Keep an unchanged reference
Start with a copy of the asset you intend to review, such as your studio’s poster or an authorised product graphic. Give that reference a clear version label in your own notes. If you search a cropped or compressed copy, record that choice instead of treating it as the original file.
Your output should be a comparison record for particular results. A list of similar thumbnails is not enough to explain whether a date, caption or credit changed.
Choose candidates for a specific comparison
TinEye accepts image uploads or image URLs and offers Best Match and Most Changed sorting. Its tutorial also describes domain or collection filtering and a Compare Match view that aligns matching portions and switches between the images. Source
After submitting the permitted reference, inspect close candidates with Best Match. Use Most Changed when you want to examine altered candidates, keeping the same reference file. These sort choices help organise inspection; they do not establish that every modification has been detected.
Apply a domain filter only when you intentionally want to review a known site. Record that narrower scope. A filtered result list should not later be described as a search of all possible locations.
Inspect the aligned area and the surrounding image
TinEye’s tutorial says the result thumbnail or Compare Match link opens the comparison. If no results are found, the stated limit is that TinEye found no match in its index. Source
Switch between the reference and candidate and inspect the matching regions. Then check the complete candidate wherever it is accessible. Alignment does not restore pixels outside a crop or provide the history of how a file changed.
For an illustrative studio poster, you might compare the event date, title placement and visible credit line. This is a suggested inspection task, not a claim that we found a modified poster.
| Visible difference | What to record | What remains unresolved |
|---|---|---|
| Cropped edge | Which reference area is absent | Why it was cropped |
| Changed date or text | The two readable versions | Who made the change or which was authorised |
| Different layout | Elements moved or omitted | The editing process |
| Missing credit line | Where the credit appears in the reference | Ownership or permission to reuse |
| Blurred lettering | The unreadable area | The words hidden by poor quality |
Do not guess unreadable text. If the text itself is important, the screenshot-text checklist explains how to separate readable wording from an uncertain transcription.
Check the page containing the copy
Open the result’s containing page when available. Record its address, the image you could actually view, surrounding description and review time. A thumbnail in search and the current page may not give you the same amount of information; retain that mismatch as a limitation.
Use one row per checked result: reference version, result page, visible differences, unresolved detail and date reviewed. Several similar copies do not independently establish who created the image or when it first appeared.
Stop at observable differences. If no match appears, write “no match found in this search,” with its scope, rather than “the image is nowhere online.” For a broader route from image candidates to accessible source pages, see the reverse-image source workflow. TinEye’s comparison controls described here are not a claim about TraceSeek’s internal search provider or interface.