John Richmond Posted April 12, 2016 Share Posted April 12, 2016 The best definition of expert I've ever found is where ex is an unknown quantity and spurt is a drip under pressure. "Experts" can be very narrow in their fields of knowledge, generalists - including highly motivated and interested amateurs - may well have a broader and deeper knowledge. In my own case the only areas I could conceivably claim "expert" status is in estuarine ecology - the areas of my masters' thesis and doctoral studies. Those studies were forty years ago but the research and taxonomic skills acquired don't disappear just because time passes and you make your living in areas other than your original specialisation. Particularly if one's outside interests build on the skills acquired while pursuing those specialisations. In my case wildlife and gardening - practical ecology. The only thing that can confidently be said that unites the many contributors to the Alamy forums is that we are all photographers. What we don't generally know is the breadth and depth of expertise outwith those photographic skills. But that breadth and depth exists - and many very knowledgeable contributors are happy to freely offer their individual expertise. Yes, it's up the original questioner to check and check again as to the validity of the answers given and, if in doubt, not provide definitive captions and keywords. Asking ID questions on the forum is part and parcel of this photographic community. Long may they be asked and long may they be answered. And, who knows, the answers might even be right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alexandre Fagundes Posted April 13, 2016 Share Posted April 13, 2016 I think misleading keywords are bad for everybody in Alamy and might send buyers to other agencies so by helping others you are not increasing competition, but bringing buyers to here which might become buyers of your own pictures. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arletta Posted April 14, 2016 Share Posted April 14, 2016 I was just checking out if there is lots of images of "raw duck meat". 690 images found... Enjoy watching the results, lol In many cases there are chickens (what a difference - a bird is a bird ), and also many of them are roasted, not raw Best one A55A4E, also sushi images, etc. Where is the rabbit? BCHH73 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiskerke Posted April 14, 2016 Share Posted April 14, 2016 I was just checking out if there is lots of images of "raw duck meat". 690 images found... Enjoy watching the results, lol In many cases there are chickens (what a difference - a bird is a bird ), and also many of them are roasted, not raw Best one A55A4E, also sushi images, etc. Where is the rabbit? BCHH73 Creative Tab? wim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arletta Posted April 14, 2016 Share Posted April 14, 2016 Both, creative and new... Should it make any difference in number or images showed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiskerke Posted April 14, 2016 Share Posted April 14, 2016 Both, creative and new... Should it make any difference in number or images showed? No it shouldn't, but occasionally it has. Not sure all has been fixed. The difference is the sorting order: Creative images come first. Then the ordinary Relevant minus the ones that are Creative. There's no line End of Creative anymore. So basically with a smallish result it's the first impression. With larger results it's the difference between sales and no sales. Google Image results now link to a page with images for a given keyword, not to the image on Alamy. After that result, a new search on Alamy will default to Creative. It may take a while before one notices that. wim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arletta Posted April 14, 2016 Share Posted April 14, 2016 Thanks for the info, had no idea Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.