pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: "Can Resubmit" link better/different from "Upload" link  (Read 7930 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #25 on: March 22, 2010, 17:29 »
0
Put another way, iStock exclusive don't get rejections for bad/inappropriate keywords - the offending keywords are removed for them.

I think that should be natural thing to do for everybody. It should take same amount of time (human or cpu time) to remove offending keywords. They must to do it anyway to generate email. I would gladly agree to make it happen by running a script. I got a feeling that in many case it's just an excuse to reject without give valid technical reason.
This is true to some extent but think about how many people would just spam the keywords until they had 50 and let the reviewers decides which are valid. That would take a lot more time and it would take even longer for images to get accepted.

Common how big is CV, 10K words? It's probably matter of milliseconds to get 50 keywords checked against it. And as I said previously they must be doing it already cause it's hard to believe reviewer is hand picking words to paste them into email.


« Reply #26 on: March 22, 2010, 17:31 »
0
Put another way, iStock exclusive don't get rejections for bad/inappropriate keywords - the offending keywords are removed for them.

I think that should be natural thing to do for everybody. It should take same amount of time (human or cpu time) to remove offending keywords. They must to do it anyway to generate email. I would gladly agree to make it happen by running a script. I got a feeling that in many case it's just an excuse to reject without give valid technical reason.
This is true to some extent but think about how many people would just spam the keywords until they had 50 and let the reviewers decides which are valid. That would take a lot more time and it would take even longer for images to get accepted.

Common how big is CV, 10K words? It's probably matter of milliseconds to get 50 keywords checked against it. And as I said previously they must be doing it already cause it's hard to believe reviewer is hand picking words to paste them into email.
Why would they compare keywords to CV? They are checking them if they are valid for the image. I imagine they click on the keywords that are not appropriate and the systems generates the email based on that.

PS: You can also add keywords that aren't in CV, however they won't be translated over to other languages, so only people using the language you use for keywords, will be able to find your pictures on those keywords.
« Last Edit: March 22, 2010, 17:33 by LostOne »

« Reply #27 on: March 22, 2010, 17:44 »
0
Put another way, iStock exclusive don't get rejections for bad/inappropriate keywords - the offending keywords are removed for them.

I think that should be natural thing to do for everybody. It should take same amount of time (human or cpu time) to remove offending keywords. They must to do it anyway to generate email. I would gladly agree to make it happen by running a script. I got a feeling that in many case it's just an excuse to reject without give valid technical reason.
This is true to some extent but think about how many people would just spam the keywords until they had 50 and let the reviewers decides which are valid. That would take a lot more time and it would take even longer for images to get accepted.

Common how big is CV, 10K words? It's probably matter of milliseconds to get 50 keywords checked against it. And as I said previously they must be doing it already cause it's hard to believe reviewer is hand picking words to paste them into email.
Why would they compare keywords to CV? They are checking them if they are valid for the image. I imagine they click on the keywords that are not appropriate and the systems generates the email based on that.

PS: You can also add keywords that aren't in CV, however they won't be translated over to other languages, so only people using the language you use for keywords, will be able to find your pictures on those keywords.

So what's the difference between actions to generate email or deleting keywords? I would say generating email is more CPU intensive than deleting couple strings?

« Reply #28 on: March 22, 2010, 18:00 »
0
The problem is that the current state of the art in computers isn't able to figure out if keyword business is appropriate for an image. The reviewer has to click them. And if IS said "We will remove the bad keywords", everyone would spam the keywords until they had 50 of them. Then the reviewers would have to click a whole lot more. The actual removing isn't the problem, clicking is.

« Reply #29 on: March 22, 2010, 18:20 »
0
This is true to some extent but think about how many people would just spam the keywords until they had 50 and let the reviewers decides which are valid. That would take a lot more time and it would take even longer for images to get accepted.

not sure if i understand your gist to this argument.
are you implying that no IS exclusive would "just spam the keywords" but all independents would be prone ?
that is why IS exclusives get this benefit and the independents don't?

why is this?
do you think that exclusives are created differently ? or that independents are mental midgets?

« Reply #30 on: March 22, 2010, 18:36 »
0
No, I just think they tolerate it with exclusives doing it but aren't prepared to increase the queues  even more (or pay more inspectors) to do it for independents. They should have some benefits since they've put all eggs in one basket.

Besides maybe major offenders might get some kind of a warning about spamming?
« Last Edit: March 22, 2010, 18:38 by LostOne »

« Reply #31 on: March 22, 2010, 18:49 »
0
No, I just think they tolerate it with exclusives doing it but aren't prepared to increase the queues  even more (or pay more inspectors) to do it for independents. They should have some benefits since they've put all eggs in one basket.

Besides maybe major offenders might get some kind of a warning about spamming?

ah, fair enough !
of course!.. i don't contend with that reasoning.  honorary badge of merit to  higher tolerance for rubbish in return fortheir putting all their eggs in one basket. sounds fair .
cheers for the quick clarify ;)

« Reply #32 on: March 22, 2010, 18:53 »
0
I just wonder if reviewers have to hand pick offending words? If CV is limited and each keyword must usually appear together with some other related keywords it must be possible to define rule that would some probability guess that if it can find words like apple, red, delicious, round, fruit, image could show apple and mark other words that are not often visible with these five mentioned. Something similar to Google's Page Rank so offending words would have lowest rank and appear last. If they can automate some thing it would be easier for them to use it for everybody.

« Reply #33 on: March 22, 2010, 21:58 »
0
- keyword minimally to avoid rejection for keywords

Just an update on this, as I was crawling through my "can resubmits" last night. My last reject purely for keywords was this:
Descr: Portrait of Korean punker pushing headphones to his ears, eyes closed, listening to music. Isolated over white.


IS:  ???
Quote
The following keywords used for this file do not appear to be fully relevant to the subject.
{[ Fine Art Portrait (Portrait), Human Ear (The Human Body), Human Eye (The Human Body), Closed (Physical Description), Pushing, Lifestyles]}
Some of the keywords used for this file do not appear to be fully relevant to the subject.
Under the new controlled vocabulary system that we now use, images need fewer keywords to do well in searches. The site automatically handles translations and synonyms, so you do not have to.
Please provide a set of simple, descriptive, focused keywords for this image before resubmitting.

So the keywords will be: one person, isolated (cut out), male, Korean (Asian ethnicity), listening, music.
But wait, maybe he is listening to a speech of Obama = music.
And who says he is listening? He was probably pondering how much his model fee will be = listening.
Is he really Korean? It wasn't mentioned on his ID, so Korean.

So the "focused keywords for this image" will be: one person, isolated, male.
Of course they will reject it then for "feathering" so I will save one round by applying my brand new 2MP-IS action: resize from 5616 to 1800 longest side (bicubic sharper), select #FFF (0 tolerance, non antialiased, not contiguous), feather this selection with 1.5px, edit>fill>white.
The final reject will then be because the Model Release has a dog-ear. ;D
« Last Edit: March 22, 2010, 22:12 by FD-amateur »

« Reply #34 on: March 22, 2010, 22:24 »
0
No, I just think they tolerate it with exclusives doing it but aren't prepared to increase the queues  even more (or pay more inspectors) to do it for independents.
Which makes no business sense at all because IS earns the most money per DL from independents, e.g. "Large  Regular  2.78" (10 credits).

KB

« Reply #35 on: March 22, 2010, 23:25 »
0
- keyword minimally to avoid rejection for keywords

Just an update on this, as I was crawling through my "can resubmits" last night. My last reject purely for keywords was this:
Descr: Portrait of Korean punker pushing headphones to his ears, eyes closed, listening to music. Isolated over white.


IS:  ???
Quote
The following keywords used for this file do not appear to be fully relevant to the subject.
{[ Fine Art Portrait (Portrait), Human Ear (The Human Body), Human Eye (The Human Body), Closed (Physical Description), Pushing, Lifestyles]}
Some of the keywords used for this file do not appear to be fully relevant to the subject.
Under the new controlled vocabulary system that we now use, images need fewer keywords to do well in searches. The site automatically handles translations and synonyms, so you do not have to.
Please provide a set of simple, descriptive, focused keywords for this image before resubmitting.

So the keywords will be: one person, isolated (cut out), male, Korean (Asian ethnicity), listening, music.
But wait, maybe he is listening to a speech of Obama = music.
And who says he is listening? He was probably pondering how much his model fee will be = listening.
Is he really Korean? It wasn't mentioned on his ID, so Korean.

So the "focused keywords for this image" will be: one person, isolated, male.
Of course they will reject it then for "feathering" so I will save one round by applying my brand new 2MP-IS action: resize from 5616 to 1800 longest side (bicubic sharper), select #FFF (0 tolerance, non antialiased, not contiguous), feather this selection with 1.5px, edit>fill>white.
The final reject will then be because the Model Release has a dog-ear. ;D

I'd probably include the word headphones, but that's just me.  ;D Also, wearing. And I see nothing wrong with music or listening -- those are obviously implied, and someone searching for music listening would expect to see images such as this one.

What makes this a fine art portrait in your view?

Human ear -- really? I don't see an ear. If someone is doing a search on human ear, do you really think they'll buy this? Maybe you should add nose, and brain, and lips, and hair, and face, and ...? (Actually, now that I mention it, the guy's hair probably is relevant ... ;D )

Human eye -- Read the current discussion on this very subject in the keywording forum (TOTW: Human Eye): http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=190141

Closed -- What's closed? His mouth? His brain? The headphones? Oh, his eyes! How about eyes closed then?

Pushing -- I would not describe his action as pushing, but even if you would, I don't think that's a very important term. JMO.

Lifestyles -- I don't know how useful this term is, either, but seems like it might be appropriate. But I'm not really familiar with it.

And of course, there's nothing wrong with Korean, either. Or Asian. Or Punk (Human Role). Or Young Adult (I'm guessing at his age -- but the point is, an appropriate age term would be relevant.)

« Reply #36 on: March 23, 2010, 00:37 »
0
Closed -- What's closed? His mouth? His brain? The headphones? Oh, his eyes! How about eyes closed then?
Thanks for your long reply to my rant. What I meant is "pushing ears" and "eyes closed" (the same discussion as in the DT flagging thread about compound keywords). I wasn't aware you could enter short phrases as IS keywords. Yepyep, it works well when you search for "Closed eyes". Thanks. I figure you will have to enter them between quotes. Useful rant anyways, also the link to the forum.  :P

"Fine art portrait" is imposed by the CV, where you have the choice between portrait as image orientation, and portrait as fine art portrait. I rather meant head shot. I always use portrait when an image is cropped around a person's face or the focus is on the face with not more than shoulders visible.
« Last Edit: March 23, 2010, 00:45 by FD-amateur »

KB

« Reply #37 on: March 23, 2010, 10:11 »
0
Closed -- What's closed? His mouth? His brain? The headphones? Oh, his eyes! How about eyes closed then?
Thanks for your long reply to my rant. What I meant is "pushing ears" and "eyes closed" (the same discussion as in the DT flagging thread about compound keywords). I wasn't aware you could enter short phrases as IS keywords. Yepyep, it works well when you search for "Closed eyes". Thanks. I figure you will have to enter them between quotes. Useful rant anyways, also the link to the forum.  :P

"Fine art portrait" is imposed by the CV, where you have the choice between portrait as image orientation, and portrait as fine art portrait. I rather meant head shot. I always use portrait when an image is cropped around a person's face or the focus is on the face with not more than shoulders visible.
This is an example of how the CV gets so complicated and confusing. Why did they decide to map portrait to fine art portrait -- isn't there a more clear definition? Well, I shouldn't criticize them, as I don't know all that's involved in it. But, you were 100% right; there's no reason that fine art portrait is an invalid term for your image. (If it is, then there are probably 50,000 other images that are wrong, too.) (Looking at some of the results for fine art portrait, there are many that do not qualify, IMO, for that term, but most do.)  I think the inspector was wrong to eliminate that on your image.

I see what you're talking about now regarding "pushing ears", but I really don't think many would search on that. That's a difficult one to keyword with the CV. Yeah, you could put the phrase in quotes, but I think the chances of a buyer doing so are pretty small. (I suspect most buyers don't search using quotes, except when the phrase is in the CV and the click on it to enter it into the search box.)

Good keywording, as I'm sure you know, is so darn important. I applaud IS for being the only site that gives us a chance to get it right via the CV, but it's such a difficult problem that the current implementation helps only a bit.

donding

  • Think before you speak
« Reply #38 on: March 23, 2010, 10:21 »
0
When I upload through DeepMeta I am very careful what keywords I keep. If I feel they are on the borderline I remove them. I keyword all my images before I upload to any of the sites, that's why I use DeepMeta so I don't have to go in and remove them after I have already uploaded them to the other sites. If I try to upload one with the borderline keyword...it usually gets rejected for it, so I don't bother even trying anymore. It's usually the concept keywords.

donding

  • Think before you speak
« Reply #39 on: March 23, 2010, 10:28 »
0
As far as the OT goes. I find it is usually easier to upload rather than resubmit. I usually will correct the problem and then change the file name and upload again. It seems when I resubmit it sits there forever waiting to be approved or rejected again.

PhotoDuneMicrostock Insider

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
1 Replies
5481 Views
Last post March 14, 2011, 05:33
by fotorob
4 Replies
1709 Views
Last post December 01, 2010, 18:38
by ShadySue
5 Replies
2056 Views
Last post September 17, 2011, 22:33
by Zeus
28 Replies
4729 Views
Last post January 24, 2012, 20:28
by krilcis
8 Replies
454 Views
Last post August 21, 2013, 23:16
by stockphoto-images.com

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors