I tried to quickly figure out which photos I had waiting for indexing and I gave up until I get some good sleep.

In case anybody is interested.....it seems that all images sent up with the minimum number of keywords and a caption, have now gone automatically on sale.   
Arrgghhhhhh!!!!!
If you are like me, some were left unsubmitted for good reason, others due to sheer laziness in deleting stuff.....Not to mention the 27 images approved just a couple of days ago and which I hadn't yet got around to finishing off.....
Oh joy......!

Some of us need to,sadly, not least due to feeble results from other sites.
We can't all do snazzy illustrations etc.

This is a bad system for me.  I hate it.  Why do we as photographers have to put up with this crap down our throats time after time?

Terrible interface. Slow and can't sort on image-name or upload-date anymore. Images that weren't suppose to be online are suddenly online. Resulting in conflict with RF and RM licenses. What a mess. Dont even know where to start to sort things out.

I really don't know what to do about alamy... a have a few photos on their website because they have this messed kind of keywording, and you have to stay and modify every photo and split the keywords in 3... Do you do like this for every image you upload on alamy? is it worth it? I had no sales on alamy... but i have only 30-40 photos online... i didn't know that they really have sales...

Clunky upload system, hardly any sales. Who cares about Alamy, really?

I thought they were modifying the upload system. Has that not happened yet?

Quote from: cthoman on January 30, 2017, 18:21

Quote from: Noedelhap on January 30, 2017, 11:26

Clunky upload system, hardly any sales. Who cares about Alamy, really?

I thought they were modifying the upload system. Has that not happened yet?

Rolling update, not everybody at the same time. Seems like there are modifications to be made as things continue. But no flash, less boxes, super words and other improvements. This will be better in the long run.

Sounds better. Thanks for the update.

all my images seem to have the same MEDIUM level of 'discoverability' whether they have been fully processed (number of people, releases etc) or not.
What a pig's ear.

I did a little experimenting, plus looking at which of my images supposedly have "good" discoverability versus "poor" and you need at least 40 of 50 keywords to get the good rating.

I have lots of images with over 30 keywords (some because Alamy used to split multi-word keywords up) and tried adding a category, or location, or information to the caption to see if it would make an image "good" and those seemed to make no difference.

I hope that their notion of good vs. poor doesn't affect search position because if you have the important keywords for an image, that's more important than getting the numbers up.

41 keywords (relevant - just!), 100 supertags and all relevant boxes ticked - still poor discoverability. Just 47 of my 2000 or so images rate as 'good'.

I just hope discoverability does not mean what it sounds like it means ie the chances of a buyer discovering an image and then - hopefully - buying it. If it does, then we're doomed, I say.........doomed.....lost in the swamp of undiscoverable and forgotten images........jolly dee.......

Me neither. Unusual...

Quote from: Jo Ann Snover on January 30, 2017, 14:27

I did a little experimenting, plus looking at which of my images supposedly have "good" discoverability versus "poor" and you need at least 40 of 50 keywords to get the good rating.

I have lots of images with over 30 keywords (some because Alamy used to split multi-word keywords up) and tried adding a category, or location, or information to the caption to see if it would make an image "good" and those seemed to make no difference.

I hope that their notion of good vs. poor doesn't affect search position because if you have the important keywords for an image, that's more important than getting the numbers up.

41 keywords (relevant - just!), 100 supertags and all relevant boxes ticked - still poor discoverability. Just 47 of my 2000 or so images rate as 'good'.

I just hope discoverability does not mean what it sounds like it means ie the chances of a buyer discovering an image and then - hopefully - buying it. If it does, then we're doomed, I say.........doomed.....lost in the swamp of undiscoverable and forgotten images........jolly dee.......

I have no idea if the discoverability means anything or is just advise. Still old system.

I read the instructions. 100 supertags? I thought it said only 10 allowed? Does anyone know what the rating is about or what it actually means, if anything?

Years ago Alamy wrote that the artists rank only matters after a number of sales. Looked like that number was 100. Does artist rank mean anything now, or have they changed to image rank?

Did anyone post this yet? The AIM manual

http://www.alamy.com/myupload/help/AIM-InstructionManual.pdf

Or this?

http://discussion.alamy.com/index.php?/topic/6970-high-discoverability/

Note: To optimize you need to have 50 tags, of which 10 are supertags.
All mandatory and optional fields must be complete.

The general consensus on the forum there is, it's a "spam-spawner" and that good keywords and phrases will work better. I don't know because this is all new, but I like their view.

Quote from: Jo Ann Snover on January 30, 2017, 14:27

I did a little experimenting, plus looking at which of my images supposedly have "good" discoverability versus "poor" and you need at least 40 of 50 keywords to get the good rating.

I have lots of images with over 30 keywords (some because Alamy used to split multi-word keywords up) and tried adding a category, or location, or information to the caption to see if it would make an image "good" and those seemed to make no difference.

I hope that their notion of good vs. poor doesn't affect search position because if you have the important keywords for an image, that's more important than getting the numbers up.

41 keywords (relevant - just!), 100 supertags and all relevant boxes ticked - still poor discoverability. Just 47 of my 2000 or so images rate as 'good'.

I just hope discoverability does not mean what it sounds like it means ie the chances of a buyer discovering an image and then - hopefully - buying it. If it does, then we're doomed, I say.........doomed.....lost in the swamp of undiscoverable and forgotten images........jolly dee.......

Where do you see this "discoverability"? Is this only with new system?

where do you see all this on alamy?

looks like i still have old page

cant find any of that discoverability things

You only see it on the new system.
Don't worry about it. At the moment, discoverability seems to mean not a lot in the real world.
Relevant searches are pretty relevant.
Creative searches are all over the place.
(both comments obviously based on my very limited samples!)
High discoverability based on needing near to 50 tags is just going to encourage spam. No idea why they think that's a good thing. There's plenty spam there as elsewhere already.

where do you see all this on alamy?

looks like i still have old page

cant find any of that discoverability things

Correct. I'm still on the old system too, but read the forums. Big discussion of the discoverability thing. Looks like maybe it's not going to be more than a guide. I see many who are ignoring it for just good words and not playing the 10+50 and all fields filled game.

Don't know why Alamy would encourage keyword spam?

Isn't Alamy up against the same wall as all the others - expected return on an image is so low that it just doesn't pay to spend time jumping through any more keyword hoops?  Well maybe this new system could be a way to rise above the mob, by making the effort to meet new keyword guidelines - but first one would have to be darn sure it works

Isn't Alamy up against the same wall as all the others - expected return on an image is so low that it just doesn't pay to spend time jumping through any more keyword hoops?  Well maybe this new system could be a way to rise above the mob, by making the effort to meet new keyword guidelines - but first one would have to be darn sure it works

But on the other hand, when images are approved they go on sale automatically, you don't HAVE to do any further keywording once basic EXIF is transferred. Unless, of course, you think that discoverability matters....what a pickle.....

Quote from: sarah2 on February 02, 2017, 04:00

Quote from: stockastic on February 01, 2017, 11:52

Isn't Alamy up against the same wall as all the others - expected return on an image is so low that it just doesn't pay to spend time jumping through any more keyword hoops?  Well maybe this new system could be a way to rise above the mob, by making the effort to meet new keyword guidelines - but first one would have to be darn sure it works

But on the other hand, when images are approved they go on sale automatically, you don't HAVE to do any further keywording once basic EXIF is transferred. Unless, of course, you think that discoverability matters....what a pickle.....

At least Alamy seems to be evolving, and envisioning a future that's different from the past.  I can't say that for any of the others.

Yes offering us more options and getting in line with the rest that already offered RF editorial so we can license on Alamy again. No releases, no credentials, just what law says about editorial use. Finally dropped the three boxes that most people hated.

Just as a note, Alamy says Supertag order doesn't matter. Word proximity still important.

Don't worry about discoverability. Just ignore it.

The system hasn't the slightest idea if an image has good discoverability (is that even a word?) It simply checks the number of keywords and maybe that other fields have been filled in.

Don't put in 50 for the sake of it - that will lower your rank and give you worse discoverability

Of course, as per usual, IMHO

Actually this is great and a lot easier, still more clicks than SS but very nice, easy and fast. Good job.
Now, if I had thousands of photos I'd be angry for needing to revisit them all.

Actually this is great and a lot easier, still more clicks than SS but very nice, easy and fast. Good job.
Now, if I had thousands of photos I'd be angry for needing to revisit them all.

How would you feel about over 2,000 and this is the third time they changed the system? 

But if it makes me more money, I'll dig in and start editing.

Good news on the search Sue, I hope this means if I include a name "within quotes" it will be found first in the search and as you point out, not for half of two other names. That old proximity advise may be weighted more now?

All this supertag, 50 words and discoverability rank is also IMHO a waste of time. Use good clear keywords, put the best ten in supertags for weighting. Put words that belong together, next to each other, and only use words that honestly apply to the actual image.

Before someone can buy something, they have to see it. Lost in others with weak keywords or mixed in the wrong place with inappropriate keywords, won't make more sales.

For now my goal is get the best ten words into supertags. Later I can see about the rest.

Nothing new Sue, I did that and for awhile the [bracket] thing they claimed would come soon. Yes the two word combined keywords is what I meant, I hope it produces better results.

I'm sure you went through the whole description used in search which was useful. But some people abused that and some found it made too many incorrect results. That's when it was the lowest weighted part of the search. Alamy disabled that.

Well I did what they said to start and had key minor details that would be found in a search. Description was nice and easy way to add a description!

Moved those into the Comprehensive box, as the other one wasn't searched. Year later they decided to add comprehensive and drop the other box from visibility. So great, now I can go move things, cut and paste thousands of files again! 

This new system will remove some of those old three box system flaws. I haven't looked at how they are dumping all the keywords into one box. What happens to the dupes? I put the same words in two boxes sometimes.

Commas will do and "quotes" are unnecessary. At least that's the way I read the instructions in other threads. Also the question of "Kodiak Bear" and the same if it was ,Kodiak Bear, between commas, is not as huge of a problem as some make it.

Yes it will appear under bear and will under Kodiak, but it will appear first for Kodiak Bear because of proximity rank. It's impossible to exclude every combination of words, because there might be a false hit, as it would exclude many more good results. What I mean is, if only exact matches worked and someone types in three words and all three words aren't there in a group, it would come up No Results.

Try that on SS for some searches. If you have two words known and one missing, on a specific kind of search, the results will be no matches found. But I know two words are there, it's my image with those two words.

Which would you rather have? Maybe a mistaken match now and then, or blank pages saying no match, because all words must be present and exactly those words?

It's just a logic issue and which one serves the most people and the buyers the best.

The answer is commas and keep it simple. Without personal testing, I won't know how much the "quoted phrase" makes a difference. The way I did that in the past, was put up 4 - 10 new images, similar subjects and they go keyword them in a variety of ways. Then wait for the system to update. Might be days.

See what different searches produce and what order. Then you will know exactly how the search works and if it makes any difference at all. Most of the time these are questions where the "two words" or ,two words, or ,two,words, all come up the same and there's not deep analysis or complicated process. I don't know for the new system.

And that's why I added same words in comprehensive and primary boxes, for more weight.  Doesn't matter anymore so no secret, it helped.

And then I found this thread.
http://discussion.alamy.com/index.php?/topic/7005-alamy-�-what-has-happened-to-the-search-engine

Often in the past, what Alamy has recommended either doesn't work in real life, or isn't optimal. (Not only Alamy, of course!)

I haven't checked this one for myself, as I didn't check the positions of any pics in my 'ten minutes at a time' batches before I changed them.
I'm putting 'revisiting the keywording and maximising the supertags' on hold til we get more empirical evidence about what's happening.

Anyone else having problems with the new IM? When I click on a submission in the left column it says there are 0 images! It's the same for all submissions. It worked a couple of days ago.

Sorted, had images not for sale as a filter!

Yep I suddenly found it all change no email just an on screen tutorial. Not up to their usual standard of communication

Alamy is dead in 2017.

Is anyone else still waiting for the new interface to show up? I'm still seeing the old one.

Is anyone else still waiting for the new interface to show up? I'm still seeing the old one.

Me!!

I even UL'd a little bundle, hoping that might kick the system. But, nope, that was nearly a week ago, and still seeing the old interface.

So did anyone actually went and added more supertags and choose categories? I kinda want to, but it looks so much work

Anyone else having problems with the new IM? When I click on a submission in the left column it says there are 0 images! It's the same for all submissions. It worked a couple of days ago.

Sorted, had images not for sale as a filter!

I can't even upload. 30 minutes for three files. I killed my upload. I will wait until they fix things.

SS doing really well. Alamy dead. Absolutely no sales for this year so far. Disgraceful considering the uploading I have done there.

What kind of photo was it? Congrats.

Quote from: stockastic on February 01, 2017, 11:52

Isn't Alamy up against the same wall as all the others - expected return on an image is so low that it just doesn't pay to spend time jumping through any more keyword hoops?  Well maybe this new system could be a way to rise above the mob, by making the effort to meet new keyword guidelines - but first one would have to be darn sure it works

But on the other hand, when images are approved they go on sale automatically, you don't HAVE to do any further keywording once basic EXIF is transferred. Unless, of course, you think that discoverability matters....what a pickle.....

My last approved batch have gone on sale without my knowledge. Defaulted to RM, which is a bit problematic, as I'm selling the images RF elsewhere.

Quote from: sarah2 on February 02, 2017, 04:00

Quote from: stockastic on February 01, 2017, 11:52

Isn't Alamy up against the same wall as all the others - expected return on an image is so low that it just doesn't pay to spend time jumping through any more keyword hoops?  Well maybe this new system could be a way to rise above the mob, by making the effort to meet new keyword guidelines - but first one would have to be darn sure it works

But on the other hand, when images are approved they go on sale automatically, you don't HAVE to do any further keywording once basic EXIF is transferred. Unless, of course, you think that discoverability matters....what a pickle.....

My last approved batch have gone on sale without my knowledge. Defaulted to RM, which is a bit problematic, as I'm selling the images RF elsewhere.

Not surprised they really need to make setting the licence much clearer its easy to slip up. It would be good to be able to set a default

Thank you... It was a student photograph on the exam.

Thanks.

You can set the default licensing model to RF or RM. In the image manager on the top line right beside your name is a little gear-wheel icon. That's where you can set the default for future submissions to RF or RM.

Thanks for that  .