MicrostockGroup
Agency Based Discussion => Sites that no longer exist => Zymmetrical.com => Topic started by: zymmetricaldotcom on February 16, 2008, 20:28
-
Some people wonder why Zymmetrical is apparently yet another eternal Beta, low and slow, not rushed to market. The reason: we are doing the job right.
Just to show you we aren't messing around here, try entering the names of some of the higher-volume photogs/designers on Zymm. Any of them, take your pick, very well-known artists who distribute on a wide variety of agencies for many years - let's see who's got the search juice.
The Challenge: Enter any one of these respected artist names in your favourite search engine, be it Google, Yahoo, MSN, etc. You will pretty quickly see, a little bit of the reason why Zymm site architecture is -the- most search engine friendly around:
Iofoto
Nicemonkey
Creatista
ElenatheWise
Madelaide
Xeniaii
YawningDog
Flemishdreams
Nialat
Cryssfotos
Oscarcwilliams
ApolloImages
Bluefern
etc.
The results: Not only does Zymmetrical rank first page for pretty much any artist we list on our site, we typically saturate the results due to our international sites. We are putting in the effort from day one, to promote the artists who work with us to the fullest.
Buyers don't typically buy stock based on artist name- we do admit. This little experiment is just intended to demonstrate the power of the site's search engine juice- while many stock searches are made with internal site search engines, you would likely be surprised at the amount of art that can be moved on account of major search engine referrals.
If we can outrank established agencies for well-known artist names before we've even gotten this show on the road, think of the possibilities for art keywords in general. We are covering all the bases in the leadup to site launch, and are very excited to have become the destination for artist-based searches.
-
Very nice.
However, if like me, the other photographers cannot get their images reviewed, its not a lot of use. I have been waiting since 24th December, and despite emailing support, nothing happens. We cannot make money or appear in search engines unless you actually put our pictures on the site.
I think maybe you only review the big name photogs.
-
Clivia, we try to give everyone their fair shake, and have been training new editors to help with the queue. In the last week we have been putitng hundreds (and on some days thousands) of new photos and graphics online, so I would imagine your original submissions will be all online shortly.
Thanks for your patience.
Very nice.
However, if like me, the other photographers cannot get their images reviewed, its not a lot of use. I have been waiting since 24th December, and despite emailing support, nothing happens. We cannot make money or appear in search engines unless you actually put our pictures on the site.
I think maybe you only review the big name photogs.
-
Three caveats:
- The pitfall of LuckyOliver a while ago was attracting random Google traffic and not concentrate on the market. As a result, LO got catapulted very high in Alexa, it gave an exorbitant view count on pictures (I had one with thousands on the 500px "thumb" that wasn't really watermarked) but a deplorable number of sales. I have been warning a number of times on the Odditorium for this, but in vain. Random hits from picture tourists don't really count. Everybody knows Maserati, but almost no one drives one.
- When Googling, make sure to do it by a blank and cookie-clean browser, and not logged in to your Google account. Google stores search patterns in a very clever way and your own name high with any agency might be because Google learned your habits.
- It's an ego boost of course for those that are very web-visible but we shouldn't forget that buyers are not interested in photographers to begin with but in the right picture. In a second and third phase come visual search and photographer karma (I wrote some stuff (http://flemishdreams.com/index.php?view=article&catid=43%3Aphotogarticles&id=73%3Akeysstrategy&option=com_content&Itemid=70) about it last week).
- And yes, it's a nice job of course.
-
Clivia, we try to give everyone their fair shake, and have been training new editors to help with the queue. In the last week we have been putitng hundreds (and on some days thousands) of new photos and graphics online, so I would imagine your original submissions will be all online shortly.
Just a comment, it's not a complaint: I've noticed images uploaded one day reviewed in the next, while others stay in queue maybe weeks. It's totally random, so one out of five submissions today is approved and two out of seven of yesterday, and then three out of four of two weeks ago are still in queue.
Regards,
Adelaide