You have to login first in order to be able to post messages.
Click here to login or register if you are a new user.


Page:
<  ... 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 
9
 of 9
Showing posts 161 - 180 of 172

no more views

Author Message
Bradcalkins
2513 posts
84
Message posted at 06/10/2009, 22:20:26 PM by Bradcalkins

Originally posted by Wisconsinart:
Quoted Message: Alternative points of view seem to focus on sales. You know an image is good on how well it sells. But that's after the fact. Why waste time on images where VIEWS will prove no one is interested.




I don't see how a sale is after the fact information, while views are not. Sales are the actual goal, while views may or may not have any bearing on sales potential for a particular image. After getting one or two sales on an image I might think it would pay to add more like it, but with just views and no sales on a group of images I don't know that it is valid to draw any conclusions about what might sell. There are too many factors to assume that lots of views will result in a best seller.



I have an image with over 1000 views and no sales, and another with 1 view 1 sale. I'll take the 2nd, thank you! My view is that the 'view' statistic provides some information, but that it is hard to draw solid conclusions from it. I really don't see that either option that is up for grabs is truly meaningful (since registered members still includes contributors). I'm easy on whether it stays like it is or goes back to how it was, or disappears altogether.
Fast primes, Olympus OM-D EM-1, 12-40mm f/2.8

Uploaded files:3627 | Total Sales: 25287
Godfer
1495 posts
76
Message posted at 06/11/2009, 01:39:08 AM by Godfer
LOL, You must have missed the official announcement.

But even though you made me laugh I still don't agree with you ;)




Originally posted by Warrenpricephotography:
Quoted Message: Then I must have misinterpreted you shouting ;)





Are you the "shout police?" :-)





Canon 5D MK II

Uploaded files:1606 | Total Sales: 30718
Martinedegraaf
1130 posts
81
Message edited at 06/11/2009, 03:37:21 AM by Martinedegraaf

Originally posted by Kcphotos:
Quoted Message:

Unless a way can be developed to determine WHY each person is viewing an image, I just can't see how it can be an accurate or reliable measure of ones ability as a stock photographer or the commercial appeal for a given image. It is just not accurate enough...




I think this is very true. I have had images getting LOTS of views within hours. When I searched for the reason (the image was not THAT spectacular;)) it turned out to be placed on the first page of the category. Not every picture is placed there (don't knnow the reason) but it gives great exposure AND a very distorted idea of popularity when you use views as a popularity guide...



Views can give some direction, but imo not too much value must be given.

And the way DT is counting views now is not going to change the usability, we just have to get used to a new standard and we can not fairly compare the old and the new views anymore.



Martine



Nikon D300, Nikkor 17-55 f2.8, Nikkor 70-200 f2.8, Nikkor 50...

Uploaded files:677 | Total Sales: 5101
Alexhor
67 posts
76
Message posted at 06/11/2009, 13:45:51 PM by Alexhor
Interesting, while at the beginning I was among first against removing guest counts, later I changed my mind because I understand that my opinion was in minority. Now you all filled few pages more still discussing the issue.

But that is not bad.



Discussion shows that image valuation is a complicated thing.



We should consider that viewers may be logged in, logged out, tourists, EXIF checkers, keyword checkers, thiefs etc. Wery colorfull group.



We should consider that numers may show something to newbie and numbers may mislead newbie.



We should consider that someone selling hundreds a day is absolutely not interested in views (I wouldn't be either) as he have superior numbers to analyze. Also the newbie is clueless as he hasn't got ANY number to analyze.



We should consider that it is DT stuff who make decisions of the prices, policy, algorithms etc. Regarding to this many daily changes may affect someones performance and it is not to blame only one change.



Someones sales drop may not be affected by views. I think that someone here doesn't understand that they are not loosing views, number of daily visitors are still there, they are just not counted. Lost of views is search engine issue while not seing views is views counter image. The first one affects sales while other don't. Everyone who see changes in their sales should address their concerns on search engine, not views counter.



Also, someone said that if viewer sees that image is viewed many times but not sold well, he will rather buy the one which is sold the same time as viewed. I don't agree with that. It has nothing to do with buyers decision. Potential buyer has its own mind, and he will not decide on the fact that many people find image but don't buy as they may have their own reasons. Buyer rather wants to be original. Images are royalty free and maybe they will hesitate to buy image that is sold 2000 times and is also more expensive (imagine two girls on a party in a same dress).



One of my clients bought a new image here on DT because he figures out that his competitor has the same DT image on his web site. Probably very salable image, lots of sells and unimportant views.



Probably the picture is now blurry because there are more then one change so we cannot decide which one to blame. Normally everyone blames the one that seems logical but this may not lead to truth. I see that maybe most important number relation is based on portfolio and looking at portfolio size/downloads may show success or not. So lets build it.
Photo gear: Olympus SLR E-510 EVOLT (ED 14-54, 40-150, 70-30...

Uploaded files:106 | Total Sales: 307
Rangpl
175 posts
Message posted at 06/12/2009, 17:11:26 PM by Rangpl
Looks like @Alexhor and all that thread have lost in space.



Really strange discussion about something what is not important, thus not counted, but anyway counted for some visitors because anyhow it is wanted.



blah blah blah



The truth is the visit counter is same as any other factor on the net and denying it is completely crazy.



And if that UGLY VIEW COUNTER is not needed - why the VIEWS are still visible or why are these counted for AUTHORISED USERS.



There is completely no relevance between VIEW and the DL. Cause if it would be, the counter would be also duplicated thus not needed.



And if the VIEWS count will be higher than the DL count, it would show that the AUTHORISED USERS VIEWS are counted with no sense too (because they (DT) say that now it is disabled cause 'views are not views' and are just misleading - and counting only authorised/logged users is right cause they MIGHT BUY - and if they NOT ? - the counter then suc$$ :)).



So we may say that this thread and idea of VIEW COUNTER as it is now - limited - is also nonsense.



If the VIEW COUNTER has no value, why some of You want to disable it, You dont need it so why You bother?



And SOME USERS LIKE IT then why You want take it them away?



And if the resources are so critically used - why is the counter still displayed, it's not needed as we may read.



I'm sure there are more valuable resource savers than this funny counter.



And so on, and so on



ZERO LOGIC





And at the end @Alexhor... You're changeing Your mind because of major-minority opinions?



I got my own.



PS.



Women are also just 'viewed' rather than 'downloaded', and that fact doesn't prevent from stating some are most beautiful and wanted than other.;) VIEWS COUNT



Each image has it's time, range and price thus 100 DLS of one might not be equal to 10 DLs of another (what means the relevancy using the DL count is also incorrect, no one knows buyers intentions and later image usage).



As i said in that above forum thread - the COUNTER ACTION is the cover for the algotihm change.



BUT I DON"T COMPLAIN - these are just a few thoughts.



Dreamstime should better FIX the counter cause it increments each F5 HIT/refresh and THAT's real BUG.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Post copied from my blog for @Alexhor to feel not angry and picked. :)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Photoshop, Lightroom, Inkscape, Blender 3D, Canon cameras. ...

Uploaded files:626 | Total Sales: 1468
Rookiedi
142 posts
74
Message posted at 06/12/2009, 17:12:35 PM by Rookiedi
Good point!
Nikon

Uploaded files:312 | Total Sales: 563
Sbotas
30 posts
75
Message posted at 06/13/2009, 06:05:04 AM by Sbotas
Yep! Almost whole page of my new pictures have zero views..


Uploaded files:1613 | Total Sales: 3199
Crystalcraig
12 posts
77
Message posted at 06/17/2009, 02:08:52 AM by Crystalcraig

Originally posted by Achilles:
Quoted Message: It is not a search engine update. We removed the counter for non-authenticated guests, at least for a while. The traffic is huge and the number not really useful. Views are still counted for members.



If we find out this is a vital resource, we will add it back. However, we need to optimize and to direct most resources to the important areas. You know them, the ones that lead to more sales. ;)




Hey everyone, just looking for some clarification. I read the entire thread and noticed a few areas that still hadn't been addressed ... With the new view tracking system, I'm unclear as to how can a photo have sales without views? Also there seems to be an implication that tracking views consumes resources better used elsewhere .... Does tracking views create logistical strain on bandwidth or processing, or is DT trying to keep down traffic by deterring photographers from viewing activity within their portfolios?



I have an image that sold with zero views. I doubt it was sold "sight unseen" or that it was part of anyone's lightbox prior to the switch (it was just uploaded). Based on what I could gather within this thread, I assume the buyer was a "non-authenticated guest" ... and if so, why was this non-authenticated-buyer's "view" not as important as say a fellow photographer that was browsing through my portfolio for no other reason than to browse? If I'm understanding how this new system works correctly, then I no longer see the benefit to tracking views.



I'd rather have no view tracking at all, or return to the former method that:

1) gives a general idea of consumer interest

2) might help a contributor identify an image that needs some keyword love, or tells a photographer to try another subject

3) might tell a photographer that they found a hot topic, or Aunt May just can't help but look at herself 24-times a day, or that no one could identify the subject from the thumbnail so they had to click on the image just to figure out what it is ...



The numbers all by themselves don't really mean anything, it's how you use them.



Thanks and Cheers ~ Two Cents
Canon EOS-1 D Mark II, 5-D Mark III, & canon lenses

Uploaded files:730 | Total Sales: 7149
Andreygorlov
186 posts
<10
Message posted at 06/17/2009, 03:23:54 AM by Andreygorlov
ыstrnge situation again...no views again...again!!!

just wondering why so many people has the same problem?
Canon cameras

Uploaded files:568 | Total Sales: 699
Saniphoto
97 posts
75
Message posted at 06/17/2009, 04:02:01 AM by Saniphoto

Originally posted by Achilles:
Quoted Message: It is not a search engine update. We removed the counter for non-authenticated guests, at least for a while. The traffic is huge and the number not really useful. Views are still counted for members.



If we find out this is a vital resource, we will add it back. However, we need to optimize and to direct most resources to the important areas. You know them, the ones that lead to more sales. ;)






Hi Serban,

Probably the solution is simply (I don't know if it is technically easy to do, anyway) to let who wants to have views in the old way choose that option and who prefer (as me) to have the 'filtered' and more useful new version, to keep it this way! :-)



Photographic gear: Nikon D300 and D700 with Nikon lenses, El...

Uploaded files:2259 | Total Sales: 28313
Saniphoto
97 posts
75
Message posted at 06/17/2009, 04:14:17 AM by Saniphoto
Hi Serban,

sorry, I wrote in a rush... didn't read with attention your last sentence. In fact, if DT needs to allocate more resources to areas more profitable for sales, so that is the key point and would need no further discussion.
Photographic gear: Nikon D300 and D700 with Nikon lenses, El...

Uploaded files:2259 | Total Sales: 28313
Tangie
1645 posts
68
Message posted at 06/17/2009, 04:33:15 AM by Tangie - member is an admin
All your opinions have been noted and we will take them into consideration in the future. You can always address previous answers and replies posted by admin staff members for important questions related to this topic,. Depending on the future site activity as well as on the feedback you provided on view counter, we will decide whether this feature should be re-added or not.

We would like to assure you that your images are viewed by all users, registered or visitors/unregistered. The only difference, if this can be called difference, is that views from unregistered members are not counted.


Uploaded files:0 | Total Sales: 0
Page:
<  ... 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 
9
 of 9
Showing posts 161 - 180 of 172
Current Server Time: 04/23/2014, 13:15:24 PM