Author Topic: Question about Image Flagged for Improper Keywords (Read 13792 times)

delow · « **on:** March 05, 2011, 10:03 »

Yesterday, I received a msg from DT saying that one of my images had been flagged for improper key wording. I've only been with DT for a little over a year and have a small portfolio. I have not had this happen before so I read through the procedures about how to handle it. In researching, I found that the person who flagged the image had opened their DT account just two days earlier and had no images on line, so I thought maybe this was a buyer. I responded that I did not understand why the keywords were inaccurate or irrelevant and requested more information. As of this writing, I have not received an answer. My question is, have others had this happen to them and do I need to worry about this?

Here's the image

and the keywords that were flagged were "eagle flying".

I didn't embed the DT image because I couldn't make the thumbnail appear in my msg, but here is the link to it on DT.
newbielink:http://www.dreamstime.com/eagle-flying-wings-spread-image12990370# [nonactive]

traveler1116 · « **Reply #1 on:** March 05, 2011, 10:12 »

I wouldn't worry about it too much, I can't see them removing the keywords for this. But who knows they charge you to change keywords after a certain point don't they? I do find it strange that they show who flagged your keywords can you work out what keywords are ok or bad between the accuser and accused, as far as I know you can't take back the flagging.

cathyslife · « **Reply #2 on:** March 05, 2011, 10:30 »

I have had several of these. Don't worry too much about them. If you politely email the person who flagged them, asking which words they felt didn't apply and they didn't respond, there's not much you can do. They go to an admin for approval or denial of the flag, so if you want to review your keywords you can edit them before they get to the reviewer. I didn't see any glaring bad keywords on your image, so I wouldn't worry about it if I were you. Just let the admin make the decision.

lisafx · « **Reply #3 on:** March 05, 2011, 12:37 »

The past several days I have had some really weird flags like this. The keywords central to the concept have been flagged. In each case, it was someone with no history or portfolio, who just joined the SAME DAY they flagged the images.

I think there are some flagging trolls on DT lately. Seriously doubt DT will remove any relevant keywords, but they might want to look into what's going on with these flagging trolls.

WarrenPrice · « **Reply #4 on:** March 05, 2011, 12:44 »

Lisa,
Please notify DT. I too have had some unusual flags but your comment would carry much more weight than mine.

lisafx · « **Reply #5 on:** March 05, 2011, 12:46 »

I left a note for the DT editors. Hopefully they will look into it.

red · « **Reply #6 on:** March 05, 2011, 13:13 »

Don't forget that the button to flag an image for a bad keyword from the search thumbnails is just a red X that is next to the Add to Lightbox button. It has been noted that some new users/buyers mistake the flag link for the lightbox link. This has been remarked upon for a long time so you would think a change would have been made by now. If I were a new user there I would have no idea what that button was for or even that I could report bad search results. It's hard to look at a site from a new user's perspective when you have been using it forever, but more attention should be given to making it easier to figure out the site features for new users (applies to all the sites, not just DT).

PeterChigmaroff · « **Reply #7 on:** March 05, 2011, 15:10 »

Well sure, I mean, technically it's an eagle landing, I can see someone getting his knickers all stretched out for that.

Grandpa · « **Reply #8 on:** March 12, 2011, 04:11 »

Does anybody know - is Dreamstime the only site, who antagonize contributors between each other with this flagging system, or other sites do the same? It look as in communist times, when peoples was denunciating each other ( today for $0.02)...

cathyslife · « **Reply #9 on:** March 12, 2011, 10:03 »

Quote from: Grandpa on March 12, 2011, 04:11

Does anybody know - is Dreamstime the only site, who antagonize contributors between each other with this flagging system, or other sites do the same? It look as in communist times, when peoples was denunciating each other ( today for $0.02)...

istock has a similar system but the contributor doesn't know who flagged the image, only that it is under review.

I don't mind the flagging system so much...so far, when I have politely emailed the flagger, they have given me their reasoning behind the flag and it has always been right. Early on, six years ago, when I first started uploading, the common thought for keywording was to add everything you saw in the picture. As time went on and the search engines evolved, that didn't make sense anymore, rightfully so. But my earlier images have a number of superfluous keywords and I am happy to remove them, if they make sense.

edit: as an occasional buyer of stock photos, I find it very frustrating to have to wade through images that have been keyworded incorrectly

Grandpa · « **Reply #10 on:** March 12, 2011, 10:42 »

Quote from: cclapper on March 12, 2011, 10:03

Quote from: Grandpa on March 12, 2011, 04:11
Does anybody know - is Dreamstime the only site, who antagonize contributors between each other with this flagging system, or other sites do the same? It look as in communist times, when peoples was denunciating each other ( today for $0.02)...

istock has a similar system but the contributor doesn't know who flagged the image, only that it is under review.

I don't mind the flagging system so much...so far, when I have politely emailed the flagger, they have given me their reasoning behind the flag and it has always been right. Early on, six years ago, when I first started uploading, the common thought for keywording was to add everything you saw in the picture. As time went on and the search engines evolved, that didn't make sense anymore, rightfully so. But my earlier images have a number of superfluous keywords and I am happy to remove them, if they make sense.

edit: as an occasional buyer of stock photos, I find it very frustrating to have to wade through images that have been keyworded incorrectly

I think a bit other: your images, keywords and mistakes are your matter and i will not touch them. For finding mistakes are reviewers, they get for it the money, it is their job and wrong keywords must be found in reviewing process, not after some years! Cathleen, have you so much time, to check once more all your portfolio? Who have nothing to do, can to remove bad keywords, too! Next - rights to flagging DT can better give only to competent photographers, not to beginners with zero portfolio. Everybody can make false account and to flag who he want.

Artemis · « **Reply #11 on:** March 12, 2011, 10:59 »

Im pretty sure they stopped reviewing the flags. I reported a picture with really blatant keyword spam almost a year ago and its still there unaltered. When i asked in the forums if the system still is in place no admin ever bothered to reply.

cathyslife · « **Reply #12 on:** March 12, 2011, 11:10 »

Quote from: Grandpa on March 12, 2011, 10:42

Quote from: cclapper on March 12, 2011, 10:03
Quote from: Grandpa on March 12, 2011, 04:11
Does anybody know - is Dreamstime the only site, who antagonize contributors between each other with this flagging system, or other sites do the same? It look as in communist times, when peoples was denunciating each other ( today for $0.02)...

istock has a similar system but the contributor doesn't know who flagged the image, only that it is under review.

I don't mind the flagging system so much...so far, when I have politely emailed the flagger, they have given me their reasoning behind the flag and it has always been right. Early on, six years ago, when I first started uploading, the common thought for keywording was to add everything you saw in the picture. As time went on and the search engines evolved, that didn't make sense anymore, rightfully so. But my earlier images have a number of superfluous keywords and I am happy to remove them, if they make sense.

edit: as an occasional buyer of stock photos, I find it very frustrating to have to wade through images that have been keyworded incorrectly

I think a bit other: your images, keywords and mistakes are your matter and i will not touch them. For finding mistakes are reviewers, they get for it the money, it is their job and wrong keywords must be found in reviewing process, not after some years! Cathleen, have you so much time, to check once more all your portfolio? Who have nothing to do, can to remove bad keywords, too! Next - rights to flagging Dreamstime can better give only to competent photographers, not to beginners with zero portfolio. Everybody can make false account and to flag who he want.

You have some valid points and I generally agree with you. The agencies get about 80% of the money, it is their job to check everything. On the other hand, if all contributors were honest and didn't keyword spam, such measures wouldn't even need to be in place. No, I don't have the time to go back and review every single one of my images, that's why it didn't bother me that someone else flagged them. If someone complained, I'd check them and change them. And even after the flag, they got reviewed again. But as Artemis has pointed out, they likely aren't even doing that. I wouldn't worry too much about it.

Grandpa · « **Reply #13 on:** March 12, 2011, 11:41 »

Quote from: cclapper on March 12, 2011, 11:10

Quote from: Grandpa on March 12, 2011, 10:42
Quote from: cclapper on March 12, 2011, 10:03
Quote from: Grandpa on March 12, 2011, 04:11
Does anybody know - is Dreamstime the only site, who antagonize contributors between each other with this flagging system, or other sites do the same? It look as in communist times, when peoples was denunciating each other ( today for $0.02)...

istock has a similar system but the contributor doesn't know who flagged the image, only that it is under review.

I don't mind the flagging system so much...so far, when I have politely emailed the flagger, they have given me their reasoning behind the flag and it has always been right. Early on, six years ago, when I first started uploading, the common thought for keywording was to add everything you saw in the picture. As time went on and the search engines evolved, that didn't make sense anymore, rightfully so. But my earlier images have a number of superfluous keywords and I am happy to remove them, if they make sense.

edit: as an occasional buyer of stock photos, I find it very frustrating to have to wade through images that have been keyworded incorrectly

I think a bit other: your images, keywords and mistakes are your matter and i will not touch them. For finding mistakes are reviewers, they get for it the money, it is their job and wrong keywords must be found in reviewing process, not after some years! Cathleen, have you so much time, to check once more all your portfolio? Who have nothing to do, can to remove bad keywords, too! Next - rights to flagging Dreamstime can better give only to competent photographers, not to beginners with zero portfolio. Everybody can make false account and to flag who he want.

You have some valid points and I generally agree with you. The agencies get about 80% of the money, it is their job to check everything. On the other hand, if all contributors were honest and didn't keyword spam, such measures wouldn't even need to be in place. No, I don't have the time to go back and review every single one of my images, that's why it didn't bother me that someone else flagged them. If someone complained, I'd check them and change them. And even after the flag, they got reviewed again. But as Artemis has pointed out, they likely aren't even doing that. I wouldn't worry too much about it.

May be i am too paranoic, but i worry about this, posted by Achilles:
Once a report is validated, the owner will lose the editing rights for that image. Further penalties can be applied if most of his portfolio has serious problems. The whole portfolio might reach for full keywording in the keymasters section, with all expenses supported by the owner. That's the whole portfolio, not only the reported files.
( it is first post http://www.dreamstime.com/thread_7808)
Full keywording, all files for $0.60 every file... It is reason to worry.

digitalexpressionimages · « **Reply #14 on:** March 15, 2011, 08:43 »

While it is very true that the editors should monitor relevant keywords considering their cut of the money but does it make sense just to say "it's not my problem so don't worry about it" if the result is fewer users because of frustration over bad search results mostly due to crappy keywords?

I have flagged keywords before because I have spent hours looking for relevant images and I have to wade through BS page after page. I routinely see images tagged with upwards of 40 keywords consisting of things clearly designed to get into as many search results as possible. Some people think that will actually help them make sales. It won't. I damages Dreamstime as frustrated buyers will go elsewhere for stock, as I have on many occasions.

traveler1116 · « **Reply #15 on:** March 15, 2011, 08:52 »

Quote from: digitalexpressionimages on March 15, 2011, 08:43

While it is very true that the editors should monitor relevant keywords considering their cut of the money but does it make sense just to say "it's not my problem so don't worry about it" if the result is fewer users because of frustration over bad search results mostly due to crappy keywords?

I have flagged keywords before because I have spent hours looking for relevant images and I have to wade through BS page after page. I routinely see images tagged with upwards of 40 keywords consisting of things clearly designed to get into as many search results as possible. Some people think that will actually help them make sales. It won't. I damages Dreamstime as frustrated buyers will go elsewhere for stock, as I have on many occasions.

I agree but Dreamstime's policy of showing who flagged your keywords so they can write you a nasty sitemail does make it less likely I will report anyone.

digitalexpressionimages · « **Reply #16 on:** March 19, 2011, 11:38 »

Quote from: traveler1116 on March 15, 2011, 08:52

Quote from: digitalexpressionimages on March 15, 2011, 08:43
While it is very true that the editors should monitor relevant keywords considering their cut of the money but does it make sense just to say "it's not my problem so don't worry about it" if the result is fewer users because of frustration over bad search results mostly due to crappy keywords?

I have flagged keywords before because I have spent hours looking for relevant images and I have to wade through BS page after page. I routinely see images tagged with upwards of 40 keywords consisting of things clearly designed to get into as many search results as possible. Some people think that will actually help them make sales. It won't. I damages Dreamstime as frustrated buyers will go elsewhere for stock, as I have on many occasions.
I agree but Dreamstime's policy of showing who flagged your keywords so they can write you a nasty sitemail does make it less likely I will report anyone.

If that's happened to you then I sympathize. Those of us that flag keywords do so to improve the overall search efficiency to make it more productive for users. That in turn results in more users, more sales and greater success for all contributors.

I'm both a buyer and a contributor and as an exclusive contributor nothing would make me happier than to have dreamstime be the #1 microstock agency on the web and the way to do that is with quality images and especially a very efficient search engine. Buyers are different than photographers. Buyers don't care who took a photo, what their story is, what their portfolio looks like or contacting them to let them know where the photo is being used. As a buyer, a graphic designer for going on 2 decades I am always under deadlines. For that reason, I go to stock agencies to get images and I do not want to spend a lot of time finding one. Seeing so many images that have nothing to do literally, figuratively or conceptually with my search terms really gets me pissed because I am under a deadline all....the....time.

if I got a nasty message from a member because I flagged his spam (that's never happened to me) I would let him have it with both barrels.

sam100 · « **Reply #17 on:** March 19, 2011, 16:15 »

Quote from: digitalexpressionimages on March 19, 2011, 11:38

Quote from: traveler1116 on March 15, 2011, 08:52
Quote from: digitalexpressionimages on March 15, 2011, 08:43
While it is very true that the editors should monitor relevant keywords considering their cut of the money but does it make sense just to say "it's not my problem so don't worry about it" if the result is fewer users because of frustration over bad search results mostly due to crappy keywords?

I have flagged keywords before because I have spent hours looking for relevant images and I have to wade through BS page after page. I routinely see images tagged with upwards of 40 keywords consisting of things clearly designed to get into as many search results as possible. Some people think that will actually help them make sales. It won't. I damages Dreamstime as frustrated buyers will go elsewhere for stock, as I have on many occasions.
I agree but Dreamstime's policy of showing who flagged your keywords so they can write you a nasty sitemail does make it less likely I will report anyone.

If that's happened to you then I sympathize. Those of us that flag keywords do so to improve the overall search efficiency to make it more productive for users. That in turn results in more users, more sales and greater success for all contributors.

I'm both a buyer and a contributor and as an exclusive contributor nothing would make me happier than to have dreamstime be the #1 microstock agency on the web and the way to do that is with quality images and especially a very efficient search engine. Buyers are different than photographers. Buyers don't care who took a photo, what their story is, what their portfolio looks like or contacting them to let them know where the photo is being used. As a buyer, a graphic designer for going on 2 decades I am always under deadlines. For that reason, I go to stock agencies to get images and I do not want to spend a lot of time finding one. Seeing so many images that have nothing to do literally, figuratively or conceptually with my search terms really gets me pissed because I am under a deadline all....the....time.

if I got a nasty message from a member because I flagged his spam (that's never happened to me) I would let him have it with both barrels.

How about having an image of a praying nun being flagged for the keyword nun..?.. (past week)
image of an emerald being flagged for emerald.. etc.. etc.. etc...and i could go on and on....

Patrick.

WarrenPrice · « **Reply #18 on:** March 19, 2011, 17:41 »

image of crawfish fishing lure tagged for crawfish.
often, images are being flagged by people with absolutely no knowledge of the subject matter.

digitalexpressionimages · « **Reply #19 on:** March 20, 2011, 11:36 »

Quote from: patrick1958 on March 19, 2011, 16:15

Quote from: digitalexpressionimages on March 19, 2011, 11:38
Quote from: traveler1116 on March 15, 2011, 08:52
Quote from: digitalexpressionimages on March 15, 2011, 08:43
While it is very true that the editors should monitor relevant keywords considering their cut of the money but does it make sense just to say "it's not my problem so don't worry about it" if the result is fewer users because of frustration over bad search results mostly due to crappy keywords?

I have flagged keywords before because I have spent hours looking for relevant images and I have to wade through BS page after page. I routinely see images tagged with upwards of 40 keywords consisting of things clearly designed to get into as many search results as possible. Some people think that will actually help them make sales. It won't. I damages Dreamstime as frustrated buyers will go elsewhere for stock, as I have on many occasions.
I agree but Dreamstime's policy of showing who flagged your keywords so they can write you a nasty sitemail does make it less likely I will report anyone.

If that's happened to you then I sympathize. Those of us that flag keywords do so to improve the overall search efficiency to make it more productive for users. That in turn results in more users, more sales and greater success for all contributors.

I'm both a buyer and a contributor and as an exclusive contributor nothing would make me happier than to have dreamstime be the #1 microstock agency on the web and the way to do that is with quality images and especially a very efficient search engine. Buyers are different than photographers. Buyers don't care who took a photo, what their story is, what their portfolio looks like or contacting them to let them know where the photo is being used. As a buyer, a graphic designer for going on 2 decades I am always under deadlines. For that reason, I go to stock agencies to get images and I do not want to spend a lot of time finding one. Seeing so many images that have nothing to do literally, figuratively or conceptually with my search terms really gets me pissed because I am under a deadline all....the....time.

if I got a nasty message from a member because I flagged his spam (that's never happened to me) I would let him have it with both barrels.

How about having an image of a praying nun being flagged for the keyword nun..?.. (past week)
image of an emerald being flagged for emerald.. etc.. etc.. etc...and i could go on and on....
Patrick.

How about a shot of a sweaty, large breasted woman in a half shirt and short shorts holding a basketball against a black background with the keyword "team". The fact that she was holding a basketball somehow made the term "team" relevant? I don't think so. That's the kind of thing I flag.

garren · « **Reply #20 on:** April 02, 2011, 18:04 »

Quote from: lisafx on March 05, 2011, 12:37

The past several days I have had some really weird flags like this. The keywords central to the concept have been flagged. In each case, it was someone with no history or portfolio, who just joined the SAME DAY they flagged the images.

I think there are some flagging trolls on Dreamstime lately. Seriously doubt Dreamstime will remove any relevant keywords, but they might want to look into what's going on with these flagging trolls.

I have to agree. Just got flagged by one of these trolls...new account - information set to private - no purchases - no portfolio. I think these people are flagging anything and everything they think they can get away with to make 2 cents.
My keywords were perfectly relevant. This flagging system is probably going to turn into a bad ordeal.

fotografer · « **Reply #21 on:** April 03, 2011, 04:23 »

Quote from: garren on April 02, 2011, 18:04

Quote from: lisafx on March 05, 2011, 12:37
The past several days I have had some really weird flags like this. The keywords central to the concept have been flagged. In each case, it was someone with no history or portfolio, who just joined the SAME DAY they flagged the images.

I think there are some flagging trolls on Dreamstime lately. Seriously doubt Dreamstime will remove any relevant keywords, but they might want to look into what's going on with these flagging trolls.

I have to agree. Just got flagged by one of these trolls...new account - information set to private - no purchases - no portfolio. I think these people are flagging anything and everything they think they can get away with to make 2 cents.
My keywords were perfectly relevant. This flagging system is probably going to turn into a bad ordeal.

It is far more likely to be new buyer testing out the site and hitting the wrong button by mistake.

garren · « **Reply #22 on:** April 03, 2011, 04:51 »

Quote from: fotografer on April 03, 2011, 04:23

Quote from: garren on April 02, 2011, 18:04
Quote from: lisafx on March 05, 2011, 12:37
The past several days I have had some really weird flags like this. The keywords central to the concept have been flagged. In each case, it was someone with no history or portfolio, who just joined the SAME DAY they flagged the images.

I think there are some flagging trolls on Dreamstime lately. Seriously doubt Dreamstime will remove any relevant keywords, but they might want to look into what's going on with these flagging trolls.

I have to agree. Just got flagged by one of these trolls...new account - information set to private - no purchases - no portfolio. I think these people are flagging anything and everything they think they can get away with to make 2 cents.
My keywords were perfectly relevant. This flagging system is probably going to turn into a bad ordeal.
It is far more likely to be new buyer testing out the site and hitting the wrong button by mistake.

I had considered that first but it seems unlikely that someone accidentally hit the "report" link and then accidentally chose two keywords.

gaja · « **Reply #23 on:** April 03, 2011, 05:46 »

Those two "chosen" keywords are just the ones the person was searching for when s/he clicked report.

garren · « **Reply #24 on:** April 03, 2011, 10:57 »

Quote from: gaja on April 03, 2011, 05:46

Those two "chosen" keywords are just the ones the person was searching for when s/he clicked report.

i see it now. I was going to far into the search process by clicking on an image then scrolling down to the report link. I re-read one of the posts above and see that clicking the link in the thumbnail view of your search results would generate a flag from your search terms. That, in itself, is an issue....but better than being overun by trolls!

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Question about Image Flagged for Improper Keywords (Read 13792 times)

delow

traveler1116

cathyslife

lisafx

WarrenPrice

lisafx

red

PeterChigmaroff

Grandpa

cathyslife

Grandpa

Artemis

cathyslife

Grandpa

digitalexpressionimages

traveler1116

digitalexpressionimages

sam100

WarrenPrice

digitalexpressionimages

garren

fotografer

garren

gaja

garren

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors