11 of 15 rejected (10 of them - 'over filtered'). No sales for 9 days. Sudden move from #2 earner to #999.... Sad, but this is their choice.

wow Unclegene, how do you explain losing 997 places in 9 days? i hate to even look where i am 

For now I will not talking of very THIN line between oversaturated images and flat dull colors, stray areas which are too blured or too spiked because I see lot of images from Getty and IS on 100% view which are deserved to do lobotomy for reviewers which approved this.

Suljo,  at least you retain your sense of humour.
the list of rejection reason (see above) are the same ones i get too in my rejections.
so maybe we have the same reviewers.

pity though, as i find IS exclusives are such helpful people. i write them in my network and all of them write me back with good encouragement. but IS just keep rejecting my images.
not many rejections, though, as i only upload to IS maybe 10 images a month. they take so long to review. and so far, my acceptance is like 20 %. so i am not wasting too much sleep on IS.

sorry i had to enter 3 postings. don't know how to add them all in one.

Because, if they delete your poor words, you don't learn the lesson on how to keyword.  An xray is an xray, not every disease on the planet.

Because, if they delete your poor words, you don't learn the lesson on how to keyword.  An xray is an xray, not every disease on the planet.

Has anyone considered that Best Match is based on how many words match the search of the number of words in the keywords? So someone with ten words and three match will show before someone with 30 words and three that match? 30% match comes before 10% match. More inane words, conceptual words, and keyword spamming with things that are not in the image, and your images will fall to the bottom faster than a guy named Louie wearing cement sneakers. 

As for Encephalitis,  Insomnia,  Alzheimer's Disease,  Epilepsy,  The Human Body (Human Attribute),  CAT Scan (Medical Scan),  Headache,  Human Skeleton (Human Bone),  Human Skeleton (Human Bone),  Surgery,  CAT Scan None of these are x-rays. I'm surprise they didn't just reject the image and close your account for keyword spamming.

Hey, that's a scenic roadway.    It's not a Halloween pumpkin, until someone carves it, I agree. Guilty of including a related holiday. But you are correct.

You are correct about concept words that don't appear in images, they aren't there, but they relate. Insomnia,  Alzheimer's Disease,  Epilepsy? Give me a clue how that relates to an x-ray? Concepts and feelings make sense for a message within an image.

As for your other points, you are also correct. Your logic is that since other people spam keywords, we should all be able to continue this.

You are also correct about the trademark names, which should not appear.

Point was, and I didn't want to have to go into details, an x-ray isn't a cat scan, isn't a skeleton or skeletal image and those words are not conceptual.

What you are saying is that buyers looking for something will suddenly want to buy a different unrelated photo, with different content, because the happened to see it based on spammed keywords. If you are a buyer, do you want to waste time looking at photos of something other than what you need?

If someone searches for the words in my keywords, the images will come up. They won't search for pumpkin and find a photo of a watermelon, which if you looked, does come up for pumpkin. Weird. Does it hurt sales or help them to have an accurate match? Does it help or hurt in the search best match if my words have a higher percentage of match?

Has anyone considered that less is more when the words are accurate? Did anyone consider that the reason their images are dropping in the searches is that the search algorithm penalizes for more words that don't match and rewards higher percentages of matching words? Some agencies track views and if you get many views and no sales, may be dropping the image in the searches, instead of lifting it.

What worked for getting views last year, might not be the best policy for getting ranking or views this year.

As far as sales, if I had good images, they would sell. Since I have mostly snapshots, not especially stock oriented, I don't expect them to be hot sellers. Guess what? They aren't. 

Quote from: RacePhoto on November 07, 2008, 16:08

Some agencies track views and if you get many views and no sales, may be dropping the image in the searches, instead of lifting it.
As far as sales, if I had good images, they would sell. Since I have mostly snapshots, not especially stock oriented, I don't expect them to be hot sellers. Guess what? They aren't. 

second statement first, racephoto. at least you're honest even to blame yourself
first statement , i see your point . i used to wonder why i get so many views yet no sales.
then i reduced my keywords to minimum of 8 for most, except for BigStock 10, which is their minimum i think. something i picked up from some of you ppl here a month or so ago,
(i think madelaide or jsnover, or someone like that)...
resulted that i get sales (although mostly subs) for 5, 3, even 2 views. so perharps you are right. maybe my images are being picked up in search priority.

i guess the good thing about this forum is we learn from all of the good oldtimers who are not jealous about sharing their ideas with us. this is why i keep participating here .

Only a guess! Hypothetical. Supposition.  Not an old timer, just older than you. Ask people who have been doing this for four years. Maybe try some of the first page Black Diamonds and Diamonds.

Since the best match algorithm is not cast in stone, but on a computer, agencies have been known to tweak it for better sales. I'm not saying this as a negative, but they are not out to cater to sellers, the primary goals are selling to customers and making money for the agency. We are third on a list of those three.

Just so I'm clear about "less is more" the concept is simple. Include every possible word that is actually in the image, some conceptual words that fit, descriptive words may be searched too. Use some restraint, leave out words that when a buyer searches will lead them to an image that doesn't contain that item. Beer is not "food". (well for some people?)

I'm not trying to imply that if you have a baked potato on a plate that you have only "potato, plate, baked, brown, legume, butter, cheese" Etc. Starch, vegetable, isolated, close-up, nobody (if there are no people), spud, isolated, cutout and more. But there's no reason to include "ingredient, dieting, snack, garlic (if you can't see garlic in the picture), salt, recipe, wealth, which do nothing to add to the description. Funny is "Baked Potato" photos that include Raw, Uncooked, Boiled, steamed, mashed, organic, fried, red (it's an isolated baked Idaho and there's not a speck of red in the photo) and some other words that contradict the actual subject. That's IS where they police the keywords and it's not bad.

Some people have a habit of including the make and model of camera and their location, in keywords (not on IS that I saw). As if I want a baked potato from Scotland to show up when I'm searching for photos of Scotland? "English Food, UK food, British Cuisine", texture, detail, objects, fat, farm, farmer, feeling, eat, oven, grill ? None of these things appear in the photos of just baked potatoes or isolated baked potatoes. This is a dumb photo of a backed potato, not something complex. Use your imagination how the bad results are exponential when the subjects are more complex.

Whoopee a photo has 150 views a month and no sales, because buyers keep hitting it in the search for something else. Views mean nothing, if the keywords aren't accurate. But someone else has photos with many less views and they have more sales. Any agency that ranks photos by views should have figured out by now that sales count, not views, because of the way keywords have become polluted.

For people who still want to argue that vague keywords that draw buyers to photos of things they aren't looking for are a bonus. You are sitting home and see a show about photography you want to watch on TV, you turn it on and there's some watercolor lesson. Next night, same station you want to watch an interesting documentary, you turn it on and find a cartoon. This happens day after day. How long does it take to say, this channel and the guide are messed up. You lose trust in the station and the schedule.

Agency + bad keyword search results = lost revenue. (maybe lost customers)

Photographer + unrelated keywords = views without sales.

If there's someone out there who believes that unrelated keywords and poor keywords, make for better sales, please explain how?

Views don't pay the rent or put food on the table. Tricking someone into viewing your image is more likely to just piss them off. 

I'm not trying to imply that if you have a baked potato on a plate that you have only "potato, plate, baked, brown, legume, butter, cheese" Etc. Starch, vegetable, isolated, close-up, nobody (if there are no people), spud, isolated, cutout

just being ultra picky, but a potato is not a legume [beans, peas] it's a tuber

however, this does point out a source of inaccurate keywords - sellers who include words they THINK are correct when theey're not -- check out antarctica images and you'll find many with keyword arctic and vice versa

steve

I'm not trying to imply that if you have a baked potato on a plate that you have only "potato, plate, baked, brown, legume, butter, cheese" Etc. Starch, vegetable, isolated, close-up, nobody (if there are no people), spud, isolated, cutout

just being ultra picky, but a potato is not a legume [beans, peas] it's a tuber

however, this does point out a source of inaccurate keywords - sellers who include words they THINK are correct when theey're not -- check out antarctica images and you'll find many with keyword arctic and vice versa

steve

Nothing wrong with being right. I must have had peanuts on my brain. Funny thread elsewhere with the person pointing out that searches are being made for balon instead of ballon. To which someone pointed out, yes, but it's balloon!  Legume was a cut and paste of keywords I found with photos, my mistake for putting it in the good keywords batch.

Zeus wrote

It really is more circuitous than that. None can exist to their full potential without the other. Take away or destroy too much of any one thing and the others dwindle as well. It's impossible to make the buyer happy without great images in the right quantity that are easy to find.

Always true. As a volunteer sometimes this comes up when the group we work for complains and someone will say, without the volunteers, we wouldn't be able to function. I've also pointed out that without the group we serve, there would be no need for volunteers. 

Of course, the agency can't sell photos with no photographers, but we can't sell without an agency, and without buyers, there's nothing. One big happy family.

I was hinting that in the eyes of a photo agency, the pecking order starts at the top, they are in it to make a profit. The customer needs must be served or they are out of business. This isn't a charity or free lunch program, the contributors are last in line when it comes to most business decisions. If you look at it the other way around, as a supply chain, we're first in line. The point I was trying to make was that search engines are designed for the benefit of buyers, and the agency making money, not photographers. Maybe I didn't do a good job of making it clear that I was talking about the topic, keywords, best match and search algorithms.

While best match sometimes seems to be out of wack and people are finding their photos that used to be up front. dropping for no logical reason, the only conclusion I can make is that the agency is making changes that they think will increase better matches for buyers and doesn't really care if I sell the photo, you do or someone who signed up yesterday. The other point which I haven't dared to mention is, everyone can't be dropping, because someone has to be going up to fill those spots at the front.

Obviously I've had a boring day between writing messages, searching search engines, uploading files on a different computer, quick editing a Birthday party I shot last night, sending things out to be printed and finding my Winter with weekends off are driving me stir crazy!

Not an amazing discovery but word order, and on some sites proximity, matters in your keywords. (just what we needed?) Depending on the site, don't call me any names if it does at IS but doesn't at SS.  I haven't spent another couple of hours testing anyplace but IS. I was plugging in some test changes at Alamy also, but I'd have to wait for the next re-indexing to see if that changes placement of the altered photo. However Alamy does their ranking and does disclose some of their search weighting, also how they distribute photos so one person doesn't come up with all the photos on the first page. OK, easy one, word order counts there too, plus how close the words are together.

More keywords, lower proximity than if some has less words and the same matching order.

This could be like discovery that the Earth isn't flat and everyone already knew that hundreds of years ago, and I just missed the obvious.

I'm still trying to figure out why people believe that adding words of obscure relevance, or even the dreaded keyword spamming, makes for better sales? Yes, more views. Yes, if someone uses those obscure words in their searches. While people are knocking themselves out for 40 keywords, there comes a point where even the dunce who thinks a potato is a legume will find potato photos if they search with that word in there for some strange reason. If I'm looking for a baked potato photo to buy, I'm not going to search for "tuber, tubers, brown, skin, red, organic, steamed" and a whole bunch more. I'll search for "baked potato" and if I want one sliced I'll add that, with butter fine.

Anyone else here ever heard of Occam's Razor? "All other things being equal, the simplest solution is the best."

The inspectors are trying to clean up a morass that has been created by years of not policing keywords. Agencies are trying to change the way we identify what's in our photos. If everyone has to abide by the same rules, nothing should change. The best photos should still sell more than average photos and the snapshots will languish at the bottom of the heap.

I did a simple photo of the new British 1 pence coin, Fotolia accepted it almost immediately, here it is
http://en.fotolia.com/id/10085836

But after about 9 days IS rejected for the following reason:

The following keywords used for this file do not appear to be fully relevant to the subject.
{[ Harp, Lion, Number 1 (Number)]}

So Harp, that will be the thing on the left, Lion, that will be the thing on the right, One, that will be the denomination indicated on the top?

My acceptance rate at IS is running at 53%, I am new to Alamy with a small portfolio but have a 100% acceptance rate so far, makes you think...?

Makes me think "How much does he make on Alamy with that %100"...

Quote from: AstburyD on November 10, 2008, 12:50

The following keywords used for this file do not appear to be fully relevant to the subject.
{[ Harp, Lion, Number 1 (Number)]}

So Harp, that will be the thing on the left, Lion, that will be the thing on the right, One, that will be the denomination indicated on the top?

Come on. Do you seriously think that someone who is searching for a harp or a lion is going to choose this coin? And there is no "number 1" at all. There are two words spelling out "one penny". The tag you selected is for an actual number, a numeral character.

Some of the whinging in this thread is just hilarious.

I'm no genius but if I had an image with a harp in it I'd probably keyword it 'harp'. Last time I did math (one=1). I think you meant 'whining' or did you?

Quote from: Zeus on November 10, 2008, 18:40

I'm no genius but if I had an image with a harp in it I'd probably keyword it 'harp'. Last time I did math (one=1). I think you meant 'whining' or did you?

Dictionary: whinge  (hwĭnj, wĭnj)
intr.v. Chiefly British., whinged, whing�ing, whing�es.
To complain or protest, especially in an annoying or persistent manner.

[Dialectal alteration of Middle English whinsen, from Old English hwinsian.]

whinger whing'er n.
whingingly whing'ing�ly adv.

I love it when I learn something new, thanks.

I got a keyword rejection last week for this:  I placed a diamond necklace over the heel of a black high-heeled dress shoe.  The wingnuts at iS rejected it, saying that the words "diamond" (as in precious stone) and "necklace" (as in jewelry accessory) were not appropriate to the image.

Okay, how do I describe a diamond necklace without using the words "diamond" and "necklace"?  At first, I couldn't believe the rejection; on second thought, I seriously considered nuking IS's corporate headquarters.  ARRRGGHHH!!!!  Does a potential "inspector" have to have a double-digit IQ to qualify for the job?  If that's the case, we're all in serious trouble here.   

Portia