MicrostockGroup
Agency Based Discussion => Adobe Stock => Topic started by: Neurobite on November 22, 2018, 07:11
-
...I wonder if it is only me who is facing currently "falls" in sells at AS after the announcement that FT will be closed, while sells in SS are going up in this period... Do you think it is seasonal or, simply, new buyers have started to choose SS more often as a long-term partner after this news biased by uncertainty towards AS?
-
...I wonder if it is only me who is facing currently "falls" in sells at AS after the announcement that FT will be closed, while sells in SS are going up in this period... Do you think it is seasonal or, simply, new buyers have started to choose SS more often as a long-term partner after this news biased by uncertainty towards AS?
I suspect its just coincidence my experience is the opposite.
-
...I wonder if it is only me who is facing currently "falls" in sells at AS after the announcement that FT will be closed, while sells in SS are going up in this period... Do you think it is seasonal or, simply, new buyers have started to choose SS more often as a long-term partner after this news biased by uncertainty towards AS?
I suspect its just coincidence my experience is the opposite.
...ok, thanks, I hope you are right!
-
...I wonder if it is only me who is facing currently "falls" in sells at AS after the announcement that FT will be closed, while sells in SS are going up in this period... Do you think it is seasonal or, simply, new buyers have started to choose SS more often as a long-term partner after this news biased by uncertainty towards AS?
Not at all, you can see the recent threads about SS being almost completely dead for a week or so while AS was growing good and many of us got 100$ sales at AS right about that time. I'd say it's seasonal after all.
-
It could also be because of the way your assets are key-worded as AS uses the first keywords as most relevant.
-
...I wonder if it is only me who is facing currently "falls" in sells at AS after the announcement that FT will be closed, while sells in SS are going up in this period... Do you think it is seasonal or, simply, new buyers have started to choose SS more often as a long-term partner after this news biased by uncertainty towards AS?
Not at all, you can see the recent threads about SS being almost completely dead for a week or so while AS was growing good and many of us got 100$ sales at AS right about that time. I'd say it's seasonal after all.
...funny, in my case SS is more than alive, it is boosting with life... :) But FT was super good in October, and now it is obviously going down in November, as far as I can see by today...
-
...I wonder if it is only me who is facing currently "falls" in sells at AS after the announcement that FT will be closed, while sells in SS are going up in this period... Do you think it is seasonal or, simply, new buyers have started to choose SS more often as a long-term partner after this news biased by uncertainty towards AS?
Not at all, you can see the recent threads about SS being almost completely dead for a week or so while AS was growing good and many of us got 100$ sales at AS right about that time. I'd say it's seasonal after all.
...funny, in my case SS is more than alive, it is boosting with life... :) But FT was super good in October, and now it is obviously going down in November, as far as I can see by today...
It just illustrates you just can't read too much into one (or even a few people's) figures....people have been predicting the imminent collapse of SS for years on the basis that they have had a bad month ;-0.
-
It could also be because of the way your assets are key-worded as AS uses the first keywords as most relevant.
...thanks for the note but it was before like that with FT, so AS is using the same principle? Because for SS keywords order is irrelevant... they all arranged alphabetically... this is how I upload them to AS as well, never spent a bit of time to rearrange them, too much efforts... they still sell... :) Do you think it makes big difference in selling? :)
-
It could also be because of the way your assets are key-worded as AS uses the first keywords as most relevant.
...thanks for the note but it was before like that with FT, so AS is using the same principle? Because for SS keywords order is irrelevant... they all arranged alphabetically... this is how I upload them to AS as well, never spent a bit of time to rearrange them, too much efforts... they still sell... :) Do you think it makes big difference in selling? :)
Ah ok, didn't know FT was already working the same way.
Not sure if that makes a big difference, but I'm guessing it moves your photos up in the page rankings, so they are not buried under the rest, and get more exposure for clients who give up searching after 10 pages.
-
...I just checked my data for FT sells in 2017, in Sep-Nov it was above year average for about 20-30%, there were in fact no "downs" as I see it now... As far as I can tell, really seasonal "downs" appear only in summer months, when majority of buyers in the Northern hemisphere are at holidays... :) In other months of the year, I do not really see any seasonal fluctuations, maybe a bit in December... :)
-
It could also be because of the way your assets are key-worded as AS uses the first keywords as most relevant.
...thanks for the note but it was before like that with FT, so AS is using the same principle? Because for SS keywords order is irrelevant... they all arranged alphabetically... this is how I upload them to AS as well, never spent a bit of time to rearrange them, too much efforts... they still sell... :) Do you think it makes big difference in selling? :)
Yes the first seven words make a big difference at AS and no difference at SS.
If you don't have the important words first at AS you are missing sales and will often not be found in the search.
-
It could also be because of the way your assets are key-worded as AS uses the first keywords as most relevant.
...thanks for the note but it was before like that with FT, so AS is using the same principle? Because for SS keywords order is irrelevant... they all arranged alphabetically... this is how I upload them to AS as well, never spent a bit of time to rearrange them, too much efforts... they still sell... :) Do you think it makes big difference in selling? :)
Yes the first seven words make a big difference at AS and no difference at SS.
If you don't have the important words first at AS you are missing sales and will often not be found in the search.
...yes, thanks, sounds horrible, can't even imagine how many good sells I have missed so far at FT since I never do keyword rearrangements... :) but seriously, is there any proof with some calculations here in the Forum or anywhere else that: 7 most relevant keywords on the top of 50 keywords ... versus ... all keywords randomly arranged ->> do indeed make more sells??? Just to have some estimate how many sells I am loosing? If there is a good number, if so, it will motivate me better to spend more efforts to do so... :)
-
It could also be because of the way your assets are key-worded as AS uses the first keywords as most relevant.
...thanks for the note but it was before like that with FT, so AS is using the same principle? Because for SS keywords order is irrelevant... they all arranged alphabetically... this is how I upload them to AS as well, never spent a bit of time to rearrange them, too much efforts... they still sell... :) Do you think it makes big difference in selling? :)
Yes the first seven words make a big difference at AS and no difference at SS.
If you don't have the important words first at AS you are missing sales and will often not be found in the search.
...yes, thanks, sounds horrible, can't even imagine how many good sells I have missed so far at FT since I never do keyword rearrangements... :) but seriously, is there any proof with some calculations here in the Forum or anywhere else that: 7 most relevant keywords on the top of 50 keywords ... versus ... all keywords randomly arranged ->> do indeed make more sells??? Just to have some estimate how many sells I am loosing? If there is a good number, if so, it will motivate me better to spend more efforts to do so... :)
The keyword order is about weighting and priority. Just for a simple example, you have a golden retriever puppy playing with a ball. You have alpha sort, who knows what, people who take the time to arrange words, will come up before you, and for that mater, your images may never be seen. While the images that show first will be Retriever, Golden, Dog, Ball, playing, puppy... what's most important?
A buyer is looking for a "golden retriever puppy", instead of seeing your work on FT/AS, they will see everyone else, because yours will have (for example) animal, adorable, baby, background, ball, chew, cute, dog, face which isn't representative or useful at all.
If this is a big time problem, you might just edit your best photos of each series and see?
The first five are primary words, the next two are less important.
-
It could also be because of the way your assets are key-worded as AS uses the first keywords as most relevant.
...thanks for the note but it was before like that with FT, so AS is using the same principle? Because for SS keywords order is irrelevant... they all arranged alphabetically... this is how I upload them to AS as well, never spent a bit of time to rearrange them, too much efforts... they still sell... :) Do you think it makes big difference in selling? :)
Yes the first seven words make a big difference at AS and no difference at SS.
If you don't have the important words first at AS you are missing sales and will often not be found in the search.
...yes, thanks, sounds horrible, can't even imagine how many good sells I have missed so far at FT since I never do keyword rearrangements... :) but seriously, is there any proof with some calculations here in the Forum or anywhere else that: 7 most relevant keywords on the top of 50 keywords ... versus ... all keywords randomly arranged ->> do indeed make more sells??? Just to have some estimate how many sells I am loosing? If there is a good number, if so, it will motivate me better to spend more efforts to do so... :)
The keyword order is about weighting and priority. Just for a simple example, you have a golden retriever puppy playing with a ball. You have alpha sort, who knows what, people who take the time to arrange words, will come up before you, and for that mater, your images may never be seen. While the images that show first will be Retriever, Golden, Dog, Ball, playing, puppy... what's most important?
A buyer is looking for a "golden retriever puppy", instead of seeing your work on FT/AS, they will see everyone else, because yours will have (for example) animal, adorable, baby, background, ball, chew, cute, dog, face which isn't representative or useful at all.
If this is a big time problem, you might just edit your best photos of each series and see?
The first five are primary words, the next two are less important.
...yes, it is very logical to me, but this is a theory, unless, somebody did analysis of this algorithm in a real situation, basically a test, an experiment with real numbers, not assumptions... :) I would assume somebody did it already here or elsewhere and can share the knowledge... :) if not, probably I can do this myself with a set of my new images (old not good), e.g. I can divide a series of 4 images half, 2 will be with randomly ordered keywords, and other 2 with 5 keywords the most relevant on the top, and see after which one from these two groups will sell better... :) The problem is that IPTC data do not support keyword order arrangement, so one has to do it manually at the FT or AS website, and there is no tool which would allow to do it for similar assets simultaneously, you have to do it one by one, and thus, it is very laborious and time consuming... :)
-
Would be good also to check page rankings for the 2 different batches of images based on relevant search terms.
If you do your metadata in photoshop, it keeps the order of the keywords, it doesn't rearrange them alphabetically.
-
Would be good also to check page rankings for the 2 different batches of images based on relevant search terms.
If you do your metadata in photoshop, it keeps the order of the keywords, it doesn't rearrange them alphabetically.
...thanks, a nice tip, never did keywording in PS... does it really preserve the order? :) so you do it with File ->File Info -> Basic or IPTC
-
Since I turned Emerald at FT over 2 years back its been a steady decline! first one to notice that was Lisafx! she is not with us anymore but her observation was spot on!
-
Would be good also to check page rankings for the 2 different batches of images based on relevant search terms.
If you do your metadata in photoshop, it keeps the order of the keywords, it doesn't rearrange them alphabetically.
...thanks, a nice tip, never did keywording in PS... does it really preserve the order? :) so you do it with File ->File Info -> Basic or IPTC
Yep I always do mine in there out of habit. File>File info> basic and then you've got to fill out document title, description and keywords (each separated by a coma). Just checked on my last batch on AS, and the order of keywords was kept as it was written in photoshop.
-
Since I turned Emerald at FT over 2 years back its been a steady decline! first one to notice that was Lisafx! she is not with us anymore but her observation was spot on!
No, there are no such thing as caps. ;)
-
Since I turned Emerald at FT over 2 years back its been a steady decline! first one to notice that was Lisafx! she is not with us anymore but her observation was spot on!
No, there are no such thing as caps. ;)
Actually its not that kind of cap!! but to save paying out commission they rather via the algorithm direct sales to contributors with a lower royalty percentage and that way save millions in payouts!.....SS does exactly the same, have been doing it for years now....DT will rob the rich and give it to the poor, justyfying it all in the name of fairness!...business must be fair!! ever heard anything so stupid??
-
Since I turned Emerald at FT over 2 years back its been a steady decline! first one to notice that was Lisafx! she is not with us anymore but her observation was spot on!
No, there are no such thing as caps. ;)
Actually its not that kind of cap!! but to save paying out commission they rather via the algorithm direct sales to contributors with a lower royalty percentage and that way save millions in payouts!.....SS does exactly the same, have been doing it for years now....DT will rob the rich and give it to the poor, justyfying it all in the name of fairness!...business must be fair!! ever heard anything so stupid??
Maybe so if business doesn't need to be fair then theres no problem with "caps" then or should business just be fair to you?
-
Since I turned Emerald at FT over 2 years back its been a steady decline! first one to notice that was Lisafx! she is not with us anymore but her observation was spot on!
No, there are no such thing as caps. ;)
Actually its not that kind of cap!! but to save paying out commission they rather via the algorithm direct sales to contributors with a lower royalty percentage and that way save millions in payouts!.....SS does exactly the same, have been doing it for years now....DT will rob the rich and give it to the poor, justyfying it all in the name of fairness!...business must be fair!! ever heard anything so stupid??
Maybe so if business doesn't need to be fair then theres no problem with "caps" then or should business just be fair to you?
Paws! this is an old story! according to some people its been going on for years and why not? its business and business means earning with any means possible!...first I heard about is was about 5 years back! and I tend to agree with it as I am experiencing it!
-
It could also be because of the way your assets are key-worded as AS uses the first keywords as most relevant.
...thanks for the note but it was before like that with FT, so AS is using the same principle? Because for SS keywords order is irrelevant... they all arranged alphabetically... this is how I upload them to AS as well, never spent a bit of time to rearrange them, too much efforts... they still sell... :) Do you think it makes big difference in selling? :)
Yes the first seven words make a big difference at AS and no difference at SS.
If you don't have the important words first at AS you are missing sales and will often not be found in the search.
...yes, thanks, sounds horrible, can't even imagine how many good sells I have missed so far at FT since I never do keyword rearrangements... :) but seriously, is there any proof with some calculations here in the Forum or anywhere else that: 7 most relevant keywords on the top of 50 keywords ... versus ... all keywords randomly arranged ->> do indeed make more sells??? Just to have some estimate how many sells I am loosing? If there is a good number, if so, it will motivate me better to spend more efforts to do so... :)
50 keywords is a load man. 10-20 relevant words is way better than a whole mess of irrelevant ones.
-
...yes, it is very logical to me, but this is a theory, unless, somebody did analysis of this algorithm in a real situation, basically a test, an experiment with real numbers, not assumptions... :) I would assume somebody did it already here or elsewhere and can share the knowledge... :)
Mat Hayward - Adobe's contributor rep - relayed information from one of Adobe's product managers about how it worked. It's possible that it has since changed or the information was wrong in the first place, but not sure how you could possibly do a valid test live, given the need for the same file with the same sales record and upload dates with two different keyword orders to check differences in search rank. Given that, why not go with what Adobe says about how they made it work?
http://www.microstockgroup.com/fotolia-com/new-adobe-stock-portal-feature (http://www.microstockgroup.com/fotolia-com/new-adobe-stock-portal-feature)!/msg502623/#msg502623
http://www.microstockgroup.com/fotolia-com/adobe-stockfotolia-keyword-ranking/msg492118/#msg492118 (http://www.microstockgroup.com/fotolia-com/adobe-stockfotolia-keyword-ranking/msg492118/#msg492118)
Ordering keywords for newly uploaded files isn't hard. For older files, I would only make changes for your known (from other sites) best sellers to save time.
-
...yes, it is very logical to me, but this is a theory, unless, somebody did analysis of this algorithm in a real situation, basically a test, an experiment with real numbers, not assumptions... :) I would assume somebody did it already here or elsewhere and can share the knowledge... :)
Mat Hayward - Adobe's contributor rep - relayed information from one of Adobe's product managers about how it worked. It's possible that it has since changed or the information was wrong in the first place, but not sure how you could possibly do a valid test live, given the need for the same file with the same sales record and upload dates with two different keyword orders to check differences in search rank. Given that, why not go with what Adobe says about how they made it work?
[url]http://www.microstockgroup.com/fotolia-com/new-adobe-stock-portal-feature[/url] ([url]http://www.microstockgroup.com/fotolia-com/new-adobe-stock-portal-feature[/url])!/msg502623/#msg502623
[url]http://www.microstockgroup.com/fotolia-com/adobe-stockfotolia-keyword-ranking/msg492118/#msg492118[/url] ([url]http://www.microstockgroup.com/fotolia-com/adobe-stockfotolia-keyword-ranking/msg492118/#msg492118[/url])
Ordering keywords for newly uploaded files isn't hard. For older files, I would only make changes for your known (from other sites) best sellers to save time.
Thank you, let me put it another way. The reason we know that the first keywords are most important is that they told us. FT said the first nine, years ago. AS says the first seven and the first five are blue, for most important the editor of AS.
I wish people would question the conspiracy theories and false caps or how once you go emerald your sales drop, as much as they question anything the agencies tell us straight out. Because someone said so. Or someone claims to know a friend who thinks so.
If someone deosn't believe AS just keyword two images, one with the first seven relevant and the other with the same words last, and search. Make sure they are very distinctive, unique words, so you don't have to fish down 100 pages to find the one with the words last, is invisible. It won't show, ever for thosse words.
Also as Jo Ann writes, 50 keywords is too many. Imagine that, the agency weights the first seven heaviest. What are the other 43 there for? And don't forget SS changes the words order, to what they find most important or relevant, and that changes. Still 50 words is far too many. I suppose someone desperate will hope that some obscure unrelated word will make a sale. WHY?
-
...I wonder if it is only me who is facing currently "falls" in sells at AS after the announcement that FT will be closed, while sells in SS are going up in this period... Do you think it is seasonal or, simply, new buyers have started to choose SS more often as a long-term partner after this news biased by uncertainty towards AS?
I see no change and no reason why in one week, after announcing the location of images would change from two mirrored sites to one main site, in Nov. 2019 would suddenly crash sales and buyers would leave? Really? That's pretty radical.
-
It could also be because of the way your assets are key-worded as AS uses the first keywords as most relevant.
...thanks for the note but it was before like that with FT, so AS is using the same principle? Because for SS keywords order is irrelevant... they all arranged alphabetically... this is how I upload them to AS as well, never spent a bit of time to rearrange them, too much efforts... they still sell... :) Do you think it makes big difference in selling? :)
Yes the first seven words make a big difference at AS and no difference at SS.
If you don't have the important words first at AS you are missing sales and will often not be found in the search.
...yes, thanks, sounds horrible, can't even imagine how many good sells I have missed so far at FT since I never do keyword rearrangements... :) but seriously, is there any proof with some calculations here in the Forum or anywhere else that: 7 most relevant keywords on the top of 50 keywords ... versus ... all keywords randomly arranged ->> do indeed make more sells??? Just to have some estimate how many sells I am loosing? If there is a good number, if so, it will motivate me better to spend more efforts to do so... :)
I re-pass my port in AS and can tell you it cost me 12 sec per image to select top 7 keywords, so it's 300 per hour, just do it, it worth...
-
It could also be because of the way your assets are key-worded as AS uses the first keywords as most relevant.
...thanks for the note but it was before like that with FT, so AS is using the same principle? Because for SS keywords order is irrelevant... they all arranged alphabetically... this is how I upload them to AS as well, never spent a bit of time to rearrange them, too much efforts... they still sell... :) Do you think it makes big difference in selling? :)
Yes the first seven words make a big difference at AS and no difference at SS.
If you don't have the important words first at AS you are missing sales and will often not be found in the search.
...yes, thanks, sounds horrible, can't even imagine how many good sells I have missed so far at FT since I never do keyword rearrangements... :) but seriously, is there any proof with some calculations here in the Forum or anywhere else that: 7 most relevant keywords on the top of 50 keywords ... versus ... all keywords randomly arranged ->> do indeed make more sells??? Just to have some estimate how many sells I am loosing? If there is a good number, if so, it will motivate me better to spend more efforts to do so... :)
50 keywords is a load man. 10-20 relevant words is way better than a whole mess of irrelevant ones.
...well, I am not sure, just will give you an example, what 40 keywords for the attached image would you remove? :)
50 keywords:
Europe, Iceland, Icelandic, Nordic, adventure, arctic, attraction, backpacking, beverage, coast, coffee, doing, drink, drinking, environment, field, flowers, force of nature, freedom, grass, hiking, hot, island, journey, land, landscape, making, meal, morning, mountains, nature, outdoors, polar, process, remote, scene, scenic, sea, seashore, self-made, skogarfoss, summer, tent, travel, trekking, volcanic, volcano, wakeup, warm, waterfall
-
...just to add another idea about keywords (I hope AS is reading this topic):
I wish that in the new edition of the AS design, there will be implemented the following improvements regarding keywording:
1) batch editing for keywords and titles;
2) in the Dashboard, there will be a list of all photos/illustrations/videos (it is more useful than a gallery);
3) in the list of all photos/illustrations/videos... there will be a column of "Number of Views", as it is in FT;
4) in the table Insights -> My Statistics -> Activity, it will be given an additional column with "keyword searched" (with what keywords this particular sell was found by the buyer), could be a very useful tool;
-
...well, I am not sure, just will give you an example, what 40 keywords for the attached image would you remove? :)
50 keywords:
Europe, Iceland, Icelandic, Nordic, adventure, arctic, attraction, backpacking, beverage, coast, coffee, doing, drink, drinking, environment, field, flowers, force of nature, freedom, grass, hiking, hot, island, journey, land, landscape, making, meal, morning, mountains, nature, outdoors, polar, process, remote, scene, scenic, sea, seashore, self-made, skogarfoss, summer, tent, travel, trekking, volcanic, volcano, wakeup, warm, waterfall
Did you mean this to be an example of keyword spam?
Many of those keywords are just wrong - sea, coast and seashore, for example - and some are unlikely to be useful in a search - attraction, self-made, force of nature, scene, process, and doing, for example. Others are a real stretch - I can's see any flowers anywhere; how can you include both Nordic and Icelandic - one of those is wrong; polar - do you mean the latitude is north of the arctic circle?; volcano - where?; hot; meal, backpacking - do you see a backpack or anyone wearing a backpack in this photo?;
As far as how I'd order these for AS, I'd choose (assuming this is in Iceland, not Norway) waterfall, Iceland, tent, coffee, camping, (name of waterfall if it's well-known), remote,.
-
...well, I am not sure, just will give you an example, what 40 keywords for the attached image would you remove? :)
50 keywords:
Europe, Iceland, Icelandic, Nordic, adventure, arctic, attraction, backpacking, beverage, coast, coffee, doing, drink, drinking, environment, field, flowers, force of nature, freedom, grass, hiking, hot, island, journey, land, landscape, making, meal, morning, mountains, nature, outdoors, polar, process, remote, scene, scenic, sea, seashore, self-made, skogarfoss, summer, tent, travel, trekking, volcanic, volcano, wakeup, warm, waterfall
Did you mean this to be an example of keyword spam?
Many of those keywords are just wrong - sea, coast and seashore, for example - and some are unlikely to be useful in a search - attraction, self-made, force of nature, scene, process, and doing, for example. Others are a real stretch - I can's see any flowers anywhere; how can you include both Nordic and Icelandic - one of those is wrong; polar - do you mean the latitude is north of the arctic circle?; volcano - where?; hot; meal, backpacking - do you see a backpack or anyone wearing a backpack in this photo?;
As far as how I'd order these for AS, I'd choose (assuming this is in Iceland, not Norway) waterfall, Iceland, tent, coffee, camping, (name of waterfall if it's well-known), remote,.
...Well, I agree and disagree at the same time... :) You can think of "coast" is not relevant here, but I would argue, if a buyer will search a waterfall in Iceland at the southern coastal side of the island, he/she will find mine... :) cause this waterfall is at seaside; Nordic is for all countries in the region in Northern Europe, including Iceland... :) see wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordic_countries
Volcanoes - they are every 5 m on Iceland, trust me, I've been there 4x times... :) and actually this particular waterfall "Skogarfoss" is built by a volcano, it is a volcano itself... :) backpacking - is what you do when you carry a backpack with a tent and sleeping bag, this is a word which is used by people who love nature and travel with a tent... 100% relevant :) ... and so on... the only a word which I would remove is "sea"... "flowers" they are there, you can not see them because of image resolution... :)
But anyway, thanks for your comments and evaluation of my keywords... :)
-
I'd remove at least 'coast', 'sea' and 'seashore' as they are not visible on the photo. You can mention it in the description if this place is near the sea but a buyer looking for coast and sea pictures will get quite annoyed if your photo comes up.
-
...well, I am not sure, just will give you an example, what 40 keywords for the attached image would you remove? :)
50 keywords:
Europe, Iceland, Icelandic, Nordic, adventure, arctic, attraction, backpacking, beverage, coast, coffee, doing, drink, drinking, environment, field, flowers, force of nature, freedom, grass, hiking, hot, island, journey, land, landscape, making, meal, morning, mountains, nature, outdoors, polar, process, remote, scene, scenic, sea, seashore, self-made, skogarfoss, summer, tent, travel, trekking, volcanic, volcano, wakeup, warm, waterfall
Did you mean this to be an example of keyword spam?
Many of those keywords are just wrong - sea, coast and seashore, for example - and some are unlikely to be useful in a search - attraction, self-made, force of nature, scene, process, and doing, for example. Others are a real stretch - I can's see any flowers anywhere; how can you include both Nordic and Icelandic - one of those is wrong; polar - do you mean the latitude is north of the arctic circle?; volcano - where?; hot; meal, backpacking - do you see a backpack or anyone wearing a backpack in this photo?;
As far as how I'd order these for AS, I'd choose (assuming this is in Iceland, not Norway) waterfall, Iceland, tent, coffee, camping, (name of waterfall if it's well-known), remote,.
...Well, I agree and disagree at the same time... :) You can think of "coast" is not relevant here, but I would argue, if a buyer will search a waterfall in Iceland at the southern coastal side of the island, he/she will find mine... :) cause this waterfall is at seaside; Nordic is for all countries in the region in Northern Europe, including Iceland... :) see wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordic_countries
Volcanoes - they are every 5 m on Iceland, trust me, I've been there 4x times... :) and actually this particular waterfall "Skogarfoss" is built by a volcano, it is a volcano itself... :) backpacking - is what you do when you carry a backpack with a tent and sleeping bag, this is a word which is used by people who love nature and travel with a tent... 100% relevant :) ... and so on... the only a word which I would remove is "sea"... "flowers" they are there, you can not see them because of image resolution... :)
But anyway, thanks for your comments and evaluation of my keywords... :)
Keep convincing yourself. You know the keywords Jo Ann pointed out are just fluff.
While you might continue to kid yourself they are relevant what you don't realise is that everytime buyers search for images and come up with irrelevant results your images get marked down as less relevant.
Describe only what is in the image not what is imagined by you ~ its just spamming
I love this justification "flowers" they are there, you can not see them because of image resolution..." ~ good grief what nonsense
-
...well, I am not sure, just will give you an example, what 40 keywords for the attached image would you remove? :)
50 keywords:
Europe, Iceland, Icelandic, Nordic, adventure, arctic, attraction, backpacking, beverage, coast, coffee, doing, drink, drinking, environment, field, flowers, force of nature, freedom, grass, hiking, hot, island, journey, land, landscape, making, meal, morning, mountains, nature, outdoors, polar, process, remote, scene, scenic, sea, seashore, self-made, skogarfoss, summer, tent, travel, trekking, volcanic, volcano, wakeup, warm, waterfall
Did you mean this to be an example of keyword spam?
Many of those keywords are just wrong - sea, coast and seashore, for example - and some are unlikely to be useful in a search - attraction, self-made, force of nature, scene, process, and doing, for example. Others are a real stretch - I can's see any flowers anywhere; how can you include both Nordic and Icelandic - one of those is wrong; polar - do you mean the latitude is north of the arctic circle?; volcano - where?; hot; meal, backpacking - do you see a backpack or anyone wearing a backpack in this photo?;
As far as how I'd order these for AS, I'd choose (assuming this is in Iceland, not Norway) waterfall, Iceland, tent, coffee, camping, (name of waterfall if it's well-known), remote,.
...Well, I agree and disagree at the same time... :) You can think of "coast" is not relevant here, but I would argue, if a buyer will search a waterfall in Iceland at the southern coastal side of the island, he/she will find mine... :) cause this waterfall is at seaside; Nordic is for all countries in the region in Northern Europe, including Iceland... :) see wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordic_countries
Volcanoes - they are every 5 m on Iceland, trust me, I've been there 4x times... :) and actually this particular waterfall "Skogarfoss" is built by a volcano, it is a volcano itself... :) backpacking - is what you do when you carry a backpack with a tent and sleeping bag, this is a word which is used by people who love nature and travel with a tent... 100% relevant :) ... and so on... the only a word which I would remove is "sea"... "flowers" they are there, you can not see them because of image resolution... :)
But anyway, thanks for your comments and evaluation of my keywords... :)
Keep convincing yourself. You know the keywords Jo Ann pointed out are just fluff.
While you might continue to kid yourself they are relevant what you don't realise is that everytime buyers search for images and come up with irrelevant results your images get marked down as less relevant.
Describe only what is in the image not what is imagined by you ~ its just spamming
I love this justification "flowers" they are there, you can not see them because of image resolution..." ~ good grief what nonsense
...well, OK, I will try to defend my point of you once more, but this will be last time! :) Who did not understand, I am sorry, go and read some marketing books... :) or keep going in convincing yourselves your keywording strategy is only right... :)
1) I do not need to convince myself in anything, since a) my images pass reviewers evaluation (>75% pass) and b) they sell very good (in average, every second images sells, every fifth more than 20 times...); this fully convinces me my strategy in using 50 keywords is correct, it could be better (e.g. to put 5 first the most relevant keywords, never tried that yet, might improve the sells), but for sure, definitely, it is not wrong;
2) There are 2 main strategies to deal with keywords, they both correct: a) either you use very narrow completely dried up of flavor and concepts keywords (as it was suggested above, when you keyword just what you see in the image) b) or you use a broader spectrum of keywords (mostly adding conceptual, abstract and imaginary keywords);
3) Rule number one in marketing says: if you want to sell well and target as much buyers as possible, put your head into buyers heads... and such heads are literally millions worldwide now, every head bears: different concepts, needs, education, mentality, English level, ideas, culture, sense of art ...etc you name it... some people know what they want exactly, then "waterfall", "Iceland", "Skogarfoss" will be enough for them (mostly only these people you target if you use strategy number 1)... some people vaguely know that Iceland exists, but they want some waterfall in Northern Europe... some people might have no clear picture what they want just a slight idea: I need some image depicting power of nature + tent ... some people may have deeper knowledge about Iceland, so they will search a waterfall at seaside (there are a few of them in Iceland, but they all with long and difficult to remember names)... I do not want to loose such buyers, this is why I do utilize a broader spectrum yet relevant keywords... :) and here you are right, I use my imagination to have an idea how other people may think and search, and how my image should be found by them... :)
4) spamming words for the image above would be: Reykjavik, glacier, woman, people, travel agency, cruise, hotel, pop star, Dettifoss (very popular waterfall on Iceland), Landmannalaugar (very touristic colorful mountains on Iceland)... etc :)
Everybody has just different strategies...
"everytime buyers search for images and come up with irrelevant results your images get marked down as less relevant" - sorry, do you have an evidence of such thing??? If you do, please, share!!! I do not think technically it is possible, 100M+ images in real time dynamically label in 1M search hourly, correcting every last search based on this massive database... this is a nonsense, too costly, too slow, how does it help to sell images better? :) You need a supercomputer, energy and manpower to run such algorithm... I do not believe in it, unless, it is proved... :)
***
-
Well and truly over thought there. ;D
-
Well and truly over thought there. ;D
...hahaha, it could be an over thought for a sms, for sure, but not for a forum, where people share opinions and expertise... :)
-
Its actually very easy for agencies to calculate the ratio of zooms to initial search returns which is a good guide to the potential relevance of keywords ask Alamy.
-
Its actually very easy for agencies to calculate the ratio of zooms to initial search returns which is a good guide to the potential relevance of keywords ask Alamy.
...it is not only a way (image keywords match to buyers expectations) how buyers decide to buy or not to buy an image... :) some people buy just because they like the photo :), some buy a random image for which keyword relevance ration is somewhere in the middle, again, just because they like it, or needed for other projects.. :) Some years ago, I had a lot of work as a designer, though, these guys spend a lot of time in microstock websites..., for many of them, microstocks are like "facebook", "pintersest" or similar kind, they look for not a particular image but for ideas, interesting concepts, inspiration... :) all these views, clicks, zooms...etc are not 100% reflect whatever keyword relevance to sells, some just pure interest, curiosity, maybe a future buy as the best... :)
-
I was responding to this
"everytime buyers search for images and come up with irrelevant results your images get marked down as less relevant" - sorry, do you have an evidence of such thing???"
-
I was responding to this
"everytime buyers search for images and come up with irrelevant results your images get marked down as less relevant" - sorry, do you have an evidence of such thing???"
It is safe to assume that if an image appears in a certain search result, is seen by the customer and not purchased that the image drops lower in the search results. It is best to only add keywords that are relevant to the image. Irrelevant keywords may be considered spam and have a negative effect on both the potential of success for your file and on the customer experience.
-Mat
-
I was responding to this
"everytime buyers search for images and come up with irrelevant results your images get marked down as less relevant" - sorry, do you have an evidence of such thing???"
It is safe to assume that if an image appears in a certain search result, is seen by the customer and not purchased that the image drops lower in the search results. It is best to only add keywords that are relevant to the image. Irrelevant keywords may be considered spam and have a negative effect on both the potential of success for your file and on the customer experience.
-Mat
Thank you Mat I could not have said it better myself :)
and that is why (as I mentioned) spamming your keywords actually has a negative effect on your image sales ;)
-
I was responding to this
"everytime buyers search for images and come up with irrelevant results your images get marked down as less relevant" - sorry, do you have an evidence of such thing???"
It is frequently quoted by some agencies keyword spamming has a detrimental effect and I refer to Mat's reply above
Is that sufficient?
-
When Adobe bought Fotolia, my sales fell considerably. Now, four months ago, sales are solid and with good commissions, nothing to complain about. My RPD has increased.
90% of sales to USA.
About the key words I also put around 40.
I know Fotolia says to put the top 7 first and I do it.
But I understand what the Neurobite cited about using "imagination," without making the image a true spam. Using concept keywords, entering the buyer's mind, emotion, colors, day or night etc, helped me sell images. I know from SS statistics.
I believe what Mat said, images seen and without purchase, fall in the search.
If an image sells well at first, it will always sell, so it works for me on Fotolia.
Some that I sell well in Istock or SS, do not sell well on Fotolia and on the contrary as well.
I have a video that sells every 2 days on SS. In Adobe it sells only once a month, when it sells. Anyway, I believe this is normal.
Same key words.
What I do with the images that I do not sell in Fotlia is to use the ADOBE platform, and change the key words, for who knows, so change it in the search. Before with Fotolia you could not get or add keywords.
It depends on work and luck, too, I think.
What could help and much to us collaborators, would be the sales insigths, which keywords sell the most, just as the SS has.
It would be amazing if Adobe had these numbers for us.
Consider that I am no professional and I only have 700 images / videos for sale on Fotolia.
Good luck to all
-
I was responding to this
"everytime buyers search for images and come up with irrelevant results your images get marked down as less relevant" - sorry, do you have an evidence of such thing???"
It is safe to assume that if an image appears in a certain search result, is seen by the customer and not purchased that the image drops lower in the search results. It is best to only add keywords that are relevant to the image. Irrelevant keywords may be considered spam and have a negative effect on both the potential of success for your file and on the customer experience.
-Mat
...Thanks Mat for jumping into this discussion; only you can clarify things which are in mind of AS contributors... :) However, even good assumptions do not build strong bridges.. :) I still have a few unclear for me points:
1) Does AS algorithm really punish ("drops lower in the search results") good images because they were viewed but not purchased??? :) Do you know that any buyer (!!!) before buying an image selects 10 best ones, carefully looks at them, then selects 3 from 10, and then goes to sleep, next morning, he/she has to do a hard task, to select 1 from 3 and buy it... Though, in other words, AS assigns less weights to those poor 9 images, because they were viewed but not purchased? Do I understand it correctly?
2) What does it have to do with bad, spam, fishing keywording? You name it... Because, if a buyer is looking for an apple, but a page with 100 results shows him/her 1 peach, in 99% the buyer even will not look at it, no clicks, no views, you have no data to work with, and the algorithm has no idea, why peach was not viewed, is that because bad keywords, or because some other 100+ parameters: colors, background, composition, crop... :) In other words, it is extremely difficult task to look into "black matter" of buyers mentality and predict their behavior... :)
3) I think the best way, and, probably, the only way, to fight spammers and fishers is to use an image recognition system, an AI (there are a lot of them already in the market), and delete the most irrelevant keywords at the stage of submitting your content... SS is already doing this... I think AS is already using a kind of this artificial intelligence (AI) software, because it can recognize duplicates or very similar content in your portfolio and reject them for submission... :) The same should be done for keywords!!! :)
-
a good image is not a good image if its keyworded incorrectly ;-)
-
Describe only what is in the image not what is imagined by you ~ its just spamming
I love this justification "flowers" they are there, you can not see them because of image resolution..." ~ good grief what nonsense
Imagining that something will get a sale for the 43 keywords that are not searched, or something that's not in the image is also nonsense. What buyer wants an image of something that's not there? :o
I think that some people, since the beginning of microstock, are convinced that they can sell images, based on just being seem. Like putting apple for a photo of a tomato in case the buyer likes the image and decides to download it. No really! People have said just that. Someone tell me, if you are searching for a photo of an apple, don't you search for apple? Not tomato, because you might randomly see something so attractive, you just can't resist downloading a file you don't want or don't need? ;D
-
Describe only what is in the image not what is imagined by you ~ its just spamming
I love this justification "flowers" they are there, you can not see them because of image resolution..." ~ good grief what nonsense
Imagining that something will get a sale for the 43 keywords that are not searched, or something that's not in the image is also nonsense. What buyer wants an image of something that's not there? :o
I think that some people, since the beginning of microstock, are convinced that they can sell images, based on just being seem. Like putting apple for a photo of a tomato in case the buyer likes the image and decides to download it. No really! People have said just that. Someone tell me, if you are searching for a photo of an apple, don't you search for apple? Not tomato, because you might randomly see something so attractive, you just can't resist downloading a file you don't want or don't need? ;D
Lol I'm gonna take a POV shot of my shoes and tag it 'aerial', I'm sure it will sell, they're very nice shoes.
-
I was responding to this
"everytime buyers search for images and come up with irrelevant results your images get marked down as less relevant" - sorry, do you have an evidence of such thing???"
It is safe to assume that if an image appears in a certain search result, is seen by the customer and not purchased that the image drops lower in the search results. It is best to only add keywords that are relevant to the image. Irrelevant keywords may be considered spam and have a negative effect on both the potential of success for your file and on the customer experience.
-Mat
...Thanks Mat for jumping into this discussion; only you can clarify things which are in mind of AS contributors... :) However, even good assumptions do not build strong bridges.. :) I still have a few unclear for me points:
1) Does AS algorithm really punish ("drops lower in the search results") good images because they were viewed but not purchased??? :) Do you know that any buyer (!!!) before buying an image selects 10 best ones, carefully looks at them, then selects 3 from 10, and then goes to sleep, next morning, he/she has to do a hard task, to select 1 from 3 and buy it... Though, in other words, AS assigns less weights to those poor 9 images, because they were viewed but not purchased? Do I understand it correctly?
2) What does it have to do with bad, spam, fishing keywording? You name it... Because, if a buyer is looking for an apple, but a page with 100 results shows him/her 1 peach, in 99% the buyer even will not look at it, no clicks, no views, you have no data to work with, and the algorithm has no idea, why peach was not viewed, is that because bad keywords, or because some other 100+ parameters: colors, background, composition, crop... :) In other words, it is extremely difficult task to look into "black matter" of buyers mentality and predict their behavior... :)
3) I think the best way, and, probably, the only way, to fight spammers and fishers is to use an image recognition system, an AI (there are a lot of them already in the market), and delete the most irrelevant keywords at the stage of submitting your content... SS is already doing this... I think AS is already using a kind of this artificial intelligence (AI) software, because it can recognize duplicates or very similar content in your portfolio and reject them for submission... :) The same should be done for keywords!!! :)
1) I personally purchase photos and videos regularly for video editing purpose for my clients, and I don't have the luxury to go to sleep and select what I want the next day or the day after... because deadline. Usually if I see something I like in the first pages, I just buy it and get on with my work. Sometimes I might need approval for specific projects so I'll copy the links and send them to the client so he can choose the ones he likes best, but definitely I'm not going to pick something because it's pretty and not relevant.
2) View means appear in search results. So your 'peach' will go down in ranking if it keeps appearing for 'apple' search in the search results but that is not the only factor taken in consideration in the algorithm, that would be too easy to cheat the system, it's a mix of sales, clicks and views, among many other things.
3) I wouldn't trust AI softwares at this point, it's not accurate enough and can't always recognise properly what's in the image let alone video.
-
I was responding to this
"everytime buyers search for images and come up with irrelevant results your images get marked down as less relevant" - sorry, do you have an evidence of such thing???"
It is safe to assume that if an image appears in a certain search result, is seen by the customer and not purchased that the image drops lower in the search results. It is best to only add keywords that are relevant to the image. Irrelevant keywords may be considered spam and have a negative effect on both the potential of success for your file and on the customer experience.
-Mat
...Thanks Mat for jumping into this discussion; only you can clarify things which are in mind of AS contributors... :) However, even good assumptions do not build strong bridges.. :) I still have a few unclear for me points:
1) Does AS algorithm really punish ("drops lower in the search results") good images because they were viewed but not purchased??? :) Do you know that any buyer (!!!) before buying an image selects 10 best ones, carefully looks at them, then selects 3 from 10, and then goes to sleep, next morning, he/she has to do a hard task, to select 1 from 3 and buy it... Though, in other words, AS assigns less weights to those poor 9 images, because they were viewed but not purchased? Do I understand it correctly?
2) What does it have to do with bad, spam, fishing keywording? You name it... Because, if a buyer is looking for an apple, but a page with 100 results shows him/her 1 peach, in 99% the buyer even will not look at it, no clicks, no views, you have no data to work with, and the algorithm has no idea, why peach was not viewed, is that because bad keywords, or because some other 100+ parameters: colors, background, composition, crop... :) In other words, it is extremely difficult task to look into "black matter" of buyers mentality and predict their behavior... :)
3) I think the best way, and, probably, the only way, to fight spammers and fishers is to use an image recognition system, an AI (there are a lot of them already in the market), and delete the most irrelevant keywords at the stage of submitting your content... SS is already doing this... I think AS is already using a kind of this artificial intelligence (AI) software, because it can recognize duplicates or very similar content in your portfolio and reject them for submission... :) The same should be done for keywords!!! :)
1) I personally purchase photos and videos regularly for video editing purpose for my clients, and I don't have the luxury to go to sleep and select what I want the next day or the day after... because deadline. Usually if I see something I like in the first pages, I just buy it and get on with my work. Sometimes I might need approval for specific projects so I'll copy the links and send them to the client so he can choose the ones he likes best, but definitely I'm not going to pick something because it's pretty and not relevant.
2) View means appear in search results. So your 'peach' will go down in ranking if it keeps appearing for 'apple' search in the search results but that is not the only factor taken in consideration in the algorithm, that would be too easy to cheat the system, it's a mix of sales, clicks and views, among many other things.
3) I wouldn't trust AI softwares at this point, it's not accurate enough and can't always recognise properly what's in the image let alone video.
...yes, that's what I meant, between searching, selection and purchasing there are many things happening, some go to sleep, some show content to clients or project leaders, some buy instantly cause they have money, so they buy whatever they like for their own database for 100+ projects in mind... :) However, what I wanted to stress here is that buyers do not buy content based on how well keywords match to their search strategy/expectations... they buy on basis of the particular image likeness, attractiveness, technical and aesthetic quality, and how well it fits to the project...
...your second point I did not get: how on earth algorithm knows that there is a peach actually in the image but not an apple and it should not be in the search results? The peach with "apple" in keywords will be shown in the "apple" search results, but machine thinks it is an apple .. and there will be 10000+ more unseen, unviewed unclicked truly apples, by your hypothesis, they should be all punished, because they were in search results but not viewed... unless there is image recognition which will tell the script the peach is not matching to the apple, let's punish only the peach... Do you understand what I mean?
...well, if you never tried Google image/place recognition service, I suggest to try it, you will be astonished how accurate it is... :)
-
I was responding to this
"everytime buyers search for images and come up with irrelevant results your images get marked down as less relevant" - sorry, do you have an evidence of such thing???"
It is safe to assume that if an image appears in a certain search result, is seen by the customer and not purchased that the image drops lower in the search results. It is best to only add keywords that are relevant to the image. Irrelevant keywords may be considered spam and have a negative effect on both the potential of success for your file and on the customer experience.
-Mat
...Thanks Mat for jumping into this discussion; only you can clarify things which are in mind of AS contributors... :) However, even good assumptions do not build strong bridges.. :) I still have a few unclear for me points:
1) Does AS algorithm really punish ("drops lower in the search results") good images because they were viewed but not purchased??? :) Do you know that any buyer (!!!) before buying an image selects 10 best ones, carefully looks at them, then selects 3 from 10, and then goes to sleep, next morning, he/she has to do a hard task, to select 1 from 3 and buy it... Though, in other words, AS assigns less weights to those poor 9 images, because they were viewed but not purchased? Do I understand it correctly?
2) What does it have to do with bad, spam, fishing keywording? You name it... Because, if a buyer is looking for an apple, but a page with 100 results shows him/her 1 peach, in 99% the buyer even will not look at it, no clicks, no views, you have no data to work with, and the algorithm has no idea, why peach was not viewed, is that because bad keywords, or because some other 100+ parameters: colors, background, composition, crop... :) In other words, it is extremely difficult task to look into "black matter" of buyers mentality and predict their behavior... :)
3) I think the best way, and, probably, the only way, to fight spammers and fishers is to use an image recognition system, an AI (there are a lot of them already in the market), and delete the most irrelevant keywords at the stage of submitting your content... SS is already doing this... I think AS is already using a kind of this artificial intelligence (AI) software, because it can recognize duplicates or very similar content in your portfolio and reject them for submission... :) The same should be done for keywords!!! :)
1) I personally purchase photos and videos regularly for video editing purpose for my clients, and I don't have the luxury to go to sleep and select what I want the next day or the day after... because deadline. Usually if I see something I like in the first pages, I just buy it and get on with my work. Sometimes I might need approval for specific projects so I'll copy the links and send them to the client so he can choose the ones he likes best, but definitely I'm not going to pick something because it's pretty and not relevant.
2) View means appear in search results. So your 'peach' will go down in ranking if it keeps appearing for 'apple' search in the search results but that is not the only factor taken in consideration in the algorithm, that would be too easy to cheat the system, it's a mix of sales, clicks and views, among many other things.
3) I wouldn't trust AI softwares at this point, it's not accurate enough and can't always recognise properly what's in the image let alone video.
...yes, that's what I meant, between searching, selection and purchasing there are many things happening, some go to sleep, some show content to clients or project leaders, some buy instantly cause they have money, so they buy whatever they like for their own database for 100+ projects in mind... :) However, what I wanted to stress here is that buyers do not buy content based on how well keywords match to their search strategy/expectations... they buy on basis of the particular image likeness, attractiveness, technical and aesthetic quality, and how well it fits to the project...
...your second point I did not get: how on earth algorithm knows that there is a peach actually in the image but not an apple and it should not be in the search results? The peach with "apple" in keywords will be shown in the "apple" search results, but machine thinks it is an apple .. and there will be 10000+ more unseen, unviewed unclicked truly apples, by your hypothesis, they should be all punished, because they were in search results but not viewed... unless there is image recognition which will tell the script the peach is not matching to the apple, let's punish only the peach... Do you understand what I mean?
...well, if you never tried Google image/place recognition service, I suggest to try it, you will be astonished how accurate it is... :)
Let's say if 100 people search for 'apple' and nobody clicks on or buys your 'peach' image, your image becomes irrelevant, and goes down in ranking. All the other images of apples in the same situation will also be 'punished' if you want to call it that - they are not relevant in the sense that nobody wants them, so they will also go down in rankings.
Back to your Waterfall image for instance, every time someone looks for actual photos of Sea or Flowers as the main subject, and scroll past your photo without clicking on it or buying it, your photo will go down in ranking. So it's a gamble, you might attract a random buyer who's in love with your photo while they were actually looking for something else, but in the meantime, every time someone isn't in love with it, your photo will go down.. until it's buried under photos of other contributors. Is it worth the risk?
-
I was responding to this
"everytime buyers search for images and come up with irrelevant results your images get marked down as less relevant" - sorry, do you have an evidence of such thing???"
It is safe to assume that if an image appears in a certain search result, is seen by the customer and not purchased that the image drops lower in the search results. It is best to only add keywords that are relevant to the image. Irrelevant keywords may be considered spam and have a negative effect on both the potential of success for your file and on the customer experience.
-Mat
...Thanks Mat for jumping into this discussion; only you can clarify things which are in mind of AS contributors... :) However, even good assumptions do not build strong bridges.. :) I still have a few unclear for me points:
1) Does AS algorithm really punish ("drops lower in the search results") good images because they were viewed but not purchased??? :) Do you know that any buyer (!!!) before buying an image selects 10 best ones, carefully looks at them, then selects 3 from 10, and then goes to sleep, next morning, he/she has to do a hard task, to select 1 from 3 and buy it... Though, in other words, AS assigns less weights to those poor 9 images, because they were viewed but not purchased? Do I understand it correctly?
2) What does it have to do with bad, spam, fishing keywording? You name it... Because, if a buyer is looking for an apple, but a page with 100 results shows him/her 1 peach, in 99% the buyer even will not look at it, no clicks, no views, you have no data to work with, and the algorithm has no idea, why peach was not viewed, is that because bad keywords, or because some other 100+ parameters: colors, background, composition, crop... :) In other words, it is extremely difficult task to look into "black matter" of buyers mentality and predict their behavior... :)
3) I think the best way, and, probably, the only way, to fight spammers and fishers is to use an image recognition system, an AI (there are a lot of them already in the market), and delete the most irrelevant keywords at the stage of submitting your content... SS is already doing this... I think AS is already using a kind of this artificial intelligence (AI) software, because it can recognize duplicates or very similar content in your portfolio and reject them for submission... :) The same should be done for keywords!!! :)
1) I personally purchase photos and videos regularly for video editing purpose for my clients, and I don't have the luxury to go to sleep and select what I want the next day or the day after... because deadline. Usually if I see something I like in the first pages, I just buy it and get on with my work. Sometimes I might need approval for specific projects so I'll copy the links and send them to the client so he can choose the ones he likes best, but definitely I'm not going to pick something because it's pretty and not relevant.
2) View means appear in search results. So your 'peach' will go down in ranking if it keeps appearing for 'apple' search in the search results but that is not the only factor taken in consideration in the algorithm, that would be too easy to cheat the system, it's a mix of sales, clicks and views, among many other things.
3) I wouldn't trust AI softwares at this point, it's not accurate enough and can't always recognise properly what's in the image let alone video.
...yes, that's what I meant, between searching, selection and purchasing there are many things happening, some go to sleep, some show content to clients or project leaders, some buy instantly cause they have money, so they buy whatever they like for their own database for 100+ projects in mind... :) However, what I wanted to stress here is that buyers do not buy content based on how well keywords match to their search strategy/expectations... they buy on basis of the particular image likeness, attractiveness, technical and aesthetic quality, and how well it fits to the project...
...your second point I did not get: how on earth algorithm knows that there is a peach actually in the image but not an apple and it should not be in the search results? The peach with "apple" in keywords will be shown in the "apple" search results, but machine thinks it is an apple .. and there will be 10000+ more unseen, unviewed unclicked truly apples, by your hypothesis, they should be all punished, because they were in search results but not viewed... unless there is image recognition which will tell the script the peach is not matching to the apple, let's punish only the peach... Do you understand what I mean?
...well, if you never tried Google image/place recognition service, I suggest to try it, you will be astonished how accurate it is... :)
Let's say if 100 people search for 'apple' and nobody clicks on or buys your 'peach' image, your image becomes irrelevant, and goes down in ranking. All the other images of apples in the same situation will also be 'punished' if you want to call it that - they are not relevant in the sense that nobody wants them, so they will also go down in rankings.
Back to your Waterfall image for instance, every time someone looks for actual photos of Sea or Flowers as the main subject, and scroll past your photo without clicking on it or buying it, your photo will go down in ranking. So it's a gamble, you might attract a random buyer who's in love with your photo while they were actually looking for something else, but in the meantime, every time someone isn't in love with it, your photo will go down.. until it's buried under photos of other contributors. Is it worth the risk?
...well, I am not sure that AS script works this way, I will explain what I mean: your algorithms with dynamic ranking (can go up and down, can be rewarded and punished) is too difficult to implement and run, and actually, no need for that... I think there is only cumulative historical scoring for each image, scripts operate with clear-cut variables, such as: number of sells, number of views, ratio views/sells, number of collections the image is put, date (age of the image)... that's it... you submitted a new image it acquires scoring, lets say 1, each its sell adds to it 1 point, each view 0.1, put in collection 0.01... your scoring can only grow up, based on image performance... Then, lets think how image search engine works? - you search for "apple", you have 1M results of images which have "apple" in their keywords, then the script select first 100 images with highest scoring, and makes first result page for you, then next page, the script may cook differently, it will show you more fresh images still with highest scoring, 3 page might have another layout, it will select best scored images from the middle... and so on... Many companies do such cocktails to maximize chance to sell for all images, not only highest ranked... Your imaginary punishment in ranking or scoring occurs naturally, passively, images which gain points push others backward... I think scoring images down by whatever reasons in active way is a fairy tail... :) Unless Mat says yes, we have it... :)
-
...well, I am not sure that AS script works this way, I will explain what I mean: your algorithms with dynamic ranking (can go up and down, can be rewarded and punished) is too difficult to implement and run, and actually, no need for that... I think there is only cumulative historical scoring for each image, scripts operate with clear-cut variables, such as: number of sells, number of views, ratio views/sells, number of collections the image is put, date (age of the image)... that's it... you submitted a new image it acquires scoring, lets say 1, each its sell adds to it 1 point, each view 0.1, put in collection 0.01... your scoring can only grow up, based on image performance... Then, lets think how image search engine works? - you search for "apple", you have 1M results of images which have "apple" in their keywords, then the script select first 100 images with highest scoring, and makes first result page for you, then next page, the script may cook differently, it will show you more fresh images still with highest scoring, 3 page might have another layout, it will select best scored images from the middle... and so on... Many companies do such cocktails to maximize chance to sell for all images, not only highest ranked... Your imaginary punishment in ranking or scoring occurs naturally, passively, images which gain points push others backward... I think scoring images down by whatever reasons in active way is a fairy tail... :) Unless Mat says yes, we have it... :)
I think you're overthinking things.
AS's search engine is fairly easy to understand. Every time an image gets downloaded, it moves up the rankings. If someone else's image gets a download and yours don't for that day, then his/her image is moving up and you're either staying still or moving down.
I don't believe views, added to collections, or clicking on it matters. The only things that defines the relevancy of the image is the download. That's why having commercially viable images is important. That and mastering the art of keywording.
-
I'm sorry neurobite but you had the explanation from Mat who works with Adobe.
You know you are keyword spamming, we know it and the buyers will definitely know it.
You are just writing lengthy posts to justify it.
Out of interest I looked for that waterfall with the extra keyword "flowers" and one page of results but only two images contained anything remotely like flowers.
Yours had no flowers so I did not click on it and neither did I save it to my light box which is exactly the behaviour you could expect from a buyer.
I have some spare subscription credits left so I think I'll go buy the two images that did contain flowers.
-
Look at it this way If I went into a supermarket for a bag of sugar and the sugar shelf was full of bags of flour I'd be pretty annoyed and stop going there after a while. If I were a supermarket I'd be even more annoyed if one of my suppliers labelled his Flour as sugar on the off chance someone looking for flour would decide on impulse to buy sugar.
-
Alamy tell us this
" Pseudonyms with a high click through rate (CTR) will be receiving more zooms relative to views than pseudonyms with a low CTR. This is important information because the ratio of zooms to views is one of the factors that influences your AlamyRank score.
Is CTR my AlamyRank?
No. CTR is just one of the factors that make up your AlamyRank."
I think its a very reasonable assumption that many if not most agencies include this to some extent in their search algorithms.
-
Alamy tell us this
" Pseudonyms with a high click through rate (CTR) will be receiving more zooms relative to views than pseudonyms with a low CTR. This is important information because the ratio of zooms to views is one of the factors that influences your AlamyRank score.
Is CTR my AlamyRank?
No. CTR is just one of the factors that make up your AlamyRank."
I think its a very reasonable assumption that many if not most agencies include this to some extent in their search algorithms.
Yeah Alamy takes it even further as this CTR score affects your whole portfolio/pseudo's image rankings and not just the image itself. Wondering if it's the same with Adobe Stock, would many low ranking images have an impact on your portfolio as a whole?
-
Alamy tell us this
" Pseudonyms with a high click through rate (CTR) will be receiving more zooms relative to views than pseudonyms with a low CTR. This is important information because the ratio of zooms to views is one of the factors that influences your AlamyRank score.
Is CTR my AlamyRank?
No. CTR is just one of the factors that make up your AlamyRank."
I think its a very reasonable assumption that many if not most agencies include this to some extent in their search algorithms.
Yeah Alamy takes it even further as this CTR score affects your whole portfolio/pseudo's image rankings and not just the image itself. Wondering if it's the same with Adobe Stock, would many low ranking images have an impact on your portfolio as a whole?
Its really anyone's guess even though some claim special knowledge...we do know adobe collect zoom stats so why wouldn't they? My guess is that sites have a "contributor ranking" based on a number of metrics that feeds into search algorithm.