Shutterstock Photographer Forum :: View topic

CristiM · Joined: 25 Feb 2005 Posts: 284

I think it would be better to make "most pouplar" as default sorting when buyers browse for photo's. That way the new buyers that come on the site see the best images first and the site will look more attractive to them, also I noticed in the forums uploaders are aware of this, and it's true, if I uploaded less photo in the last few days my sales dropped, I'm thinking people upload quantity reather than quality every day just to get in front. Ok some will say that sometimes most popular are not always best because some maybe old and that's how they gained numerous downloads, but there can be an algorithm to sort the images by downloads in a period of time and those will really be the most popular.

Edit:My rejection rate is so far less than 1% so I think I been uploading good pics, but if it is like this I will also start to upload anything just to stay in front too.

rodehi · Posted: Wed Mar 02, 2005 3:19 pm

Perhaps Jon you could leave that as an option for the photog's to decide for their personal galleries.I would like to be able to have a little more creative control of mine.If not to be able to sort the order of appearance individually then to choose from the list of preset default options.If not i too would agree with Cristi and prefer that "most popular"be my default ....Ron

CristiM · Joined: 25 Feb 2005 Posts: 284

That would be good too, but I'm not talking about the individual galleries, but about the main gallery wich is on the site where designers buy. The reason I came up with this is because both shutterstock and I have lost one today, who is not a designer but he is my client and I am a designer. He wanted to buy the images for me to work with, but he couldn't really find what he whas looking for, so he looked at another sites. I don't know if he found it yet or if he's coming back I am trying to deal with it, but it would be so much better if best images would came up first, and if people wouldn't submit keywords that arn't really related to the images.

rodehi · Posted: Wed Mar 02, 2005 4:44 pm

What image is he looking for?

CristiM · Joined: 25 Feb 2005 Posts: 284

Several, one of them is for example "people having fun" I looked at the site for the keyword "fun" and the first page is 90% full of images that have verry little to do with fun, some funny things start on the second page, and the people having fun may be at page 68. If I searched "people fun" alot of activities come up many can be considered fun but the really good images the one that makes one say "wow this site has cool pics" are again maybe at page 45 or so... the ones on 1'st page are good ones useful images I'm not saying, but we all really want to put the ones that are best on the front page if we want to get more customers. I'm sure even if he didn't find exactly what he whas looking for he would of stayed, if he saw some really outstanding ones first. You know how they say, "first impression..." right now he is browsing istockphoto, and he keeps messaging me that he found this and that, and I can't force him not to, I keep telling him there are ghood pics on SS and he should look more carefully, but that's all I can do.

rodehi · Posted: Wed Mar 02, 2005 5:02 pm

I searched group fun and found
http://www.shutterstock.com/pic.mhtml?&id=36904&searchterm=group+fun&searchtermx=&anyorall=all&attr=&value=
fun is a pretty vague searchword having fun doing what?where?

CristiM · Joined: 25 Feb 2005 Posts: 284

I don't know exactly what keywords he used all I'm saying that if we would put the best images first we would all have to win.

Dwight Smith · Joined: 28 Dec 2004 Posts: 987 Location: Santa Cruz, CA

One of our weaknesses has been the inability to use phrases in our keywords list. I believe the Shutterstock crew is working on giving us that ability.

For the time being, it might be a simpler task to build a search engine for the title of the image.

StuartE · Posted: Wed Mar 02, 2005 5:55 pm

This is such a hugely blinkered viewpoint of images that I am amazed how many people subscribe to it... if the most popular images are the default option, how exactly would your latest upload of a 'perfect' shot get to the top to be seen? Why is it automatically assumed that a shot that has been here longer, and hence has more downloads, somehow better than every new shot submitted to the site? My spread of downloads is even amongst my images, every day, some old, some new - I'd love to have the number one shot on the site, but honestly, only one person can have that - but I don't assume that any one of my shots is going to be the best, forever - that's just unrealistic...

Cheers,
Stuart

rodehi · Posted: Wed Mar 02, 2005 6:02 pm

I was thinking of a nice way to explain that Stuart thank you.I had originally thought Cristi was talking about this option for personal galleries thats why i agreed with her,what are your thoughts on being able to organize ones personal gallery?......Ron

CristiM · Joined: 25 Feb 2005 Posts: 284

I stated clearly in the first post that not the one with most number of downloads should be considered good, there can be made a smarter algorythm for that, like the number of downloads in a verage for a period of time instead of a count of all time downloads. Also the new images should have a simple "latest uploads" link like all stock sites do. Belive me I don't think that any of the images I have would make even close to first page for each galley, but it is preety important for the site to make an outstandin impression on first browse for buyers to decide to spend the money, then during the month or year they have payed for thru search and more accurate browsing I am sure they will come to our less perfect ones too. This will also encurage submitters to be more careful on composing and thinking images instead what they do now. As you see all along the forum the secret is to upload every day so you stay in front, and they are right, if I uploaded less in the past few days sales dropped visibly. But I think if we all would be more concerned with overall quality reather than quantity on long term we will all have to win. I also think is more fair like that. May the best be first, not the last. Again I am sure none of my images will get even close to the first pagess, but I'm sure after they pay and they stay a month or a year they will get to mine. There is a new stock photo site coming every month I think by the end of this year there will be 1000 sites that will sell imagess than comes what's natural and ony a few will remain. Soon buyers will come browse 2 pagess to get an ideea then if they are not convinced, they move on... I think you have more to loose this way than you win for 1 day or 2 whan your image is in front.

rodehi · Posted: Wed Mar 02, 2005 6:11 pm

Perhaps you could steer him to the "top downloads"page or one of those fine "lightboxes"?

StuartE · Posted: Wed Mar 02, 2005 7:00 pm

Hi Ron,

I worry about the organisation of my gallery when it's for art's sake, or to show off my photographic skills, or lack thereof - here, I'm not really worried about the order the portfolio is in - only that there is plenty in there... what I would like is for people to be able to search withing my portfolio, and more importantly, for them to be able to refine a search within a search, ala DT...

Even if you did carefully order your portfolio, would you then need to redo it with the newest uploads? And would the viewer still go there and click straight onto the 'most popular' (I would...) I can think of better things to do with my time here than that - although when I'm uploading and there's nothing in the forums to read/answer I could play with my gallery, I'd still probably do something else instead, like editing the next shot...

Cheers,
Stuart

jlye · Joined: 21 Jan 2005 Posts: 229 Location: Singapore

Personally I prefer with the current system. If it's always popular first, then your new work might "NEVER" have a chance to be seen and stay at the bottom of the queue ALWAYS. But with the current system, new images at least gets to be in the front. If they are spotted, good for them, if not .. it's just too bad even with the exposure given.

my 2 cents

CristiM · Joined: 25 Feb 2005 Posts: 284

It's like this: You have a shop and you have some really attractive products that you can put in the window and make lots of people come into your shop, or you can put in the window some less attractive products that don't sell so good, with the hope to sell those too. I prefere to put the attractive one in the window then after the people come in to show them the less attractive one too. However I understand you guys you don't like to be challenged to put more time and thought into it, you maybe prefere it how it is, and sell only because you put yours in the window for a day or 2. Pitty we loose those buyers that move on because the window is less attractive... it worth a thought tho. Maybe Jon can see better in the stats how many people browse and decide not to buy... maybe we could try it for a while to see if it brings us more customers, because I know one thing for sure, the more customers the better we all sell, regardless on what page it is. There is one thing I think all you guys forget, they make a decision to spend the money in 5 minutes then they stay 1-12 months (enoght time to browse the site all over). But the decision to give more than 100$ is made in the first minutes. If they don't your pics can be in the front page for ever.