Angler Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 Alamy, it's important to keep the customers happy. But without us - the photographers - you wouldn't be in business. Isn't it important to keep us happy as well? Cheers, Philippe Alamy used to make me happy, back in the day when we got 70% of the sale & the average sale was $150. Where did it all go wrong? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Niels Quist Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 The comprehensive keywords do not seem to be visible to all. However, they are not of the same value, but it may be good to know...Edited: Sorry, Pearl is correct (below post) - and later Mark. The comprehensive keywords are the first, did not think of that at all - nor had read Pearl's post.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pearl Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 The comprehensive keywords do not seem to be visible to all. However, they are not of the same value, but it may be good to know... They are visible in mine, in fact they are the first as I mentioned earlier. Pearl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spacecadet Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 Checking one of mine with comps, they are all there, but comps first, then ess, then mains, with duplication removed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chrissie Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 Good news as far as I'm concerned. I'm glad to be able to 'give' the buyer more than 50 characters of keywords to help them choose my image. Although often the caption, the essential keywords and the location are all that's needed and those were seen anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chrissie Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 Good news as far as I'm concerned. I'm glad to be able to 'give' the buyer more than 50 characters of keywords to help them choose my image. Although often the caption, the essential keywords and the location are all that's needed and those were seen anyway.Chrissie, ALL your keywords have ALWAYS been searcheable.This discussion is about what is VISIBLE to customers/photographers. Cheers, Philippe Yes, that's what I said - the caption, essential keywords and location have always been visible - if I need any more than that then I'm glad to now be able to add more detail for the buyer to see. If someone wanted to copy keywords it was easy enough to extract that information from an image. This change gives the buyer more information and I'm all for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Niels Quist Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 Good news as far as I'm concerned. I'm glad to be able to 'give' the buyer more than 50 characters of keywords to help them choose my image. Although often the caption, the essential keywords and the location are all that's needed and those were seen anyway.Chrissie, ALL your keywords have ALWAYS been searcheable.This discussion is about what is VISIBLE to customers/photographers. Cheers, Philippe Yes, that's what I said - the caption, essential keywords and location have always been visible - if I need any more than that then I'm glad to now be able to add more detail for the buyer to see.If someone wanted to copy keywords it was easy enough to extract that information from an image. This change gives the buyer more information and I'm all for that. Shouldn't that information be entered in the caption and description field? And yes, you could extract the information, but this would require a download of the large preview photo and PhotoShop or similar programme to see the information. Too much work for more than one interesting check. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Julie Edwards Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 I personally don't see the problem or any of the issues. Almost all of the other major agencies (Getty, Corbin's etc) show all the keywords... Then they make the tick able to improve and filter the results. I'm pretty sure most of us here do not keyword in a dark room never looking at other images or other library's. Just because we see the keywords, does not mean it's just a case of copy / paste plagiarism. It's the combination of the keywords and image that matters, I would only start worrying if I saw both my images and keywords copied.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Mitchell Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 I personally don't see the problem or any of the issues. Almost all of the other major agencies (Getty, Corbin's etc) show all the keywords... Then they make the tick able to improve and filter the results. I'm pretty sure most of us here do not keyword in a dark room never looking at other images or other library's. Just because we see the keywords, does not mean it's just a case of copy / paste plagiarism. It's the combination of the keywords and image that matters, I would only start worrying if I saw both my images and keywords copied.... As others have mentioned, Corbis, Getty, etc. usually do the keywording for contributors. Alamy doesn't (fine by me), which means that your own work (rather than the agency's) can now be plagiarized. That's the main concern. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NYCat Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 I feel like I can use some guidelines on keywording now. Since words that go together are best put together and we have lots of room in the Comprehensive fields I have put in both Wild Animal and Wild Life. Some people seem to use Wild Life instead of Wildlife when they search so I started including that. Now I notice an image in which Life appears by itself because they have not repeated the Wild. Very clever, I think, that they are managing not to repeat words but kind of messes up what I have been doing. I'm sure I'll find other instances that don't work. A bit worrisome in terms of not wanting to do keywords all over again. Also, since Comprehensive used to be the least important section I wonder why it appears first. I have taken more trouble with the Essential and Main. Paulette Edit… Just found another problem. I couldn't figure out why I would have put North in the keywords so I looked and saw that I had put North America. Since I used America earlier they eliminated that -- leaving North by itself. Alack and alas I think I had better stop looking. I am going to want to re-keyword a lot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SShep Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 Since words that go together are best put together and we have lots of room in the Comprehensive fields I have put in both Wild Animal and Wild Life. Some people seem to use Wild Life instead of Wildlife when they search so I started including that. Now I notice an image in which Life appears by itself because they have not repeated the Wild. Very clever, I think, that they are managing not to repeat words but kind of messes up what I have been doing. I noticed this too but I think that although they have taken out duplicates in the displayed keywords, they still work in the same way. If you search for the reference number of one of your photographs with "wild animal" and "wild life" as keywords, and then individually add each of those terms to the search including the quote marks I think it will still find the photograph each time - and the quote marks have been implemented from the search side of things. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Julie Edwards Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 I personally don't see the problem or any of the issues. Almost all of the other major agencies (Getty, Corbin's etc) show all the keywords... Then they make the tick able to improve and filter the results. I'm pretty sure most of us here do not keyword in a dark room never looking at other images or other library's. Just because we see the keywords, does not mean it's just a case of copy / paste plagiarism. It's the combination of the keywords and image that matters, I would only start worrying if I saw both my images and keywords copied.... As others have mentioned, Corbis, Getty, etc. usually do the keywording for contributors. Alamy doesn't (fine by me), which means that your own work (rather than the agency's) can now be plagiarized. That's the main concern.I realise that but so can the photo was part of my point.... All I'm saying is I think it is being blown up out of all proportion.. If at some point they add add tick boxes a-la Getty & Corbis to make searches easier to filter which may (May!) lead to more buyers, downloads, sales, would you still prefer hidden keywords? Key wording is a bit of a black art but hey I could have keyword a number of my waiting images in the time it's taken to read this thread ;-) Hands up straw poll - now many here NEVER look at any other images as they keyword, I mean, none... (Devils advocate here on purpose, don't shoot me down, just think for a second)... No axe to grind either way other than I see it might be a step to an easier search tool for buyers... Just think it's a bit if a storm in a teacup, that's all... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NYCat Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 Since words that go together are best put together and we have lots of room in the Comprehensive fields I have put in both Wild Animal and Wild Life. Some people seem to use Wild Life instead of Wildlife when they search so I started including that. Now I notice an image in which Life appears by itself because they have not repeated the Wild. Very clever, I think, that they are managing not to repeat words but kind of messes up what I have been doing. I noticed this too but I think that although they have taken out duplicates in the displayed keywords, they still work in the same way. If you search for the reference number of one of your photographs with "wild animal" and "wild life" as keywords, and then individually add each of those terms to the search including the quote marks I think it will still find the photograph each time - and the quote marks have been implemented from the search side of things. Steve Thanks, Steve. That is reassuring. I do think I will work differently in the future. I have always started with the Essential keywords and usually do the Comprehensive last. I will now begin with the Comprehensive and bear in mind that repeated words will be gone at least in terms of being visible. It would be good to hear from Alamy about this issue. Paulette Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_J Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 Q for ALAMY: will this change have any effect on the order in which images are shown to buyers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shergar Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 Here is the example I followed as best I could for Keywording . Provided by alamy . So am I correct in thinking that Alamy would now remove any keyword that has been used twice? http://www.alamy.com/contributor/help/annotation-options.asp Main Keywords families [four people] “mature men” “mature women” “mature man” “mature woman” child “family group” mother father brother sister son daughter siblings children parents kids mum dad “day trip” portrait happy together shirt dress [yellow T shirt] [blue T shirt] togetherness [family hugging] summer Comprehensive keywords [casual clothing] water sea ocean coast coastal beach shore outdoors outside natural square image color image colour color photography [mature male] [mature female] woman women pre-adolescent child [young family group] shorts summer sunshine warm happiness smile relaxing relaxes relaxed relaxation embracing embraces embraced hug hugging affection together “waters edge” Wouldn't this example end up as a bit of a mess as far as Keywording is concerned? More importantly whats the guide lines for Keywording now ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Endicott Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 LOL!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Julie Edwards Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 A further thought / suggestion (been giving this a lot of thought as to wether I'm wrong and it is an issue or not). I think its not the words themselves that are the black art, when it comes to Alamy, its the ordering of them and in which box... Simple solution.. maybe if they were not displayed in order of addition but in Alphabetical Order - everybody happy, no? (and this would make it easier for the customer to see as well)... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDP Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 There was similar contributor disquiet back in December 2009 when the change was made from showing Comprehensive keywords to Essential. The argument then was that, since the Essential field was highly weighted, words would be copied from top ranked images - plus ça change..........! Although there will undoubtedly be plagiarism, Alamy do seem to have put some thought into the implementation of the new layout. There's no way of easily identifying which words appear in which fields or the frequency with which they occur. Given the importance of the Essential field, it could even be argued that the new layout is less helpful to plagiarists. Despite this, Julie's idea of putting the words in alphabetical order has a lot of merit and would make copying even less useful. Ian D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mihai Popa Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 I think showing more keywords will allow Google's web crawling bots to index Alamy content. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
losdemas Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 A further thought / suggestion (been giving this a lot of thought as to wether I'm wrong and it is an issue or not). I think its not the words themselves that are the black art, when it comes to Alamy, its the ordering of them and in which box... Simple solution.. maybe if they were not displayed in order of addition but in Alphabetical Order - everybody happy, no? (and this would make it easier for the customer to see as well)... Mmmm, not a bad idea, Julie. Here are Corbis' keywords they display: Here is the same picture now with all of Alamy's: While Corbis also have their own links that take you away from your image, it's far harder to copy and paste. Richard. Alamy, if you decide to go through with it - please - at least place the keywords alphabetical in columns and with the possibility to select some of them like the Corbis example above. That way, it's impossible to copy the whole lot in a blink of an eye, which looks very inviting to do by newcomers, lazy bums and those who realise they suck at choosing the right keywords. Cheers, Philippe Not impossible, Philippe, just a little more troublesome (I just tried it - still less of a chore than creating your own keywords). Adding the check-boxes also enables the customer to select more than one keyword at a time. I think showing more keywords will allow Google's web crawling bots to index Alamy content. Alamy's robots.txt file determines what Google will or will not spider. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedSnapper Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 'if the one they're on isn't quite right'- thanks Alamy for directing the customer away from my image! The business is to sell images not necessarily *your* image km Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Crellin Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 This could also have implications for captioning. For example, in the UK at least any vacuum cleaner is often called a Hoover regardless of make, or a 4x4 car is often called a Jeep. I have taken the view that it is OK to use these terms as keywords to help somebody find an image but that anything visible such as caption and esskeys should be scrupulously accurate. If people can now see all of the keywords I would think they are entitled to expect them to be absolutely correct. Steve That is my worry - I include incorrect but common mistakes in a lower keyword level sometimes - even common mis-spellings. My main beef is that more people will start using my pseudonym in keywords as some *** already is - and I've reported this to Alamy with no result. In fact they will copy it without thought... John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paulstw Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 My experience of 'some' photographers is that they will cut corners to get ahead in this game. We don't like to think about it, but it's every man for them-self in this industry. I take great offence when I've been tracking Kingfisher for 6 months. I finally nail their stretch of river, and get some nice shots only to be asked by other photographers where they are. It's the same with landscape stuff. I always get people asking me where I got a particular shot. This extends to hiding EXIF data on Flickr too. People get so offended if I hide my EXIF data. To me it matters not a peep but for some it's another way of copying something. Photographers in some cases want shortcuts to everything. Giving access to all the keywording data that folk out hard effort into will only mean that a fair few will come along and just rip off that work. We can't deny that it happens. These two links show a very real trend in ripping off keywording from other photos on the market. http://microstockgroup.com/tools/keyword.php http://arcurs.com/keywording/index.php You can already copy someone's style of pics, via the "Have you seen" threads. You see what sells, and you just mirror the commonality. Now you can just rip off the keywords too. I know far too many photographers who cut corners, and do anything to get ahead fast. It's a cut throat industry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Crellin Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 I think showing more keywords will allow Google's web crawling bots to index Alamy content. Could be a good reason - and Google are very strict about trying to place words on pages so that "real people" can't see them so Alamy have no option if they want the keywords in the Google index. But my evidence from sales that originate from my well-ranked on Google website is that people don't Google for images to BUY. Maybe that's changing though... John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex Todd Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 spacecadet, on 11 Feb 2014 - 5:10 PM, said: 'if the one they're on isn't quite right'- thanks Alamy for directing the customer away from my image! The business is to sell images not necessarily *your* image km My business is to sell my images. I'm not here to play Mother Teresa. Cheers, Philippe I think keith's point is that Alamy don't care whose image is sold as long as they sell it and get their 50%. We are all colateral damage. If someone copies your keywords and their image is a better fit for the client, you will be unhappy (if you find out) but Alamy will be happy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.