Author Topic: keyword spamming (Read 7558 times)

leaf · « **on:** July 17, 2007, 05:04 »

I am out to get some pictures for my website so i decided to go shopping at lucky oliver.

I am looking for images to do with summer and beaches perhaps with sun and sand, but it would be great to have a camera in the image as well.

I did a search for
summer camera

hmmm... seems like lots of people like to put camera in their keywords since the pictures was taken with a camera

in the first 16 images there was only 4 with a camera and the rest of the results didn't seem much better.
some of the the top 16 images are as follow (by the way i love the forum code you have provided bryan

it even automatically copies - - very fancy - two thumbs up)

my question for lucky oliver - will there be a keyword spamming alert button anytime??? i would like to use it. $:-\$

Stu99 · « **Reply #1 on:** July 17, 2007, 05:15 »

It seems that the fault lies not with keyword 'sticky word' spamming but with the search default including text in the description.

I looked at three images that didn't have any hint of a camera, they all had the word camera in the description ie; 'lady reaching for the camera'; 'doe looking at the camera" etc.

I think other sites ignore the words that are found in the description, only including description words in the search.

I wonder if this is an oversight or deliberate, since this obviously can cause some frustration.

leaf · « **Reply #2 on:** July 17, 2007, 05:20 »

ah yes.. i guess that makes sense. Perhaps they could be ranked lower if it was ONLY in the description??

Stu99 · « **Reply #3 on:** July 17, 2007, 05:26 »

Quote from: leaf on July 17, 2007, 05:20

ah yes.. i guess that makes sense. Perhaps they could be ranked lower if it was ONLY in the description??

Or maybe not at all. I can only see that the inclusion of description words would cause further keyword spamming frustration. Perhaps this may become as issue for LO as it continues to grow.

Karimala · « **Reply #4 on:** July 17, 2007, 07:15 »

Quote from: leaf on July 17, 2007, 05:20

ah yes.. i guess that makes sense. Perhaps they could be ranked lower if it was ONLY in the description??

Great idea! And maybe a higher ranking for words that are included in both the keywords and description. A lot of the descriptions at LO are extremely lengthy, almost like mini stories about the day the photog shot the photo, and really don't have anything to do with the subject matter.

CJPhoto · « **Reply #5 on:** July 17, 2007, 11:04 »

Quote from: Karimala on July 17, 2007, 07:15

Quote from: leaf on July 17, 2007, 05:20
ah yes.. i guess that makes sense. Perhaps they could be ranked lower if it was ONLY in the description??

Great idea! And maybe a higher ranking for words that are included in both the keywords and description.

ranked high if in the description and keywords (since must be a major focus) but not at all if not in keywords.

CJPhoto · « **Reply #6 on:** July 17, 2007, 11:05 »

Quote from: leaf on July 17, 2007, 05:04

my question for lucky oliver - will there be a keyword spamming alert button anytime??? i would like to use it. $:-\$

My question for lucky oliver - what is acceptable use for your watermarked images? it seems it makes it very easy for a blogger (or forum poster) to steal an image if they aren't concerned with the watermarks.

bryan_luckyoliver · « **Reply #7 on:** July 17, 2007, 12:33 »

Leaf, thanks for the thread. I'll try to answer a few questions.

1. The copy feature is a clever little thing that Ryan was able to figure out. It's great if you're posting in our Odditorium a lot.

2. Search relevance. We recently did an upgrade to our search results- I've written about this on the blog a bit. For most searches there has been a huge improvement. Search is an ongoing activity.

Right now we know we have some weakness in the relationship between words. We're aware of some of the problems. Camera is a 'generic' term on a photo site, so it causes some problems. If you do a search for 'camera' it's much better. We'll be working on this over the next year.

3. Spam. It's on the feature list. Direct reporting is useful. We're also collecting some interesting information which will penalize Carnies that spam.

4. Watermarked images. The web is a connection of images and text- if it's public, people are going to link content- we'd prefer to control this more by providing the tools to make it easier. A link back to the photo is much better than a watermarked image taken with no record. It's defense and offense. The vast majority of linked images are used in the Odditorium.

madelaide · « **Reply #8 on:** July 17, 2007, 19:32 »

I'm not sure that descriptions should be neglected in the search. I think that if a word appears in title and description and keyword, then the image is probably the most relevant. If in title or description and in keywords, a little less relevant. If only in keywords, a bit less. If only in the title or description, then the less relevant.

In the "lady reaching for the camera" example, there is nothing wrong in the description but camera is not a valid keyword, however someone may search for "woman looking at the camera", I guess, and that would be a right match.

I think it's just a matter of fine-tuning the relevance.

Regards,
Adelaide

ianhlnd · « **Reply #9 on:** July 17, 2007, 20:40 »

Leaf, I agree whole heartedly. Spamming leads the buyer down all kinds of paths til he gives up. Why not limit the key words to the catagories, max maybe 12 keywords?

maunger · « **Reply #10 on:** July 19, 2007, 16:26 »

Quote from: ianhlnd on July 17, 2007, 20:40

Leaf, I agree whole heartedly. Spamming leads the buyer down all kinds of paths til he gives up. Why not limit the key words to the catagories, max maybe 12 keywords?

My preference is to not limit the number of words -- i can spam an image with just 5 words if that’s what the limit were... "nude, sexy," etc.

limiting the number of words won't solve the problem if you ask me.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: keyword spamming (Read 7558 times)

leaf

Stu99

leaf

Stu99

Karimala

CJPhoto

CJPhoto

bryan_luckyoliver

madelaide

ianhlnd

maunger

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors