Doc Posted February 3, 2017 Share Posted February 3, 2017 On 5th Dec a very significant change happened to the order in which images were searched for – at the time it was referred to as a Re-Rank, but it wasn’t – it was a new Search Engine algorithm. I, and many other contributors have noticed problems with this, and since it is a Search engine problem, rather than a re-rank I have started a new thread. I returned from a trip to South Africa, and had keyworded a few images prior to the change, but most have been done after it, some with the old, but many with the new Image Manager. I have noticed the following: 1. Images keyworded with the old IM, before the 5/12/16 change appear much higher up in searches than those keyworded with the new IM 2. Images keyworded most recently with the new IM also appear at the bottom of a search of my own images for a particular search term (in the old IM, those keyworded more recently generally appeared more highly placed.) 3. Making words/phrases “supertags” seems to make little/no difference to the placement of images in the search For example: In a search for Cape Town, of which I now have 181 images on sale, my 3 highest placed images are all on p2 of the search, and are all images taken in Cape Town Airport. An example is H9K6NR These were keyworded under the old MI, and the keywords were changed by me in the new MI when it came out. None of them have “Cape Town” as a supertag, they have “Cape Town Airport” and “Cape Town international Airport” as supertags amongst others, yet they still appear much higher than all my other images which have “Cape Town” as a supertag. On the first 20 pages of the “cape town” search (100 images/page) I have 26 images of the 181 images I have in total. This image I have keyworded most recently is not one of them – in a search of my own images it appears 116/181 Yet it has supertags of “cape town”, “Cape Town Waterfront”, “Cape Town South Africa” and “Cape Town sunset” amongst its 10 supertags. Even in a search of “Cape town sunset” it appears on p18 of 35 pages. On the other hand, image B0GCTR appears on p1 of a “Cape town” search. I don’t know whether “cape town” appears as a supertag…. Perhaps the contributor if he reads this could let us know, but the pseudonym only has 186 images. I used to have a good rank, whichever way you looked at it – p1 of BHZ, usually well placed in searches, and selling 70+ images per month regularly. It seems that with the new search engine mine and many other contributors rank has fallen severely – but why is this? I contacted Contributor Services about this on 6th Dec and they replied: “Regarding your perceived re-rank, the updates to the search engine have made the results more optimised to give customers better results for their searches” Now if Alamy felt they had been doing badly, and needed a change to boost their business I could understand this change, but in September, 2 months before the new search engine they announced their best month ever. So what are the points I am trying to make? 1. this is NOT about the new IM, it is about the change to the search engine which occurred on 5/12/16 2. It is putting images keyworded under the new IM below those keyworded under the old IM in searches 3. Within the new IM it appears to be generally putting more recently keyworded images below previously keyworded images (cant be a good thing for the customer) 4. Images with words and phrases which have been made “supertags” are not being consistently ranked above images which have the same words as ordinary “tags” even within ones own pseudonym. 5. I don’t think this search engine is working properly. I would be interested to hear the thoughts of other contributors on this, but more importantly, could Alamy please say something about this? It would be nice to know that these problems are being recognised and worked on. I for one am not going to do any further keywording till something changes. Kumar (the Doc one) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.