Author Topic: What is aciculum? (Read 4521 times)

Reckless · « **on:** July 07, 2014, 01:32 »

While browsing some photos on iStock I noticed a keyword ( aciculum ) near the end of the list. This was on a photo of a semi-truck. I looked it up and see it is a part of certain insects but wonder if there is some other usage of the word in other parts of the world.

The only reason I decided to inquire here is after putting the word into the search field 583 pages came up and the first photo is the famous one of the little girl blowing on the dandelion seeds. I also checked randomly and found the keyword on all the files I checked. I thought I was well versed in the English language but if this word is that common, I must have missed "aciculum" day at school. It's late here so I will have to wait till morning to see if there is a need for such a word. Thanks.

Beppe Grillo · « **Reply #1 on:** July 07, 2014, 01:56 »

You are right, searching on 123RF I have found a lot of images not having nothing to do with insects…
http://it.depositphotos.com/stock-photos/aciculum.html

–––
New Latin, alteration of Late Latin acicula small pin for a headdress

Source: http://biology_en_ru.academic.ru/463/aciculum

(But I don't see the relation with the photos)

dpimborough · « **Reply #2 on:** July 07, 2014, 04:23 »

Sounds like really up market keyword spam using obscure Latin terms

ShadySue · « **Reply #3 on:** July 07, 2014, 04:32 »

V ery mysterious - 894 apparently random images on SS too: http://www.shutterstock.com/cat.mhtml?searchterm=aciculum&search_group=&lang=en&language=en&search_source=search_form&version=llv1
and 110 equally random on Alamy: http://www.alamy.com/search/imageresults.aspx?qt=aciculum

So it's clearly not just one of iS's strange 'keyword bugs'.

Other definitions of acicula:
"One of the needlelike or bristlelike spines or prickles of some animals and plants; also, a needlelike crystal."
"Biol., Geol. a needlelike spine, prickle, particle, or crystal; esp., an ice crystal"
"slender needle-like leaf"
But I still see no relevance in most of the images. I'd never heard of the word before.
I wondered if it was a word in another language, but neither Googling nor checking the nationalies of contributors on iS using the word helped (3 random clicks: Italian, Indian, German).
Then I wondered if it's some group of people who are connected in some way by social media using it like BHZ on Alamy to monitor search positioning, but I think that's a long shot.
Someone here usually has the answer to a mystery, and I look forward to reading it.

ShadySue · « **Reply #4 on:** July 07, 2014, 04:44 »

Just clicked on another five randomly on iStock. The random five were not badly spammed, and in each case, aciculum was the first rearranged word as shown on the file's page, though not as they were entered.
Also 769 on Ft, 675 on DT.
0 on Stocksy, though.

Reckless · « **Reply #5 on:** July 07, 2014, 08:58 »

I wonder if that word has been added to all these photos later by someone other than the photographer. I can't imagine why that would happen but also can't imagine anyone adding this word on their own. Possibly some hackers idea of a secret joke?

bunhill · « **Reply #6 on:** July 07, 2014, 09:13 »

I think this is an iStock thing. I suspect that the reason the word is also found out of context at other sites is likely to be connected with people copying the keywords from other people's files. And / or in the files which were later uploaded to other sites using existing metadata - perhaps after people dropped exclusivity.

Beppe Grillo · « **Reply #7 on:** July 07, 2014, 09:57 »

Quote from: bunhill on July 07, 2014, 09:13

I think this is an iStock thing. I suspect that the reason the word is also found out of context at other sites is likely to be connected with people copying the keywords from other people's files. And / or in the files which were later uploaded to other sites using existing metadata - perhaps after people dropped exclusivity.

How can it be an iStock thing if you find a lot of results on other sites too?
And did you tried a search with google images?

–
Mysterious mystery…

bunhill · « **Reply #8 on:** July 07, 2014, 10:06 »

Quote from: Beppe Grillo on July 07, 2014, 09:57

How can it be an iStock thing if you find a lot of results on other sites too?
And did you tried a search with google images?

There are fewer than 900 images at Shutterstock with that keyword. There are approximately 63,000 at iStock. That is why I believe it is an iStock word which has ended up elsewhere via keyword copying. As I said above. And possibly also as a result of formerly exclusive work later being uploaded elsewhere using existing metadata. As I said above.

The other reason I am guessing it is an iStock thing is because there was an era when some of the people doing stuff on the content side at iStock I think had a tendency to use words rather like that in order to flag particular content or to describe particular initiatives.

(Not discounting the possibility that a few pictures at any site might actually be tagged with that word for literal reasons).

Reckless · « **Reply #9 on:** July 07, 2014, 10:20 »

Quote from: bunhill on July 07, 2014, 10:06

Quote from: Beppe Grillo on July 07, 2014, 09:57
How can it be an iStock thing if you find a lot of results on other sites too?
And did you tried a search with google images?

There are fewer than 900 images at Shutterstock with that keyword. There are approximately 63,000 at iStock. That is why I believe it is an iStock word which has ended up elsewhere via keyword copying. As I said above. And possibly also as a result of formerly exclusive work later being uploaded elsewhere using existing metadata. As I said above.

The other reason I am guessing it is an iStock thing is because there was an era when some of the people doing stuff on the content side at iStock I think had a tendency to use words rather like that in order to flag particular content or to describe particular initiatives.

(Not discounting the possibility that a few pictures at any site might actually be tagged with that word for literal reasons).

That is an interesting thought. I wonder if I put that word into one of my images if it would jump up five notches in the search algorithm?

bunhill · « **Reply #10 on:** July 07, 2014, 10:40 »

I think it was probably a long ago thing which is only kept alive today via keyword copying.

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #11 on:** July 07, 2014, 13:21 »

aciculum isn't in the CV (I checked by editing one of my own images).

If you look at the images with that keyword, the oldest is from 2002 and the newest from June - in other words it isn't some ancient or recent temporary snafu that caused it (or an addition/subtraction from the CV as there are a couple of new images with the keyword and they have no other keywords in common

http://www.istockphoto.com/photo/shipyards-and-crane-42763232?st=6aff840

http://www.istockphoto.com/photo/ritratto-bimba-bagnetto-42863346?st=19a107e

Not sure about the copying as here's an illustration uploaded in June to both iStock and Shutterstock and it has the keyword

http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-197528900/stock-vector-greeting-card-snail-with-butterflies.html
http://www.istockphoto.com/vector/snail-with-butterflies-42488614?st=8b90a2b

Could there be some third party keywording tool that's adding this word (which I had never heard prior to this thread?)

wordplanet · « **Reply #12 on:** July 07, 2014, 13:27 »

Thinking Shady Sue's thought that on iS it could be like BHZ at Alamy and on other sites via copying seems the most likely explanation. A way to see if your files are moving up or down in searches.

ShadySue · « **Reply #13 on:** July 07, 2014, 17:31 »

Quote from: wordplanet on July 07, 2014, 13:27

Thinking Shady Sue's thought that on iS it could be like BHZ at Alamy and on other sites via copying seems the most likely explanation. A way to see if your files are moving up or down in searches.

The trouble with that theory is that the way the best match was historically supposed to work (and indeed, did for a long time) was that keyword relevance was added during the course of viewing and buying, so you could have some files near the top of searches, but others near the bottom, whereas at Alamy your whole port goes up or down at each change.
Then the keywords would be auto-rearranged on the file's page over time to put the most searched-on/presumably relevant ones at the front of your list, no matter what your original order was.
The weird thing was 'aciculum' is the first showing keyword on each of several random files I clicked on, although usually 'middle' as apparently originally keyworded. As Jo Ann says, it's not in the CV, so it's not as though it's been wrongly DAd from something else (e.g. for a while the keyword Mela only mapped to 'apple' from the Italian, so it was wrong for the festival (now added to the CV)).

roede-orm · « **Reply #14 on:** July 08, 2014, 00:30 »

I know some photographers here in Germany, who add a special word (mostly a very strange word that makes actually no sense) to the keywods for more easily find their pictures on the net. Maybe this is such a case?

bunhill · « **Reply #15 on:** July 08, 2014, 01:11 »

Quote from: Jo Ann Snover on July 07, 2014, 13:21

If you look at the images with that keyword, the oldest is from 2002 and the newest from June - in other words it isn't some ancient or recent temporary snafu that caused it (or an addition/subtraction from the CV as there are a couple of new images with the keyword and they have no other keywords in common

I am guessing that long ago (maybe 2007/8) the content team were putting together a collection of images and that word was added to potential selections. Much as keywords are used to today to identify images submitted in response to specific briefs.

Either way, I am guessing that all recent uploads with that keyword have the word included because the keywords have been copied from other files.

Difydave · « **Reply #16 on:** July 08, 2014, 06:04 »

Try narrowing the search "aciculum" with the word "handcarves"
They can't all be copied keywords surely? Some of them would have been DA'd out during uploading.

ShadySue · « **Reply #17 on:** July 08, 2014, 07:11 »

Quote from: Difydave on July 08, 2014, 06:04

Try narrowing the search "aciculum" with the word "handcarves"
They can't all be copied keywords surely? Some of them would have been DA'd out during uploading.

Neither 'aciculum' nor 'handcarves' are in the CV, so no DAing possible.
Hmmm, there are loads of huge sellers with 'handcarves' in the keywords. No matter ignorami are copying it.
I see bunhill has posted on the keyword forum for aciculum and Ducksandwich is looking into it. Maybe add 'handcarves' to that query. Maybe they were secret keywords to denote a particular early 'lypse?
It will be interesting to see the answer when it comes!

Difydave · « **Reply #18 on:** July 08, 2014, 07:21 »

Quote from: ShadySue on July 08, 2014, 07:11

Quote from: Difydave on July 08, 2014, 06:04
Try narrowing the search "aciculum" with the word "handcarves"
They can't all be copied keywords surely? Some of them would have been DA'd out during uploading.
Neither 'aciculum' nor 'handcarves' are in the CV, so no DAing possible.
Hmmm, there are loads of huge sellers with 'handcarves' in the keywords. No matter ignorami are copying it.
I see bunhill has posted on the keyword forum for aciculum and Ducksandwich is looking into it. Maybe add 'handcarves' to that query. Maybe they were secret keywords to denote a particular early 'lypse?
It will be interesting to see the answer when it comes!

Yes not "DAd". Wrong terminology. Just "removed during the keywording process"

Which is what most people would have done, or at least should have done, and makes me wonder if these have been somehow been randomly added later somehow. You can see the ones that have been copied, as they would seem to be the recent ones which are if not actually spammed, then are not so well keyworded.

ETA I've added a bit about the "handcarves" word to Bunhill's thread on the iStock forum.

ShadySue · « **Reply #19 on:** July 08, 2014, 07:38 »

Quote from: Difydave on July 08, 2014, 07:21

Just "removed during the keywording process"
Which is what most people would have done, or at least should have done,

Hve you checked keywording on a lot of new files, particularly of newbies? It looks as though they applied the same batch of keywords to many totally unrelated files and threw them all up. And while I got 'horizontal' removed from a file which admittedly was only c1.2w x 1h, these all get left in on inspection.

I guess there is also the breed of person who thinks that if 'aciculum' is a useful keyword on very high selling files, they should have it.

I am really intrigued now to find the answer to this conundrum.

Difydave · « **Reply #20 on:** July 08, 2014, 08:23 »

Haven't really checked that extensively. What I certainly can see from a quick look now, and looking in the recent past, is that some files seem to have every imaginable keyword applied. No matter how tenuous the link may be. Now I know I've had the occasional keyword correctly removed from uploads in the past few months, so it makes me wonder if at least some of these are being added after acceptance, with little checking or thought.

Difydave · « **Reply #21 on:** July 08, 2014, 08:37 »

Incidentally "aciculum" is a word, although it looks as if it is more often used in the plural "acicula" which is also a genus of snails. (I knew the word looked vaguely familiar, but I've just been doing some reading)
But "handcarves" isn't a word AFAIK, "hand carves" (with space) is the correct, but still fairly unusual usage surely?
A Google search for "handcarves" brings up firstly (for me at least) links to groups of stock images on several of the microstock agencies including iS and SS.

ETA added "Google" to "search" in last para.

ShadySue · « **Reply #22 on:** July 08, 2014, 08:38 »

"Adding later" is the official line iStock is taking, apparently, but I don't believe it. Why would anyone bother to add a dozen or more totally unrelated keywords (unless they were obviously talismans to great sales, like aciculum and handcarves - that's clearly where I've been going wrong all these years)? I've sometimes looked at the port of someone with egregious keywording, and it often turns out that the keywords do fit other files in their port, which is why I suspect they're batch keywording many unconnected files and uploading the lot; and very few inspectors other then Keywordzilla, are bothered.
I have no idea why they stopped bothering about keywording. Possibly they have been told not to inspect keywords (but Keywordzilla just has to), possibly they got a pay cut or pay freeze, so are working to contract (I have absolutely no insight into their pay or contract, but it's a possibility) or ... ? It seemed to happen about the same time as almost everything got accepted at iS.

On the latter, I can't help but think this thread is farcical:
http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=361792&page=1
'It looked as if your file was done this way, so it was rejected on that basis. It turns out it was done a different way, so the same file is acceptable and accepted.' Not judged on the merits of the actual file. NB, I am only commenting on the rejection/acceptance criteria, NOT the file.

cuppacoffee · « **Reply #23 on:** July 08, 2014, 08:47 »

From my observations poor keywording has gotten out of control and several agencies have either given up or lack the resources to monitor keywords. When additional keywords are added after acceptance no one checks them. With the volume of images being uploaded today and everyone clamoring for faster reviews they can't possibly be as vigilant as they were when they opened their doors due to lack of or refusal to pay fairly for reviewers and keymasters. Add to that reviewers who don't speak English as well as US-based reviewers (and some of those are not grammar experts) it compounds, especially when the tendency to copy and paste from similar images is rampant.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: What is aciculum? (Read 4521 times)

Reckless

Beppe Grillo

dpimborough

ShadySue

ShadySue

Reckless

bunhill

Beppe Grillo

bunhill

Reckless

bunhill

Jo Ann Snover

wordplanet

ShadySue

roede-orm

bunhill

Difydave

ShadySue

Difydave

ShadySue

Difydave

Difydave

ShadySue

cuppacoffee

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors