• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

730 Forum reputation = excellent

About geogphotos

  • Rank
    Forum regular

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Suffolk, England


  • Alamy URL{95B42DF3-1E9B-4C8F-A843-DA54AD10C8AA}&name=ian+murray
  • Images
  • Joined Alamy
    19 Dec 2002

Recent Profile Visitors

3,186 profile views
  1. CTR

    Anthony Collins is Mr BHZ, no longer of this forum unfortunately.
  2. 79 pages viewed & ZERO zooms

    Perhaps this depends on how you create your pseudos. If you simply use them to organise images then quite likely they are all much of muchness. All I can say is that my top pseudo 'geogphotos' produces higher search positions for images than my secondary pseudo 'geogphoto'. I work to maintain the strength of my top pseudo and simultaneously to maintain the weakness of the secondary one. Not surprisingly I see effects from that. The top pseudo gets all images that have been bought or zoomed, and all images selected by external editors. The purpose of the lower pseudo is still to have images available but not to have them appearing too high in searches - they are there for specific searches and for searchers who drill down but otherwise on generic, vague searches should not show in the first pages. I'd suggest assessing this for yourself with your own images.

    If Agency 1 stopped selling Unlimited RF images for 500,000 repeat print runs for such a low fee we would all be making more money. Likewise if photographers stopped supporting Agency 1 and thought a little more about the future rather than just next month. Anyway, what grounds do you have you to complain about the fees at Agency 2? That's the last comment from me on this.

    We would all make far more money if Agency 1 sold images at a proper price instead of $0.38 net.

    How can you complain when you willingly accept 0.38 cents for each licence at Agency 1?

    In total 537 images for $470. Agency 2 is doing well isn't it?

    The issue is that if you are willing to accept $0.38 cents sales from Agency 1 why would you complain about $24 average sales at Agency 2, or even the $6 sale at Agency 2?
  8. You get what you pay for?!!

    They might have bought the copyright - he says he has given up and the business has folded. Anyway, best leave weddings to people who know what they are doing. Not for me!!
  9. You get what you pay for?!!

    They don't make Mercury Press and Media look great either - I assumed at first glance that they had taken the pics since they have their name on them.
  10. SERIOUSLY???

    Not sure how far this will be allowed to go comparing with G. But my experience is that Alamy gets better average fees but misses out, as you say, on the occasional biggie. There are some horrible stinking low fees at G as Christian points out. But I feel that to some degree A and G occupy different areas of market, and G is engaged in the front line head-to-head battle with SS. Alamy is obviously also involved but to a lesser degree in this 'price-war' because its market base is different, largely editorial, encyclopedic content, more local less global, with a loyal customer base.
  11. SERIOUSLY???

    Yes, that's why there is a steady stream of new arrivals, especially from microstock. But how many last? I think that stock now is more or less a hobby pursuit for many - not a job and not really a business.
  12. SERIOUSLY???

    I have no idea what point you are trying to make. Is it a kind of 'normalisation' to justify your commitment to microstock? As you say the pressure on fees is already ridiculous without going looking for even lower ones. You ask me to look at what Brasilnut is saying. He is saying his last 15 microstock sales were each for $0.34. The only point I am trying to make is this. Microstock lowers prices. That affects Alamy and all similar stock agencies. Microstockers who get fed up with microstock cannot expect Alamy to exist in some sort of insulated bubble and rescue them from their microstock decisions which have created low prices in the first place. Anyway, we are all free to do as we want. I'll stick with Alamy and keep away from microstock.
  13. SERIOUSLY???

    The point is simple. Christian is wrong when he repeatedly states that Alamy is a micro. But it won't stop him. He has being saying the same thing for over 10 years regardless of the facts and figures.
  14. SERIOUSLY???

    So you won't do my simple experiment?
  15. SERIOUSLY???

    Okay Christian lets do a little experiment. My 15 most recent sales from Alamy are shown here - gross amounts. Just a straight screen shot no editing at all. Now please do the same for a straight sequence from one of your micros. You could even do some basic statistical analysis to see if the same figures could be from the same 'population'. If your claim is correct the figures should be much the same with the same sort of mean.