MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Veer sales nowadays  (Read 14339 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: April 21, 2015, 11:12 »
0
Hi,

I haven't uploaded to Veer for about 2 years. Is it worth to upload again ? How are your sales there as compared to other agencies ?

Thanks!


No Free Lunch

« Reply #1 on: April 21, 2015, 11:16 »
+2
I reach payout ($100) every two months so worth uploading in my eyes and wallet...

« Reply #2 on: April 21, 2015, 12:19 »
0
I reach payout ($100) every two months so worth uploading in my eyes and wallet...

I get payout every couple months too.  For me this makes it one of my lowest performers.  If I did not already have my whole port there I would not bother getting it on the site.  I do upload the few new images I do per week there cuz the upload is easy.  Lots of .25 subs lately tho which I don't like.

« Reply #3 on: April 21, 2015, 12:37 »
+7
Honestly, I would not bother. Do not expect alot of $ as they are pretty much on the same level for me as Stockfresh/Crestock. I dont even know why I still upload to these sort of agencies. Waste of time..

« Reply #4 on: April 21, 2015, 12:46 »
+2
They blow stockfresh out of the water, but still aren't very good for me unless I get an EL - which is becoming very rare.

dpimborough

« Reply #5 on: April 21, 2015, 14:58 »
+6
still waiting to get to payout after two years :(

« Reply #6 on: April 21, 2015, 15:29 »
0
Sales there have become very slow lately - almost nothing all year.  OTOH, uploading is easy and reviews now are fast and reasonable.  IMO they are worth the small amount of additional time required for uploading, but keep your expectations low.

« Reply #7 on: April 22, 2015, 00:42 »
+4
I only started submitting there a few months ago. They have an annoying limit of around 50 submissions a week, so it will take months to upload even a modestly sized port.

dpimborough

« Reply #8 on: April 22, 2015, 04:46 »
+5
Sales there have become very slow lately - almost nothing all year.  OTOH, uploading is easy and reviews now are fast and reasonable.  IMO they are worth the small amount of additional time required for uploading, but keep your expectations low.

I'm sorry but I have to disagree on the upload process it is hit and miss either failing or only part of the file queue uploading often.  :(

Then unlike other agencies I have to spend time re-adjusting the keywords to fit in to their clunky keyword system.  Not to mention making sure I don't have more than 25 keywords as they tend to throw the image out if they are more than 25 (I was advised by Veer to do this about a year ago). :o

And if you have more unusual subjects there is no point uploading as their keyword system doesn't allow for odd or unusual keywords. :'(

« Reply #9 on: April 22, 2015, 12:00 »
0
Wow I didnt know about that 25 keyword thingy. Perhaps thats the reason my images dont sell as well as they used to few years back. I'll probably try with 25 keywords on new images for a few months and if it does not work out then I'll drop then by the end of summer

« Reply #10 on: April 22, 2015, 12:21 »
+5
I just checked and found out some of the most important keywords are missing!
Usually my images have 50 keywords. That's OK with all other agencies except "the most special" - Veer!?
No more uploads from me!!! >:(

« Reply #11 on: April 22, 2015, 13:08 »
+4
... Not to mention making sure I don't have more than 25 keywords as they tend to throw the image out if they are more than 25 (I was advised by Veer to do this about a year ago). :o
And if you have more unusual subjects there is no point uploading as their keyword system doesn't allow for odd or unusual keywords. :'(

Lol, buahhah!  ;D Over year ago I asked them why my sales dropped so much. What is the reason that I don't sell here. They said to "upload more and maybe sales will come"(that's right, the magic and popular sentence). I closed my account soon after as I didn't see any more sense in wasting time here. (partner program was another reason).
I watch and can't believe how patient people are...

« Reply #12 on: April 22, 2015, 13:23 »
+1
I never heard about the 25 keyword thing.  Almost all my images have more than 25.  Do they just toss out the extra words?  I try to mostlybput the most important words first, so I don't know how much this affects me.  Do they penalize images with more keywords in the search?

« Reply #13 on: April 22, 2015, 14:06 »
+7
They removed some of my precisely chosen keywords and added some completely irrelevant! I can't believe how stupid is this policy! 

dpimborough

« Reply #14 on: April 22, 2015, 14:36 »
+2
I never heard about the 25 keyword thing.  Almost all my images have more than 25.  Do they just toss out the extra words?  I try to mostlybput the most important words first, so I don't know how much this affects me.  Do they penalize images with more keywords in the search?

I had a batch rejected and this is what they said "Unfortunately, we cannot accept this image as it is the second time it has been submitted with poor keywords. "

It was the first and only time it was submitted and the images had 48 keywords and the keywords were relevant.

Veer advised not to exceed 25 keywords as rejection would be the outcome

« Reply #15 on: April 22, 2015, 17:41 »
0
I never heard about the 25 keyword thing.  Almost all my images have more than 25.  Do they just toss out the extra words?  I try to mostlybput the most important words first, so I don't know how much this affects me.  Do they penalize images with more keywords in the search?

I had a batch rejected and this is what they said "Unfortunately, we cannot accept this image as it is the second time it has been submitted with poor keywords. "

It was the first and only time it was submitted and the images had 48 keywords and the keywords were relevant.

Veer advised not to exceed 25 keywords as rejection would be the outcome

Wow.  Stupidist rejection reason yet.  If they only want 25 they should just toss the rest like crestock does.  I don't like having relevant words removed but I like stupid rejections even less.

Love your butt whompin gif!

H2O

« Reply #16 on: April 22, 2015, 19:02 »
+2
They have some sort of computer program that changes the keywords for there keywords and there keywords are generally very odd -- this could be why they have been held back as a site as it must make there clients task of searching the data base difficult.

They rejected a whole load of my images with place names in, I could not figure this as these words where used on other sites to find my images.

Basically I think there search might be dated and have problem with new terminology.

« Reply #17 on: April 28, 2015, 22:20 »
+2
I wrote to support once, asking why a half of my keywords are missing and the other half is replaced. I found 13 keys instead of 50 in one image. They are replied that it was already 13, when they received it. And their keyword processor is so complicated, so we can do nothing, except improve my skills and I must rekeyword it properly we-don't-know-how.
But, citation: "Most of his original keywords still work for putting the content in front of customers. Yay!"

Yay! They are not!

« Reply #18 on: April 29, 2015, 00:19 »
+2
I have given up on them. I have not removed portfolio but I will not upload more pictures (due to "big" sales) !

« Reply #19 on: April 29, 2015, 10:11 »
+4
Just discovered the keyword stripping. Seems really random :-\  Someone talking about shooting themself in the foot..........

« Reply #20 on: May 01, 2015, 09:41 »
+9
Just discovered the keyword stripping. Seems really random :-\  Someone talking about shooting themself in the foot..........


So glad I saw this thread. I found over 100 of my files with the main keyword missing. Have no idea why they would remove the main keyword and in some instances create their own substitution! I emailed them the complete list.
 
Here is the worst offender, with none of these keywords included in the uploaded meta data:


« Reply #21 on: May 01, 2015, 10:54 »
+8
Someone used the words Veer and Sales in the same sentence?  Interesting.   

I agree about the keywords.  When they remove the keywords figure skater from a photo of a figure skater on ice skates in a pretty sequined competition dress there is something amis.

dpimborough

« Reply #22 on: May 10, 2015, 04:39 »
+1
Just discovered the keyword stripping. Seems really random :-\  Someone talking about shooting themself in the foot..........


So glad I saw this thread. I found over 100 of my files with the main keyword missing. Have no idea why they would remove the main keyword and in some instances create their own substitution! I emailed them the complete list.
 
Here is the worst offender, with none of these keywords included in the uploaded meta data:




That is beyond pathetic.  My guess they are farming out re-keywording to none English speakers in India or South East Asia to keep it cheap as you like.

Getty have the same problems with re-keywording

I raised the subject on this site a few months ago. 

http://www.microstockgroup.com/veer-marketplace/isn%27t-time-for-a-new-keyword-strategy/msg404573/#msg404573


« Last Edit: May 10, 2015, 04:42 by Teddy the Cat »

« Reply #23 on: May 10, 2015, 08:14 »
+2
Here is the worst offender, with none of these keywords included in the uploaded meta data:



OMG, that is the most laughable/worst selection of keywords I've ever seen for a given image. You have my sympathy.

I was with Veer for several years, saw no value in it, and pulled my port there a couple of years ago. No loss.

« Reply #24 on: May 10, 2015, 09:47 »
+8
Wow, I've just checked mine and they have done the same thing - stripped out all of the most important keywords and put in very general ones or completely wrong ones instead.  They have removed all of the scientific names of plants and animals even though those provide the most efficient way to search for something specific.  That explains why sales essentially stopped a few months ago.  Not worth bothering to submit there anymore.  Whoever came up with the idea to do that should be fired - it must be killing their business if nobody can find what they want.

Semmick Photo

« Reply #25 on: May 10, 2015, 09:58 »
0
Did anyone ask them why they do that?

« Reply #26 on: May 10, 2015, 12:20 »
+8
Did anyone ask them why they do that?

Of course not - this is MSG, all we do is complain!

Actually in response to your question I did ask them and will let you know how they respond.

Noedelhap

  • www.colincramm.com

« Reply #27 on: May 10, 2015, 13:08 »
+4
Ahahaha, I'm sorry, this is just laughable.

This '25 keywords' thing has got to be one of the worst new policies ever. Changing and screwing up my carefully keyworded images (they apparently even retro-actively changed keywords of accepted images) is not only rude, it's blatantly stupid.

They won't be receiving any new images from me. If they really want to play it the hard way, I'll just drop them. Their subscription sales are worthless anyway.

« Reply #28 on: May 10, 2015, 13:29 »
+1
Had situation with removed essential keywords often at IS too. Cannot believe that it is random. It is work for hire

Noedelhap

  • www.colincramm.com

« Reply #29 on: May 10, 2015, 14:49 »
+2
I think it's not outsourced, it's just an automated process. Most keywords are made plural, and some generic but irrelevant keywords (like 'nobody') are added. Most relevant keywords are randomly stripped.

« Reply #30 on: May 11, 2015, 10:53 »
0
Just discovered the keyword stripping. Seems really random :-\  Someone talking about shooting themself in the foot..........


So glad I saw this thread. I found over 100 of my files with the main keyword missing. Have no idea why they would remove the main keyword and in some instances create their own substitution! I emailed them the complete list.
 
Here is the worst offender, with none of these keywords included in the uploaded meta data:




Hi Rimglow,

I want to first apologize to you, and to the rest of the contributors on this thread about this "keyword issue". I think there are a few factors at play re: this issue. I am working with the keyword team now to see if we can get all of you some actual feedback about this problem.

In the meantime, Rimglow, I would like to know if you can send me a list of the original keywords you submitted with the image you linked to. I pulled what looks to be your original set from when you submitted. From what I can tell they are exactly what you took a screenshot of.

Grant
- Attachments and other options

« Reply #31 on: May 11, 2015, 11:46 »
+2
The Keywords that are included with my meta data are: sugar; bowl; glass; food; granules; crystals; sweet; white; isolated; condiment; dishware; transparent; container; clear; granulated; dispenser; macro; isolated; isolated on white; closeup; object; nobody; white background; cut out; studio shot; single object; ingredient; clipping path

These Keywords made it through all the other stock sites this file was uploaded to. I don't know why they were changed on Veer.

None of my photos have ever used the Keywords: sacred, fluffy, portraits, nests, indoors, or shells.
« Last Edit: May 11, 2015, 12:05 by rimglow »

Semmick Photo

« Reply #32 on: May 11, 2015, 13:01 »
+3
If its true that the original keywords got replaced/switched on the meta data somewhere along the process, then Veer has a massive issue on their hands.

« Reply #33 on: May 11, 2015, 13:32 »
0
I am still looking into Rimglow's issue. It seems as though it could be a metadata mixup on the ingest portion. Waiting on confirmation.

As for the overall "keyword" issue that I have been getting reports of, I feel like 2 things are going on here. The 1st is that, admittedly, the Veer CV needs some work - we are doing our best to clean things up as fast as we can.

The second issue is a possible misunderstanding of how the keyword hierarchy works. Below is a portion of a response from the keyword team regarding an issue with a contributors file and the term "pleasant smells" being substituted for "fragrant". I hope this clears some of the misunderstanding up. Also, please note the mention of "green" and "eco-friendly" in the below discussion. That is also a point of confusion/trouble for some.

You should also note that when you submit your images and  you already have kw's embedded, you can still, and should review them before submitting. To use the "green" example, the editing tool in your workspace will prompt you to clarify whether or not you mean "green(colors)" or "eco-friendly(environmental issue). If you skip this then it will cause issues with words that aren't defined prior to submitting. 

...the preferred term is not affecting search results, and therefore theres no reason I can think of that this is affecting sales. Fragrant and Pleasant Smells return the exact same number of search results. In the exact same order. Eco-friendly is getting added because of the keyword green. Is it sort of weird? Yes it is. Green is one of the worst mapping issues we struggle with. I guess thats actually useful feedback. If theyre giving us the color green, it helps a lot if they use green color or color green so the automap doesnt try and choose the environmental meaning. (Same with orange, black, white, peach colors are the worst).

Heres all the terms we have for pleasant smells that will all return the same results:

Aroma
Aromas
Aromatic
Aromatically
Aromatics
Aromatizing
Essence
Essences
Fragrance
Fragranced
Fragrances
Fragrant
Fragrent
Good Smell
Good Smelling
Good Smells
Good-Smelling
Pleasant Aroma
Pleasant Aromas
Pleasant Odor
Pleasant Odors
Pleasant Odour
Pleasant Odours
Pleasant Scent
Pleasant Scents
Pleasant Smell
Redolence
Redolences
Redolencies
Redolency
Redolent
Smell Good
Smelling Good
Smells Good
Sweet-Smelling

The hierarchies also include results for air fresheners, incense, and perfumes and colognes!


Grant

« Reply #34 on: May 11, 2015, 13:54 »
+4
Your keyword issues are more serious than this. When I search for "Northern Lights" on Veer (I happen to have lots of northern lights shots) I get results that more than 50% don't show something even closely related to the search term. Many of my northern lights images don't show at all.
That's no wonder, I know it now thanks to this forum thread, because the keyword "northern lights" has been stripped. I feel like having wasted a lot of time uploading to Veer.


« Reply #36 on: May 11, 2015, 14:41 »
+13
Why, oh why would you be using a CV at all??!!  It has proven to be a complete disaster  when used elsewhere.   Customers are used to simple word or combination word searches like Google, Amazon, etc. 

Please scrap the already disproven CV system and go back to keeping the original keywords we uploaded.  It may come as a shock, but most of us actually know what we are doing.

PS. Thank you for coming on to answer our questions.   My frustration is not at you personally, but at whatever person or group of persons that decided to go with this genius CV idea.
« Last Edit: May 11, 2015, 14:45 by PixelBytes »


« Reply #38 on: May 11, 2015, 14:55 »
+5
Pixel - I know it isn't personal and I completely understand the frustration that something like this causes. Trust me, I am also frustrated. I wish I could do more to simplify this. As you can probably imagine, it's not as simple as removing the CV, especially when a search experience is built around that.

FWIW, I am compiling this feedback and sending it up the ladder. Hopefully, it will give others here a feeling of what the contributor experience is like.

As always, don't hesitate to shoot me an email. My (digital) door is always open.

Grant

Thanks for being here, not taking the criticism personally, and for conveying our issues to the decision makers. :)

« Reply #39 on: May 11, 2015, 16:12 »
-1
Here's an illustration to how infuriating and random a main Keyword omission can be. While doing a search for "Wood Barrel Isolated", I see that my upload from 2006 never shows up, because the Main Keyword "barrel" has been stripped by Veer.  Other images that have the word barrel show up.



The Keywords in the uploaded meta data were: Barrel, Wine, Gunpowder, Rum, Container, Keg, Wood, Old, Cellar, Lager, Beer, Storage, Cask, vintage, oak, empty, hoop, fermentation, macro, isolated, isolated on white, closeup, object, nobody, white background, cut out, studio shot, single object, clipping path


Semmick Photo

« Reply #41 on: May 11, 2015, 16:24 »
+6
Your CV system is adding tonnes of spam, my (key)word.

« Reply #42 on: May 11, 2015, 16:25 »
+1
What should we do if your CV does not include the meaning of the keyword for our image?


« Reply #44 on: May 11, 2015, 16:37 »
0
What should we do if your CV does not include the meaning of the keyword for our image?

Feel free to email me with the image that you are concerned about. I would be happy to take a look at it. I would also suggest taking time to review the keywords prior to submitting them. There may be things that aren't matching up in that portion of the process. I understand, you probably embed your KW's and you don't think you should have to review them prior to submission but it may be worth the extra effort.

Semmick Photo

« Reply #45 on: May 11, 2015, 16:49 »
+2
This is where the disconnect is coming in. The excerpt from the email I received from the keywording team explained it best:

 "But again, I get that some of the mapping options are funky looking, but they dont impact search negatively. In fact, we put their content in front of way more searches for free".I

That is the best way we can explain it. We are not stripping or spamming images with keywords.
but you are. A barrel is not a basement even if the word storage was used.

« Reply #46 on: May 11, 2015, 16:53 »
0
This is where the disconnect is coming in. The excerpt from the email I received from the keywording team explained it best:

 "But again, I get that some of the mapping options are funky looking, but they dont impact search negatively. In fact, we put their content in front of way more searches for free".I

That is the best way we can explain it. We are not stripping or spamming images with keywords.
but you are. A barrel is not a basement even if the word storage was used.
You are correct, a barrel is not a basement. However, the term cellar, which was submitted with the image, could be rolled into the term basement, which is probably what happened in that instance. It can be found in search by either term.
« Last Edit: May 11, 2015, 16:56 by GrantP »

« Reply #47 on: May 11, 2015, 16:57 »
+6
Example:

http://marketplace.veer.com/stock-photo/Australian-water-dragon-Physignathus-lesueurii-9383494?slot=01&pg=1&SearchId=94e74995&skeywords=9383494#

The search for "australian water dragon" shows a total of five results, none of that my image.

The search for the scientific name ("Physignathus lesueurii") shows no results at all.

Obviously, both of these were in the keywords when I uploaded the file.
It's not only that some keywords seem to be missing, it's the main keywords.

And @Grant: checking keywords for each file after submission is way too much effort. Sorry to say, but your sales volume is much too low to make that effort worthwhile.

When you report to your development team, I'd suggest whatever they plan to do to your CV, please make sure that images do appear in searches for the exact keywords that were existing at upload time.
If there is any fancy CV that adds additional search terms on top, fine with me. But please:
a) don't change / delete any of the existing keywords
b) don't expect us to spend additional effort after submission.

Thanks for listening, I just hope your folks back at Veer don't just ignore the input you are gathering...

« Reply #48 on: May 11, 2015, 17:09 »
+6
nobody, but nobody is going to take the time to review keywords of uploaded images at Veer given the return there.

« Reply #49 on: May 11, 2015, 17:16 »
+2
When I look at your image on the site, I see this message:

Based on the keywords you have provided, we will index your image with additional related keywords, shown below.

Fair enough. I don't think the contributors can see that message. That's where the confusion comes in. We think that since we can't see the main Keyword in the search result, it's not there. Good to know it is!
« Last Edit: May 11, 2015, 17:59 by rimglow »

« Reply #50 on: May 12, 2015, 13:12 »
0
Pretty slow. I might get a payout once a year.
It's too bad, sales used to be pretty strong at Veer and I still like company.
I buy stock from them because the quality of the images and the search engine is better than a lot of sites.
More consistantly creative/artisitic.

« Reply #51 on: May 13, 2015, 15:03 »
+1
I am proud to announce, I've made my first sale at Veer.

It was this file: http://marketplace.veer.com/products/9390596

And it earned me 2.10$

« Reply #52 on: May 14, 2015, 01:45 »
+1
I am proud to announce, I've made my first sale at Veer.

It was this file: http://marketplace.veer.com/products/9390596

And it earned me 2.10$

Very nice image. Congratulations!

« Reply #53 on: May 14, 2015, 02:19 »
0
Thanks :)

« Reply #54 on: May 14, 2015, 03:01 »
0
You're welcome.
« Last Edit: May 14, 2015, 03:03 by marthamarks »

Shelma1

« Reply #55 on: May 14, 2015, 05:59 »
+3
I had the same keyword issues with my vectors...my files don't show up when searching the main keywords. Went back and forth with emails and got the same silly answers sent to me from the keyword department. Stopped uploading there. Not worth it. I can use that extra time to create more images which sell very well at the bigger sites.

Noedelhap

  • www.colincramm.com

« Reply #56 on: May 14, 2015, 08:42 »
+3
Quote
"But again, I get that some of the mapping options are funky looking, but they dont impact search negatively. In fact, we put their content in front of way more searches for free".

That is the best way we can explain it. We are not stripping or spamming images with keywords.


Actually, the flunky mapping options putting content in front of more searches IS in fact sort of spamming. Because these images will appear in irrelevant searches.

Let's take an example from one of my images:

Very realistic shiny chrome ball. Gradient mesh used.
Very realistic shiny chrome ball. Gradient mesh used.


Veer keywords:

balls, reflections, shiny, spheres, drawings, shadows, silver color, nobody, white background, three dimensional

My original keywords:

chrome, ball, bullet, metallic, metal, silver, gray, steel, blurry, reflective, reflection, shiny, realistic, photorealistic, realism, clean, sphere, spherical, vector, illustration, drawing, white, shadow, light, shape, object, gradient mesh

(In bold are the (completely) missing ones.)

When I search for "chrome ball", my image doesn't come up, but colored web 2.0 buttons, rugby balls, soccer balls, stairs and chrome pens do.
« Last Edit: May 14, 2015, 09:07 by Noedelhap »

« Reply #57 on: May 14, 2015, 12:27 »
0
Quote
"But again, I get that some of the mapping options are funky looking, but they dont impact search negatively. In fact, we put their content in front of way more searches for free".

That is the best way we can explain it. We are not stripping or spamming images with keywords.


Actually, the flunky mapping options putting content in front of more searches IS in fact sort of spamming. Because these images will appear in irrelevant searches.

Let's take an example from one of my images:

Very realistic shiny chrome ball. Gradient mesh used.
Very realistic shiny chrome ball. Gradient mesh used.


Veer keywords:

balls, reflections, shiny, spheres, drawings, shadows, silver color, nobody, white background, three dimensional

My original keywords:

chrome, ball, bullet, metallic, metal, silver, gray, steel, blurry, reflective, reflection, shiny, realistic, photorealistic, realism, clean, sphere, spherical, vector, illustration, drawing, white, shadow, light, shape, object, gradient mesh

(In bold are the (completely) missing ones.)

When I search for "chrome ball", my image doesn't come up, but colored web 2.0 buttons, rugby balls, soccer balls, stairs and chrome pens do.


Hi Noedelhap,

Your image appears for me in search and the keywords you listed are completely incorrect.


Shelma1

« Reply #59 on: May 14, 2015, 12:50 »
+3
Veer has very low sales and serious keyword issues. Instead of arguing with us why don't you fix things? Time better spent, IMO.

« Reply #60 on: May 14, 2015, 12:59 »
+2
Veer has very low sales and serious keyword issues. Instead of arguing with us why don't you fix things? Time better spent, IMO.

Shelma,

I am not arguing with any of you. I am trying to help explain how the Veer keywording system works. Granted, it isn't perfect (far from it), but I don't find it fair for someone to post accusations regarding their images not being able to be found on the site, or "missing" keywords. If/when that happens it seems appropriate to investigate and respond to their post. I would encourage you to read my responses and try to understand what I am sharing.

I have passed this thread on to many others at Veer. I have done my part. For now, I will keep answering questions the best I can.

« Reply #61 on: May 14, 2015, 15:24 »
+2
Veer has very low sales and serious keyword issues. Instead of arguing with us why don't you fix things? Time better spent, IMO.



I have passed this thread on to many others at Veer. I have done my part. For now, I will keep answering questions the best I can.


Grant,

I have posted an example from my port further up in this thread.

Quote
Example:

http://marketplace.veer.com/stock-photo/Australian-water-dragon-Physignathus-lesueurii-9383494?slot=01&pg=1&SearchId=94e74995&skeywords=9383494#

The search for "australian water dragon" shows a total of five results, none of that my image.

The search for the scientific name ("Physignathus lesueurii") shows no results at all.

Obviously, both of these were in the keywords when I uploaded the file.
It's not only that some keywords seem to be missing, it's the main keywords.

And @Grant: checking keywords for each file after submission is way too much effort. Sorry to say, but your sales volume is much too low to make that effort worthwhile.

When you report to your development team, I'd suggest whatever they plan to do to your CV, please make sure that images do appear in searches for the exact keywords that were existing at upload time.
If there is any fancy CV that adds additional search terms on top, fine with me. But please:
a) don't change / delete any of the existing keywords
b) don't expect us to spend additional effort after submission.

Thanks for listening, I just hope your folks back at Veer don't just ignore the input you are gathering...


I looked at the image again. Now the words "australian", "water", "dragons" have been added to it.
Did someone on Veer side add those words as a reaction to this thread?
If so, thank you for that.
But the image still does not show if I search for "australian water dragon". Neither when searching for the scientific name.

And anyway, manually fixing single images when reported cannot solve the problem. Who knows how many images are affected...


« Reply #63 on: May 14, 2015, 15:48 »
0
Thanks.

Noedelhap

  • www.colincramm.com

« Reply #64 on: May 14, 2015, 20:44 »
0


Quote
"But again, I get that some of the mapping options are funky looking, but they dont impact search negatively. In fact, we put their content in front of way more searches for free".

That is the best way we can explain it. We are not stripping or spamming images with keywords.

Actually, the flunky mapping options putting content in front of more searches IS in fact sort of spamming. Because these images will appear in irrelevant searches.

Let's take an example from one of my images:

-image-

Veer keywords:

balls, reflections, shiny, spheres, drawings, shadows, silver color, nobody, white background, three dimensional

My original keywords:

chrome, ball, bullet, metallic, metal, silver, gray, steel, blurry, reflective, reflection, shiny, realistic, photorealistic, realism, clean, sphere, spherical, vector, illustration, drawing, white, shadow, light, shape, object, gradient mesh

(In bold are the (completely) missing ones.)

When I search for "chrome ball", my image doesn't come up, but colored web 2.0 buttons, rugby balls, soccer balls, stairs and chrome pens do.

Hi Noedelhap,

Your image appears for me in search and the keywords you listed are completely incorrect.

They weren't incorrect, I copied them directly from the keywords list. So they must have been added later...? Very strange.  ???
« Last Edit: May 14, 2015, 20:46 by Noedelhap »

« Reply #65 on: May 22, 2015, 14:39 »
+5
Dirkr -

I sent this thread to the keywording team. They may be trying a few things on their end to understand your specific issue.

I will ask them and see if they can give me an update.

Any update?

Now I see that many of my files have today's date although they are online for quite a while.
And the missing keyword thing goes on.
Many of my wildlife shots have been stripped of the species names of the animal on the picture. A search for those does not deliver results.

It's getting totally ridiculous. Is it some kind of obscure strategy to hide the content from buyers?

« Reply #66 on: May 22, 2015, 16:57 »
+1
It's getting totally ridiculous. Is it some kind of obscure strategy to hide the content from buyers?

They certainly have no desire to hide content from buyers - I assume it was a misguided attempt to make things better.  I can think of no reason to strip out scientific names - my guess is that they automatically remove or remap any word that is not in their controlled vocabulary.  I have no idea how they are doing as an agency, but for me sales have pretty much dried up - this year they are averaging about a third of what it was last year, which was less than half  the year before, which was only 75% of what it was in 2012.  So far my monthly average sales in 2015 are about 12% of what they were in 2012.  It is not a fair comparison because I had ELs that year but none so far this year but it is still a huge drop.  It is too bad because Veer used to have good sales per image online but now it has dropped to next to nothing.  Of course I am small potatoes so my stats don't say anything about their overall health but I can't imagine that messing with keywords is helping sales or drawing in customers.  You would think with the iS CV nonsense that agencies would realize that an efficient search algorithm is the way to do it - that is why SS is tops right now.  I hope Veer can bring back customers as they were good in the past.  They did make reviewing faster so fixed one problem from the contributor side at least, and they do read and respond in these forums which is better than almost every other agency these days.  I'll keep hoping for better sales but won't be holding my breath.

« Reply #67 on: June 12, 2015, 04:13 »
+2
Dirkr -

I sent this thread to the keywording team. They may be trying a few things on their end to understand your specific issue.

I will ask them and see if they can give me an update.

Any update?

Now I see that many of my files have today's date although they are online for quite a while.
And the missing keyword thing goes on.
Many of my wildlife shots have been stripped of the species names of the animal on the picture. A search for those does not deliver results.

It's getting totally ridiculous. Is it some kind of obscure strategy to hide the content from buyers?

Bump.

Grant, if you are reading, any update?

As long as Veer keeps stripping essential keywords from images I will not upload any more.

On top of that, I'd like to hear how Veer wants to add back those keywords they have removed to make existing files searchable by their main keywords again.

« Reply #68 on: June 12, 2015, 07:12 »
+3
I can think of no reason to strip out scientific names - my guess is that they automatically remove or remap any word that is not in their controlled vocabulary.

If scientific (Latin) names are stripped from keywords, for any reason, then it's the kiss of death for a wildife/nature photographer.

Given that individual species of plants and animals can have many "common names" all over the globe, and also given that sub-species usually have a second Latin name that distinguishes them from other varieties of their general species it's essential to provide the one thing that everybody can agree on: the official scientific (Latin) name.

If stripping those names out has been Veer's policy all along, it's no wonder that my specialty, birds and other wildlife, never seemed to have a chance of selling there. Makes me even happier that I dumped Veer a good while ago.

« Reply #69 on: June 12, 2015, 07:14 »
+1
An individual can get keywording wrong......but Veer need a whole TEAM to make it this bad :o

Sales for me.......nah - most underperforming expectations site for me

« Reply #70 on: June 12, 2015, 07:28 »
0
My last sale there was in March - it's been all downhill since 2012.  It's really too bad they are sticking with this CV nonsense - you'd think iStock would have proven beyond a doubt that it doesn't work, it is just not possible to make a new language.  SS has shown that an efficient search algorithm is the road to success.  I hope Veer can turn things around because RPDL is usually very good there but will not be holding my breath.

« Reply #71 on: June 12, 2015, 07:34 »
+1
I remember in a past life Librarians and the like stuck to the gospel of controlled vocabularies and didn't understand how the likes of google searches undermined the concept completely. I heard many times how people wouldn't be able to use the internet efficiently  without a controlled vocabulary then instantly go to google to find what I wanted. In fact the UK govt once had a very sophisticated and no doubt costly search engine based on this.....trouble was some wag put a very similar front end on google and it outperformed it nearly every time and no cost to the tax payer!!!!

« Reply #72 on: June 12, 2015, 08:54 »
+1
All kinds of problems with the search and site plus terrible sales. I only still upload there because I have fond memories of their old rep!

« Reply #73 on: June 12, 2015, 09:56 »
0
I'm a stubborn if started so I'll finish person but Veer are now (nearly) bottom of my priorities and as I now have quite a big backlog of pics to work on and post on better selling and easier sites to upload on think it will be a while before they see my stuff. (incidentally Panther at very bottom and crestock the only one I stopped on due to high rejection rates no sales and their downright rudeness in their rejection reasons).

« Reply #74 on: June 12, 2015, 13:38 »
+3
I can think of no reason to strip out scientific names - my guess is that they automatically remove or remap any word that is not in their controlled vocabulary.

If scientific (Latin) names are stripped from keywords, for any reason, then it's the kiss of death for a wildife/nature photographer.

Given that individual species of plants and animals can have many "common names" all over the globe, and also given that sub-species usually have a second Latin name that distinguishes them from other varieties of their general species it's essential to provide the one thing that everybody can agree on: the official scientific (Latin) name.

If stripping those names out has been Veer's policy all along, it's no wonder that my specialty, birds and other wildlife, never seemed to have a chance of selling there. Makes me even happier that I dumped Veer a good while ago.

Fully agree, that's what's making me so mad.

And they do the same to travel images, they strip out the exact location names if it is not something super-well known.

Completely absurd.

« Reply #75 on: June 21, 2015, 00:21 »
0
Also, could you explain why nice can't mean "kind"?  Veer only allows three different meanings for nice:

For the keyword 'nice', do you mean:
Nice (Alpes-Maritimes); good (quality); Nice (Lake County)


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
45 Replies
18239 Views
Last post August 27, 2010, 05:44
by mtkang
6 Replies
2013 Views
Last post December 16, 2011, 04:20
by sharpshot
4 Replies
2592 Views
Last post October 11, 2012, 10:51
by tab62
4 Replies
1769 Views
Last post November 28, 2012, 14:51
by tab62
32 Replies
5021 Views
Last post November 29, 2013, 02:48
by Ariene

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle