Author Topic: How many keywords does everyone use at iStockphoto? (Read 13168 times)

Whiz · « **on:** September 03, 2007, 19:49 »

I usually use around ten keywords, and I also use a keyword suggestion tool.

Link to the keyword suggestion tool:

http://freekeywords.wordtracker.com/

sharply_done · « **Reply #1 on:** September 03, 2007, 20:00 »

I typically use between 30 and 40.

Dunno if it matters, but I purposefully arrange them. Because of the CV, some of the keywords I use to describe an image on IS aren't used on that same image on other sites.

hatman12 · « **Reply #2 on:** September 03, 2007, 20:41 »

I also typically use 30 - 40.

I use phrases quite a lot, like 'cardboard box' or 'christmas gift'. The IS CV recognises these instantly. Fotolia and BigStock also recognise them. DT, SS and StockXpert split up all the words and I have to input them again manually.

madelaide · « **Reply #3 on:** September 03, 2007, 20:51 »

I suppose I also average between 30 and 40. In a few images I surpassed the 50 maximum keywords and had to delete some of them.

Regards,
Adelaide

snoozle · « **Reply #4 on:** September 04, 2007, 13:35 »

wow I typically use between 10 and 15, looks like there's something else to improve upon as well as taking more and better photos.

sharpshot · « **Reply #5 on:** September 04, 2007, 14:40 »

Do you need more than 10 or 15? My best selling photo on istock has 15. I have a dog house that has sold 68 times with just 8 keywords. I could add another 40 but that would use up my time and might annoy people who were not looking for a dog house.

When I started there, I tried to put in as many keywords as possible but now I use a lot less.

sharply_done · « **Reply #6 on:** September 04, 2007, 15:29 »

The amount of keywords obviously depends a lot on what the image contains as well as the complexity of the marketplace.

pr2is · « **Reply #7 on:** September 05, 2007, 07:42 »

Quote from: sharpshot on September 04, 2007, 14:40

Do you need more than 10 or 15? My best selling photo on istock has 15. I have a dog house that has sold 68 times with just 8 keywords. I could add another 40 but that would use up my time and might annoy people who were not looking for a dog house.

When I started there, I tried to put in as many keywords as possible but now I use a lot less.

I often wondered about that myself. Let's say, there is a portrait of a pretty woman in a magically looking forrest surrounding. Is there point in adding keyword "magic"? How probable is it that a buyer includes this word in his search? Or, if it's an attempt to make the net broader in hope that someone looking for an image of a magician at work stumbles on woman's portrait and likes it - does that happen or he just gets irritated? I guess someone buying photos could shed the light

bjorn · « **Reply #8 on:** September 05, 2007, 10:59 »

Lets learn from the best

:

This weeks top 10 sellers on IStock (http://www.istockphoto.com/most_popular.php)

have respectively 43, 39, 43, 35, 37, 27, 40, 33, 32, 28 keywords.

pr2is · « **Reply #9 on:** September 05, 2007, 11:16 »

I don't know if that tells us much bjorn... there are too many factors involved in photo's popularity, not sure keywording can be singled out like that as a deciding or even significant factor. Sharpshot's experience in a post above is different, just simple directly relevant keywords were enough to make photo a good seller (obviously it was a good photo to begin with)

bjorn · « **Reply #10 on:** September 05, 2007, 11:44 »

With all due respect and nothing personal, but sharpshot's best shot sold 124 times in roughly 1 year (i would sign for it). But the top selling images i referred to sell that much in one week.

I guess the only way to find out is if you double or half your keywords and look over a longer time what happens.

I think that if you add more general keywords like 'email' or 'contact' to sharpshot's top image, sales will go up. Once again, learn from the best, look at how general and objective their keywords are.

Just my 2 cents...

sharply_done · « **Reply #11 on:** September 05, 2007, 12:09 »

Yep, I agree.

Keywording is the only tool you have to market your image, and you are handicapping your income by not paying it the close attention it deserves. The only restriction I place on keywords is that they must be relevant to the way I want to market the image.

So go ahead, limit yourself to some arbitrarily finite number of keywords, it's nobody's loss but your own.

pr2is · « **Reply #12 on:** September 05, 2007, 13:07 »

"Contact", OK... but "email"? Wouldn't it be really pushing it? By the standars being established aacross the sites, this one would seem like a keyword spam to me if used for the photo of a mail post box. What am I missing?

cmillc22 · « **Reply #13 on:** September 06, 2007, 15:23 »

i know i need to work on my keywords, i just do not know how you can come up with that many words for one photo $:-\$

hatman12 · « **Reply #14 on:** September 06, 2007, 15:42 »

"english", "england", "united kingdom", "royal mail", "post box", "mail box", "postage", "posting", "classic", "delivery", "antique", "quaint", "bright red", "colourful", "old", "classic design", "typical", "icon", "fifties", "sixties"......... and perhaps even "postman pat" (joke)........

sharpshot · « **Reply #15 on:** September 06, 2007, 16:08 »

I will add a few more keywords and see what happens.

hatman12 · « **Reply #16 on:** September 06, 2007, 16:28 »

Choosing keywords is a big problem, and as sharply points out however good or bad the image sometimes it's the keywords that make the sale or not. Visibility is everything.

The problem is trying to think like a buyer. In sharpshot's postbox image it would be easy to just think that buyers are looking for a picture of an English postbox and leave it at that. But actually, a buyer might be searching for something that is 'typically English' which is a different kettle of fish altogether. Given that most of the agencies are based in America, the 'typically English' search is likely to be much more popular than 'postbox'.

sharply_done · « **Reply #17 on:** September 06, 2007, 18:33 »

Inspired keywording work, hatman!

pr2is · « **Reply #18 on:** September 06, 2007, 19:57 »

That's a good point hatman. Adds different dimension to keywording.

PS. May I add "Going postal" to your impressive list of suggestions?

(Not sure if this joke is internationally understandable or specific to US)

Quote from: hatman12 on September 06, 2007, 16:28

The problem is trying to think like a buyer. In sharpshot's postbox image it would be easy to just think that buyers are looking for a picture of an English postbox and leave it at that. But actually, a buyer might be searching for something that is 'typically English' which is a different kettle of fish altogether. Given that most of the agencies are based in America, the 'typically English' search is likely to be much more popular than 'postbox'.

sharply_done · « **Reply #19 on:** September 06, 2007, 23:11 »

Whenever I see good keywording, I'll from now on say something like "He pulled a hatman on those keywords", "He made like hatman with it", or "Wow, that image has been totally hatmanned!"

Pixart · « **Reply #20 on:** September 07, 2007, 10:33 »

This would be a good place to ask a question. I have a photo of a woodpecker. It has the keyword Toucan. It is obviously NOT a toucan. Toucan is not in my IPTC data. Toucan is not visible in my edit photo profile, nor in any of IS suggested keywords. Where is this word coming from? Anyone know how I can delete it? I tried their forum today but was bumped out, IS seems a little unstable today.

yingyang0 · « **Reply #21 on:** September 07, 2007, 11:23 »

Pixart - if you link to the photo here I'll look at it. The most likely thing is that one of the disambiguated terms maps to toucan.

Pixart · « **Reply #22 on:** September 07, 2007, 11:30 »

Thanks YY, I appreciate you trying to help. I'm getting a 503 error now at IS but I will check back again this afternoon, if I can get back on IS later.

Pixart · « **Reply #23 on:** September 07, 2007, 15:01 »

Here's the link. I was able to remove median nerve when it updates. I just don't want to get busted for spamming over the toucan part.

http://www.istockphoto.com/file_closeup.php?id=3515684

yingyang0 · « **Reply #24 on:** September 07, 2007, 20:33 »

Quote from: Pixart on September 07, 2007, 15:01

Here's the link. I was able to remove median nerve when it updates. I just don't want to get busted for spamming over the toucan part.

http://www.istockphoto.com/file_closeup.php?id=3515684

I finally got a chance to look (IS is now back up minus forums) and I can't see what it is. I would sitemail keywords about it so they can get it fixed.

pr2is · « **Reply #25 on:** September 08, 2007, 10:26 »

Guys,

I have an image that seems suitable for a clean experiment. Uploaded 10 days ago, zero views at this point. I was able to come up with whole 14 keywords for it. Anyone proficient in effective keywording would be willing to help with this one so I add them, write down the number of views at that point to discount the views generated by your clicks and see in a week or so how much it influenced the visibility?

http://www.istockphoto.com/file_closeup.php?id=4128409

Thank you

pr2is · « **Reply #26 on:** September 08, 2007, 10:29 »

Actually... I just thought of even cleaner way to experiment with this. Two very close images, similar keywords, one is viewed 6 times, another 7. I would add new keywords to only one of them leaving second as a control material:

http://www.istockphoto.com/file_closeup.php?id=4043950

http://www.istockphoto.com/file_closeup.php?id=4043006

What do you think?

yingyang0 · « **Reply #27 on:** September 08, 2007, 12:50 »

Quote from: pr2is on September 08, 2007, 10:26

Guys,

I have an image that seems suitable for a clean experiment. Uploaded 10 days ago, zero views at this point. I was able to come up with whole 14 keywords for it. Anyone proficient in effective keywording would be willing to help with this one so I add them, write down the number of views at that point to discount the views generated by your clicks and see in a week or so how much it influenced the visibility?

http://www.istockphoto.com/file_closeup.php?id=4128409

Thank you

'wine glass', 'shadow', whatever kind of wine that is (merlot maybe), 'ripples', 'alcohol', 'red wine'

yingyang0 · « **Reply #28 on:** September 08, 2007, 13:03 »

Quote from: pr2is on September 08, 2007, 10:29

Actually... I just thought of even cleaner way to experiment with this. Two very close images, similar keywords, one is viewed 6 times, another 7. I would add new keywords to only one of them leaving second as a control material:

http://www.istockphoto.com/file_closeup.php?id=4043950

http://www.istockphoto.com/file_closeup.php?id=4043006

What do you think?

'fruit salad', 'healthy eating', 'selective focus', 'focus on foreground', 'macro'

I'd also get rid of 'healthcare and medicine' since this isn't medically related.

pr2is · « **Reply #29 on:** September 08, 2007, 13:07 »

Thank you yingyang. I'll wait a bit for more suggestions so I edit keywords once.

LOL, 'healthcare and medicine' got mapped in by CV, my miss... obviously not appropriate.

hatman12 · « **Reply #30 on:** September 08, 2007, 19:14 »

"red wine", "wine glass", "bordeaux", "french wine", "claret", "sultry", "mood", "atmosphere", "concept", "idyllic",
"relaxation", "typically french", "french life", "picnic", ......."petrus?".......

PaulieWalnuts · « **Reply #31 on:** September 08, 2007, 21:11 »

Does IS search only look at keywords, or title and description too?

pr2is · « **Reply #32 on:** September 08, 2007, 23:09 »

Added keywords, thanks guys. Will give it a week or so and report changes.

sharpshot · « **Reply #33 on:** September 09, 2007, 02:04 »

Quote from: Nazdravie on September 08, 2007, 21:11

Does IS search only look at keywords, or title and description too?

I think it looks at the title too but not the description. Some of my early titles were very poor and I have changed them.

sharply_done · « **Reply #34 on:** September 09, 2007, 04:36 »

Quote from: sharpshot on September 09, 2007, 02:04

Quote from: Nazdravie on September 08, 2007, 21:11
Does IS search only look at keywords, or title and description too?

I think it looks at the title too but not the description. Some of my early titles were very poor and I have changed them.

Thanks for the tip, sharphot - I'd better get busy!

diane555 · « **Reply #35 on:** September 09, 2007, 07:20 »

Quote from: Nazdravie on September 08, 2007, 21:11

Does IS search only look at keywords, or title and description too?

No, IS does not search the title or the description...only the keywords.

sharpshot · « **Reply #36 on:** September 09, 2007, 07:30 »

Quote from: diane555 on September 09, 2007, 07:20

Quote from: Nazdravie on September 08, 2007, 21:11
Does IS search only look at keywords, or title and description too?

No, IS does not search the title or the description...only the keywords.

I read somewhere that they do use the title but perhaps not.

Susan S. · « **Reply #37 on:** September 09, 2007, 17:24 »

istock used to use the title for keywords, but when the Controlled Vocabulary came in last year they dropped that, and titles should no longer be included as keywords (as Diane correctly says).

madelaide · « **Reply #38 on:** September 09, 2007, 20:58 »

If I were to write the logics in a search tool, I would consider as least the title besides the keywords. I mean, an image that has "dog" as a keyword and also in the title is more likely to be more relevant than one with dog in the keywords only. Even more relevant would be images with dog in the title, description and keywords.

Ok, nothing impedes one to put a title such as "sexy woman" in a photo of a bar of soap, it's just like keyword spam.

Regards,
Adelaide

fotografer · « **Reply #39 on:** September 10, 2007, 01:50 »

Quote from: madelaide on September 09, 2007, 20:58

If I were to write the logics in a search tool, I would consider as least the title besides the keywords. I mean, an image that has "dog" as a keyword and also in the title is more likely to be more relevant than one with dog in the keywords only. Even more relevant would be images with dog in the title, description and keywords.

That's how the DT search engine works. I think that it gives much more relevant searches.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: How many keywords does everyone use at iStockphoto? (Read 13168 times)

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors