Discoverability query.

[Turnbarry]

Can anybody advise me whether, or not, the 'Discoverability' bars actually move at all? I haven't got many images up yet, but the ones I have are fully key worded to the extent that I can't add any more.
The "Discoverability' bar is still stick in the orange sector (poor discoverability) and I don't really know what I can do to get it to budge. Is this a Beta feature? 

Thanks,

Barry

[NYCat]

Don't worry about discoverability. Just be accurate and complete in your keywording. We think Alamy makes a mistake in encouraging people to add unimportant keywords. It is likely to hurt you. Just search the forum and you will see how many times we have said this.

 

Paulette

[Turnbarry]

Thanks a lot NYCat, I only include words that have some relevance to the image, but there is a limit to these.  Much appreciated.

 

[Joseph Clemson]

In a subject as specialised as yours, the discoverability bar is a complete irrelevance, even more so than it is to the rest of us.  Anybody who needs your images will use the scientific names and yours will be one of the few to show up in the search.

 

Now, I have no idea what most of the keywords mean in your images, but I would urge you to make sure your ID of the subject is accurate as picture editors will be relying on your knowledge to point them to the correct picture. 

 

Finally, I would take out keywords which will give many false positives in searches, unless they are absolutely relevant. For instance someone searching for  'sandstone wall' will hardly ever be looking for a picture of microscopic vegetation. 

 

In your line of photographic work you don't need a multiplicity of keywords, you just need the correct ones for the subject at hand. Sales will not be numerous, but if there is any justice, they should be, at least, moderately rewarding when the sales do come in.

[Colin Woods]

2 hours ago, Joseph Clemson said:

For instance someone searching for  'sandstone wall' will hardly ever be looking for a picture of microscopic vegetation. 

 

Agree, but I would leave "stone wall", "sandstone wall" in the description though. The "where" is an important part of the caption even if its not a readily identifiable place. 

[Turnbarry]

Hi Joseph and Colin,

Many thanks for your very informative responses. I totally agree with what you say. I don't post pictures of Bryophytes at all if I have any doubt that they are identified correctly, which is probably the hardest part of the process! Substrate is often an important indicator for species type in Bryophytes and might be useful. I am sure a full taxonomic and informative set of keywords will suffice. As you say, anybody looking for such images will know what to search for.
I was in two minds as to whether to post them on Alamy given their nature, but decided that after doing all the work, they may be of use in some areas.

One thing I didn't expect was that the file sizes for 'stacked' images are relatively small after cutting out the backgrounds, but I have got around this.
You help and advice is very much appreciated. I will endeavour to post more images soon when I have finished my current project.

Regards,

 

Barry

[Martin Williams]

An interesting thread everyone. I just joined Alamy and have "suffered" the same issues and so have poured in quite relevant but bland words, sometimes repeated to get the "50". Are you saying that I dont need to and my images will still be on sale even when in the orange low down?

Edited April 23, 2019 by Martin Williams

[Turnbarry]

Hi Martin,

Most of my images are Bryophytes and as they are 'specialised' (with unique taxonomic names) in that only somebody looking for a specific species or feature of Bryophytes would know what search terms to enter, I only really need to include keywords specific to those mosses. 
I queried the fact that the 'Discoverability' indicators didn't budge even when I had reached the limit for keywords.

From the above comments this does not appear to be an uncommon thing.

When I contributed general images to Alamy a few years back I found that 'pertinent' keywords which described the type of image and what area it was relevant to worked fine and I sold plenty of images.

Not sure what subjects you do, but words that describe them accurately should be fine.

If you photograph a specific topic, landscapes, flora etc, there will always be a set group of words you can include first then add to for specific images. I kept mine in a word file and added to them as necessary.

Probably best to ignore the 'Discoverability' indicators and look more to whether you could find a photograph like yours using the keywords you have included.
Cheers,

 

Barry

[John Gaffen]

 Fields left blank under the " Optional" Tab,  in image manger, also have some impact on the, discoverability,  this could be a factor in your case.  

[Turnbarry]

Hi John,

Thanks for that - I think they are but will make sure.
Barry

 

[Colin Woods]

On 23/04/2019 at 04:04, Martin Williams said:

Are you saying that I dont need to and my images will still be on sale even when in the orange low down?

Yes, absolutely. Keyword what you see in the image - what, where, when, who, why, how and any 'emotional' keywords like calm, happy, fun, etc. Adding keywords just to get green is about the worst thing you can do as it means that your images will appear in more searches, including searches on your less relevant keywords. A part of your Alamy rank (ie on which page you appear in a search) is the ratio of clicks on an image (ie when a searcher clicks the photo to see it in more detail) to zooms (ie when it appears on the page as the result of a search). So if you appear on lots of search results but almost never get clicked your ratio will go down and so will the chances of a sale. Its high time that Alamy realised the worthlessness of Discoverability and the amount of confusion it causes, and dumped it. I personally think Alamy are going for a bit of social media credibility , but Alamy is not a social media site. The Discoverability bar is your enemy.

[Martin Williams]

Thanks Colin