IanButty

Verified
  • Content count

    42
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

5 Forum reputation = neutral

About IanButty

  • Rank
    Forum newbie

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Stockport, UK

Alamy

  • Alamy URL
    http://www.alamy.com/contrib-browse.asp?cid={4F9904D7-7009-4CA2-B66F-300CDFB4DC96}&name=Ian+M+Butterfield
  • Images
    7085
  • Joined Alamy
    22 Jan 2003

Recent Profile Visitors

257 profile views
  1. In the green

    I can't vote yet. I have 20% in the green. The vote options say "between 10% and 20%" and "between 20% and 30%" - my score falls between the cracks! (pretty much like my sales since AIM went live and the search engine was updated). I am using Jim Kier's "Lightroom Alamy Bridge" plug-in and at present letting it work what words are going to be super tags and tags. I already have a pretty exhaustive hierarchical keyword taxonomy in Lightroom which includes synonyms. It is something I have developed over 10 years of keywording images in various DAMs (Digital Asset Management programs). Jim Kier's algorithms along with my keyword hierarchy do a reasonable job of getting the right words in the supertags. However it is not perfect by any means, but I look at it as a trade off accuracy vs time. The other week I managed to update over 1000 of my 7000 images in just one afternoon. I better to have 1000 images that are mostly tagged accurately, than 100 images that perfectly tagged and 900 that are poorly tagged. (The remaining 6000 images are proving more of a problem - They date from a time when I stored both PSD and DNG versions of images in my Lightroom catalog and the software complains about duplicate references). Some of them went green most didn't. I am trying not to worry about the fact that most of my images aren't green and will probably never be green. Once I have sorted the remaining 6000 images, I'll look at improving the accuracy further. But until Alamy Measures broke a few days ago, the semi automated changes to my 1000 images were showing a significant improvement on views and zooms.... but alas no improvement on sales yet.
  2. Glad I found this thread. I was starting to panic. As of the end of last month I started the process of updating my keywords, captions and image data. So I have been carefully monitoring the effect it had on views and zooms (looking at the views/zooms recorded under 'This Month') and for the first 10 days to 2 weeks it all looked as though it was having the desired effect. Then it all appeared to go pear-shaped. I was beginning to think the updates I had been doing weren't making any difference after all. And that the improvements I was seeing in measures early in the month was just a blip. I hope they can fix this soon and without loss of data. A 'hole' in the data won't help the analysis of my changes.
  3. Photographers never retire... they just loose focus! (Sorry... I'll get me coat)
  4. Categories and contributors options.

    I'm in the process of assigning categories to all my images, I too would be interest to hear from Alamy about this.
  5. Ability to replace one image with another via AIM

    Matt, You have just reminded me of something from the old days when I first started with Alamy. I *think* back in 2004/5 when I need to replace an image the advice was as follows: 1. Upload the replacement image. Once it is through QC, note the ID (lets call it NEWID) 2. View the image to be replaced note down its ID (let's call this OLDID) and make a note of keywords, captions and other metadata 3. Caption and keyword the new image include the ID of the old image, OLDID, as one of the keywords and set the metadata as per the old image. 4. Wait for the database to be updated (overnight) so that new image is now visible to buyers. 5. Edit the old image and remove all keywords (tags), Set the the caption to be: "This image has been replaced with NEWID" 6. Mark the old image for deletion. A couple of things to note about the process. Step 3 - Important to add the old ID as a tag to the new image so that anyone searching with the alamy ID for the image gets the new image coming up on the search results Step 5 - Removing all keywords from the old image will ensure that the new image not the old image turns up in searches. Step 5 - Setting the caption to a message to send buyers to the new image makes anyone who has the old image in a lightbox aware of the replacement. Step 6 - Marking for deletion has to be the last step as (at the time) it wasn't possible edit captions and keywords after an image is marked for deletion. I think this process will still work today, but I'll give it a go and report back. Ian.
  6. Ability to replace one image with another via AIM

    I started in 2003 and I am in the process of revisiting my images from the first few years and in many cases I'm sitting here with head in hands going. Why on earth did I process them like THAT! I'd like to replace a couple of hundred of mine, but I am sure that Alamy would not be happy with me sending them a list of replacements that long. Perhaps if they could give us an indication of how many they would be willing to do, and how frequently. (Eg. 2 images at time once a week, or 50 images in on go every 6 months) then we we can concentrate on replacing the ones that are in most need of it. Ian.
  7. Interesting. I studied physics at University. One of the principals of physics is that the way to solve problems is to come up with a theory. At this stage you don't have any evidence, it's just an idea. Then... you look for ways to either disprove the theory or ways to confirm the theory. If you can prove the theory fantastic. Job done. If you disprove the theory you come up with a new one and design a new set of tests, until you can either prove it or more often than not just run out of ways to disprove the theory. If the later is what happens then you have the current best understanding as to what is happening. So applying this approach. From what people are reporting, here and on other threads. I have a theory. Order in which the first image from a specific photographer appears on a search is calculated by the overall/average rank of the contributor. What the first image is and the order of subsequent images from that photographers is calculated by the rank of the specific pseudonym. All I (we) need to do is come up with a test to prove or disprove it. Of course... even if I could prove or disprove it, it doesn't answer the question of whether I should consolidate my pseudonyms. I guess as goegphotos said I might have to ask Member Services about that one. Ian.
  8. Keywording and Misspellings

    It gests even worse when dealing with Arabic place names as the translitteration in to english can yeild several equally valid and different spellings. All of which eats in to the 10 available super tags.
  9. Stupid Question about AIM...

    D'oh! I'll stop storing that information in my Lightroom catalog then! Thanks, Ian. PS. Did they give any reason why they did away with it? I know when they did away with "Is a cut out" it was because they could determine that by analyzing the image. I doubt they could determine if an image was digitally altered the same way. PPS. Now if they would just do way with people "1,2,3,4 and more" and replace with a simple yes/no then I'd be happy.
  10. Stupid Question about AIM...

    I am still getting my head round AIM since I started uploading again. I know this is stupid but for the life of me I can't find where I set whether an image is digitally altered or no. Can someone point me in the right direction. Thanks Stupid of Stockport
  11. Keywording and Misspellings

    I'm sure I must have lots of misspellings in my keyword collection. I try to avoid them but unfortunately I am dyslexic and have trouble spotting them.
  12. Sorry folks, this is another of my what's changed since I was active posts. I've done a search of the forums and read a few interesting posts suggesting that pseudonyms are no longer independent of each other. When I was active and submitting regularly the general thinking was that it was good practice to split the images into different pseudonyms because it meant that an unpopular pseudonym wouldn't drag down a popular one. At the time I started creating a new pseudonym for each country of the world I had photographed, each region of the UK, and in the case of models one for each model I'd shot. Since then I've travelled to many more countries and worked with many more models and my list of pseudonyms not runs to over 60!! The fact that I had so many pseudonyms didn't really bother me - 60 is just a number, and until I read the recent posts I believed it was a good idea to continue to keep them separate - let each collection fend for itself and in the gladiatorial arena that is Alamy Rank. However now with the theory that the pseudonyms are somehow linked in the ranking algorithm, I wondering if I ought to consolidate back down to smaller number. When I set up the pseudonyms it was round the time that we all used the BHZ keyword (and yes we called them keywords not tags in those days) to get an idea of relative ranking. As things stand at the moment I have one pseudonym "Ian M Butterfield (concepts)" that ranks on page 5 out 30+ pages. The rest are languishing between 1/2 and 2/3s down the listing. Some of the newer pseudonyms don't have any images with a BHZ tag, so I don't know there they fit into the grand scheme of things. I can already think of one big reason for consolidating. The Alamy measures info is VERY misleading with a lot of pseudonyms . Because I have a relatively low number of images in each pseudonym (Average of just over 115 per pseudo) it can give odd results. If I look at the the CTR for "Ian M Butterfield (Canada)" over the period 1 Jan 17 - 28 Sep 17. it has a CTR of 25.0 - wow! thought, until I delved deeper. Over that whole 9 month period, there were only two searches resulting only 4 views and 1 zoom. It might be a CTR of 25.0 but actually it was pretty rubbish performing pseudonym! So bottom line, what's the current thinking? Is there much point in creating lots of pseudonyms anymore? How many do people have and are people still using them to let different images live or die on their own merits? Thanks Ian.
  13. Primary and Secondary Categories

    All fair questions. Especially the last one. If 23 becomes 56 just after I have finished categorising ~7000 images and I have revisit them to check if any need recategorising then I I won't be happy.
  14. Primary and Secondary Categories

    Hi Betty, Thanks for the reply. I wasn't aware of the 'proximity' thing. I'm effectively still using " " and [ ]. I do almost all my tagging in LR, but Jim Keir's Lightroom Alamy Bridge has a priority sorting algorithm which does a pretty good job of shuffling the keywords so that the most appropriate are at the front and the then the top 10 get chosen as the super tags. For my images, it works pretty well, and I only need to do a few tweeks to what it has selected once everything is here. I can also set all the optional data in LR and transmit that via the plug-in. I've spent a little time this week developing a set of smart collections which tell me exactly which images are missing which bits of optional data - including the primary and secondary categories. So hopefully it won't take me too long to bring my pre-AIM images up to scratch - I'm just doing a handful each day until I get there. Ian.
  15. Primary and Secondary Categories

    Thanks for the replies - I hadn't realised that they weren't being used yet. Will be interesting to see how they come into play in the future. Oh well, I guess I'll just keep setting them and see what happens. I think the thing that is shocking me more than anything is how much has changed while I have been 'away'.