Here is the latest message I received from Istock. This is not the first time they have changed my keywords (maybe even on this photo). I agree some of the keywords should not have been there (the system is so screwy that sometimes I have a hard time picking one of their options though). But why can't I have cupcakes, cake, dessert, fruit, food and drink, and carbohydrates on a picture of blueberry muffins and coffee? Is this not food and drink? I once had them remove the keyword pumpkin from my photo of pumpkin muffins. I went back and added it to the description then added the keyword back in. I think this is crazy. Maybe it's just me.

The problem with their system is that, if you take a photo of a chewing gum, and you add the keyword "soft", to them it means "softness (concept)" NOT "softness (physical quality)". Is this idiot? YES. Will it change? NO. Is it worth complaining about it on forums? NO.

I am sorry, you will have to accept that IS is odd.

I've also been told that the keywords are hierarchal - so that if you have "golden retriever" which is under "dogs" and "animals" then "dogs" and "animals" are also included in keyword searches.

__________________
s e l l p h o t o s . t k

Top Sellers • Shutterstock • Fotolia • Dreamstime • BigStock • StockXpert • FeaturePics • MostPhotos •

Thanks. I guess my original post was to ask for opinions on whether you think all of the keywords that istock removed were warranted. I would appreciate any feedback on that. If you, like I, think that "food and drink" should not have been removed, is it OK to go back and add it back into the keywords?

Thanks for any advice.

Susan

__________________
My Website

I have the same confusion, Susan. I have a photo of a model holding a cell phone, looking a bit concerned or in deep thoughts, "cell phone/mobile device" were considered bad keywords.

I have another photo of a budhha meditating, with a single flower in front of him. The bad keywords include "Human Face, Flower Arrangement, Single Flower, Flower Part".

I don't get it either.

According to your explanation, I guess because I have the word Buddha, "human face" becomes unnecessary? Or because I have "pansy", so "single flower", "flower part" etc., shoud not included?

If that's the case, iStock should educate us, instead of sending out confusing rejections.

I know I'm confused. They added "three objects". Who would search for that?

__________________
My Website

"Three objects" just means the number "3" is being distinguished from "three people" or "three animals" or "3 years old" or whatever. Anyone searching using the keyword "3" will have the option of choosing one of those phrases to further refine their search.

As for why IS is changing your keywords, contributors and buyers are allowed to report inaccurate keywords and add anything they feel might help buyers find the image.

__________________
Photography by Karin Lau | SmugMug Pro Account | Shutterstock | Mostphotos | StockXPert | Dreamstime | iStock | 123RF | BigStock

The wikiing system is far from perfect (I have seen deleted too some appropiate keywords from some file), but, at the same time, the istock disambiguation system works ages better than any micro competitor when searching from foreign languages. In many other sites, when searching from non-english languages the results are plain comic and innacurate.

I just found some answers on another microstock forum. Thanks for all your replies.

__________________
My Website