Cryptoprocta

I had to google Doritos (my tooth is sweet, not savoury).

No need for you to feel silly; if anything, Alamy should feel silly sending out erroneous emails.

:-) It seems that from time to time, Alamy workers are 'at a loose end' and send out erroneous emails. It's happened a few times in the past. Maybe they could better use that time to follow up non-reporters and non-payers? Just a suggestion, off the wall as the idea might seem.

Yeah, I wondered about 15 I uploaded on Sunday and 'managed' yesterday (they're live today). I've already 'managed' another 5 from yesterday since then!

Somewhere between hobbyist and semi-pro, in that I take pics for stock that I'd never take for my own pleasure or use, even though I know that 'managing' them will be a PITA.

I just got an email from Alamy telling me I've got 17 images offline, ...yadayada... I looked and found I had two images not for sale, one was a genuine mistake on my part from a couple of weeks ago, and I've now captioned and keyworded it; the other I will delete. But where can I find the other 15? TIA

Actually in the school I taught in (quit almost 8 years ago) the computing department taught the pupils that they could use images free for schoolwork*, but also taught them about copyright. I read the posters the pupils had made. However, the pupils were of the view that that was just what stupid old teachers thought, and wasn't true. *but just before I left, a system called Glow was set up, which supplied many thousands of perfectly adequate photos (at that time), in a closed system, which pupils and teachers had to use whenever possible. Ths system is (or was at the time) also used in England and Wales. Pretty strict about access - I was knocked off it a couple of days after I left, even though my GTC registration was valid for another four months, so I was eligble for doing supply, had I wished to. Google themselves encourage this. I have said before that I was in another room during a Google talk in which they were talking particularly about accessibility in a working environment, and the speaker said, "Just Google images and paste them into your document like this ..." No mention of copyright (but I was't an official delegate, and listening from a 'room off' or I'd certainy have brought this up in the Q&A session).

It isn't doable. I always think buyers must be annoyed by this sort of thing, but who knows? The usual platitude is "we are all affected the same way". I have lots of this sort of search, almost every day I have some photos of wild, wet buffalos in a wallow being searched on for Wet'n'Wild. <rolls eyes> I think it would be just about impossible to set anti-keywords - the system combines any word from the description or keywords, in any order, and contrary to what's stated, these can trump the actual search set in a phrase. For example, a photo of "Joe Bloggs" and "Jane Doe" may well be higher in a hypothetical search for Joe Doe or Jane Bloggs than those of the actual people.

Sent 10 up with apparently no problems, about an hour ago, using the web uploader.

The only thing you can do is make sure your keywords are tightly relevant to your images. For example, MY1AP8 is a photo of a red balloon outdoors. Your keywords abstract, birthdays, celebration, cheer, child, children, marketing, party are not relevant to your image - I know balloons can be used by children, as marketing, at parties, but that's not what your image shows If a buyer types in 'party' that's what they want to see. They know what a balloon is, they will search 'balloon' if they want. I clicked on a few others of your images, and you are keywording extremely 'loosely'. That could go against you as you'll get false hits, which you'd have no chance of getting a zoom or sale from. It's bad enough getting false hits from the way the search engine is set up, you don't want to set yourself up for more. Don't worry about CTR, don't worry about optimising - don't sweat the small stuff. For what it's worth, I and others don't see much relationship between zooms / CTR and sales.

This has already been discussed several times in the forum, you can check these threads. Bottom line: DON'T spam keywords just to reach the red 'optimised' bar. Keyword only what is relevant to the image. Your images would not be optimal if they had poor, irrelevant keywords. Delete any irrelevant keywords, keep those which are relevant. Don't worry about your CTR either. If you have good images and good keywording, you'll get zooms and sales (unless the subjects are over-supplied here).

I'd be interested in that, because I'm trying to establish whether it would be worth considering buying an iPhone as my next phone, given that it seems there's not much likelihood of Android being supported, despite promises. Otherwise I'm perfectly happy with Android - there's a big price difference!

As I've said before, I've had refunds of PU sales of boxes of medicinal pills. As suggested on the forum, it seemed like the buyers thought they were actually buying the medications. When I questioned this with Alamy, they said I'd be surprised how often that happens, and not just for medicines. I then put wording to the effect that this was a stock photo, not a real packet of tablets into the description, or where space didn't allow, in the extra information, and haven't had a refund since. Stupid and/or desperate people buying medicine from an unknown (for medications) site; but that's easy for me to say in a country where prescribed medicine is free to all.

I just tried, and it's suddenly working (Chrome/Win)

If you have an Adobe CC product, you will have access to My Portfolio, as part of the bundle (meaning that it would stop if you stopped your subscription). I keep meaning to try it out, but it'll likely be the long nights of next winter. https://www.myportfolio.com/