| Author |
Message |
PhotoEuphoria

Joined: 02 Feb 2005
Posts: 146
Location: Tennessee, United States
|
Posted: Sun Mar 20, 2005 3:57 am
| |
When PS allows 50 keywords to be embedded in the IPTC data and the other sites take at least 50 keywords, it is a major pain in the A double S to have to go in and delete up to 20 keywords with EVERY DANG UPLOAD!!!
This extra (and time consuming) step really defeats the purpose of having IPTC data auto extracted in the first place. Convenience!!!??? This used to be the first site I uploaded a new batch to. Now I grit my teeth and postpone the agony as long as I can.
Would it be possible to have the extra words removed automatically. Say... if we hit enter without removing the extra words, the extra vanish in a small poof of pink smoke. Would that be so hard to do? I could live with that. Thanks. -jaimie |
|
StuartE

Joined: 28 Nov 2004
Posts: 1606
Location: Adelaide, South Australia
|
Posted: Sun Mar 20, 2005 8:37 am
| |
Only problem is how would the system know which 20 are the 'extra' less important keywords? If it just drops 20 from your list, it could well drop the 4 or 5 most important words that you really need to have so the designer can find your green tree statues... :-)
Cheers,
Stuart |
|
jlye

Joined: 21 Jan 2005
Posts: 229
Location: Singapore
|
Posted: Sun Mar 20, 2005 8:42 am
| |
I love Green Tree Statues .. LOL .. anyone found it yet ?? |
|
PhotoEuphoria

Joined: 02 Feb 2005
Posts: 146
Location: Tennessee, United States
|
Posted: Sun Mar 20, 2005 8:50 am
| |
I know but I don't care. If I get a warning then I can choose to take the time to fix it or ignore it. If I have 34 words, it is only because I think all 34 words are important. Wasn't that the point of limiting it, to make sure we only use important relevant words? So if it cuts off the last 4 of 34 then it is just as well as any to me. But it will be my choice (fix or ignore) but right now I don't have a choice. And I don't see how having a choice could harm anyone. |
|
Anita
Joined: 16 Mar 2005
Posts: 13
Location: Tartu, Estonia
|
Posted: Mon Mar 28, 2005 6:37 pm
| |
I really don't see the need to constrain people to submit 30 or less keywords. What does it bother you if somebody is good with thinking out description data about their images? I mean one thing is to fight against keyword spamming but that method doesn't really cut it. It gets really on my nerves when i constantly hit the over the limit point and have to start deleting the keywords - it is a big WASTE of time.
If you MUST keep the feature - can you at least make some kind of word count extra. That if you submit your work before you're fully finished (i do that for backup reasons) it not only gives you the usual errors but also the word count on exsisting keywords per every image. |
|
StuartE

Joined: 28 Nov 2004
Posts: 1606
Location: Adelaide, South Australia
|
Posted: Mon Mar 28, 2005 8:28 pm
| |
The thing that gets me, and I'm sure some of my images benefit from it too, is that there are images out there from before the keyword limit that are potentially easier to find because they have more than 30 words on them - I'd like to see those images identified to the photographers to cull excessive verbosity off, so that it is fair for all here - since the limit came in, I've only had a couple of occasions where I've gone over the limit, but that's simply because I've toned down trying to find 'all' the words to describe a shot - now I just use the common words and go on from there - thinking about the best keywords is hard enough without keeping track of how many I've added too... lol
I'm happy to only have 30 words... it's just frustrating that some images have upwards of 60...
Cheers,
Stuart |
|
LuvThatVert:)

Joined: 07 Mar 2005
Posts: 1434
Location: Miami FL USA. Joined ShutterStock on: Feb 21, 2005
|
Posted: Mon Mar 28, 2005 9:04 pm
| |
Remember "grandfathering" rules exist in many areas of our life!
Granfathering rules can be unwritten rules, NOT always there for the sole purpose of avoiding upsetting people.
Sometimes we granfather because its convenient; applying new writen rules backward in time may be too costly and time consuming.
Sam. |
|
shutterstock
Joined: 22 Oct 2004
Posts: 1881
Location: New York, NY
|
Posted: Mon Mar 28, 2005 9:59 pm
| |
| PhotoEuphoria wrote: | When PS allows 50 keywords to be embedded in the IPTC data and the other sites take at least 50 keywords, it is a major pain in the A double S to have to go in and delete up to 20 keywords with EVERY DANG UPLOAD!!!
This extra (and time consuming) step really defeats the purpose of having IPTC data auto extracted in the first place. Convenience!!!??? This used to be the first site I uploaded a new batch to. Now I grit my teeth and postpone the agony as long as I can.
Would it be possible to have the extra words removed automatically. Say... if we hit enter without removing the extra words, the extra vanish in a small poof of pink smoke. Would that be so hard to do? I could live with that. Thanks. -jaimie |
Changed to 50! :) |
|
StuartE

Joined: 28 Nov 2004
Posts: 1606
Location: Adelaide, South Australia
|
Posted: Mon Mar 28, 2005 10:05 pm
| |
Wooohoooooo!! Good stuff Jon... :-)
Cheers,
Stuart |
|
LuvThatVert:)

Joined: 07 Mar 2005
Posts: 1434
Location: Miami FL USA. Joined ShutterStock on: Feb 21, 2005
|
Posted: Mon Mar 28, 2005 11:36 pm
| |
50 keywords,
Hooray!
Sam. |
|
Anita
Joined: 16 Mar 2005
Posts: 13
Location: Tartu, Estonia
|
Posted: Tue Mar 29, 2005 3:22 am
| |
This is way better than 30 ! :) Thnx. |
|
csubick
Joined: 16 Mar 2005
Posts: 187
|
Posted: Tue Mar 29, 2005 7:49 am
| |
Now if I can 50 keywords for each of my photos.... :) |
|
Anita
Joined: 16 Mar 2005
Posts: 13
Location: Tartu, Estonia
|
Posted: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:25 am
| |
mmh, i don't still seem to be able insert more than 30 keywords. It still gives errors. Jon, didn't you say you raised the limit? |
|
shutterstock
Joined: 22 Oct 2004
Posts: 1881
Location: New York, NY
|
Posted: Tue Mar 29, 2005 4:07 pm
| |
| Anita wrote: | | mmh, i don't still seem to be able insert more than 30 keywords. It still gives errors. Jon, didn't you say you raised the limit? |
Ooh - i thought we did - looks like it's still in the queue of todo's..
give us another day.. sorry for the false alarm. |
|
shutterstock
Joined: 22 Oct 2004
Posts: 1881
Location: New York, NY
|
Posted: Tue Mar 29, 2005 4:09 pm
| |
try now! |
|
| |
|