Jump to content

Recommended Posts

32 minutes ago, oleschwander said:

If you upload an image every day, you are sure to be the very first image in the search - in all categories ..??? 

 

32 minutes ago, oleschwander said:

That's common knowledge.

I didn't say to upload just one image daily, as you say, that is common knowledge.

 

32 minutes ago, oleschwander said:

Some find this very interesting. Why is it odious to discuss it in line with other topics ..?

The short answer is :

Quote

Refrain from using the forum to call out other contributors’ work in a negative light. Constructive criticism is welcome, when contributors have asked for feedback.

How would you feel if others would take apart your portfolio????

Don't answer that, you are an old enough contributor to know that I am right.

 

BTW. I checked a few of his images too from page 3, 4..., and later of his port and it is not the same as on the first pages.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 137
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I think his greatest success must be in 'man'...8 out of the 10 top images on page one of 22.148 million photos are from him and all are editorial, non-model-released whilst SS is imploring everyone t

I would like to apologize to everyone. I didn't want to offend anyone. And I didn't want to stir up controversy. I just wrote about a certain oddity that even I did not discover. I thought you might f

But it appears he has only been able to game the system on SS. I think it does hurt any stock library if the best images (and most relevant) are not brought to the top of a search. I wonde

Posted Images

I know that this is all supposition but I am rather inclined towards @Whiteaster's view.

If you are successful at microstock then surely you would expect your images to rate high on searches.  Isn't that what it's all about?

I'm not able to judge from my own portfolio but I imagine (I haven't checked) that some of the 'successful' contributors on this thread find their images frequently on the first page of a search with relevant keyword/s? 

I suppose that, at the end of the day, we will never know the answer... and in any case, we can only guess what is affecting not just this contributor's placement, but the placement of all our images, as Sstock has never (to my knowledge) revealed the secrets of its algorithmic magic box.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Whiteaster said:

I checked a few of his images too from page 3, 4..., and later of his port and it is not the same as on the first pages.

I have not looked as thoroughly into his port as you have (until now!).

But look at a few generic single words - in so different topics - like 'rose' (36.000 pages), 'puppy' (15.000 pages) and 'motorcycle' (5.000 pages). He must be the best earner in the history of microstock! 🙌 It's almost superhuman ... 🤔

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Studio 2 said:

I suppose that, at the end of the day, we will never know the answer... and in any case, we can only guess what is affecting not just this contributor's placement, but the placement of all our images, as Sstock has never (to my knowledge) revealed the secrets of its algorithmic magic box.

Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition ..! 

Link to post
Share on other sites

If I was in the business of producing films, and my competitor managed to win the academy award in every category for years, I'd be wondering too.  I think such curiosity is healthy.  I certainly am amazed at this photographer's image placement, and would love to know how he did it.  We'll probably never find out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

oleschwander, 

I hate to be nit picky but the figures you quoted (i.e. "rose" 36,000 images) are actually pages not images.  I did a cursory check and it appears that there are approx. 100 images on each page.  If my math is correct, that is over 3.5 million rose images and his wilted rose is ranked # 1.  Strangely, enough he also has an image of a water drop which has a rose colored hue that is also found on the first page (#61 ) of over 3,5 million rose images when you look up the single keyword "rose".  I agree, this sounds, looks and smells a bit suspicious.   

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, oleschwander said:

I have not looked as thoroughly into his port as you have (until now!).

But look at a few generic single words - in so different topics - like 'rose' (36.000 images), 'puppy' (15.000 images) and 'motorcycle' (5.000 images). He must be the best earner in the history of microstock! 🙌 It's almost superhuman ... 🤔

Yes, it is interesting. I checked the puppy and rose keywords too.

What I see is that most of his images are very clear, one main subject without distractions or multiple subjects and he writes his keywords accordingly.

When you can do that, you are a winner. Here is an example from the OP's port: high heel bride shoes

and one from yours: honda logo sky

BTW. he uploaded a second batch today, or the review was split in two, who knows.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Steve Bower said:

oleschwander, 

I hate to be nit picky but the figures you quoted (i.e. "rose" 36,000 images) are actually pages not images.  I did a cursory check and it appears that there are approx. 100 images on each page.  If my math is correct, that is over 3.5 million rose images and his wilted rose is ranked # 1.  Strangely, enough he also has an image of a water drop which has a rose colored hue that is also found on the first page (#61 ) of over 3,5 million rose images when you look up the single keyword "rose".  I agree, this sounds, looks and smells a bit suspicious.   

Of course Steve - I also thought there were lot and lots more roses than 36.000 images .. and motorcycles were also on the 'low' side. Yes, there must be millions ..! Thanks ..! I have changed it. Of course that makes it even more puzzling ... WOW ...!

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Whiteaster said:

When you can do that, you are a winner. Here is an example from the OP's port: high heel bride shoes

Yes, you certainly have a point here though 'Africa' has 6.700 pages and Oleg has 37. And in the case of 'Africa' - and many others - you have to use more keywords than one. But never the less - maybe you're right ... 

22 minutes ago, Whiteaster said:

and one from yours: honda logo sky

Ha ha - you got me there. But there are only two pages - and the best very image is certaily not mine, I'm sorry to admit ..! 😆 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Whiteaster said:

Refrain from using the forum to call out other contributors’ work in a negative light. Constructive criticism is welcome, when contributors have asked for feedback.

I don't think anyone actually call out his work in a negative light... Well "average at best" might sound negative but still ok. Asking if he hacked the system is more questionable though... And there is not (too much of) criticism IMHO (mostly). Just curiosity...

I also wonder how he can have his pictures so well ranked, because I would love to do the same!

Is it a balance between new content sell, portfolio size and number of downloads? Let say every time you add a new content, you have several downloads within 24h, then your image must rank high. If they rank high, then you have a better chance to have more downloads as they appear in the first page of research. Now I could imagine that a contributor with a small port but a large amount of sales could be considered as more popular for the algorithm compared to a contributor with a huge portfolio and a regular amount of sales. Images from a popular contributor would be ranked higher too probably? So perhaps all you need to do is make sure that you're gonna sell your images as soon as you add them (trendy images, buyers=friend, high impact image, portfolio promotion, ...), and have a number of sales consistent with your portfolio size (try to delete those image that don't sell, are too similar, not trendy, ...)...

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tim photo-video said:

Do you want to say that this is a masterpiece?

I just said that it doesn't matter.

1 hour ago, Ralf Liebhold said:

Thank you, my picture is the first. I was wondering until now why the picture is sold so often under 750 Honda pages. 😄

Finally some good news.

47 minutes ago, Awana JF said:

try to delete those image that don't sell,

You should never do that. I have no idea how the ranking works but an old image that was never sold could be brought forward and start selling, it happens often.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ralf Liebhold said:

Thank you, my picture is the first. I was wondering until now why the picture is sold so often under 750 Honda pages. 😄

But your image is not number one if you just type 'Honda'. And that's the point here imo. By the way - my image is on page two even yours are the best ..😝  (perhaps mine are oldest?)

Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Whiteaster said:

You should never do that. I have no idea how the ranking works but an old image that was never sold could be brought forward and start selling, it happens often.

Well I'm not doing it because 1) it would take too much time and 2) as you say you never know what will sell

I had 3 sales this month from a cloister in Dubrovnik that are there since my beginnings (end of 2019) and that never sold before...

But I wonder if the ratio download/portfolio size matters in the ranking... 

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Whiteaster said:

I am trying to understand what is going on in this thread.

I see a good portfolio of a good size, started in 2019, good descriptions, good keywording, no duplicates and really nothing that this contributor could be accused of doing wrong on purpose.
Apparently, he is uploading daily (today he has new images compared to yesterday), and that is keeping his portfolio on the first page.
He could be just lucky with his sales but even if the search engine would favor him in some absurd way, I don't see how  this is anyone's business.

Constant uploading in a normal rhythm is the way to go for better exposure not picking on someone who can't defend himself.

Uh-huh
Thank you!
Clear 👌

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Awana JF said:

I don't think anyone actually call out his work in a negative light... Well "average at best" might sound negative but still ok. Asking if he hacked the system is more questionable though... And there is not (too much of) criticism IMHO (mostly). Just curiosity...

I also wonder how he can have his pictures so well ranked, because I would love to do the same!

Is it a balance between new content sell, portfolio size and number of downloads? Let say every time you add a new content, you have several downloads within 24h, then your image must rank high. If they rank high, then you have a better chance to have more downloads as they appear in the first page of research. Now I could imagine that a contributor with a small port but a large amount of sales could be considered as more popular for the algorithm compared to a contributor with a huge portfolio and a regular amount of sales. Images from a popular contributor would be ranked higher too probably? So perhaps all you need to do is make sure that you're gonna sell your images as soon as you add them (trendy images, buyers=friend, high impact image, portfolio promotion, ...), and have a number of sales consistent with your portfolio size (try to delete those image that don't sell, are too similar, not trendy, ...)...

Crazy talk. It sounds like you are suggesting that the algorithm plays favourites and that search results are skewed based upon some kind of portfolio performance metric. We know that can't possibly be true because all of the most knowledgeable forum experts here have discounted that for years. Forum heresy just to consider it out loud. LOL. That would also mean that portfolio size has relatively little to do with success if the proportion of popular images in your portfolio is at a critical mass high enough to boost your overall performance metric. That would also imply that taking your time, being thoughtful about what you produce and creating content that is both useful and of sufficient quality to be attractive to a wide variety of buyers is some sort of magic formula for success. Insane.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Foodio said:

Crazy talk. It sounds like you are suggesting that the algorithm plays favourites and that search results are skewed based upon some kind of portfolio performance metric. We know that can't possibly be true because all of the most knowledgeable forum experts here have discounted that for years. Forum heresy just to consider it out loud. LOL. That would also mean that portfolio size has relatively little to do with success if the proportion of popular images in your portfolio is at a critical mass high enough to boost your overall performance metric. That would also imply that taking your time, being thoughtful about what you produce and creating content that is both useful and of sufficient quality to be attractive to a wide variety of buyers is some sort of magic formula for success. Insane.

Wow
👏
You are not shy about expressions.
Can we get your expert opinion on the very first three images on the stock by tag beach?
Among 13,242,875 images of all types

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mr.Music said:

Wow
👏
You are not shy about expressions.
Can you get your expert opinion on the very first three images on the stock by tag beach?
Among 13,242,875 images of all types

Wow! That is an achievement and now I know that it's definitely bent. Well spotted.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mr.Music

The second shot is great, I wish I had taken it.  However, I never would have uploaded the #1 and #3 image if they were mine.  Surprisingly 😆, those were taken by OlegRi.  My most popular "Beach" has been sold nearly 600 times and it doesn't appear until page 10.  I could be wrong but it almost appears that Oleg is not playing by the same rules🤣.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Steve Bower said:

The second shot is great, I wish I had taken it.  However, I never would have uploaded the #1 and #3 image if they were mine.  Surprisingly 😆, those were taken by OlegRi. 

I wonder if we see the same page. The second image is from OlegRi, 1 and 3 are not.

1 hour ago, Steve Bower said:

it almost appears that Oleg is not playing by the same rules🤣.  

Do you know what those rules could be, I want to apply/break them too?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...