pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Incorrect keywords DT  (Read 27696 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #125 on: March 04, 2010, 09:24 »
0
Thank you for the explanation and the links, Serban. This certainly helps.

Some of us don't spend all of our time in the forums (we are actually out trying to make money), and therefore don't always see when major changes are made or when new policies arise. It is really becoming difficult to keep up with all the changes going on right now. For exclusives, the task might be easier. But when a contributor uploads to several sites, the task is daunting. Not your fault, as I know you would love for everyone to be exclusive!

I think I still disagree with you about the 2 cents though. When the net result of flagging spam is to clean up the database and attract more buyers, everyone can get on board with that, and does so with that sole intention. When the net result of flagging spam is to make money, you have attracted people who could care less about buyers and contributors and just want to add to their pockets.

But I do agree with you about everything else.


RT


« Reply #126 on: March 04, 2010, 09:41 »
0
The flag will only inform you: you can educate the admin (and the flagger) OR fix the image (and you will not have your rights blocked).

How do you educate the admin, on the flags I've had there's only the option to reply to the flagger. And once read they disappear.

My biggest concern lies over the ability of the admins to understand that sometimes people flag a set of keywords they've used as a phrase when in single use they are relevant, and I'm also concerned that given the vast numbers of flags that have suddenly appeared admins may take the easy option of just approving the flag. Is there any recourse?

I know you say to ask on the DT forum but unfortunately you have a habit of deleting anything you don't like the sound of.

lisafx

« Reply #127 on: March 04, 2010, 10:03 »
0
Well said Cathy!  This sums up my feelings exactly!

I am grateful to Serban for posting here and hope the tone of these forums does not chase you away.  We get excited about things sometimes, but there is so much good information and when you post here you are often communicating with people who can't keep up with all the individual site forums. 

I applaud the goal of cleaning up the keywording system, but I do worry that the issue of keyword phrases is a problem.  Reviewers will naturally approve the removal of the words slot machine from an image of a water machine with a coin slot, and similar situations.  I would too if it was presented to me that way.

I also think that the .02 "reward" is having unintended consequences, such as generating hundreds of thousands of flags, many of which are false.  If you eliminated the payment you would be more likely to get legitimate flags from people who care about accurate searches.

But again, thanks very much for taking the time to post here and also for being open and receptive to contributors concerns :)

« Reply #128 on: March 04, 2010, 11:03 »
0
Serban, your statements and efforts do NOT prevent this systems from ripping apart search phrases.

I'm sure you and Dreamstime know that there are buyers out there using search phrases. What is being done about that?

« Reply #129 on: March 04, 2010, 14:16 »
0
ive had enough of DT aswell, i get flagged quite a lot for bad keywords and most of the time its false. now i just upload images and let the key mentors keyword everything. cant get flagged then. if i have a batch of simular images i just upload 1 and then copy all the keywords to my simular images. my sales have plummeted really badlt this year - worst ever!

« Reply #130 on: March 04, 2010, 17:21 »
0
There is a certain etiquette that should apply to any poster on any forum.

True enough and if you conducted your own forums with the same 'certain etiquette' that you hold in such esteem, by not just deleting every post or thread that you don't like, then maybe you'd get more takers.

You may not have noticed but issues concerning Istock are hardly ever discussed on the MSG forum nowadays. Why? Basically because there's no need to; we can fully discuss the issue in question on their own forums without concern that the posts will be deleted or the thread locked, etc. They let their contributors vent their spleen, with only the lightest of hands on the tiller, and it works much better that way.

Ultimately both the contributors and the agencies have the same objective, to sell images. You don't need to be scared of them and what they have to say.
« Last Edit: March 04, 2010, 17:25 by gostwyck »

« Reply #131 on: March 04, 2010, 21:01 »
0
Quote
You may not have noticed but issues concerning Istock are hardly ever discussed on the MSG forum nowadays.

The whole IS/Thinkstock/StockXpert thing was definitely discussed here, in depth, about 2 weeks ago. For days. And I disagree with you about threads not ever getting locked on IS...that happens all the time! We must be visiting two different IS forums.  ;)

RacePhoto

« Reply #132 on: March 05, 2010, 00:48 »
0
Quote
You may not have noticed but issues concerning Istock are hardly ever discussed on the MSG forum nowadays.

The whole IS/Thinkstock/StockXpert thing was definitely discussed here, in depth, about 2 weeks ago. For days. And I disagree with you about threads not ever getting locked on IS...that happens all the time! We must be visiting two different IS forums.  ;)

You can't see what's invisible?

Funny that Alamy locked all the off topics sections, but then left them all there. It was kind of a message to keep on topic from now on, but they didn't delete the old ones.

I don't bother with the site forums much, unless it's really late at night and I'm REALLY bored. Something about "show us your latest ... photo" just drove me away.

« Reply #133 on: March 05, 2010, 03:23 »
0
We don't delete any posts or threads that are not either debated to death in another thread (usually we move posts for this) or agressive and harsh. Also, any kind of attack towards another user is deleted or moderated. The number of moderated posts is minimal (around 2-3 posts per week at most) and most of the attacks came from users from here, after reading a misleading thread. There are many negative posts in the threads I posted and as you can see they are still there.

Our forums are not censored but moderated. We apply the basic rules of netiquette.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netiquette
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_%28Internet%29

I can give you a huge list of extremely rude posts made by admins of the website you mentioned. I will not replicate that here. I'll not divert this into an attack towards someone else, but if you really think we're bad for moderating/deleting a post, send me a PM to give you some examples of the language used.

There are tons of threads here that defame agencies and their editors or admin. Offensive language was used often and the meaning of the agency is slowly lost. I'm not eager to participate into this process, as it eventually will affect the overall perception of contributors.

Until problems mentioned above are fixed, this will be my last post here. If you have questions about flagging or anything else, please contact me via Dreamstime's comments or by email at any time and whenever you need help. Farewell.

WarrenPrice

« Reply #134 on: March 05, 2010, 10:15 »
0
Bull... My posts were deleted and YOU followed that with threatening or intimidating personal comments.  One that was deleted simply responded to a comment about the economy affecting sales at DT.  I stated that my sales were good at other sites so I did not believe that.  You deleted it and followed with intimidating comments.

and, I have not seen any of the language you mentioned.  I don't see such language here.

why contact you personally?  So you can lock my sales?

« Reply #135 on: March 05, 2010, 10:39 »
0
Bull... My posts were deleted and YOU followed that with threatening or intimidating personal comments. 

Same thing happened to me.   

« Reply #136 on: March 05, 2010, 20:49 »
0
Achilles,

I still think that composed keywords would reduce improper flagging and improve relevance in searches as well.  Someone looking for a "white dog" doesn't want a black dog on white background.

« Reply #137 on: March 05, 2010, 20:57 »
0
...Someone looking for a "white dog" doesn't want a black dog on white background.

Eloquently put.

« Reply #138 on: March 07, 2010, 11:03 »
0
Ellen Boughn was the flagger for this one...
Your image was flagged/reported for incorrect usage of the following keywords: nude. No admin action has been taken yet and the report is pending.
  ::)


I checked this photo as there is no way that I would flag a photo of a nude man as having 'nude' as a bad keyword. I might have used the search words "nude from the back"
or nude back. Since you used 'back' in the description, the image came up. Since Dreamstime uses words in the description for the search, 'back' would have been considered a keyword. The other issue is that I often sort not on most relevant but most downloaded. I did this first when searching for images for my book, for example. If I had chosen most relevant, the image would most likely have been far down in the search.

« Reply #139 on: March 07, 2010, 12:12 »
0
Ellen's example shows that even with the best intentions lead to confusion between contributors and reviewers.

Implementing the flagging system that focuses on the actual keyword part of an image is one thing (despite the problem of missing disambiguation...) but DT's move to include the image description into the search function therefore creates a big problem when it comes to keyword reporting. This means more instances of confusing reports that have to be checked.

Technically a very simple process when it comes to avoiding this but this has not been thought through from DT at the time of implementation.
Maybe now this can be tackled...  ::)

red

« Reply #140 on: March 07, 2010, 13:02 »
0
Exactly! I have suggested from the beginning that descriptions not be added to the search algorithm. For instance, a photo of a wildflower shows up when you search for an elephant because it includes this description "wild aster found at Elephant Mountain in Maine." If I were a flagger I would flag this image especially if I didn't take the time to read the description which in my mind should only be filled in as fluff to possibly foster creative thinking for the buyer, or give details that have nothing to do with what the image "is."
 
Other examples:
A search for symphony orchestra brings up a violin - description reads "a gorgeous symbol of symphony and music."
A search for waterfall brings up a fern - description reads "Maiden hair fern on a wet cliff near a waterfall."
And a search for that ever popular business meeting brings up many of choices such as a line of catered food which, you guessed it has "buffet at business meeting" in the description.

Buyers search by looking at thumbnails and do not bother to click through to the image's description unless they are interested. At that point a good description may help. But it is not what sells an image. An image is purchased visually, not be reading (in most cases).

« Reply #141 on: March 07, 2010, 14:03 »
0
I think using the description additionally to keywords is important for relevance.  If an image has a wod only in the description, it's less relevant than if it is in the keywords.

I, for instance, have a photo of a clay court and in the description I say it's the type of court of Roland Garros, but Roland Garros is not a keyword.  If you search for "Roland Garros", non editorial, it's the last image in the results - and it is one of the two with more downloads in the results.  You will notice also that many images before it have Roland Garros as keywords, even if some don't even show a court - tennis balls illustrations, for instance.  THAT is spam.

I am not saying that a buyer looking for Roland Garros will like to find my images, I'm only showing that the description has a smaller weight in the relevance sorting.  But this weight can still be very important.

Dan

« Reply #142 on: March 09, 2010, 14:49 »
0
  I  have  2  flagged  images  out  of  2  on  DT.  I  don't  know  who  flagged  them  or  how  to  find  who  did.  Could  someone  clarify  how  to  do  this?

red

« Reply #143 on: March 09, 2010, 14:52 »
0
You need to read through this entire thread in the DT forums and if that does not answer your question you will have to contact their support with a specific question.
http://www.dreamstime.com/thread_7808

lisafx

« Reply #144 on: March 09, 2010, 16:04 »
0
  I  have  2  flagged  images  out  of  2  on  DT.  I  don't  know  who  flagged  them  or  how  to  find  who  did.  Could  someone  clarify  how  to  do  this?

The notification you get in your comments section shows who flagged them.  It's on the far right under "comment by" unless something has changed in the last few days...

« Reply #145 on: March 09, 2010, 17:04 »
0
I have just learnt that you can use the "reply" in the comment to explain the flagged keywords, and not only the person who flagged the image will see it, but also the reviewer later.  I had thought we would have to send a note to support.

Dan

« Reply #146 on: March 12, 2010, 10:35 »
0

I  got  the  flag  message  but  no  comments  by  anyone  to  show  who  flagged  it.

This image has been rightfully reported as having bad keywords and an editor approved the needed corrections. At this time you can add more keywords only through the key-mentoring system.

« Reply #147 on: March 30, 2010, 21:19 »
0
I just got the opposite of this. I had a message about a bunch of keywords added. This has never happened to me at DT. Anyone else have this?

red

« Reply #148 on: March 30, 2010, 21:27 »
0
There is an option under each image where you can either report bad keywords or suggest more keywords. If you suggest 10 (must be at least 10) and they are reviewed and accepted you get the famous 2 cents. They even used to have a special section of images that needed keywords for anyone to look at and have a go at, but that has recently disappeared. I hope they replace it with something more useful, I always thought it was kind of odd.

You can use this form to suggest more keywords. The minimum amount is 10 keywords, no misspellings accepted. The suggestion will enter a waiting list and $0.02 per image will be rewarded, if the suggestion is accepted.

« Reply #149 on: March 30, 2010, 21:59 »
0
I just got the opposite of this. I had a message about a bunch of keywords added. This has never happened to me at DT. Anyone else have this?
Somebody must like you a lot.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
28 Replies
3161 Views
Last post July 12, 2013, 14:32
by cthoman
2 Replies
1967 Views
Last post May 20, 2014, 20:14
by ecadphoto
2 Replies
1664 Views
Last post March 29, 2016, 20:25
by angelawaye
31 Replies
7459 Views
Last post September 26, 2016, 19:57
by AlessandraRC
0 Replies
907 Views
Last post May 23, 2018, 22:30
by grace

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results