MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: SS should introduce daily upload limit!  (Read 5870 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: January 14, 2009, 10:12 »
0
What do you think? Should SS introduce daily upload limit, for example, 15 uploads per day? Or per week.


« Reply #1 on: January 14, 2009, 10:35 »
0
Why impose a limit? If you can upload over 15 quality images a day what benefit would it have to add restrictions?

« Reply #2 on: January 14, 2009, 10:49 »
0
Perhaps they should restrict people that have a high rejection rate but I don't see why there should be limits for those that upload quality images.  I think the upload limits have had a negative effect with istock.

« Reply #3 on: January 14, 2009, 10:53 »
0
The solution is not the upload limit but deleting over million (billion for US folks) of crappy images already online. And give more money to reviewers and hire some really educated staff really knowing what is real-world photography and printing about. However I have least trouble with SS inspectors with approval somewhere between 80-90%. But we see dozens of bad compo/light images accepted every day and thats not good.

« Reply #4 on: January 14, 2009, 11:07 »
0
The solution is not the upload limit but deleting over million (billion for US folks)


No, a million is a million, but a billion is a milliard in Europe/UK.
Link here

On topic. It's the site owner who decides what's "crappy" and what not, not contributors. It's the customers that buy "crappy" images, not contributors. If iStock limits its upload to 15 for non-exclusives, so be it. It's their site.

« Reply #5 on: January 14, 2009, 13:25 »
0
Meh I just wish they would change there search so you don't have to constantly feed the beast to maintain decent sales. (Some claim this doesn't happen to them -- I don't believe them)

« Reply #6 on: January 14, 2009, 14:18 »
0
Definitely not a fan of upload limits.  I do wish SS would cull the non-sellers. Been on the site 3 years with zero sales?  Bye bye!

Xalanx

« Reply #7 on: January 14, 2009, 14:24 »
0
What do you think? Should SS introduce daily upload limit, for example, 15 uploads per day? Or per week.

Would you be thinking at a daily upload limit if you had 400 photos in your port instead of 4000?  :P

I think restrictions can be good, used wise. To counterfeit the avalanche of similar shots that take entire pages of search results. But not 15 / week - that's too low and it only advantages those who already built a large portfolio.

« Reply #8 on: January 14, 2009, 14:36 »
0
Like the idea of upload limits. It would give good new images a fighting chance instead of getting buried to quickly. If anyone hasn't noticed the shelf life of being listed under new images is rapidly decreasing. Luck of the draw seems to have a big impact on whether or not an image will sell well. 70,000 images a week is a big jump from just a year ago.

« Reply #9 on: January 14, 2009, 14:42 »
0
I dont know Peter - what makes you think along those lines?

« Reply #10 on: January 14, 2009, 14:52 »
0
15 per day doesn't sound so bad since many seem to say they upload to SS in batches of 20 already.  But, 15 per week?   Ouch. 

It would be interesting to see how The Beast would react to upload limits though, wouldn't it?   I guess our new content would enjoy sales like it used to, but I wonder too if old content would be revived.  And would subscribers notice? I wonder how many pages they go through when searching by newest.

« Reply #11 on: January 14, 2009, 15:21 »
0
I thought they had a upload limit. It is called 95% rejection in my case.

« Reply #12 on: January 15, 2009, 22:34 »
0
SS is definitely not proactive when it comes to the pushing the envelope. I do not think they are interested in improving contributors, buyers, search, and other enhancements.   Your images only show in recent searches after that  they fall into the disappearing abyss.
SS will only change when forced to by the competition.

DanP68

« Reply #13 on: January 16, 2009, 00:27 »
0
I dont know Peter - what makes you think along those lines?


Maybe because he has a substantial portfolio online and doesn't want the competition?

« Reply #14 on: January 16, 2009, 01:51 »
0

I would think they could manage the upload queue using some kind of reviewing rotation.  They could review no more than a certain number (15?) from each contributor for some time period (day/week) or just rotate through contributors upload queues reviewing no more than a certain number (15?) at a time and let the reviewing resources available determine the limits.  That should give variety to the newest image sort and be relatively fair to all contributors.

I have not idea how they do it now so maybe this is the current system.

Anyone else no the details of how they prioritize reviews?

fred

« Reply #15 on: January 16, 2009, 03:06 »
0
Peter never wants competition. :) We all know he only want's him self in this business :) He said it many times. Everytime when someone new is accepted at SS he has a comment about new competitors  :)
« Last Edit: January 16, 2009, 03:18 by whitechild »

« Reply #16 on: January 16, 2009, 09:12 »
0
Yes, yes, I want all the juice for myself!  ;D :P


helix7

« Reply #17 on: January 16, 2009, 10:51 »
0
Quite frankly, I don't think SS cares if there is a glut of crap images in the collection. If they did care, there would already be a bunch of restrictions, higher review standards, etc. I can't really speak for photos, since I don't do photos myself, but I have to imagine that the situation is similar to what I see in the illustrations category: a lot of crappy stuff gets accepted every day.

I'd be all for upload limits and (at least in the vector section) tighter review standards.



« Reply #18 on: January 16, 2009, 11:26 »
0
I think everybody else but me should have an upload limit 8)

« Reply #19 on: January 16, 2009, 18:13 »
0
except me, because I came up with an idea. lol.

« Reply #20 on: January 16, 2009, 21:23 »
0
except me, because I came up with an idea. lol.

Sure. Shutterstock will listen very carefully to you.
Quote
76,066 new stock photos added this week
138,519 photographers

70,000 x 50 weeks = 3,500,000 more by the end of the year. Not much more buyers. In 10 years from now, the whole world will be shooting, photoshopping and keywording for the last 5 buyers left.

 ;D
« Last Edit: January 16, 2009, 21:27 by FlemishDreams »

DanP68

« Reply #21 on: January 17, 2009, 07:57 »
0
The one saving grace to the image glut is that the Shutterstock most popular default search is basically just DL's divided by days online, with a slight tweak (according to their FAQ).  This suggests that the "poor images" with little to no DL's aren't showing up in the most popular search, and therefor not competing for views.

« Reply #22 on: January 17, 2009, 09:17 »
0
[
Quote


70,000 x 50 weeks = 3,500,000 more by the end of the year. Not much more buyers. In 10 years from now, the whole world will be shooting, photoshopping and keywording for the last 5 buyers left.

 ;D

No control leads to an oversupply of images. More images equal to a decline of sales per contributor. Larger database equal harder search to find useable images for project.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
24 Replies
7107 Views
Last post February 07, 2009, 01:02
by disorderly
5 Replies
3225 Views
Last post September 15, 2009, 10:35
by Team PantherMedia
12 Replies
4284 Views
Last post November 11, 2012, 12:23
by fotografer
33 Replies
3780 Views
Last post July 02, 2013, 07:14
by Gannet77
39 Replies
11982 Views
Last post June 16, 2015, 16:20
by Semmick Photo

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results