By Randy G. Taylor
Keywording is about as exciting as eating broccoli. At least, that's what PDN writer David Walker says. He's right, of course. However, good keywording, like broccoli, is a healthy habit to adopt. Keywording is the third most important task for selling images in modern markets ( the image itself and marketing being first and second). If researchers can't find it, they can't buy it. In an ideal world, keywording should be done by the most experienced, smartest person on staff. This article is intended to help the rest of us to keyword successfully and increase sales as a result. Let's first review general preparations, cautions and mindset that should precede the actual keywording.
Some image marketing outlets offer a method of keywording online, web access to enter or update captions directly in the database of the agency or portal. It is probably not in your best interest to use an online data entry process or software that does not give you back the results of your efforts - the keywords. Creating keywords in the agency's web site essentially gives away your labor for free. It is a better strategy and long-term investment to keep and control keywording in-house. Then leverage the value of your time invested by submitting keywords (and photos) to multiple distribution channels from a centralized source that you control.
Although keywording can be done by just typing words into a word document of some kind, this is an inconvenient and inefficient way to do it. Another option is to enter words directly into the "File Info" of an image using Photoshop or similar, then extract the words in a program like Portfolio or Cumulus when needed. Newspaper photographers commonly use File Info (IPTC) for captioning. But this is also inefficient because each image must be opened, one at a time, to add keywords unless special software is used to bulk process the photos.
Some keywording software can be purchased, such as A2Z (available from www.a2zkeywording.com for $279 per individual or $1,279 for agencies). There is one universal software that is free. Keyword Compiler™ has been gradually refined by the staff of StockMedia.net since 1996. It is available for free download at stockagencies.com. A special version is also available free for members of Creative Eye/Mira.com.
Some service-oriented agencies or reps will do keywording at a reasonable price that usually ranges from $3 to $6 per image. (Some example are Stock Connection, Mira and Stock Media). A new option is Keywords To Go, a paid service by industry veteran Paul Henning (see www.stockanswers.com). Many agencies will provide you with their proprietary software for submissions. Regardless of the software or process chosen, it is extremely important that you end up with an exported set of keywords.
As difficult as it is to determine, you should try to find out how words are searched and used in the database that holds your images. In many engines, for example, fields or groupings of words are separated by a comma. So, the phrase "Paris, France" might be searched as "Paris" and "France" by default. (This is a subtle, but significant point.) Do searches only find an exact match? Or, will they find any word in the caption? Or either? Also, verify if both the keywords and the caption are searchable, or just one or the other. And, find out if searches are case sensitive. If so, you'll need to carefully consider the difference between words like "park' (as in to park a car) and "Park" (as in Everglades National Park). Understand the structure of the database for which you are keywording.
Ask how dates are handled. Engines with an editorial emphasis usually have a separate field for the date of the event. In editorial, it is significant if the photo shows President Bush at the microphone on the exact day that he gives Iraq a 48 hour deadline vs. the hundreds of other press conferences. And, what format it used for the date? European style with the day preceding the month? Abbreviated? Spelled out? (Although important for editorial, for commercial images, dates reduce sales since few would choose to buy an "old" picture.)
Most engines will get confused if keywords contain prepositions, or worse yet, the specific Boolean logic words ("and", "or", "not"). So, avoid prepositions, except in captions. (One major engine uses natural language search in which buyers can enter whole sentences. This process, however, is problematic for searches in foreign languages and limits their ability to expand into global markets.)
And speaking of Boolean, does the engine use the plus sign ("+") and minus sign ("-") to mean "and" or "or"? For example, does "man+woman" search the same as "man and woman"? In the learning curve of software development, some engines found that the minus sign creates havoc with hyphenated words. So, a search for "African-Americans" might find pictures of wildlife in Africa if the engine reads it as "African not Americans". This, of course, is extremely politically incorrect. How the search engine is structured will have hidden but profound differences on the search results that are based on the keywording that you submit.
The first tip: Multi-word phrases should often also be entered as individual words when appropriate. So, "wide-angle lens" should also be entered as "wide-angle" and "lens". But, "The White House" should NOT also be entered as "white" and "house".
Editorial vs. Advertising. Early in the keywording process, you should pick your target market for each image. You must decide if the photo is more likely to sell for editorial use in a magazine article or textbook ... or for commercial/advertising use in a brochure or trade ad. As a comedian once said, "You can't have it all. Where would you put it?". Trying to be all things to all buyers will actually reduce your sales. Know for which target market you are keywording BEFORE you begin keywording. (In fact, it's wise to know your target market before you shoot the picture. Keywording experience will probably help you to shoot more saleable pictures.)
Clients seeking images for editorial use want to know the standard five W's (who, what, where, why and when) in the caption of each image. Editorial captioning is a delicate dance that balances the amount of information that is necessary to be provided while not going overboard with expository description. Often, publishers seek extremely precise images for editorial use, especially in specific categories such as science or nature. Detailed keywording is necessary to find (and sell) these images.
Commercial uses are virtually the opposite, needing an undiluted focus on the emotions and concept most conveyed by the image. Commercial researchers really don't want to know the facts. For these buyers, details just get in the way, turning up irrelevant searches. Successful commercial images have in common a single dominant theme, concept or subject that is instantly apparent in viewing the image. (Ironically, shooting styles for commercial stock, contrary to popular belief, can actually be far more trendy and free than with editorial imagery because of this.)
The goal, then, for keywording commercial photos is to keep the caption short and to use as few of the dominant concepts, emotions or subjects as possible, but also to add as many variations as possible of keywords that exactly describe those same concepts. Commercial images need significant keywords, but tiny captions.
By contract, successful keywording of editorial images demands abundant information in the caption, sufficient to make detailed searches and then to make a purchasing decision from information displayed. Editorial needs a thorough caption, but minimal keywording.
For now, suffice it to say that effective captions for editorial images are crammed full of details while the keywording for good selling commercial images removes as much information as possible, leaving only pure emotion or concept. (This is explained in greater detail in the March 2003 newsletter for StockMedia.net members.)
In editorial, it is unbelievably important to be precise and to get it right! (This is an area in which the photographer can assist editors enormously in captioning. After all, who knows the details better than the person on the scene who can ask questions?) Editorial image buyers are often extremely demanding about the details of a subject. What they need is exactly what they need, and nothing similar will do. Because of this, editorial keywording can demand detail that is not apparent in the image, provided that it is completely relevant, accurate and concise.
Religion and ethnicity are good areas in which to illustrate the point. A researcher might be looking for an image specifically of Mormons or Latter Day Saints, in which case an image of Protestants or Catholics or Seventh Day Adventists just won't do. An image of people praying in a generic church will not sell to this market. Or, a buyer might be seeking a Shinto temple in Japan, but not a Buddhist temple. Or, they might be tracking down an image that is not just of Judaism, but one that specifically illustrates either the Reform, Hasidic or Orthodox sect.
Expand on the precision. An editorial caption that speaks only of "purple flowers" will render the image worthless. Calling the flowers "painted daisy" and "daisies" is better. Adding that they are "goblin gellardia" makes them saleable to include textbooks or similar. And, knowing that this is also a "desert flower" really completes the potential for sales. The burden is on the photographer to provide this level of detail and precision on many topics such as scientific, geology, wildlife and nature, medical, etc..
It is very important that the details be relevant. For example, that a person pictured is Irish American is irrelevant unless that image shows an environment or situation that supports that particular aspect. So, it doesn't matter if a person shopping for groceries is Irish American. That image should not be captioned as such. But a person walking in a St. Patrick's Day parade - and most importantly, who you know FOR A FACT is an Irish-American without assuming anything - should be captioned accordingly. Include relevant details and only relevant details. And, make sure they are true and accurate. In short, be precise.
Abbreviations and region can also be part of this required precision. An MRI machine needs the keyword phrase "Magnetic Resonance Imaging". Emergency Medical Personnel are probably also known as "EMP". Then there is the factor of descriptions that change from region to region. Where you live today, would you order a submarine sandwich, a sub, a hoagie, a grinder or a Philly?
Precision and detail are important for editorial. But, this is not a game show. You don't get points for being close. If there were a score keeper, you'd get one point for each correct detail and loose a thousand points for each wrong one. If you don't know what the subject is, don't say something that is wrong. Don't guess. Scientific editorial sales demand exact details of what the subject is. Being wrong can be very messy.
The Catch 22 is that all this precision is often lost on the gatekeepers who initiate the first wave of most research. These are often young and inexperienced individuals who are searching for exactly what they're told. They have little knowledge or imagination to expand a search when results are suspiciously absent. So, that makes it tricky. Don't submit vague or overly wordy captions, but don't submit wrong ones either.
Early keywording committees decided to standardize many aspects of words. By limiting keywords, search results would be more consistent. So official guidance, for example, said that keywords should always be singular (not plural) and in the masculine form (only significant in non-English languages). These rules, however, required buyers to conform to an unnatural standard.
Since then, the marketplace has spoken. The reality is that committees cannot change or dictate to the instinctive buying habits of clients. One must, unfortunately, throw out the wisdom of structured form and plan for the chaos and random nature of the research process. One must anticipate the variations possible. So, you probably should include masculine, feminine, singular and plural (nuevo/nueva, baby/babies). You just never know how the client will search. (Note: Plural use is debated. Precisionists argue that "a child" is different from "children". This editor would opt to keyword for the majority of buyers who don’t understand such nuance.)
Some photographers falsely believe it benefits them to add every possible keyword imaginable, no matter how remote or disconnected it is from the theme of the image. In fact, this type of "gaming" actually hurts sales. Search results become laughable (and clients don't return to the site) when keyword searches turn up unrelated images. This conflict - inexperienced keyworders adding unrelated words vs. clients seeking precise, limited results - is the biggest problem of keywording currently. Nothing will destroy a database and drive away clients faster than having countless, undesired images come up on every search.
Admittedly, it's a leap of faith. But photographers must accept that they are better off to accurately present their images to likely buyers than to attempt to put every image they've ever created in front of everybody, regardless of how irrelevant those images might be to the needs of the client. To better understand this, one must wear the hat of the photo buyer while keywording. Ask yourself, "Would I be happy to see this picture while searching for my intended results? Is this image completely dominated by the subject, emotion or concept that I seek?" Honest answers will encourage a good keyworder to exclude irrelevant words.
Sex sells. That's true. But, it also attracts certain portions of the general public to a database who have no intention at all of buying pictures. This eats up expensive bandwidth and dilutes the speed and resources available for real buyers. It robs photographers by diverting resources to service unproductive consumption. So, it is highly recommended that one carefully consider keywords of images that are "sexy".
It is strongly suggested to never use slang words that describe human body parts. So, words like "tits" have no place in a stock photo database, at least none that are commercially viable. Even the word "breast" is highly questionable, except perhaps in a medical context like a breast exam. Always look for less salient alternatives, like "nude" instead of "naked" for fine art photographers.
Researchers come in three flavors: "Beeline shoppers" who know exactly what they're after and don't want to waste time getting it. "Browsers" who know the subject, but want lots of selection from which to choose. And the "clueless" who are really just looking for ideas. Most buyers are "browsers". The best clients are "beeline shoppers". And the clueless are important for future sales.
It is up to the keyworder to tag each image intelligently to help clients find what they want. Clients who fill their needs easily and fast are likely to buy. If they don't, they may not come back to the web site for a long time.
Remember also that clients often use very simple words to search. Unfortunately, you don't know exactly which simple words they will use. Region of language (ie, English vs. American) makes a difference, for example. Other factors might include their upbringing. education, personal experiences, job training, age and hobbies. Dat's a lot o' variables! Thinking like the client while keywording will help to weed out the wrong options.
Don't miss out on search hits by leaving out variations of words or phrases that could be used to find this specific image. You should add variations that are likely to be searched, provided that they all mean exactly the same thing. In editorial, a caption might include "President Bush". But, if a person searches for "George W. Bush", the image will not be found. Consider keywording such an image as "President Bush", "President George Bush", "President George W. Bush", "George Bush", and "George W. Bush". You can never be certain of which combination will be used to find the image.
For advertising markets, you should add synonyms, variations of a primary keyword that have the same meaning. (But be sure not to dilute sales by having too many meanings per picture.) So, if you have an image of two people talking together, and this interactive talking is the dominant theme of the image, then you should add not just the obvious, like "talk", "talks" and "talking", but also add keywords like "chat", "chatting", "converse", "conversing", "conversation", "conversations", "discuss", "discussing", "discussion", "discussions", "speak" and "speaking". In addition to literal words, remember the concepts. "Communication", "communications", "communicating" and "communicate" would likely also be appropriate for a picture of people talking.
There is plenty to ponder here, enough to get you thinking about keywording. This lays out the groundwork to begin an on-going, long-term process. In the next article, we'll go into greater detail about just how to keyword. How do you know which words to use? Part two will include sections on Common Mistakes, The Worst I've Ever Seen, The Top Do's, Focus on What Matters, Think Ahead To Marketing, and Pay for Expertise. It will include a list of questions to ask yourself when keywording each image.
And finally, always remember that keywording is unbelievably subjective. Don’t get into fights with your spouse or coworkers over which words to use. There is no one right answer.
There is plenty to ponder here, enough to get you thinking about keywording. This lays out the groundwork to begin an on-going, long-term process. In the next article, we'll go into greater detail about just how to keyword. How do you know which words to use? Part two will include sections on Common Mistakes, The Worst I've Ever Seen, The Top Do's, Focus on What Matters, Think Ahead To Marketing, and Pay for Expertise. It includes a list of questions to ask yourself when keywording each image.
About the Author: Randy Taylor is CEO of Stock Media Corporation which runs the image marketing channel StockMedia.net and provides the software that runs mira.com and solusimages.com. He was previously the VP of the Press Division of Liaison Agency (a Getty Images company) and contract photographer for the Black Star and Sygma. He started his career as a staff photographer for the Associated Press in Paris, France in 1977.
Copyright
2003 Randy G. Taylor/StockMedia.net. All rights reserved. "Stock
Media" is a registered trademark of Stock Media Corporation.