MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: THIRD & FINAL WARNING: Unacceptable Keyword Practices  (Read 8522 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Uncle Pete

« Reply #50 on: December 07, 2014, 14:29 »
0
Does this work for missing CV - DA definitions too? I have a few that would make my life better. But of course only people who upload race cars and racing would be interested. They would be fairly racing related DAs but common for anyone who needed them or used that kind of material.

ShadySue, just post the keyword you want added in the forum or send a message to ducksandwich.   With all the complaining about keywords not being in the CV you do here you could easily have solved your problems months ago.  You say you don't care about it but by all the posts you make about this it sure seems like you do. 

There is a quick and easy way to fix your problems but you choose not to do it, I don't get it.  Why spend your time shooting, editing, keywording, uploading, complaining, searching, etc.. etc.. for your images if you won't do something so simple that might be necessary for it to be licensed?
« Last Edit: December 07, 2014, 14:35 by Uncle Pete »


« Reply #51 on: December 07, 2014, 14:34 »
0
Does this work for missing CV definitions too? I have a few that would make my life better.

ShadySue, just post the keyword you want added in the forum or send a message to ducksandwich.   With all the complaining about keywords not being in the CV you do here you could easily have solved your problems months ago.  You say you don't care about it but by all the posts you make about this it sure seems like you do. 

There is a quick and easy way to fix your problems but you choose not to do it, I don't get it.  Why spend your time shooting, editing, keywording, uploading, complaining, searching, etc.. etc.. for your images if you won't do something so simple that might be necessary for it to be licensed?
It all depends on the case I'm sure but for ShadySue's example I think they would probably add the common and latin names for a bird species that was already accepted into the collection.  Some different definitions aren't different enough to warrant an extra term but it only takes a second to request a keyword to be added so it can't hurt to try.

« Reply #52 on: December 07, 2014, 14:55 »
0
Truth is they never added keywords which weren't likely to be widely used,  but as noted above before this low priority bug you could always add a keyword 'for your own use'.
That's not at all the truth, I've had lots of keywords added where only one or two images would be affected.

Why should that responsibility be thrown on us? They are the ones who invented this new vocabulary.  If they accepted general English keywords that would be a BIG ADVANCEMENT for Istock. Instead they invent a caddywhompus system that required/s contributors to learn a new method of key wording.  Istock should do what they used to do (maybe they still do as I don't get rejections on key wording anymore) and have tough scrutiny at submission, but with a general english key wording system. "Beauty in nature"? And you kidding me? What contributor would EVER know

1. That this key phrase exists
2. When to use it?

« Reply #53 on: December 07, 2014, 15:01 »
+1
just post the keyword you want added in the forum or send a message to ducksandwich

As I have tried to explain in my previous post, there can be an issue with new keywords being added to hierarchy. Especially if this results in mapping being changed. The problem is that it can mean that existing images in the library end up effectively orphaned. Because CV hierarchy changes are not adequately communicated to people with existing images which may be affected.

« Reply #54 on: December 07, 2014, 15:19 »
+2
Why should that responsibility be thrown on us?
That's the just the way it is.  You can cry and moan about it or you can work within the system and get your images seen.  I choose to put my work on iStock and since I want my images licensed I do the keywording how they want and if there aren't keywords in the CV that I think should be there I request them to be added.  I don't see much point in whining about it, I'd rather spend my time getting my images sold.

ShadySue

« Reply #55 on: December 07, 2014, 15:43 »
0
It all depends on the case I'm sure but for ShadySue's example I think they would probably add the common and latin names for a bird species that was already accepted into the collection. 
As you say, it all depends on the case.
One of my old CN didn't get a batch of South American birds (which he'd had accepted) added.
AFAIK he now submits elsewhere as a matter of course.
« Last Edit: December 07, 2014, 18:09 by ShadySue »

« Reply #56 on: December 07, 2014, 16:01 »
0
Why should that responsibility be thrown on us?
That's the just the way it is.  You can cry and moan about it or you can work within the system and get your images seen.  I choose to put my work on iStock and since I want my images licensed I do the keywording how they want and if there aren't keywords in the CV that I think should be there I request them to be added.  I don't see much point in whining about it, I'd rather spend my time getting my images sold.

I am not crying and moaning, I am stating a fact. I have adapted because it is necessary that one does. All I am saying is that they didn't have to create this monstrosity of a system called controlled vocabulary. Even you, Ticktock, I am sure would love to have a more user friendly system at IS, specifically the key wording strategy. They have complicated things by now requiring prioritizing words, forcing contributors to go through that time consuming process.  Many people like me who have been in this for, say, more than 8 years, have to keep two sets of keywords, one for IS and one for everyone else. You can defend them all you want (as you always do) but their system SUCKS!!

ShadySue

« Reply #57 on: December 07, 2014, 16:11 »
0
They have complicated things by now requiring prioritizing words, forcing contributors to go through that time consuming process. 

Nope, that was just a blip in the continuum.
http://www.istockphoto.com
/forum_messages.php?threadid=351851&messageid=7026088#post7026088

Referred to by Kelvinjay in this October thread:
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=363509

Actually, I think prioritising is a good idea, in theory, but with the system as mucked up as it is now, who knows what would break if they tried it.

« Reply #58 on: December 07, 2014, 16:15 »
0
^

I used to think that the CV was a strong idea. But today I wonder whether it is an over-engineered and over complex solution vs the lightweight simplicity of free text. The staffing and technical overheads must also be significant and I wonder whether it will ultimately be phased-out ?

The Party Food example above is a good one. Party Food and Buffet should bring up subtly different mixes of images. And there will be many similar examples. The CV eliminates this sort of granularity by making things the same which are actually potentially different. In this example a complex implementation of simplicity creates ambiguity.

And changes to the structure of the CV potentially result in existing images being effectively orphaned. For example, even if Party Food were to be retrospectively given its own place in the hierarchy, those images which are already primarily keyworded Buffet would not necessarily be mapped to the new item. For instance, many who knew that Party Food = Buffet in the iStock CV, or used copy,would not have included the  potentially more descriptive term. And they would have no way of knowing that they should revise their keywording. Because these changes are not effectively communicated to those with content which might be affected.

I think that the idea of a CV potentially made sense at a managed library like Getty Images where it was originally implemented and where the keywording was done by staff. I am not so sure that it makes sense at a site like iStockphoto where thousands of images are uploaded and keyworded every day by the contributors themselves.


It is one of these things that should never have got past the "idea" stage. 

« Reply #59 on: December 07, 2014, 16:24 »
+1
Why should that responsibility be thrown on us?
That's the just the way it is.  You can cry and moan about it or you can work within the system and get your images seen.  I choose to put my work on iStock and since I want my images licensed I do the keywording how they want and if there aren't keywords in the CV that I think should be there I request them to be added.  I don't see much point in whining about it, I'd rather spend my time getting my images sold.

I am not crying and moaning, I am stating a fact. I have adapted because it is necessary that one does. All I am saying is that they didn't have to create this monstrosity of a system called controlled vocabulary. Even you, Ticktock, I am sure would love to have a more user friendly system at IS, specifically the key wording strategy. They have complicated things by now requiring prioritizing words, forcing contributors to go through that time consuming process.  Many people like me who have been in this for, say, more than 8 years, have to keep two sets of keywords, one for IS and one for everyone else. You can defend them all you want (as you always do) but their system SUCKS!!
I actually like the CV, I would rather see the uploading process be even more time consuming if it gave better results.  I like that Alamy makes you break your keywords up into different categories, it's better now that iStock has some keywording order relevance.  If you are going to spend time, money, and effort to make your images it doesn't seem like too much to spend a few minutes keywording your images well if it will help them sell.

The CV for instance has the same results if you search in English for 'USA' and in Spanish for 'estados unidos' whereas on Shutterstock those two searches come up with radically different results.  The search in Spanish on shutterstock comes up with many irrelevant images first and more than 4 times the total number of results.  The point of the CV is to have it translated into many different languages and continue to get good results, in this case it looks to me like the iStock search has done much better.  The English search at SS looks good but the Spanish search looks pretty bad overall.
« Last Edit: December 07, 2014, 16:45 by tickstock »

stockuser

« Reply #60 on: December 08, 2014, 04:05 »
0
Yes their CV rocks like everything else they offer...

« Reply #61 on: December 14, 2014, 09:17 »
-1
.
« Last Edit: December 15, 2014, 03:57 by jsmithzz »


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
3 Replies
2244 Views
Last post August 20, 2008, 16:22
by kosmikkreeper
20 Replies
5632 Views
Last post June 14, 2010, 21:52
by UncleGene
449 Replies
30172 Views
Last post July 06, 2013, 19:29
by Leo Blanchette
7 Replies
3346 Views
Last post December 17, 2013, 02:50
by 7Horses
11 Replies
3084 Views
Last post August 01, 2019, 04:12
by zsooofija

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results