DJ Myford

On your Dashboard, just below Tools, you'll see "Additional revenue options". Click on that, and the various options appear.

That's an 18MP sensor. 6MP gives a file that is large enough for Alamy, so there should be no need to upsize the image unless you cropped heavily. Note that the file size quoted by Alamy refers to the image before it is compressed into the JPEG format: the JPEG file will be much smaller. Edit: It might be easier to think in pixels rather than memory. 3000x2000 pixels or more is acceptable.

IIRC "processing failed" is not a QC failure: it means something went wrong during upload and the file was corrupted or didn't complete the transfer. Another possibility is that you haven't completed the keywording etc. on your initial submission in order to get the images on sale, and the system is stopping you uploading more until you have done so to prove you are a genuine contributor and not a bot (but that is a guess).

The distributor takes their cut first - typically 40% - and then Alamy takes 80% of what remains. They snuck the change in by removing the definition of the distributor's cut from the contract, so now we have no way of knowing what the distributor's cut will be.

Just a quick note incase you are getting views mixed up with zooms. A "View" simply means that the thumbnail of your image is returned in a search, alongside possibly hundreds or thousands of other images. A "Zoom" means that a customer has clicked on the thumbnail to take a closer look, so is a better indication of interest in your images. That said, there is currently an ongoing issue with the stats not reporting accurately, so the figures may be misleading.

Zooms are only registered from selected customers, so unless your friend is one of Alamy's regular clients, the zoom will not appear.

I wish I'd signed up a few years later, and missed the attempt to impose storage fees. I'd probably have continued submitting material rather than asking Alamy to delete all my images and largely walking away. I still have a stack of unused CD-Rs in the cupboard that I thought I would burn through in less than a year. Yes, it was my decision to limit my submissions, but the decision was informed by Alamy's actions. At the time it was generally accepted that stock was a long-term investment, and storage fees could wipe out the return from a license if it was issued many years after submitting the image (as some who opted for the Green and Red plans found out). More images could mean more sales, but would definitely mean more fees. At the time I thought I was cutting my losses, but it turned out I was cutting my gains.

I believe that Account Balance shows all activity, including licenses that are subsequently refunded. The initial sale adds to the sales total, and the refund adds to the deductions total. If the license is then re-issued at a different price, it again adds to the sales total. So refunded sales are effectively recorded twice, which would probably account for the discrepancy. As an example: Sale +$100 Commission -$60 Then a refund: Sale refunded -$100 Commission returned +$60 The overall balance is back to zero, but if you add up the positive transactions, you get $160 of "phantom" sales that are added to the "Sales total".

All activity on your account should be shown in the "Account Balance" tab. Are the licenses showing up there, or is everything listed as "Other income"?

Other Income is excluded: only licenses count. My DACS was just two lines - presumably as no UK TV - with one going up and one going down from last year. Overall sum was very slightly down.

As the card was fully functional before being formatted, it should be able to function as an attached drive on the computer. Perhaps add some files of a type the camera would recognize, then see if it will perform a format. But that is a long shot. If all else fails, you could possibly keep the card as a computer drive for transferring files or backup. I use an old CF card as storage for a digital photo frame: I know you want to keep using it in the camera, but it seems a pity to throw away an otherwise functional item of storage.

The distributor takes their cut first, then (for silver) Alamy takes 80% of what is left. You get the remainder. Distributor cut is typically 40%, but that figure is no longer defined in the contract.

Other reassurances that we've been given via this forum have proved to be false, so it's getting increasingly hard to believe anything we are told. This just feels like yet another reason to not send any more images to Alamy. Sorry, but it's just getting ridiculous: Licences are supposed to be legal documents that accurately set out the rights that have been purchased.

Yes, I get the same. If they've patched the code to 'fix' measures, they've broken some links in the process.