New format.
Is it truly awful or is it just me?
Images on sale number are inconsistent from one page to another.
96 images are flagged as on sale but with poor dicoverability - looks like mainly the ones I haven't yet sent through to go on sale. 
But best of all ZERO images of my 2000-ish port ie NO images ie NOT A SINGLE PHOTO is flagged as on sale and optimized!
No longer surprised it's been such a grim month on AL!

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

It's clunky and rubbish.

They also duplicated all the keywords loading both comprehensive, important and major keywords

I wished they'd warned us I 'd have stripped out all the comprehensive keywords

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......!

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

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

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.

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?

QuoteThis 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?

I agree. I think many, including me, put up with it since there are no barriers to entry and there's the remote potential to earn $100+ an image, unlike the 36cent subs elsewhere.

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.

If the women can demonstrate (This past weekend) for respect and fair treatment, maybe all photographers who have had enough should have a weekend movement at their headquarters.  Afterall, a picture is a thousand words.

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...

They really have sales. I got my first when I had over 800 files  six months, but some have had sales with very few uploads. It all depends on whether you have what a buyer happens to want.

Quote from: Noedelhap on January 30, 2017, 16:26
Clunky upload system, hardly any sales. Who cares about Alamy, really?

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

Quote from: cthoman on January 30, 2017, 23:21

Quote from: Noedelhap on January 30, 2017, 16:26
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.

Quote from: YadaYadaYada on January 31, 2017, 01:13

Quote from: cthoman on January 30, 2017, 23:21

Quote from: Noedelhap on January 30, 2017, 16:26
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.

Mine hasn't changed yet other than the commas and no spaces. I remember carefully using their [] system a long time ago and nothing came of it. So that was a waste of time. I hope however they convert the old system into the new system makes logical sense so it doesn't ruin every image that doesn't get re-keyed.

Although if the re-keying really worked it might be worth it. If you had to do every file by itself it might be a nice way to remove the competition of the people who upload thousands and thousands of nearly identical images - but they will probably just use the bulk editor on them all anyway.

Sales have decreased there over the last few years, but I suspect it is another case of supply outstripping demand.

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.

A pig's ear.  Amen

Quote from: Jo Ann Snover on January 30, 2017, 19:27
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.......

No sales for me in 2017 so far. 

Me neither. Unusual...

I have access to the new system today.
I agree, it's totally clunky, at least for existing images.

I have only 10 files with high discoverability. Every one of these has long keyword phrases which have been split by the new system, giving near to 50 keywords.

It seems to me at the moment like long keyword phrases can't be accepted, and if in the old system, were split into individual words, meaning the individual words will wrongly show up in searches for these words. The files are findable on a search with the whole phrase, but I don't like spamming the individual words.
Can't see a way out. If I delete each individual word, the file won't be searchable at all on 'what it is', yet with it split, it's polluting other searches which I hate.

Quote from: sarah2 on January 31, 2017, 14:14

Quote from: Jo Ann Snover on January 30, 2017, 19:27
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?

sorry - typo - 10 supertags. But yes, it would be nice to understand something of the rules of the game - ranking, rating etc.