I just realized I used the term 'special collection' above when I meant 'smart collection'. Sorry about the possible confusion.

Don
I tried the 'staged collections' approach you described back in LR2 but it quickly became too cumbersome for me. I spent far too much time moving files around different collections without actually accomplishing anything useful. It's also prone to the kinds of errors you suggested.

There is a fundamental difference between collections and smart collections that many (most?) people don't understand. You define a collection and give it a name and then you tell LR what files to include in that collection. On the other hand, a smart collection is really a database query (see previous post) - you tell LR what rules to follow to put files in the  smart collection then LR shows you all the files that satisfy the rules you gave. You cannot tell LR directly to include any specific file in a smart collection. This is also why you cannot make a smart collection your target collection (most people probably haven't noticed that).

When I learned more about keywording and constructing smart collections, I was able to develop my current approach. I'm still looking for new ways to improve on it. The way LR handles keywording is really clunky and Adobe needs to rethink the user interface for it. My keyword list has thousands of entries arranged hierarchically and growing quickly. It's difficult to navigate.

I'm not trying to convince anyone to use my method. I'm just describing it as a possibility that may work for you. If you have a system you're happy with, by all means keep using it.

I do pretty much what Imagenomad describes. I use 'non-exporting' keywords to define special collections.

--> Alexa, here's how to make a keyword non-exporting in Lightroom:
1. Right click on any keyword in your Keyword List in the right panel, select one of the options: (a) Edit Keyword Tag, or (b) Create Keyword Tag, or (c) Create Keyword Tag inside "...". This brings up the Edit Keyword Tag dialog box.
2. In the dialog box, type in your new keyword if necessary.
3. In the options below, UNCHECK the box that says 'Include on Export'.
4. Select Save.
5. Lightroom adds the keywords to the files when you export them unless you told it not to by deselecting the option.

I found it useful to me to be able to quickly identify which keywords don't get exported. I do that by spelling them in ALL CAPITALS so they will stand out in the image's keyword list. Imagenomad uses a leading underscore to accomplish the same thing. The underscore and all caps have no special significance to Lightroom.

Even though the keyword is not exported, Lightroom can search for images that you tagged with it. This gives you the ability to define Special Collections using non-exported keywords. If you are familiar with databases, you can think of a special collection as a database query that you have pre-defined and, when you select the collection, Lightroom simply displays the result of the query.

I use non-exporting keywords for several things including keeping track of workflow (SELECT, KEYWORDED, DEVELOPED, agency and submission status, etc). For example, "Show me the files that have been developed but not keyworded yet" or "Show me the files that are developed and keyworded but haven't been uploaded yet". These kinds of queries are developed on the fly then deleted when I finish with them. When you've done it a few times, you'll soon see how simple it is.

I'm not sure if anyone else has done it, but you can also use non-exporting keywords to keep track of MR & PR release status, model names etc. without putting them in the IPTC data. I have a different way to do it, but this method is much easier. I just haven't converted to it yet.

Quote from: ShadySue on December 03, 2013, 16:02

Quote from: stockastic on December 03, 2013, 15:27

The disappointment for me was Macrografiks.  Nice looking site, unique marketing and content, good communication.  But no sales and no views.  Maybe it's too soon to write them off, but it doesn't seem like anything is going to happen there in my lifetime. 

I'm surprised and sorry to read that. I thought they would do well and I really like the images on their front page compared to that of any other site I've seen.
(but I'm not a buyer  )

I have only 160 images there so I wasn't expecting much, but the total lack of views is pretty discouraging.  However, they keep sending out positive communications about building their collection.  Maybe they're taking a long view.  I've left the 160 there but have stopped uploading or checking the site.

Disappointing because macro is one thing I'm particularly able to do, and they liked what I had.  They even used a couple of my shots in ads.   But it's basically crickets chirping so far.

I also do a lot of macro, I was looking at their website in September and was unable to find any image that had sales. Nothing! And there are some nice images there. I concluded that they have not yet started looking for customers. They seem to have lots of talented contributors but I won't upload there until they do start showing sales. What are they doing to promote themselves?

4) Not a lot of conceptual work:  A keyword search for "conceptual" yields 21 results, although perhaps that's being too vague.  Here are some other related searches: "fantasy" 130 results, "surreal" 100 results (a lot of which the keyword doesn't even apply), "magical" 142, "mystery" 227 results, "strength" 233 results, "power" 308 results.  I have no doubt this category will grow as the collection matures

I don't understand why anyone would use "conceptual" as a keyword. What would it look like? How could I photograph it? All the other keywords you mentioned are definitely concepts in my opinion so I would disagree with your conclusion that there is not a lot of concept work.

The RRS tripod & ballhead I recommended is 5.1 pounds - about 2.4 kilograms. Very light. My Gitzo/Manfrotto combination is a bit heavier (6 or 7 pounds) but I have no problems carrying it in the field and I'm not particularly strong. The carbon fibre legs are very light and give very good support.

If you're committed to your $200 price range, this definitely is not for you.

8. Don't forget to put your presets on the external drive.

I probably forgot a couple other things too. 

"From time-to-time  we offer special pricing and/or promotions not available on the website so it is always advisable to check with me before making any purchase."

In other words: We can give it to you even cheaper than the price you see on our website.

They're offering to discount their prices without the customer even asking. That's the number one no-no in sales psychology. What in the world are these guys thinking?

I can't even withdraw my images from Thinkstock without dropping iStock as well.

Include a note to the inspector explaining the situation.

let's just say i purchase a photo of an ape because somebody like you felt that it should be keyworded as a such, when in actual fact it is a monkey, used it on a cover of a major magazine, then i had to write a letter of correction, or even worse face litigation, or even way worse lost my client by buying poorly keyworded images, then i would most likely not buy from that source again. all because of one person who thought he would falsely keyword an image for the buyers that did not know the difference?

If someone hired me to take a picture of an ape then I would make sure I took a picture of an ape and not a monkey. It would be up to me to know the difference. Giving them a picture of a monkey would be incompetent on my part.

Similarly, if they asked me to design a magazine cover featuring a picture of an ape, I would be asking them questions about what what sort of ape they had in mind and that is exactly what I would give them. It's up to me to ensure the picture is indeed an ape. Again, anything less would be incomprtence. The customer could also give me the freedom to use a monkey or a gorilla instead but that's his decision, not mine.

My point is that not only do we contributors have a responsibility to keyword accurately but buyers also have a similar responsibility to ensure the picture is indeed appropriate for their project.

I'm missing the 16th and 18th of May, along with the 8th, 9th, 21st and 30th in June. 

There must still be some glitch if we are all missing the same days.

I don't get PP sales EVERY day but I do have one for June 9 & another for June 30.

None on any of the other dates you gave.

Well, I was initially pleased with 2 XXXL downloads back-to-back and my thought was that the lower pricing might mean people were buying larger images. But I saw Lisa's alert and it got me wondering if it really was legitimate.

I posted this on June 12 in the iStock PP forum, got banned quickly thereafter and later the post was deleted.

Quote

I have a buddy that works in IT at iStock and he told me that iStock cut the banana rations of the monkeys who key in the PP data and the monkeys went completely bananas!! (pun intended) The monkeys are essentially rioting, destroying equipment and throwing feces all over the place. Total disaster.

The monkey problem is so bad the iStock IT department is considering switching to computers to both automate and speed up the process. I for one welcome that change.

But, hey, that's just what I heard.

It was a cheeky post but my intent was to have a laugh at iStock's expense and bring a little humour to a troubling situation. I think it was quite obvious that it was fictional.

Now as the problems continue on for nearly another week, I am beginning to think my fictitious anecdote, as impossible as it seems, was totally accurate.

No wonder I got banned from the forums so quickly, I inadvertently exposed their dark monkey secret. 

Hmmm.

There may be some truth to that. Check out the istock home page http://www.istockphoto.com/ You may need to login to see the blinking ad in the top left corner of the display.

0.40$ for a L is getting pretty ridiculous.

The buyer therefore paid somewhere between $0.50 and $0.67 per credit depending on your royalty rate. That seems very low. Was it a subscription sale?