Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I have done an analysis in Measures on filters used in searches over the past year.

 

1. 50 searches included [DT] Date Taken. While I can see it obviously matters for some subjects, some searches were very generic (savannah, ocean). Perhaps they meant to look for newly uploaded images and should have used the “New” button instead? This leads me to the following dilemma: if I already have a good number of the same subject uploaded a while back, should I add more of the same, jeopardising my CTR but perhaps leading to a sale?

 

2. Searches with [MR] Model Released: I was surprised to see that some of my images without people, thus no MR, had been picked up.  I asked MS the reason. Reply:  Alamy tecchies have coded if no person, then Model Released. This is a rather twisted logic, as the result is unhappy customers all round: false hits for photographers, false returns for photo buyer, presumably expecting people. Once again, how can we explain some generic searches like Tumbleweeds, Ant, Storm with MR??

 

3. As an added observation, 598  searches included [FS] File Size. I’d be curious to know what size was selected.

 

Any opinion on point 1 anyone?

 

Cheers

Gen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

About item 1 I think the reason for uploading a newer image should be if you are adding something to the table.

A different angle, a special light in the sky, stormy weather, a rainbow, a newer camera with more resolution,

But not only because of the date,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your questions are a reminder of how little contact photographers now have with publishers and researchers. We don't have much of an idea what they are thinking and they have just about zero knowledge of the way various photographers work. Communication scarcely exists to-day, so we are just guessing at things.

 

Should we revisit sites and subjects? For sure, there is almost always room for improvement and there will be some researchers who will have a preference for updated material. On the other hand, I regularly sell images which date back to well before the digital age

 

I expect filters like file size and date taken are likely to be used on a second visit to selections to fine-tune final choices

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One theory about [FS] has been that clients have come to expect to pay less for smaller files.

In my own stats, they all have resulted in larger files to come up. That could be because I have very few smaller files.

 

wim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you all for your comments. Food for thought.

 

It is difficult to do the right thing as we don't know the rationale behind some filters. 

 

Wim: I was making sure that my macro shots were at least 24MB, but if the theory is true, then I'm doing the wrong thing. On the other hand, if clients are after bigger files, then I'm right.

 

I've decided not to get too bogged down by this analysis and keep uploading.

 

Cheers everyone!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mine are usually around 70 Mb and over uncompressed. That's about 25 megapixel.

 

wim

 

That's big files! It reminds me of the good old days when we had to uprezz to 70Mb for Alamy.

 

Mine are usually around 46Mb, except the macro shots which, even with a macro lens and extension tubes, have to be cropped if the insect is really small.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.