MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Snapvillage QC?  (Read 4444 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: October 14, 2007, 20:10 »
0
Browsing through my "huge" portfolio (I deleted most because of the initial absence of a watermark) of 3 photos at SV, I noticed that the view count staid unchanged for 6 weeks (4,4,24). Not much going on?

Doing a search on "asian, man" I found (1) that my shot with those keywords doesn't turn up and (2) some real beauties that make me wonder about SV quality control.

Perfect isolation and absence of hard frontal flash shadow. Look how well the black gun stands out against the black suit:


Perfect isolation, perfect contrast, no blown-out highlights, great focus on the eyes, copyspace at the right side (his back of course):


Very sharp shot of a lady glued on a sunset. What a great idea, collect all your bloopers where the focus went wrong, and call them 'blurs'. May I suggest Gaussian blur 20px? A very noise-free image too, SS would love it. A real bargain for just 25$!


No further comments....

The search function is also defective. What the heck is going on with their tag separators? Looking for "soldier, man, jungle" or "soldier man jungle" or "soldier,man,jungle" gives me:
"You searched for: soldier, man, jungle - No images found."
"You searched for: soldier man jungle - No images found."
"You searched for: soldier,man,jungle - 36 images found."

One of them is this (where is the soldier, man, jungle? It's an underwater shot):


And of course, my shot with these tags (below) isn't included:
"elated,  laptop,  male,  military,  shirtless,  computer,  people,  tropical,  wireless,  young,  young man,  victorious,  victory,  reaching,  screen,  dress,  shout,  shouting,  sitting,  skin,  slim,  soldier,  stud,  success,  tanned,  teeth,  terrorism,  terrorist,  triumph,  triumphant,  muscular,  necklace,  notebook,  nude,  PC,  man,  manly,  masculine,  elation,  exotic,  expression,  fatigues,  guerrilla,  happy,  joy,  jungle,  keyboard,  arms,  army,  Asian,  beach,  camouflage,  cheer,  cheering,  chest,  communication"

(link to photo: http://www.snapvillage.com/PictureDetail.aspx?vcb6uh=NURJwh2QzWoouLkxOmVxnDLM%2beKAsktd7I%2buPl%2bcQ8%2fr4GZpafSnknfIVohYJzmK)
« Last Edit: October 14, 2007, 21:04 by FlemishDreams »


PaulieWalnuts

  • We Have Exciting News For You
« Reply #1 on: October 14, 2007, 21:21 »
0
I don't think there is much QC. Right on their FAQ it says:

Is there an image review process?
Yes. We arent picky, but we do review all submitted images to make sure they meet our basic legal and technical requirements.

« Reply #2 on: October 15, 2007, 01:13 »
0
They are only doing what all the other agencies did when they started up - collecting as many images as possible to get the library going.  Once they've got a few hundred thousand in the library they'll start to tighten up.

« Reply #3 on: October 15, 2007, 01:58 »
0
They are only doing what all the other agencies did when they started up - collecting as many images as possible to get the library going.  Once they've got a few hundred thousand in the library they'll start to tighten up.

But what's the point of uploading all that rubbish? No one in their right mind is going to buy it and, from the agency's point of view, it just degrades their collection.

I would have thought if buyers have to wade through a load of junk to find a decent image they're going to move elsewhere.

« Reply #4 on: October 15, 2007, 02:17 »
0
There is a lot of junk on all of the sites but most of it gets buried and it adds to the size of the overall collection.  I know, because some of it is mine.  One of these days, I am going to do some pruning :)  Some of it sells though.  I am amazed what people will buy but perhaps they want some images that don't look technically perfect.  Looking through magazines, snapshots sell and some sell for lots of money.

« Reply #5 on: October 15, 2007, 02:26 »
0
There is a lot of junk on all of the sites but most of it gets buried and it adds to the size of the overall collection.  I know, because some of it is mine.  One of these days, I am going to do some pruning :)  Some of it sells though.  I am amazed what people will buy but perhaps they want some images that don't look technically perfect.  Looking through magazines, snapshots sell and some sell for lots of money.

yep, i would have to confess to some of the junk as well  :-X, I am not sure many of us can point fingers.

Alamy has a VERY lax quality control system and their business seems to be working.

« Reply #6 on: October 15, 2007, 04:15 »
0

Alamy has a VERY lax quality control system and their business seems to be working.


Yes, but Alamy has some sort of sophisticated (?) ranking system which looks at the number of times an image has appeared in a customer's search, the number of times it has been clicked on by the customer, and the number of times it has been bought.

No one quite knows how it works (there's been a lot of speculation, and parts of the algorithm are patented I believe) but the result is that if you have a lot of rubbish images in your collection you sink down to the bottom in any search. And with some searches throwing up 100+ pages there's not much chance of a customer seeing the rubbish.
« Last Edit: October 15, 2007, 11:46 by Bateleur »

« Reply #7 on: October 15, 2007, 05:02 »
0
exactly, so my point was that if an agency wants to be very liberal with their acceptance and still have it work, they can.  Alamy for example.  If snap village wants to run their site similarly with a 'fancy' search result ranking they can.

« Reply #8 on: October 15, 2007, 08:15 »
0
One of the technically worst photos I ever submitted somewhere had been accepted by FT and to my surprise, keeps getting downloads, two just last week. 
 Rosta

« Reply #9 on: October 15, 2007, 09:40 »
0
My current bestseller at IS as well as SS is a terrible photo. I only uploaded it after 6 months because I didn't have anything to do one evening. It was even rejected at IS once.

SnapKillit has something called "Snappyness" factor. I guess that's a way to promote what they believe is good stock photos, and get the crap down where it belongs: a big grey substance at the bottom, increasing the bulk of their portfolio without being seen too often.

« Reply #10 on: October 27, 2007, 04:56 »
0
That's right...the 'snappyness' thing takes into account views,reviews,downloads...so I suppose it'll take a while for the picture to get shuffled into any kind of order. There's a lot of filler,similars, and suchlike turning up in searches at the moment. 
I'm interested to know, though, how you balance posting decent images to microstock sites, with hesitating to post your 'best' work? Or do you not hesitate?

« Reply #11 on: October 27, 2007, 22:12 »
0
That's right...the 'snappyness' thing takes into account views,reviews,downloads...so I suppose it'll take a while for the picture to get shuffled into any kind of order. There's a lot of filler,similars, and suchlike turning up in searches at the moment. 
I'm interested to know, though, how you balance posting decent images to microstock sites, with hesitating to post your 'best' work? Or do you not hesitate?

I upload what I believe will sell. Unique photos, I upload to Alamy and MyLoupe, but I will probably have some of them at Snapvillage (maximum price) as well.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
11 Replies
12315 Views
Last post July 10, 2007, 20:21
by hatman12
12 Replies
4063 Views
Last post June 17, 2008, 12:18
by Brian O'Shea
24 Replies
5904 Views
Last post May 07, 2008, 18:01
by louoates
1 Replies
2989 Views
Last post September 30, 2008, 13:55
by melastmohican
60 Replies
18310 Views
Last post February 05, 2009, 02:54
by Clivia

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle