Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About Former_Poster

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I've got quite a few environmental type images. Obviously visual appeal of these should be low. But i've just found a picture of mine of a leaking sewage outlet. A literal photo of sh*t has been ranked 9/10 for visual appeal.
  2. I wonder if all the unrated ones are 5s or lower but SS chooses not to show it. I've got a large number of images that are frankly awful and should definitely score way way under 6...But none do. The lowest i have rated is 6. Checking other profiles and search results at random the same.
  3. OK so i started going through some of the worst "why arent my images selling" threads on here to look for low ratings. So apparently this is an 8/10 for being visually appealing. So a terrible mobile phone snapshot taken from a moving train or car window, motion blur in the foreground, huge burnt out over exposed sky and even the reflection of the person taking it in the window that should never in a million years have been accepted but is a 7/10 for visual appeal.... I haven't yet found *anything* under a 6.
  4. 6 is the sweet spot. All my top earners and top downloads are 6s! The few 9s and 10s i can find of mine have earned 10c or nothing. Everyone aim for 6 ! Has anyone found an image 5 or under yet? I havent.
  5. 3 out of my top 5 all time sellers are 6/10s. All with over 1000 sales and near daily sales.
  6. Interestingly, for anyone having issues seeing this, i get them to display for many images in MS Edge browser. Changing to Chrome or Firefox the rating doesn't appear even after a direct copy/paste URL. Pasting it back into Edge from Chrome and it appears. The source code however does contain mention of it in those browsers, its just not displayed. Does have me wondering if this thing has been used behind the scenes for quite a while and a mess up with the code is suddenly causing it to be seen in some circumstances.
  7. Worst thing is a customer filter for "AI quality over 7" or similar. This would hide the majority of good images from the buyer. From a buyer point of view you'd only want the "best" so would use a filter to remove lower than that. Its no different to how everyone uses TripAdvisor or Trustpilot etc - you generally filter out anything less than "good" and go from there. If you have a choice of 2 images, one is ranked 6, the other 9, you're going to go for the 9 all things considered. With an AI that thinks clouds are people in reality this says nothing about the quali
  8. I suspect unrated is because it hasn't trawled through all of image catalogue yet to rate them all. It'll take a fair few server resources for the Artificial Stupidity to work through 300,000,000 images and assign them a completely random AI rating.
  9. SS really need to stop treating contributors as an inconvenience and explain to them the additions. If its going to affect image sales or revenue people need to know how it works and how to adapt to it. They need to be open about what the thing does and how it works in enough detail to be useful. And things like ratings, authentic should be trialled privately with contributors long before being exposed to the public to buy.
  10. Yep, public, ive tried colleagues and random searches. Its a buyer side rating.
  11. So we have "Authentic Photos" which we have no idea what it means and "Predicted quality" with no idea what it means. And neither do buyers as SS haven't explained it to them either.
  12. Just what we need. The AI that thinks foliage is noise and clouds need a model release is now ranking how good the images are. I mean what could possibly go wrong? Just tried on a few of mine. Of those it displays on, my most popular images (thousands or hundreds of dollars per image) scored 6 or 7 out of 10. Ones ive had that i didnt even submit to Alamy as focus was slightly off but dumped on here are getting 9 out of 10. Images that have sold 700 times rank low, others that have sold once for a sub in 10 years ranking high.
  13. Download numbers steady. Revenue down 75% on same time last year.
  14. 15-40% still exists, whats change is the selling price. Subscription 4k videos now go for about $10 so you'll get between $1.50 and $4 commission now instead of 20-40 under the old system. "Web use only is worse. Ive 'sold' multiple videos for $0.34 lately.
  • Create New...