Presumably he didn't. I guess it was intended for editorial use only by the photographer. It's quite common for travel photographers to take shots of local people which are ok for use in travel articles/brochures but not on yoghurt pots.

Yes, I've been trying to find out more with no success as yet. But I think you've hit it right, since the man is suing the yogurt company and not the tog or agency.

Quote from: ShadySue on April 08, 2010, 12:46

Quote from: KB on April 08, 2010, 12:07

Quote from: sjlocke on April 08, 2010, 10:50

Yes, only keywords are used in the search engine.

Strange, then, that IS doesn't allow us to repeat a word (even common words such as "the" or "in") in the title. That one trips me up every so often. Sometimes I have to abbreviate a word just to get it in the title. I wonder if it's related to Google search?

Nope, it's to prevent keyword spamming (that was explained by Ethan (IIRC) some time ago in relation to someone asking about a photo about apple slices and an apple pie, but they couldn't have apple twice. IMC, my problems are with e.g. Crex crex or Puffinus puffinus. But I learned from another that if you put Crex-crex it'll be read as Crex crex by Google.

I find it almost impossible to give correct names to the species my husbands uploads to Istock. How do you get species names through the mill? I tried to give the name Torbay sole as a keyword to a flounder, but that species is not listed, only six American types of flounder.
Then I try to use the keyword minke whale to some whale beefs (since that is the only whale species Norwegians  hunt and eat, and therefore relevant for someone searching for that type of whale meat.) But no; I have to choose dwarf minke whale, even though that is not completely correct. 
And now we got a reject for the keyword �atrium� in the picture of a heart. The only choices are atrium (human heart), and atrium (house). Since it is a swine heart, both are incorrect.

Hmmm.
This is just my opinion - Torbay Sole isn't in the Controlled Vocabulary, but if you type it in, you can 'add it for your own use' by clicking on the blue text to the right of the word "Torbay Sole is unknown ..." This means that the phrase will turn up in English only (which is probably OK for your needs) provided that a searcher knows to search on "Torbay Sole". I'd also add its scientific name Glyptocephalus cynoglossus to the keywords.
The whale meat: Hmmm. There are a lot of oddities in the Natural History part of the CV - I'd have thought that Minke Whales were more common, though very difficult to photograph. I think you should put 'whale meat' in 'for your own use' (as well as whale [1] and meat as you have), and perhaps ask Keywords to add Minke Whale to the CV. Though it could take months if there isn't much call for the term. I wonder how many people would specifcally look for a photo of Minke Whale Meat.
[1] There's also an argument that 'whale' shouldn't be one of the keywords, as there isn't an actual whale in the photo - one of my regular wikis is of plates of cooked duck keyworded 'duck(fresh water bird)', but then there is a DA for duck (white meat).
The good news is that 'animal heart' is in iStock's CV. (animal face isn't, which is a pain if you're doing animal portraits). I guess they wouldn't add animal atrium to the CV, as there won't be much call for it, and because hearts have atriums, so it's kinda expected.

Quote from: ShadySue on April 08, 2010, 13:29

Going by your description only (which is all we have to go on, as we can't see the image, hint, hint)

the image was linked above:
http://www.danhowell.com/Darlene_Gallery/images/DarleneH_099.jpg

Oh, sorry, I missed it.
The thing is, it needs some prior knowledge. If you'd just shown me the photo without any other info and asked me what it was, I'd have said it was a girl about to do some sunbathing on a beach. In that photo, I wouldn't know the difference between an karrimat equivalent and a yoga/exercise mat. Maybe that's just me.
See http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=197171&page=1, where the photographer had more knowledge about an image than the viewers.

Quote from: Gannet77 on April 08, 2010, 11:47

As sjlocke says, yes, only the actual keywords are used in the search engine, as far as I am aware.

And although "yoga", "pilates" or whatever don't seem appropriate to me either for that image, there is a keyword in the CV for "yoga mat" which disambiguates to "exercise mat" and I would think that would be OK.

They also bounced 'healthy lifestyle' and 'recreational pursuit' on the same image.  To me, those are pretty broad terms which the image falls within.

Going by your description only (which is all we have to go on, as we can't see the image, hint, hint) the latter two would probably pass most inspectors. However, it only needs one wrong keyword to fail an inspection if you aren't exclusive.
Your best bet would be to post the image and the removed words to the keywording forum on iStock for more formal evaluation before you resubmit.

Quote from: sjlocke on April 08, 2010, 10:50

Yes, only keywords are used in the search engine.

Strange, then, that IS doesn't allow us to repeat a word (even common words such as "the" or "in") in the title. That one trips me up every so often. Sometimes I have to abbreviate a word just to get it in the title. I wonder if it's related to Google search?

Nope, it's to prevent keyword spamming (that was explained by Ethan (IIRC) some time ago in relation to someone asking about a photo about apple slices and an apple pie, but they couldn't have apple twice. IMC, my problems are with e.g. Crex crex or Puffinus puffinus. But I learned from another that if you put Crex-crex it'll be read as Crex crex by Google.

But a yoga mat IS a yoga mat.

The OP said that they had the keyword 'yoga' removed, [which IMO with the others they mentioned and the description of the imges, were correct removals] not 'yoga mat'.
If I had a picture of (just) a saddle, would it be correct to put 'horse' or 'horse riding'?
(The correct answer is 'no'.)
Even if there were a person carrying the saddle (walking to/from the stable), 'horse riding' would hardly be appropriate.
@OP, there is a keywords forum at iStock where as well as other contributers sticking in their tuppence'orth, members of the Keywords team, like emyerson and Ducksandwich chip in regularly.
@OP2 - the fact that bad keywords were accepted in the past doesn't mean that we should continue bad practice. They're being cleaned up, but there are so many images that it will take a long time.
If you want to help, you can wiki individual files, or make suggestions for bulk wikis in the sticky thread at the top of the keywording forum.

Fresh example: yesterday I had a view on woman lifting man. It so happens that is what my photo shows. But looking for photos of woman lifting man shows that although 'woman' 'lifting' and 'man' are relevant for most of the photos in the search result, very few of them show a photo of a woman lifting a man, which is almost certainly what the buyer was looking for.
I'm very much afraid that the keywording and search are what's making Alamy fall further and further back.
To be fair, in that particular search, istock fares no better, and, surprisingly, no-one appears to have added "woman lifting man" 'for their own use'.

Quote from: azurelaroux on April 06, 2010, 06:59

The same would be true if you have 3 people in a shoot. One release for when you have all 3 in a shot, one for when only 2 are in the image and one for when the person is alone.

Ummm no (again) - 3 people 3 seperate releases is all you need, when all 3 are in the shot you send a copy of all 3 releases, when there's 2 in the shot you send a copy of the 2 relevant releases etc etc - in description add "incl. group shots"

Remember to stich the appropriate releases together, e.g. in Photoshop, before sending.

Sorry, I boobed somehow, so I'll bolden what I actually added in this post:

Quote from: ShadySue on April 06, 2010, 06:11

Quote from: stokfoto on April 06, 2010, 05:43

Thank you all for useful information and tips.

One think I'd like  IS  to implement is that I'd like to have a model release  replacement option until the files get reviewed. because once you attach a release to a file that is in pending queue it gets locked and there is no way to change it    I had uploaded a whole series of photos with the same release and  after getting the first one rejected I  either had  to wait until the rest is rejected  or had   to remove and re upload the files,which is just waste of time and upload limits (sometimes) as well

That's not going to happen, as it's important that the actual MR is reviewed at the same time as the photo.

Once an image is grabbed by inspectors, it's "locked for editing", so you can't edit keywords either at that stage. I have no models, so I don't know at which stage you can or can't change releases. But really, what you describe is nothing different to for instance missing a tiny logo in a series, and not being able to change and resubmit subsequent images while they're in the queue, you'd have to remove them from the queue and start again - I can't remember for sure if that affects your upload limit, but I don't think so. I guess it's to teach us to get it right before uploading.

I mean you should be able to replace a model release until the actual file (photo etc)gets reviewed . many other sites offer that  I don't see  why IS couldn't do it ? As long as you attach the release to the same file they could be reviewed at the same time  and  I don't think it would necessary  change anything in the review procedure .

Thank you all for useful information and tips.

One think I'd like  IS  to implement is that I'd like to have a model release  replacement option until the files get reviewed. because once you attach a release to a file that is in pending queue it gets locked and there is no way to change it    I had uploaded a whole series of photos with the same release and  after getting the first one rejected I  either had  to wait until the rest is rejected  or had   to remove and re upload the files,which is just waste of time and upload limits (sometimes) as well

That's not going to happen, as it's important that the actual MR is reviewed at the same time as the photo.

I would have put essential keywords as "adelaide city" "adelaide cityscape"

Oldhand

If you mean when keywording, it makes no difference, you can do "adelaide city", "Adelaide cityscape", "Adelaide monument", with "s and commas - they will still show up as separate words on the search, and an image so keyworded will show up on a search for "city monument".
I understand that "... ..."s is supposed to work, but it doesn't.

Quote from: nosaya on April 05, 2010, 08:55

Its spring break here in the US.
Should we expect slow sales this week?

Friday and/or Monday is a holiday in many countries. so this weekend has been quiet for many.
I'm a teacher; we're off this week and next, but I hardly expect that will affect sales.

Its spring break here in the US.
Should we expect slow sales this week?

Friday and/or Monday is a holiday in many countries. so this weekend has been quiet for many.