pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Flagged keywords - what ???  (Read 18160 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: September 10, 2009, 09:17 »
0
Out of thousands of submissions I had a couple of images rejected due to keywording issues. I'm strict against keyword spamming.

Now out of the sudden it appears that at Dreamstime people feel motivated to flag other people's images with inappropriate keywords.

What is the flagging about?

Do these "flaggers" get any incentives for doing that (and please don't make up stories about that)?

I check the flaggers portfolios and see worse use of keywords in their images. I just don't have the time to flag their images.

Friend of mine at DT is experiencing the same.

Anyone else?


abimages

« Reply #1 on: September 10, 2009, 09:31 »
0
There was a discussion recently at Dreamstime. http://www.dreamstime.com/thread_18084

Someone got 'flag happy' about the word 'cowboy'. Including my shot of some cowboy boots. I complained, but surprise surprise nothing was done! I think the flagger gets .02 cents per keyword if the site agrees with their suggestion.

Xalanx

« Reply #2 on: September 10, 2009, 14:43 »
0
Yea I had this kind of stuff too. I imagine that there will always be people willing to make a few cents by picking on other portolios, without taking a look at their own, first.

« Reply #3 on: September 10, 2009, 15:11 »
0
yeah, some $%&$%( flaged 50 of my images. And I am also strict not to spam with kws. But, it was 20 days ago, and nothing happend, so I dont care.

Dook

« Reply #4 on: September 10, 2009, 15:32 »
0
Does this affect search quality of your images? If not, who cares?

« Reply #5 on: September 10, 2009, 15:42 »
0
I'd rather see the reviewers getting 2 cents more per image review and checking the keywords in the first place than some site members with questionable agendas.

Let trained reviewers take over that job and not some idiots who sometimes don't even speak English as their native language clogging up resources on the agency's site.

It's not making sense.

Xalanx

« Reply #6 on: September 10, 2009, 15:57 »
0
There are many times when out of curiosity I'm looking at the keywords the buyer used to find and download my photos. A lot of times the search engine returns also images that don't have anything to do with the subject in question. However, I am aware that there are times when people make mistakes and it can happen to copy / paste keywords from one photo to others even if they're not about the same thing. I don't think keyword spamming works and I don't think it's so much of a problem that it has to be fought this way, paying 2 cents for a find. If you look at all agencies, regardless of what they do against kw spam, the search engine returns mostly the correct results. I'm quite confident that the number of photographers who put "air" as keyword in a photo with a woman sitting in grass and hope to sell to buyers that search for "air" is irrelevant.

My most recent example is of a photo of mine with a child in a restaurant. Of course, eating - that's what the search terms were about, as well. Among the results in the first page there was also a photo of a statue of a mythological creature, full of wrong keywords. It's clear the author made the wrong copy / paste. Will I report him? No. Why? Because his photo didn't affect my sale, people looking for "eating" will not buy his photo - it's his loss, not mine.
And I don't think it's nice, btw.

« Reply #7 on: September 10, 2009, 16:42 »
0
deleted
« Last Edit: September 10, 2009, 16:45 by takestock »

« Reply #8 on: September 10, 2009, 16:44 »
0
I'd rather see the reviewers getting 2 cents more per image review and checking the keywords in the first place than some site members with questionable agendas.

Let trained reviewers take over that job and not some idiots who sometimes don't even speak English as their native language clogging up resources on the agency's site.

It's not making sense.
I agree with you on this. Well said!
 



« Reply #9 on: September 10, 2009, 16:47 »
0
Let trained reviewers take over that job and not some idiots who sometimes don't even speak English as their native language clogging up resources on the agency's site.
English is not my native language. Should I stop uploading?

If keywords were "frozen" after approval, then leaving this to reviewers only might make sense.  As it isn't so, I think anyone should be allowed to report inadequate keywords - which are not automatically removed. 

And yes, I've done that when I saw something wrong.

« Reply #10 on: September 10, 2009, 17:21 »
0
Looks reasonable to me.  If you don't spam your keywords you won't have a problem.  No action is taken until the flagged keywords are reviewed and you have plenty of time to fix it before review.

If someone makes a mistake on their keywords (copy/paste error or whatever) they should appreciate being made aware of it.

If someone is spamming keywords they need to be stopped.  

Simple as that.

fred

lisafx

« Reply #11 on: September 10, 2009, 17:35 »
0
Yeah, it seems kind of nutty.

I had the word "Senior" flagged on three different pictures of....Seniors.  As in senior citizens, old people, pensioners.  In fact, "senior" is the universally accepted term on all sites for the over 65 crowd.  The person who flagged them either has competing images or else is a complete moron.    

Since these "flags" have to be reviewed by some inspector before being removed from the image, there should be some sort of penalty for people flagging clearly appropriate keywords.
« Last Edit: September 10, 2009, 17:38 by lisafx »

« Reply #12 on: September 10, 2009, 18:08 »
0
...Since these "flags" have to be reviewed by some inspector before being removed from the image, there should be some sort of penalty for people flagging clearly appropriate keywords.

Thanks Lisa!

This the exact point.

No doubt that constant violators need to be stopped and penalized but for issues like Lisa mentioned above I think nobody disagrees that this is a waste resources - and guess what, we have to pay for this nonsense.

« Reply #13 on: September 10, 2009, 18:36 »
0
For 2 cents.....my God.... that's sad.... looks like economic crisis still rocks :D

« Reply #14 on: September 10, 2009, 18:50 »
0
For 2 cents.....my God.... that's sad.... looks like economic crisis still rocks :D

You see - it's not about the money. It's about pissing other contributors off.

Who . has the time to make the effort of flagging people???

« Reply #15 on: September 10, 2009, 19:39 »
0
This is really hard to understand.....

« Reply #16 on: September 10, 2009, 19:55 »
0
For 2 cents.....my God.... that's sad.... looks like economic crisis still rocks :D

You see - it's not about the money. It's about pissing other contributors off.

Who . has the time to make the effort of flagging people???

I can't tell about the others, but for me it's certainly not for the money.  I come accross an image with wrong keywords, I report it.  It's not like I keep looking for images to report, and if people do that I am certain DT can detect that easily.

« Reply #17 on: September 10, 2009, 20:01 »
0
I can't tell about the others, but for me it's certainly not for the money.  I come accross an image with wrong keywords, I report it.  It's not like I keep looking for images to report, and if people do that I am certain DT can detect that easily.

I'm upset about the "flaggers" that report an image for a keyword that is directly related to the image. Why should any resources be wasted for keywords that do relate to the image???

I'm not talking about the sexy apple thing...

« Reply #18 on: September 10, 2009, 20:21 »
0
I'm upset about the "flaggers" that report an image for a keyword that is directly related to the image. Why should any resources be wasted for keywords that do relate to the image???
Are you sure that DT doesn't take any measure about inappropriate flagging?  Have you got appropriate keywords removed by them?  I have in IS - like rose removed from a photo of ... a rose - but not in DT, I believe. Do they send us any notice?

« Reply #19 on: September 10, 2009, 20:33 »
0
Are you sure that DT doesn't take any measure about inappropriate flagging?  Have you got appropriate keywords removed by them?  I have in IS - like rose removed from a photo of ... a rose - but not in DT, I believe. Do they send us any notice?

I contacted them today because of a much bigger issue regarding the flag-feature and the response was rather neutral.

All in all and I can only speak for myself, I don't care at all what keywords other people are using. It's not going to affect my sales.

It will affect theirs.

If the agencies don't like the way people keyword their images then they should take active actions to prevent it from happening.

It's almost like handing out guns to everybody and tell everyone to arrest/shoot criminals. Now guess what's going to happen...

As soon as people get some kind of power they will abuse it and I'm most certainly sure that more people will abuse the flagging feature than use it wisely.

I've gotten so many images flagged that I don't even want to know what's happening to people that sell sexy apples...


« Reply #20 on: September 10, 2009, 20:41 »
0
I got flagged... Silly thing...

« Reply #21 on: September 11, 2009, 01:06 »
0
Just check today and noticed that three of my lion images were locked by DT for being flagged for the keywords "panthera" and "cat".  The scientific name of a lion is Panthera leo.  According to Wikipedia: Panthera is a genus of the family Felidae (the cats), which contains four well-known living species: the Tiger, the Lion, the Jaguar, and the Leopard. ...

 Did not know that the word "cat" is reserved for domesticated cats only. Seems like some of the reviewers who must judge the validity of the flagged keywords are as clueless as these flaggers.

« Reply #22 on: September 11, 2009, 02:14 »
0
>...
<...
My most recent example is of a photo of mine with a child in a restaurant. Of course, eating - that's what the search terms were about, as well. Among the results in the first page there was also a photo of a statue of a mythological creature, full of wrong keywords. It's clear the author made the wrong copy / paste. Will I report him? No. Why? Because his photo didn't affect my sale, people looking for "eating" will not buy his photo - it's his loss, not mine.
And I don't think it's nice, btw.

This is a business so 'business rules' and not 'being nice' should be what you base your actions on, as you say it did not affected this sale, but the question you need to answer is what about the next?

Just another perspective, Lets say another image of yours is a perfect match to a search term, and is returned in a search where it is positioned as the first image on 'Page 6', our buyer only looks at '5 pages' and lightboxes a couple of images to re-visit, within the first five pages there are 5-10 images of 'mythological creatures' that do not fit the keywords, now you have lost a potential sale, our buyer is not happy with the search results, and the keyword spammer is not aware that the bad keywording has damaged our buyers experience.

A few cents difference in price point will not attact and keep our buyer, but a good search engine with relevent quality images returned will, the sites that will retain our buyer will be the ones that offer our buyer the best experience, so if there is an image that breaks the keywording rules then it is not a bad thing if you report the image, as it could strengthen the position of the site with this and other buyers.

If there is a business case for reporting an image then you should not feel bad about doing it, and keyword spamming is a good enough reason as it could affects both the website owners and your revenue.

David  ;)  
« Last Edit: September 11, 2009, 02:20 by Adeptris »

« Reply #23 on: September 11, 2009, 02:33 »
0
I think I'm correct in stating that Dreamstime splits phrases into individual words. Therefore, someone doing a search for 'dog end' would be happy with the images returned, where someone seeing a cigarette butt whilst searching for 'dog' would not be.

« Reply #24 on: September 11, 2009, 04:02 »
0
As Click Click said above, I think it should be left to admin to check over the keys.
This way, there would be no ill feeling amongst members.

As it is - it's just contributors doing Admin work.
Has any other site adopted this flagging. I am not aware of any!


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
10 Replies
5866 Views
Last post February 03, 2011, 04:11
by Punit Patel
1 Replies
2473 Views
Last post July 09, 2007, 08:42
by snem
0 Replies
2318 Views
Last post August 05, 2008, 23:37
by bbettina
25 Replies
10857 Views
Last post April 03, 2011, 12:25
by stockastic
12 Replies
3545 Views
Last post November 14, 2012, 10:42
by dbvirago

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle