Are You in the Important Landmark Mix?

[Ed Rooney]

. . . or do you avoid these subjects because you feel there are already too many images of major landmarks in Alamy and other stock agencies? Do you go to Paris and skip shooting the Eiffel Tower? In Rome, do you bypass the Colosseum? And do you bypass the Freedom Tower here in NYC? Do you ignore the Little Mermaid in Copenhagen? Do you skip shooting all these kinds of things and instead walk the back streets of the world's major cities? 

 

I still have a comparatively small collection, just 1,654 as of today, and my number of sales are not large either, but the prices I've been getting at Alamy are good and have gotten better this past year.  One-third of my sales are of major landmarks. I would capture the Queen having tea with her grandchildren, but I don't have access to that event. We all have access to local landmarks. 

[Jill Morgan]

When I go to Toronto, I shoot the landmarks. Don't have a lot up though, except a few of the CN Tower and a couple of tourist attractions. Unless I can get an unusual angle or something, it is just another in a huge selection. I think skylines can be more important than you think as they change constantly, so I am sure the NEW button is clicked as well as filtered by date taken. Anyone wanting a skyline shot wants to be sure its as current as possible. Toronto's skyline has changed drastically over the past year.

 

I still hope to take a day in November (assuming it sunny) and take a tour bus view of the city. I think when you live somewhere (I grew up in Toronto) you don't notice the stuff that a tourist would notice or have pointed out to. It was years before I even went up the CN Tower because it was always there. Had to have a visitor from Ireland before I finally went up in the see through elevator.

 

Jill

[David Davies]

I bet it did not fetch nearly as much as one of the first Apple Macs, which I believe was also sold yesterday!

 

 

This is one of my best sellers, about two hours drive away in the Rhine Valley, a picturesque area renowned for a good Riesling and an abundance of castles!

 

 

 

 

 

It also happens to be on one of the busiest freight train routes in Europe, with tracks on both banks of the Rhine and almost constant noise!

 

 

 

[Martin P Wilson]

When I go to Toronto, I shoot the landmarks. Don't have a lot up though, except a few of the CN Tower and a couple of tourist attractions. Unless I can get an unusual angle or something, it is just another in a huge selection. I think skylines can be more important than you think as they change constantly, so I am sure the NEW button is clicked as well as filtered by date taken. Anyone wanting a skyline shot wants to be sure its as current as possible. Toronto's skyline has changed drastically over the past year.

 

I still hope to take a day in November (assuming it sunny) and take a tour bus view of the city. I think when you live somewhere (I grew up in Toronto) you don't notice the stuff that a tourist would notice or have pointed out to. It was years before I even went up the CN Tower because it was always there. Had to have a visitor from Ireland before I finally went up in the see through elevator.

 

Jill

 

That is true but I try keep myself in tune with the landmarks by doing a tour of the city when we have visitors from afar. Most are friends of our children (they are both travel widely with their work) so I show them the sites. So I have to try and see my home town as a tourist would but they stil spot and ask about things I miss.

[John Mitchell]

I enjoy photographing Vancouver landmarks, especially what is left of our heritage buildings, but I find that they don't sell. All buyers seem to be interested in are the city skyline (boring) and the Lions Gate Bridge, of which there are bushels of images available on Alamy and everywhere else. My pictures of landmarks in Latin America, where I've travelled extensively, do quite well on Alamy, though.

 

Not sure that it does any good, but I often put "landmark" and landmarks" in my keywords when appropriate.

 

This straight-on shot of Mexico City's cathedral (biggest in Latin America) is probably my best-selling landmark image.

 

[Ed Rooney]

When I go to Toronto, I shoot the landmarks. Don't have a lot up though, except a few of the CN Tower and a couple of tourist attractions. Unless I can get an unusual angle or something, it is just another in a huge selection. I think skylines can be more important than you think as they change constantly, so I am sure the NEW button is clicked as well as filtered by date taken. Anyone wanting a skyline shot wants to be sure its as current as possible. Toronto's skyline has changed drastically over the past year.

 

I still hope to take a day in November (assuming it sunny) and take a tour bus view of the city. I think when you live somewhere (I grew up in Toronto) you don't notice the stuff that a tourist would notice or have pointed out to. It was years before I even went up the CN Tower because it was always there. Had to have a visitor from Ireland before I finally went up in the see through elevator.

 

Jill

 

I just removed the image of the Fifth Avenue Apple Store, because it does not really make my point. It is somewhat unusual, although neither a very-wide shot nor a hot spot sun reflection are really that unusual these days. I removed that image because you said: "Unless I can get an unusual angle or something, it is just another in a huge selection." I'm talking about landmark subjects, large and small, subjects that most people will recognize without a caption. Of course it should be done professionally, be sharp, in good light, and so on . . . but I'm asking about having landmark subjects in your collection -- not an unusual approach, just a good picture, like David's shot of the German castle. Most of the landmark subjects I've sold are good images but NOT really spacial. 

 

So I'm talking about having your images included in that "huge selection." Clear? 

[Martin P Wilson]

That's interesting Ed. I have had little joy with landmark pictures so I am working at Keith Morris's suggestion of:

 

Think "in" not "of"  and think "a" not "the" - I was already trying to work that way when he made it clear by putting ot so succinctly.

 

I look at my local town and I see hundreds of essentially identical pictures of my local landmark, Wollaton Hall, a 16th century country house. Used as Wayne Manor in last Batman film. I have never sold one of the Hall, have of the park but not through Alamy. Problem is the main people who are going to use them at all frequently are the local tourist boards, local paper, local companies and designers  all of whom will have dozens of pictures in their own libraries. Nationally and internationally there will perhaps be a handful of usages per year - shared out across those 1,000 images.

 

I guess NYC has a wider appeal than even a major Elizabethan country house in the English provinces.

[Ed Rooney]

Martin, can I assume that you do not see any advantage in NOT having pictures of Wollaston Hall? And I trust you mention the Batman connection in your keywords. 

 

(Another error in my OP: I should have put a hyphen between important and landmark, since important does not modify "mix.") 

[Martin P Wilson]

Martin, can I assume that you do not see any advantage in NOT having pictures of Wollaton Hall? And I trust you mention the Batman connection in your keywords. 

 

ABsolutely. It would be totally remiss of me not to have a good selection of pictures of Wollaton Hall and Park and its events in my collection and I do mention the Batman connection. If I need a walk it is one of my destinations, I don't really need to use the car and it is a pleasant diversion for an hour or so.

 

As I say the only problem is there are more photographers of it than picture users! So they havn't sold; perhaps one day.

[Ed Rooney]

Those historic manor houses are really something, Martin. I lived in Woodstock and had a pass to Blenheim Park.  And unlike the skylines Jill mentioned, historic properties do not change very often.  

[Martin P Wilson]

Indeed they are Ed but many are now "owned" by the National Trust who prevent the commercial use of photographs except from selected photographers through their own library. Which is why I resigned membership of the NT; even as I member I could not put images taken in the grounds on Alamy or other libraries, strictly I can't licence them myself either.  From time to time Alamy has a purge of NT "property" images. I used to visit NT sites frequently but no longer.

 

The properties are supposed to be in trust to the nation, not a quasi-private commerical operation. Anyway enough of that, there have been many threads onb the subject.

[Ed Rooney]

John, that's a nice Mexico City image and a good argument for including people, a human connection, with landmark pics. 

[Martin P Wilson]

You cant sell what you dont have.

In the past I would nonchalantly ignore the main iconic sites because there were already a gazzilion photos already out there. A couple of years ago I had a wee project where I needed straghtforward photos of the iconic sites, Eiffel Tower, Statue of Liberty and... I didn't have them. I had them worked into other images to give a sense of place, but what I needed, the most simple, I didn;t have.

How many images of a subject an agent has in their collection and where mine fit into the mix is important. Whether I have images of a subject in my collection is more important.

 

I relate to that - as a writer and sometime blogger I never know when I will need one of the more obvious subjects. I suspect that combination of writing and pictures will probably be a  significant element of my 2015 plans. I feel that the way forward  is to take more control and use my work myself so I am in process of redesigning my blogging sites: slow travel, thought/ sketch, eclectic magazine etc. I appreciate the traditional market for selling writing has gone much the same way as for pictures so that is another reason to do my own thing.

[John Mitchell]

John, that's a nice Mexico City image and a good argument for including people, a human connection, with landmark pics. 

 

Yes, people can give a sense of scale as well. I think the reason that older shot of the cathedral has done well is because it's almost impossible to get a clear shot. There is usually too much going on in the Zocalo (main square) -- political protests, musical extravaganzas, giant Mickey Mouse balloons floating around, etc. -- in front of the building. I lucked out on that particular day. I've tried to duplicate the view on later visits and failed.

[Jools Elliott]

To answer your question Ed, yes! 

 

Cities are forever changing as well as buildings etc that surround various monuments and famous landmarks.

 

Over on the dark side, just under 10% of my collection is devoted to Paris. Does it sell? Yes. But then some of what I have is very very unique and the view points not available to the public. One particular image from a private view just netted me a nice sum.

 

I used to live in Salisbury, UK. I must have one of the biggest collections of images concentrated on the cathedral. Another very well photographed landmark. Does it sell? Yep. Already found two of my cathedral images on a UK newspaper and on MSN because Lonely Planet named the city as one of the best places to go in 2015.

 

What people need to do is keep on shooting and ignore the "but it's done to death" line. Everyone has a different eye and so can put a different spin on things.

[Martin P Wilson]

To answer your question Ed, yes! 

 

...

 

What people need to do is keep on shooting and ignore the "but it's done to death" line. Everyone has a different eye and so can put a different spin on things.

 

Which is why despite the hundreds and even thousands some peeople continue tto make frequent sales of iconic landmarks - they have found something a bit different that shines out amongst all the essentially thoughtless "me too" stuff (of which I know I have plenty but am working to address it with my new stuff)

[Jools Elliott]

Lately, I employ the following:

 

1) Stop

2) Look

3) Point camera

4) Do I need to take that picture?

5) If yes, click.

6) If no, move on.

[Martin P Wilson]

Lately, I employ the following:

 

1) Stop

2) Look

3) Point camera

4) Do I need to take that picture?

5) If yes, click.

6) If no, move on.

 

I would suggest

 

6) think what and where might be better,

7) Move there

8) repeat from (1)

[John Mitchell]

 

You cant sell what you dont have.

In the past I would nonchalantly ignore the main iconic sites because there were already a gazzilion photos already out there. A couple of years ago I had a wee project where I needed straghtforward photos of the iconic sites, Eiffel Tower, Statue of Liberty and... I didn't have them. I had them worked into other images to give a sense of place, but what I needed, the most simple, I didn;t have.

How many images of a subject an agent has in their collection and where mine fit into the mix is important. Whether I have images of a subject in my collection is more important.

 

I relate to that - as a writer and sometime blogger I never know when I will need one of the more obvious subjects. I suspect that combination of writing and pictures will probably be a  significant element of my 2015 plans. I feel that the way forward  is to take more control and use my work myself so I am in process of redesigning my blogging sites: slow travel, thought/ sketch, eclectic magazine etc. I appreciate the traditional market for selling writing has gone much the same way as for pictures so that is another reason to do my own thing.

 

 

I find that photographing with a storyline in mind can sometimes help. Many of my sellers on Alamy are images that I took to illustrate travel articles that I wrote or at least planned to write.

[Jools Elliott]

Absolutely Martin. At times though, it's not always possible.

 

Still, as I said people shouldn't be afraid of going somewhere as it's always done. Everyone sees things differently.

[David Davies]

This was taken from the classic vantage point in Staithes on the NE. coast of England but looking the other way to the usual view, which has been done to death. Has only sold once, but not on Alamy, but I am still happy with it!

[Foreign Export]

To answer your question Ed, yes! 

 

Cities are forever changing as well as buildings etc that surround various monuments and famous landmarks.

 

Over on the dark side, just under 10% of my collection is devoted to Paris. Does it sell? Yes. But then some of what I have is very very unique and the view points not available to the public. One particular image from a private view just netted me a nice sum.

 

I used to live in Salisbury, UK. I must have one of the biggest collections of images concentrated on the cathedral. Another very well photographed landmark. Does it sell? Yep. Already found two of my cathedral images on a UK newspaper and on MSN because Lonely Planet named the city as one of the best places to go in 2015.

 

What people need to do is keep on shooting and ignore the "but it's done to death" line. Everyone has a different eye and so can put a different spin on things.

 

Couldn't agree more

[Bryan]

Foolish to avoid local landmarks. If local you can get there when the conditions are at their best, while you should know the optimum angles etc. Changing seasons/times of day/weather present new opportunities. Local landmarks have provided some of my best earning, if not best selling, shots.

 

Whenever I go to a "foreign" location I feel that, unless the light is perfect, I am struggling against local knowledge and skill. That's a challenge that I enjoy, but it's so much easier to do well in your own backyard.

[Martin P Wilson]

Foolish to avoid local landmarks. If local you can get there when the conditions are at their best, while you should know the optimum angles etc. Changing seasons/times of day/weather present new opportunities. Local landmarks have provided some of my best earning, if not best selling, shots.

 

Whenever I go to a "foreign" location I feel that, unless the light is perfect, I am struggling against local knowledge and skill. That's a challenge that I enjoy, but it's so much easier to do well in your own backyard.

 

Spot on Bryan, and your Durham and North-East pics are a testament to that point.

[vpics]

Lately, I employ the following:

 

1) Stop

2) Look

3) Point camera

4) Do I need to take that picture?

5) If yes, click.

6) If no, move on.

 

Alamy might need that picture. But honestly, we all have a psychological problem. Not a bad one, but still a problem. If you constantly think about not shooting something, you block yourself for everything else. So, if you go to Paris and don't want any Eiffel Tower shots, your mind will block you from seeing new things at it will constantly remind you of the Eiffel Tower. Better to go out and tell yourself you want new and quirky shots and have a good day - and if you spot the Eiffel Tower on the way, just shoot it. It frees up your mind.