MicrostockGroup
Microstock Photography Forum - General => General Stock Discussion => Topic started by: rimglow on October 24, 2014, 08:22
-
I've read that unique and detailed descriptions are important to SEO. My question is what if your descriptions were poor on older submissions? Can going back and updating the Description field increase your SEO? Do you get a do over or does it only count when you first upload the photo?
-
Ask Stocktal, they will say yes.
Also symbio site users worked this principle.
I am not sure of the effects. Google does as they please, tomorrow all could be futile again.
-
What do you mean unique and detailed? Are you suggesting "juicy ripe red delicious apple carefully isolated with clipping path over white background" over "apple isolated on white"? If not, can you give example of what you mean?
I always thought keep it simple was better. If that's not true, I want to know what I should be doing?
-
What do you mean unique and detailed?
(http://i.istockimg.com/generic_image_view/257076/257076)
as per IS (http://www.istockphoto.com/article_view.php?ID=1782&sp_rid=&sp_mid=7220692):
Bad description: "Boy on a beach with dog"
Good description: "An adorable little boy and dog build a sandcastle together on the beach off the cost of Oregon. (And the playful dog destroys the castle with his paw!) Shot with Canon 20D , ISO 100, heavy processing for retro bleached look, slight vingette added."
-
What do you mean unique and detailed?
([url]http://i.istockimg.com/generic_image_view/257076/257076[/url])
as per IS ([url]http://www.istockphoto.com/article_view.php?ID=1782&sp_rid=&sp_mid=7220692[/url]):
Bad description: "Boy on a beach with dog"
Good description: "An adorable little boy and dog build a sandcastle together on the beach off the cost of Oregon. (And the playful dog destroys the castle with his paw!) Shot with Canon 20D , ISO 100, heavy processing for retro bleached look, slight vingette added."
I really laughed at that one. (for those who don't know, it's the latest iS wheeze to try to win sales back). That description might well fit that image at a stretch, (with a specially-trained sandcastle-building dog) but it's exactly what they used to tell us not to say - 'if it's not in the image, don't say it'. That 'good description' could be good for a video clip, but not for this still.
The way they have described what might but probably isn't what that pic is about is like a primary school exercise where you use an image to stimulate 'imaginative writing'. 'How did the story start?', 'What might have happened before?', 'What might happen next?'
-
Something somewhere inbetween what U11 suggested. :) The first is too limited the second is a bit verbose.
I tend to look at things similar to ShadySue. Everything that's needed to describe the image and what's honestly in it. (main subject and theme) and nothing more.
"Happy grinning young boy at the beach on a sunny day, dog digging in the white sand seashore."
What do you mean unique and detailed? Are you suggesting "juicy ripe red delicious apple carefully isolated with clipping path over white background" over "apple isolated on white"? If not, can you give example of what you mean?
I always thought keep it simple was better. If that's not true, I want to know what I should be doing?
-
Something somewhere inbetween what U11 suggested.
just to make it clear it is not my suggestion but IS (http://www.istockphoto.com/article_view.php?ID=1782&sp_rid=&sp_mid=7220692 (http://www.istockphoto.com/article_view.php?ID=1782&sp_rid=&sp_mid=7220692))
-
probably noy worth redoig for agencies, since the agency itself has a greater effect -- eg, 123 does a very good job at getting images highly placed (not necessarily relected in sales though)
also, there's a distinction between indexed pages and indexed images -- eg the latter you should submit a separate image sitemap (symbiostock does this and wordpress also has a free plugin from yoast which does an excellent job. yoast also has immediate feedback on how well your wordpress page is optimized for SEO -- there's a discussion of using these tools in the symbiostock forum)
images however have an additional hurdle, since scoring high for your image of 'grilled shrimp' will also pull in anyone searching for recipes, etc. that's why adwords isn't the greatest way to get real buyers to your site.
-
By "unique" I simply mean not copying and pasting a description that appears somewhere else on the internet.
-
Overly happy caucasian, laughing young boy and his pet dog playing in the sand on the beach during a summer day.
On SS that would have been nailed for lighting/WB, OOF and composition if not more.
-
Gave you a heart for that one and sorry. I did see the comment that an agency had suggested it, but didn't follow.
Let me restate my opinion as, IS suggests that artists use more (http://s5.postimg.org/72gi3iwrn/spam99sq.jpg) in conflict with their keyword policies.
Really I'm trying to be a fan of CV but this is just odd because of the camera, iso, filter, and somewhere stretching the facts. (if they are building a sandcastle together, how is the dog destroying it. Then they aren't building anything TOGETHER) I see a happy kid and a dog, digging in the sand? ;)
Something somewhere inbetween what U11 suggested.
just to make it clear it is not my suggestion but IS ([url]http://www.istockphoto.com/article_view.php?ID=1782&sp_rid=&sp_mid=7220692[/url] ([url]http://www.istockphoto.com/article_view.php?ID=1782&sp_rid=&sp_mid=7220692[/url]))
-
I did see the comment that an agency had suggested it, but didn't follow.
http://www.istockphoto.com/article_view.php?ID=1782 (http://www.istockphoto.com/article_view.php?ID=1782)
-
Boy and dog on sandy beach. Dog has found something interesting to canines where sandcastle of boy once stood. (This explains 'ex-sandcastle' in keywords). :D
-
I find it hard to believe that this would have a significant impact on sales.
-
What do you mean unique and detailed?
([url]http://i.istockimg.com/generic_image_view/257076/257076[/url])
as per IS ([url]http://www.istockphoto.com/article_view.php?ID=1782&sp_rid=&sp_mid=7220692[/url]):
Bad description: "Boy on a beach with dog"
Good description: "An adorable little boy and dog build a sandcastle together on the beach off the cost of Oregon. (And the playful dog destroys the castle with his paw!) Shot with Canon 20D , ISO 100, heavy processing for retro bleached look, slight vingette added."
I really laughed at that one. (for those who don't know, it's the latest iS wheeze to try to win sales back). That description might well fit that image at a stretch, (with a specially-trained sandcastle-building dog) but it's exactly what they used to tell us not to say - 'if it's not in the image, don't say it'. That 'good description' could be good for a video clip, but not for this still.
OMG! Seriously?! Its worse than I thought. Don't some of the micros punish us in the search if our description is too wordy! Now we have to write some syrupy maudlin epic for each upload? Good Lord. ::)
-
Okay, I have it. Dog on sunny beach scratches at the sand to cover his recent dump while adorable little boy looks on and laughs.
-
Good one. Lets go really Micro keyword on this, Woman in red sweater with her daughter, misty day on the seashore, watching a passing ship.
::)
Okay, I have it. Dog on sunny beach scratches at the sand to cover his recent dump while adorable little boy looks on and laughs.
(http://i.istockimg.com/generic_image_view/257076/257076)
-
I find it hard to believe that this would have a significant impact on sales.
but in can help IS look more unique in google "eyes"
-
another SEO suggestion to IS: ask photographer to provide alternative descriptions for different holidays: halloween , xmas, valentine etc.
-
iS/Getty need to fix their weird search terms problem. The art director I'm working with has been complaining about it all week. She hates whatever they've done to "improve" the search there. She says it's harder to find what she needs. I see her going back every day and trying to figure out what phrases she needs to input to find what she's looking for. Which annoys me, because the longer it takes her to find images the less time she has to brainstorm with me.
-
iS/Getty need to fix their weird search terms problem. The art director I'm working with has been complaining about it all week. She hates whatever they've done to "improve" the search there. She says it's harder to find what she needs. I see her going back every day and trying to figure out what phrases she needs to input to find what she's looking for. Which annoys me, because the longer it takes her to find images the less time she has to brainstorm with me.
I think that has more to do with Keywords, than Photo Description and SEO.
-
iS/Getty need to fix their weird search terms problem. The art director I'm working with has been complaining about it all week. She hates whatever they've done to "improve" the search there. She says it's harder to find what she needs. I see her going back every day and trying to figure out what phrases she needs to input to find what she's looking for. Which annoys me, because the longer it takes her to find images the less time she has to brainstorm with me.
I think that has more to do with Keywords, than Photo Description and SEO.
And the fact that all manner of spam has getting in for the same length of time as standards were relaxed and that's been polluting certain searches and sorts.
-
No, she's not complaining about the wrong keywords, but the boxes she has to click to the left and the phrases (disambiguation). Whatever Getty changed about their search in the past year is slowing her down.
-
No, she's not complaining about the wrong keywords, but the boxes she has to click to the left and the phrases (disambiguation). Whatever Getty changed about their search in the past year is slowing her down.
If they're working as intended, the process should help speed up search. It seems to work better than it did a few months back.
This is clearly dated, but might help:http://www.istockphoto.com/article_view.php?ID=1409 (http://www.istockphoto.com/article_view.php?ID=1409)
Other than that, we'd need to know what her precise problem/s is/are.
-
LOL "Young boy screams in panic as he has to go urgently to the bathroom while a angry homeless dog is blocking the way. Image heavily processed with retro filters and screwed up white balance as a attempt to get in to Stocksy."
:D ;D
-
How many agencies are still including each individual word in the description in their search engine? I recall SS several years back saying they did this. Don't know if they still do or if any other agency does as well.
-
For older submissions I think that the best solution is to cancel the old upload and to resubmit the picture
-
For older submissions I think that the best solution is to cancel the old upload and to resubmit the picture
Why?
Changing the title/description, in DM or even within iS, should you want to do so, is far faster.
Would you really want to write an 'imaginative essay' on your images rather than just sticking to the facts?
In addition, what little I'm selling at the moment is old, hardly-sold files rather than best sellers or recent files, but YMMV on that.
-
I also do long photo descriptions for SEO reasons, for some of my photos, such as these photos with at least 300 words descriptions:
http://www.jareso.com/photo/73/water-sawmill-in-kvacianska-valley-slovakia/ (http://www.jareso.com/photo/73/water-sawmill-in-kvacianska-valley-slovakia/)
http://www.jareso.com/photo/69/budatin-castle-in-zilina-slovakia/ (http://www.jareso.com/photo/69/budatin-castle-in-zilina-slovakia/)
http://www.jareso.com/photo/131/southern-side-of-famous-orava-castle-slovakia/ (http://www.jareso.com/photo/131/southern-side-of-famous-orava-castle-slovakia/)
http://www.jareso.com/photo/79/broadcasting-transmitter-against-the-blue-sky/ (http://www.jareso.com/photo/79/broadcasting-transmitter-against-the-blue-sky/)
http://www.jareso.com/photo/573/close-up-of-two-pigeons-having-bath-in-a-fountain/ (http://www.jareso.com/photo/573/close-up-of-two-pigeons-having-bath-in-a-fountain/)
They seem to pick a lot of traffic from SERP, when compared to photos that have descriptions under 50 words. My goal is to have 300 words descriptions on all of my photos, but it goes very slowly; because such descriptions take a lot of time to be written.
You can read more about it at my blog:
http://www.jareso.com/blog/how-to-rank-better-in-serp-with-personal-portfolio-website/ (http://www.jareso.com/blog/how-to-rank-better-in-serp-with-personal-portfolio-website/)
Along with the long photo descriptions, translations also play a very import role when it comes to ranking and picking of traffic from SERP. Translated versions of my personal portfolio website actually pick more traffic from local - language specific searches - than those in English.
Again, read more at my blog, if you want:
http://www.jareso.com/blog/one-little-secret-about-those-much-wanted-stock-image-buyers/ (http://www.jareso.com/blog/one-little-secret-about-those-much-wanted-stock-image-buyers/)
-
Nice feedback Jareso :-)
-
Search engines would decompose long sentences into individual words. it is is like have more keywords added in different location. If in your description words from keywords list are re-used it probably does not help.
I thought that many agencies provide localized version of image pages and some even localize keywords. Suggestion to translate your page to different languages make sense only for self hosting.