I can't believe this problem still isn't fixed. I just tried uploading 3 images to IS, all have no metadata.

I was going to ask if this was another slam at non-exclusives (yes, I am a conspiracy theorist and proud of it!) but I see some exclusives posting that they have problems also.

I used to have the same problem when I was using a free utility to add/manage keywords, but now just putting them into photoshop and the problem went away.

I do add metadata in PS CS4, and it doesn't work every single time. Usually once I upload a couple with none, I cancel and re-upload and then it works. Yesterday, not so much.

Hmmm. It is pretty pathetic.

Just found this over on the IS forum, posted about a half hour ago...

Hi again,
Here's a brief summary of what we're working on in Systems at iStockphoto, related to the problems you refer to here.
- Video uploads are sometimes failing with an error "403 - Forbidden", or a blank error window. We have confirmed the behavior and are looking into the uploads server settings now to try to resolve it
- JPEG Metadata not being read. This is a long standing issue with the software we use to read the jpeg metadata, and it continues to get worse over time, as updates to the metadata standard have been numerous and often enough to cause us to lag far behind in our support for the standard. This won't be fixed right away, but we are evaluating better options now and hope to have something much better for you soon
- ImageManager uploads failing. We know what is causing this, we're going to have to work with the dev team for ImageManager and get the code updated. Until then please use DeepMeta
Speaking of Deepmeta, it should work fine for reading the metadata out of your files (to answer a previous question).

I'll get back to you later today as we have some more info to report. Thanks for your patience!

So IS has changed their software and now the only way to get my metadata read is to use software created by them (DeepMeta). Hmmmm.

Who wants to make a bet...I'm betting this is NEVER going to get fixed.

I never upload from multiple browsers, and still have the missing metadata problem at least 20% of the time.  That is, until Tuesday after whatever work they did on the upload system.  After that I had a 100% failure rate.

I tried the beta of Deepmeta for the Mac and gave up almost immediately.  First, it was taking many minutes to example each image; and second, it managed to not find a single keyword in any of the images it processed.  Didn't seem much point in pursuing it any further.

I tried the beta of Deepmeta for the Mac and gave up almost immediately.  First, it was taking many minutes to example each image; and second, it managed to not find a single keyword in any of the images it processed.  Didn't seem much point in pursuing it any further.


I wondered about that. I also work on a mac and noticed the real versions were developed for PCs and the mac version is beta.

KB, an admin in the forum just stated that a contributor did develop the software, but here's the site I went to:

http://www.deepmeta.com/

All I see is istock's logo plastered everywhere, with reference as to how you use this with your istock portfolio. If I were an exclusive at istock, I guess I wouldnt mind, but being a non-exclusive and uploading to competitive sites, I'm not sure I want to put software on my computer that is endorsed by istock. Call me paranoid, but I know for a fact that data can be captured by software, and I'm not sure I want any of my data being captured by istock. I am NOT saying that this program does that...I AM saying that I am going to be very wary about this until I have a software guru check it out.

I did have ImageManager on my computer for a while, but found that to be cumbersome and it didn't work well either. When you downloaded it, you actually went to the contributors site, NOT something with istock all over it.

edit: I just found this on the contact page of the deepmeta site.

Eazign bvba, a small Belgium based company, has created and maintains the DeepMeta software and web site.
Eazign bvba is registered in Brussels. Reg ID: 0860.434.441. The company was founded in 2003, leveraging over 20 years of experience in software and web development.

KB, an admin in the forum just stated that a contributor did develop the software, but here's the site I went to:

http://www.deepmeta.com/

All I see is istock's logo plastered everywhere, with reference as to how you use this with your istock portfolio. If I were an exclusive at istock, I guess I wouldnt mind, but being a non-exclusive and uploading to competitive sites, I'm not sure I want to put software on my computer that is endorsed by istock. Call me paranoid, but I know for a fact that data can be captured by software, and I'm not sure I want any of my data being captured by istock. I am NOT saying that this program does that...I AM saying that I am going to be very wary about this until I have a software guru check it out.

edit: I just found this on the contact page of the deepmeta site.

Eazign bvba, a small Belgium based company, has created and maintains the DeepMeta software and web site.
Eazign bvba is registered in Brussels. Reg ID: 0860.434.441. The company was founded in 2003, leveraging over 20 years of experience in software and web development.

I'd never noticed that before. That must be Franky's software company. I'm not sure about "seeing iStock's logo plastered about everywhere" -- I just see one, little logo in the upper right hand corner.  Like I said, AFAIK, this is just Franky's effort, and it's terribly generous of him to share it with all of us, for free. (I can see how some suspicions can arise from that.)

Please do have your software guru check it out, but I am sure there's no hanky panky going on (but if I'm wrong, be sure to let us all know!). But once you are satisfied, honestly, you owe it to yourself to try it out. I upload to 8 other sites besides IS, so I understand your reluctance to use something that doesn't help with the others. But if you are going to upload to IS, it just makes sense to use DM, since it saves you time and effort.

It took many attempts, but I finally convinced another independent contributor in my CN to try DM out a little while ago. She was thrilled with it, and couldn't believe it took her that long to try it. On the other hand, I have another CN member who still refuses to even try it, so I can't convince everyone.

Once you get used to using DM, going back to the "bad old" iStock UL'ing web method is like trying to use dialup after switching to broadband. There's no going back!

If/when you do try it out, be sure to read the "Getting Started" pages:
http://www.deepmeta.com/GettingStarted/

It took me a few months before I discovered those pages, and there were a ton of features lurking that I had missed. Honestly, it's a wonderful program.

It is an incredibly generous offer to give for free, but why didn't the contributor offer it on their own website instead of one that looks like an istock website? Just sayin.

It is his own website. He just stock an IS logo on it, but I don't believe he ever intended to make it seem like it was an IS site (or one endorsed by IS).

Having to change to this means changing around my whole workflow. Now I will have to use this for keywording and uploading to IS, while still using PS, re-keywording or copying and pasting, both of which take even more time, for the other sites. Will have to ponder this new development.

It hasn't changed my workflow much.

I save my keywords in the EXIF data. DM reads this when you import an image, and you then use DM to disambiguate. The only extra keywording step (besides DA'ing itself, of course) is IS-only phrases. I usually just type those in when DA'ing in DM (there are only a few that aren't relevant to other sites).

I think if you stop looking at this as a hassle, extra trouble, or a bad thing, and instead appreciate DM for what it can do, you might find yourself pleasantly surprised once you've gotten over the learning curve (which isn't too bad, but of course exists with any new application). You might even become a DM advocate like me -- don't say I didn't warn ya! 

I have no plans to change my workflow to include Deep Meta.   Maybe if istock was my only site I would do that, but not with 8 other sites to upload to.

As Asiaphoto said, uploading one at a time instead of in multiple browser windows seems to work better, but I generally upload in batches of 15+ at a time and it isn't really practical to do that one image at a time.  Beside which even if the metadata is initially read, if you don't submit the image right away (within 5 minutes or so) it is then lost.

I am glad to read they are working on this issue because it is ridiculous to have to use third party software instead of having the most basic site functionality.  Hope they get a handle on this sooner rather than later. 

Who are that guys from DM?
On iStock site on their download page with software they dont exsist.
Third part?!?, and Alfa, and Beta an no Vector/Flash/Video feature?!?

What is the purpose or any kind of usefulness of that wanna bee "application" at all?

Quote from: KB on September 03, 2009, 17:56

Quote from: lisafx on September 03, 2009, 17:41

I have no plans to change my workflow to include Deep Meta.   Maybe if istock was my only site I would do that, but not with 8 other sites to upload to.

I think you've been talking with that certain person in my CN, because that is pretty much exactly what she says. 

Actually, I have no idea who that would be and I haven't been talking to anyone on istock about this.  This is my own feeling on the subject and hasn't been influenced by anyone else, but it isn't surprising there are others who feel the same. 

Seriously, it is total BS to have to bother with an outside program because istock can't manage functionality that every other piddly wannabe stock site can handle.

Lisa, I was just joking about my CN member. I even happened to mention your name once, and she did not know you, so I'm sure you haven't been discussing it with her. 

I don't disagree with you that IS' upload procedure sucks and should be better. But since the reality is what it is, I just don't understand people's reluctance to use a free, available, and well-liked tool to make their job easier.

But enough of my evangelizing. It's to my benefit, really, to not encourage people to use DM. The more difficult the IS upload process, the fewer new images will be uploaded. 

The more difficult the IS upload process, the fewer new images will be uploaded.

And I wouldn't be surprised if that wasn't the intent to begin with.

You are not alone in wondering this Cathy.  Over the past year or so, while upload processes at the other sites have all been streamlined, it has grown more and more tedious at istock. 

One either has to conclude that istock is incompetent (highly doubtful considering their success) or that these obstacles are meant to keep out the faint of heart

Quote from: lisafx on September 04, 2009, 09:21

One either has to conclude that istock is incompetent (highly doubtful considering their success) or that these obstacles are meant to keep out the faint of heart

Hey hey! Lisa I know how you Americans love a conspiracy theory, but I doubt that is the case
I have just uploaded and didn't get any metadata showing Despite doing the 'forum shuffle', which always seemed to work in the past!

So your vote is for "incompetence" then?

So your vote is for "incompetence" then?

Oh, it's definitely 'incompetence' __ read cclappers pasted message from the IS forum above.

I am not exclusive as well and Deepmeta has definitely decreased my workload (I think I'll have to join KB in the Deepmeta marketing team...).

Same here. Uploading without it would be much more tedious.

This morning I did read somewhere that DeepMeta will pull keywords directly from Photoshop. If this is true, that would solve my issue with having to keyword twice, once in DM and once in PS. BUT...

I also read a bunch of posts on the IS forum that users of DM have also been having issues with their metadata not being read. And I could swear that yesterday morning I read some posts by people using Lightroom that were having issues also (since the latest downtime on IS a couple of days ago), but for the life of me when I went to find those posts this morning, I could not.

Well, anyway, the whole thing truly does show either incompetence or planned incompetence, whichever.

I'm sorry KB, I had to

As long as you don't do it again.     

This morning I did read somewhere that DeepMeta will pull keywords directly from Photoshop. If this is true

Perhaps you read my post? 

The only way you'll know for sure (apparently) is if you try it. But I recommend against that. 

Sorry if it seems like I'm giving you a hard time, Cathy.

To be honest, I felt exactly as you did when I first heard of DM. I completely ignored it, and couldn't see how it could do anything but complicate my already complex workflow. Then after many months of reading (and skipping) people's praises of it, I finally decided, what the heck, I'll give it a try. It was ok, but not earth-shattering. But eventually I read that online manual, and that's when I learned of all the power lurking right below the surface. And I've been a believer ever since.

Oops. Sorry, goldenangel, looks like I did it again!