M.Chapman

Verified
  • Content count

    1,217
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

575 Forum reputation = excellent

About M.Chapman

  • Rank
    Forum regular

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Alamy

  • Alamy URL
    http://www.alamy.com/contrib-browse.asp?cid={72CEF26C-BD33-43B9-830D-8FE28CE464C7}&name=Mark+Chapman
  • Images
    3491
  • Joined Alamy
    12 Jan 2010
  1. +1 I've tried using what should be the most favourable combination of tags and supertags for the best image in a set, but it doesn't seem to reliably place it first. I have a feeling that images which have sold previously (possibly against different search criteria) are given a bit extra "magic sauce" and tend to be placed earlier than those that haven't, but it's hard to know for sure. Mark
  2. Please remove panel in AIM

    Doesn't it disappear altogether when you click "Got It"
  3. Adobe's new LR "strategy"??

    Has to be one of the least informative promo videos ever... But whatever it is, I feel I must have it! Mark
  4. Adobe's new LR "strategy"??

    Thanks. That helps clarify. Mark
  5. Adobe's new LR "strategy"??

    Oops sorry, link now fixed
  6. Adobe's new LR "strategy"??

    Interesting article and following debate here. Adobe unveils all-new cloud-based Lightroom CC, rebrands old application 'Lightroom Classic' Mark
  7. In the green

    3% in green for me. But this is largely due to duplication when Alamy converted the old keywords from main essential and comprehensive field into tags and some phrases seem to have been split. IMHO it's usually a bad idea to "get into the green" by adding 50 tags for 2 reasons. 1) Too many tags will result in irrelevant views without zooms, driving down Alamy rank 2) It makes subsequent editing of tags very difficult as the dreaded "one of your images contains 50 tags" error message will keep popping up. With 3% in the green my sales revenue graph looks like this, so I'm happy to leave my discoverability where it is. In fact I'm baffled as to why Alamy added this measure of "discoverability" in the first place. I'd much prefer it if it simply indicated whether I'd remembered to enter a caption, at least one tag, one supertag and entered something on the optional page. Mark
  8. In the green

    Probably depends if they search for "Sightseer in Trafalgar Square" or Sightseer in Trafalgar Square (i.e. without quotes). If they use quotes the image with the exact matching phrase should come out much higher. If they don't use quotes, then I'm not sure. Should be easy to test though. However, in my experience most buyers don't use very sophisticated searches (e.g. using quotes or additional terms like NOT in their searches). Mark
  9. alternative ALT text

    Not sure I've understood your question. But you might want to Google Exiftool and ExifToolGui which allow you to view and edit pretty much any of the metadata in image files. I've run them on both Windows and Mac to do intricate editing of metadata (e.g. turning lens distortion correction on and off). Hope that helps. Mark
  10. Alamy Financial Results for 2016 now available

    It does feel like "pile 'em high, sell 'em cheap" strategy. Then along comes a more efficient operator who offers better service at lower prices.... The current approach is currently helping Alamy to keep it's head above water, but it's having to paddle faster and faster. The fact that Alamy is surviving in a competitive market is good for us. But, before too long, I feel sure Alamy will need to drive down their costs. OTOH The new search engine now seems to be working well and Alamy has a great diversity of images. Mark
  11. Alamy Financial Results for 2016 now available

    Yes, luckily the cost of the storage is probably falling (per TB) as fast Alamy's collection is growing. Alamy's accounts show that Alamy own just £2.5M of computer hardware (but I'm not sure if they sub-contract the image hosting?). However, maintaining fast response times with a rapidly growing image database and more searching customers 24/7 is probably more challenging. At some point there will be a tipping point where the current infrastructure just can't keep up. The rush to drive sales by adding masses of images (without any restraints on saleability or keywording) will end up costing. Personally I think the efforts of QC should be changed. Instead of doing QC per image on a purely technical basis, it should be QC of contributors themselves. This would include checking both technical image quality of a sample of their images and checking their keywording quality. The idea being to ensure that a higher proportion of the images being added are going to more than pay for their place on Alamy's servers.
  12. Excel

    I think you might find it easier to create a custom Function to do this. Then the operations can be broken down into separate indented statements rather than crammed into a single equation.
  13. Alamy Financial Results for 2016 now available

    The thing that strikes me is just how slim the margins are at 5.6%. It's good that a large proportion of the cost of sales are contributor and distributor commissions which vary according to the level of sales, but I still fear Alamy is vulnerable in a downturn. If I was the new CEO I'd be looking at the fixed costs. For example the ongoing hardware and maintenance costs of hosting a huge and growing collection of imagery and providing fast access to it. Even if business drops these costs are still there. Alamy hosts lots of images that will never sell or "earn their keep" including; duplicate images, lots poor quality images, lots of incorrectly keyworded images. I'd be considering ways of culling images, thereby allowing the collection of good saleable images to grow without driving up hardware and support costs. It should also improve customer experience by providing faster access to the remaining (good) images. It probably wouldn't be cost effective to do this on an individual image by image basis. But might be possible on a contributor by contributor basis. A sample of images from contributors with very, very poor sales (relative to the number of images) could be scrutinised for the above faults and an advisory email sent encouraging them to make improvements. If no action is taken their images could be removed, or their commission level reduced? In a volume business, controlling cost of sales whilst maintaining or improving quality are key. Unfortunately this could mean that commission payments are also put in the spotlight. With an oversupply of images, perhaps commission percentages should be graded according to contributor performance? Mark
  14. This could be of interest. Hopefully with the rise of Pixsy, ImageRights etc, widespread image theft may start to decline, at least in those territories where action can be taken. Mark