Quote

Firstly: if you submit a big bunch of similar images, most of them (if not all) get rejected for that very reason (unless you sell your photos on some unknown website in which case they might go for your images anyway). Secondly, if all images are keyworded the same you will compete with yourself in the search results and the missing variation will extremely limit the number of keyword combinations your images can be found under. But I think you just want to tease me to reveal more of what I learned or know.

1. similars DO get accepted at all agencies
2. I'd love it if a search only generated a bunch of MY images for the buyer to choose from!  why put all your efforts into one perfect image when a variety of images will create more buyers?

1. Not my experience, but maybe I just had bad luck. More than 5 similar images and all others got rejected in my case. Fotolia is even worse. Good for you if you had different outcomes.
2. But the probability is so much lower for that to happen at the first place. What makes you think it's still better? In my eyes it's like hoping for a rare event happening in a lottery. Just putting all your bets on one single thing and hoping that lottery strikes. For 25 cents. And nothing for a long time again.

Lots of similars get through these days at DT. Take a look at the latest photos. http://www.dreamstime.com/new-stock-photos-images

fwiw - here are the most popular keywords on symbiostock sites -- anyone who limits their keywording to these overused tags is not going to get noticed

Keyword	Sites    Used    Views
green	164   31553   28566
white	163   69223   35832
background	162   54819   34210
blue	158   40558   26689
red	157   31438   20574
nature	156   42794   20570
water	150   23361   16997
summer	148   26879   14306
yellow	148   18489   11015
food	144   21741   26283
black	143   22104   16573
color	142   26635   10523
isolated	139    47672   28286
sky	138   28780   14657
tree	137   14067   10370
orange	137   12261   7756
holiday	136   16852   11577
travel	135   26151   10419                                             similar lists for most used keywords, most viewed keywords, etc at http://cascoly.com/symbio/symbiostock-keywords.asp

so the # of k words doesn't matter? I was told by fellow contributors veterans it does. I've always felt relevance was more important .

Yes the # of keywords Might matter. It does on DT for example and Alamy, but I never tested SS. If (big if), SS uses relevancy like DT and Alamy, the number keywords, divided by the total matching keywords, would give you a relevancy level.

So two similar images, same size, everything else except number of keywords (one controlled variable) 4 out of 40 is 10% and 4 our of 15 is 37%. The second image would rank higher in the search.

There could be many other things, file age, DLs, views with no DLs, time since last DL, views that produce sales... it's impossible to know what they are using. Also it wouldn't change anything, except in a few small ways. It's just a mental problem with little value.

There are 42 million images. Lady with headset 20,000 - Business Handshake 45,000 - sliced tomato isolated 45,000 (really just for fun, but how many are needed?) does anyone think their new image in the most popular download searches has any chance at all of making a return on the investment? This is a universal dilemma in Microstock and SS at this point.

But if I understand the OP he's saying the number of words in the title, and the special number he came up with, not meaning how many relavant keywords but some magic number?

Yes the number of words, might matter, but it's not like seven or 15 is the right secret number.  It's different all the time. Title? Interesting question. How much does title effect anything on SS?

If he meant something else, it would be good for Einstein to explain. I find the $5 to read his study a little strange. People here share information, it's not, I'll sell you questionable secrets or theories, pay me and then read them.

so the # of k words doesn't matter? I was told by fellow contributors veterans it does. I've always felt relevance was more important .

You are correct. As many as you need to accurately define the image and what's in it. Some will have less words, some will have more.

I think there's some old "wisdom" (superstitions die hard too) from Micro that more words is always better and I think that the agencies have compensated for that. Maybe in 2005 packing the words, would get you more views and more DLs. Now it just makes for angry customers, because their searches are full of inappropriate results.

That's mostly Opinion and Conjecture except the first sentence.

Good accurate keywords will get best results. Don't leave out words because of counting numbers and don't add questionable or unrelated words, just because you want more words.

Thanks for the  info .It's confusing sometime others telling u no u need more and some saying u have plenty as long as they are relevant . I just try and go with my own gut instinct.
Sometime I put maybe 7 other times I will put 30 or so.

The secret is not in the number of keywords, but in a creative image with keywords that represents them. Simple as that. I speak this by pure observation of my pictures and images of others. If you make something new and interesting, real quick this will be at the top of the rankings, or at least on the first page of the search.

The secret is not in the number of keywords, but in a creative image with keywords that represents them. Simple as that. I speak this by pure observation of my pictures and images of others. If you make something new and interesting, real quick this will be at the top of the rankings, or at least on the first page of the search.

yes.

if we look at the best sellers they all have a common pattern : they instantly look good at first glance, even at thumbnail size, no matter if they were buried among 100s of similar thumbs, they just stand up among the crowd.

By now I only have around 300 images online which is by far not enough, since I spent more time writing the software than making photos and submitting. I have at least one sale a day (average 2, sometimes up to 5).

I have only around 200 vector on Shutterstock, without any peculiar keyword strategy, I use between 40 and 50 keyword for each image always. I have several sale a month (in 2014: min 617, max 766) and "more expensive sales" are about 10%. How much you think I can increase this performance according information that you sell?

OK guys I was quite busy, so I couldn't visit here earlier. As I mentioned before, I can't guarantee anything. I just noticed that while on some websites the best selling images have as little as 3.x keywords in their title, they are significantly longer somewhere else. If this pattern occurs in an overwhelming amount of best selling images I thought some people here might want to know.

Other thing no one realized, I was selling the information incredibly cheap (try to get that information yourself and you'll see how much pain it's to get reliable numbers). You didn't grab it, you didn't get it.

By now I also started researching single keywords, and I debunked some keyword myths. The word "blue" for example mentioned by cascoly isn't such a bad keyword. It's true that you have a huge competition if you just enter "blue" into the search box (how many people will look just for "blue"?), but it is highly searched in combination with other keywords. It might not directly lead to sales but it will get you views (which you need to make any sales at all).

Just to warn keyword spammers: if blue is not the dominant color of your image, it probably won't get you views but instead it will downrank you for keyword spamming.

But if you have lot's of blue, you might want to specify it closer.
Here are some hand picked sale probabilities per view (under few assumptions such as landing close to the top in search results + I won't reveal for which website):

powder blue: 7%
deep blue: 9%
cold blue: 9%
isolated on blue: 15%
electric blue: 26%

I can't believe that anyone would even bother offering something so obviously time wasting and irrelevant - but for what it's worth for anyone new happening upon this discussion:

Your first priority should be your images - usefulness and technical quality.
Your second priority should be assembling a complete and relevant list of keywords. Come up with a useful title.

Nonsense claims about magic numbers of keywords or title words are just that.

one again , well spoken .
but every once in a while, someone wants to sell horseshit secrets of my success
and the web is full of horseshit secrets of my success
which in the old days we used to call them snake-oil.

oh btw, i have a fail-safe method to making lots of $$$$$$$
it's available to anyone for a P.O. of a quid

shhhh, don't tell anyone, after u receive my method, ok?