CM photo Posted March 28, 2016 Share Posted March 28, 2016 Some mistakes are genuine, some as a result of laziness or spamming. And some are blatant attempts to play the system and cheat at the expense of contributors who keyword honestly and conscientiously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrumu Posted March 28, 2016 Share Posted March 28, 2016 I'm a taxonomist by profession, won't correct people's identifications for free I assume if you don't want to share your knowledge with us (for free), you don't expect us to share our knowledge (for free) with you when you ask questions in this forum... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Kuta Posted March 28, 2016 Share Posted March 28, 2016 I've always thought that having some kind of flagging system would be a great idea. Everyone benefits when subjects are identified correctly. I think that some kind of flogging system might be more effective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chrissie Posted March 28, 2016 Share Posted March 28, 2016 I'm a taxonomist by profession, won't correct people's identifications for free And why should you - well said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chrissie Posted March 28, 2016 Share Posted March 28, 2016 I have made my feelings clear before when 'ID Requests Please' appear on the forum and the OP accepts the 'best answer' regardless... If you're not 100% sure on the details don't submit the image no matter how brilliant it is. If it's brilliant and you want to submit then only keyword what you know (bird, summer, blue, insect, USA) etc. I am astounded by 'professionals' on here who think it's OK to guess an ID rather than accepting it's not clearly ID'ed and generic/general details only can be given. On previous experience I expect to be shot down again - but I'll stick with it, if you don't know, don't guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Richmond Posted March 28, 2016 Share Posted March 28, 2016 I have made my feelings clear before when 'ID Requests Please' appear on the forum and the OP accepts the 'best answer' regardless... If you're not 100% sure on the details don't submit the image no matter how brilliant it is. If it's brilliant and you want to submit then only keyword what you know (bird, summer, blue, insect, USA) etc. I am astounded by 'professionals' on here who think it's OK to guess an ID rather than accepting it's not clearly ID'ed and generic/general details only can be given. On previous experience I expect to be shot down again - but I'll stick with it, if you don't know, don't guess. We all make mistakes. The Alamy forums can and should act a little like peer review in science where contributors can submit ideas and ask for their peers opinion. There is a lot of expertise on here - why not take advantage of it? And, though I'm hesitant to do this and may well earn red arrows, I'd advise you to have a look at your keywording for your Southern Hawker dragonfly shots. It's Aeshna cyanea, not Aeshna cycnea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alexandre Fagundes Posted March 28, 2016 Share Posted March 28, 2016 In my other agency they created a flag system, the users would earn I think 1 cent for each flag. This lead to tons of spammy flags, very time consuming to everyone. I had images of the Eiffel Tower flagged for the word Paris so you have an idea. I am not against the flag system, but it has to be well thought so it add up and dont become a nightmare for everyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Rooney Posted March 29, 2016 Share Posted March 29, 2016 How do you like this collection of keywords? Is there anything on Planet Earth that this contributor left out? Don't think so, since he/she/it ends up with the word "world." apartments, art deco, avenues, battery park, bicycles, bronx, brooklyn, brownstone rowhouses, bryant park, buildings, central park, chelsea, chinatown, collection, discover, downtown, east village, financial district, flatiron district, floor, fountain, garden, gothic and international style, green design, ground zero, hells kitchen, honeymoon, hotels, in, largest, liberty island, lights, lower east side, manhattan, meatpacking district, midtown, museum, neighborhood, new york city, new york skyline, nolita, nyc, panoramic view, queens, residential districts, roofs, rooftop, skyline, skyscrapers, soho, staten island, streets, sun, sunset, terrorism, the big apple, theater, tourism, tourists, townhouses, travel, trees, tribeca, trip, union square, upper east side, upper west side, varied, windows, world Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NYCat Posted March 29, 2016 Share Posted March 29, 2016 He seems to have left out Greenwich Village, though he has some photos of our library. He has included "terrorism". Yikes! Paulette Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fotoDogue Posted March 29, 2016 Share Posted March 29, 2016 He seems to have left out Greenwich Village, though he has some photos of our library. He has included "terrorism". Yikes! Paulette Not in this one he didn't. apartments, art deco, avenues, battery park, bicycles, bronx, brooklyn, brownstone rowhouses, bryant park, buildings, central park, chelsea, chinatown, collection, discover,downtown, east village, financial district, flatiron district, floor, garden, gothic and international style, green design, greenwich village, hells kitchen, honeymoon, hotels, house covered in ivy, in, largest, liberty island, lights, lower east side, manhattan, meatpacking district, midtown, museum, neighborhood, new york, new york city, nolita, nyc,panoramic view, queens, residential districts, roofs, rooftop, skyline, skyscrapers, soho, staten island, streets, sun, sunset, the big apple, theater, tourism, tourists, townhouses,travel, trees, tribeca, trip, union square, upper east side, upper west side, varied, windows, world Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dustydingo Posted March 29, 2016 Share Posted March 29, 2016 I'm a taxonomist by profession, won't correct people's identifications for free FGS . . . this post received a coward's arrow. Some folk (well, one in particular) need to grow up and try arguing a point instead of sniping anonymously. Coward's arrow removed . . . although it's London to a brick on this post gets one too dd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dustydingo Posted March 29, 2016 Share Posted March 29, 2016 I'm a taxonomist by profession, won't correct people's identifications for free And why should you - well said. And this post too received an anonymous coward's arrow . . . I've cancelled it of course . . . Apropos of nothing really, but the phrase "merchant banker" only brings up 44 results on Alamy search. Just sayin' . . . dd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hdh Posted March 29, 2016 Share Posted March 29, 2016 I'm a taxonomist by profession, won't correct people's identifications for free And why should you - well said. Well, I suggest the good people of the "Have you found" threads will send an invoice to Alassandra and Chrissie when they spot one of their images. And no, I won't add a smiley. B.t.w. Chrissie, it's Trachyaretaon brueckneri NOT Trachyaretaon Bruekneri. That'll be $25.00 thank you very much! Did you thank John for correcting your dragonfly picture for ...... free? Cheers, Philippe +1 It is like in real life, some do see competition, others community and a few appreciate opportunities for give and take. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hdh Posted March 29, 2016 Share Posted March 29, 2016 Don't you just hate it when you accidentally click the up arrow when you didn't mean to and you cannot cancel it? Anyway... One of the nicest things in these forums is how many people will help others with their keywording, identification, etc.. There are always going to be those who refuse to help as all they care about is competition, but many here are happy to help when they are more knowledgeable, and I try my best too if I think I can offer something to help a fellow photographer. I often struggle with identifying things I'm not an expert at (insects, for example, which can be very tricky to get right), which is just the way it goes when you do stock, as most of us have a wide variety of shots and can't be an expert in all subjects. It feels good to help people too rather than have this cold "find out for yourself" attitude. If someone has the attitude, "If you don't know it, don't submit it" then maybe rather than telling people that, they should spend the time that took to improve their own keywords/editing/give a few up arrows to those who have helped them, etc.. It's not as if we're giving away secrets to thousands of competitors and spoiling our own chances of sales. Like others have said, it's give and take and there's a nice sense of community in here from most people. Not long ago I was helped hugely by a fellow photographer who was more concerned about helping see someone with decent photos have more success, than about any potential competition. That's my rant for the day. Geoff. +1 and agree fully! (hope it wasnt me who deserved the down arrow ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cbimages Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 I've been checking various underwater images of shrimps on Alamy to decide which of mine are worth processing - ie, if there's only a small number of images of a species, or if mine offer a different angle etc. There are 24 images of one species. 12 of those are of a two completely different species, which both are very common and very easy to identify. The photographer of all 12 images has them keyworded with three different species names. It's very frustrating to see, and I really feel for image buyers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 ... multiple locations for animals seen on safari Animal location is a tricky one. I have recently been putting up quite a few of my safari pictures. Most were taken in Botswana, and are tagged as such. The caption always says exactly where the location was. But the animals are rarely, if ever, found in Botswana alone. Moreover, there are sometimes connections with other countries, such as a bird photographed in one country being the national bird of another. So, should the keywords include only the location at which the animal was photographed, or may they properly include other countries in which the animal (assuming it has been properly identified) are known to be found? I tend to adopt the former (tag with actual location only), but this means I may be missing out on searches for animal X (in my collection) in country Y (which I have not visited). Often the surroundings could be anywhere, unless a significant view of surrounding landscape is included. I have made only one exception to this, which is where a photograph has been taken in one reserve which is close to the boundary of another: I think it is acceptable to tag both, not least because you can often look across or see animals crossing the boundary, and you know that the particular animal would be found in both reserves. What do others think? Would it be acceptable to include other countries in which the animal is found, assuming the location is otherwise unidentifiable in the photograph? Or should the country keywords be limited to the country in which the photograph was actually taken? Graham Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Richmond Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 There's another point about plant and animal ID that's worth making and that is that it can change with time. Earlier this month I sold an image of a plant that is still often described under an old, now invalid name. My two images have both the old and the new nomenclature in the keywords. Other contributors images only have the invalid name. The search was on the new name, only my images came up, both were zoomed and one sold ($80.96, thank you Alamy). Would I have sold the image if the other contributors had kept their naming up to date? I don't know - but the occasion didn't arise. Incorrect ID can be financially costly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cbimages Posted March 30, 2016 Share Posted March 30, 2016 Yes, I try to keep my names up to date, although it can be very difficult (and time consuming). In the caption I put the new name first, then follow with "Previously xyz". Both names put in keywords. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gurcharan Posted April 5, 2016 Share Posted April 5, 2016 We all are here to build up a respectful portfolio, error free as far as possible. We have often been messaging members in Forum if we found any discrepancy in ID or label, and don't think any sincere contributor would ignore it, because it is to his/her benefit, suggester is only helping. It is effective in active Forum threads. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrumu Posted April 12, 2016 Share Posted April 12, 2016 I'm a taxonomist by profession, won't correct people's identifications for free And why should you - well said. Well, I suggest the good people of the "Have you found" threads will send an invoice to Alassandra and Chrissie when they spot one of their images. And no, I won't add a smiley. B.t.w. Chrissie, it's Trachyaretaon brueckneri NOT Trachyaretaon Bruekneri. That'll be $25.00 thank you very much! Did you thank John for correcting your dragonfly picture for ...... free? Cheers, Philippe (and now back to my keywording. Have to "guess" lots more species.) I have big respect for you, Philippe, and also for John, for your positive attitude of still helping people even after they announced that they would not help anyone (at least not for free). More on the original topic, I agree with previous posters that there should be some kind of report function to point out problems. Bad keywording, keyword spamming, QC fails which slipped thru and made it to the database; all those issues don't only lower the affected image's sales potential/value; they also hurt Alamy's reputation and thus all our images' sales potential/value. Just one example I found while doing a few searches on what to upload next: I doubt though that such a report function can be implemented in an effective way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chrissie Posted April 12, 2016 Share Posted April 12, 2016 I'm a taxonomist by profession, won't correct people's identifications for free And why should you - well said. Well, I suggest the good people of the "Have you found" threads will send an invoice to Alassandra and Chrissie when they spot one of their images. And no, I won't add a smiley. B.t.w. Chrissie, it's Trachyaretaon brueckneri NOT Trachyaretaon Bruekneri. That'll be $25.00 thank you very much! Did you thank John for correcting your dragonfly picture for ...... free? Cheers, Philippe +1 It is like in real life, some do see competition, others community and a few appreciate opportunities for give and take. And some recognise that as professionals we should be 100% sure of our labels and not accept a simple and unverified crowd source answer, however well meant Apologies for my two spelling mistakes on correctly labelled specimens - interestingly it hasn't stopped sales! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spacecadet Posted April 12, 2016 Share Posted April 12, 2016 But they're not correctly labelled, are they? You have the only search hits with the incorrect spelling and you don't appear in searches for the correct. We're professional photographers, not botanists or whatever. I don't accept that we should not do our best, and say that the train in FX80M3 is 1962 stock when it might, just might, be 1959 stock, or that the coach in FX80M7 is a Leyland National mark 2 when it just might be a mark 1, depending on the exact date of registration. Most posters here will help out with something that's outside my field. I now know not to trouble you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chrissie Posted April 12, 2016 Share Posted April 12, 2016 But they're not correctly labelled, are they? You have the only search hits with the incorrect spelling and you don't appear in searches for the correct. We're professional photographers, not botanists or whatever. I don't accept that we should not do our best, and say that the train in FX80M3 is 1962 stock when it might, just might, be 1959 stock, or that the coach in FX80M7 is a Leyland National mark 2 when it just might be a mark 1, depending on the exact date of registration. Most posters here will help out with something that's outside my field. I now know not to trouble you. Exactly - Mark 1 or Mark 2 is very important. That's correct identification. Botanists, train experts, whatever, if you don't know, give a generic label or don't submit. I've apologised for the incorrect spelling on my correct identification. There is a difference between submitting because you're 100% sure and submitting because Alamy Forum ID'ed it for you. If you don't know don't submit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spacecadet Posted April 12, 2016 Share Posted April 12, 2016 You miss the point. I'm not a train expert. That photograph was taken nearly 30 years ago. It's scrap now. I check but I might be wrong. You seem to say don't be wrong. There is knowledge on the forum beyond what is in my head. I use it. If a buyer is unsure of my caption, he checks it himself. He may be liable. I'm not, in general. The time I spend on an image reflects its value and I don't go down to the British Museum for a $6 licence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chrissie Posted April 12, 2016 Share Posted April 12, 2016 "You seem to say don't be wrong." Yes "If a buyer is unsure of my caption, he checks it himself." No - a thousand times no. Someone back me up? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.