geogphotos

Very sad and shocked to hear this news, The blog is also sad but brave and inspirational. http://broken-cloud.blogspot.com

We have had our moments but hope that you are okay. Haven't seen your name around here and it used to be all the time. Best wishes

It does seem bizarre that a newspaper publisher wants to restrict the rights around publishing photography.

Same here: 'Client wants to use one of your images for a fee of $5000. Will you drop your restriction'. I did, they disn't! I suggested that it might be better to lower expectations and report that a customer is considering an image. Alamy does seem to want it both ways on restrictions.

Jansos - itcould be that even though non-exclusive it could only have come from Alamy -one possibility would be an Alamy watermark

If you pay peanuts.... This is a joke.

Another question is how do you get access to this Standard Licence. I don't see it available when I look at image pricing?

I think we can all agree to that being true!

Who thinks that the introduction of Standard Licences will increase their Alamy income? Anybody? Who thinks that it will it increase Alamy's profit? If so, please explain.

This is what spooks me 🫣

Apologies I wasn't clear. The $1 average fee guesstimate was for the 900 licences at the 'other place'. I based it on what I get for my usual 300 or so monthly licences from the same place. Maybe $1 was a bit too low and anyway you are doing better than that.

Thanks for the ideas Brian. I continue to explore other options and have done since starting to go non-exclusive in 2012. I do think that getting the images that I already have in more and more markets is increasingly important. Unfortunately, this is not the place to have that discussion.

a) I'm not good enough or interested - just an ex teacher with a camera b) My estimate for your income of approx $1 per licence? (from an editing base of 150k images) with the mean sliding year on year- many fees under $1 some a few cents. 2023-24 was my best ever stock income. Alamy is a decreasing proportion of that. Standard licences seem to me to be a harbinger. The word 'Standard' suggests so. The irony is that the growth sectors depend on image licensing - illegal copying and secondary uses. This is where volume is key. Standard licences, in my view, will not be sufficiently compensated for by volume - could lead to competitors undercutting further. Like you, the other 'stock' is $$$ and involves no effort just risk.

The Standard Licence looks set to wipe out other licences and become the standard licence! Why would anybody choose to pay for this when for a fiver you get a print run to 100,000 in perp? Magazines and books £ 39.99 Use in a single magazine or book (print and/or digital), inside use, 2,500 circulation, worldwide (excludes advertising).

Is the date relevant?