GS-Images

Verified
  • Content count

    3,059
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,535 Forum reputation = excellent

3 Followers

About GS-Images

Alamy

  • Alamy URL
    http://www.alamy.com/contrib-browse.asp?cid={B5F548C9-EC2C-4EDC-A2F2-E2DEA87CA2D5}&name=Geoff+Smith
  • Images
    5440
  • Joined Alamy
    12 Sep 2010

Recent Profile Visitors

6,221 profile views
  1. Image identification

    I should have asked the lady, but would someone be able to identify this dog breed please? They were absolutely lovely dogs.
  2. Another tweet today from Alamy to confuse contributors regarding discoverability. How many new contributors come to the forum asking about this? It's clearly confusing, and I'd be confused too if I were new to Alamy. The wrong term is being used. What it tells people is that being "green" will lead to your images being more likely to be "discovered", which is not the case at all. It's great to have a way to flag images where the optional data has not been completed, or with only a few tags, but calling it "discoverability" and having that tag threshold so high, and keeping on pushing it on Twitter, is hurting everyone. This is not just the rant of one person, and a forum search shows that it's what just about every poster to these forums thinks. Geoff.
  3. Digitally Altered Images

    I don't bother. If the image looks realistic and the customer is happy with it, whether it's been severely edited or not, I don't think it matters. It's only with live news it would matter as you're reporting the facts. It's one less thing to have to bother clicking on when doing my keywords, which is a good thing. Geoff.
  4. CTR

    I must have upset someone without knowing it. A regular occurrence.
  5. Favourite images uploaded - Feb 2018

    Panties? Have we changed subject? Oh, I just realised I misread that. Sorry, my mistake.
  6. Favourite images uploaded - Feb 2018

    I agree! I have an image somewhere just showing such tiles. They're everywhere here. I can't walk anywhere without seeing those damn tiles! I hate them! I was buying groceries the other day and a couple of those roof tiles pushed in front of me at the checkout! Such rudeness. You wouldn't get that from roof slates, would you? I don't know Allan, I think roofing materials need more education. I blame Trump.
  7. CTR

    You're welcome, and I agree with you about having saleable images with comprehensive and accurate tagging. When asking Alamy for more details on this sort of thing, their response is often to tell us to concentrate on uploading our best images and tagging accurately, and not worry about the search engine. That advice can be frustrating when you're not doing well and really want some clear answers to how to improve your situation, but with all the uncertainty and seemingly contradictory test results many of us have when trying to work it all out, I think it is the best advice. I do understand the point of view Alamy appear to have, that it's up to contributors to upload our best images and tag them well, and it's their job to make sure the most appropriate images are seen. That does make sense, but I do sometimes question why certain images that aren't the most relevant appear higher up, which is when I like to know what things are causing it so I can make changes to my tagging. An example of how the search engine doesn't seem to work quite the right way is the position that one of my images appears if you search for "pretty woman" (no quotes). There are over 2 million results, and my first one is in position 5. Of course that's great for me in some ways, but that is not the image I'd choose to come first for such a search. She is pretty, but that image is more about the fact she's using a smartphone. I don't have "pretty woman" as it's own tag, but I do have those words as part of other tags (such as "pretty woman smartphone"). I have other images with that as their own tag, which I think should be appearing first. Anyway, going off topic a little there. Geoff.
  8. Favourite images uploaded - Feb 2018

    Fledgling Robin (re-processed from an older version). Cluster of berries on an Ivy (Hedera helix) plant. Personally I'd change my name if my family name was Butt! Neighbours having a chin-wag. It was intended as an image showing the "close", but I thought it was also worth tagging with words relating to neighbours meeting for a chat.
  9. CTR

    That does seem a bit rough after 65 passes. I've failed twice since starting at Alamy in 2010, at least 2 or 3 years ago now (twice in a row, strangely!). I don't know how many batches I've uploaded since the fails but lately I've been going a bit loopy with uploading so much, so it's likely to be more than 65. Yes, QC rank is based on your uploads and failures, although from what Mark said about, it doesn't make any real difference to how long it takes Alamy to check batches. Nobody knows their AlamyRank other than Alamy, but you can sometimes get a good idea simply from looking at search results. That isn't accurate though of course, and in fact could be misleading due to all the factors at play (some known, some unknown to me) with image placement. Some of us used to use something called BHZ, which is where we would put BHZ (a random thing a contributor once came up with that wouldn't be searched for by a customer) in one of our RM images as a supertag (used to be in the Essentials field before AIM), and the position that image appeared in gave a rough estimate of our rank compared to others who were doing the same thing. That was frowned upon by Alamy, but I never understood why because it always gave a very good idea of things, and was consistent. Since the search engine changes over a year ago though, it's all become rather irrelevant so is probably no longer a good way of knowing our AlamyRank compared to others, although I still believe it gives a vague idea (the same images still appear highest like they always have), as long as you only put BHZ in one RM image in one of your pseudos, and don't repeat it in any other tag. Probably best not to bother to be honest, but that's what we used to do. Geoff.
  10. CTR

    Hi Sally. The 3 stars you have are only for your QC rank, nothing else. It just gives you higher priority if Alamy have lots of updates to go through. Geoff.
  11. CTR

    Long time to chat Betty, I hope things settle down with your move quickly. I'll join the party if that's ok and post my recent zooms for the same time periods. Since the re-rank late last year my views have shot up and zooms have mostly followed them to match. I do often find the same as others, that I'll have a period of no zooms followed by a period of higher than average zooms. In the past few days the wonderful and very pretty zoom fairy has visited me while I sleep and left me quite a few, which was kind. I've left her a box of chocolates to say thanks. 24th Jan - 22nd Feb 46 zooms CTR: 0.58 Last 7 days 16 zooms CTR: 0.90 This month so far 35 zooms CTR: 0.60 For a bit of fun I checked zooms for all of February 2017 - I had just 7. March was 10, April was 10. I hope sales will soon start to appear to match my higher zooms. My CTR would be better now, but with having a higher rank than I used to have, I'm seeing searches that bring up so many of my images that the CTR plummets. Someone recently searched for "UK", unhelpfully, and I've had several searches bringing up over 100 views with no zooms! Anyway, according to Alamy, CTR makes very little difference (not sure of the exact phrase they used without checking) to our AlamyRank, so I think that as long as we're getting SOME zooms to show some interest in our images, the CTR isn't very important. Have a nice Weekend folks, Geoff.
  12. 79 pages viewed & ZERO zooms

    It's hard to say John, because we've all seen that the theory doesn't always do what we expect in practice. I'm honestly nervous about saying anything definitive as I don't want to mislead anyone, or make a claim that turns out not to be correct. That's why I'm choosing my wording carefully! Geoff.
  13. 79 pages viewed & ZERO zooms

    I've posted about this many times in the past year, since the search engine changed. I've quoted info about it direct from Alamy before, but not all the details are certain as Alamy don't like to give too much away. My summary of the pseudo situation, BASED ON what Alamy have said, is that pseudos are for your own organisational purposes. The search engine knows if you use pseudos as a way to get some images with the same tags higher in results than others, and then it SEEMS that the pseudos are linked for that search, and images in a high performing pseudo won't necessarily come up higher in results than those in a low performing pseudo. So my conclusion is that the only real use for having different pseudos is if you want different ones for different types of images. So maybe all your flowers could go in a pseudo called Martin-Flowers, so it's a sensible name for a customer, so it's clear what the content is. Although I think it's better to create a lightbox with an appropriate name for sharing collections with potential customers. I've been criticised a lot in the past for sharing information like this that has either come from Alamy or is my own interpretation of what they have said, as some claim to find different results. Maybe they do for unknown reasons, but I can only say what I have been told and what my own experience backs up (to some degree, although with other unknown factors affecting placement, not much is predictable any more). Take it all with a pinch of salt of course. Also any tests are not conclusive due to the fact that images can move position in results depending on interest that's been shown (I guess that means zooms/lightboxes/sales), therefore they may not be static. Geoff.
  14. Image identification

    So does that mean I actually got an ID correct? *gasps* Yes it was the type of leaves I noticed too, so I feel content I managed to get that one right. Cheers John, Geoff.
  15. Image identification

    Thank you once again John. For some reason I was remembering Rowan Trees as "Red Robin". I have no idea why I did that. I have already got some Red Robin examples (just the red leaves) so must have mixed them up in my head. The Cotoneaster, #4, has similar small berries to several images I have that I have identified as Rowan Trees (Sorbus aucuparia) in the past. I have checked all of those, and the berries look the same but leaves are quite different from my #4 above. This is a closer example, which I have looked into again and it definitely does match a Google search for Rowan Tree. Hopefully you'll agree! These next 2 are closeups I have of red berries (not necessarily from the same actual tree), and looking at those leaves I'm unsure if they are Rowan tree berries of maybe Cotoneasters. The above one and the 2 below were all taken in August or September, if that helps. Would you be able to clear this up for me please John?