MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Spamming = more sales  (Read 6791 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

shank_ali

« on: December 07, 2008, 08:39 »
0
I only became aware of spamming when looking at keywords attached to files simliar to mine before uploading for inspection.I was shooting in a musuem/tropical greenhouse yesterday and took a few photos of a lemon tree.Just put "lemon" "tree" into the istock search engine and two good sellers hit you but the keywords are pathetic and i removed 16 when i wikied the file.
Is istockphoto still hoping contributors don;t spam.
Is the 4 million files in the library spam free.
Can a contributor add crap keywords after it is accepted and placed in the library<<< yes, but why ? lock down the puppy and if you wish to add keywords later site mail support.


« Reply #1 on: December 07, 2008, 11:01 »
0
I think that the spammers that add irrelevant keywords to their pictures only think they are helping themselves. As a buyer as well as a contributor, I find it really annoying when I'm searching for one thing and have to wade through a ton of irrelevant pics, whether the picture is good or not. I think that spamming plan is only going to backfire on them. I could be wrong about that, maybe they know something I don't. I certainly do agree that if admins are going to take the time to go through a file's keywords, they should lock them down when they finish editing, but allow the contributor to edit by email.

« Reply #2 on: December 07, 2008, 11:09 »
0
I think all the sites should limit us to 10 keywords.  It would be great if none of us spammed but I often see the highest selling images have loads of inappropriate keywords.

Locking the keywords after review wont work because reviewers often reject appropriate keywords.  Sometimes they don't know when a word is spam and when it is vital to the image.  There are lots of posts about that in this forum.  I now use the minimum keywords and add more after the file has been accepted.

gbcimages

« Reply #3 on: December 07, 2008, 11:45 »
0
I think that the spammers that add irrelevant keywords to their pictures only think they are helping themselves. As a buyer as well as a contributor, I find it really annoying when I'm searching for one thing and have to wade through a ton of irrelevant pics, whether the picture is good or not. I think that spamming plan is only going to backfire on them. I could be wrong about that, maybe they know something I don't. I certainly do agree that if admins are going to take the time to go through a file's keywords, they should lock them down when they finish editing, but allow the contributor to edit by email.

I agree with you,I only put about 10 keywords to my images.

« Reply #4 on: December 07, 2008, 13:01 »
0
I don't understand how spamming could increase sales how come a buyer would   buy a bunch of flowers while they are searching for image of a businessman(but on subscription site spamming could work though)
anyway 10 keywords sometimes might not enough to include all important  aspects of an image.and disabling photographers right to add or remove keywords  after approval or limiting  number of keywords would (to my point of view)be  in  a way punishing decent contributes for immoral act of spammers. I think instead they should implement hard  penalties to those who are clearly spammers and   contributors or buyers  could  report inappropriate keywords. I also don't like the idea of conceptual keywords being left out  and considered as irrelevant if not spamming.(which happens at IS)
imagine having a portrait of a kid smiling and not being allowed to include the "happy" as keyword. 
« Last Edit: December 07, 2008, 13:03 by stokfoto »

shank_ali

« Reply #5 on: December 07, 2008, 13:35 »
0
I was the first person to make a topic in the new keyword section on the istock forum...Are you a spammer. typical knee jerk reaction by the forum admins removed it and i got a site mail,which i ignored.
Istock have allowed contributors free reign to put any keyword we want next to a file since the start of the site.
Asking contributors to wiki anothers file is pretty dumb and open to abuse.
They created the mess but lets see in a years time if the mess is cleaned up.
Inspectors reviewing my files is of course acceptable but  having them check my keywords is a diferent kettle of fish.Have they been trained are they fluent  english language graduateS with a 100% knowledge of the CV.
NB if i take a photo of an apple on white background it's isolated,room for copy,white background,studio shot and next time i shall add' combine harvester' to make sure the inspector is a  awake  :)

« Reply #6 on: December 07, 2008, 14:07 »
0
Is announced that it was starting a new procedure for dealing with spammers. They were giving everyone an undisclosed amount of time to clean up their portfolios before they started dropping the hammer. After that any serial spammers would be given a personal invitation through sitemail to clean up their stuff. If they didn't clean it up then their ability to edit and/or upload images would be suspended until they cleaned up their act. I think they mentioned that the images would be removed from searches as well but I'm not sure.

The announcement was made a month or so ago. I don't know that any attempt to clean up the spam will help. First the reviewers and wiki editors are well known for removing relevant keywords from images. Secondly, there are several important contributors over there with seriously spammed portfolios.

I gave up on worrying about trying to wiki files after I realized that without a serious consequence the spamming would never stop. It's not that big of an inconvenience to add the removed words back in and that is really the only current consequence of getting caught.

« Reply #7 on: December 07, 2008, 15:11 »
0
azurelaroux,

There was a discusion about this new policy here. 
http://www.microstockgroup.com/index.php?topic=6037.0

What annoys me is to see images with valid keywords - sometimes the main keywords - rejected by inspectors. Some examples are here:
http://www.microstockgroup.com/index.php?topic=6389.0

Regards,
Adelaide

« Reply #8 on: December 07, 2008, 15:32 »
0
Thanks for the link. I had hopes that they were serious about cleaning it up. In theory they should have been sending out notices starting Oct 17th or so. The problem is that we are now in early December and that orange is still keyworded as apple.


« Reply #9 on: December 07, 2008, 17:04 »
0
I think all the sites should limit us to 10 keywords.  It would be great if none of us spammed but I often see the highest selling images have loads of inappropriate keywords.

This would be terrible. All the similar images on a site would have the same 10 keywords and buyers would not have a chance anymore to narrow the search by using terms like 'one mid-adult man only' or 'looking away' or 'hands in pocket'... etc.
All images showing a business meeting would have these 10 keywords only:
Business, Business person, Businessman, Businesswoman, Meeting, Office, Team, Teamwork, People, Discussion

Nothing about the outlook and age ot these people, nothing about the place, the camera position, the number of people, the colors... etc. This would be even more terrible on a site where they do not use controlled voculabry.

« Reply #10 on: December 07, 2008, 17:16 »
0
I think the most effective solution would be weighted keywords--each contributor gets a certain number of "points" per image, and assigns a certain number of those points to each keyword.  The more points, the earlier the image shows up in search results for that specific keyword.  A would-be spammer would be wasting his points on irrelevant or peripheral keywords and reducing the number of points he has to "spend" on other, more relevant keywords.  This solution would also improve the overall accuracy of search results.  Apparently this idea has been floated several times, but never caught on.

« Reply #11 on: December 07, 2008, 18:24 »
0
As long as there are serious monetary incentives for spamming with little consequences, it is going to happen. I think the quickest little fix would be to get rid of the default CV matching for searches (so that spamming an image to the default search term brings it up first even if it isn't that term).

IS needs to report on how many portfolios have been cleaned up and how many have been booted for failing to clean up.

I think if any site really fixes the spam issue, they will get a lot more business, the only one that seems to have come close in my opinion is DT, as I rarely see lots of completely bogus returns there, and if i do, I can report them with one click.
 

« Reply #12 on: December 07, 2008, 18:51 »
0
I really like limiting keywords to 10-15 words. If you can't get your message across in ten words there is something wrong.

bittersweet

« Reply #13 on: December 07, 2008, 18:52 »
0
I really like limiting keywords to 10-15 words. If you can't get your message across in ten words there is something wrong.


Not always, as demonstrated here:
http://www.microstockgroup.com/index.php?topic=6522.0

« Reply #14 on: December 07, 2008, 19:21 »
0
I really like limiting keywords to 10-15 words. If you can't get your message across in ten words there is something wrong.


Since two years I rank my keywords in order of relevance. Any site can cut them off where they like, 5, 10, 15 or whatever, I'm still sure the most relevant ones will stay. It would be great if the search engines took this relevance-ranking into account, but only CanStockPhoto and Fotolia do it.

To make ranking fast, I wrote a script tool for it.

shank_ali

« Reply #15 on: December 09, 2008, 02:23 »
0
I really like limiting keywords to 10-15 words. If you can't get your message across in ten words there is something wrong.


Since two years I rank my keywords in order of relevance. Any site can cut them off where they like, 5, 10, 15 or whatever, I'm still sure the most relevant ones will stay. It would be great if the search engines took this relevance-ranking into account, but only CanStockPhoto and Fotolia do it.

To make ranking fast, I wrote a script tool for it.

Can you me more careful when you post links on this forum.When i clicked on your link.. my pc froze and could not even shut in down and had to turn the power of at the mains which as you no aint good for a pc.

« Reply #16 on: December 09, 2008, 02:43 »
0
I really like limiting keywords to 10-15 words. If you can't get your message across in ten words there is something wrong.


Since two years I rank my keywords in order of relevance. Any site can cut them off where they like, 5, 10, 15 or whatever, I'm still sure the most relevant ones will stay. It would be great if the search engines took this relevance-ranking into account, but only CanStockPhoto and Fotolia do it.

To make ranking fast, I wrote a script tool for it.

Can you me more careful when you post links on this forum.When i clicked on your link.. my pc froze and could not even shut in down and had to turn the power of at the mains which as you no aint good for a pc.


There is nothing wrong with his link. It must be your computer. Don't be so quick to attack him.

« Reply #17 on: December 09, 2008, 02:50 »
0
i didn't have problems with the link.

« Reply #18 on: December 09, 2008, 05:04 »
0
Neither have I.

« Reply #19 on: December 09, 2008, 05:54 »
0
A good case of PEBCAK probably.

Microbius

« Reply #20 on: December 09, 2008, 07:24 »
0
I think the most effective solution would be weighted keywords--each contributor gets a certain number of "points" per image, and assigns a certain number of those points to each keyword.  The more points, the earlier the image shows up in search results for that specific keyword.  A would-be spammer would be wasting his points on irrelevant or peripheral keywords and reducing the number of points he has to "spend" on other, more relevant keywords.  This solution would also improve the overall accuracy of search results.  Apparently this idea has been floated several times, but never caught on.

Yep, that's a good suggestion, same idea as the one I floated where you get exactly 50 keyword, but you can repeat the same word as many times as you like, which would give it a higher rating.
An algorithm more like Alamy's would be good too, where an image will rank higher in a search if it has been viewed or downloaded as a result of the same or similar searches in the past.

shank_ali

« Reply #21 on: December 09, 2008, 15:15 »
0
my pc is fine and as i network of a router i also don't need a firewall.When i clicked on the link an internet explorer box appeared and when i pressed ok my screen froze.When i clicked on the link just now i just pressed cancel  i could see the script page fine.
I was attacking the link not the person fyi.

« Reply #22 on: December 10, 2008, 07:23 »
0
Shank

If you'd read what the window said - assuming it's the same one I got - you would have realised that it was warning that importing the standard thesaurus would take some time and IE would pop up a warning about it being slow.

As it said, quote: "just be patient and continue".

There is nothing wrong with the link.

Also, although going through a router is good, it doesn't mean a software firewall is not useful too.  I'd advise both.

shank_ali

« Reply #23 on: December 21, 2008, 03:14 »
0
kudos to the new metadata team.Things are slowly improving on the site.I have had another 16 site mails of this team this week informing me of improvements in my keywords.
I still see good selling images with strange and irrellavant keywords attached but lets hope with time even these will be corrected.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
1 Replies
2789 Views
Last post April 09, 2015, 14:23
by jakobdam
4 Replies
4215 Views
Last post July 04, 2015, 10:03
by Dodie
26 Replies
10396 Views
Last post January 13, 2017, 13:47
by Pauws99
2 Replies
2419 Views
Last post February 09, 2017, 09:11
by jonbull
2 Replies
4003 Views
Last post April 04, 2018, 16:58
by YadaYadaYada

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors