The more I try out their search the more convinced I become that there is a 'club'. It's quite a big club, I am definitely not in it and I haven't a clue about how one gets in it. The algorithm or whatever seems programmed to promote certain contributors who are from very diverse levels and pricing but their images keep cropping up time and time again on the first pages of default search. Had another one yesterday where the last 10 or so shots on page 1 were a series, all by the same contributor, none had been downloaded and most had not even been viewed but they were on page 1 (that series was also not relevant to my search topic either and it continued on page 2).

When half of the first page is taken up by images from one contributor and you've waded through the gratuitously inserted 'infinity collection' images (in which I wouldn't be interested anyway because I came to FT for microstock pricing), then there's not a lot of space left for anyone else's images.

Unlike SS, for which I find the search quite good, FT takes no account of the title (description) of the image in its search placement. For those in the 'club' it takes almost every keyword and inserts that contributor's image(s) at every search opportunity on the first pages. And some images have longevity despite their lack of sales, they still appear high in search after even 2-3 weeks.

I wouldn't rule out that theory but am struggling to see how FT would benefit.  It might be an impact of the sorting of keywords by relevance on submission - some might, some might not and some may do it better than others but impossible to compare because they are just displayed in alphabetic order.

Tested that too a while back. FT says, place the 6 most important keywords first and one contributor's image that came up repeatedly in the first 2 pages did that with 15 of their keywords (out of around 20) when a single keyword from that images' keywords was entered into default search. It's almost as if the search algorithm gets stuck at a certain point and just goes round in circles on a small number of contributors/images.

I can't say that I would know how to construct an algorithm that is relatively fair to both established sellers whilst introducing new work on the early pages but to show more than half of the images on the first page (that are new and often without downloads) from a single contributor, I find unfair both to contributors as well as buyers.

Just had an 'out of mind' experience with FT search. Searched 'bread' and got 26 shots on the first page all from the same contributor, just uploaded and all (except one) with zero views and one download ( the exception had one view and one dl)! Went to page two and there's another 3 there (at the top of P2) from the same contributor.
Looks to me like, get a mate to buy a sub and start downloading everything that the guy/gal submits!
A bit daft really cos the shots will probably never be bought by real buyers.......funny desaturated colour to all!

Good spot. Such tactics have been tried before (strangely, also by East Europeans) and resulted in the account being promptly suspended on IS. Relatively new contributor (or 'account' anyway) who is unlikely to survive for too much longer.

Quote from: OM on September 09, 2012, 06:11

Unlike SS, for which I find the search quite good, FT takes no account of the title (description) of the image in its search placement.

This is new for me. SS using title/description for it's search algorithm. Is this true?

Really... does anyone know?  I think DT uses Title and Description.  Do any others?

Quote from: OM on September 09, 2012, 06:11

Unlike SS, for which I find the search quite good, FT takes no account of the title (description) of the image in its search placement.

This is new for me. SS using title/description for it's search algorithm. Is this true?

I'm a new entrant to SS and I tried to get as much info about submitting before I took the 'plunge'.

Perhaps I did see the submitter guidelines from 2009 in which it is stated that titles are NOT searchable:
http://submit.shutterstock.com/newsletter/137/article1.html

However, I also looked through Shutterbuzz before submitting my initial 10 for review and found this from June 2012:

http://www.shutterstock.com/buzz/stock-image-descriptions-for-seo

You�ve spent time and effort to make great content for Shutterstock. Now how do you make sure that your work gets discovered (and downloaded)?

We�d like to share one simple tip for applying search engine optimization (SEO) to your Shutterstock image descriptions: Above all, write a good description.

Creating accurate, precise and easily understood descriptions for your images and footage is absolutely essential to getting them seen and bought. Why? Because good descriptions help customers find your images and footage on search engines like Google, which can be the first place potential customers look when they�re ready to buy an image or clip.

Here�s a step-by-step example of how accurate and relevant descriptions can increase the chances that a customer will find your content through a search engine.

So, perhaps for SS search the title still does not count but many images are now found through Google and other search engines........so it does/can make a difference.

I ve gone up on FT ranking... yay me

Mine 7 day rank is 124 at the moment. A bit worried that being so close to the top100 gets you so little money