Don't want to start a riot, but....

[Betty LaRue]

Today, my zooms have hit an all time high. And contrary to all the tests and beliefs, a decent number of those zooms are of images I've reworked, choosing supertags.

 

These are images that already had good captions that didn't need changing. It doesn't "seem" I'm being penalized for adding the supertag designation.

 

Not saying I don't believe Geoff's superb testing or anyone else's findings. All I'm saying is doing as Alamy says is working for me.

Now, if sales of some of those zooms follow....

Betty

[Allan Bell]

Today, my zooms have hit an all time high. And contrary to all the tests and beliefs, a decent number of those zooms are of images I've reworked, choosing supertags.

 

These are images that already had good captions that didn't need changing. It doesn't "seem" I'm being penalized for adding the supertag designation.

 

Not saying I don't believe Geoff's superb testing or anyone else's findings. All I'm saying is doing as Alamy says is working for me.

Now, if sales of some of those zooms follow....

Betty

 

 

Not trying to deflate your balloon Betty but the search engine sees reworked images as new. i.e. uploaded most recently. So it will put them into the recently uploaded category were a lot of buyers will look for fresh stock.

 

Allan

[spacecadet]

My views and zooms are up noticeably since December as well (sales not following). I'm keywording as I always have, going back and adding supertags,  but not many of the zooms are of reworked images. A good number of the views seem to be and they may be ranking a bit better- it's hard to tell with a fairly poor rank like mine.. Captions do seem to be important now though. Fortunately mine are quite decent.

The bugbear as always is the difficulty of changing keywords where there are more than 50 tags.

 

I don't think Alan is right. The "new" category uses upload date and changing tags doesn't change that.

[John Mitchell]

That's encouraging news, Betty.

 

No riot here, though. None of my zooms of the past month are of reworked images, but I've not redone nearly as many images as you have.

 

I would think that Mark is correct, though, the "new" category is most likely based on upload date. Has anyone tested this?

[Betty LaRue]

I just ran a test. Some of my reworked images are in "new" but a whole lot of well-past 6 months old and beyond that hasn't been reworked are in there, too.

I'd say it's inconclusive and not to be relied on.

[Number Six]

Hi Betty

 

Pleased to say that my zooms are up as well, and sales are pottering on quite nicely (for me).

 

However, I haven't changed any of my keywords/tags and am unlikely to do so unless there is very convincing evidence (or Alamy guidance) that it's extremely beneficial to do so. The only exception is that I have used the new system to remove my name as a keyword/tag as it was occasionally attracting unnecessary views (and probably had no benefit).

 

Regards

 

John

[Betty LaRue]

I've thought about doing that with captions, Geoff. Just haven't made myself.  It's one thing to get better placement, but won't it leave buyers reading the caption scratching their collective heads? I like my caption to tell a short story. But I'm still thinking... 

[M.Chapman]

Today, my zooms have hit an all time high. And contrary to all the tests and beliefs, a decent number of those zooms are of images I've reworked, choosing supertags.

 

These are images that already had good captions that didn't need changing. It doesn't "seem" I'm being penalized for adding the supertag designation.

 

Not saying I don't believe Geoff's superb testing or anyone else's findings. All I'm saying is doing as Alamy says is working for me.

Now, if sales of some of those zooms follow....

Betty

 

I'm seeing good views and zooms too, with some of my legacy images (keyworded on the old MI, and not updated yet using new MI) often appearing on Page 1 for some quite general searches (with over 10,000 hits). But, I can't work out why....

 

I've been playing with searches for a particular keyword.

 

This keyword was present in just one of my old images in the Essential field (it was keyworded on the old MI). After some bouncing around, it had settled down in recent weeks, consistently appearing at the top of page 4 when I searched for that keyword. This image has sold previously.

 

To test the new MI, I removed this keyword from the old image and added it as a Tag (using the new MI) to a newly uploaded image with just 4 other dummy tags. It appeared about halfway down Page 1.  Wow!

 

I then added 4 more dummy tags, it's position didn't change at all. (Suggests the number of matching tags is not divided by the total number of tags to determine placement. It would be if I was writing the search algorithm!)

 

I then changed the reference keyword from a tag to a supertag. The image position on Page 1 improved very slightly (moved up 1 row - not enough to be significant?)

 

Last night I changed it back to a Tag, today the image has dropped to halfway down Page 2.

 

I've no idea what's going on. But it's producing some welcome sales (I had one a few days ago, searched, zoomed and sold all in one session for a reasonable sum $190 gross).

 

But I suspect it won't last. 

[Phil Robinson]

Record number of sales today (I think) and most of them are old images, not reworked under the new system and I'd forgotten I'd taken most of them.

I can't say I've noticed a huge change in views / zooms either way, but my newer images do seem to be appearing higher up in searches now - not very scientific, I know.

[Betty LaRue]

I guess that is proof older images are being churned and mixed with the new. In spite of wanting to see my newest and best up front, stop and think if you're a buyer. They probably enjoy seeing fresh (to them, old to us) work in the first few pages. That's the buyer's upside.

 

The downside, of course, is when our best sellers sink into oblivion. I'm hoping that the churning is a continuous thing, and our best will see the light of day again.

[Jon Lewis]

Hi All

 

The results from the new search engine are all over the place I'm getting plenty of views. BUT today I searched for two towns I have images for the search results included images at least 100 miles away and of in one case waterfalls ??????not what picture editors are expecting.

I am finding more and more spurious results high up in the search after the update.

I know the subject/subjects but someone was from a different location/country they would have to trawl through them to find out they are incorrect.

Also impossible to attach correctly stemmed tags because of character limit looking for workaround .

 

I think we need some guidance on whats what as everybody is in the dark over the new system .

 

Jon

 

I haven't changed any legacy images apart from a couple of spelling mistakes and am still shooting uploading.

[John Mitchell]

Hi All

 

The results from the new search engine are all over the place I'm getting plenty of views. BUT today I searched for two towns I have images for the search results included images at least 100 miles away and of in one case waterfalls ??????not what picture editors are expecting.

I am finding more and more spurious results high up in the search after the update.

I know the subject/subjects but someone was from a different location/country they would have to trawl through them to find out they are incorrect.

Also impossible to attach correctly stemmed tags because of character limit looking for workaround .

 

I think we need some guidance on whats what as everybody is in the dark over the new system .

 

Jon

 

I haven't changed any legacy images apart from a couple of spelling mistakes and am still shooting uploading.

 

Something weird does seem to be going on. My CTR is almost always above the Alamy average. Suddenly it has dropped to 0.26 for March, the lowest I can ever remember it being.

[Perry]

I have a record of amount of zooms also. Some zooms of images i recently uploaded (done under new IM) and High views.

My CTR was always below average, but is now above. However, sales stay the same.

So what will the future bring?

[John Richmond]

I've done nothing to my pre new AIM submissions (apart from a couple that needed botanical name changes) and have only used supertags on the newly uploaded shots.  Result was my best month ever in February for views, sales value and number of zooms (34).  March is also looking good for zooms - 15 already with 5 being the only image zoomed.  CTR for both months is my usual above the Alamy average - well above for March.  Sales are also looking promising this month.

 

Because I haven't altered anything on my legacy images' tagging I suspect the increase is due to my habit of writing fairly comprehensive captions which duplicate my main keywords.  This does seem to be having a greater impact in the new system and I seem to be benefitting.

[Broad Norfolk]

John - That's interesting because I've done much the same as yourself with a completely opposite effect. Zooms have all but disappeared and my CTR has dropped to it's lowest point for some years. No sales either this month so far. I believe Phillipe has mentioned in other threads that it's a bit of a lottery at the moment - seems so! Bit of a roller coaster.

Jim.  

[John Mitchell]

John - That's interesting because I've done much the same as yourself with a completely opposite effect. Zooms have all but disappeared and my CTR has dropped to it's lowest point for some years. No sales either this month so far. I believe Phillipe has mentioned in other threads that it's a bit of a lottery at the moment - seems so! Bit of a roller coaster.

Jim.

 

Yes, it does seem to be a bit of a roller coaster. My CTR rose to 0.54 today after a couple of new zooms, so things are looking up again.

[John Walker]

I'm another who has resisted making changes until everything settles.  My zooms are up and sales were good for February.  Zooms good for this month but sales slow - early days still.

 

John

[Marianne]

Deleted because I think I was responding to a different thread. 

[Graham]

My CTR is down quite a bit: it has only been lower in April 2016 in the last year (not sure why that was a bad month).  But my sales are catastrophically down.  I would normally expect sales of over 12 a month on average, maybe a little more since I increased my portfolio substantially over the last year, so comparing the early months of last year with this year is not comparing like with like. This year should be better than last, but the reverse is true.  One sale on 8 March was my first since 22 February, February as a whole this year was only about half long-term average, and half of last year's February sales from a materially smaller portfolio.  Maybe things will even out over the longer term, but presently I seem to be a heavy loser from the changes.

 

Graham

[Marianne]

I think I was responding to the wrong thread in my earlier post, so I'll try again:

 

In my case, strong zooms and strong sales seem to be independent of the new IM. The only files I went in and tagged and supertagged so far are some lighthouse images and though three have current zooms, that's not unusual, and for some the only change I made in the new IM was to take them out of PU. 

 

I haven't touched any of the other zoomed images since the new IM. Some are previous sellers, but many have never been zoomed before despite having been online for 5 to 9 years. 

 

At first I attributed my strong CTR (0.83 total) to the ratio of more zooms to fewer views, since my views are still down about 30-40% from my usual average, but as of today the past month's zooms are close to my yearly high just in sheer numbers. The last time my total CTR was higher, was March 2016.

 

Sales since the new IM are all older images (circa 2005-2012, uploaded between 2008-2012), one sold before but the others were never zoomed nor sold previously. Some are obscure subjects, some popular searches. 

 

The new search algorithm is bringing up both well-ranked images as well as images that may have never been anywhere near page one or two before. About half my zooms and four of my last five sales were from my news pseudo, which only has a rank of 0.46 compared to 1.81 for my primary pseudo, which could confirm others' suspicions that pseudos may well be linked. I know earlier experiments I performed seemed to indicate this was true, and the performance of my portfolio overall seems to bear this out. However...

 

... there is another conclusion that can be drawn from those same facts. Older photos from lower-ranked pseudos may be popping up as a result of some other feature in the new algorithm that recycles old images into the mix. Although at or above average for the better part of the past year, my total CTR went from a high of 0.85 last March to a low of 0.23 in October, then up to 0.5 and back down to 0.21 in December - I can't recall it ever being that low before, but despite this I had above average sales starting in October and they have stayed strong since then, even though my CTR didn't go back up until last month. 

 

This randomness makes sense, because if all your photos showed up based on your pseudonym's rank, how would that rank ever change if it was low? I think that there are two things going on here, highly ranked pseudos (and possibly those with a good total CTR) are given an edge, but this is tempered by some randomness in the algorithm to let those gems hidden in average and below average pseudos get seen. That's why if you've got the highest rank of the many photographers who shoot a certain subject, the entire first page isn't made up of just your images. They are spread out. If a buyer doesn't like one photographer's style, they might look elsewhere rather than scrolling to page two, so Alamy makes sure they have a variety of choices. This makes good business sense for Alamy and also encourages photographers to keep shooting, knowing they have a chance for their rank to change, and for their photos, even of popular destinations such as London and NYC, to be seen.   

[Betty LaRue]

Glad your vertigo is resolving, Marianne. That's the best thing gotten from your post, edging out good sales and visibility! Although those are important!

Betty

[Marianne]

Glad your vertigo is resolving, Marianne. That's the best thing gotten from your post, edging out good sales and visibility! Although those are important!

Betty

 

 

Thanks Betty! I think I was editing my post it while you were typing LOL - I wrote way too much but I'm trying to figure out what's going on with the search. Bottom line is, it seems to be boosting my numbers, and if we're both seeing good results, then I'm happy for both of us!  Your productivity as well as that of many others here always blows me away!