Quote from: melastmohican on March 22, 2010, 15:18

Quote from: sharply_done on March 20, 2010, 23:01

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.

Quote from: melastmohican on March 22, 2010, 17:29

Quote from: LostOne on March 22, 2010, 16:57

Quote from: melastmohican on March 22, 2010, 15:18

Quote from: sharply_done on March 20, 2010, 23:01

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?

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?

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

- 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:  

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.

Quote from: LostOne on March 22, 2010, 16:56

- 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.

I'd probably include the word headphones, but that's just me.  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 ... )

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.)

Quote from: KB on March 22, 2010, 23:25

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.  

"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.

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.