Three? Four? Five? Six? The more the better and more traffic? Yes?...
NO!
Results from split tests by the Search Engine Journal say that using more than two or three hashtags led to significant drop in traffic. The maximum engagement was with just one hashtag!
So, the best course of action is to be a miser and don't go about spraying hashtags with the hope of more visitors.
Happy blogging. :)
(I have purchased all the images and I have the rights to use them commercially. Photo source: https://getstencil.com/?tap_a=9103-1801f8&tap_s=200974-3b53a9 )
1? interesting;)
there is a great chance to be wrong in this choice)
Haha, true. But you get the benefits if you do it right. Then it is pertaining to 'general' social media like facebook and instagram... not steemit I think.
There is one thing I should warn you about as I see that you are a new Steemit member.
You claim that you have purchased all the images, and I believe that is true.
You also claim that you have the right to use them (even) commercially, so let's say that this might be true either although we don't know that as you are not providing the information under which license this right has been granted to you.
The photo source that you are giving, is not the image source, in fact.
It's your referral link to getstencil.com website, and it hasn't anything to do with the photo that you used in your article(s), and that especially because you are using the same photo source link in all your posts.
Fake image/photo sources are not accepted on Steemit, and your posts might get penalized (downvoted) just because of that. Please, take care of it!
In other words, you don't credit the author of the photo, in fact, what might be one of the license conditions for commercial use (and very often it is, but we don't know that as I said before, because you don't provide the info about the license).
In this particular case (for the photo used in this article) it wouldn't be a problem as the photo is under CC0 Creative Commons license which license doesn't require attribution.
But in general and above all of that, keep in mind that GetStencil.com can't be the photo/image source as it's only a tool, (same as PhotoShop or any other free or paid image manipulation tool out there).
In other words, even if you are paying for the tool usage, it doesn't mean that all the photos that you have access to (through it) are free to use for commercial purposes.
Meaning, many images/photos might be free to use on Facebook, Twitter, Pinterest, Instagram or some other similar networks (as the users are not getting paid for posting there), while the same ones are not allowed on Steemit and other similar sites where we are paid for our content.
Therefore, it's very important to check the license for each photo/image that you use, and when and where that is needed to give the proper attribution to the author if you want to stay out of copyright trouble.
I understand your concerns Ma'am. But I asked getstencil.com and they said I could use the photos in anyway I like commercial or noncommercial, including steemit. I can say for sure that there is no copyright trouble whatsoever (or use for commercial purposes). Other than that does steemit have any other issues?
I have not given any message about photo in my current post so I can take things forward after you reply to this. Yes, the photo is from getstencil.com again.
P.S. getstencil.com is different from photoshop, but does have some photo editing capabilites. It is more like canva.com which has its own database of photos. While one pays $1 for most pictures on canva.com, getstencil.com offers its entire database of photos for a monthly fee.
In that case, I assume you wouldn't have any problems as they (getstencil.com) is very likely picking the photos from the sites where those photos are free to use for commercial purposes and even doesn't require the attribution.
The only problem that remains is fake linking, as your Photo source links don't lead to the photo itself (as they should) by that giving the attribution to the author what is the main purpose of the photo source links.
From my point of view, if the photos that you get from getstencil.com are free to use and free to use for commercial purposes, and as well don't require attribution, it would be better to skip entirely the photo source link than providing a fake one (with entirely different purpose which is, in fact, your possible affiliate earning, if someone signs up to to getstencil.com through your link).
Meaning, getstencil.com is not the owner or the copyright holder of those images, but just a mediator who provides them (as they are anyway free to use) through their paying photo editing tool service.
In other words, and when you already mentioned canva.com, if you would find such free to use photos, images, illustrations, etc., which are free to use and don't require attribution through the sites like Pixabay.com, Pexels.com or similar (where from getstencil.com most likely put them in their database, anyway), and upload them to canva.com (which is the tool, as you said by yourself, very similar to getstencil.com, you would be able to manipulate and edit them almost the same way but without need to pay the monthly fee to getstencil.com either not to canva.com as you would be using free photos from one of the above-mentioned or similar sites. Think about it!
And I can easily prove you what I'm talking about with the very photo that you used in this article. Meaning, the photo could be easily found on the following Pixabay.com page and on the right side menu, you would see that it's licensed under CC0 Creative Commons license, free to use for commercial purposes and with no attribution required. You can easily download it from there and upload it to canva.com, play with it however you like and publish it on Steemit, all free of any charges.
Besides, that's why I told you in my previous comment that you wouldn't have a problem with this particular photo, as according to its license even the photo source link (attribution) is not required.
Personally, I attribute the author (although it's not mandatory) whenever I use the images from the sites such as Pixabay.com is, and which in this concrete case is someone who present him/herself with the nickname yourschantz, but are you going to follow my example or not, it's entirely up to you (as it's not something obligatory).
So, once again, if you are using the photos under such or similar (not demanding) licenses, you even DON'T have to put the photo source link at all.
But, putting a fake photo source link (which is even a referral link) is a big NO, NO not only on Steemit but in general when we talk about the online publishing.
I hope I manage to clarify to you a few things and what I was really referring to. 🙂
Sure! And I have stopped adding the link. :)
Thank you very much for the useful information.
May be. But I don't see any logic in it. Is it some conspiracy by Search Engine Journal? 😜
Possibly yes! :D