Firn

I can't follow what you are trying to say. He is already on top of the search results for all relevant keywords. That was the very reason why this thread was made. What will happen if we click on his images? His ranking can't go up any more, he is already on top.

He was already on top of every keyword when this thread was made (the very reason why it was made.) He can hardly become more popular....

It also doesn't look like a picture that should be in the top search results, so I am not going to make any assumptions about a picture that isn't following any logic in the first place, especially not based on data of which I know it's incorrect. I understand we would all love to believe that even though this guy has somehow managed to cheat the system, he isn't profiting from it, but I know from my own experience from my portfolio, that a good rank is more important than good quality. I have awesome pictures that got buried in the black hole of a database and never sold,

As already explained, the data is incorrect at least for images submitted after 2019 and does not mean anything. For all we know the image cold have sold 10.000 times.

When there are trademarks in an image, it does not matter whether they are the main focus of the image or not. You can only submit images containing trademarks as editorial.

There was a thread where this was discussed already. Sadly the system seems to be flawed - all my images submitted in the past 12 months shows as having low popularity and never having been used, even my bestsellers, as some of my most successful images are form 2020. Images that sold far less often, but have been submitted in 2019 show as popular and often used. So right now this , whatever the purpose, is a system that basically gives wrong information to customers. Whether it motivates people to buy not used images or the other way around - I don't know. Some people here argue that

@Milleflore Images I kind of feel like your e-mails aren't really helping the case. 😅 I understand you want to speak up for the guy, but at least for me, this makes it look like his whole stock business was rather a mess? And from what I understand you had your port up there, but twice since it was already up there through Depositphotos, so Jon removed your port from there again (After you had gone through the work of submitting your images) - And now he is asking Gunter to submit his photos there, but his port is also already up there through Depositphotos? It sounds a bit confusing and

No, I am not sure. I thought I had read it somewhere, but maybe it was just my assumption because only the first 5 keyword fields were highlighted. In the MG forum Mat from Adobe himself says he thinks the first 10 are the most relevant, but not even he seems to know for sure? So who really knows? I wish microstock agencies wouldn't always make such a big secret out of how the order of search results are determined. One should think they would want us to know as detailed as possible, so we could present our images as good as possible.

As others said, on SS keyword order does not matter. They re-shuffle the keywords in alphabetic order. However, I think that on Adobe only the order of the first 5 keywords matter, not the first 10.

Ah, I remember this one. There was a thread about it in the MG forum once where it was discussed. https://www.[do_not_advertise_other_microstock_groups]/new-sites-general/stockphoto-com-36170/ It's a site by a guy who used up $250,000 of his family's savings to purchase the domain Stockphoto.com, because he thought with just this name alone he would rank No.1 on search platforms and it would be an guaranteed success without having to do any promotion work. Looks like that did not work out if he is approaching contributors directly and making such desperate offers. How you decide is up t

I think the ranking only gets displayed if you have a rank lower than 40.000. At least that was when the ranking showed up for me for the first time after I joined Adobe.

No, it is not against the rules to edit photos, unless it is an editorial usage only photo. In this case photos might not be edited in a way to change the context of the photo.

I am at position 13.150 right now, but I don't know what position I was in May 20. I think something around 18.000-20.000? I just checked and my download number for Jan-May 20 was actually lower than Jan-May 21, but my earnings were more. So I would conclude that the position ranking is considering download numbers instead of earnings, thus my improved ranking despite lower earnings. But it doesn't make sense that you have dropped in position despite more downloads. I can't make sense of this position system.

Adobe was doing well for me until around middle of last year. Like with all microstock sites I take part in I kept expanding my portfolio and my earnings keep rising. With small income sites the rise was obviously less noticeable, but Adobe is, or was, one of my top 3 earners. For a brief moment it was even my best earner. But then something seems to have changed for me on Adobe. My earnings keep stagnating for months and then the trend started to be even going downwards. More than on any other agency I seem not to be able to rally sell new content. Most of my sales are from files I uploaded

No, of course size is not an issue if the photo is in focus. But if your photo is in focus, your image will not get rejected for focus. No matter how often people here tell "but my photos are in focus", whenever someone posts a 100% size version of it, in 95% of all cases it turnes out the photo was not in focus. Some people don't seem to see it. I don't know why. But a photo with a soft focus that would have been rejected in large size can possibly get though the review process if sized down as the soft focus becomes less noticeable.