Jump to content

ottertrack

Verified
  • Content Count

    8
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Forum reputation = neutral

About ottertrack

  • Rank
    Forum newbie

Alamy

  • Alamy URL
    http://www.alamy.com/contrib-browse.asp?cid={F6863A8E-AD71-49D1-9A6C-E10B926DD8B7}&name=Leon+Werdinger
  • Images
    10339
  • Joined Alamy
    27 Dec 2011
  1. Among other non-user friendly aspects of the new Image Manager is selection process for Primary & Secondary categories. The 25 options seem like they'd easily fit at one time on a larger drop down menu box but Alamy made the box so small that only 10 categories can be viewed at a time, requiring extra scrolling. It might sound like a silly little nitpick, but the time required for this ads up, and it's frustrating because it seems like such an obviously poor design where doing it right would have been so easy. Here's Alamy's initial response to my suggestion to make life easier for contributors by eliminating the need to scroll through categories: "We have no plans to add this feature to the categories list as the current set up works fine. If in future this feature doesn’t work we will look at improvements." Here's the response I sent to Alamy: But I don’t understand why you say the feature works just fine and there are no plans to improve it when the simple modification I suggested would obviously make it much more user friendly. Are you serious that you’ll only look at improvements when something is completely broken as opposed to improving weaknesses as they’re found? And here's Alamy's response to mine: "We don’t see this feature as being weak and we haven’t had any other contributors experiencing issues with it. We have a long list of improvements to make and at the moment this modification isn’t a priority." So I guess one question is, do any of you other contributors experience this as an issue? Also, while on the topic of Alamy's seeming disregard for how user-friendly the new image manager is, I'm very disappointed that they didn't improve the model & property release component by incorporating a suggestion made years ago to include a folder that photographers could put old releases in so that when we scroll through the release list to attach one to an image we don't have to scroll through a potentially huge list that includes every release we've ever uploaded. If we were able to transfer old ones that we no longer need handy into a separate folder that would sure save time. Any thoughts on that?
  2. Disappointed to hear that the new Image Manager won't include the obvious improvement, suggested years ago, to allow photographers to put old model releases into an archive folder so that we don't need to sort through every release we've ever uploaded in order to find ones to attach to new images. Makes me skeptical that the new Image Manager was designed with photographers in mind.
  3. Thanks. Glad to know they're working on it. Hope the new version will be much more user-friendly.
  4. Here's something I posted in Feb. 2014 (with the wording slightly updated): Hey Alamy folks - it'd be very helpful to have a way to have two folders or some other way to manage model and property releases so that older ones can be stored in a separate place. As it is, one has to wade through every model release they've ever uploaded in order to access current ones to attach to images. In my case, and likely many others, I don't need easy access to 90% of the releases that I've uploaded because I'm mainly attaching newer releases to newer images. But having to wade through hundreds of releases in order to find the newer ones is much more time consuming than it needs to be. Why not create the option to transfer model releases between two folders so that we can keep the ones we want handy in one and have the other as an archive? It would of course be helpful for uploads to default to the "A" or non-archive folder (since those releases would be more likely to be accessed for attaching to images) and of course it'd be critical to have a simple, user-friendly way to move single or multiple releases from one folder to another as needs dictate. Here's the reply from Alamy (Posted 11 February 2014 - 02:55 PM) Hi there, Thanks for this suggestion - we agree this could do with updating and have added it to the list of features we will look at upgrading with the next refresh of Manage Images. Alamy Simple idea, eh? It's now Dec. 2015 - is there update on this???
  5. Hey Alamy folks - it'd be very helpful to have a way to have two folders or some other way to manage model and property releases so that older ones can be stored in a separate place. As it is, I have to wade through every model release I've ever uploaded in order to access current ones to attach to images. Most of the old ones are ones I won't ever need to access again, or if I do, it'd be rare. But having them mixed in with newer ones sure makes finding the newer ones much more time consuming. And of course, if the best way to achieve this is to have two separate folders, it'd be critical to be able to move releases from one folder to another as needs dictate.
  6. Thanks again Mirco. I was able to find the defaults for the pseudonyms and license types. Now if Alamy would add options for defaults for image type and some of the others that'd be even better. Also appreciate your explanation of the double keywords and the words on my portfolio!
  7. Thanks Mirco. I am using Image Manager 2.4, and use the batch processor, but am not aware of any way to set defaults. If you know of a way please let me know. The keywords embedded in my images automatically populate to the Comprehensive Keyword field, so I just copy them to the Main Keyword field. Do you think that there's any disadvantage to having the same keywords in each field? And another suggestion for Alamy concerning Manage Images: It'd be very helpful to have a way to have two folders or some other way to manage model and property releases so that older ones can be stored in a separate place. As it is, I have to wade through every model release I've ever uploaded in order to access current ones to attach to images. Most of the old ones are ones I won't ever need to access again, or if I do, it'd be rare. But having them mixed in with newer ones sure makes finding the newer ones much more time consuming. (Alamy, if you see this suggestion please let me know, otherwise I'll put this one a new post.) Thanks.
  8. Hi, There are a couple things you could do to make the Manage Images much more user friendly for me: 1. Let users set default settings for Attributes, especially for "What is this image?," "Pseudonyms & Licence types. I always use the same selections on those and I imagine many other contributers do also, so it'd save a lot of time compared to having to manually select each time, even batch labeling. These defaults could of course be easily overridden when needed. "Is this image digitally altered?" would also be good to be able to assign a default answer for. And of course it'd be good if the default settings apply when working on single images and on batches. 2. 99% of the time my Comprehensive keywords and Main keywords are identical. (The only time they're not is when the list of Comprehensive keywords is too long to fit into the more limited number allowed in Main keywords.) So when editing batches it'd be really helpful to have a box to tick that would copy the Comprehensive keywords into the Main keyword box for all images. Hope I've explained those suggestions in a way that makes sense. Thanks.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.