Agency Based Discussion > Alamy.com
Alamy "discoverablity" revisited
Uncle Pete:
--- Quote from: stockastic on July 30, 2020, 12:40 ---I'll check this out myself of course, but what's a "supertag" and would I have to go back and punch them all in by hand?
--- End quote ---
Yes, one by one and watch what you mark as you can select All Approved.
--- Quote from: ShadySue on July 30, 2020, 13:28 --- don't worry about discoverability - it's a stupid thing Alamy introduced which has led to a lot of [useless effort and] spamming.
--- End quote ---
I added the bracket part. :)
stockastic:
I'm already remembering why I gave up on Alamy years ago. I thought things might have been simplified by now.
Uncle Pete:
--- Quote from: stockastic on July 31, 2020, 09:41 ---I'm already remembering why I gave up on Alamy years ago. I thought things might have been simplified by now.
--- End quote ---
Oh you mean because this is the 4th time I've had to go and edit every single image, manually, individually, because they changed something in the system or the search?
I only did the images that are still exclusive on Alamy and those that I thought had the best possibility of being downloaded, if found. Some are sets and groups and will still be found, but they won't have the Supertags, but with good, limited, specific words, they are going to be just fine. I didn't adjust illustrations or backgrounds or the "stock" kind of stock.
Someone remind me, did this also replace artists rank and pseudonym monkey business. Where people would play games, trying to have the system favor their best Pseudo and then they would have a number of others for less desirable mater. How does that work? Send your lower images to jail and hide them, while trying to play the system and bring your best images, that already sold, up to the front a little bit.
Talk about a waste of time and effort playing the pseudonym game.
ShadySue:
--- Quote from: Uncle Pete on August 01, 2020, 09:50 ---
--- Quote from: stockastic on July 31, 2020, 09:41 ---I'm already remembering why I gave up on Alamy years ago. I thought things might have been simplified by now.
--- End quote ---
Oh you mean because this is the 4th time I've had to go and edit every single image, manually, individually, because they changed something in the system or the search?
--- End quote ---
Yup
--- Quote ---I only did the images that are still exclusive on Alamy and those that I thought had the best possibility of being downloaded, if found. Some are sets and groups and will still be found, but they won't have the Supertags, but with good, limited, specific words, they are going to be just fine. I didn't adjust illustrations or backgrounds or the "stock" kind of stock.
Someone remind me, did this also replace artists rank and pseudonym monkey business. Where people would play games, trying to have the system favor their best Pseudo and then they would have a number of others for less desirable mater. How does that work? Send your lower images to jail and hide them, while trying to play the system and bring your best images, that already sold, up to the front a little bit.
Talk about a waste of time and effort playing the pseudonym game.
--- End quote ---
On their forum, the jury is currently out over Pseudos and AR.
I will say that at the moment, and for a year or two at least, words in the caption are favoured in search. That's generally a Good Thing, as normally your most important words will be in your caption. The downside is that words which are really needed for context in your image will be searched on. For example, if your caption was, "Crowd waiting for Donald Trump to make a speech demonstrating his idiocy", which could be perfectly accurate even if DT isn't in the picture, will show up in a search for Donald Trump.
On the upside, this week I was looking to see what the 'opposition' for a subject I was thinking of submitting. As usual with a non-moderated system, there were several mis-identifications in the search. But at the end were about 15 pics none of which had the subject in the images. When I looked, they were all of the same mountain range in the US, all properly captioned AFAIK, and all the keywords were apparently correct, EXCEPT that they all had the waterbird species and England among the keywords. I can only surmise that the only reason all these were at the end of the search for the species was because it wasn't in the caption - and those who had misidentified it (bizarrely, it doesn't look anything like any other species!) had the wrong name in the caption as well as the keywords.
Mantis:
I have 1,366 images that are poor discoverability. I am not about to go spam my own images. This is a stupid idea and encourages keyword spamming.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version