I only look at my own, day to day and I know exactly what images have the most money,m most DLs, are latest DL and newest, there's no sense to it, at all.

 I suggest that people try to avoid thinking we can understand or explain, the meaning of the search, because it changes by location, by user (previous search cookies), and by any number of other factors. It always did, but the big change in 2012 was extensive.

You might be more successful figuring out why some Monarch Butterflies migrate 4000 miles and others never leave where they live. Or how they moved the giant moai statues, or maybe proof of the question... is there intelligent life in outer space.

We don't know and without a way to examine and record large collections of data, we aren't going to have anything but rumors and guesses.



Just singing the good old Microstock Blues,
T-Bone Walker knew it was coming, a long time ago....

They call it stormy Monday,
Tuesday's just as bad,
Wednesday's worse,
Thursday, oh so sad.

Yes, the eagle flies on Friday, and Saturday I go out to play
Sunday I go to church, I get down on my knees and pray


my sales disappeared today on SS, yesterday was low, today is worse, sales should be high at least to 17-18 december,  i fall on august levels this week, excpet tuesday was only normal.

Bobby Bland.

« Reply #38 on: December 08, 2014, 12:18 »
-2
I agree and look forward to the results and data from such a test.

A rational, fair minded, critical thinker would be willing to verify that the information deceminated via shutterstock representatives is indeed factual before they repeatedly parrot or pass that same information on to their fellows. 

It would be exceedingly easy to accurately prove or disprove shutterstock's claim that they perform "first in first out reviews by participating in a structured contributor test which has been carefully designed to offer accurate information.

A contributor lacking critical thinking skills as well a fair minded integrity, would be unwilling to perform due diligence to determine or verify whether the information that has been provided by shutterstock is factual; before they pass that unconfirmed information on to a large number of contributors.

I will leave it to you to determine by your actions, in which camp you ultimately reside.

So do I, it would be interesting to see verified information for once, instead of inane parroting of shutterstock PR.

And since you are the once representing shutterstocks claim of "first in first out reviews" as factual information and you have also publicily stated that your intelligence is superior to my own and a few others here.

It will be interesting to see if you have the rectitude to design, roll out and invite participation in a test that will offer repetable accurate results.

Uncle Pete

« Reply #39 on: December 08, 2014, 12:32 »
+2
I know we agree much more than we disagree, except for some minor details, most of the time. Here's why YOU are responsible for the testing, not me: You are making the claim. (name calling and misplaced characterizations, do nothing for your position  by the way, please stop)

"When debating any issue, there is an implicit burden of proof on the person asserting a claim. An argument from ignorance occurs when either a proposition is assumed to be true because it has not yet been proved false or a proposition is assumed to be false because it has not yet been proved true. This has the effect of shifting the burden of proof to the person criticizing the assertion, but is not valid reasoning."

The ball is in your court, you are making the claim.

I agree and look forward to the results and data from such a test.

A rational, fair minded, critical thinker would be willing to verify that the information deceminated via shutterstock representatives is indeed factual before they repeatedly parrot or pass that same information on to their fellows. 

It would be exceedingly easy to accurately prove or disprove shutterstock's claim that they perform "first in first out reviews by participating in a structured contributor test which has been carefully designed to offer accurate information.

A contributor lacking critical thinking skills as well a fair minded integrity, would be unwilling to perform due diligence to determine or verify whether the information that has been provided by shutterstock is factual; before they pass that unconfirmed information on to a large number of contributors.

I will leave it to you to determine by your actions, in which camp you ultimately reside.

So do I, it would be interesting to see verified information for once, instead of inane parroting of shutterstock PR.

And since you are the once representing shutterstocks claim of "first in first out reviews" as factual information and you have also publicily stated that your intelligence is superior to my own and a few others here.

It will be interesting to see if you have the rectitude to design, roll out and invite participation in a test that will offer repetable accurate results.

Rinderart

« Reply #40 on: December 11, 2014, 21:08 »
+3
We all have old images sell every now and then. But the last 3 days Im selling Nothing But 9 year old Images. I mean Nothing But. Nothing Newer. I hate it. My newer work Just falls faster and has no chance.thats a pretty screwy algorithm search if ya ask me. 

« Reply #41 on: December 11, 2014, 23:42 »
+4
We all have old images sell every now and then. But the last 3 days Im selling Nothing But 9 year old Images. I mean Nothing But. Nothing Newer. I hate it. My newer work Just falls faster and has no chance.thats a pretty screwy algorithm search if ya ask me.

I'm selling a good amount of new uploaded images at SS lately. 

« Reply #42 on: December 11, 2014, 23:44 »
+5
We all have old images sell every now and then. But the last 3 days Im selling Nothing But 9 year old Images. I mean Nothing But. Nothing Newer. I hate it. My newer work Just falls faster and has no chance.thats a pretty screwy algorithm search if ya ask me.
It seems that new images need to mature a bit and then they start to sell. Its like my sales of new images always trails a few weeks, to months, and then they start selling.

« Reply #43 on: December 12, 2014, 02:17 »
+4
I'm selling new images, uploaded few days ago but yes, if they stay here for a long while, about a month, they sell much better.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
2 Replies
1947 Views
Last post July 10, 2007, 17:08
by sharply_done
10 Replies
2440 Views
Last post August 12, 2013, 06:21
by ajt
145 Replies
22035 Views
Last post July 14, 2017, 09:53
by niktol
71 Replies
12644 Views
Last post February 04, 2018, 10:45
by YadaYadaYada
7 Replies
3065 Views
Last post January 22, 2018, 10:33
by Chichikov

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results