Getting real sick of these "editors"

1. 94

   Daughter Of Maatposted 20 months ago

   While I'm happy my latest article was moved to a network site, these editors...
   
   I received an email that stated my article was edited, and one of the things listed was they changed the lead photo to one that had no text overlay.
   
   
   
   However, they actually did the opposite. See below:
   
   
   
   Clearly, that image has text overlay. AND this image was in a specific place in the article where the text actually references the photo.
   
   The original photo I had at the top of the article was this one:
   
   
   
   And the article is locked so I can't edit it.
   
   This is incredibly frustrating. I spent hours on this article only for an "editor" to go in and change my work in an effort to "make it network site compliant." All they did was take an image out of context.
   
   I have emailed the editors, but to me this is infuriating and I needed to vent.
   
   Thanks for reading.

   replyreport
2. 70

   Glenn Stokposted 20 months ago

   Mel, the reason why they didn’t want the original image at the top is because it was not landscape. I can see why they moved the other to the top—because it IS landscape.
   
   The top image always needs to be landscape. That’s more crucial than avoiding text overlay.
   
   The problem with the editor's change is that they overlooked the fact that the image needed to be positioned where it related to the content. But they tried their best to compensate for the fact that the image you originally had at the top was not landscape.
   
   The solution would be to crop that square image you want at the top to make it landscape. Then place that at the top and move the other back down to where it was meant to be. You’ll be able to do that after they finish whatever updates they are doing. That lock is only temporary while they are working on it.

   replyreport
   1. 94

      Daughter Of Maatposted 20 months agoin reply to this

      And see therein lies the problem, Glenn. There's another image in landscape, that is very similar to the one they moved, that has no text overlay and is NOT mentioned in the article. So while I don't object to the landscape thing, it does specify no text overlay in the email, and THERE WAS an image in landscape without text. In the mean time, anyone reading it, is missing out. And traffic on this article has doubled since they moved it.
      
      Also, the last time I had an article under a lock, it literally took month for it to be unlocked, and that was about 3 weeks ago.
      
      I wish they could send an email telling me what needs to be fixed in the article, before they make changes, allow me time to fix it, and then move the article. Obviously that's not efficient, but in a perfect world...

      replyreport
      1. 70

         Glenn Stokposted 20 months agoin reply to this

         Mel, See Angel's note above. They never received your email. As for the decision of which image to use for the top, the editors do their best to work through so many articles that still need landscaped images on top. It's time-consuming and easy to miss a better choice.
         
         Anyway, I made a landscaped version of your eye image for you to use and sent it to your email. Look for it. I'm pleased to do that for you, especially since you have always been so helpful in answering my questions about cataract surgery.

         replyreport
   2. 68

      eugbugposted 20 months agoin reply to this

      Whatever about them being at the top, I think it was a wrong decision to remove images with text overlay. Also editors are hiding these images instead of moving them down an article. If I look at a grid of results from a Google image search, I will always be drawn to a well crafted image with text than all the others that look more or less the same.

      replyreport
3. 82

   Justine Guiaoposted 20 months ago

   In relation to Glenn's reply, I notice a text at the lower part of the picture. If that's a watermark of the image's source, it is another reason why hey changed it.
   
   I'm not quite sure about this though because it was not mention in the email that they sent you.

   replyreport
   1. 94

      Daughter Of Maatposted 20 months agoin reply to this

      That watermark actually mine, and is on every image I have used in my articles. It's actually the result of the slit lamp camera I used at work, one of my doctors set it up for me. As of yet it has not been an issue, and has not been mentioned in any of the emails they've sent. But it's worth asking them about!

      replyreport
4. STAFF

   Angel Jenningsposted 20 months ago

   Hi Mel,
   
   Thank you for the feedback; I'm sorry to hear you are unhappy with the edit. You should now be able to edit your article.
   
   We're not seeing your email in the editors@hubpages.com inbox. Please resend it, and we will address your concerns promptly.
   
   Take care,
   Angel

   replyreport
5. 60

   FatFreddysCatposted 20 months ago

   I reeaaaaallly don't like it when editors change the photos in my articles.
   
   I'm particularly P.O.'d by the Powers That Be deciding that "square" photos were no good for the lead off position in articles, and that those photos have to be "landscape" instead.
   
   (Before anybody bothers trying to explain it to me, yeah, I KNOW that there's some sort of gibberish SEO-related voodoo reasoning behind the landscape versus square decision, but I don't care. It's still annoying.)
   
   I write mainly album reviews, so it makes sense for me put a picture of the album cover prominently at the top of the review. Album covers, as you might have noticed, tend to be square. I've been doing my Hubs this way for YEARS, and it was never a problem until recently.
   
   Now editors are bumping the album cover pics farther down in the body of my articles and replacing them with generic, clip-art pictures of electric guitars, records, or musical notes at the top, which may fit the "formatting" but they make the article look cheap IMO.
   
   Worse, in one instance they replaced the album cover photo with a picture of the band I was writing about, but it was the wrong lineup of that band, with a lead singer and guitarist who didn't even perform on the album being reviewed.
   
   I'm sure many of you know how nit-picky music nerds are. I don't want readers coming to my article, seeing that "wrong" pic and thinking I don't know one lineup of so-and-so from another. It throws any kind of "authority" I might have right out the window.
   
   So I took it out and put the album cover back up top again. So far, they've left it alone, but (William Shatner voice) for... how... LONG?
   
   Rant over.

   replyreport
   1. 83

      Kenna McHughposted 20 months agoin reply to this

      FC, there are always exceptions to the rule, such as yours.

      replyreport
6. 82

   Rupert Taylorposted 20 months ago

   The way these things go it will probably change. Remember when it was all the rage to put text in images. Nope. Not anymore. Text in images is an abomination. Soon we'll be told images have to be circular or rhomboid, whatever the heck that is.
   
   I write a lot of biographies and the top image for the story is, of necessity, a portrait of the subject. These images tend to be - erm - portrait shaped. Wonder why that is.

   replyreport