Jump to content

Wilm Ihlenfeld

Members
  • Content Count

    2,165
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Wilm Ihlenfeld

  1. Okay, I wasn't aware that he started in March 2021. I thought he started here much earlier. So you are right.
  2. Hello Thijs, now I can see the information too. As for my portfolio, the information is correct. I then looked at the information for the "one account phenomenon" portfolio. However he does it, that all his images show up at the top of the search - it obviously doesn't do much. All images get high attention, but are not or hardly downloaded. Or in other words: many views, few or no downloads. But since the images still appear at the top of the search, he has not only managed to place the images right after the upload at the top, but also that they stay there, although the algo take
  3. That‘s a fantastic sale indeed! Congrats to you!
  4. Today, the share of $0.10 sales for me was 66.6%. Level 5. The levels do not matter at all.
  5. Deb and Thijs: I still can't see this information about popularity and whether an image was used or not anywhere, unfortunately. I must have the wrong browsers. So I can't check if it's true what you see there. Maybe this information is generated from a view/download ratio. Or maybe images sold through an API or partner agency can't be captured by the "AI". I don't know. But it's true: more transparency and information for the contributors - shutterstock's capital - would be fair. But they don‘t care.
  6. One contributor proclaimed at that time that contributors with a "piddly tiny portfolio" who don't have several thousand images in their portfolio don't have a clue about the microstock business, statistics, numbers, downloads and success, and therefore had better keep their mouths shut. Ultimately, it was about the age-old debate about quality vs. quantity. But that belongs to the past and does not need to be revived now.
  7. This reminds me of endless discussions in the past. Anyone with less than 10,000 images in their portfolio was denied the right to have a say. At least this is a source of information that offers interesting insights.
  8. I had two ODs for $0,10 several weeks ago. Both at Level 5. In March I had one for $0,15, too.
  9. Currently I have over 100 downloads less compared to July 2020 up to 25.07.
  10. This is exactly what I wanted to write, too, Steve. It can‘t be true what‘s going on here!
  11. Looking at the portfolios of those guys who uploaded your video, I can see this: https://www.shutterstock.com/de/video/clip-1057908982-top-view-forest-mixed-green-conifers-deciduous https://www.shutterstock.com/de/video/clip-1062851128-cloud-nature-green-landscape-rain https://www.shutterstock.com/de/video/clip-1062886573-beautiful-nature-view-stock-video and https://www.shutterstock.com/de/video/clip-1067149834-luminous-white-wireframe-body-rotating https://www.shutterstock.com/de/video/clip-1059125087-video-bust-figure-technology-advance https://www.
  12. Incredible! This can't be true! And that there is a file without author is incredible as well. doodlart: I would beg you to write an e-mail to infingementclaims@shutterstock.
  13. Wrong, sorry. It disappeared in Safari and Opera, but I still can see it when using Firefox.
  14. Thank you, Heide. That's interesting, because this was one of the many images that stopped showing up when I used the "top quality" filter in the search. But the filter is gone now, as I have already written. And why we don't get this "popularity" displayed in every browser, I don't know either. I can't see it anywhere.
  15. I can‘t see a popularity score in my browser, Heide. Neither an „often used“ hint. It seems that they are experimenting a lot.
  16. And all of a sudden I sold images for $67 yesterday...
  17. The top quality filter (beta version) has disappeared all of a sudden. I can't see it anymore...
  18. Congrats to your milestones, Awana and Marek! 👍
  19. Steve, I can't understand the principle. First they accept everything imaginable in images until there are over 300 million. Then they introduce a new AI that makes the selection grotesque. And then they add a rating filter that reduces the amount of images by more than two thirds. Where's the sense in that? The width is now no longer there. Yet it was precisely the width that shutterstock obviously wanted so much.
  20. Out of 364 million image files, only 108 million remain when using the Top Quality Filter. That is less than 30%. For illustrations it is only 14.8% and for vectors only 13% remain.
  21. I guess it doesn't work with all browsers.
  22. I don't understand this AI and think the whole thing is anachronistic. You take a picture. It is accepted. It's been on page 1 of 5,000 for 3 years when you filter by relevance. Of course it is bought accordingly often. If there were complaints about the quality on the part of the buyers, the picture would no longer be on page 1. Now you click on Top Quality. There are still 2,500 pages left. But the image is no longer visible. So the AI that ranks the images in the search engine has decided differently than the AI that is used in Top Quality. What is for sure: Top Quality
  23. I was wondering why my downloads were down so much in June 2021 compared to June 2020. Now I see that the Top Quality filter is clearly highlighted in the search. I can use it for photos, illustrations and vectors. When I use it on photos, about half of all photos are dropped. When I use it on vectors, in the samples I did, it was about 80% vectors that I no longer see displayed. So there seems to be a lot more sifting going on there than with photos. My photos and vectors seem to be mostly unrated or poorly rated by the AI. My best seller, for example, can no longer be found
×
×
  • Create New...