Google Search by Image vs. Tineye

[ikakene]

I just discovered Google's Search by Image feature. It has all the functionality of Tineye and more. Nothing very scientific, but here are the results of a few preliminary GSBI vs. Tineye comparisons:

Image 1.
GSBI results=143; Tineye results=0

Image 2.
GSBI results=517; Tineye results=37

Image 3.
GSBI results=187; Tineye results=1

Image 4.
GSBI results=182; Tineye results=1

Image 5.
GSBI results=251; Tineye results=24

Image 6.
GSBI results=47; Tineye results=0

Image 7.
GSBI results=1; Tineye results=0

Conclusion:

Google Search by Image seems to kick the shit out of Tineye in every way except maybe insofar as... with Tineye, you wouldn't likely need to worry about "giving Google access to your most private thoughts and feelings."

 

[bobistheowl]

If you use Yahoo for images searches, you'll get results from http://www.flickr.com/, which generally has the highest quality photos. Yahoo own flickr, so google often doesn't find images on their competitors' sites.

 

[ikakene]

Interesting. And do you know how well Yahoo fairs against GSBI in terms of numbers of hits outside of www.flickr.com? One of the things I find most attractive about GSBI is that you can drag-and-drop straight from the online source. Yahoo searches images only by text input, no?

 

[b4u]

If you use Yahoo for images searches, you'll get results from http://www.flickr.com/, which generally has the highest quality photos. Yahoo own flickr, so google often doesn't find images on their competitors' sites.

Wrong!
Google search by images also searches flickr. if an image is online Google should find it.


as an example I searched an image of an asian girl and these are my results http://www.google.com/search?tbs=sb...RoJfj0rxEGYdlWe0egUWTtOWP7WXQYmJHSUaqC1ccrBzg

you can see it found a photo set for the girl on flickr as well as a video on dailymotion and many other locations too. it even correctly found her name.

 

[b4u]

Interesting. And do you know how well Yahoo fairs against GSBI in terms of numbers of hits outside of www.flickr.com? One of the things I find most attractive about GSBI is that you can drag-and-drop straight from the online source. Yahoo searches images only by text input, no?

it's even easier when you get the Chrome or Firefox extension. then you simply right click any image and select "search Google with this image"

 

[Anynym]

While the number of "hits" is interesting, I'd also want to know how many false-positives and/or false-negatives they imply. Any idea?

 

[ikakene]

While the number of "hits" is interesting, I`d also want to know how many false-positives and/or false-negatives they imply. Any idea?

I`d like to know the answer to that question also. With this familiar image, the preliminary search results tell you that there are "About 376 results." Quickly scrolling to the end of the list (which is actually only about 138 results across 15 pages), you find the following: "In order to show you the most relevant results, we have omitted some entries very similar to the 143 already displayed. If you like, you can repeat the search with the omitted results included."

Regardless, though, most people that I`ve seen in TERB`s various Reviews areas cite Tineye hits as evidence of B&S. And while there`s no denying that evidence, even if half of the purported GSBI results are false positives, GSBI is clearly a more powerful image search tool, and would reveal possible B&S even where Tineye can`t. (Plus, the interface: [a] drag-and-drop, b4u`s observation about the Chrome and Firefox extensions.)

I`d like for someone to provide evidence of Tineye producing search results that Google misses.

 

[BackToTheHobby]

I'd like for someone to provide evidence of Tineye producing search results that Google misses.

That isn't going to happen, I'm afraid. Tineye is actually the brainchild of a local company (Idée) down on Queen St. Their algorithms are good; they were top of their field until Google sussed out their niche market, and put the Google resources behind the field of image search. The result is a much better, algorithmically (sp?) sounder product, with a much larger field of images to search against.

All this, by the way, from an insider at Idée who, of course, would probably appreciate being left nameless. Still, kudos to them for starting the trend in the first place; they're just not going to be able to compete with the likes of Google, that's all.