Author Topic: Interesting New Feature - galleries and profile (Read 16296 times)

kjorgen · « **Reply #50 on:** November 15, 2012, 06:03 »

Quote from: CD123 on November 13, 2012, 17:20

I have a "page" of facebook, but when I paste the link into the facebook link "template" URL they have, it tells me that it may only consist of letters and numbers and it does (except for the front slash required after the word "page" in the URL)?

Use only the 15 numbers at the end of your facebook URL

CD123 · « **Reply #51 on:** November 15, 2012, 06:27 »

Quote from: kjorgen on November 15, 2012, 06:03

Quote from: CD123 on November 13, 2012, 17:20
I have a "page" of facebook, but when I paste the link into the facebook link "template" URL they have, it tells me that it may only consist of letters and numbers and it does (except for the front slash required after the word "page" in the URL)?

Use only the 15 numbers at the end of your facebook URL

Another clever girl! Hy heart to you as well (and let anyone say anything about blonds again) :-)

estionx · « **Reply #52 on:** November 15, 2012, 08:54 »

Quote from: jsnover on November 13, 2012, 20:50

Quote from: estionx on November 13, 2012, 18:32
Hi, this is a good idea, here I leave my profile: http://shutterstock.com/gallery-945871.html

It's a nice way to browse people's work. I took a look at yours and think it might be better to split landscape into Architecture (the buildings) and Landscape (the other outdoor shots). I'd remove the fireworks shots from Landscapes as they have their own group. It makes it easier to see quickly assess each group if you have it tightly focussed.

Ok thanks !! I will follow your advice.

bye

gostwyck · « **Reply #53 on:** November 26, 2012, 08:00 »

I've noticed a huge increase in 'Image Gallery Views (by logged in users)', at the bottom of the contributor page, since the new Profile pages were implemented. I used to only get 4-6 on average but last week it was 18.

It does suggest that buyers are being encouraged to explore portfolios as a result of this feature.

Anyone else?

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #54 on:** November 26, 2012, 13:17 »

I had no idea that feature was there (I never scroll down from the contributor page and it's off the bottom of my screen)!!

Last week I had 10 views but I don't know what it used to be, so I can't compare

cascoly · « **Reply #55 on:** November 26, 2012, 19:47 »

thanks for pointing this out! i knew about galleries but not how to make them public , so i hadnt done much with them

to find your galleries, first just enter your shutterstock portfoilo page:

http://www.shutterstock.com/g/cascoly

near the top left, there's a choice of images or galeries - clicking galleries will give your url, eg:

http://www.shutterstock.com/gallery-82956/artist-picks

mtilghma · « **Reply #56 on:** November 27, 2012, 16:02 »

I'm not a fan of this. Some may see it as a way to market your work yourself, thus supplementing the marketing your work receives. I see it as a gateway towards them pawning off the marketing job on us.

gostwyck · « **Reply #57 on:** November 27, 2012, 16:33 »

Quote from: mtilghma on November 27, 2012, 16:02

I'm not a fan of this. Some may see it as a way to market your work yourself, thus supplementing the marketing your work receives. I see it as a gateway towards them pawning off the marketing job on us.

Well last year SS spent $30M on sales and marketing, about 25% of their entire revenue, so I don't think you can accuse them of shirking their responsibilities in that regard.

Of course the galleries are a means of self-marketing but only for your benefit. They are a tool to promote your portfolio to customers in competition with the 22M images from other contributors. It's free and it only takes a few minutes to set up. Up to you if you choose not to use it.

CD123 · « **Reply #58 on:** November 27, 2012, 16:51 »

Quote from: mtilghma on November 27, 2012, 16:02

I'm not a fan of this. Some may see it as a way to market your work yourself, thus supplementing the marketing your work receives. I see it as a gateway towards them pawning off the marketing job on us.

I totally agree with you. The site visitors which they attracted through their marketing can find your work on their own. This is just a blatant shifting of responsibility. Whatever you do, do not make use of this function and support the fascist pigs.

more for me than you....

mtilghma · « **Reply #59 on:** November 27, 2012, 17:16 »

You guys obviously don't have to agree with me. In fact I'm relieved that you don't.

But for clarity, I did not say they have ever shirked the responsibility yet. They've been great and are my favorite agency. I even bought some stock! But I am nevertheless unsettled by the doors this opens. Yes, it opens some good ones. But it also sets the (potential) path in motion for them telling us our worth to them is related to things other than our photo portfolio. I see them ranking us, in someway, based on the traffic we bring into the site. Some of you will want that. I don't.

mtilghma · « **Reply #60 on:** November 27, 2012, 17:20 »

Quote from: CD123 on November 27, 2012, 16:51

Quote from: mtilghma on November 27, 2012, 16:02
I'm not a fan of this. Some may see it as a way to market your work yourself, thus supplementing the marketing your work receives. I see it as a gateway towards them pawning off the marketing job on us.

I totally agree with you. The site visitors which they attracted through their marketing can find your work on their own. This is just a blatant shifting of responsibility. Whatever you do, do not make use of this function and support the fascist pigs.

more for me than you....

I know this was in jest, but I do feel the need to mention that I think you misunderstood my point. I do not think that my buyers could have found my work on their own, and that SS's marketing has not helped me. Quite the opposite. I'm terrified of the potential eventuality that they reduce their marketing and tell me to do it myself via social platforms, because I'd be like a fish out of water. I feel that my success at SS is dependent on their marketing, not my own, which seems to be the opposite of what you got out of my post.

CD123 · « **Reply #61 on:** November 27, 2012, 17:37 »

Quote from: mtilghma on November 27, 2012, 17:20

I know this was in jest, but I do feel the need to mention that I think you misunderstood my point. I do not think that my buyers could have found my work on their own, and that SS's marketing has not helped me. Quite the opposite. I'm terrified of the potential eventuality that they reduce their marketing and tell me to do it myself via social platforms, because I'd be like a fish out of water. I feel that my success at SS is dependent on their marketing, not my own, which seems to be the opposite of what you got out of my post.

Glad you clarified it a bit. However. I doubt if the SS owners will ever be so stupid as to hand over the marketing of a multi million dollar and one of the most successful micro stock agencies to their non marketing experienced contributors. If I had millions of images under my control and I can get the contributors to assist in categorizing them better, which will hugely benefit my buyers and the contributors of such an action, I would have done the same. It is wise, it is economical and mutually beneficial. This is my take on the business perspective of it. Further it is up to every contributor to take part or not. I respect your choice, but do not agree.

mtilghma · « **Reply #62 on:** November 27, 2012, 17:43 »

I think I agree with you, if you only take it that far. I have made the profile and made several sets, organizing my best photos, etc. I see the use in that, marginally (how different is it than the existing categories, if it's only taken this far)?

What I don't like is how we are encouraged to hawk these sets via social media. Do I see contributors hawking their sets as detrimental to SS? No, not really. I do, however, see it as detrimental to me. There are many many many contributors who are better "social butterflies" than me, though perhaps not better photographers. I know, being a photographer is as much about marketing as it is about photography, but I don't even think this hawking will help them directly. I just fear that we'll be ranked by the "social traffic" we generate, even if that traffic does not relate to sales.

lisafx · « **Reply #63 on:** November 27, 2012, 17:52 »

I see this more as a way to market to buyers that SS has already attracted. Making it easy for them to find similar themed images in my portfolio. I already do the same with lightboxes on Istock, but have to use my own coding to do so. SS makes it a lot easier to promote yourself, if you want.

FWIW, I am not interested in social media or promoting myself there. If I were it would be my own website I would market.

CD123 · « **Reply #64 on:** November 27, 2012, 18:03 »

Quote from: mtilghma on November 27, 2012, 17:43

I just fear that we'll be ranked by the "social traffic" we generate, even if that traffic does not relate to sales.

That will be an equally stupid business move. SS is, like all businesses, all about sales.
Most sites offers facebook and other links to help you promote your own port. This is thus not a new concept and no site have shifted their responsibilities that way (in any case none of the ones still operating).

gostwyck · « **Reply #65 on:** November 27, 2012, 18:21 »

Quote from: CD123 on November 27, 2012, 17:37

Quote from: mtilghma on November 27, 2012, 17:20

I know this was in jest, but I do feel the need to mention that I think you misunderstood my point. I do not think that my buyers could have found my work on their own, and that SS's marketing has not helped me. Quite the opposite. I'm terrified of the potential eventuality that they reduce their marketing and tell me to do it myself via social platforms, because I'd be like a fish out of water. I feel that my success at SS is dependent on their marketing, not my own, which seems to be the opposite of what you got out of my post.

Glad you clarified it a bit. However. I doubt if the SS owners will ever be so stupid as to hand over the marketing of a multi million dollar and one of the most successful micro stock agencies to their non marketing experienced contributors. If I had millions of images under my control and I can get the contributors to assist in categorizing them better, which will hugely benefit my buyers and the contributors of such an action, I would have done the same. It is wise, it is economical and mutually beneficial. This is my take on the business perspective of it. Further it is up to every contributor to take part or not. I respect your choice, but do not agree.

Exactly. Well said.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Interesting New Feature - galleries and profile (Read 16296 times)

kjorgen

CD123

estionx

gostwyck

Jo Ann Snover

cascoly

mtilghma

gostwyck

CD123

mtilghma

mtilghma

CD123

mtilghma

lisafx

CD123

gostwyck

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors