• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,211 Forum reputation = excellent


About GS-Images

  • Rank
    Forum regular

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location


  • Alamy URL{B5F548C9-EC2C-4EDC-A2F2-E2DEA87CA2D5}&name=Geoff+Smith
  • Images
  • Joined Alamy
    12 Sep 2010

Recent Profile Visitors

3,713 profile views
  1. Spruce up the front page

    I just took a quick look at one of Alamy's major competitor's websites. I'm not thinking of jumping ship but was just curious on how other agencies did things. As soon as I landed on their home page I thought, "WOW". I was greeted by a main image, all of it showing, and it looked stunning. Even as a photographer myself, I was impressed and felt that I wanted to keep looking. The majority of their front page is full of photos, all very high quality and professional, and I can imagine any new potential client feeling very confident in using that particular agency. In contrast, Alamy's homepage is dull, out of date, and often has mostly the same images on for weeks (maybe longer?), the front image cannot even all be seen unless you use a mobile device, and often the main important parts of the image are not even showing on a desktop computer. Right now there are 14 images on Alamy's front page. I am impressed by just one of them. The first images people see surely need to be vibrant, full of life, be unique and stunning, and make new clients feel like they'll get a good product if they use Alamy. I know the images on the front page are showing various type of images available, but they mostly don't strike me as being professional photos of a standard I'd want to pay for. I just don't think they would grab someone's attention. Another point - The main image should be clickable. I suggested that in a previous suggestions thread but the response didn't really explain why it couldn't be done. This is all just some suggestions and is not a complaint or a moan, and not intended to be negative. I just wanted to make those points after seeing a competitor's front page, in the hope that Alamy might consider giving the front page an overhaul. I think the rest of the site is fine, and I've always thought the new(ish) search results page was modern, responsive and clear. It's just the front page. Geoff. A photo of a herd of cows on the front page would be good too.
  2. Where is MircoV?

    Yep it is odd. He posted on another stock photography forum, and was last active there on 26th July. Can't find anything else. Geoff.
  3. Where is MircoV?

    Maybe he got sick of all the moaning? He usually tended to be more positive than the majority of us (me included). I did once wonder if he might work for Alamy, as some of his posts tended to take their side when things went wrong, even though the rest of us were annoyed and frustrated at whatever was going wrong at the time. Maybe he's just a more positive person than the rest of us. I know it was him who started the "Post your positive whatever here" thread, which is a great thread and nice to have here. Geoff.
  4. I'll keep my trap shut about online gambling! Encouraging that is.......anyway, back to the state of stock photography. This "stock is dead" talk all sounds very depressing, but I'm doing ok and so are many others here, despite all the complaining. My sales revenue since 2010 is looking fine, and if the search engine hadn't been in a mess for a few months, that last point would be higher by now. It's slowly rising back up again though. My graph for sales volume looks similar, with the last point dipping just below the point of 2016. So yea, my average gross per license has dropped, but my relatively low number of sales means that it isn't statistically meaningful. I'm posting this to give a positive spin, and show that at least things are looking ok for me compared to the last 6 years. IF you know what you're doing at Alamy (it's taken me a while to feel I know what I'm doing), and have patience, and don't ignore all the advice from experienced contributors, there's no reason you cannot do well at Alamy......let's just hope they don't make any more disastrous changes that stop our best and most relevant images being seen. Geoff.
  5. +1, great idea. I'm not sure how much difference it would make though to the sort of people who use our images without paying. I've seen my own images with the watermark blatantly spread across it being used on fairly large websites. They seem to not be too bothered about it, possibly because they know there's every chance they'll get away with it. We still need an online infringement form! It must be over a year ago I suggesting that to Alamy. Would take a very short time to set up. Geoff.
  6. Image identification

    Thank you very much indeed John. I'm always so grateful that you're willing to give me and others the benefit of your flower/plant expertise. These ones do look lovely. I had another walk through the same park yesterday and they didn't look as colourful and vibrant, so maybe I caught them just at the right time. Thanks again John, Geoff.
  7. Yes I think you're right, and I had my own FAA link in my sig too. I did wonder if we should remove them, but prints weren't available on Alamy in all countries at first, and I'm not sure when they were. They certainly weren't available in the UK when prints were first introduced. Geoff.
  8. 1) I did read all your post Bill. I have heard Alex out and have been interested to hear his points of view, and you'll see many polite friendly responses from me to him in this thread. 2) Writing "The hypocrisy in this thread is stunning" is an intentionally antagonistic comment so isn't a good start. 3) "Until recently many forum members with an FAA link in their signature". That was when Alamy didn't sell PRINTS, so FAA were not in competition with Alamy. Now they are, to some extend, selling prints via another company, and we can no longer post a link in the signature. Perfectly fair. 4) "Someone mentioning their UK shooting guide series of books". I am not aware of that, but a book about how to take photos is hardly anything that would harm Alamy or the contributors. 5) "Geoff promoting his photography by dumping image after image on the forum". Written in an argumentative way, don't you think? As already stated, posting my images, as many of us do, is not promoting competition in any way but in fact could be seen as encouraging clients to find and purchase licenses for our images, benefiting the poster, Alamy, and every contributor who's images maybe seen by someone who has not previously been aware of Alamy. You could also post some of your images here and there Bill - They'd be nice to see. Maybe join in some of the lighter-hearted threads where some of us post fun photos? It's a nice release from the serious stuff and I think it helps create a friendlier atmosphere here. 6) "Philipe positioning himself as the expert on keywording". PhilipPe doesn't need me to fight his battles, but he IS a keywording expert, and I think of myself as one too after years of learning it and changing everything to fit in well with the new systems. You go on to say, "A service he provides to photographers he represents, before he puts their images up on Alamy for a cut of their royalties". He always mentions keywording methods to HELP others USING ALAMY. The benefit is then to Alamy and all contributors, including you, and you might pick up a few tips yourself (not to imply your keywording is poor, but I have never looked so wouldn't know). 7) "Someone informing the Forum they were running a photography seminar". Personally I don't particularly like that but I think I'm the only one, so I keep quiet. Plus I don't see it matters because it will only bring more money to the pot for Alamy, and therefore potentially the rest of us. 8) "A micro-stocker writes a book and puts a mention of the book below his signature". It's the promotion of microstock that lowers prices for everyone, that the majority of us dislike. 9) "For the record, I enjoy hearing about what other Forum members are doing outside the Forum. I think all of the above enhances the Forum, so I am not complaining about any of the above, including the microstock book". I hear you Bill, I read that before my previous post too and appreciated that you wrote it. I am fully aware Bill that, if you have any red arrow allowance left today, I'll get one for this post as I have for others today. I'll leave that up to your conscience. I'm simply responding politely to your points, and if you disagree that's perfectly fine, but it could be done in a nicer way for all the over-sensitive weirdos like me who share the forum with you. No offence intended to you in any way. All just my own opinions as part of the discussion. Geoff.
  9. Image identification

    Amy ideas please? August, UK. They're planted with other flowers. They aren't as tall as they look in this. Maybe about half a metre tall. Thanks, Geoff.
  10. anyone have experience of copytrack

    Not much would surprise me these days. Geoff.
  11. Just thought I'd continue "promoting my images" by "dumping" yet another image here. I'm sure there's a message in this one somewhere, but I can't quite place it. At least it's better than arguing! Just to add - I share my images because I'm proud of them, and they are only available on Alamy, so I don't see why it is a problem and why it's hypocritical. Everyone is free to share their own images, and many do. Geoff.
  12. anyone have experience of copytrack

    I'm wary of these companies. I've had a look at their website, and although this maybe just me being overly cautious, I'm not impressed by the misuse of English. Starting sentences with "And" and "Because" is not correct English, and for a service where precise use of language is critical to avoiding legal issues, it raises red flags to me. I'd still be interested in other people's success with them though. Seems a bit too good to be true that they are that great and can get money from so many countries for only 30% fee. What's the catch? Geoff.
  13. Pseudonym

    I don't honestly know if they're carried over or not (I'm going to check that soon), but the older results may not show up until you get new data? Just a thought but I don't know. Geoff.
  14. Pseudonym

    So it is Measures you're talking about, not the database of images. The new pseudo won't be displayed unless you have views in the date range you have selected. Geoff.
  15. Pseudonym

    That did used to work, and it's why I used different pseudos. I know you've found that it can still work, as we've discussed it before. It isn't supposed to make any difference and it doesn't SEEM to for me since the changes, which is a shame because I found it useful to have a similar system as you have now. I stopped using different pseudos when I suspected my image placement was being brought down by having some pseudos with a poor CTR. Alamy said that wouldn't happen, but I'm unsure about it. LawrensonPhoto - I'm still confused. You referred to the database, but also to Measures, which are different things and work/update differently. Geoff.