What would you like to see in the new manage images / upload process?

[Joseph Clemson]

I'd like the ability to use Manage Images to find an image which is already in my collection and to be easily able to copy all the description, keywords etc to images(s) I'm processing for submission.

[Pearl]

I'd like the ability to use Manage Images to find an image which is already in my collection and to be easily able to copy all the description, keywords etc to images(s) I'm processing for submission.

You can already do that with the present version.  Just use the search facility at the top.

 

Pearl

[Joseph Clemson]

 

I'd like the ability to use Manage Images to find an image which is already in my collection and to be easily able to copy all the description, keywords etc to images(s) I'm processing for submission.

You can already do that with the present version.  Just use the search facility at the top.

 

Pearl

 

But if I open an image from my current collection, I can't have open an image from the Images not Ready category  in order to copy information. I tend to just work on one or two similar images at a time and copy/paste between them using the next/previous image button if they are of a similar subject. Fine if both images are in the Images not Read category, but not if one ofthem is already in the library. Or am I missing something  obvious?

[Martin P Wilson]

 

 

I'd like the ability to use Manage Images to find an image which is already in my collection and to be easily able to copy all the description, keywords etc to images(s) I'm processing for submission.

You can already do that with the present version.  Just use the search facility at the top.

 

Pearl

 

But if I open an image from my current collection, I can't have open an image from the Images not Ready category  in order to copy information. I tend to just work on one or two similar images at a time and copy/paste between them using the next/previous image button if they are of a similar subject. Fine if both images are in the Images not Read category, but not if one ofthem is already in the library. Or am I missing something  obvious?

 

 

But you can build a batch from multiple categories to work in that way. Not ideal but I have used it in the situation you describe.

[NYCat]

 

 

I'd like the ability to use Manage Images to find an image which is already in my collection and to be easily able to copy all the description, keywords etc to images(s) I'm processing for submission.

You can already do that with the present version.  Just use the search facility at the top.

 

Pearl

 

But if I open an image from my current collection, I can't have open an image from the Images not Ready category  in order to copy information. I tend to just work on one or two similar images at a time and copy/paste between them using the next/previous image button if they are of a similar subject. Fine if both images are in the Images not Read category, but not if one ofthem is already in the library. Or am I missing something  obvious?

 

 

If you search for and zoom one of your images on sale you will get the option to "Edit Image". I do that on a new window when I am in Manage Images and then I click the search results window red button to close all but the zoom. I can move the zoom window and my Manage Images window to put them side by side.

 

Paulette

[Pearl]

 

 

I'd like the ability to use Manage Images to find an image which is already in my collection and to be easily able to copy all the description, keywords etc to images(s) I'm processing for submission.

You can already do that with the present version.  Just use the search facility at the top.

 

Pearl

 

But if I open an image from my current collection, I can't have open an image from the Images not Ready category  in order to copy information. I tend to just work on one or two similar images at a time and copy/paste between them using the next/previous image button if they are of a similar subject. Fine if both images are in the Images not Read category, but not if one ofthem is already in the library. Or am I missing something  obvious?

 

It's not as easy as it used to be but it can be done.  You need two tabs open and go to My Alamy on each tab.  Then select Manage images for each of the My Alamy tabs.  In each case select "Take me to the new version" and you should end up with two Manage Image windows.  You can use one to search for old images whilst having your new images on the other then you can copy and paste between them.  I work with two monitors which makes it easier but it is still possible with one.

 

Pearl 

[Joseph Clemson]

Thanks everybody for the help in how to copy data from one image to the other - I do appreciate your assistance.

 

However, it is still some way short of what I would like to see. At another site where I have my videos, I can display a list of clips which includes both all my accepted clips and the new clips I'm preparing to submit; I tick two boxes to select the source clip and the new clip. I select the action to 'Copy Tags from an Existing Clip' and 'Execute'. Two seconds later the new image is populated with description, keywords and other settings, and I can edit these, save and submit.

 

Cutting and pasting between images is the workaround I use here at Alamy. The speed and neatness of 'select' and 'click to copy' is what I would like to have in its place.

[TokyoM1ke]

Thanks everybody for the help in how to copy data from one image to the other - I do appreciate your assistance.

 

However, it is still some way short of what I would like to see. At another site where I have my videos, I can display a list of clips which includes both all my accepted clips and the new clips I'm preparing to submit; I tick two boxes to select the source clip and the new clip. I select the action to 'Copy Tags from an Existing Clip' and 'Execute'. Two seconds later the new image is populated with description, keywords and other settings, and I can edit these, save and submit.

 

Cutting and pasting between images is the workaround I use here at Alamy. The speed and neatness of 'select' and 'click to copy' is what I would like to have in its place.

If they do that then multi-step undo is a must.

[wiskerke]

Thanks everybody for the help in how to copy data from one image to the other - I do appreciate your assistance.

 

However, it is still some way short of what I would like to see. At another site where I have my videos, I can display a list of clips which includes both all my accepted clips and the new clips I'm preparing to submit; I tick two boxes to select the source clip and the new clip. I select the action to 'Copy Tags from an Existing Clip' and 'Execute'. Two seconds later the new image is populated with description, keywords and other settings, and I can edit these, save and submit.

 

Cutting and pasting between images is the workaround I use here at Alamy. The speed and neatness of 'select' and 'click to copy' is what I would like to have in its place.

 

Here that would destroy your rank pretty quickly.

So I'm all for it ;-)

 

wim

[Joseph Clemson]

 

Thanks everybody for the help in how to copy data from one image to the other - I do appreciate your assistance.

 

However, it is still some way short of what I would like to see. At another site where I have my videos, I can display a list of clips which includes both all my accepted clips and the new clips I'm preparing to submit; I tick two boxes to select the source clip and the new clip. I select the action to 'Copy Tags from an Existing Clip' and 'Execute'. Two seconds later the new image is populated with description, keywords and other settings, and I can edit these, save and submit.

 

Cutting and pasting between images is the workaround I use here at Alamy. The speed and neatness of 'select' and 'click to copy' is what I would like to have in its place.

 

Here that would destroy your rank pretty quickly.

So I'm all for it ;-)

 

wim

 

The key word in the keywording process I outline is 'Edit'. I hardly ever do more than two or three similar images but it is useful to be able to copy all keywords etc, edit the essential ones to reflect the nuances of the new image and leave intact those the images have in common and then save it.  I too recognise that simply copying the same keywords to lots of images would wreck my ranking.

[Lynn Palmer]

Once images are key worded and ready to be published, why is there a one or two day delay before they show in the portfolio and searches? Why can't they be automatically posted as soon as all the required fields are completed?

[spacecadet]

Once images are key worded and ready to be published, why is there a one or two day delay before they show in the portfolio and searches? Why can't they be automatically posted as soon as all the required fields are completed?

Because the database is updated overnight.

[DHill]

 

Thanks everybody for the help in how to copy data from one image to the other - I do appreciate your assistance.

 

However, it is still some way short of what I would like to see. At another site where I have my videos, I can display a list of clips which includes both all my accepted clips and the new clips I'm preparing to submit; I tick two boxes to select the source clip and the new clip. I select the action to 'Copy Tags from an Existing Clip' and 'Execute'. Two seconds later the new image is populated with description, keywords and other settings, and I can edit these, save and submit.

 

Cutting and pasting between images is the workaround I use here at Alamy. The speed and neatness of 'select' and 'click to copy' is what I would like to have in its place.

If they do that then multi-step undo is a must.

 

I agree - but would go further and say that multi-step undo (with a shortcut key, ctrl-z or apple key + z) is a must anyway. 

 

Regards, 

David. 

[scotstock]

I would like to be able to see the keywords used when an image is sold, not just zooms.

[Clemency Wright Consulting Ltd]

- keyword database that supports the automation of plurals and synonyms for improved efficiency and consistency

- hierarchical keyword structure to optimise search results (eg if London is added then England, English, UK, United Kingdom, Britain, Great Britain, GB, British Isles, Europe, European are automatically applied)

- an interface that allows users to bulk add keywords to relevant images

 

Alamy - are there any changes planned to Alamy Search Ranking technology? If not, and keywords continue to be entered according to relevancy (Essential, Main or Comprehensive), then this remains largely a manual process. A more efficient workflow would be to introduce radio buttons so that once the majority of general keywords have been applied within the batch, via a bulk adding function, the user could then go in and individually assign Essential/Main/Comprehensive on an image-by-image basis. This, to me, would deliver greater efficiency for contributors and keywording providers, as well as improved search results for Alamy customers.

 

 

 

 

[Phil Robinson]

Slightly off topic (perhaps) but having just done some searching for insect images, a way of reporting other people's pics with HORRENDOUSLY WRONG CAPTIONS would be useful. 

[Martin P Wilson]

- keyword database that supports the automation of plurals and synonyms for improved efficiency and consistency

- hierarchical keyword structure to optimise search results (eg if London is added then England, English, UK, United Kingdom, Britain, Great Britain, GB, British Isles, Europe, European are automatically applied)

- an interface that allows users to bulk add keywords to relevant images

 

Alamy - are there any changes planned to Alamy Search Ranking technology? If not, and keywords continue to be entered according to relevancy (Essential, Main or Comprehensive), then this remains largely a manual process. A more efficient workflow would be to introduce radio buttons so that once the majority of general keywords have been applied within the batch, via a bulk adding function, the user could then go in and individually assign Essential/Main/Comprehensive on an image-by-image basis. This, to me, would deliver greater efficiency for contributors and keywording providers, as well as improved search results for Alamy customers.

 

The first and second are available for those of us who use PhotoMechanic and I think LR, PS and other software also support controlled and structured vocabularies with synonyms etc. I used this approach for a while but it all too easily encourages keyword stuffing rather than carefully considered keywording. I am in the process of stripping my strcutured keywords right back to basics to create a much tighter vocabulary tailored to my photography.

[Martin P Wilson]

Slightly off topic (perhaps) but having just done some searching for insect images, a way of reporting other people's pics with HORRENDOUSLY WRONG CAPTIONS would be useful. 

 

And for buyers to be able to do so as well.

[Cribb Visuals]

Not only wrong captions but also keyword spam

[losdemas]

Slightly off topic (perhaps) but having just done some searching for insect images, a way of reporting other people's pics with HORRENDOUSLY WRONG CAPTIONS would be useful. 

 

I do know that this would result in a better overall impression of Alamy from a buyers perspective, but...personally, if some contributors are too lazy to get it right, then I'm happy to get the sale rather than them. 

[KerinF]

 

I have another one (apologies if this has been mentioned already):  ability to enter common foreign characters so can provide accurate place / proper names in original language, e.g. ß, ö, ø, etc.  I have only just noticed that when I have entered these, the letter just drops out of the final uploaded keyword list - guess I will be going back and removing all these   Bizarrely and quite inconsistently, though, when I do the same thing when uploading to Stockimo, the characters stay there.  So the place names are actually tagged better in Stockimo than Alamy.  (I do enter the anglicised version anyway, but have only just noticed I have all these weird typos where foreign characters have dropped out)

[Phil Robinson]

 

Slightly off topic (perhaps) but having just done some searching for insect images, a way of reporting other people's pics with HORRENDOUSLY WRONG CAPTIONS would be useful. 

 

I do know that this would result in a better overall impression of Alamy from a buyers perspective, but...personally, if some contributors are too lazy to get it right, then I'm happy to get the sale rather than them. 

 

 

I agree with your sentiment but it does give a very bad impression to potential buyers. The problem is not that the buyer won't see their picture, it's that they'll see it when are looking for something else.

The pics I was referring to above were of a Small Tortoiseshell butterfly - one of our commonest - captioned as a Painted Lady. It's a very obvious mistake and a researcher looking for butterfly images isn't going to be confident that the rarer species that they might not recognise will be what the captions claim. They will head for a specialist agency who have people checking these things.

[Clemency Wright Consulting Ltd]

 

- keyword database that supports the automation of plurals and synonyms for improved efficiency and consistency

- hierarchical keyword structure to optimise search results (eg if London is added then England, English, UK, United Kingdom, Britain, Great Britain, GB, British Isles, Europe, European are automatically applied)

- an interface that allows users to bulk add keywords to relevant images

 

Alamy - are there any changes planned to Alamy Search Ranking technology? If not, and keywords continue to be entered according to relevancy (Essential, Main or Comprehensive), then this remains largely a manual process. A more efficient workflow would be to introduce radio buttons so that once the majority of general keywords have been applied within the batch, via a bulk adding function, the user could then go in and individually assign Essential/Main/Comprehensive on an image-by-image basis. This, to me, would deliver greater efficiency for contributors and keywording providers, as well as improved search results for Alamy customers.

 

The first and second are available for those of us who use PhotoMechanic and I think LR, PS and other software also support controlled and structured vocabularies with synonyms etc. I used this approach for a while but it all too easily encourages keyword stuffing rather than carefully considered keywording. I am in the process of stripping my strcutured keywords right back to basics to create a much tighter vocabulary tailored to my photography.

 

Martin, it seems the real issue here is not so much whether you can configure LR, PS or PhotoMechanic to approximate an efficient keywording process, but rather, how should Alamy update their keywording interface to achieve better results? With the responsibility on photographers to keyword their own content, it would make sense to integrate a professionally created keyword database within the Portal. This would afford built-in control over hierarchical keyword application. With regard to spamming, keywording remains largely manual, which is not to say it cannot use technology to achieve efficiency. But ultimately, it's far better to use a controlled vocabulary alongside professional training and guidance, than an automated system that has limited ability to 'read' an image. I would relish the opportunity to discuss options with Alamy around keywording, however unfortunately, it would appear that search is not a key area for development right now. Perhaps Alamy could comment on this?

[Inchiquin]

- keyword database that supports the automation of plurals and synonyms for improved efficiency and consistency

- hierarchical keyword structure to optimise search results (eg if London is added then England, English, UK, United Kingdom, Britain, Great Britain, GB, British Isles, Europe, European are automatically applied)

 

I believe that the Alamy database used to support stemming for plurals and the like but it was removed. I assume they had a good reason for removing it in which case it's unlikely to come back.

 

The hierarchical suggestion is a good one and is something that I've been planning to add to my own site if only I could find the time to build the search engine.

 

Alan

[Graham]

A feature request is difficult in advance of knowing how the non-Flash version will be implemented.  Assuming that the basic system of thumbnails and moving from one to another remains, I would like to see:

• thumbnail order respects upload order.  It annoys me no end that the system seems to have a mind of its own as to the order in which thumbnails appear, irrespective of user image naming or upload order.  Images xxx1 to xxx5 will appear in inverse order with xxx5 first, and there are apparently random re-orderings, particularly if several batches have gone through QC together.
•  
• ability to create a user-defined thumbnail order, by drag and drop.  Sometimes in a series of images you realise that an image some way down the line bears a closer relationship to others at the beginning of the line: it would be useful to be able to re-order, so that common keywords could easily be copied and pasted between successive images without having to jump around all over the place.
•  
• eliminate the categories of keywords (Essential/Main/Comprehensive) and instead rely on user defined order.  And (if this is not a fourth wish in my wishlist), limit keywords by number of keywords rather than number of characters.

While I agree with most of the suggestions here, I would not advocate any form of automatic hierarchical keyword structure.  I already have my keywords set up in this way in Lightroom.  Were the system then to regard each of my hierarchical keywords as an independent keyword of equal relevance, I can imagine all sorts of keyword proliferations which would need to be culled, which would be just as tedious as having to add them in the first place - one form of tedium replaced by another, instead of an overall improvement.

 

Graham