syntax annotation options

[Baarney]

 I took advantage of the opportunity by invitation to ask a question of CEO James West.  I brought up the time-honored issue of enabling quotes and brackets.  This was the response:

 

 

Hello Bernard

 

Some parts of the additional annotation options are already live such as proximity. Our search engine will prioritise an image with keywords in order "blue car dog" when a search is made for "blue car".

It will be returned lower in a result for a search for "blue dog".

 

The other additional syntax annotation options are not live as not enough contributors have used them to make it worthwhile releasing.

 

We cannot give a realistic timeframe of when (or even if) they’ll be implemented as we’re concentrating development time to other areas of our search engine and other parts of the site.

 

Drop us a line if you’ve got any other questions.

 

Thanks

 

 

Is it possible that not enough contributors have used them, because they know they are inoperable?  I intend to respond and will offer an update if forthcoming.

 

[Betty LaRue]

I still use them, anyway the quotes and brackets.  But I've forgotten what ^ stood for. Quit using it but see it on some of my old images.  I figure if they're ever implemented, I'm in good shape.

[John Mitchell]

Thanks for the update. I was using the brackets, etc. but stopped over a year ago because I thought Alamy had changed its mind. I'd hate to have to go back and add them.

[Ed Endicott]

Quite frankly, I have over 4,000 images on the site.  When I uploaded those images, commas were in the EXIF data to separate phrases and words.  When the images went through the Alamy system, the commas were removed.  I don't have this issue with any other agency out there and I don't know of any other agency out there that currently does this (THIS IS NOT THE INDUSTRY STANDARD).  My workflow will not change to accommodate Alamy and until a definitive change has been made, I am not willing to spend the time to go back through those 4,000+ images to make changes.

 

Take a look at the size of the portfolio of Zuma Press - do you really think they are going to take the time to change all of the images they've uploaded?

[Trevor Chriss]

Yes thanks for the update, I generally tend not to use them, although in the past I have flirted with them. 

I was actually thinking about this very topic this morning, so very apt for me.

Thanks.

[Baarney]

It seems most are willing to just accept what is.  In my case, there's a specific problem.  I live in Santa Barbara, and, since I can't put it in quotes, I get numerous false hits during the holidays like "Santa dancing".  My CTR can ill afford such aberrations.  Keywording is tedious enough as it is, so I don't use them as it creates extra work.  Going back to add them would be a monumental task, but it doesn't seem likely that there will ever be the need.

[Ed Endicott]

We all have that issue.  As an example, I photographed a SCCA sanctioned auto race that took place in a parking lot at Denver International Airport.  The same images come up for Denver and for Denver International Airport and for Denver Airport and for DIA.....and since I'm based in Denver and I do newsworthy stuff every image have the location.  My images come up all over the place for the wrong reason all of the time.  Alamy made the decision last year or the year before to remove the location from the search algorithm but the location should be a required keyword either way.

 

[Betty LaRue]

Anyone remember what the ^ was used for?  I'll put it in if I just knew how to use it again, lol!

[KWheal]

That's an interesting answer given by alamy. I tend to put each keyword in once only but the reply suggests that instead of putting say

tall thin slender man male (just an example)

 

you should in fact put in

tall man tall male slender man slender male tall slender man slender tall man tall slender male slender tall male

 

This is to ensure you get the search terms in order

 

There would never be enough space !!!!

Kevin

[digi2ap]

Thanks for asking the question about this - I have indeed been using the quotes and brackets but may now have a re-think.  Without these syntax options and to avoid incorrect searches do people think that a smaller number of specific keywords is best?  

[Inchiquin]

Well, my attitude is that the fewer the keywords the better, as long as you have all the important bases covered. I always take a long hard look at each pic and think very carefully about what search terms customers would actually want that image to come up for. Just because a particular object is prominent in the image doesn't necessarily mean that it's the kind of image people searching for that object will want to see.

 

With regard to the annotations... it affects ALL of us. Every single Alamy contributor has keyword combinations that are going to throw up false matches and there's nothing we can do about it. I have loads and loads and my CTR suffers as a result but so does everyone's, and mine usually stays above the average regardless. I just ignore the issue and get on with taking photographs.

 

Alan

[MariaJ]

I'm not a fan of the searches using proximity as a key factor in retrieving images.  I find it misses a lot of images that would meet the criteria of the search.  For example, two of my images came up in a search for "Canadian university", whereas I have 18 that meet that criteria, and all had those two words in the keywords.  The two that were viewed both had those two words next to each other in my keywords.  That was a bit of an anomaly as for the rest I had put the name "X university", and the word Canadian was elsewhere in the keywords.  

 

It would be helpful if we could use the annotations to submit word phrases that customers might search for, which might include using individual words more than once, e.g. "X university", "Canadian University", "university students", etc.  You can use phrases like this for Stockimo images, why not for the rest?  I find myself second guessing and rearranging keywords based on what has come up in searches, but I don't know how helpful that is as the next customer may use a different order anyways.