Quote:
Originally Posted by sjlocke
Seems to me, finding the product is the next part, and without data about the image (how many people are in it, keywords, etc), buyers are going to waste time going through too many returns. Contributors really seem to complain a lot about uploading processes, when it should be about providing the best data about the image so the buyer can find it.
|
Making uploading easier instead of harder, will attract more sellers and make it easier for new photos to be contributed. Maybe you like taking an hour to upload 15 photos a week, and then another half hour disambiguating the same files. I'd rather upload ftp, review and be done with it.
I don't like having to click a whole page of fields, agreeing to conditions and admissions. I don't like having my files end up in some strange area, where I have to move them to another and then submit, one by one, clicking some vague categories, after I already ftp'ed the whole batch.
With the way keywords work and the way people spam them, the real answer is the
Keyword Police 
One site has one set of categories, another has their own idea. IS has the massive disambiguation (which may or may not work) that takes time to click here and there. Some have no broad categories for many items I upload. Oh it's an "Object / Other" wow that helps. Best answer on some sites is just having Transportation and skipping trying to classify in, because there are so many variables. Miscellaneous / Business, there's another useful one.
What good does making us spend time, adding all that data do, if people can't use it and when they do, it still turns up vague or useless results? There are no standards between the sites either! Does anyone really search using category, which is broader than key words?
Go type in some common word like "apple" and see what you get. Then come back and tell me how important categories, sub-titles and number of people and some of the other things they ask for really are.
You'll see a series of silhouettes (I don't know why?), New York, a computer, mostly apples, a blue abstract vector, but every photo that has an apple in the background of a desk or on the back of the table with some bread, or in a cornucopia, comes up as "Apple". A site that forces only the main subject and keywords that apply, will win the hearts of buyers. Who wants to waste time going through 100 images of things that aren't what they claim to be?
Enter Red Apple and it gets better for a few pages, then it gets much worse, because every dang file that has RED in it starts to show up. Searches get worse as you add more words, to make them more selective. It is often counterproductive.
Fix the keywords first!
Back to my original point, which I think you may have missed sjlocke. (or I didn't make clear) You can have 10 million images on a site, but if there are no buyers, it doesn't matter, the service will fail.
Without buyers, it doesn't matter how perfect your search is. There's no one looking!
Sorry but I don't do models, I hadn't considered releases as a factor in deciding my easiest site. I'll look at 123 next batch and see if I'm being blind.
Every site that uses ftp is pretty fast and works well enough once someone gets to editing and saving. Except Panther Media. Even Alamy is easy enough with their bank of questions. How bad is it? I can upload to SV five photos at a time, faster than PantherMedia, by the time I get done clicking columns and boxes.
sjlocke, 200,000 downloads and over 4000 images. Nice! Are you an iStock exclusive?
Linear Mode
