Are your online pictures gathering pixeldust in a digital shoebox?

You upload your best shots for the world to see. You wait a few weeks for comments and kudos to roll in. You check the stats…no-one’s looking.

 One of the great things about the Internet is the ability it gives us to share photos with a wide audience. Prior to the development of this communication revolution the only way to share photos was through physical photo albums, pictures on the wall, slide shows for bored relatives, or, if you were really lucky, to get them published in a magazine or newspaper. Even truly remarkable amateur photographers could only ever hope to find a somewhat limited audience for their pictures.

For most of us, though, no-one except a few friends and relatives ever got to see the pictures we made. Now we can all share our pictures with the world via social networking sites like Flickr, Facebook, Instagram, Pinterest, 500px and  Twitter, among others.  This assumes, of course, that we actually want people to see the results of our creative efforts, and that we believe we have images worth sharing.

I’m always amazed when I see pictures loaded up to websites with nothing more than the camera-assigned file number as their title. I mean, who’s ever searched for DCSF0295862013? If you want people to find your pictures a title like this isn’t going to do the job. Just as bad as this is “Untitled” .  When people are conducting searches on the web they are hardly likely to use a camera file name name, or the word “untitled” as their search term. Below is a search result doing exactly that:

As you can see there are 594 million results matching the term “untitled”. If you post a picture titled “untitled” you are competing with each and every one of those results…no easy task! Actually, typing in a specific, camera-assigned file name narrows the field down considerably, as the screen grab below illustrates: Now we are down to just over 44 000 results, which is really quite manageable, I suppose. “DSCF” is part of the file naming protocol for Fuji cameras. Other manufacturers have different, but similar, protocols. However, the fact is that although typing in an image file name narrows down the field considerably, there are not too many people out there who are ever likely to use this method to find pictures.

If you look at the screen grab above, you’ll notice that the two entries I’ve shown both link to shots posted to Flickr. (Neither of these pictures is mine, btw.) I’ve had a look at both of them. One is a  shot of the back end of a zebra standing in a room of sorts, peering out through a doorway covered with one of those translucent plastic strip doors that you normally see in industrial settings.

Now lets say I have an idea for an ad that depends on a picture of a zebra looking through a doorway. “Maybe,” I think, “I’ll find the shot somewhere on the ‘Net. After all, with billions of pictures online someone is bound to have uploaded a picture of a zebra looking through a doorway, right? Hmm, what should I use as my search term? Oh! I know, I’ll type in DSCF6228 and see what comes up.” Well, I’d be pretty dumb if I did that. Surely I’d be more likely to type “zebra looking through doorway”? And that’s exactly what I did: Surprisingly, we’re now up to over 18 million results. At first this may seem counter-intuitive. I mean, why name pictures in a way that increases the competition? But that’s missing the point. Because what’s interesting in the above result is not so much what does turn up, but what doesn’t. And what doesn’t show up is the exact picture I’m looking for. Nor will it ever show up, because “DCSF6228″ doesn’t match my search query. If the owner of the zebra pic had simply added the title “zebra looking through doorway” it would be an exact match and, more than likely, show up as the #1 result. I could then ask the picture’s owner for permission to use the shot and quite possibly they’d get a nice little cash bonus as a result.

You don’t have to get ridiculously creative with your titles and descriptions either, just a simple description of the subject of the picture should be enough. You may think that it’s pointless to have a picture of a couple walking on a beach titled “Couple walking on beach”, after all, anyone can see that’s the subject of the picture. But you’re not writing the title for your human visitors…you’re writing it for search engine spiders.

If your picture is competing with thousands of others of a similar nature, then you want to make sure you use every opportunity a site gives you…title, description, tags, hashtags, “@” symbols or whatever.

Even though I don’t post pictures for commercial gain I’ve had several request over the years to use one or other of my shots in ads or for other commercial uses. These pictures would never have been found if they were either posted as “untitled”, or had a “DCSF” type of title. But even if no-one ever asked to use my pictures it wouldn’t bother me. The reason I post anything at all is so that I can share them with anyone who cares to look. Hopefully they bring a little pleasure to someone, somewhere.

Advice for professional photographers…from an amateur photographer

The picture above is by far my most viewed picture on Flickr. I’m not saying it’s a particularly good picture, or that it’s my best picture. There’s a little story as to how it became my most viewed picture, and if you’re a photographer, professional or amateur, who wants to get a few more views of  your shots by having them show up in search engines more often, then this article may offer you some useful information.

Firstly, a disclaimer; I’m not presenting myself here as some sort of SEO “guru”. I’m interested in SEO from a marketing perspective and, as a copywriter, I’ve spend some time learning about it. This post is not a comprehensive discussion of the subject. It just highlights some things I’ve learned over the years and noticed through looking at my Flickr stats, which are available to anyone who has what Flickr calls a “Pro” account, i.e. a paid account.

Secondly, I’m not affiliated to Flickr in any manner or form, so if I advise you to get a “Pro” account with the photo sharing site, I do  not stand to benefit in any way.

Thirdly, you may get better results from other photo services – in this article I’m talking about Flickr because it’s my photo website of choice. Apart from this WordPress blog, I have accounts at other sites such as 500px.com,  jpgmag.com, tumblr.com and Google+, but Flickr is what I use 99% of the time. Google+ is also getting good reports from photographers and I’m sure that from an SEO perspective, the fact that its a part of Google won’t do any harm.

Okay, with that background info let’s dive right in. The story of the picture above is that shortly after I posted it to Flickr it started getting hits from search results. At first it was just one or two a month, but eventually it became almost daily and often several hits in one day. I also noticed  there was another picture on Flickr, of a similar subject and similarly titled, that consistently showed up higher in those same results. This made me curious about what the other poster had done to “optimise” her photograph. When I checked I didn’t notice anything obvious that should have resulted in her picture coming in higher in the rankings; her picture didn’t even have a description, just a title.

As a bit of fun, really, and also to just see if I could affect the results, I made a small change to the title of my picture and repeated  the title in the flow of copy in the description. It wasn’t long before my picture regularly appeared above hers in the search results and, eventually, I stopped seeing her picture at all.

However there is another element in the SEO of this picture that I think help it get a few hits, at least in the normal search results. Obviously, in an image search people can actually see the picture, so this technique won’t have as great an effect as it does in normal organic search. The little trick is in the picture description.

Here is the page title and description for this picture as they appear in a search result:

“For some reason I looked up and thought this could be a page in a medical textbook discussing arteries, veins, and capillaries…”  The link, on its own, appears to be just another link to a picture of arteries, veins and capillaries, among many other links to similar info and pictures available. But the description makes the link different to the others. “What did he see when he looked up?” “Why does it look like a page in medical textbook?” These are questions a curious surfer may want answered so they’ll risk a quick diversion from their real search to get answers. The phrase “Dunno if you agree.” is another encouragement to look at the picture.

Anyone stumbling upon this link in the search results knows full well they will not be seeing an actual picture of the subject matter they are searching for. But they are prepared to risk a couple of minutes of their time to satisfy the curiosity the description arouses.

Photography is not my living, so I don’t spend a lot of time figuring out how to optimise each and every picture I upload, but I do it give it some thought whenever I post pictures. The exercise I conducted on this picture was more for fun than anything else. Nevertheless, here are a few pointers that may help you

Firstly –  if I were a professional photographer I’d learn everything I could about SEO. These days it’s absolutely essential to have a web presence, but I see many professional photographer sites that don’t make the most of that presence. Images are not enough for SEO, you need text. In fact, for SEO purposes, the text on your site is far more important than the images.

Secondly – if you upload images to web services other than your own website, you should give them captions and titles that’ll help search engines and potential clients find you. Don’t just assume people will find you just by your name…there are many potential clients who don’t know your name – probably they don’t even know you exist – but if they saw your work they just might be more inclined to work with you.

Thirdly – spread yourself far and wide across the web. Instead of just one or other platform, use as many as you can. Every picture you post is another opportunity for someone to find you.

I hope this post helps you land a few more clients whatever your field of photography, be it landscape, portraiture, weddings, travel, photojournalism, or anything else.

UPDATE: Since I started working on this post one of my pictures was selected for the Flickr blog, and that particular picture has now surpassed this tree shot as my most viewed picture, but that’s another story entirely.

Time to take a leak

Ever since the famous “latest iPhone prototype left in bar” routine some years back, companies have been falling over themselves to make “mistakes” they can then exploit for PR purposes. This nonsense is particularly prevalent in the photographic equipment world. It seems these days that the major manufacturers don’t introduce any new equipment without first “leaking” something about it.

Now, the word “leak” implies a certain degree of skulduggery. Someone has obtained information that perhaps they shouldn’t have, and now they’ve decided to spill the beans to a world eager to grab some “inside” info. Or maybe an employee has been fired and has decided to get even with the company by alerting the press, and, by extension, the competitors, about some propriety software or hardware.

What the word “leak” does not imply, is information generated in the PR department. Things are NOT “leaked” from PR offices, they are “released”, as in “Press Release”.

Of course, information sent out in a common-or-garden press release isn’t nearly as exciting as information that’s “leaked” , with it’s shades of cloak and dagger industrial espionage. But, camera and lens manufacturers, we are not as stupid as you think. Frankly, though, I’m amazed firms still trot out this tired old chestnut. Not so long ago Canon and Nikon were falling were producing more leaks than a Welsh farmer on steroids in an effort to whip up publicity for their impending models.

I thought “leaked information” had had its day in the sun, but apparently not. Here’s Canon’s latest press release…er…sorry, “leak”, via a Facebook post from the good folks at PetaPixel:

If this information was genuinely leaked one would expect heads to roll. But you can bet your last roll of Kodachrome no action will be taken against anyone at the company for “leaking” this info. Unless it’s to give the leaker in PR a raise.

Olivier Voisin…Another Photographer In Syria Dies

I recently read of the death of Olivier Voisin, a French photographer covering the Syrian conflict for various agencies. The story I encountered first was this one on the British Journal of Photography’s (BJP) website.

In the BJP report I came across this disturbing quote:

Last week, a group of photographers, editors and journalists launched the “A Day Without News?” campaign to highlight the risks their peers face when covering war zones, and to persuade governments to take action to ensure their safety.

(emphasis added).

War photographers choose to do what they do. They know the risks and are willing to take those risks. Whether they are adrenalin junkies or not I cannot say. All I know is they go to places most of us would rather not go, often to bring us stories many of us would rather not hear. Nevertheless, it’s their choice. I feel the concept of expecting governments “to take action to ensure their safety” a bit beyond the pale.

What, I ask, can governments do to ensure the safety of people who willingly and deliberately put themselves in highly volatile and dangerous situations day in and day out? And which government should, say in Voisin’s case, take the responsibility? France, because he was a French citizen, Syria, because he was in Syria at the time he sustained his injuries, or Turkey, where he was taken following the tragic events a few days ago?

It should also be noted that Voisin, who, according to this moving tribute “loved danger”, was in Syria illegally. Surely, in a case like this no amount of government intervention could have helped. I’m not criticising Voisin for his actions. Rather, I’m criticising calls for ever-increasing government interventions. Government interferes far too much in too many sphere’s of life as it is and we don’t really need them interfering in areas where they cannot have any form of control.

Worse, according to this this Huffington Post article Syria is today regarded the most dangerous place for journalists, with 28 deaths reported in 2012, while others remain captive or unaccounted for. According to the report at least one newspaper has ceased accepting submissions from Syria because “the dangers of operating there are too great”. Just what do these esteemed “photographers, editors, and journalists” expect governments to do to ensure the safety of newspeople in such hostile territories as Syria.

Many photographers have died while covering armed conflicts, and many more will die in future. That’s what happens in wars. To all those engaged in this most dangerous of photographic pursuits I can only say “Keep clicking, but please stay out of danger as far as you possibly can!”

Naturally, too, I offer my sincere condolences and sympathy to the family of Olivier Voisin, and to the families of the many other fine photographers, journalists, and reporters who’ve paid the ultimate price to bring us face-to-face with the most unimaginable horrors of the world. Long may your light shine.

Olivier Voisin’s work can be viewed at his website.

Another aspect of the BJP article that bothers me slightly concerns the writing style. Years ago I did a brief stint in a radio newsroom. There I was taught to keep a semblence of recency on any story by keeping it, as far as possible, in the present tense, as in “A man has died in a freak accident…” rather than “a man died in a freak accident…” which is past tense. That’s all well and good for the most part, but more and more these days I’m seeing ridiculous attempts to follow this rule at all costs. Thus, in the BJP story we find this tortuous phraseology:

Freelance photographer Olivier Voisin has died on 24 February from injuries sustained while covering the Syrian conflict.

If you’re going to put a date on the event you are not fooling anyone into thinking it’s present tense and there’s no need for the awkward “has died” construction. While one can possibly forgive these faux pas in reports from non-English speaking sources, this is from the British Journal of Photography, by jove!

A Somewhat Funny SEO Lesson from Flickr

When I first got  a Flickr account back in 2007, I used the handle “Finepixtrip” as the account name and began to upload pictures. Later, with the Yahoo takeover of Flickr there were some account settings that needed to be changed. I can’t remember all the ins and outs of the procedure but I obviously messed it up and somehow or other I lost access to the account. “No matter,” I thought, “as it’s only been going a few months and there aren’t too many pictures yet, I’ll just open a new Flickr account from scratch,” which I did, using the slightly different “finepixtrix” as my monicker.

Yesterday I decided to check on the old account just to see what, if anything, was happening with it. I was looking through the photos and came across this pic of a display at  Maropeng, the Cradle of Humankind centre about 30 kms outside of Johannesburg in the Kromdraai district.

When I looked at the stats for the picture I was gobsmacked to see that to date it’s had  7070 views! I thought: “Zowie! Has this old account been doing amazingly better than my “proper” Flickr account – the one I use regularly? How can that be, I haven’t added any pictures to it for over five years and I have absolutely no interaction with anyone with this account!?”

I quickly looked at the numbers for several other pictures but they weren’t nearly as impressive. The next most viewed picture, strangely enough also of Maropeng – but just an exterior view of the visitor’s centre – comes in at a measly 223 views. Most of the pictures have less than 50 views. So what gives? Why has this particular picture scored 7,000+  views?

Then it dawned on me. It’s the  title and caption. The title, “Early Naturists”, is ideally optimised for people who are searching for pictures of naturists, which, as we know, is another term for nudists. Some people are probably a bit shy when searching for nude pictures and don’t want to tell Google that that’s what they’re really after, so they use less “incriminating” words – like “naturists”.  And of course there are those who are genuinely curious about the naturist lifestyle and want to learn more about it, and probably some actual naturists who want to learn about the activities of like-minded people in other parts of the world. But none of this was going through my mind when I titled the picture.

Next, there’s the caption under the title. It contains the word “nudes” and “gorgeous bodies”, so that’s a cinch for the search engines! At the time I just thought it was a slightly humorous caption to go with these strange looking creatures. I  haven’t done a search myself for these terms so I don’t know how high the picture ranks in the results pages, but I bet more than a few surfers are a tad disappointed after they click on the link and see the picture on Flickr, especially if they aren’t using the image search facility and  just see the title and description in the results. Searches for “cradle of humankind”, “maropeng”, “kromdraai” and similar terms probably bring a trickle of visitors, too.

Despite the massive number (for any of my pictures, anyway) of views, the picture has only generated one comment, from someone who goes by the name of KJ49, who said: “dat’s crazy”.

By way of contrast, the most popular picture on my “proper” Flickr page has a mere 3,025 views as of today. It’s not a great shot but just for fun I did a bit of purposeful SEO on the title and caption of this picture a couple of years ago and it shows up quite high and often in the search results pages. But that’s another story.

On a different note, I realised the other day that I haven’t posted here in over 12 months! To be honest I haven’t really had the inclination and I’ve also been thinking quite seriously about what I want this blog to be. I have the notion that my photography is not really good enough to sustain an on-going effort – there is just so much brilliant stuff out there – and there are various other aspects of photography I sometimes feel like discussing. There are so many interesting debates taking place all the time and I really want to start weighing in and making my voice heard…or is that just being conceited? Ah well, maybe it’s time to stop soul searching and just start posting, regardless of whether anyone reads it or not.

You can see the old Finepixtrip Flickr page here.

My “proper” Flickr page is here.

P.S. It’s going to be interesting to see how many hits this post gets, considering its subject matter!

“Secret” places and Art Deco buildings

(Click on images for larger view)

Anstey's Building

The fun thing about photowalking is getting to places you wouldn’t normally veture to for personal safety reasons. So I was rather chuffed when Jo’burg Photowalkers announced a meet-up at Anstey’s Building, a fine example of Art Deco architecture,  in downtown Johannesburg. (That’s it in the shot above, which I took while from the car while looking for the designate3d parking spot). I haven’t been to this part of town for many years so it was interesting to see how things have changed since the time I worked just a block or two away from this spot. And they have changed a lot, unfortunately not necessarily for the better in many respects. However, I was there to take pics, not lament the sorry state of of a once-beautiful city going to seed.

"New-style" shopping in the old Jo'burg CBD.

The change hits you as soon as you hit street level. I took the shot above as we exited the parking garage. From here it’s a short walk to the entrance of  Anstey’s  Building, our meeting place for this walk. After entering the building you walk down a fairly dull corridor and suddenly arrive in the lift lobby to be greeted by some stunning Art Deco work. It’s like stepping back to the 20s or 30s. I’m not sure if this is restoration work, or still the original craftsmanship.

Art Deco in Anstey's Building.

The cafetaria in the old Park Station.

But possibly the most fascinating part this particular photowalk was going into the old Park Station section of Johannesburg’s main railway station. Normally closed off to the public, the Photowalk organisers had arranged for the building to be opened for us. And what a place. I can still remember walking through this part of the old station when it was still in use some time in the 80s. I had several meals in the cafetaria above, which now just echoes with silent calls to ghostly waitresses. The corridors and halls of this venerable old building offer up a wealth of visual interest and you could easily spend a whole day in here and still not exhaust all the possibilities!

The main concourse of the old station.

Wonder why this old chair was left behind.

On the floor of the main concourse.

Entrance to signal room.

I think this was the pub. In those days it would have been a "men only" watering hole.

After the station we stopped off in a building called Manners Mansions. This is directly opposite Anstey's Building and was apparently designed by the same architect.

The main stairwell.

Manners Mansions terrace from Anstey's building.

The north facade of the Johannesburg city hall seen from the top of Manners Mansions.

 

The Carlton Centre office tower from the top of Manners Mansions.

Johannesburg CBD from the top of Manners Mansions

In the next post I’ll put uip a few more pics from this photowalk, but more views of town from street level. Until then…

 

Pretoria from on high

The Hotel 224, Pretoria.

A short walk from the Union Buildings is the Hotel 224, where we headed for the next photo session – sunset over Pretoria. The 15th floor conference centre, kindly opened for us by the hotel’s understanding management, proved to be an ideal vantage point for the spectacle. And spectacle it turned out to be, with just the right amount of cloud about to add interest to the sky without blotting out the sun.

Looking west

Loftus Versveld stadium, home to the famous Blue Bulls rugby team.

Arcadia, somewhat inappropriately named perhaps, is Pretoria’s main high-density living district.

“Thanks” to Hotel 224 for opening your facilities to us, and thanks to Pretoria Stadstappers Fotoklap for organising a great photowalk. In the next post we’ll venture in Johannesburg’s inner city and a couple of special buildings. Until then…