So, there’s no keeping up with Getty and its multi-billion-dollar resources, right?

Experts in stock photography have been banging on about keyword tags for years, urging libraries to add concepts as well as specifics (such as subject and location) so that picture buyers can search for terms such as ‘spirit’ or ‘success’ and come up with something meaningful. And when they don’t find the right picture immediately, your tags should point them to a bunch of alternatives.

Last week we got a note about Getty’s latest Mini MAP (What Makes A Picture) report, titled “10 Simple Things about The Simple”, illustrating “a new visual language that connects with people’s concerns in the economic downturn”, along with a lightbox giving examples of how simplicity can be interpreted through stock imagery.

The lightbox features 10 pictures, including a man covered in mud, another smelling saplings in a garden shed, several images of children, and quite a nice photo of a feather floating on the surface of a lake at sunset.

This last image (#85155531) seemed to illustrate the concept best, so I clicked on it, and then pressed the tab “Find similar images” at the end of the keyword search terms (Feather, Simplicity, Nature, Horizontal, Outdoors, Finland, Water, Cloud, Sunset, Reflection, Idyllic, Solitude, Scenics, Beauty In Nature, Floating On Water, No People, Photography, Tranquility). From there I was given a choice of searching by Subject, People, Location, Style or Concept. I chose the latter, and clicked the Simplicity box.

The results kind of surprised me. The first recommendation is from the 2nd Annual National Kidney Foundation Celebrity Golf Classic, a grip-and-grin portrait of US figure skating champion Michelle Kwan at Lakeside Golf Club in Burbank, California. Next up is a close-up picture of grass, which better fits the bill. But then I’m offered two photos from Sandown Races. Another grass picture. Two more from the Golf Classic. An apple on grass. Sandown. Golf classic. Sandown. Golf Classic. And so on…

Interestingly, the most relevant images (grass, apple, etc) were also tagged under Photographer’s Choice – an initiative Getty introduced in 2006, which allows photographers to choose the images they want to submit, but charges them $50 per picture for the privilege.

One assumes they also do their own keywording, and it seems they’re doing a better job than Getty’s editors.

I also came across an interesting article by Jim Pickerell on Black Star Rising, in which he surveyed (in 2007) Getty contributors and found most were making much less money from the agency, despite posting up more images. And more relevant to this discussion, they also complained about Getty’s keywording and editing schedule.

“The keywording is terrible,” says one anonymous contributor, “and at times the image title is wrong, making all the keywords wrong. I must inspect images in new uploads and write Getty to fix the keywords which takes four weeks or more.”

Another contributor reports that, “edits have been taking three to seven months. Art directors and editors seem to have been assigned too many photographers. The ‘Traffic’ staff was fired in the restructuring of the company, and it seems that therefore it is another three to six months until the work appears ‘Live’ on the website, once I have turned it in final files to my art director. So it is now taking nine months to a year to get work ‘Live’ on the website”.

Going back to the image of the feather on a lake, if I’d clicked on a separate tab, “More images like this” (under Image Details, to the left of the photo), I was given much more relevant suggestions, mostly natural landscapes. A few were by the feather photographer, Nina Monkkonen, plus a couple of rather beautiful images by James D Rogers and Marc+Crumpler. But I was taken to these images via the Reflections and Beauty in Nature keywords, rather than a real concept, like ‘simplicity’. So, for example, if I’d been looking for a picture to illustrate a story on a subject like downsizing or paired-down living, I’m not sure how relevant they would be.

I think what this illustrates is that small (or one-man-band) agencies still have something to offer that the blue-chip stock libraries can’t provide – service, specialisation and relevance.

Meanwhile, one area where Getty really excels is in art directed material, and in the trends research it produces to inform these shoots. “10 Simple Things about The Simple” (download it here) is definitely worth a read, even if you’re not in the stock business (portrait, lifestyle, still life, ad, editorial and reportage shooters will find it interesting).

In brief, the report says:

• Conveying simplicity is difficult
• Simplicity is a value in itself – a humanistic aspiration
• ‘Simple is messy’. Think personal clutter rather than minimalism. It’s about the things that matter, rather than how they’re neatly ordered. (Reportage style is favoured for a more naturalistic look.)
• Think simple pleasures – work life/balance, craft, making things, nature, tradition and continuity. And most of all, think childhood.
• Simplicity is about sensuous, tactile pleasures – taking time to smell the roses (or plant samplings).
• Strip it down. Allow space for images. Cut out noise. Create simple compositions that bring subjects to the fore. And be bold with it.