Jump to content

Having a global pseudonym for your Alamy account - what do you think?


Recommended Posts

Hi Everyone,

 

Nothing to show off just yet (because it's still a work in progress) but work is continuing to race ahead with the revamp of the contributor tools. Internally we're calling this the "Contributor Experience Project" because this covers upload, QC, track submissions and keywording / image management. We'll share more with you about it all when we can but meanwhile...

 

As part of the project, we're considering adopting a similar feature of other stock sites, where you would have a single unique "username" for Alamy and your credit line would default to this. We would change the term "Pseudonym" to something like "Collections" so you could still split your images into different sections in order to view AlamyMeasures stats for different sets of images, but you would have a global, single credit line that would be applied to all the images. If you needed different credit lines for different images, you would have to have a separate account.

 

Why would we do this?

 

Overall this will should be a benefit to you. Having a single username attached to your account would allow us to create unique URLs for your collection which is fantastic for Search Engine Optimization (SEO). These URLs would link through to your collection and help generate more traffic to your content. At the moment we can't do this, as there is nothing to ensure names and pseudonyms are unique. Not only do we have pseudonyms that are common names, but some users use generic terms like "Animals" and "Travel" etc which is confusing for everyone when the credit line reflects that. 

 

So, your unique address could be (as an example)

 

alamy.com/USERNAME (for all images)

 

or, potentially

 

alamy.com/USERNAME/CollectionName (for images split into collections)

 

In either case, the credit line across ALL images would be the same. This would be a change we introduce quickly when you log in – you choose one Username and then we’d apply the changes. There wouldn’t be any retrospective extra work for you to do. We’re not envisaging that this would change how AlamyRank works.

 

Summary of reasons why it might be a good idea:

·         Conformity. Other stock sites do this so it keeps things simple

·         Increased SEO. More traffic going to your images

·         Keeps things easy to understand. Pseudonyms are confusing all round - even saying the word and spelling it can often cause difficulty!

·         You can still keep a level of anonymity or use a business name if needed with usernames

 

I want to stress at this point that we have not decided on this, it's an idea. We would like to hear your thoughts though if and why you think this is a bad idea. Is there something we're overlooking? A downside we can't see? Please let us know. 

 

Cheers

 

James A

 

Alamy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello James,

 

Thanks for your open message to us J.

 

First of all I think also it is a generally good idea. Just one little thing came directly up to me. It is regarding RF photos.

 

There are contributors that also submit the same RF images to Micros while they also keep other RF images just for traditional agencies like Alamy. The pseudonym is very helpful here to split those photos. I think if a client finds under a certain pseudonym the same photo on micros he will then every time avoid the pseudonym. He will think “It’s the microstock contributor”.

With pseudonyms we can at least create a pure “Not Microstock contributor” since I believe that not having images on Micros will create more sales here.

 

Thanks.

 

Mirco

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only level of anonymity available would seem to be at the username level ie: you would have to setup a separate account.  I don't have many images where I am worried about this, but sometimes its useful to be able to put a photograph under an anonymous pseudo eg: somebody breaking the law, parked illegally, etc.

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess one little fly in the ointment (Alamy search: 22 images, only two of which are really relevant) . . . sorry, can't help myself . . . one little fly in the ointment would be if folk chose unsernames that replicated some of the problems with pseudonyms: in other words, ones that "are confusing all round - even saying the word and spelling it can often cause difficulty".

 

dd

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's generally a good idea. Since images are sometimes published with Alamy credit only — at the option of the publisher or distributor — perhaps that option could be available to the contributor as a check box. It would be one way of answering Steve's concern.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only level of anonymity available would seem to be at the username level ie: you would have to setup a separate account.  I don't have many images where I am worried about this, but sometimes its useful to be able to put a photograph under an anonymous pseudo eg: somebody breaking the law, parked illegally, etc.

 

Steve

 

To solve this problem, could you give contributors the ability to optionally supply a different credit line on a per image basis (i.e. at the same time as you do the keywording). If the contributor supplies a credit line for an image then it is used otherwise the global pseudonym is used by default?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would not have a problem with this in theory, my only concern would be that there is at least one other contributor with exactly the same "real" name as myself, what if we both wanted to be known by that?

 

 

I have just fired off an email to Alamy MS before lunch with this same problem occurring for me already. The other contributors images show mixed with mine when I search for my images only by contributor name.

 

This makes it problematic as I wish to place links to my images in other places but do not want to have another contributors (with the same name) images show as well.

 

Thinks: Perhaps my email instigated this thread?

 

Allan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I would not have a problem with this in theory, my only concern would be that there is at least one other contributor with exactly the same "real" name as myself, what if we both wanted to be known by that?

 

 

I have just fired off an email to Alamy MS before lunch with this same problem occurring for me already. The other contributors images show mixed with mine when I search for my images only by contributor name.

 

This makes it problematic as I wish to place links to my images in other places but do not want to have another contributors (with the same name) images show as well.

 

Thinks: Perhaps my email instigated this thread?

 

Allan

 

 

You could just change your name through Deed Poll.. easy.. problem solved!  :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anything that leads to more traffic is great. Naturally there will be a few contributors with the same name, but first one to it wins then number two, three just have to adapt i.e. Martin Carlsson 2, Martin Carlsson 3 or whatever.

 

Would CTR still be calculated on a per "collection" basis or would it from then on only be one global CTR?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

I would not have a problem with this in theory, my only concern would be that there is at least one other contributor with exactly the same "real" name as myself, what if we both wanted to be known by that?

 

 

I have just fired off an email to Alamy MS before lunch with this same problem occurring for me already. The other contributors images show mixed with mine when I search for my images only by contributor name.

 

This makes it problematic as I wish to place links to my images in other places but do not want to have another contributors (with the same name) images show as well.

 

Thinks: Perhaps my email instigated this thread?

 

Allan

 

 

You could just change your name through Deed Poll.. easy.. problem solved!  :D

 

 

 

Change it to "BHZ" ;)

 

Seriously though it will cause problems with trying to get your own images noticed via links back to Alamy.

 

Allan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would not have a problem with this in theory, my only concern would be that there is at least one other contributor with exactly the same "real" name as myself, what if we both wanted to be known by that?

 

Perhaps the contributor who signed up with Alamy first should have priority. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like any change that makes the Alamy site more intuitive for the photo buyer, and increases SEO.

 
Working with an Alamy system that is similar to the competition, makes the Alamy experience more intuitive for clients. New or old clients do not have time to learn a slightly different working method, and may abandon Alamy in frustration in spite of all the great photography available on Alamy.
 
I think one credit “alamy.com/USERNAME” would work best for the client and therefore ensure more credits for images.
 
You are not proposing this as a credit, but a long credit like “alamy.com/USERNAME/CollectionName” is too long. That creates problems for designers both in space available and the overall look of the page. It also looks bad on a page that contains credits in a different format from different stock libraries. It is therefore less likely to be used.
 
The most likely to be published USERNAME is one that is short, unique, and functional. Therefore Alamy may want to limit the character length of the USERNAME, and the actual name used. No client will credit a distracting USERNAME like “Howie from Maui” as an example. I once knew a photographer who used his last name of “Gudz” as a credit. He got more credits than anyone else.
 
Presently there is a place on the price page where one can click on the unique Pseudonym name to see only the pseudonym collection. I would like to retain that feature, even when I assume that one would be clicking on a universal USERNAME in the future. I have two pseudonyms that have two different styles A and B. If a client clicks on an image under pseudonym A, because the client likes the style of A, there is no sense sending him to my entire USERNAME collection containing styles A and B.
 
If photographers know that some of their lesser works will be associated with their USERNAME, then it may encourage the discarding of lesser work. This would be a good thing for both Alamy and the photographer.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I would not have a problem with this in theory, my only concern would be that there is at least one other contributor with exactly the same "real" name as myself, what if we both wanted to be known by that?

 

Perhaps the contributor who signed up with Alamy first should have priority. 

 

 

 

My thought exactly.

 

Allan Bell (The original one)  Where have I seen that before? :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

I would not have a problem with this in theory, my only concern would be that there is at least one other contributor with exactly the same "real" name as myself, what if we both wanted to be known by that?

 

Perhaps the contributor who signed up with Alamy first should have priority. 

 

 

 

My thought exactly.

 

Allan Bell (The original one)  Where have I seen that before? :D

 

 

I was thinking of changing my name to Chuck - don't think I'll bother now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whatever is best for buyers and sales takes priority over contributor's usernames. Other places demand a unique username to be able to offer link back to your stuff, then you can often choose what your credit line should be i.e. name or business name.

 

Just out of curiosity, is there a way to see when another contributor first joined? I can only see myself, June 2004.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not very much in favour of this. I have different kind of areas I work in - News, Travel, Theatre & Dance, Fashion Shows etc. I have different pseudonyms for each. 

 

It might suit someone with just a few hundred images on sale, but if you have thousands, that's another matter. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not very much in favour of this. I have different kind of areas I work in - News, Travel, Theatre & Dance, Fashion Shows etc. I have different pseudonyms for each. 

 

It might suit someone with just a few hundred images on sale, but if you have thousands, that's another matter. 

 

But that would be dealt with these hypothetical "collections" instead. Proposed link backs were to unique username (vpics) (your entire portfolio) and unique username/collectionname - vpics/travel, vpics/news etc. All credit lines would read "vpics" regardless from which of your pseudonym/collection it was sold from.

 

The only difference to now is;

 

- Pseudonyms will be called collections.

- Credit will be the same regardless from which of your pseudonym/collections it comes from.

- Available to properly link back to contributor AND/OR a pseudonym/collection.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like vpics I have separate pseudonyms for press accredited work in the areas of the arts, sports and others which I prefer to keep separate however I have 18,000 odd others which would happily lump together.

 

Slight change of subject, but I would like to see an option which flags up a collection is specifically only for editorial use. A few of my pics seem to be captioned this way (I assume via Alamy News?) but not though any action I’ve taken, I have to resort to blocking out all restricted uses and this does not flag up editorial only. It’s an issue for me with accredited museum and gallery work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like vpics I have separate pseudonyms for press accredited work in the areas of the arts, sports and others which I prefer to keep separate however I have 18,000 odd others which would happily lump together.

 

Slight change of subject, but I would like to see an option which flags up a collection is specifically only for editorial use. A few of my pics seem to be captioned this way (I assume via Alamy News?) but not though any action I’ve taken, I have to resort to blocking out all restricted uses and this does not flag up editorial only. It’s an issue for me with accredited museum and gallery work.

 

As I understand it the proposal is that you can split up your portfolio to your heart's content into different collections (new name for pseudonym). However, regardless of which collection it sells from you have to choose ONE username (your name, business name, alias or whatever you'd like) that will be used as the credit line. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I'm not very much in favour of this. I have different kind of areas I work in - News, Travel, Theatre & Dance, Fashion Shows etc. I have different pseudonyms for each. 

 

It might suit someone with just a few hundred images on sale, but if you have thousands, that's another matter. 

 

But that would be dealt with these hypothetical "collections" instead. Proposed link backs were to unique username (vpics) (your entire portfolio) and unique username/collectionname - vpics/travel, vpics/news etc. All credit lines would read "vpics" regardless from which of your pseudonym/collection it was sold from.

 

The only difference to now is;

 

- Pseudonyms will be called collections.

- Credit will be the same regardless from which of your pseudonym/collections it comes from.

- Available to properly link back to contributor AND/OR a pseudonym/collection.

 

Problem is, vpics is only a pseudonym for the forum. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

I'm not very much in favour of this. I have different kind of areas I work in - News, Travel, Theatre & Dance, Fashion Shows etc. I have different pseudonyms for each. 

 

It might suit someone with just a few hundred images on sale, but if you have thousands, that's another matter. 

 

But that would be dealt with these hypothetical "collections" instead. Proposed link backs were to unique username (vpics) (your entire portfolio) and unique username/collectionname - vpics/travel, vpics/news etc. All credit lines would read "vpics" regardless from which of your pseudonym/collection it was sold from.

 

The only difference to now is;

 

- Pseudonyms will be called collections.

- Credit will be the same regardless from which of your pseudonym/collections it comes from.

- Available to properly link back to contributor AND/OR a pseudonym/collection.

 

Problem is, vpics is only a pseudonym for the forum. 

 

 

Well whatever username you choose for example "Vibrant Pictures" and for collections "News", "Travel" would become as URL link back vibrantpictures/news or vibrantpictures/travel. Credit would be "Vibrant Pictures" regardless if you sold something from your "news"-collections or "travel"-collection.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.