...if someone uploads a shot that is really nicely done but is badly mislabelled? Obviously the first thing to do is to contact the author of the shot, but if they don't respond, what then? Shots that are wrongly labelled damage the reputation of RGB Stock and, by implication, all of us.
As a case in point, see http://www.rgbstock.com/photo/nKQfUHo/Rhino+Cooling+Off which is labelled as a rhino but is clearly a hippo. Hippos, being designed for living in water, have eyes that are positioned high on the head, so that they can still see whilst almost totally submerged. Rhinos on the other hand have eyes that are positioned much lower on the head, in order to line up with their offensive weapon - their horn. So the shot is definitely wrongly labelled. What would the mods do?
Good point. I'd suggest to leave a comment directly on the image making users aware of the photographers error. There chances are quite good that users can take notice.
Hmm, yes, I've done that, but it would still be nice to get the title and key word changed so that the image doesn't come up wrongly in searches.
Kevin, because everyone is a volunteer, and real life happens, sometimes things are missed, or there is noone to make a change. Let people know, as well as the image owner, explaining the reason for correct keywords, etc, (and often that is enough, as everyone wants downloads).
I would love to help people with keywords (and I often try via the contact form or comments), but there are simply too many to really be effective. Keywords are so important, as that is how people find images that aren't on the most popular or recent lists.
I'm sure someone will see your post soon.
Thanks for your comments Dez. In fact, I've already done both your suggestions - contacted the owner and let people know through this forum thread, so we'll see what happens.
Incidentally, I've noticed on the Other Site there are frequent mislabellings - craneflies called mosquitoes, hoverflies called bees, tortoises called turtles, and so on. Doesn't do a lot for credibility.
Well, I called a hoverfly a wasp once. It's human t get things wrong. And not everyone knows the correct terms in English. Maybe we could have a committee of people to write keywords for those who struggle.
Such a committee would be a great idea. Photographers could even tick a box in their profile if they would want to get suggestions or not. I'd luckily accept keyword suggestions at any time. It often drives me crazy to try to imagine the importance of differences like AE and BE in spelling and in meanings...
If we could have a page of suggestions re certain subjects - perhaps the most popular list would be the best to work from - then people could get some ideas. I always suggest they look at Uri Arcurs' keywording site, a thesaurus, or the keywords on similar images on this or pay sites.
Good idea Dez. I'm happy to help with keywords for animals in particular.
I will mention it to others and see what they think. Everyone is away or very busy right now, but we'll see what can be done, if anything.
I have a different quesion. Do keywords have copyright too ? Do they belong with the image or do they just exist to make it easy to find on the site ?
I assume it is the last thing, then I guess it wouldn't be so bad for a certain number of people to be able to fix the worst "offenders" (the keywords that are obviously wrong).
We could even indicate in the photomanagement section that something has been changed on an image.
I can't imagine there could be anything legal about fixing keywords, particularly on a free site. However, while fixing bad ones is good, it's better to prevent the problem by making it a bit easier for people to find suitable words. Maybe a "keyword" link to a page of suggestions? It is very relevant to the site's success. Downloaders need to be able to find what they are looking for, or they might not return.
I don't think keywords can possible be copyrighted, as they exist in many other places on many other websites, newspapers, etc. They are surely in the public domain.
I think the two main concerns for RGB Stock are that downloaders should be able to find the images they want, and should be confident that the key words really do represent the image with reasonable accuracy.
Does it matter if, for example, a hoverfly is mislabelled as a bee, or a tortoise mislabelled as a turtle? Yes, I think it does. Someone wanting images for a website about honey is most unlikely to be happy with photos of hoverflies. Or someone wanting images for a publication about marine reptiles is unlikely to find pictures of tortoises to be any help at all.
I appreciate that many folk aren't too familiar with the subtleties of different kinds of animals or plants. Equally, I would be at a loss concerning different kinds of fabric. So some way of helping each other find the correct keywords would be a very good idea. Suggestions for lists of suitable keywords would go some way towards meeting this need. However, it pre-supposes that the person has actually identified the subject correctly. If they don't know or aren't sure, perhaps there should be a "Help! - What is it?" category on the Forum (or homepage?) where a link to the image can be placed so that folk able and willing to help can make some suggestions.
Again, this won't meet all the potential situations, but perhaps these measures will help reduce problems to a minimum.
Any further ideas?
@Dez It is not possible to suggest hippo on an image that has a hippo but has a rhino keyword.
If we keep a list of what was fixed, maybe we can suggest those changes to prevent them from happening again.
How about a "report wrong keywords" link near the photo on the site ? Do you think many would click it ?
I think it's feasible. Is it a lot of work? But that's only going to be a few images, really. The problem of not enough keywords is also a big issue. You're right - if I think a hippo is a rhino, then nothing will save me! LOL
I Think it's not only a problem on this site. I do use Uri Arcurs' keywording site or I look directly on shutterstock or somewhere else. And the keywords you find there are also partly simply wrong and don't fit to with the image.
I think Lennies idea is very good.
I was just looking at how Flickr handles it, it looks to me like you can add tags to the photo of someone else ? Would that be a good idea ?
I await honest answers to legitimate questions about rgbstock as I continue to pose in the technical questions forum - much to my frustration.
The problem with others adding tags is it leaves it open for abuse. I don't think that is a good idea.
Stephen, I'm not sure what your problem is, but your questions were answered, and why you keep going on about the matter is beyond me. Do you do this on all image sites or just here?
Jay had the following idea:
Anyone that is a photographer* should be able add or modify keywords to other photographers photos. Obviously with a notification email.
I think maybe only adding should be allowed.
Even if rhino is wrong, it seems to me that adding hippo would be enough for people to at least find it. So that way we can partly fix the worst problems.
Jay thought a checkbox saying you want to allow other to change to keywords on your photos when uploading would be a good idea. I'm now thinking it should just be on your profile. Per photo seems overkill to me.
@Stephen Sorry, I wanted to comment on it, I forgot. Please, don't cross-post.
* Which is a user with at least one approved photo online
@18 Well, thanks for that Stephen, but please don't hijack this thread by using it to divert to a quite different issue. On this thread we're discussing keywords.
Now, responding to Lennie (@14, @17), I think the idea of a "report wrong keywords" link is a very good solution, but I'm not at all sure about giving the ability to everyone to add keywords in the style of Flickr. I can see that it would be a strong temptation to a troll to seriously mess up a number of people's efforts...
Yes, I can see how trolling could be an issue that is why only someone who has his/her own photos approved is allowed to add keywords (probably not even change/delete, just add).
Maybe it's a stupid idea, do tell ! :-)
No, I still disagree. On the other site when you could score images out of 10, that was constantly abused. The fellow who came here to make trouble who had a thing about me on sxc (I mean he kept harassing me) was a registered person with lots of good images. No, I think it would be abused. A box to notify the approvers is much safer, and if they could add the keywords or fix them it would be better. If it's too much work, then perhaps others could be designated to do that. I'd be prepared to put some time into it.
I agree with Dez on all counts.
I'm afraid that having a 'report wrong keywords' link would almost never be used except from just a small group.
In that case we might as well promote that small group to fix keywords directly (with notification to the photographer I presume).
Then again, if you have a link. It is a good way to find new members for that group.
A little side note:
I checked Flickr, you can only add keywords to 'contacts' (people you know).