Robert Brook Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 But doesn't Corbis and some other agencies do the keywording themselves? I do all the same keywording for Alamy and Corbis. Corbis somehow select their own key-categories to display but it's me who's done the initial graft. Richard. Corbis, naturally, (they've got the resources) have a much better keywording system. The contributor supplies some of the keywords, ambiguous terms are clarified, the system automatically adds more, and they are edited to boot. (e.g: 'Boston': Do you mean 'Boston Mass' or 'Boston Lincs'? 'Lincs'). The system will then add: Boston Borough, Lincolshire, England, UK, United Kingdom, Europe etc. Conceptual words are catered for, and edited out if inappropriate. With this level of discipline, having all keywords as links is a greate resource for buyers. With the Alamy brouhaha it may not work as well, but will help buyers to dig deep into the collection. For example: a buyer can start with a common word and quickly move onto more technical terms. RB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Brook Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 "I'm very well aware of that. Call me selfish but I'm here to fill MY pocket. Aren't we all ......????" (Arterra) Why are buyers bothering with Alamy at all, given the competition? One reason is depth. Currently the most lucrative side of the editorial market is book publishing. Most book picture researchers probably go: Corbis>Getty>top specialists>Oh Flippin' Bloody Hell it's Alamy again. If Alamy doesn't do whatever it can to make it's collection searchable, it won't have the buyers to fill anyone's pocket. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paulstw Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 You call a string of keywords of which you can only click ONE WORD .... "searchable"? The way our keywords are now displayed is completely useless for customers (just a great help for keyword snatchers). It would be of any help if you can select SEVERAL keywords, which is the case at most other agencies (Corbis, Age, NPL, Minden Pictures, FLPA, .....). keywords of picture DRRBE0 : bronze, statue, sculpture, German, journalist, writer, poet, conservationist, Hermann, Löns, artist, sculptor, Marlies, Leonardy, Rex, town, Walsrode, Lüneburg, Heath, Lunenburg, Lüneburger, Heide, Lower, Saxony, Germany, Europe, patrimony, heritage, art, hunter What the hell is the point in being able to click on just "sculptor" or just "poet" or just "German". Could someone please explain, 'cause I honestly can't see any use in 636,960 pictures showing up after clicking on "German" (or whatever word above) "German sculptors" ..... yes, could be useful! But just ...... "German"? Come on! Cheers, Philippe I was going to make this point earlier too. Clicking on a single keyword would take the client totally away on another search not related to what they were looking for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Mitchell Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 You call a string of keywords of which you can only click ONE WORD .... "searchable"? The way our keywords are now displayed is completely useless for customers (just a great help for keyword snatchers). It would be of any help if you can select SEVERAL keywords, which is the case at most other agencies (Corbis, Age, NPL, Minden Pictures, FLPA, .....). keywords of picture DRRBE0 : bronze, statue, sculpture, German, journalist, writer, poet, conservationist, Hermann, Löns, artist, sculptor, Marlies, Leonardy, Rex, town, Walsrode, Lüneburg, Heath, Lunenburg, Lüneburger, Heide, Lower, Saxony, Germany, Europe, patrimony, heritage, art, hunter What the hell is the point in being able to click on just "sculptor" or just "poet" or just "German"? Could someone please explain, 'cause I honestly can't see any use in 636,960 pictures showing up after clicking on "German" (or whatever word above) I can understand it might be useful to search for "German" + "sculptors" or "Hermann" + "Lons" (yep, Löns (his real name) gives zero results. Had to add Lons without the ¨ ). But just ...... "German" or just "Hermann"? Come on, be serious! Cheers, Philippe Have to admit that I too don't understand the point of sending buyers off on possible wild goose chases when they click on single keywords. Perhaps Alamy could explain what they had in mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Brook Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 You call a string of keywords of which you can only click ONE WORD .... "searchable"? The way our keywords are now displayed is completely useless for customers (just a great help for keyword snatchers). It would be of any help if you can select SEVERAL keywords, which is the case at most other agencies (Corbis, Age, NPL, Minden Pictures, FLPA, .....). keywords of picture DRRBE0 : bronze, statue, sculpture, German, journalist, writer, poet, conservationist, Hermann, Löns, artist, sculptor, Marlies, Leonardy, Rex, town, Walsrode, Lüneburg, Heath, Lunenburg, Lüneburger, Heide, Lower, Saxony, Germany, Europe, patrimony, heritage, art, hunter What the hell is the point in being able to click on just "sculptor" or just "poet" or just "German"? Could someone please explain, 'cause I honestly can't see any use in 636,960 pictures showing up after clicking on "German" (or whatever word above) I can understand it might be useful to search for "German" + "sculptors" or "Hermann" + "Lons" (yep, Löns (his real name) gives zero results. Had to add Lons without the ¨ ). But just ...... "German" or just "Hermann"? Come on, be serious! Cheers, Philippe Then the obvious answer is for Alamy to get one of their coders to write a few lines of HTML and put in a few checkboxes. Should take all of two hours. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shergar Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 I don't particularly like the idea of the visible keywords . But it is what it is and its just one of those things that you just have to adjust too. But what I would like is some guidelines to the new Keywording so that I can get on and make whatever changes that are needed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Mitchell Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 You call a string of keywords of which you can only click ONE WORD .... "searchable"? The way our keywords are now displayed is completely useless for customers (just a great help for keyword snatchers). It would be of any help if you can select SEVERAL keywords, which is the case at most other agencies (Corbis, Age, NPL, Minden Pictures, FLPA, .....). keywords of picture DRRBE0 : bronze, statue, sculpture, German, journalist, writer, poet, conservationist, Hermann, Löns, artist, sculptor, Marlies, Leonardy, Rex, town, Walsrode, Lüneburg, Heath, Lunenburg, Lüneburger, Heide, Lower, Saxony, Germany, Europe, patrimony, heritage, art, hunter What the hell is the point in being able to click on just "sculptor" or just "poet" or just "German"? Could someone please explain, 'cause I honestly can't see any use in 636,960 pictures showing up after clicking on "German" (or whatever word above) I can understand it might be useful to search for "German" + "sculptors" or "Hermann" + "Lons" (yep, Löns (his real name) gives zero results. Had to add Lons without the ¨ ). But just ...... "German" or just "Hermann"? Come on, be serious! Cheers, Philippe Then the obvious answer is for Alamy to get one of their coders to write a few lines of HTML and put in a few checkboxes. Should take all of two hours. . Good suggestion IMO. Hope someone up in coding is listening in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Mitchell 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. The fact of the matter is that just about everything is now up for grabs on the Web. As media guru Marshall McLuhan said back in the 1960's, "The medium is the message." He wasn't wrong, it seems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Mitchell Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 But doesn't Corbis and some other agencies do the keywording themselves? I do all the same keywording for Alamy and Corbis. Corbis somehow select their own key-categories to display but it's me who's done the initial graft. Richard. Corbis, naturally, (they've got the resources) have a much better keywording system. The contributor supplies some of the keywords, ambiguous terms are clarified, the system automatically adds more, and they are edited to boot. (e.g: 'Boston': Do you mean 'Boston Mass' or 'Boston Lincs'? 'Lincs'). The system will then add: Boston Borough, Lincolshire, England, UK, United Kingdom, Europe etc. Conceptual words are catered for, and edited out if inappropriate. With this level of discipline, having all keywords as links is a greate resource for buyers. With the Alamy brouhaha it may not work as well, but will help buyers to dig deep into the collection. For example: a buyer can start with a common word and quickly move onto more technical terms. RB The check box system seems to work well. Some other agencies use it as well. Check boxes might not be practical for Alamy, though. If it were possible for customers to select more than one keyword at a time from the list using the "Ctrl" key, that would be a major improvement IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Mitchell Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 But doesn't Corbis and some other agencies do the keywording themselves? I do all the same keywording for Alamy and Corbis. Corbis somehow select their own key-categories to display but it's me who's done the initial graft. Richard. Corbis, naturally, (they've got the resources) have a much better keywording system. The contributor supplies some of the keywords, ambiguous terms are clarified, the system automatically adds more, and they are edited to boot. (e.g: 'Boston': Do you mean 'Boston Mass' or 'Boston Lincs'? 'Lincs'). The system will then add: Boston Borough, Lincolshire, England, UK, United Kingdom, Europe etc. Conceptual words are catered for, and edited out if inappropriate. With this level of discipline, having all keywords as links is a greate resource for buyers. With the Alamy brouhaha it may not work as well, but will help buyers to dig deep into the collection. For example: a buyer can start with a common word and quickly move onto more technical terms. RB The check box system seems to work well. Some other agencies use it as well. Check boxes might not be practical for Alamy, though. If it were possible for customers to select more than one keyword at a time from the list using the "Ctrl" key, that would be a major improvement IMO. Customers simply won't use the Ctrl key to select multiple keywords. That's nowhere done. Alamy doens't need rocket science to add simple check boxes (and making the keywords viewable for customers only). I truly hope they fix that as soon as possible. (wonder how much of my hard work is already nicked. Alamy must be heaven for some contributors AND photographers from other agencies ) Cheers, Philippe Agreed, check boxes would probably be the best solution. But the Ctrl key method (or something like it) would be better than nothing. Regarding Corbis, I only have a handful of images with them, but I find that their automated (?) system often adds irrelevant and unnecessary (IMO) keywords. Hope Alamy doesn't go in that direction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stipe Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 After this USELESS step, I am expecting instead a USEFUL step by Alamy: name of who purchased our photos! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Brook Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 "Regarding Corbis, I only have a handful of images with them, but I find that their automated (?) system often adds irrelevant and unnecessary (IMO) keywords. Hope Alamy doesn't go in that direction." JM http://www.corbisimages.com/Search#p=1&pg=John+Mitchell I admit the word 'strange' is a bit strange John, but all these keywords seem to be order to me. Where's the "irrelevant and unnecessary" here? Robert Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Brook Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 "Regarding Corbis, I only have a handful of images with them, but I find that their automated (?) system often adds irrelevant and unnecessary (IMO) keywords. Hope Alamy doesn't go in that direction." JM http://www.corbisimages.com/Search#p=1&pg=John+Mitchell I admit the word 'strange' is a bit strange John, but all these keywords seem to be order to me. Where's the "irrelevant and unnecessary" here? Robert Chinese New Year: mammal? Cheers, Philippe You are using photographer logic rather than pic researcher logic here, chum. Horse=mammal. If a researcher is researching myths/festivals/rituals/ceremonies involving animals/birds/fish/mammals, or ideas or concepts about, what keywords are they likely to use? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Mitchell Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 "Regarding Corbis, I only have a handful of images with them, but I find that their automated (?) system often adds irrelevant and unnecessary (IMO) keywords. Hope Alamy doesn't go in that direction." JM http://www.corbisimages.com/Search#p=1&pg=John+Mitchell I admit the word 'strange' is a bit strange John, but all these keywords seem to be order to me. Where's the "irrelevant and unnecessary" here? Robert Chinese New Year: mammal? Cheers, Philippe Right on. Excellent detective work. You wouldn't happen to know Edward Snowden, would you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Mitchell Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 "Regarding Corbis, I only have a handful of images with them, but I find that their automated (?) system often adds irrelevant and unnecessary (IMO) keywords. Hope Alamy doesn't go in that direction." JM http://www.corbisimages.com/Search#p=1&pg=John+Mitchell I admit the word 'strange' is a bit strange John, but all these keywords seem to be order to me. Where's the "irrelevant and unnecessary" here? Robert Chinese New Year: mammal? Cheers, Philippe You are using photographer logic rather than pic researcher logic here, chum. Horse=mammal. If a researcher is researching myths/festivals/rituals/ceremonies involving animals/birds/fish/mammals, or ideas or concepts about, what keywords are they likely to use? Interesting point. There is some logic there after all. Thanks. Update: Thinking about this further, I doubt that I would have added the keyword "mammal" to the image that Phillipe commented on (even though I do now see the logic) because it would probably come up in too many false search result -- i.e. there is no mammal in the photo, only Homo sapiens. I tend to be quite literal with keywording, usually describing exactly what I see in the image plus a few concept words where appropriate. If the photo had an actual horse or other mammal in it, I would use "mammal." Corbis has added a few other terms to my photos (e.g. "pseudoscience" to one of them) that I find a bit of a stretch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Mitchell Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 LOL I think I'm more related to Hercule Poirot Cheers, Philippe bien sûr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.