Author Topic: The 4/3/11 Istockphoto Best Match Change (Read 59736 times)

cobalt · « **Reply #50 on:** April 03, 2011, 20:55 »

Looks like someone "restarted" best match and it probably needs some activity to get going. At least, I hope this is what´s happening. I just don´t understand why they don´t let contributors now "Hey guys, we are pushing some software buttons this week-end". Just so that we know what is going on.

For many here istock is a considerable income and with all the issues people are jittery enough already. A little understanding can go a long way.

Elenathewise · « **Reply #51 on:** April 03, 2011, 21:28 »

I don't know what they are smoking there in Calgary... I was puzzled for a while reading this thread - which slider people are talking about? I think I found it now, at the very bottom under "Display settings" - it says "Choose the level of importance of keyword relevance". Seriously? Why would I want irrelevant results to be displayed in my search?...

That's question number one.
Question number 2 - why oh why can't they just have "Show me cheap stuff" and "Show me expensive stuff" options? Wouldn't that make things simple and transparent for buyers and fair to contributors? It's depressing but I think I know the answer to this one - they think they can trick and confuse the customers into spending more money that they should. Although (sadly) it's a common practice with many companies these days, buyers are getting smarter and not taking this anymore - they just leave and take their business elsewhere. That's what I do. That's what many people who buy on Istock will do (and I know are doing already). Too bad....

jsmithzz · « **Reply #52 on:** April 03, 2011, 21:39 »

Quote from: cobalt on April 03, 2011, 20:55

Looks like someone "restarted" best match and it probably needs some activity to get going. At least, I hope this is what´s happening. I just don´t understand why they don´t let contributors now "Hey guys, we are pushing some software buttons this week-end". Just so that we know what is going on.

For many here istock is a considerable income and with all the issues people are jittery enough already. A little understanding can go a long way.

They've always been poor at communicating things and managing the firestorms that erupt in the forums. After 10 years you think they would've gotten a clear communication strategy hammered out. I guess not.

lagereek · « **Reply #53 on:** April 04, 2011, 00:37 »

Quote from: Elenathewise on April 03, 2011, 21:28

I don't know what they are smoking there in Calgary... I was puzzled for a while reading this thread - which slider people are talking about? I think I found it now, at the very bottom under "Display settings" - it says "Choose the level of importance of keyword relevance". Seriously? Why would I want irrelevant results to be displayed in my search?... That's question number one.
Question number 2 - why oh why can't they just have "Show me cheap stuff" and "Show me expensive stuff" options? Wouldn't that make things simple and transparent for buyers and fair to contributors? It's depressing but I think I know the answer to this one - they think they can trick and confuse the customers into spending more money that they should. Although (sadly) it's a common practice with many companies these days, buyers are getting smarter and not taking this anymore - they just leave and take their business elsewhere. That's what I do. That's what many people who buy on Istock will do (and I know are doing already). Too bad....

Whats frustrating is the fact that even if the site gets back to normal, even with a good best match, even if everything starts to work to perfection, its just too late, the irreparable damage is done, blasted out all over the Internet and public forums.
In business you get one chance, thats it and the cover is blown.
Sad!

pancaketom · « **Reply #54 on:** April 04, 2011, 00:58 »

Quote from: lagereek on April 04, 2011, 00:37

Quote from: Elenathewise on April 03, 2011, 21:28
I don't know what they are smoking there in Calgary... I was puzzled for a while reading this thread - which slider people are talking about? I think I found it now, at the very bottom under "Display settings" - it says "Choose the level of importance of keyword relevance". Seriously? Why would I want irrelevant results to be displayed in my search?... That's question number one.
Question number 2 - why oh why can't they just have "Show me cheap stuff" and "Show me expensive stuff" options? Wouldn't that make things simple and transparent for buyers and fair to contributors? It's depressing but I think I know the answer to this one - they think they can trick and confuse the customers into spending more money that they should. Although (sadly) it's a common practice with many companies these days, buyers are getting smarter and not taking this anymore - they just leave and take their business elsewhere. That's what I do. That's what many people who buy on Istock will do (and I know are doing already). Too bad....

Whats frustrating is the fact that even if the site gets back to normal, even with a good best match, even if everything starts to work to perfection, its just too late, the irreparable damage is done, blasted out all over the Internet and public forums.
In business you get one chance, thats it and the cover is blown.
Sad!

They have had many chances this last year. They always chose the dark side or just fumbled though.

Karen · « **Reply #55 on:** April 04, 2011, 01:09 »

Just remember what they told us - "Money is not what will make you happy"

lagereek · « **Reply #56 on:** April 04, 2011, 02:23 »

I know what you mean but in a sesnse theyre right! I dont believe for a minute that money is everything and although Im earning very well at IS and Diamond and all, it still only represents a very small part of my overall income, in fact not even worth to get agitated about, however some people here could probably live on my IS income alone, depending on where they live.
Most of us here I think gets flustered and annoyed when things arent working properly, causing hassles and irritations or leaving us in a sort of limbo state, not knowing whats happening, coming or going. IS, is very good at this, in fact if they could earn money on creating states of uncertainties, we would all earn a fortune.

gclk · « **Reply #57 on:** April 04, 2011, 02:53 »

Quote from: jsmithzz on April 03, 2011, 21:39

Quote from: cobalt on April 03, 2011, 20:55
Looks like someone "restarted" best match and it probably needs some activity to get going. At least, I hope this is what´s happening. I just don´t understand why they don´t let contributors now "Hey guys, we are pushing some software buttons this week-end". Just so that we know what is going on.

For many here istock is a considerable income and with all the issues people are jittery enough already. A little understanding can go a long way.
They've always been poor at communicating things and managing the firestorms that erupt in the forums. After 10 years you think they would've gotten a clear communication strategy hammered out. I guess not.

Yep. I'd think the same about a testing strategy. Or a working change management system. But as usual they seem very sure that they know better... and hey apparently they might do some more 'tinkering' with the best match at some point in the week - oh brilliant! No need for anybody to have a clue what they're doing when they can just 'tinker' around with the live search. What fun!

lagereek · « **Reply #58 on:** April 04, 2011, 05:38 »

Jeez! they must be petrified! the slightest hint of a slider or best match thread is locked within seconds. Difficult to voice any opinion on IS now. Wonder if this is going to stay? or if its just a test version?

Karen · « **Reply #59 on:** April 04, 2011, 06:34 »

Quote from: cobalt on April 03, 2011, 20:55

Looks like someone "restarted" best match and it probably needs some activity to get going. At least, I hope this is what´s happening. I just don´t understand why they don´t let contributors now "Hey guys, we are pushing some software buttons this week-end". Just so that we know what is going on. For many here istock is a considerable income and with all the issues people are jittery enough already. A little understanding can go a long way.

http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=320732&page=1
"Generally we're getting more and more satisfied with the overall sort... ...Again, we've been happy so far with the trends we're seeing since this went live. We saw room for improvement and have been working there and getting happier..."

ShadySue · « **Reply #60 on:** April 04, 2011, 06:49 »

Quote from: Karen on April 04, 2011, 06:34

http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=320732&page=1
"Generally we're getting more and more satisfied with the overall sort... ...Again, we've been happy so far with the trends we're seeing since this went live. We saw room for improvement and have been working there and getting happier..."

So they totally changed the direction they'd been moveing in, rather than tweak slightly.
Maybe it was the masseuse's turn to tweak the buttons.

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #61 on:** April 04, 2011, 07:08 »

Quote from: gostwyck on April 03, 2011, 13:50

Ouch! I think this one is going to hurt. I've just tried a few of my regular 'test searches' and it looks like we've had a huge shuffle of the pack. Images older than a year or so appear to have been punished badly in favour of newer images almost irrespective of how well either have been selling. If it stays like this it will produce some vast changes in the fortunes of individual contributors.

Yeah, my best-selling image - with almost 1,000 sales - is now buried under 700+ other files in the most relevant search, despite being in the top three or four when the same search is switched to "by download". Several imitations of it are much higher up the best match ... but, of course, they are newer.

cathyslife · « **Reply #62 on:** April 04, 2011, 07:22 »

I don't know why other buyers sort by best match anyway. I never did. And now, best match doesn't mean the buyer is getting the best match of the image they are looking for, it means they are getting istock's best match to the image that makes them the most money. What a joke that has turned into.

Difydave · « **Reply #63 on:** April 04, 2011, 08:39 »

At the moment it looks as if they're messing about with the results without fully understanding what the changes are doing to the results. Something along the line of "Well we did this before and it worked out well. If we do it twice as much - Ah s**t it broke!"

Seems to me that they need to get the thing back to returning some sort of reasonable results.
And then I have a totally radical suggestion:

LEAVE THE BLASTED THING ALONE FOR A WHILE.

lagereek · « **Reply #64 on:** April 04, 2011, 10:14 »

Hi Dave!

Yes thats exactly what it is, they have lost control over the whole thing and its running amok, turning into the Micro worlds worst best match and actually encouraging independants to leave the site.
Only here in Scandinavia and England, we are 6 Diamonds (1 black) and 2 Gold, independant contributors chatting to each other and are pretty convinced they wish to get rid of us. Pitty really. We are all commercial freelance photographers, so none of us depend on Micro.

It could ofcourse be a test version which would be the thing to do, but I doubt it.

Many are now convinced this is leading up to a sell-out, Getty is planning to sell the place, preassures from above, H&F, etc.

best! Oh and Im still a non smoker. Christian

PaulieWalnuts · « **Reply #65 on:** April 04, 2011, 10:38 »

It seems like they're testing different scenarios to see how revenue, profits, and sales volume are affected.

Clearly, this one is heavy Vetta/Agency. I'd guess they'll leave it this way for a while unless they see sales volume or buyer activity dropping. If volume stays up then this best match will probably boost revenue and profits quite a bit.

kingjon · « **Reply #66 on:** April 04, 2011, 11:25 »

Isn't the tweaking of the best match to favor newer images done every year (probably several times/year)? They eventually go back to favoring the best sellers. If they didn't do that, would new uploads even have a chance to sell?

Pixart · « **Reply #67 on:** April 04, 2011, 11:33 »

Quote from: PaulieWalnuts on April 04, 2011, 10:38

It seems like they're testing different scenarios to see how revenue, profits, and sales volume are affected.

Clearly, this one is heavy Vetta/Agency. I'd guess they'll leave it this way for a while unless they see sales volume or buyer activity dropping. If volume stays up then this best match will probably boost revenue and profits quite a bit.

Why the f*ck don't they just split the freakin site already. If you want Vetta, premium, exclusive - click here. If you want microstock - click here. It's not like they are losing money on the independents, I would think the independents and their 85% agency fees are propping up the luxury offerings.

VB inc · « **Reply #68 on:** April 04, 2011, 11:50 »

If certain contributors are propped up by this best match, wouldn't it also be possible for the best match to demote (put further back on the ebb line) certain contributors? Contributors that actively voice their concerns and protest here or on istock would be on this if there was such a thing.

lagereek · « **Reply #69 on:** April 04, 2011, 12:07 »

Quote from: VB inc on April 04, 2011, 11:50

If certain contributors are propped up by this best match, wouldn't it also be possible for the best match to demote (put further back on the ebb line) certain contributors? Contributors that actively voice their concerns and protest here or on istock would be on this if there was such a thing.

Sure! after what I can see, you, yourself have just been put back on the ebb-line, you know, demoted, that is. Im truly sorry for you.

best.

cathyslife · « **Reply #70 on:** April 04, 2011, 12:09 »

Quote from: VB inc on April 04, 2011, 11:50

If certain contributors are propped up by this best match, wouldn't it also be possible for the best match to demote (put further back on the ebb line) certain contributors? Contributors that actively voice their concerns and protest here or on istock would be on this if there was such a thing.

Most definitely it would be possible to demote certain contributors. Since VB Inc. now has me on ignore and he won't see this, I will voice my opinion for others, who are open-minded and understand that everyone has the right to post their feelings and opinions in an open forum.

I think istockphoto has been working towards a goal, ever since Getty bought the company, and that is to make a lot of money and then sell. They will promote and demote whoever and whatever accomplishes that goal. I have no doubt that my files were "demoted" a long time ago, because a) I was only a gold contributor b) because I was an independent contributor c) because it is not my full-time career, and therefore did not turn myself into a factory. Fortunately, I don't have to worry about whether istock wants to "demote" me because I speak freely here or anywhere else...because I pulled my files the beginning of the year. Don't for a second think that that didn't hurt my income, because it did. Some things are more important to me. Others may not be in the same position as I am, and that's ok.

Most others here post anonymously, for that exact reason (like VB Inc). They don't have to worry about payback.

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #71 on:** April 04, 2011, 12:27 »

Quote from: cclapper on April 04, 2011, 12:09

I have no doubt that my files were "demoted" a long time ago,

Maybe you demoted yourself by still shooting at the same level you had been, and the same subjects as a lot of people contribute. I looked at your SS portfolio, and I see paper clips on white, some standard food on white, things found outside the home, etc. Those kind of things fight with all the other new "stock shooters" for sales, so sales diminish across the crowd equally as more come in. It isn't necessarily a conspiracy.

VB inc · « **Reply #72 on:** April 04, 2011, 12:38 »

Quote from: lagereek on April 04, 2011, 12:07

Quote from: VB inc on April 04, 2011, 11:50
If certain contributors are propped up by this best match, wouldn't it also be possible for the best match to demote (put further back on the ebb line) certain contributors? Contributors that actively voice their concerns and protest here or on istock would be on this if there was such a thing.

Sure! after what I can see, you, yourself have just been put back on the ebb-line, you know, demoted, that is. Im truly sorry for you.

best.

Thats why i dont post on istock forums... and i go all incognito here =D

cathyslife · « **Reply #73 on:** April 04, 2011, 12:47 »

Quote from: sjlocke on April 04, 2011, 12:27

Quote from: cclapper on April 04, 2011, 12:09
I have no doubt that my files were "demoted" a long time ago,

Maybe you demoted yourself by still shooting at the same level you had been, and the same subjects as a lot of people contribute. I looked at your Shutterstock portfolio, and I see paper clips on white, some standard food on white, things found outside the home, etc. Those kind of things fight with all the other new "stock shooters" for sales, so sales diminish across the crowd equally as more come in. It isn't necessarily a conspiracy.

I don't remember using the words conspiracy, and you are absolutely correct. All of those things certainly play into my "demotion", no doubt (which I acknowledged in my prior post, as a), b) and c). But how do you then explain others who have consistently contributed better photos, people photos, etc. and who have inadvertently found themselves "demoted"?

VB Inc. is saying that just by posting here in this forum and speaking negatively, people are getting "demoted". I suspect people were getting "demoted" long before all the negative talk started here, meaning whatever "demotions" there may be, doesn't have to do with posting in this forum.

cathyslife · « **Reply #74 on:** April 04, 2011, 12:49 »

Quote from: VB inc on April 04, 2011, 12:38

Quote from: lagereek on April 04, 2011, 12:07
Quote from: VB inc on April 04, 2011, 11:50
If certain contributors are propped up by this best match, wouldn't it also be possible for the best match to demote (put further back on the ebb line) certain contributors? Contributors that actively voice their concerns and protest here or on istock would be on this if there was such a thing.

Sure! after what I can see, you, yourself have just been put back on the ebb-line, you know, demoted, that is. Im truly sorry for you.

best.

Thats why i dont post on istock forums... and i go all incognito here =D

And I bet you are still getting "demoted", which means it has NOTHING TO DO WITH posting here in this forum. It has to do with istock/getty's games.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Poll

How has the 4/3/11 Best Match change affected your sales?

Author Topic: The 4/3/11 Istockphoto Best Match Change (Read 59736 times)

cobalt

Elenathewise

jsmithzz

lagereek

pancaketom

Karen

lagereek

gclk

lagereek

Karen

ShadySue

BaldricksTrousers

cathyslife

Difydave

lagereek

PaulieWalnuts

kingjon

Pixart

VB inc

lagereek

cathyslife

Sean Locke Photography

VB inc

cathyslife

cathyslife

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors