Jump to content

Hi! Looking for some advice again


Recommended Posts

On 29/12/2021 at 19:39, Sebas Jakim said:

I don´t understand quite well this. Let´s imagine, for example, somebody types "Scotland" and my photo comes out.

I don't understand why you would put "Scotland" as a tag where it's irrelevant.

All you're doing is making buyers annoyed, and pushing a genuine Scottish image lower in the search.

Plus, if a buyer buys the image thinking it's in Scotland and finds it isn't, you're personally liable if s/he sues for misrepresentation.

Can you afford the time, money and hassle?

Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Cryptoprocta said:

Plus, if a buyer buys the image thinking it's in Scotland and finds it isn't, you're personally liable if s/he sues for misrepresentation.

I take the point but I doubt that somewhat. A buyer has to exercise due diligence.

Edited by spacecadet
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, spacecadet said:

I take the point but I doubt that somewhat. A buyer has to exercise due diligence.

There might still be some sort of hearing to establish whether or not they had done that.

I was highlighting that Alamy in their contract tries to absolve themselves of all responsibility. Whether or not they can legally do that, I have no idea, and it would also take a legal case to establish.

Bottom line is, why deliberately insert misleading keywords? There is no value to the seller, it's an annoyance to the buyer, and it could push down properly-keyworded files. Indeed, on Alamy in particular, you very often see a lot of well-keyworded files at the very bottom of a multi-page search, way below totally irrelevant images, because of the way Alamy mixes files by the same contributor, who might be a specialist.

 

Edited by Cryptoprocta
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Cryptoprocta said:

Plus, if a buyer buys the image thinking it's in Scotland and finds it isn't, you're personally liable if s/he sues for misrepresentation.

Can you afford the time, money and hassle?

 

 

Sorry, but that is on the buyer for hits , especially since we contributor do not control how the system returns search queries.  I am curious in fact what the jurisprudence is on people relying on Keywords to establish content of on image.  If the person never wrote "Scotland" in the Caption, isn't that on the client. 

 

Furthermore technically I could have "New Scotland in Latin"  as a keyword for all my Nova Scotia images (i won't because of the impact on my CTR), is it my responsibility that Alamy would bring these out in a Scotland search? 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, meanderingemu said:

Sorry, but that is on the buyer for hits , especially since we contributor do not control how the system returns search queries.  I am curious in fact what the jurisprudence is on people relying on Keywords to establish content of on image.  If the person never wrote "Scotland" in the Caption, isn't that on the client. 

 

Furthermore technically I could have "New Scotland in Latin"  as a keyword for all my Nova Scotia images (i won't because of the impact on my CTR), is it my responsibility that Alamy would bring these out in a Scotland search? 

 

I totally agree, and have often written about the way Alamy mixes words from any word or phrase in the keywords with each other or with any random word in the caption. But that's a totally different issue from deliberately inserting wrong keywords, which is unjustifiable.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Cryptoprocta said:

I totally agree, and have often written about the way Alamy mixes words from any word or phrase in the keywords with each other or with any random word in the caption. But that's a totally different issue from deliberately inserting wrong keywords, which is unjustifiable.

 

 

i agree that they are unjustifiable- and that's also on Alamy for not controlling and having no reporting mechanism, i however have doubt on the liability part.

 

In the end Alamy made a decision to move towards Quantity over Quality as a competitive tool. 

 

Edited by meanderingemu
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Cryptoprocta said:

There might still be some sort of hearing to establish whether or not they had done that.

I was highlighting that Alamy in their contract tries to absolve themselves of all responsibility. Whether or not they can legally do that, I have no idea, and it would also take a legal case to establish.

Bottom line is, why deliberately insert misleading keywords? There is no value to the seller, it's an annoyance to the buyer, and it could push down properly-keyworded files. Indeed, on Alamy in particular, you very often see a lot of well-keyworded files at the very bottom of a multi-page search, way below totally irrelevant images, because of the way Alamy mixes files by the same contributor, who might be a specialist.

 

 

Remember the case last year of the wrongly identified rare parrot.   Photo editors are not necessarily subject area specialists, but some of their readers will be. 

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/01/2022 at 13:09, Rebecca Ore said:

 

Remember the case last year of the wrongly identified rare parrot.   Photo editors are not necessarily subject area specialists, but some of their readers will be. 

A couple of years ago, a wildlife magazine I subscribe to published a wrongly-ascribed photo of an obscure and very localised tropical insect. A surprising number of readers wrote in, though I have to say that the differences between the two insects are miniscule IMO. I didn't take note of which agency the original image came from, but they had definitely used Alamy as well as other agencies in the past. The next issue of the mag published an apology and said it would only be sourcing from specialist agencies in future. So that person, who may well have made a genuine mistake, diverted sales away sellers of potentially-relevant content here and elsewhere. Conversely, they have unwittingly directed sales to outlets which generally charge realistic fees.

NB: Price isn't always the main driver of sales.

Edited by Cryptoprocta
  • Upvote 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

Accurate key wording and title descriptions are important on Almay.  But, with so few images online, you will struggle for sales  simply because of the sheer numbers of competing images from other photographers. Its a numbers game on Alamy. You really do need a reasonable size portfolio in order to compete or stand out from all the others. 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 07/01/2022 at 00:45, meanderingemu said:

 

i can see if Alamy has the best selection of different stuff you would try here, and then look elsewhere if they also have that image with a google search, more efficient than going through 4-5 MS , under assumption that if it not on Alamy, it's not elsewhere, but i think those days are gone

 

yes for instance alamy has far more photos of my town (many are editorial) than the micro sites 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Meanwhile @OP, you have 2HCCX9C  correctly captioned and keyworded as Burrowing Owl, Athene cunicularia - but then for no good reason you have also keyworded it as a different (though related) species, Little Owl, which is Athene noctua.

Again, you could be misleading buyers, leading to their embarassment and anger with Alamy.

Again, why on earth would you deliberately keyword a wrong species? It's extremely unlikely that someone specifically wanting a photo of a Little Owl to illustrate an article will suddenly decide to use a photo of a Burrowing Owl instead. If they just wanted to choose the best species of Owls, or even Athene owls, your real keywords are sufficient.

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.