[STOCKPHOTO] A paradigm shift : Alamy prepares for online submission !
Dr. P. Kumar
agency launches is just-announced online submission program.
Submission to Alamy was yet considered painfully slow and sluggish
with several complaints of contributors being let down by alleged 'bad
media' detection by personnel running Alamy's QCs. Online submission
is definitely going to ease and simplify contributions ... and
realizing Alamy's amazing contributor-base (individuals +
agencies) ... the 'numbers' may simply get madenning. These swelling
numbers are at times blamed for great content dilution at Alamy. How
online submission affects these remains to be seen.
Anyways, with this long-desired change in image-submission process,
Alamy definitely becomes the biggest (numbers again) online TRAD stock
business model ... I hope I'm right here !
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Courtesy of The STOCKPHOTO Network - http://www.stockphoto.net/
Posting Rules - http://www.stockphoto.net/Subscriptions.php#rules
STOCKPHOTO Archives - http://www.stockphoto.net/Archives.php
STOCKPHOTO Bookstore - http://www.stockphoto.net/bookstore/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/STOCKPHOTO/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
STOCKPHOTO-...@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Stockphoto Seller
Carl May/BPS
"Dr. P. Kumar" <drpk...@rediffmail.com> wrote:
The real imapct of Alamy's 'numbers' game will now be seen soon as the
agency launches is just-announced online submission program.
Submission to Alamy was yet considered painfully slow and sluggish
with several complaints of contributors being let down by alleged 'bad
media' detection by personnel running Alamy's QCs. Online submission
is definitely going to ease and simplify contributions ... and
realizing Alamy's amazing contributor-base (individuals +
agencies) ... the 'numbers' may simply get madenning. These swelling
numbers are at times blamed for great content dilution at Alamy. How
online submission affects these remains to be seen.
Anyways, with this long-desired change in image-submission process,
Alamy definitely becomes the biggest (numbers again) online TRAD stock
business model ... I hope I'm right here !
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Courtesy of The STOCKPHOTO Network - http://www.stockphoto.net/
Posting Rules - http://www.stockphoto.net/Subscriptions.php#rules
STOCKPHOTO Archives - http://www.stockphoto.net/Archives.php
STOCKPHOTO Bookstore - http://www.stockphoto.net/bookstore/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
David Kilpatrick
>It remains to be seen whether or not Alamy has shot itself in the foot with its drive to become large. Returns from many searches on Alamy are now swamped with mediocre to poor images, wearing out the photo buyer who doesn't have time or patience to plow through mountains of chaff to get to the kernels. Some of this, of course, is due to the presence of both RF and RM at Alamy--at such sites, many creatives and photo researchers are know to check both for their searches, a habit that is not likely to go away. And having grown to its size--a size near 5 million images that it actively promotes--it is not likely Alamy could pare back to a more edited, targeted, and profitable (per image) collection if it wanted to.
>
> Carl May/BPS
>
>
>
>
The majority of reasonable three-word searches for subjects that I cover
yield a single page of results. Only highly generic searches like
'Eiffel Tower' get stupid results. It's fairly easy to hone down Alamy
results and I imagine it will get easier as search functions improve.
David
Stockphoto Seller
How about "animal cell nucleus"? That's a common textbook subject but a pretty specific three-word term. The returns from that would turn off any sophisticated photo researcher, especially those images that do not even show animal cells and the glut of (green) similars that show no nuclear details. Who would trust such junk? Or get a little more generic and search on "animal cell"--what photo researcher is going to get a good impression from a lot of pictures of cell phone users?
And look at the keywording over almost any selection of images returned from a search, ranging all the way from highly expert to illiterate gibberish. With keywording as bad as the low-quality images, I'm afraid there is not much Alamy can do to improve their obese collection for serious photo users without a sweeping systemic cleanup that would be contrary to their much-promoted (over)growth.
Even when Alamy gives search returns that are on the mark, the photographs can be mostly mediocre--or, at least, they appear to be mediocre in the preview images on Alamy. There are, without question, many excellent pictures on Alamy; but from all indications, the obvious lack of editing for the portal beyond making sure images meet technical file requirements has resulted in a badly overfilled collection.
The overall glut of images and unrestrained rows of similars on Alamy have a deadening effect, making one wonder how much better photographers would do with strict self-editing on a more selective portal. One of the many sales and marketing topics being batted about in some RM circles is a new RM portal--sort of the Alamy approach limited strictly to RM images by professionals in order to achieve higher standards and more satisfaction for image users. Another idea I have been trying to boost without much luck so far is a search facility along the lines of StockPhotoFinder but for strictly RM photographers and agencies. Yet others are discussing ideas for entirely new kinds of online systems for gathering and marketing/distributing RM images. Some photo buyers are starting to make negative noises about the selection at the big conglomerates, so there is a chance some such ideas will gain substance in the future.
Carl May/BPS
David Kilpatrick <icon...@btconnect.com> wrote:
majority of reasonable three-word searches for subjects that I cover
yield a single page of results. Only highly generic searches like
'Eiffel Tower' get stupid results. It's fairly easy to hone down Alamy
results and I imagine it will get easier as search functions improve.
David
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
David Kilpatrick
>No matter--this is not what our photo buyers are saying. And one hears the same thing with some frequency elsewhere. Of course, some photo users are much better than others in using search terms.
>
> How about "animal cell nucleus"? That's a common textbook subject but a pretty specific three-word term. The returns from that would turn off any sophisticated photo researcher, especially those images that do not even show animal cells and the glut of (green) similars that show no nuclear details. Who would trust such junk? Or get a little more generic and search on "animal cell"--what photo researcher is going to get a good impression from a lot of pictures of cell phone users?
>
>
That is a search engine issue, not a content issue. It happens with many
subjects, because Alamy treats the terms as 'or' rather than as 'and'.
It can be fixed and needs fixing.
>
> And look at the keywording over almost any selection of images returned from a search, ranging all the way from highly expert to illiterate gibberish. With keywording as bad as the low-quality images, I'm afraid there is not much Alamy can do to improve their obese collection for serious photo users without a sweeping systemic cleanup that would be contrary to their much-promoted (over)growth.
>
>
Many of the worst keywording examples come from well-established,
well-known existing picture libraries and surprisingly few from
individual specialist photographers.
>
> Even when Alamy gives search returns that are on the mark, the photographs can be mostly mediocre--or, at least, they appear to be mediocre in the preview images on Alamy. There are, without question, many excellent pictures on Alamy; but from all indications, the obvious lack of editing for the portal beyond making sure images meet technical file requirements has resulted in a badly overfilled collection.
>
>
This does remain a mystery to me. There's no doubt that if I search for
'Borders Kelso Abbey' for example, some of the worst and least relevant
shots mysteriously appear first, almost as if the search order is
reversed - with a batch of mismatches to the actual subject coming up
before most correct matches. Maybe ImageRank will sort this problem out.
>
> The overall glut of images and unrestrained rows of similars on Alamy have a deadening effect, making one wonder how much better photographers would do with strict self-editing on a more selective portal. One of the many sales and marketing topics being batted about in some RM circles is a new RM portal--sort of the Alamy approach limited strictly to RM images by professionals in order to achieve higher standards and more satisfaction for image users. Another idea I have been trying to boost without much luck so far is a search facility along the lines of StockPhotoFinder but for strictly RM photographers and agencies. Yet others are discussing ideas for entirely new kinds of online systems for gathering and marketing/distributing RM images. Some photo buyers are starting to make negative noises about the selection at the big conglomerates, so there is a chance some such ideas will gain substance in the future.
>
>
I'm still not convinced by editing controls which pre-empt the buyer's taste. My latest sale was A10PB5, which is a shot of the Falkirk Wheel. A general search produced 272 images of the Wheel. I am picture editor myself - that's my main job really - and I would probably trim this down 20 selected images, of which A10PB5 would NOT be one. In fact I reckon maybe just one of my own shots would make into my edit, perhaps two at a pinch. Some photographers would see their entire shoot removed, one photographer would have about half the entire final 20 because of the fantastic conditions prevailing when he/she did the shoot (millpond water and clear sun, great reflections).
But this presumes an aesthetic decision which removes the buyer's own choice. A buyer obviously liked some aspect of A10PB5 enough to give it a half-page in a book, in preference to 'better' shots. This is the true strength of Alamy. Because no picture editor has gone in there and removed all the choice, the buyer has real freedom to get exactly what they prefer, not what a stereotype photo library shot is supposed to look like.
David
Valerie Henschel
One of the agencies I submit to has a search feature that brings up a
defining question when you request certain ambiguous words. Requesting
"cell" might trigger a question of "Do you want cellular phone,
plant/animal, battery, terrorist, monastery, weather, electrical or jail?".
Actual question terms may vary according to images available. I am sure
David R. could elaborate more on this type of qualifier question and how it
is built into a search engine.
Alamy and other general image agencies would do well to adopt something
similar to ease the search process. Anytime you can reduce customer
frustration, you improve your chances of success, and the success of your
contributors.
Valerie Henschel
Regional Photo
hens...@tenforward.com
Tech
similar to ease the search process. Anytime you can reduce customer
frustration, you improve your chances of success, and the success of your
contributors.
I see two things here. One big one is educating the photographers in how to
effectively/accurately keyword an image. It really is an art form. Check a
bunch of the images on Alamy and you will see keywords like 'stick', 'rock'
'shadow' when it is a miniscule part of the image. All in a desperate
attempt to get their images to come up in any search. Unfortunately their
short sightedness creates lousy search results overall, hurting the agencies
effectiveness and everybody's sales.
The second is educating clients on how to do an effective search, to
minimize getting back a bunch of unrelated images.
Cheers
Jeff Boucher
Dr. P. Kumar
content dilution, submission of its RF as RM elsewhere and vice versa,
submission of microsite images to Alamy as RF or RM) today is in fact
totally unavoidable as consequent to such rapid business expansion
without any content editing/approval worth the mention. Alamy, today,
is no mere photo-agency, it indeed is an image portal - so great is
its number of images and contributors (individuals & agencies). The
numbers game at Alamy is just unprecedented elsewhere. Alamy dwarfs
all/most other agencies as much in such game of 'numbers' as in its
sad content dilution, irrelevance of search returns, and almost mind-
boggling 'multiples-of-similars'.
P. Kumar
Rubens Abboud
wrote:
> One of the agencies I submit to has a search feature that
brings up a
> defining question when you request certain ambiguous words.
Requesting
> "cell" might trigger a question of "Do you want cellular phone,
> plant/animal, battery, terrorist, monastery, weather, electrical
or jail?".
> Actual question terms may vary according to images available.
[snip]
> Alamy and other general image agencies would do well to adopt
something
> similar to ease the search process.
Alamy could not implement this effectively because:
a) search engines optimized for edited collections are not
necessarily the best engines for unedited collections; and
b) it has no control over how images are keyworded.
Alamy's search role models are Google and Yahoo!
Best regards,
Rubens.
http://www.TheImageNation.com
Travel stock photography
Stockphoto Seller
Yes, this is what better search facilities are doing--helping the one seeking images to get to what they want. It can be as simple as generating a list of alternative keywords that appears when search results appear or more sophisticated interaction of the sort you describe.
People might want to take a look at the way searches are set up and refined for the photo seeker on Getty Images. Such interaction is not a nicety, though one might feel friendlier toward the megamonster because of it. It keeps the photo seeker on the website and moves them ever closer to images that they are likely to want.
Carl May/BPS
Valerie Henschel <hens...@tenforward.com> wrote:
Hi Carl,
One of the agencies I submit to has a search feature that brings up a
defining question when you request certain ambiguous words. Requesting
"cell" might trigger a question of "Do you want cellular phone,
plant/animal, battery, terrorist, monastery, weather, electrical or jail?".
Actual question terms may vary according to images available. I am sure
David R. could elaborate more on this type of qualifier question and how it
is built into a search engine.
Alamy and other general image agencies would do well to adopt something
similar to ease the search process. Anytime you can reduce customer
frustration, you improve your chances of success, and the success of your
contributors.
Valerie Henschel
Regional Photo
hens...@tenforward.com
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Courtesy of The STOCKPHOTO Network - http://www.stockphoto.net/
Posting Rules - http://www.stockphoto.net/Subscriptions.php#rules
STOCKPHOTO Archives - http://www.stockphoto.net/Archives.php
STOCKPHOTO Bookstore - http://www.stockphoto.net/bookstore/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
Jeff Greenberg
wrote:
> The overall glut of images and unrestrained rows of similars on
Alamy have a deadening effect
selection at the big conglomerates
=====
Do you see the day coming when Alamy will collapse into a teeny tiny
boutique agency after which unemployed Alamy staff will have plenty of
time to post endless negative comments about other agencies on
Stockphoto.net?
jeffgreenberg
Brian Seed
From: STOCK...@yahoogroups.com [mailto:STOCK...@yahoogroups.com]On
Behalf Of Jeff Greenberg
Sent: Friday, May 26, 2006 9:34 PM
To: STOCK...@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [STOCKPHOTO] Re: Too many images at Alamy? What next?
--- In STOCK...@yahoogroups.com, Stockphoto Seller <bpslistmail@...>
wrote: The overall glut of images and unrestrained rows of similars on
Alamy have a deadening effect
> Some photo buyers are starting to make negative noises about the
selection at the big conglomerates
> Carl May/BPS
=====
Do you see the day coming when Alamy will collapse into a teeny tiny
boutique agency after which unemployed Alamy staff will have plenty of
time to post endless negative comments about other agencies on
Stockphoto.net?
jeffgreenberg
Jeff,
Your sly innuendos and insults do not belong on this or any other list.
Judging by other comments made by you in the past you appear to have a fair
amount of acid in your system.
Carl is only saying what many others believe to be true. Photographers are
beginning to comment on a dimunition of their earnings at Alamy because of
the increasing girth of its image collection. Alamy knows it has a ton of
junk on its site and has announced a system whereby the sludge will sink to
the bottom and the prime images float to the top. This doesn't mean that
some photographers are not suited by Alamy's willingness to accept images by
the ton. It is God's gift to prolific photographers many of whose images
would be rejected by critical editors.
Alamy, itself, is reporting lower per image sales. This certainly doesn't
mean it is a bad, or failing agency, it may simply be going through a
growing phase.
Carl is a regular contributor to this list and he does know a thing or two
about stock photography. Let us see... He has run a successful stock agency
over very many years. He is an expert on the subject matter he supplies to
the marketplace. His contributing photographers appear to be happy with his
representation of their work. He has not sold out to Getty, Corbis, or
Jupiter images. He firmly maintains the rights-managed status of his images.
Yep, he is a bad guy.
Brian Seed
Stockphoto Seller
I'll file your comment below in my "Classic Non-Sequiturs" folder.
Thanks, and good luck with the image-spamming.
Carl May/BPS
Jeff Greenberg <JeffGr...@juno.com> wrote:
--- In STOCK...@yahoogroups.com, Stockphoto Seller
wrote:
> The overall glut of images and unrestrained rows of similars on
Alamy have a deadening effect
> Some photo buyers are starting to make negative noises about the
selection at the big conglomerates
> Carl May/BPS
=====
Do you see the day coming when Alamy will collapse into a teeny tiny
boutique agency after which unemployed Alamy staff will have plenty of
time to post endless negative comments about other agencies on
Stockphoto.net?
jeffgreenberg
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Courtesy of The STOCKPHOTO Network - http://www.stockphoto.net/
Posting Rules - http://www.stockphoto.net/Subscriptions.php#rules
STOCKPHOTO Archives - http://www.stockphoto.net/Archives.php
STOCKPHOTO Bookstore - http://www.stockphoto.net/bookstore/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
David Sanger
> Alamy, itself, is reporting lower per image sales. This certainly doesn't
> mean it is a bad, or failing agency, it may simply be going through a
> growing phase.
Brian - Alamy did not report lower per image sales, and in fact said
nothing at all about their revenue.
Anecdotal evidence from some contributors is where that suggestion has
come from.
david
--
david sanger
travel stock and assignments worldwide
da...@davidsanger.com
www.davidsanger.com
fivaldi
be used as a portal from where sub-distributors will
find the picts they'll edit tightly?
Fernand Ivaldi
--- "Dr. P. Kumar" <drpk...@rediffmail.com> a écrit :
> realizing Alamy's amazing contributor-base
> (individuals +
> agencies) ... the 'numbers' may simply get
> madenning. These swelling
> numbers are at times blamed for great content
> dilution at Alamy. How
> online submission affects these remains to be seen.
>
> Anyways, with this long-desired change in
> image-submission process,
> Alamy definitely becomes the biggest (numbers again)
> online TRAD stock
> business model ... I hope I'm right here !
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Courtesy of The STOCKPHOTO Network -
> http://www.stockphoto.net/
> Posting Rules -
> http://www.stockphoto.net/Subscriptions.php#rules
> STOCKPHOTO Archives -
> http://www.stockphoto.net/Archives.php
> STOCKPHOTO Bookstore -
> http://www.stockphoto.net/bookstore/
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
> STOCKPHOTO-...@yahoogroups.com
>
>
>
>
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
En finir avec le spam? Yahoo! Mail vous offre la meilleure protection possible contre les messages non sollicités
http://mail.yahoo.fr Yahoo! Mail