• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by M.Chapman

  1. Geological feature ID

    Any geologists out there? I've uploaded some pictures of what I think is an exposed vertical volcanic rock dyke on Skye. This shows a general view. I also took some closeups of the unusual geometric fractured surface of the side of this rock band. My is question is - Is there a technical term for this kind of fractured surface, or any other suggestions for my caption and keywords? Thanks in advance. Mark
  2. A Simpler Workflow

    It's not auto HDR, it's swapped to handheld twilight mode, it's a way of reducing noise and effect of camera shake when shooting in low light. It takes several short exposures in quick succession, aligns them (to reduce effect of camera shake) and then combines them. I'd be happy to submit jpgs straight from my Sony RX100 M3 to Alamy using either of the intelligent auto (iA and iA+) modes assuming conditions weren't too challenging. (Only the iA+ mode uses the multi-exposure trick). I'd still want to inspect at 100% before submitting though. In reality I don't submit the jpgs because I prefer to start from RAWs because of the extra flexibility they bring. But, for many shots, when I compare the results of my efforts, the in camera jpgs would have sufficed. Mark
  3. Geological feature ID

    Excellent, thanks. I've downloaded and installed it. It's a shame it seems to need internet access to display a map when on site (so not so good in remote locations) and the maps aren't as detailed (on an iPhone anyway) as those available by going to the BGS website. Mark
  4. Geological feature ID

    Thanks for your help and clarifying that. Yes it was strange that the dyke itself was very dark and appeared to be basalt. But the side face, when viewed from the right angle appeared quite different, as if it been coated with a reflective / coloured material. You're right that such images don't sell very frequently, but when they do the use is typically in educational books and the fees have been well worth it. You're right about the geology of Skye, it's fabulous. I imagine it's one of the most geologically diverse places in the UK. I'll be keywording a couple of other unusual geological images shortly and will post on the forum for comment. Mark
  5. Geological feature ID

    Many thanks guys. MDM - The second photo is a closeup of the vertical exposed face of the dyke and the fractures are straight not curved (so not conchoidal?). Excellent tip about the BGS website. This intrusion is marked on there. I wonder if it's sensible to include the National Grid ref in the caption as I know exactly where this feature is. Mark
  6. has Alamy issued GDPR white paper?

    The barrage of emails I've been receiving from companies over the last few weeks as they frantically check (before the GDPR deadline) if they can still contact me by email raises the awareness. I've been amazed how many companies have my email addresses. Some of them are from companies that haven't contacted me for years and I'd only sent them a single email in the past (e.g. customer complaint). It's been quite a good opportunity to get my details removed Mark
  7. Supertag experiment

    It appears that this might be so, but it's hard to be 100% certain. Image downloads or lighboxing could also be factors that are having an effect instead, but Alamy doesn't tell us about those on a per image basis. But it does look like the zoom history (and/or views, downloads, lightboxing history or some other Alamy "magic sauce") moves with the image when it moves to a new pseudo and back again. Mark
  8. Supertag experiment

    Image has now moved back to slot 2. Mark
  9. Keywords, my big problem

    Suggest searching this forum for threads on "Discoverability" and you'll get most of the answers you need. This link should get you started. https://discussion.alamy.com/search/?&q=discoverability&search_in=titles
  10. poor discoverability photos

    Don't worry about discoverability not being optimised. If you search the forum you'll find lots of discussions about it. PS. It's best to post questions in the "Ask the forum" section, you'll get a faster resonse. Mark
  11. Images with Property

    That's the same approach I take. Mark
  12. Images with Property

    I think Alamy's interpretation is much broader than that. If any part of a person (who may or may not be recognisable) appears then you must count them in the "Number of people in the image" and then you are prompted to supply model releases. If you haven't got releases then you must sell as RM only. Hovering over the question-mark next to the "Number of People in the image" in AIM shows the rule. However, it's all a bit daft because these questions are on the optional info page in the new AIM... Mark
  13. Supertag experiment

    I just tried an experiment. I moved my White Stuff image to a totally new pseudo yesterday. Today its position only dropped by 1 place from slot 2 to 3. This suggests two things to me. 1) The reason my White Stuff image was appearing high in the results is not because it was associated with a highly ranked pseudo (I wish!). 2) Whatever is causing its high position in search results (potentially the recorded zoom this image had previously) has transferred with the image from the old pseudo to the new one. I'll now move this image back to my usual pseudo to see whether it goes back to slot 2. Mark
  14. Supertag experiment

    I see your White Stuff image has now moved up to slot 11. Did you change something? Has a zoom now been reported? Maybe the database took a long time to completely update? Maybe it's because I zoomed it for you? (This shouldn't happen as I'm not an Alamy customer). Mark
  15. Supertag experiment

    That's strange.... Suggests, in the case of this image other factors (competing pseudos' ranks, zooms, sales, downloads?) may be having a dominant effect? I've got an image in slot 2. It has White Stuff in the caption and "White Stuff" as a supertag (complete with capitalisation). I have no reported sales for this image , but it has been zoomed once. No idea on number of views, downloads or lightboxes... Mark
  16. That was my interpretation. "Age of the image" could be upload date and/or shooting date which we know are stored with each image. "The level of interest shown in it by customers".... that's much harder to know exactly what this means. If interest shown by customers is broadened to mean "interest in images from a contributor" then it could simply mean a pseudo's rank is taken into account, which is based on CTR which could be called "interest"? However, my feeling is that zooms, downloads and sales are probably stored on an image by image basis so could be being used. I'm not sure about views. Like Wim, I also have seen cases were images that have sold may have been demoted. But with all the other (hidden) factors at play it's hard to know for sure. Mark
  17. Supertag experiment

    I see the White Stuff image still hasn't moved. Did you make "White Stuff" a supertag yet? Mark
  18. Only if BHZ is applied to images in each pseudo where all other factors have been equalised. i.e. Images were taken at the same time uploaded in the same batch, have identical caption, tags and supertags and they haven't had differing number of views, zooms or sales. This effectively means they need to be freshly uploaded images. NB. I don't know for certain that all these factors affect image position, but in discussions with Alamy at the Photography Show at the NEC in March they mentioned that a variety of factors can be taken into account, including the age of the image and the level of interest shown in it by customers. But they also emphasised that different criteria may be applied depending on the search and even the customer. For example, the age of a photo may be taken into account for searches of popular travel locations, but not for searches of food. However, they also said that they frequently tweak the algorithms. So what's true at one time may not be true later. I'm pretty sure I see some evidence for date taken affecting some of my travel shots (but not others). My suggested test therefore tries to exclude as many of these factors as possible from the results to leave only the Pseudo's rank. Mark
  19. Here's my suggestion. Upload a number (=no of pseudos you have) of new images in a single submission, with all images taken on the same date. Once they pass QC, make a note of their Alamy refs, hopefully they will have first 3 or 4 letters the same to help find them in the search results. Allocate identical keywords to each one including a reasonably popular term (so that ~1,000 images will be returned in an Alamy search). Allocate one image to each of your pseudos. Wait 24 hours for search database to update (don't wait too long to minimise chance of views or zooms occurring) Carry out an Alamy search using the keyword. Set page size to 100 images per page and use <Cntrl -> to get 10 images per line (helps count image position) Now locate each of your images amongst the ~1,000 images returned. (Use <Cntrl F> to look for first 3 or 4 letters of Alamy ref on each page). Why 1,000 images? It's a tradeoff between ensuring that there are plenty of other other contributors images for your to be scattered amongst and the ease of finding your own images. If you're happy to spend longer finding your images, then pick a more popular search term/subject. Mark
  20. Why not inspect the EXIF data to check what the aperture the camera was trying to set during the offending exposures? If they were wide open (max aperture) or only a few stops from wide open, then sticking aperture blades won't be to blame. Indeed, given that you say all the pixels are 255 I struggle to believe that it's sticking aperture blades. Suggest also checking the time stamps on the faulty images. Were they taken as a burst? Are the shutter speed and aperture values on the faulty images sensible or crazy? etc. If the images are RAW files then try developing in LR or whatever you usually use? Is the RAW data white too or just the embedded jpg? Mark
  21. Supertag experiment

    When I was doing my testing I also added a new unique keyword (e.g. MyTest11) after every change, so I could be sure the search database had updated by doing a regular Alamy search from my new keyword. Usually that was overnight but sometimes it was late afternoon before the update happened. Mark
  22. As a result of updating to High Sierra I came to realise that my days of soldiering on with PSE8 and LR6 are numbered. (PSE 8 and some components of LR6 are only 32 bit and so the next release of OSX won’t support them). I’ve therefore been experimenting with trial versions of just about every alternative. I’ve tried Apple Photos + DxO plugin, Darktable, GIMP, Pixelmator Pro, Luminar Jupiter, Affinity Photo, ACDSee, AfterShot Pro, DxO Photolab, Capture One 11 and Adobe PSE 2018, LR CC and PS CC. After a great deal of deliberation I concluded (rather reluctantly as I don't like the subscription model) that PS CC is the new tool for me. It easily beats many of the relative newcomers (Affintiy, Pixelmator, Luminar, ACDSee) both in terms of usability and responsiveness (on 2012 MacBook Pro with 16GB RAM) and in the quality of the final result. The detail I could recover from my RAW files in PS CC was matched by Capture One and DxO, but using many of the "budget offerings" I could only achieve decidedly "mushy" results. Automatic CA removal, noise reduction and shadow and highlight recovery were also key discriminators, where some of the budget offerings" were woefully inadequate. But.... as I swap from the ACR used by LR6, to the new ACR used by LR7 and PS 19 CC I notice Adobe have made a couple of significant changes behind the scenes... The new default camera profile has been swapped from "Adobe Standard" to "Adobe Color". The new profile is more contrasty and can result in clipped shadows and highlights. The default level of sharpening during raw conversion has been increased from 25 to 40 for all cameras. Adobe claim these changes have been made to make the default results more pleasing, but they may not suit an Alamy workflow. NB. These changes won't affect those using their own develop presets, but will affect those who simply rely on the default settings - so watch out. Now I need to focus on uploading, and hopefully selling, more images to pay for my my subscription. Mark
  23. Supertag experiment

    Presumably you've left your the tags of your other images of Swindon Orbital alone? I see that 10 of the 28 images of Swindon orbital are yours and the first one (MHJDP6) is already in slot 2. Does MHJDP6 already have Swindon and Orbital as supertags? Tests I've done (by changing captions and tags on a single image) show that supertags appear to be given have a higher weighting than captions which are given have a higher rating than tags. This is, I believe, how it's supposed to be. But there are other factors that affect image position. I'm in discussion with Alamy at the moment about one of my images that beats (appears in higher slot) than all my other images of a particular subject, almost irrespective of what I do to its caption, supertags and tags. It's an image that hasn't been zoomed (according to My Alamy Measures*) or sold. But others image of mine that appear in lower slots have been. The images were taken and uploaded at the same time. For some reason this image seems to be receiving some extra "Alamy magic sauce". *Maybe Alamy log all zooms, whereas I can only see those made by selected customer accounts and this affects image position? Mmm.... now there's a thought.... Mark
  24. Supertag experiment

    For what it's worth - I confirm I'm seeing images of yours in the same slots as you do. Mark
  25. Adobe PS CC and the alternatives

    I heard a slightly different version of the last line. to stop it, close all open windows and then press "Start" Seriously though, as soon as Windows 10 started forcing upgrades on me (which I couldn't postpone) and when these updates failed to correctly install and then it repeated the whole update process again (including a GB download), I went back to Windows 7 and then migrated to Mac. Mark