|
MicrostockGroup Sponsors
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - ShadySue
Pages: 1 ... 52 53 54 55 56 [57] 58 59 60 61 62 ... 624
1401
« on: November 01, 2018, 14:09 »
Can't you add the keywords in your software?
1402
« on: November 01, 2018, 05:30 »
Is there such a thing as an RM video agency (which actually sells)? That way you could test the waters elsewhere without breaching your RF-exclusivity, and you could keep your existing RF files there.
I don't do video, so I've never looked; maybe others know?
Yes I'm thinking about that, I was hoping that things will get better but I'm properly naive - keyword system is too old for the new type of works, Contributor Exclusivity is not paying off in my case.... it's just hard to do it after 12 years....
I've read a lot over the years from videographers saying that iS video exclusivity wasn't worth it, even if there's still a (small) case for photo exclusivity.
1403
« on: October 31, 2018, 13:18 »
Is there such a thing as an RM video agency (which actually sells)? That way you could test the waters elsewhere without breaching your RF-exclusivity, and you could keep your existing RF files there.
I don't do video, so I've never looked; maybe others know?
1404
« on: October 31, 2018, 04:57 »
Sorry, I can't help you. The site does appear to be a mess, maybe even worse than before. I suspect (with no concrete proof) that they've cut support staff. Certainly, they're doing everything they can to discourage us from taking out support tickets.
It might be worth looking on their forum (if you haven't already) to see if anyone else has the issue.
Then you could post there (if you haven't already) exactly what you've put here.
You likely won't get any help there, and make sure you state your contacts with their support team, but if it allows others to check, a pattern may be shown.
Good luck!
1405
« on: October 28, 2018, 19:18 »
Artificially inflating keywords leads to spamming and irrelevant searches.
Isn't it so on all sites ..? [/quote] Of course, but no other site actually encourages it with a silly 'turn the bar green' system. Anyway, just because other sites do it doesn't mean you'd want your site to do it, does it? I'm sure the site which sorts out search properly will prevail. Sadly, the desire of a proportion of contributors to want to spam will make that difficult to achieve.
1408
« on: October 27, 2018, 13:41 »
I'm not sure how much the QC rank counts for anything, but maybe someone knows better.
A lot of things on Alamy don't actually count for anything, e.g. 'discoverability' (causes more harm than good).
What do you mean by that ..?
Artificially inflating keywords leads to spamming and irrelevant searches.
1409
« on: October 26, 2018, 15:49 »
Lets not let this thread deteriorate in to ethnicity please, its been a long day down the hospital and the other thread has just gone up the spout and round the bend 
But here's the list of terms used by Alamy 
RM - Rights Managed
RF - Royalty-Free
PR - Property Released
MR - Model Released
Land - Landscape
Pt - Portrait
Pan - Panoramic
Sq - Square
C - Creative
WP - With People
WOP - Without People
DT - Date Taken
AE - Archive Excluded
FS - File Size
PH - Photograph
IL - Illustration
CO - Cut Outs
I'm half Italian, Southern part as well.  Wasn't going down any other road, except terms can have more than one meaning.
Thanks for the list. Do buyers actually use them on Alamy and do they get used other places?
Buyers definitely use them. (Do you never look at Alamy measures?)
However, very few buyers seem to know (or even think to try) that putting ""..."" round a name or phrase leads to a much cleaner search (cutting out the St Joe/John Bloggs scenario).
Will do, I do look at Alamy measures, just that after the fact, they don't tell me much about trends. Sometimes useful when I look at my own. The other part, do they use those on other sites? Should I be adding these abbreviations to SS for example?
I haven't a clue about SS, obviously.
But you don't add these abbreviations to your keywords on Alamy. Their system throws up files which match the criteria.
BTW, I have no idea how buyers know about them - I see the list of abbreviations on the side of a pseudonym's stats in Measures, but didn't see them on the Buy Images hints page.
BTW, another unusual search I've seen several times is [FS] only (no keywords), i.e. they want to see any files over a certain size.
Yes and thanks for pointing out the [letters] are added by Alamy measures not something I should be worried about adding for better search. I thought that some people here were saying that buyers use Pan or Land for example in their searches, now I see it's just measures assigning those for our information.
I didn't say these words were added by Alamy measures. That would make no possible sense. I said that I didn't know how customers know how to add these abbreviations Actually, having connected my eyes to my brain, it's very, very obvious how buyers use these filters: https://www.dropbox.com/s/uwbtt1es2moicwz/Alamy%20search%20filters.jpg?dl=0The filters ticked will map in measures to these abbreviations in Measures.
1410
« on: October 25, 2018, 13:25 »
Lets not let this thread deteriorate in to ethnicity please, its been a long day down the hospital and the other thread has just gone up the spout and round the bend
But here's the list of terms used by Alamy
RM - Rights Managed
RF - Royalty-Free
PR - Property Released
MR - Model Released
Land - Landscape
Pt - Portrait
Pan - Panoramic
Sq - Square
C - Creative
WP - With People
WOP - Without People
DT - Date Taken
AE - Archive Excluded
FS - File Size
PH - Photograph
IL - Illustration
CO - Cut Outs
I'm half Italian, Southern part as well. Wasn't going down any other road, except terms can have more than one meaning.
Thanks for the list. Do buyers actually use them on Alamy and do they get used other places?
Buyers definitely use them. (Do you never look at Alamy measures?)
However, very few buyers seem to know (or even think to try) that putting ""..."" round a name or phrase leads to a much cleaner search (cutting out the St Joe/John Bloggs scenario).
Will do, I do look at Alamy measures, just that after the fact, they don't tell me much about trends. Sometimes useful when I look at my own. The other part, do they use those on other sites? Should I be adding these abbreviations to SS for example?
I haven't a clue about SS, obviously. But you don't add these abbreviations to your keywords on Alamy. Their system throws up files which match the criteria. BTW, I have no idea how buyers know about them - I see the list of abbreviations on the side of a pseudonym's stats in Measures, but didn't see them on the Buy Images hints page. BTW, another unusual search I've seen several times is [FS] only (no keywords), i.e. they want to see any files over a certain size.
1411
« on: October 25, 2018, 12:21 »
Getty's keywords are awful. I have 17 on there from Cape Cod and only two have the keyword "Cape Cod" which means I'm unlikely to get many sales. Crazy! There's a fall image that has sold recently on Alamy with pumpkins in front of a church on the Cape that has "church" "Spirituality" and "Architecture" as keywords, but not "fall" "pumpkins" "Halloween" "Cape Cod" or "Chatham" - all necessary and much more relevant. Even lighthouses on the Cape don't have the lighthouse name or Cape Cod - and they certainly had those keywords on 500px.
Something to look into. Very disappointing. I'm glad to do my own keywords even if it's more work. What a waste for them to have made my photos unsaleable since there isn't a single keyword that would help people find them. Pumpkins on the lawn of a church don't scream "spirituality."
Their mapping tool is all over the place. When they went to ESP, I discovered that many of my files had missing keywords. You can't do it yourself nowadays, so I had to go through support, and every time I got a nippy note telling me that the description wasn't searchable only keywords, which I knew perfectly well, but they had 'disappeared' the keywords. I did a lot of singles, then a big batch, and I haven't got a round tuit for sorting through the rest. Finding out which keywords are missing takes forever, because it seems that if you had a keyword, and it isn't on the file's page as a keyword, that keyword might still be searchable, as they only put certain keywords on the file page. Not very handy, especially as they took descriptions off the page of non-editorial files too - it's like they've heard of making information available to buyers, but want no truck with it.
Hidden but perhaps still searcheable keywords - thats a new concept... Hard to tell then if modifications to keywords we make appear on Getty and if its worth spending time to revisit them.
I assume you mean "modifications we ask Support to make for us"? Of did I miss them allowing us to do it ourselves again? The only way we can know is to do 'test' searches. (A couple of times I've found a file showing up in a search within my own portfolio, but not in a site-wide search (or vice-versa). Getty even manages the impossible.
1412
« on: October 25, 2018, 11:41 »
Getty's keywords are awful. I have 17 on there from Cape Cod and only two have the keyword "Cape Cod" which means I'm unlikely to get many sales. Crazy! There's a fall image that has sold recently on Alamy with pumpkins in front of a church on the Cape that has "church" "Spirituality" and "Architecture" as keywords, but not "fall" "pumpkins" "Halloween" "Cape Cod" or "Chatham" - all necessary and much more relevant. Even lighthouses on the Cape don't have the lighthouse name or Cape Cod - and they certainly had those keywords on 500px.
Something to look into. Very disappointing. I'm glad to do my own keywords even if it's more work. What a waste for them to have made my photos unsaleable since there isn't a single keyword that would help people find them. Pumpkins on the lawn of a church don't scream "spirituality."
Their mapping tool is all over the place. When they went to ESP, I discovered that many of my files had missing keywords. You can't do it yourself nowadays, so I had to go through support, and every time I got a nippy note telling me that the description wasn't searchable only keywords, which I knew perfectly well, but they had 'disappeared' the keywords. I did a lot of singles, then a big batch, and I haven't got a round tuit for sorting through the rest. Finding out which keywords are missing takes forever, because it seems that if you had a keyword, and it isn't on the file's page as a keyword, that keyword might still be searchable, as they only put certain keywords on the file page. Not very handy, especially as they took descriptions off the page of non-editorial files too - it's like they've heard of making information available to buyers, but want no truck with it.
1413
« on: October 25, 2018, 11:33 »
Lets not let this thread deteriorate in to ethnicity please, its been a long day down the hospital and the other thread has just gone up the spout and round the bend
But here's the list of terms used by Alamy
RM - Rights Managed
RF - Royalty-Free
PR - Property Released
MR - Model Released
Land - Landscape
Pt - Portrait
Pan - Panoramic
Sq - Square
C - Creative
WP - With People
WOP - Without People
DT - Date Taken
AE - Archive Excluded
FS - File Size
PH - Photograph
IL - Illustration
CO - Cut Outs
I'm half Italian, Southern part as well. Wasn't going down any other road, except terms can have more than one meaning.
Thanks for the list. Do buyers actually use them on Alamy and do they get used other places?
Buyers definitely use them. (Do you never look at Alamy measures?) However, very few buyers seem to know (or even think to try) that putting ""..."" round a name or phrase leads to a much cleaner search (cutting out the St Joe/John Bloggs scenario).
1414
« on: October 25, 2018, 04:30 »
One would think that with modern computer software that kind of thing should not happen.
Yebbut this is Getty we're talking about. They've been tech-challenged at least since I started in 2007, though how much of the historic issues were due to the existing iS framework, I couldn't speculate. But with ESP, it's all their own doing.
1415
« on: October 25, 2018, 04:26 »
And what eclectic searches. I had one recently in the form of "Joe Bloggs" (WOP) meaning 'without people'. My pic was of a church of "St Joe" designed by "Jim Bloggs", but it was WOP.
Which is why I treat people who claim to be expert in SEO and clever keywording strategies with scepticism!
:-) Do you ever wonder what a searcher wanted? I've just seen I had a search yesterday for 'riding horse painting'. Probably they wanted a pic of a painting of someone riding a horse, or someone painting someone else riding a horse; but just maybe they wanted a pic of someone painting while riding a horse.
Most likely they were looking for photos of "Joe Bloggs" jeans or clothing
it was a UK brand way back in the 90's
It wasn't really Joe Bloggs. It was "in the form of..." The actual name threw up several apparently well-known options when googled. Of course, if someone wanted to see the works by a designer/artist/architect/maker, adding WOP would be a good way to do it.
1416
« on: October 25, 2018, 03:15 »
And what eclectic searches. I had one recently in the form of "Joe Bloggs" (WOP) meaning 'without people'. My pic was of a church of "St Joe" designed by "Jim Bloggs", but it was WOP.
Which is why I treat people who claim to be expert in SEO and clever keywording strategies with scepticism!
:-) Do you ever wonder what a searcher wanted? I've just seen I had a search yesterday for 'riding horse painting'. Probably they wanted a pic of a painting of someone riding a horse, or someone painting someone else riding a horse; but just maybe they wanted a pic of someone painting while riding a horse.
1417
« on: October 25, 2018, 03:06 »
And what eclectic searches. I had one recently in the form of "Joe Bloggs" (WOP) meaning 'without people'. My pic was of a church of "St Joe" designed by "Jim Bloggs", but it was WOP.
1418
« on: October 24, 2018, 17:03 »
Oh hi BIG zero!! having your monthly again are you? dear oh dear!
MINUS 100 for this comment.
1419
« on: October 24, 2018, 16:54 »
The iStock newsletter just arrived and it mentions this organization. Its legit
Yep, got that. For some reason, only certain people got the email: maybe those who sold most in France (?).
1420
« on: October 24, 2018, 04:26 »
I haven't had the email.
1421
« on: October 23, 2018, 16:54 »
What kinds of images could be sell on Alamy?
Why not check out the Alamy forum?
1423
« on: October 23, 2018, 11:26 »
I have image on Sthutterstock, Fotolia,Istock,Dreamstime,123Rf and Alamy. In all of them i have sells, but not in Alamy, why?
The most obvious answer is that Alamy buyers don't need your images. Could be because they can get them cheaper on the cheap sites, but that isn't the whole answer, as some people say they sell the same images on micro and on Alamy. Sales do tend to be lower on Alamy for most people, that's just a fact; and certain historic buyers have moved to e.g. SS (seen in credits in publications). However, at least one reasonably-big buyer has recently moved TO Alamy (from Thinkstock, so apparently choosing not to go the Getty PA route), so they must be being proactive in attracting new buyers to some extent.
1424
« on: October 23, 2018, 10:02 »
Many years back, I accidentally uploaded a pic from an unapproved camera in a batch and it literally dropped out during upload and was marked as 'unapproved camera' (but the rest of the batch went through OK).
Presumably there was some sort of filter back in the day that could do that, but also presumably there are many more unapproved cameras now which might make that programming cumbersome.
1425
« on: October 22, 2018, 14:34 »
Sorry,but where do I find how much each photo I sold in September sold for? I can't seem to find the individual photo sales breakdown...
thanks!
If you click Account Management > Royalties, then click 'Export', you can download a psd or a .txt file. The .txt file can be loaded into a spreadsheet, but it's ugly. It's much nicer (more visual, clearer) to use one of the Third-Party apps like DeepMeta or TodayIs20. Or both!
Pages: 1 ... 52 53 54 55 56 [57] 58 59 60 61 62 ... 624
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
?? Neither have I, but your point was ... ?
