Please restore unlimited number of keywords for Pro Users

Paul (France)

Hi Andy,

How is it going? As you know keywords form an essential part of my Smugmug site and of my professional business. In the past I could enter any number of keywords. Nowadays the number of keywords picked up by the Smugmug system is reduced to a maximum of 15, which means my Smugmug pro site lost an important part of its functionality.

I hope it can be restored. I think it should be restored for Pro Users at least. It really positively is part of the business, of the final sales made. Reducing keywords is cutting the profit.

THE DETAILS

Here I show you a pic that has 16 keywords, but that on this moment cannot be found when you search for the keywords 16. Of course the extra keyword can only be seen when you are logged in and click on "edit".

http://paulsmit.smugmug.com/gallery/644861#27567711

Keyword 16 is here "traditionaltechnology".

If you search for it this photo is not found, try:
http://paulsmit.smugmug.com/keyword/traditionaltechnology

The same is true for several photos I have been keywording these last days.

Why keywords are so important for me? Have a look here:
http://www.paulsmit.biz/photosgeneral.html

Also I use them in our promotion towards clients. On this moment, for instance, I'm preparing an email for all french woman magazines, promoting a part of our pictures of Vietnam, namely only pictures about "Women in North Vietnam" (the traditional dress styles and the jewellery in these pics are interesting for women with an interest in fashion). The link in my email towards these pictures is this one:
http://paulsmit.smugmug.com/keyword/womeninvietnam/2/27567684

So if this keyword "womaninvietnam" happens to be keyword 16 or higher with some photos they will not be shown to the art directors of these woman magazines. And that means I cannot do serious business.

Since Smugmug always has been about serious business (you know I'm a big fan) I trust this can be corrected, at least for the pros.

Curious for your reply,

Paul

dragon300zx

Moved as this is a smugmug concern, not a general business thing.

Andy

Paul (France) wrote:

Since Smugmug always has been about serious business (you know I'm a big fan) I trust this can be corrected, at least for the pros.

Curious for your reply,

Paul

Bonjour mon ami Paul,

Thanks for posting your concern. I'm afraid, the answer is no, at the present time. We found that there were a number of folks using lots and lots of keywords, and this was causing a tremendous strain on our database servers. A few were impacting the experience for many. So, we settled on 15 keywords.

I wish I had a better answer for you at the moment, but I do not. If things change, or new ways come about to handle more keywords, we'll surely revisit this.

Thanks again.

Paul (France)

Make it a Pro service

Andy wrote:

Bonjour mon ami Paul,

Thanks for posting your concern. I'm afraid, the answer is no, at the present time. We found that there were a number of folks using lots and lots of keywords, and this was causing a tremendous strain on our database servers. A few were impacting the experience for many. So, we settled on 15 keywords.

I wish I had a better answer for you at the moment, but I do not. If things change, or new ways come about to handle more keywords, we'll surely revisit this.

Thanks again.

Hi Andy,

Nice hearing from you again and thanks for your reply! I would like to suggest a solution for this problem. Most non-professional photographers have no or little use for keywords. But for pros it is the only way to make their photos accessable. So you could make keywording something that is not available for the Standard Accounts. The pros pay nearly 4 times the price, and unlimited keywords should be part of it.

Finishing use of keywords for standard accounts, you would limit the strain on your servers a lot already, since the system creates keywords from the file names. And that is a LOT of keywords, probably a lot more then ones created by the professionals.

I don't know of any professional photo service on the web that doesn't give the possibility of unlimited keywords. In the beginning period of Smugmug I had a lot of creative discussions with Chris, I was inviting Smugmug to create keywords (in fact I created the possibility on Smugmug before Smugmug did), Smugmug used a lot of my feedback and finally created something that was better then what I had suggested.

Stepping back on keywords while Smugmug's customers integrated them in the webexperience for their clients is a bad thing. For me keywords are essential and they were part of chosing definitely for Smugmug after my feedback was integrated. Limiting the usability of keywording would be a reason for me to leave Smugmug, but leaving this great ever-developing Smugmug is the last thing I want.

Smugmug is the best. But my clients need access to my photos, that is what the photo business is about. So choosing to limit that access is chosing to be against professional photographers.

What does Smugmug think about my suggestion to make unlimited keywords a Pro service, to keep it at 15 for Power users and stop with keywords for standard accounts?

Curious about your reply,

Paul

Andy

Paul (France) wrote:

and stop with keywords for standard accounts?

I don't have body armor thick enough for this battle

BeachBill

Did this change occur recently?

I wonder if this is why some people are saying their site/photos are no longer showing up in Google search results?

Allen

I'm having a hard time figuring how ya can come up with more then 15 KW's
for an individual photo. Are you putting every keyword in a photo for the
whole site?:D

Doug G.

BeachBill wrote:

Did this change occur recently?

I wonder if this is why some people are saying their site/photos are no longer showing up in Google search results?

BeachBill,

Google is constantly changing their search algorithm to improve search results. Unfortunately, that can sometimes affect individual sites in unpredictable ways.

I thought SmugMug WAS a virtual gallery? How would you define 'virtual gallery'?

My virtual gallery: www.ashcreekimages.com

Doug G.

Paul (France) wrote:

...Here I show you a pic that has 16 keywords, but that on this moment cannot be found when you search for the keywords 16. Of course the extra keyword can only be seen when you are logged in and click on "edit".

http://paulsmit.smugmug.com/gallery/644861#27567711

Keyword 16 is here "traditionaltechnology".

If you search for it this photo is not found, try:
http://paulsmit.smugmug.com/keyword/traditionaltechnology

The same is true for several photos I have been keywording these last days...

Paul,

Your English is very good!

I am wondering why you are using keywords the way you are? If you use 'traditionaltechnology' (one word) as a keyword, only people who use that precise word will find your photo. People who enter the search term 'traditional technology' (2 words) will never find your photo.

www.ashcreekimages.com

BeachBill

Doug G. wrote:

I thought SmugMug WAS a virtual gallery? How would you define 'virtual gallery'?

"virtual gallery" is Smugmug's term for a promised future enhancement. It allows you to use one physical image file in one or more galleries instead of having separate physical copies of the same image in each gallery you want to display it in. The current system wastes disk space and makes it more difficult to track popular images.

Paul (France)

Using keywords a strange way

Doug G. wrote:

Paul,

Your English is very good!

I am wondering why you are using keywords the way you are? If you use 'traditionaltechnology' (one word) as a keyword, only people who use that precise word will find your photo. People who enter the search term 'traditional technology' (2 words) will never find your photo.

www.ashcreekimages.com

Hi Doug,

Thanks for the compliment about my English! For a Frenchman it would be something indeed, but I'm Dutch, living in France. In Holland we learn English much earlier and series and films on television are in there original languages, so kids pick up languages easier, especially English.

You are right that my keywording system is rather weird. The reason is that I don't use them in the normal way. If you are intertested you can see here how that is:
http://www.paulsmit.biz/photosgeneral.html
http://www.paulsmit.biz/photostouristical.html
http://www.paulsmit.biz/photosflowers.html

These are three stock lists and the subjects link to keyword-searches on my Smugmug site. My intention is that these keywords are unique. They could be numbers, in fact.

I don't use keywords the traditional way because things can go wrong that way, in my opinion. In the case of your suggestion it would mean that one of the keywords would be "traditional". That could be confusing. I can better illustrate that with another example. I saw a photo agency that keyworded the Black H'mong mountain tribe in Vietnam as follows: "black", "h" and "mong". Therefore people who search for "black" get shown these photos. But these pictures are not black.

Therefore I use my lists, that are high on search results by Google and clients use them as well. In on of the lists simply "Traditional technology" is listed and it links to that strange keyword "traditionaltechnology". Google finds the list very well (but, as you say, not the keyword and therefore not directly the picture).

It was a choice. Your system is okay as well, but it sometimes generates results that don't fit with the keywords, as I illustrated with "black". My intention was that clients that click in my lists get results that are 100% to the point, without 'noise'.

But the negative side of my system is that the three lists need quiet a lot of keywords and since I use "blackhmong" and not "black" (which already exists) and "hmong" (which might already exist) I need even more keywords. Therefore with some pictures (maybe one in seven) I surpass 15 keywords.

That is the origine of my problem here. I had built a system on the possibilty of (in theory) unlimited keywords and in the middle of my work Smugmug changes the allowed number of keywords and destroys the way my website works.

But I guess it will be changed for Pro Accounts. It is the only way. Just look at Digital Railroad, Alamy or the sites of any professional photo agency, like Getty or The Image Bank. The only way to sell pictures for them is being able to add the right keywords. And in the rare cases they surpass the number of 15 (as they do with many agencies as well) it cannot be that picture researchers with the intention to buy cannot get the pictures they want on their screen.

I am curious how other people use keywords? Thanks for your suggestion,

Paul

pilotdave

Paul (France) wrote:

I am curious how other people use keywords?

I use keywords so that the people I photograph can find their pictures. Don't think I've needed 15+ yet, but I've come close and definitely think I will in the future. I'm disappointed to hear there's a limit.

How about for stock photography? From what I've seen, stock services prefer LOTS of keywords. The more the better.

I don't use keywords in the traditional way... I don't use them to help the public find my pictures, but rather just for the people in the pictures to find the ones they might be interested in.

I really hate the basic search functionality on smugmug... keywords have been working really well for me. I don't know that unlimited keywords is necessary, but I do think that 15 is too low a limit, at least for my (future) needs.

Dave
http://www.skydivingstills.com

iamback

Allen wrote:

I'm having a hard time figuring how ya can come up with more then 15 KW's
for an individual photo.

I'm not. And I'm not a Pro either, but I think 15 keywords is a serious limit for anyone taking keywording seriously (and I do, Pro or not!).

Let's take an example: nature photography. For instance, I'm in Kyrgyzstan, and I take a picture of some plants. Let's also assume that I know exactly which (sub)species of plant these are. To make such a picture of any value to a botanist, my first keywords would be the whole taxonomy of the plant: I'd have to start right up the top, because just a species name doesn't say whether it's a plant or a bird! Names are required to be unique only within their "Kingdoms". So, I'd start from the top (Plantae) and go right down to subspecies. That alone could already give me 8 or 10 keywords, depending on which levels may be relevant. Then of course, the location is important - so I'd need country, region, province, nearest village, as well as latitude and longitude and, not to forget, altitude. That's 7 more! Season, of course, is also important. We're already easily at or past 15 keywords, and have not even started on the more general ones such as thistle, white, flower, and more to describe the thing in more general layman's terms. (The fact whether a flower was visible or not, and what color it was, would of course be of value to the botanist as well.)

15 keywords is simply too small a number. A lot of semantics may (no, will) be lost with that.

I heard of this limit on the very day I signed up, as a Power user, with in the back of my mind I may one day want to upgrade to a Pro account. If I'd heard it before I would again have hesitated to sign up in the first place. I'm quite disappointed.

If you really need to set a limit, make it something like 30. It would make a huge difference, I'm sure. And/or limit the number further for standard users. Or, of course, upgrade your systems...

BeachBill

I will ask again, is this 15 keyword limit a recent change? Is it documented or announced somewhere? This thread is where I first heard of this limit.

Thanks!

kml

All of my images have more than 15 keywords - they are all relevant to the subject. I not only use the general keywords, but conceptual as well.

I have noticed that when I upload, all my keywords are still included with the image. My keywords are in an alpha list. Does SM just drop off all the words from 16 on up when it comes to searching?

If this is the case, I can see where the most relevant need to go first which is kind of a pain since my program uses alpha.

I will add my voice to this discussion - Pro users should have the ability to post unlimited keywords. Limit the other levels - we pay a much higher rate and are here to sell - the keywords are a very important part of the selling process. Please reconsider this.

Andy

iamback wrote:

If you really need to set a limit, make it something like 30. It would make a huge difference, I'm sure.

Actually, it makes a gigantic difference, I'm sorry to disagree with you - your suggestion would result in massive infrastructure issues and performance considerations which are the reason behind the 15 number limit.

And/or limit the number further for standard users. Or, of course, upgrade your systems...

It is alwasy easier to spend other people's money

iamback

Andy wrote:

Actually, it makes a gigantic difference, I'm sorry to disagree with you - your suggestion would result in massive infrastructure issues and performance considerations which are the reason behind the 15 number limit.
It is alwasy easier to spend other people's money

Well, I just paid for an account - my money - but I'm beginning to wonder whether that was a wise decision when I'm running into such serious limitations.

And I do mean serious.

It also makes me wonder how you're going to handle selling stock with a limit like this.

Andy

iamback wrote:

I'm beginning to wonder whether that was a wise decision

Hi Iamback - I'm very sorry that you feel this way. It's not too late, if you regret your decision we'll offer you a full refund. I'm terribly sorry that I don't have a better answer for you on the # of keywords.

ivar

Andy wrote:

I don't have body armor thick enough for this battle

At SmugMug we do take these things seriously, and we have been looking into possible solutions:

Andy

ivar wrote:

At SmugMug we do take these things seriously, and we have been looking into possible solutions:

Use the photoshop liquify tool and remove 50 lbs plz thanks!

ivar

Andy wrote:

Use the photoshop liquify tool and remove 50 lbs plz thanks!

bwg

iamback wrote:

...as well as latitude and longitude and, not to forget, altitude.

huh? who is going to search for 58.43366666670000?

Lets get back to reality.

iamback

bigwebguy wrote:

huh? who is going to search for 58.43366666670000?

Location, on combination with altitude can make a lot of difference to what plant grows where. To a botanist such information is valuable.

They may not search for it, but once on a page, if if these are encoded as keywords, they could with just a few clicks see all plant photos taken at the same location, or at a particular altitude. You can't do that with a caption, you can do that with a keyword.

Keywords are not just for searching, they're also to record meta data and forming logical groups.

ivar

iamback wrote:

Location, on combination with altitude can make a lot of difference to what plant grows where. To a botanist such information is valuable.

They may not search for it, but once on a page, if if these are encoded as keywords, they could with just a few clicks see all plant photos taken at the same location, or at a particular altitude. You can't do that with a caption, you can do that with a keyword.

Keywords are not just for searching, they're also to record meta data and forming logical groups.

The EXIF has specific fields for location and altitude. You want to put the location in the keywords as well?

iamback

ivar wrote:

The EXIF has specific fields for location and altitude. You want to put the location in the keywords as well?

Yes, because you can group things by those data. You can't do that with EXIF data.

I would not do that for every photo, but I would for plant photos, especially plant photos taken in mountainous areas where things like micro climate and altitude are very important. In fact, I bought a GPS specifically to record that data and returned to some places I'd been before.

Andy

iamback wrote:

Yes, because you can group things by those data. You can't do that with EXIF data.

I would not do that for every photo, but I would for plant photos, especially plant photos taken in mountainous areas where things like micro climate and altitude are very important. In fact, I bought a GPS specifically to record that data and returned to some places I'd been before.

Geo data is already recorded in exif, if you want to put in the lat/long #s in as a keyword, well, I suppose that's up to you.

iamback

Andy wrote:

Geo data is already recorded in exif, if you want to put in the lat/long #s in as a keyword, well, I suppose that's up to you.

Well, I can put it in, the problem is that with the 15-keyword limitation it won't be actually usable.

Andy

iamback wrote:

Well, I can put it in, the problem is that with the 15-keyword limitation it won't be actually usable.

You are the only person requesting lat/long be a keyword So, it's good that you can do it

iamback

Andy wrote:

You are the only person requesting lat/long be a keyword So, it's good that you can do it

I'm not requesting that they be keywords. I just gave you a use case for wanting to use them (as well as altitude) as keywords, along with a host of other keywords, pushing me over the 15-keyword limit. I'm not just making this up - these are things I really want to do.

Am I going to have to build my own keywording database then?

ivar

iamback wrote:

I'm not requesting that they be keywords. I just gave you a use case for wanting to use it as a keywords, along with a host of other keywords, pushing me over the 15-keyword limit. I'm not just making this up - these are things I really want to do.

Am I going to have to build my own keywording database then?

The limit is 15 keywords. We know you want it to be higher, thanks for your concern and suggestion. We are aware of your request

Andy

iamback wrote:

Am I going to have to build my own keywording database then?

I have offered you a full refund, if you wish to do this. I'm sorry we don't have a better answer for you right now.