MicrostockGroup
Microstock Photography Forum - General => Symbiostock => Symbiostock - SEO & Marketing => Topic started by: cascoly on July 30, 2013, 15:38
-
as I've looked at the various keyword stats at http://symbiostock-search.com (http://symbiostock-search.com), I've discovered several instances of what i'd consider keyword spamming
there are over 11000 different keywords being used right now. folks will have different opinions as to whether images of mule, elk or monkey should also include the tags horse, deer or ape, respectively. but to me, when someone has an image of paris, and also includes new York and Singapore as keywords, that's a bit much (I've made this up completely but here are analogous tags out there)
my question is how should sym sites and the global searches handle this? simplest is to stay with a completely hands off policy, but this risks user annoyance if poor keywording is too common
any ideas?
-
I try to stay away from spam, but if I have a flag of a french colony and its called whatever, and it has traces of the French flag, I will tag it with the Island name and with France and French Colony. Thats not spam to me. It might be to others. I have never spammed, but I have stretched on occasions. And if you find spam, it could be a stray keyword. If I run into them, I delete them myself.
What can you do about it, nothing I think. If I will be 'punished' for it in the future, I will be more than happy to disconnect from the network.
Just my two cents.
PS: My keywords are a mess because I split up all my keyword phrases as workaround for the local search, but it created a heap of spam. I am eagerly waiting for the premium version so I can clean it up.
-
Hi
I realised i messed up by using dumbell for kettle weights, as far as i know i changed them. However, if anyone notices any bad keywords on mine, please tell me!
Thanks
Mark
-
I'm rekeywording most of my files before I used the keyword tools and the 50 keyword maximum that ends always in SPAM
-
Same here. I don't keyword spam, but in the early days of stock, we were allowed to do some weird things. I don't think it's an issue for me because I am going through each and every photo and cleaning up. Just like I had irrelevant ones in there, I have also found images where I missed a bunch I should have used. Please tell me if anyone finds wrong ones and I will fix them.
When people keyword spam on their own sites, it's their business. If it annoys buyers, they just won't go back. But now that we are all connected through the global search, keyword spamming that will annoy buyers punishes the whole network. And I'm not talking about mis-keywords here and there, as Ron describes. I am talking about what cascoly talked about: images of mule, elk or monkey that also include the tags horse, deer or ape, respectively. A horse is not the same as a mule, and if I were looking for a horse, I want a picture of a horse. If I wanted a mule, I would search horse AND mule, or mule.
Do a search for corn on some of the agency sites...I see all kinds of images that have nothing to do with corn, at least here in the US...images of wheat, etc.
Since you, cascoly, put all of your time and effort into the global search, I think that if you see a site that does this keyword spamming excessively, maybe you could contact them and ask them to clean it up. If, after a reasonable period of time, it has not cleaned up, then maybe they should not be included in the search? Not sure if technically you can do that, but I think you have every right since you are the one doing the work on the search.
If people don't like it, they can be independent. I would like to think that most people here would be amenable to fixing the keywords, because they are likely leftovers from early microstock and are an oversight. The ones that put up a big fuss, in my opinion, are the ones who probably have no intention of fixing them and have done it intentionally. Everyone knows there are always people who want to cheat the system. ::)
-
Without the ability of having a search engine that can search on complex phrases, it is almost impossible to avoid what some people would call spam. For example, a lot of artists have images with copy space on them (so that customers can add text to the image). But in order to include that in the keywords, they currently have to include both words "copy" and "space". So anyone searching for "space" (as in the stuff between the stars and planets), will have images that show up with white copy space and not one star or planet in them. You could also include the keyword "copyspace" but you never know how someone will spell the word(s). The same is true for many other keywords that are part of complex phrases. For example, if someone wants to find images using the word "pop" (as in burst), they will find images with "popcorn", "soda pop", "pop artists", etc. So I think that the search engine needs to be upgraded to include the ability to search for complex phrases.
In addition, everyone has a different definition of what spam is, so it is hard to come up with hard and fast rules. This is especially true with conceptual images.
Another idea might be to have the ability to "flag" a keyword on an image. This way someone could flag a keyword and the artist would get an email. If the artist starts getting a bunch of emails about a certain keyword in an image, then that would let them know that the keyword should probably be removed from the image.
-
..... I am talking about what cascoly talked about: images of mule, elk or monkey that also include the tags horse, deer or ape, respectively. A horse is not the same as a mule, and if I were looking for a horse, I want a picture of a horse. If I wanted a mule, I would search horse AND mule, or mule.....
here's the problem - I don't consider those examples spam - someone looking for an ape, may be looking for the more general idea of 'monkey' etc. since we can't be there to see that buyers use perfect keywords, I don't have a big problem when people use terms more loosely than if it were a peer reviewed journal article.
Since you, cascoly, put all of your time and effort into the global search, I think that if you see a site that does this keyword spamming excessively, maybe you could contact them and ask them to clean it up. If, after a reasonable period of time, it has not cleaned up, then maybe they should not be included in the search? Not sure if technically you can do that, but I think you have every right since you are the one doing the work on the search.
that's why I started this thread - because I don't WANT to be the one who decides these things
-
Without the ability of having a search engine that can search on complex phrases, it is almost impossible to avoid what some people would call spam. For example, a lot of artists have images with copy space on them (so that customers can add text to the image). But in order to include that in the keywords, they currently have to include both words "copy" and "space". So anyone searching for "space" (as in the stuff between the stars and planets), will have images that show up with white copy space and not one star or planet in them. You could also include the keyword "copyspace" but you never know how someone will spell the word(s). The same is true for many other keywords that are part of complex phrases. For example, if someone wants to find images using the word "pop" (as in burst), they will find images with "popcorn", "soda pop", "pop artists", etc. So I think that the search engine needs to be upgraded to include the ability to search for complex phrases.
In addition, everyone has a different definition of what spam is, so it is hard to come up with hard and fast rules. This is especially true with conceptual images.
Another idea might be to have the ability to "flag" a keyword on an image. This way someone could flag a keyword and the artist would get an email. If the artist starts getting a bunch of emails about a certain keyword in an image, then that would let them know that the keyword should probably be removed from the image.
yes, I think those are good examples
the email info in the symbiocard files is encrypted, so emailing isn't a possibility,but maybe the ability to flag potential spam might be doable
-----
the bulk editor is going to be a great way to clean up tags and descriptions. it makes it easy to see and edit images that have incorrect tags, etc
-
then disregard everything I said. ;)
-
Since it was used as an example of possible spam, here's a brief natural history lesson. 'Deer' is a family of animals which includes the following North American species:
1. White-tailed deer aka Virginia deer
2. Key deer (a dwarf variant of the white-tailed deer found in southern Florida)
3. Coues deer (a dwarf variant of the white-tailed deer found in the Arizona desert)
4. Mule deer
5. Black-tailed deer (a smaller variant of the mule deer found in coastal areas of southwestern BC and Washington)
6. Elk aka Wapiti
7. Moose
8. Woodland caribou
9. Barren-ground caribou
10. Reindeer
... there may be more - these were just the first ones that popped up in my abbreviated pocket field guide.
I would keyword any of the above species with their correct name, their family name ('deer') and their Latin names. I take the same approach with wildflowers and trees as well. I don't consider that spam.
-
Without the ability of having a search engine that can search on complex phrases, it is almost impossible to avoid what some people would call spam. For example, a lot of artists have images with copy space on them (so that customers can add text to the image). But in order to include that in the keywords, they currently have to include both words "copy" and "space". So anyone searching for "space" (as in the stuff between the stars and planets), will have images that show up with white copy space and not one star or planet in them. You could also include the keyword "copyspace" but you never know how someone will spell the word(s). The same is true for many other keywords that are part of complex phrases. For example, if someone wants to find images using the word "pop" (as in burst), they will find images with "popcorn", "soda pop", "pop artists", etc. So I think that the search engine needs to be upgraded to include the ability to search for complex phrases.
In addition, everyone has a different definition of what spam is, so it is hard to come up with hard and fast rules. This is especially true with conceptual images.
Another idea might be to have the ability to "flag" a keyword on an image. This way someone could flag a keyword and the artist would get an email. If the artist starts getting a bunch of emails about a certain keyword in an image, then that would let them know that the keyword should probably be removed from the image.
That! Man I couldnt have said it any better.
-
..... I am talking about what cascoly talked about: images of mule, elk or monkey that also include the tags horse, deer or ape, respectively. A horse is not the same as a mule, and if I were looking for a horse, I want a picture of a horse. If I wanted a mule, I would search horse AND mule, or mule.....
here's the problem - I don't consider those examples spam - someone looking for an ape, may be looking for the more general idea of 'monkey' etc. since we can't be there to see that buyers use perfect keywords, I don't have a big problem when people use terms more loosely than if it were a peer reviewed journal article.
Since you, cascoly, put all of your time and effort into the global search, I think that if you see a site that does this keyword spamming excessively, maybe you could contact them and ask them to clean it up. If, after a reasonable period of time, it has not cleaned up, then maybe they should not be included in the search? Not sure if technically you can do that, but I think you have every right since you are the one doing the work on the search.
that's why I started this thread - because I don't WANT to be the one who decides these things
The general rule of keywording is this... no more, no less
Who:
What:
Why:
Where:
When:
So for example a monkey is a monkey not an ape, and an ape is an ape not a monkey. so keyword "what" it is and nothing more it can't be both. now an ape and a monkey are both primates so using "primate" is acceptable. monkeys have tails and apes don't.
Using this as an example, it can be either an ape or a monkey - but not both, but both can be a primate.
i hate nothing more than bad keywording as it affects us all in the long run and I report it when I spot it, we should all do the same.
i recently saw a photo of a tea plantation in Malaysia and the keywords were also Sri Lanka, India, Thailand, and China... how can a known tea plantation in Malaysia be located in five different countries? I have also seen a temple in Kathmandu with keywords that contained as keywords three other temples in Kathmandu and also used Tibet, which is not Nepal at all.
Personally, if i was an art director/designer and have never left small town anywhere, but was assigned to make a brochure of sorts or a magazine spread featuring agriculture in Sri Lanka, and I ended up using a photograph on the cover that was Malaysia, I'd be pissed off.
That is what keyword spam is - falsifying information.
-
Since it was used as an example of possible spam, here's a brief natural history lesson. 'Deer' is a family of animals which includes the following North American species:
1. White-tailed deer aka Virginia deer
2. Key deer (a dwarf variant of the white-tailed deer found in southern Florida)
3. Coues deer (a dwarf variant of the white-tailed deer found in the Arizona desert)
4. Mule deer
5. Black-tailed deer (a smaller variant of the mule deer found in coastal areas of southwestern BC and Washington)
6. Elk aka Wapiti
7. Moose
8. Woodland caribou
9. Barren-ground caribou
10. Reindeer
... there may be more - these were just the first ones that popped up in my abbreviated pocket field guide.
I would keyword any of the above species with their correct name, their family name ('deer') and their Latin names. I take the same approach with wildflowers and trees as well. I don't consider that spam.
moose, deer family, latin name... but not deer.
-
The general rule of keywording is this... no more, no less
Who:
What:
Why:
Where:
When:
So for example a monkey is a monkey not an ape, and an ape is an ape not a monkey. so keyword "what" it is and nothing more it can't be both. now an ape and a monkey are both primates so using "primate" is acceptable. monkeys have tails and apes don't.
Using this as an example, it can be either an ape or a monkey - but not both, but both can be a primate.
i hate nothing more than bad keywording as it affects us all in the long run and I report it when I spot it, we should all do the same.
i recently saw a photo of a tea plantation in Malaysia and the keywords were also Sri Lanka, India, Thailand, and China... how can a known tea plantation in Malaysia be located in five different countries? I have also seen a temple in Kathmandu with keywords that contained as keywords three other temples in Kathmandu and also used Tibet, which is not Nepal at all.
Personally, if i was an art director/designer and have never left small town anywhere, but was assigned to make a brochure of sorts or a magazine spread featuring agriculture in Sri Lanka, and I ended up using a photograph on the cover that was Malaysia, I'd be pissed off.
That is what keyword spam is - falsifying information.
I agree on the bad place names, that was the main reason I started the thread -- altho the caption should clear that up
-- there are, however, 2 ways to keyword -- first, to accurately & precisely describe the image - the Ws
but second, a broader array of tags to help people find the image even when they don't know exactly what they want, or when they're willing to accept something beyond the narrow keywords they entered -- as the various examples make clear, that second type is interpreted differently. the more professional your buyers, the narrower you can make the keywords
-
Very easy on simple images, not on conceptual images where a lot of keywords can be used, to describe the concept or a concept.
I have images of a man in a reptile skin, the keywords used on that image are mostly conceptual and far fetched. I added liar to the keywords, and it was bought using the keyword liar.
-
Very easy on simple images, not on conceptual images where a lot of keywords can be used, to describe the concept or a concept.
I have images of a man in a reptile skin, the keywords used on that image are mostly conceptual and far fetched. I added liar to the keywords, and it was bought using the keyword liar.
and how do you know it was purchased by using a certain keyword? this is a concept i would call exaggeration.
-
.....
i hate nothing more than bad keywording as it affects us all in the long run and I report it when I spot it, we should all do the same.
.....
our problem/opportunity with sym is that there is no place to report right now - other than going to the individual sites & leaving comments or emails
one possibility would be to create a list of flagged images & keywords that was only accessible to symbio owners. each owner could check reports about their images & remove them from the list
other ideas?
-
The general rule of keywording is this... no more, no less
Who:
What:
Why:
Where:
When:
So for example a monkey is a monkey not an ape, and an ape is an ape not a monkey. so keyword "what" it is and nothing more it can't be both. now an ape and a monkey are both primates so using "primate" is acceptable. monkeys have tails and apes don't.
Using this as an example, it can be either an ape or a monkey - but not both, but both can be a primate.
i hate nothing more than bad keywording as it affects us all in the long run and I report it when I spot it, we should all do the same.
i recently saw a photo of a tea plantation in Malaysia and the keywords were also Sri Lanka, India, Thailand, and China... how can a known tea plantation in Malaysia be located in five different countries? I have also seen a temple in Kathmandu with keywords that contained as keywords three other temples in Kathmandu and also used Tibet, which is not Nepal at all.
Personally, if i was an art director/designer and have never left small town anywhere, but was assigned to make a brochure of sorts or a magazine spread featuring agriculture in Sri Lanka, and I ended up using a photograph on the cover that was Malaysia, I'd be pissed off.
That is what keyword spam is - falsifying information.
I agree on the bad place names, that was the main reason I started the thread -- altho the caption should clear that up
-- there are, however, 2 ways to keyword -- first, to accurately & precisely describe the image - the Ws
but second, a broader array of tags to help people find the image even when they don't know exactly what they want, or when they're willing to accept something beyond the narrow keywords they entered -- as the various examples make clear, that second type is interpreted differently. the more professional your buyers, the narrower you can make the keywords
accuracy does not have a broader array.
you are either pregnant or you are not.
-
....
and how do you know it was purchased by using a certain keyword? this is a concept i would call exaggeration.
some agencies like DT show the keywords that were used
eventually we'll have similar data about searches in sym reports and an owner could match the searches to sales
-
Very easy on simple images, not on conceptual images where a lot of keywords can be used, to describe the concept or a concept.
I have images of a man in a reptile skin, the keywords used on that image are mostly conceptual and far fetched. I added liar to the keywords, and it was bought using the keyword liar.
and how do you know it was purchased by using a certain keyword? this is a concept i would call exaggeration.
Shutterstock shows you the keywords used to purchase the images. Probably technology unfamiliar to dinosaurs.
-
Very easy on simple images, not on conceptual images where a lot of keywords can be used, to describe the concept or a concept.
I have images of a man in a reptile skin, the keywords used on that image are mostly conceptual and far fetched. I added liar to the keywords, and it was bought using the keyword liar.
and how do you know it was purchased by using a certain keyword? this is a concept i would call exaggeration.
Dreamstime sometimes provides the keywords for a purchased image.
-
.......
accuracy does not have a broader array.
you are either pregnant or you are not.
that's precisely the point - the reason for keywords is to help people find the image they will buy, not to provide the most accurate description. if you choose to ignore buyers who don't know the difference between a monkey & an ape, that's your decision
what about an image of a woman on an exam table talking to her doctor - pregnant might be a possible keyword?
-
interesting, did not know that about some agencies showing you which keywords were used. i stand corrected. i am not with any of those agencies so had no clue.
-
.......
accuracy does not have a broader array.
you are either pregnant or you are not.
that's precisely the point - the reason for keywords is to help people find the image they will buy, not to provide the most accurate description. if you choose to ignore buyers who don't know the difference between a monkey & an ape, that's your decision
what about an image of a woman on an exam table talking to her doctor - pregnant might be a possible keyword?
you can caption however you want. i have been in this business for way too many years working with many magazines worldwide, newspapers world wide, and publishers worldwide to know that you don't caption a monkey an ape or vice versa in hopes your buyer/client/editor/art director/designer does not know the difference and do so in a desperate attempt to sell an image. that shows your lack of professionalism.
now in your case of the woman on exam table, it would be a stretch to use pregnant - unless she was visibly pregnant, but you could also use cancer and syphilis.
so what are you going to do keyword it for what it is or use the entire medical dictionary of every known ailment to mankind as a keyword in desperate hopes of a sale?
-
you can caption however you want. i have been in this business for way too many years working with many magazines worldwide, newspapers world wide, and publishers worldwide to know that you don't caption a monkey an ape or vice versa in hopes your buyer/client/editor/art director/designer does not know the difference and do so in a desperate attempt to sell an image. that shows your lack of professionalism.
now in your case of the woman on exam table, it would be a stretch to use pregnant - unless she was visibly pregnant, but you could also use cancer and syphilis.
so what are you going to do keyword it for what it is or use the entire medical dictionary of every known ailment to mankind as a keyword in desperate hopes of a sale?
you're just proving my point - it's NOT ABOUT professionalism, and it's not about the caption. keywords are VWERY different from captions. you're in the first class of buyers I described. many of us are aiming for the 2nd group-- the much larger population of people who are NOT professionals but who sometimes need images. the pros are likely to stay with their subscriptions where they can get XXL images for pennies
-
you can caption however you want. i have been in this business for way too many years working with many magazines worldwide, newspapers world wide, and publishers worldwide to know that you don't caption a monkey an ape or vice versa in hopes your buyer/client/editor/art director/designer does not know the difference and do so in a desperate attempt to sell an image. that shows your lack of professionalism.
now in your case of the woman on exam table, it would be a stretch to use pregnant - unless she was visibly pregnant, but you could also use cancer and syphilis.
so what are you going to do keyword it for what it is or use the entire medical dictionary of every known ailment to mankind as a keyword in desperate hopes of a sale?
you're just proving my point - it's NOT ABOUT professionalism, and it's not about the caption. keywords are VWERY different from captions. you're in the first class of buyers I described. many of us are aiming for the 2nd group-- the much larger population of people who are NOT professionals but who sometimes need images. the pros are likely to stay with their subscriptions where they can get XXL images for pennies
i meant keyword - my bad.
let's just say i purchase a photo of an ape because somebody like you felt that it should be keyworded as a such, when in actual fact it is a monkey, used it on a cover of a major magazine, then i had to write a letter of correction, or even worse face litigation, or even way worse lost my client by buying poorly keyworded images, then i would most likely not buy from that source again. all because of one person who thought he would falsely keyword an image for the buyers that did not know the difference????
keyword how you want man, but by not keywording accurately you are ruining the party for everyone.
now your captions must be really special, this is a monkey/ape from blah blah blah. monkey/apes eat bananas. a monkey is not an ape, nor is an ape a monkey, but because you might not know and you searched for one but not the other we will say it is or is not in case i get a sale,
i think you have answered your own question in regards to what keyword spam is.
while you are being liberal with false keywords, ape, monkey, you might want to add human just in case the buyer wants a monkey while they searched for a human as we are all primates.
continue the spam man, you are good at it, and really good at justifying it.
-
Is this a serious conversation?
-
Is this a serious conversation?
as serious as a heart attack.
what do you think?
is being very liberal with keywords considered keyword spam?
i say yes it is, and cascoly seems to think it's not.
so back to the reference of monkey and ape, they are very different and there ore the correct keywords should be used. but cascoly thinks they are cute and sort of the same and therefore it's quite ok to keyword as both just in case the buyer wants to purchase what he did not search for in the first place, and feels that there is a chance it would be a missed sale.
my point is that anything other than accurate keywords is spam. his point is that it's ok to use non accurate keywords as long as one (buyer) does not know the difference between a monkey and an ape.
so yes, it is serious as falsely using keywords will turn all buyers off, thus hurting us all in the long run. nothing worse than searching for an ape and getting a page full of monkeys. or searching for oranges and getting lemons etc.
-
I'm amazed its even an issue in a world where people run their own sites. Glad people care to consider it though :D
-
Is this a serious conversation?
is being very liberal with keywords considered keyword spam?
I guess I should give my little bit here -
From a customers perspective, if you enter the word "car" and a mouse shows up its annoying.
I design strictly from an SEO perspective, knowing most customers will find you landing from a search engine. And they will probably be using categories. Search on a person's site is probably not the biggest part of the picture.
With the new search system available soon you'll be getting results from content and titles if you wish, as well as word fragments ("wonderbread" will show up in searches for "bread").
I think people will care the most about keyword spamming when centralized operations start popping up more. In which case I'm sure those hub sites will probably have some standards.
Hope this is helpful.
-
let's just say i purchase a photo of an ape because somebody like you felt that it should be keyworded as a such, when in actual fact it is a monkey, used it on a cover of a major magazine, then i had to write a letter of correction, or even worse face litigation, or even way worse lost my client by buying poorly keyworded images, then i would most likely not buy from that source again. all because of one person who thought he would falsely keyword an image for the buyers that did not know the difference????
If someone hired me to take a picture of an ape then I would make sure I took a picture of an ape and not a monkey. It would be up to me to know the difference. Giving them a picture of a monkey would be incompetent on my part.
Similarly, if they asked me to design a magazine cover featuring a picture of an ape, I would be asking them questions about what what sort of ape they had in mind and that is exactly what I would give them. It's up to me to ensure the picture is indeed an ape. Again, anything less would be incomprtence. The customer could also give me the freedom to use a monkey or a gorilla instead but that's his decision, not mine.
My point is that not only do we contributors have a responsibility to keyword accurately but buyers also have a similar responsibility to ensure the picture is indeed appropriate for their project.
-
let's just say i purchase a photo of an ape because somebody like you felt that it should be keyworded as a such, when in actual fact it is a monkey, used it on a cover of a major magazine, then i had to write a letter of correction, or even worse face litigation, or even way worse lost my client by buying poorly keyworded images, then i would most likely not buy from that source again. all because of one person who thought he would falsely keyword an image for the buyers that did not know the difference????
If someone hired me to take a picture of an ape then I would make sure I took a picture of an ape and not a monkey. It would be up to me to know the difference. Giving them a picture of a monkey would be incompetent on my part.
Similarly, if they asked me to design a magazine cover featuring a picture of an ape, I would be asking them questions about what what sort of ape they had in mind and that is exactly what I would give them. It's up to me to ensure the picture is indeed an ape. Again, anything less would be incomprtence. The customer could also give me the freedom to use a monkey or a gorilla instead but that's his decision, not mine.
My point is that not only do we contributors have a responsibility to keyword accurately but buyers also have a similar responsibility to ensure the picture is indeed appropriate for their project.
yes, i know you get it, but the OP doesn't. i agree, contributors have the responsibility to keyword accurately, and buyers should have similar responsibility to ensure the picture is indeed appropriate for their project as there are contributors that are deviant enough to caption an image for what it is not.
"if you choose to ignore buyers who don't know the difference between a monkey & an ape, that's your decision" this is his excuse to spam. this is willful misdirection.
this sh!tty attitude will turn buyers off and go where there is no misdirection in keywording, which will affect us all in the long run. some sites actually are vigilante about keywords and will reject an image over bad keyword, and so they should be.
enough from me on this, i don't need to keyword spam. tricks are for kids.
-
I am with cascoly here. While an image's caption should as accurately and precisely as possible describe the image, keywords are to help image users finding the best image for their purpose. I doubt that even half of potential ape/monkey image buyers are aware of the academic differentiation. We should also take into account that there are a lot of buyers that are not native English speakers. If a buyer cares to read my monkey image's caption found with keyword ape, this image would never make it on a cover if that buyer really wanted an ape.
In any case, when I look at the keywords that buyers used to find and buy my images on DT I find that roughly one third used keywords that are more or less off. I take this as clear indication not to be overly dogmatic on this issue. If I really p!ss off buyers like shudderstok, so it be. - Just show me one stock collection from many contributors that is free from "keyword spamming" issues when you see it as strict as shudderstok? Yet, it seems buyers are still happy to use such collections in ever increasing numbers.
My 2 cents!
-
I am with cascoly here.
+1
-
I tried a search for "dog", one of my fav stock subjects, and I was surprised to see one of my "pulled pork sandwich" shots show up. I guess because I included my site name as a keyword "dogford studios".
I don't think that qualifies as keyword spam. There was also a picture of a bridge from somewhere over the dog river or something.
***** Now that I think about it some more. I probably wouldn't want muck up one of my fav search words. If the search engine is pulling "dog" out of "dogford".
Anyway I've been focusing on SEO. I don't know how many people are using the sys network search to find stuff. I think we need to concentrate on pulling people in to the network via SEO.
-
I tried a search for "dog", one of my fav stock subjects, and I was surprised to see one of my "pulled pork sandwich" shots show up. I guess because I included my site name as a keyword "dogford studios".
Where did you do the search?
I just tried it on Symbiostock.info and didn't see the sandwich show up.
-
I had this conversation on MSG a few months back.
In some languages, the word for "monkey" and "ape" is the same. In Italian, there is one word for both that has the same etymological root as "simian".
The conversation arose because iStock's keywording system disambiguates "ape" to "monkey".
The "monkey/ape" problem is fairly specific but it is a real one. A similar problem is "English" being used by buyers when they mean "British" (or even "Welsh", "Scottish" or "Northern Irish"). Ditto for "England" being used when the buyer really means "United Kingdom". So just like I may keyword an orang-utan as "monkey" I have the conundrum of deciding whether to keyword all my shots from Wales as "England". I see that even our very own Mr Locke made this egregious error recently in another thread. (That was cleared up but it's still a common problem).
Trust me. Asking a Welshman to include "England" as a keyword for a shot taken in the town of his birth is like asking Dubya to vote Communist. ;)
I think that the point is that it's easy to spot extreme keyword spam but there's a huge, wide, large, massive, grey, gray, area, region, where one woman's spam is another man's effective, comprehensive, best practice (practise).
-
Great Britain and the UK are different as well, but I always add them both if I shot something in England. My images of the Seven Sisters in
Brighton Sussex have all 3
(http://semmickphoto.com/wp-content/uploads/symbiostock_rf_content/521-seven-sisters-chalk-cliffs-and-foreground-rocks.jpg)
http://semmickphoto.com/image/seven-sisters-cliffs-in-england/ (http://semmickphoto.com/image/seven-sisters-cliffs-in-england/)
-
The Seven Sisters are in Sussex between Eastbourne and Seaford, they do not stretch as far as Brighton :)
I think you were probably closer to Beachy Head looking west ?
Some more views of them http://stockimages.kerioak.com/image/chalk-cliffs-at-beachy-head-viewed-over-red-viburnum-berries/ (http://stockimages.kerioak.com/image/chalk-cliffs-at-beachy-head-viewed-over-red-viburnum-berries/)
-
The Seven Sisters are in Sussex between Eastbourne and Seaford, they do not stretch as far as Brighton :)
I think you were probably closer to Beachy Head looking west ?
Some more views of them [url]http://stockimages.kerioak.com/image/chalk-cliffs-at-beachy-head-viewed-over-red-viburnum-berries/[/url] ([url]http://stockimages.kerioak.com/image/chalk-cliffs-at-beachy-head-viewed-over-red-viburnum-berries/[/url])
Sorry, you are right, I meant Sussex. Brighton is not in the keywords. That day we started shooting in Brighton.
(http://semmickphoto.com/wp-content/uploads/symbiostock_rf_content/4345-the-pleasure-pier-in-brighton-england.jpg)
-
http://cascoly.com/symbio/symbiostock-network.asp (http://cascoly.com/symbio/symbiostock-network.asp)
Gave me the sandwich shot and a few other randoms from my portfolios based on "dogford studios" in my keywords. I didn't try symbiostock.info
I wouldn't want to mess up the usefulness of search but I also recall one of the most annoying things I experienced on DT was this idiot who had nothing better to do then pull tickets on people for supposive keyword stuffing.
I'd get these stupid tickets on legitimate keywords and then have to explain how they were relevant. The guy was either super OCD or was just trying to cause trouble.
-
I'm really not a very good authority on this subject. We all love spam here:
(http://whatscookingamerica.net/History/spam_musubi.jpg)
-
If someone hired me to take a picture of an ape then I would make sure I took a picture of an ape and not a monkey. It would be up to me to know the difference. Giving them a picture of a monkey would be incompetent on my part.
Similarly, if they asked me to design a magazine cover featuring a picture of an ape, I would be asking them questions about what what sort of ape they had in mind and that is exactly what I would give them. It's up to me to ensure the picture is indeed an ape. Again, anything less would be incomprtence. The customer could also give me the freedom to use a monkey or a gorilla instead but that's his decision, not mine.
My point is that not only do we contributors have a responsibility to keyword accurately but buyers also have a similar responsibility to ensure the picture is indeed appropriate for their project.
exactly -- when I started this thread, I thought the monkey/ape example was a fairly easy example of what would NOT be spam. guess I was wrong
in any case, what I was looking for was a discussion of what might be done for what most people would consider extreme spam - eg, one microagency suggests 'sexy' as a category for ANY image that has 'woman' in the keywords or description.
I've come across a coupla cases of this in the existing collection, but as it grows it's more likely and I was looking for ways to handle it .
-
Personally keyword spamming doesn't bother me in a system where I can just cut off the connection with the spammer :D
People of course will say "OMG Leo doesn't care about keyword spamming!!!" but really the issue is that keywords are a small part of what bring customers to you at this point. Regarding the network and everyone sharing the load though, I'd hope blatant disrespect and self-promotion could be avoided.
-
Personally keyword spamming doesn't bother me in a system where I can just cut off the connection with the spammer :D
People of course will say "OMG Leo doesn't care about keyword spamming!!!" but really the issue is that keywords are a small part of what bring customers to you at this point. Regarding the network and everyone sharing the load though, I'd hope blatant disrespect and self-promotion could be avoided.
I agree with Leo. However, I can see that keyword spamming might create a problem for those of us who run a hub site. One idea to deal with it could be a system where image searchers/buyers can easily "flag" what they think is keyword spamming. Image owners and hub site owner could then be informed of those flags. It'd help hub sites to recognize possible spamming and help everyone else not intentionally spamming to pinpoint and correct issues.
That said, I am aware that DT has such a system implemented, which I believe is just a PITA and doesn't help much. But that's just my limited view as a contributor. So I might be wrong.
-
Just a thought...I've noticed in analytics that my most common keyword on my site is "minipic" aka the thumbnail. Would it be helpfull SEOwise to change minipic to stockphoto?
-
In the more recent version we're setting up I'm pretty sure thats been addressed.
-
Keyword spamming means you are using repeated keywords in the content, I mean to say that high keyword density can cause keyword spamming. One more reason for keyword spamming is that you are using your keywords repeatedly in title and description tag for the website.
-
Keyword spamming means you are using repeated keywords in the content, I mean to say that high keyword density can cause keyword spamming. One more reason for keyword spamming is that you are using your keywords repeatedly in title and description tag for the website.
Thats the whole purpose of SEO !
Yoast actually is telling us to make sure the focus keyword is everywhere.
-
Keyword spamming means you are using repeated keywords in the content, I mean to say that high keyword density can cause keyword spamming. One more reason for keyword spamming is that you are using your keywords repeatedly in title and description tag for the website.
Thats the whole purpose of SEO !
Yoast actually is telling us to make sure the focus keyword is everywhere.
I agree. Thats what seo is all about.
I consider keyword spamming when someone adds popular, irrelevant terms to their image. Like when i do a search for a horse and get pictures of women with a headset.
-
I consider keyword spamming when someone adds popular, irrelevant terms to their image. Like when i do a search for a horse and get pictures of women with a headset.
Yes, but she might be talking to a horse ;D
-
Possibly she might even have been talking to this horse
(http://stockimages.kerioak.com/wp-content/uploads/symbiostock_rf_content/3764-horse-with-its-nose-on-laptop-keyboard.jpg)
-
Keyword spamming means you are using repeated keywords in the content, I mean to say that high keyword density can cause keyword spamming. One more reason for keyword spamming is that you are using your keywords repeatedly in title and description tag for the website.
Thats the whole purpose of SEO !
Yoast actually is telling us to make sure the focus keyword is everywhere.
yoast will also flag it and reduce the rating when you overuse the keyword
-
Keyword spamming means you are using repeated keywords in the content, I mean to say that high keyword density can cause keyword spamming. One more reason for keyword spamming is that you are using your keywords repeatedly in title and description tag for the website.
Thats the whole purpose of SEO !
Yoast actually is telling us to make sure the focus keyword is everywhere.
yoast will also flag it and reduce the rating when you overuse the keyword
Not if it is used in the title, description and meta data, body of the text and the url. In fact, if the keyword is missing in one of them, Yoast warns you its not in there
-
Keyword spamming means you are using repeated keywords in the content, I mean to say that high keyword density can cause keyword spamming. One more reason for keyword spamming is that you are using your keywords repeatedly in title and description tag for the website.
Thats the whole purpose of SEO !
Yoast actually is telling us to make sure the focus keyword is everywhere.
yoast will also flag it and reduce the rating when you overuse the keyword
Not if it is used in the title, description and meta data, body of the text and the url. In fact, if the keyword is missing in one of them, Yoast warns you its not in there
keyword DENSITY is repeating the keyword in the same area - like desc or title
-
Keyword spamming is the term given to the excessive addition of keywords or keyphrases to a web page. This could be accomplished through a variety of means ranging from simply repeating keyphrases in your body text.
-
Keyword spamming is the practice of inserting a large number of keywords into Web content and meta tags in the attempt to artificially increase a page's ranking in search results and drive more traffic to the site.
-
We are talking about photos not websites.