Stock photos by the same contributor

[DDoug]

Clicking on a particular thumbnail in search results and then scrolling down the page, there are links to other options: Stock photos by the same contributor, Search stock photos by tags, and Similar stock images. The thing that is bothering me is that when I look at my own images, only the second and third options are present. "Stock photos by the same contributor" isn’t there.

 

Is there a reasonable explanation for what seems to be very unequal treatment of contributors? As it is, it certainly dampens my enthusiasm for re-uploading my former collection along with new images.

[wiskerke]

36 minutes ago, DDoug said:

Clicking on a particular thumbnail in search results and then scrolling down the page, there are links to other options: Stock photos by the same contributor, Search stock photos by tags, and Similar stock images. The thing that is bothering me is that when I look at my own images, only the second and third options are present. "Stock photos by the same contributor" isn’t there.

 

Is there a reasonable explanation for what seems to be very unequal treatment of contributors? As it is, it certainly dampens my enthusiasm for re-uploading my former collection along with new images.

Are you sure you have other images with the exact same keyword in the exact same pseudonym? Because that is how this option works.

 

wim

[DDoug]

Yes, I have only one pseudonym which is my name. I use Photoshop's import-export of tags, so similar images tend to have the same ones. Sometimes images of mine will show up under the "similar stock images" heading because the similar images coincidentally happen to be mine. "Stock photos by the same contributor" is not there on any images that I've checked, however.

[wiskerke]

38 minutes ago, DDoug said:

Yes, I have only one pseudonym which is my name. I use Photoshop's import-export of tags, so similar images tend to have the same ones. Sometimes images of mine will show up under the "similar stock images" heading because the similar images coincidentally happen to be mine. "Stock photos by the same contributor" is not there on any images that I've checked, however.

But is that for the same keyword you use in that search? Because that word in the search box is what triggers the same contributor series.

If I try a search for post-and-beam houses in Tecklenburg I get your extra images by the same contributor as always. And underneath those the rest.

 

wim

[DDoug]

36 minutes ago, wiskerke said:

But is that for the same keyword you use in that search? Because that word in the search box is what triggers the same contributor series.

If I try a search for post-and-beam houses in Tecklenburg I get your extra images by the same contributor as always. And underneath those the rest.

 

wim

If I do the same search, I do see that my images show up. If I search only Tecklenburg, images from a number of contributors show up. When I click on an image from another photographer, then below that is the expected same contributor set. When I click on one of my own, that set is not there.

 

Anyway, thanks for looking into it, Wim. it could be something I'm not doing right with the search function is the cause of my confusion.
Don

Edited November 16, 2023 by DDoug

[wiskerke]

2 hours ago, DDoug said:

If I do the same search, I do see that my images show up. If I search only Tecklenburg, images from a number of contributors show up. When I click on an image from another photographer, then below that is the expected same contributor set. When I click on one of my own, that set is not there.

 

Anyway, thanks for looking into it, Wim. it could be something I'm not doing right with the search function is the cause of my confusion.
Don

Well it turns out there's more to it.

Could it be that this is the same first five words of the caption pattern we have seen long ago? (Was it 5 or 6 or 7?)

That would mean that only when your search word is in the first part of your caption, the images will turn up in the same contributor section.

 

What rules are governing the other sections? The longer I look at them, the less sure I am I understand anything about it. It's not the first words of the caption. Not a search by image either.

In the case of Tecklenburg, you sometimes get images by the same contributor in the same contributor section, but underneath another image or maybe just underneath the same image, but on another moment, you get no same contributor section, but images by the same contributor do show up among the Similar stock images section.

Then with another image of just the historic city center, captioned Historic center, Tecklenburg Image ID: 2F96RJB, you get the mayor of Charleston, South Carolina, whose name is Tecklenburg in the Similar images section.

Most of the time it's not that stupid though. And with that mayor, it may not be all that stupid either, because people may indeed be looking for something or somebody in the US or the UK instead of some weird foreign little old village abroad in a faraway land.

So maybe the function is too smart for us me.

 

wim

[DDoug]

13 hours ago, wiskerke said:

Well it turns out there's more to it.

Could it be that this is the same first five words of the caption pattern we have seen long ago? (Was it 5 or 6 or 7?)

That would mean that only when your search word is in the first part of your caption, the images will turn up in the same contributor section.

 

What rules are governing the other sections? The longer I look at them, the less sure I am I understand anything about it. It's not the first words of the caption. Not a search by image either.

In the case of Tecklenburg, you sometimes get images by the same contributor in the same contributor section, but underneath another image or maybe just underneath the same image, but on another moment, you get no same contributor section, but images by the same contributor do show up among the Similar stock images section.

Then with another image of just the historic city center, captioned Historic center, Tecklenburg Image ID: 2F96RJB, you get the mayor of Charleston, South Carolina, whose name is Tecklenburg in the Similar images section.

Most of the time it's not that stupid though. And with that mayor, it may not be all that stupid either, because people may indeed be looking for something or somebody in the US or the UK instead of some weird foreign little old village abroad in a faraway land.

So maybe the function is too smart for us me.

 

wim

Searching “grand marais minnesota” and scrolling down toward the bottom of the first page I see one of my images and click on it (2T2PKAF), Sure enough, there’s the Stock photos by the same contributor link. As I’m wondering what I did right on that image that I did wrong on the Tecklenburg set, I’m also wondering why we should have to try to trick the algorithm or whatever into providing a level playing field. It isn’t up to me, but if it were I’d say that all images should have the same contributor link regardless of captions and tags.

[Robert M Estall]

I have long wondered about the "more images from the same photographer" option. You might like to see it, but seriously, would any researcher ever want to use this? I really don't think it remotely likely. Just to remind, my other half was chair of the Picture Researchers Association so there has been quite a bit of chat about and with picture researchers in this household. They really don't want to spend time on scrutinising your portfolio, they want to move on, search for the next request, etc. If they ever did, they don't these days!

[Harry Harrison]

27 minutes ago, Robert M Estall said:

I have long wondered about the "more images from the same photographer" option.

Fully respect your opinion, and that of your partner of course, but I'm thinking that it isn't quite working in the way that you describe, I also think they should change the title to make it clearer, I've made this point before I think. It isn't just showing more images by that photographer, it is showing more images of that subject area by that photographer, or possibly just of that subject, building or event etc. Putting aside the possible vanity of the photographer I would have thought that would be useful to a picture researcher because that photographer was at that particular event, on that particular day when the weather was like that, or the people looked like that, the building looked like that in that light etc. etc., in other words 'Similar' images by that photgrapher which is why I don't understand why don't say  that. Instead we get just 'Same contributor' on the hover over the thumbnail and 'Stock photos by the same contributor' below the zoom image. Neither of those titles tell the full story.

 

It also seems from this post that Alamy might have changed how their algorithm recognises which images from that photographer might be deemed to be similar.

 

 

Edited November 17, 2023 by Harry Harrison

[wiskerke]

1 hour ago, Harry Harrison said:

Fully respect your opinion, and that of your partner of course, but I'm thinking that it isn't quite working in the way that you describe, I also think they should change the title to make it clearer, I've made this point before I think. It isn't just showing more images by that photographer, it is showing more images of that subject area by that photographer, or possibly just of that subject, building or event etc. Putting aside the possible vanity of the photographer I would have thought that would be useful to a picture researcher because that photographer was at that particular event, on that particular day when the weather was like that, or the people looked like that, the building looked like that in that light etc. etc., in other words 'Similar' images by that photgrapher which is why I don't understand why don't say  that. Instead we get just 'Same contributor' on the hover over the thumbnail and 'Stock photos by the same contributor' below the zoom image. Neither of those titles tell the full story.

 

It also seems from this post that Alamy might have changed how their algorithm recognises which images from that photographer might be deemed to be similar.

Some other agencies have options for the photographer and the client to find images of the same venue or the same model(s).

By the same photographer I mean.

 

Harry is right that nowadays almost nobody cares that there are different credit lines under the images. Or no credits at all. But some books and magazines still do. Somehow they are the better paying clients as well. Call them traditional or decent. Maybe they only want to present themselves that way, who knows. Anyway some agencies think it's beneficiary to them. As is Alamy, because the same contributor feature is there. (Probably not that many agencies still think in terms of some value for the photographers.)

 

A thing to consider is how well does the feature work for the client?

Let's do some testing on a rainy night.

 

wim

 

edit: by the same photographer

Edited November 17, 2023 by wiskerke

[Betty LaRue]

I don’t have an images by same contributor section either. But when I bring up one of my images, there is a search by keyword function, & when I choose a keyword from my list, all of my images that uses that keyword show up, but mixed in with other peoples’ images.

Edited November 18, 2023 by Betty LaRue

[Harry Harrison]

On 18/11/2023 at 14:52, Betty LaRue said:

I don’t have an images by same contributor section either

None? That seems very strange, hard to understand why that might be?

[Harry Harrison]

There was a previous thread on this, well several probably, but I was thinking of this one:

 

https://discussion.alamy.com/topic/11806-similar-stock-images/#comment-217016

 

Here Wim wondered if it was driven by Supertags, having done some tests I don't think it is. I have some images that come up for an obscure search 'Turville Jubilee'. Rather neatly you get 11 of my images taken in the Buckinghamshire village of Turville together with 17 by another photographer taken in another Buckinghamshire village, Weston Turville, the villages are in fact 20 miles apart. The 'Same contributor' option on the thumbnail brings up all 11 whether or not those keywords are supertags, and in fact whether those keywords are present at all because I temporarily removed them for one of the images. So it seems to come from the caption, and not just from the first few words of the caption in fact because 'turville' is in fact the last word in my caption.

On another note, I'm pretty sure that the 'Same contributor' option on the thumbnail brought up actual small thumbnails before.

[NYCat]

On 18/11/2023 at 09:52, Betty LaRue said:

I don’t have an images by same contributor section either. But when I bring up one of my images, there is a search by keyword function, & when I choose a keyword from my list, all of my images that uses that keyword show up, but mixed in with other peoples’ images.

 

I decided to check for you, Betty, so I searched on Alamy for a BLT sandwich and spotted one of yours. When I clicked on it there was an images by same contributor section with your other BLTs. You also had the little icon on the thumbnail. I wonder if it has to do with searching on Alamy's main search page.

 

Paulette

[DDoug]

After a buyer has zoomed an image, he or she is presented with other optional images in the same vein. It’s as though the system is saying, “Before you pull the trigger on licensing that photo, maybe we could interest you in one of these others instead.” If the only alternatives shown are those from other photographers, it might lessen the likelihood that the one whose image was zoomed in the first place would get the sale. As to whether any of it makes any difference in practice, I have no idea. I do wonder, though, what the purpose is. Assuming that the initial keyword search turned up a grid of images that are relevant to the search by various contributors and the customer already zoomed one or several from that selection, what’s the point of presenting a new selection of similar images? Wouldn't they already have been in the initial grid of search results?

[Harry Harrison]

1 hour ago, DDoug said:

Wouldn't they already have been in the initial grid of search results?

They would have been, but if there were a large number of search results (and we're not in Editorial) then each of the images from a particular photographer would be separated by (it seems) 18 images or thereabouts, so 'similars' from that photographer would be much more difficult to spot. I don't think Alamy have done it as a favour to us, they must see it as sales tool, and it seems that some of their competitors do also.

Edited November 20, 2023 by Harry Harrison

[Harry Harrison]

1 hour ago, NYCat said:

I wonder if it has to do with searching on Alamy's main search page.

Yes, I think it's only when you do a search because it is comparing the search terms used with other images for that contributor that share those search terms, though precisely how it is doing it isn't entirely clear obviously. If you are simply looking at your own images or searching by a barcode then that won't happen, though I remember that some do actually put barcodes of 'similars' in as keywords for related images in which case they would come up.

 

It isn't always rational though, Steve F's post shows that:

 

https://discussion.alamy.com/topic/15810-alamys-similar-stock-images/#comment-321254

 

 

[Betty LaRue]

Okay, pardon me. When I searched before, I just clicked on my images under my avatar on the forum. Then I clicked on one of those images. There was no images by same contributor.

But when I just now went to the Alamy search box & put in “BLT” I found one of mine & clicked on it, like Paulette said above (thanks!) there is a “Images by same contributor” section and below that, other contributor’s images. In that group, I found one more of mine, one that had potato salad on the plate with the BLT. Maybe the addition of the potato salad changed the keywords just enough to keep it out of the “by same contributor” group. Strange, that, since BLT tag was there.