I don't sell on Adobe Stock but I did watch the webinar. I wondered a lot why they don't have a controlled vocabulary system like Gettyimages. CV would do away with problems that seems to come up with different ways of spelling words and phrases and would make translation much easier. CV would be a pain in the butt to setup, but once setup would be a more reliable way to search (IMHO).

Also I wondered a lot about the putting the most important top 10 keywords first. That would be a pain in the butt to do manually for all images. Keywording is already time consuming enough as it is, without spending time thinking about which 10 keywords is even more important. In fact in my own experience selling on iStock, I've actually noticed that I had no idea which words customers use the most to find my own images, not until I started spending time looking at the landing page for each of my images and look at the keyword order that has been rearranged by iStock in order of searches. Since I only sell on iStock I could be quite biased, but I think their method of doing A/B testing on keywords and organically figuring out which ones are more important is a better method than the contributor choosing which ones. That is the entire point of A/B testing, that customers know best.

I also thought that when there are 50 keywords all keywords are flat vs 49 keywords or less, then keywords are weighted. Seems not smart. A/B testing would have solved this quirk. There is no need to assume someone is spamming if they have 50 keywords vs 49 if you just did A/B testing.

Anyway, these are just my uneducated thoughts.

Well worth watching.
The main 3 takes for me where:
(i) titles are searchable
(ii) top 10 keywords are prioritised higher
(iii) 50 keywords stops point (ii) above.

The depressing thing is a large chunk of my portfolio has 50 keywords because years ago when i started i was told more is better!  and i havent got the inclination to go through 10,000+ images deleting 1 keyword or so from each!

A future presentation on search would be very welcome.

It means they use keyword order as one of the factors in ranking search results.

I.e. if the keyword the buyer searches for is within the first ten keywords of an image, this image will be displayed before those images that don't have that keyword in their first ten (all other factors being equal...)

Quote from: dirkr on December 02, 2019, 15:35

It means they use keyword order as one of the factors in ranking search results.

I.e. if the keyword the buyer searches for is within the first ten keywords of an image, this image will be displayed before those images that don't have that keyword in their first ten (all other factors being equal...)

Wanted to make sure I understood that correctly. OK first ten are weighted more heavily. If I have some that are "similar" I might want to use different top ten words, I mean alter the 6 -10 words for example for different details of the subject.

I've always treated the top 5 or was it 7 or is it 9 as the top nine.  Now I'll make that a Top Ten List! 

As a best practice, list the most important keyword first, the second most keyword second, etc. Once you get to keyword 11, the weight in search is pretty light as I understand it so it's less important you post the remaining keywords in order.

Another important note...I received confirmation that updating the keyword order on files that have been online for a while will not have much, if any impact on the search results.

-Mat

Quote from: Uncle Pete on December 02, 2019, 15:39

Quote from: dirkr on December 02, 2019, 15:35

It means they use keyword order as one of the factors in ranking search results.

I.e. if the keyword the buyer searches for is within the first ten keywords of an image, this image will be displayed before those images that don't have that keyword in their first ten (all other factors being equal...)

Wanted to make sure I understood that correctly. OK first ten are weighted more heavily. If I have some that are "similar" I might want to use different top ten words, I mean alter the 6 -10 words for example for different details of the subject.

I've always treated the top 5 or was it 7 or is it 9 as the top nine.  Now I'll make that a Top Ten List! 

As a best practice, list the most important keyword first, the second most keyword second, etc. Once you get to keyword 11, the weight in search is pretty light as I understand it so it's less important you post the remaining keywords in order.

Another important note...I received confirmation that updating the keyword order on files that have been online for a while will not have much, if any impact on the search results.

-Mat

Double interesting, I just updated some, and I could have saved the time for something new?  But if that's the way it works, you saved me some time doing something that doesn't matter.

I still like the highlight on the first 5, then reported as 7 or 9 and now it's 10. But if each word is valued in descending order, I will always put the most important word first, not third as I have. My logic (or lack of) was put auxiliary words 1 and 2 and the simplest main word as third, to make placement better if someone is looking for some specific version of #3. Maybe not...

Mat if you can help, how does the system find "more from this series"? I have some images that are various similar compositions with key elements different, and when I click more from this series, only two show. I don't think more from this model applies to mine, as I have no models. Keywords are very much alike.

The question is, why would only two of four, show as more? Title, keywords? That would be helpful, as I might have had the keywords in a different order on the images, in an effort to get views, which would then lead people to the four variations.

Actually another complaint, comment, suggestion... to make life better for all of us. Why does Adobe and only Adobe read Title instead of Description? Every upload, I have to go back and copy the Description, into the box. Oh I suppose I could add the full description to every image in title, instead of using Title for Title and Description for Descriptions? 

Is there a better answer anyone?

I vaguely remembered an answer from years ago. Just tested and it works. Leave the title field blank and Adobe reads the complete description. I don't know if any site uses Title so I'm going to stop filling in that data.

Quote from: Uncle Pete on December 03, 2019, 12:37

Mat if you can help, how does the system find "more from this series"? I have some images that are various similar compositions with key elements different, and when I click more from this series, only two show. I don't think more from this model applies to mine, as I have no models. Keywords are very much alike.

I've scratched my head more than once over stuff like this, too, Pete. Always a bit perplexed when (on one site or another) I see "more from this series" or "similar images" or some such on the page with one of my images� and there is no observable similarity whatsoever. A photo of a bumble bee in a flower may result in a "similar" photo of a mountain, or some such.

Obviously, something has triggered the "similar" or "series" response in some AI robot's pointy little head that my very human head can't discern.

'Tis a puzzlement.

I didn't think of AI. I imagined that some keywords or title information was used. But AI would explain why of four images, two are similar, and two aren't? For a little less mystery, one has a Treble Clef and one has a Bass Clef, they are different, distinctive meanings, but otherwise alike. But not according to the "more like this". The third which is similar to the treble clef, is a staff with no designation.

I'm happy for the information and I'm adjusting the way I view my keyword order on Adobe, and making sure the Title/Description adds to the search if possible.

Anything with the same release seems to show in more. Not sure if the AI is looking at the images and ignoring the words?

I finally got a chance to look at webinar, lot of useful information, thank you!
I am wondering about keywords for isolated images. Right now I am using: "isolated, cut out, work path, clipping path". For me, isolated always meant that image has work path included, but in AS search I see there is filter for isolated images and info: "Isolated assets have subjects appear alone on a solid background." I don't know if AS recognizes isolated images by keywords or with Sensei, AI or whatever.

- I guess that we should include words "isolated" and "cut out" anyway - even if images don't have work path?
- I would like to know if work path still stays in image when customer downloads it? I think I have read somewhere that Shutterstock removes it, I am wondering is it same thing on Adobe Stock. If yes, that would be little less work and less keywords for me. Plus, I don't want to mislead customers.

The clipping path is removed when a customer downloads the file so that is an irrelevant keyword that can actually lead to frustration for customers that expect it based on the keyword.

I think it's reasonable to assume some customers would still use the word "isolated" or "cut out" if searching for an image featuring an isolated subject. I wouldn't use it as one of my top 10 keywords but still worth adding to the list in my opinion.

-Mat

The clipping path is removed when a customer downloads the file so that is an irrelevant keyword that can actually lead to frustration for customers that expect it based on the keyword.

I think it's reasonable to assume some customers would still use the word "isolated" or "cut out" if searching for an image featuring an isolated subject. I wouldn't use it as one of my top 10 keywords but still worth adding to the list in my opinion.

-Mat

Nice and clear as always, thank you very much Mat!

Quote from: Uncle Pete on January 07, 2020, 12:20

My summary of the webinar. Please feel to correct anything I heard wrong or interpreted wrong.

Mat? When is the Search Webinar that you mentioned, I'd look forward to knowing some of the answers to things that you noted, would be for that team.

Nice information, thank you.

Thank you Pete! This was very useful 

Thank you.

Not going to fill the page with quoting myself. What I did was opened Wordpad, and started watching. Every time I thought there was a point worth noting (for myself, I didn't intend to post this) I paused and added, then back to play. That's why some ideas are repeated, as they repeated in the webinar. I went back and tried to make a little better structure and complete sentences.  I even backed up a couple times to make sure I heard right.

The part about not having 50 keywords was repeated and explained many more times, I reduced that repetition for the text version.

After the first showing someone had posted that the value decreases for 11 on down, but after watching this, the value is flat from 11 on down. I had previously interpreted the meaning that, for example, 11-15 had more weight than 16-20. Not True. Exception, same word in the Title will add value to words from 11-49.

Stacy Wolf (guess at spelling) made it clear and repeated, if you have 50 words they will all be 1/50th, effect negating any advantage to first words or title words Etc.

The part about the system showing related words, to help buyers, was interesting. People can find my images for words I may have missed and also if I search my own, some day, I could learn new appropriate words for the future.

And although the search has a feature for copy space, aka no one, negative space and some others  I'm still adding those phrases. I'd like to see examples of how or what the system sees as copy space. What I mean is, percentage? Placement? How does something get designated by the system as meeting criteria for the filter?

I was kind of put off by the comment that re-indexing wouldn't add much of anything, and don't understand why? On the other hand, I'm lazy, so that will give me an excuse not to go back and fix my images with better words. I'll think about that. Some really early works barely have 10 words.

Looking forward to the webinar about the search.

Thank you so much for the information!

Do those principles apply equally to any type of content (e.g. images and videos)?

Yes, search should work the same regardless of the content type.

-Mat

I've scratched my head more than once over stuff like this, too, Pete. Always a bit perplexed when (on one site or another) I see "more from this series" or "similar images" or some such on the page with one of my images� and there is no observable similarity whatsoever. A photo of a bumble bee in a flower may result in a "similar" photo of a mountain, or some such.

Obviously, something has triggered the "similar" or "series" response in some AI robot's pointy little head that my very human head can't discern.

Keyword 'nature' perhaps?

Mat, any excited plans for the next webinar?