Jump to content
  • 0

Recent Hamburg photos not showing?


Question

I have been uploading my shots of Hamburg over the last two weeks. Each have been keyworded to get the maximum On Sale / Optimised.
 
As a check I thought I would do a search for HAMBURG under the new tab. I have looked on every page as far as the 20th page - not one single image of mine appears. The first image on the 20th page is dated the 27th of September. Weeks older than my shots.
 
In the past my images usually appeared under the New tab a day or so later. Has something changed?
 
To be honest I am beginning to think there is no point in me making the efforts to have ZERO exposure.
 
Please can anyone explain what is going wrong?
Link to post
Share on other sites

9 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0

Yes there has been a change to the NEW tab. Now 'new' means 'date taken' not 'date uploaded'.

I noticed that your Hamburg images were taken on 20th September. That would explain it.

 

It doesn't mean that you have no exposure though. I'm not sure how many buyers use the 'new' filter. Also it's likely that at least a second search tag would be used.

 

As far as Optimized is concerned, forget about it. Do a search, there has been countless threads about it.

 

Good luck!

 

Edited by gvallee
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

I don't know what is going on with a search for the single term 'Hamburg' where choosing 'New' brings up many, many Live News images, but as you say, none of yours. However, your images are clearly in the database as if you search for specific subjects, e.g Hamburg Elbphilharmonie then your images are well up the search results. The workings of the Alamy search engine are mysterious and given that there are over half a million results for Hamburg, it may be that among the myriad of terms in your keywords and captions, it is omitting yours.

 

It is not necessarily a good thing to aim to reach maximum discoverability, espcially if it leads contributors to using keywords which are periperhal or even irrelvant. In the longer run, it leads to false positives in search results and drives your images down the rankings. My personal approach is to keep things as simple as possible and only include the main subject of any image, rather than trying to cover all bases. 

 

I'll be interested to read what insights other contributors have to offer.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
1 minute ago, Cofiant said:

Just had a look, it appears that some of your images are around pages 30 and 31.

The previous pages seem to be mostly live news, demonstations and sport etc.

 

That's because Colin's images were taken on 20th September. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Actually I think that answers the question. Despite me adding some photos this week, if they were shot a month ago they will appear that far back in the listing.

 

Thanks for your help.

Edited by ColinWalton
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
5 hours ago, gvallee said:

Yes there has been a change to the NEW tab. Now 'new' means 'date taken' not 'date uploaded'.

I noticed that your Hamburg images were taken on 20th September. That would explain it.

 

It doesn't mean that you have no exposure though. I'm not sure how many buyers use the 'new' filter. Also it's likely that at least a second search tag would be used.

 

As far as Optimized is concerned, forget about it. Do a search, there has been countless threads about it.

 

Good luck!

 

interesting change.   not sure if this was customer requested,  i could see it.  Might have to do with influx of new contributors uploading all their files and clients complaining that "New" had bunch of images from 5-10 years ago? 

 

i guess the ideal would be hybrid with taking images from last X months, then sorted by date uploaded. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
10 hours ago, Niels Quist said:

Probably getting more news oriented and less book oriented in the future.

Possibly to push PA's to the front? Having tested a few topical subjects their images aren't tagged well, if at all, but are on the first page.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • 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.