Jump to content

All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Past hour
  2. Looks like they've taken a lot of photos of the photographs on display in that exhibit. I've been to that exhibit a couple times when it traveled to Canada and the photography is amazing. But taking photos of the winning photos and then selling them? To me that's unethical. And I'm pretty sure no photography was allowed at the exhibit.
  3. Today
  4. I once saw a mind-blowing exhibit at the Metropolitan Museum of Art about photo editing before Photoshop - negatives may not have lied, but prints certainly could. I'd like to see what else could make that squirrel make such a face, LOL. I'd assume the judges would do some pixel-peeping.
  5. Definitely unethical. Quite immoral IMHO as well. I recall when I visited the last exhibition (entrance is by fee payment and ticket only unless u are a member of NHM) had a no photos sign - wonder if its on the ticket as well.
  6. Yesterday
  7. Indeed it was. Taking a photo of someone else’s highly acclaimed photo in an exhibition (not to mention all the other images from the same exhibition) seems highly dubious to me and I would have thought would open the contributor up to an infringement action. I am surprised that this is acceptable to Alamy.
  8. I presume this is a 'partial refund' nine months after the original invoice was issued, but the formatting isn't like any other refund I've had. https://www.dropbox.com/s/wc8x5o2xjcphvmh/OddRefund.jpg?dl=0 The top screenshot is what I found today, and when I checked back, I presume it refers to that sale cleared on the 14th March in the lower screenshot. I do see an invoice dated 28th Jan for that file. So maybe what happened was, the file sold for $24.03 gross/$12.02 net, invoice issued in Jan 2019 and paid on 14th March. Then somehow a discount has been retrospectively applied of $4.81 which they have oddly accounted for by taking $4.81 off me and then paying me $2.40. Is this just a new way of laying that out, or is my interpretation way off beam? (Don't appreciate ten-month-later discounts, just sayin')
  9. Remember this one that was submitted in a contest and won? best part was the ridicule ones that followed https://www.digitaltrends.com/photography/nikon-photo-contest-fail/
  10. The Photography Show is too big and way too busy for my liking. The SWPP convention which takes place every January in London is much better if you want to have a chat with the various company reps, especially if you go to the trade show on the Friday rather than the weekend days. Several paper manufacturers (Permajet, Fotospeed, Hahnemühle) usually have stands, the reps tend to be knowledgeable and there are often discounts on paper. The trade show is free as well. Permajet are having a free open day on November 3rd in Stratford-upon-Avon with other photographic companies as well. The blurb says there some printing experts attending who will advise on prints 1:1. Might be worth a look if you are anywhere in the region.
  11. The risk is shared between us and the agency. I got an email today telling me a decent-for-me-for-2019-on-Alamy sale from May was unrecoverable due to the company becoming insolvent. So we share the loss 50-50.
  12. Those are impressive numbers. Given your plants specialty, though, I imagine that clients need to do a lot of zooming, perhaps more than with other subjects.
  13. Had a couple of times earlier this year when the rolling zooms count went over the 100 mark, only to fall again the following day. The only one that's stuck in my records is July 2019 when I went to 104 for the month. Currently running at 80 for the rolling month, nearly identical to my last 12 months average.
  14. 2019 is already my best year ever for sales (144 so far). I averaged about 47 zooms per month so far this year (Jan. to Sept.).
  15. No you also have to wait for magazine, newspaper and TV sales to clear as they usually have quarterly payment terms. Its not unusual to find some that should have been reported as a sale being used on a website or in a newspaper being reported as a sale some months later. I had a photo used by a well known travel and lifestyle magazine which was not reported until I prompted Alamy. And know I have not come across another agency (that I use) that operates in this way.
  16. Considering your sales have been outperforming this year, it isn't obvious from your Zoom numbers.
  17. If I ignore the recent mysterious recent surge, then we are pretty similar. I just checked over 12 months from October to October and my average is only 55 (generally not been having a great year).
  18. Actually shooting in York , Maine or York, England should not return for New York, except if you have an image of New Kids of the Block. but that's irrelevant. And the Person shooting New York, will get hit by search for York and derivatives. For example on the actual search for "York Street", 99% of hits were false positives. and again, how as it affected the ranking, if your image is the first one for "York Harbor Beach"", out of 14 pages?
  19. With due respect, Article 12.3 of the contributor agreement, and in fact, the whole article 12, does not specify what you have mentioned, i.e. that Alamy pays out only once it received the payment from the customer (and provided other conditions are met such as minimum cleared amount of 50 USD). It only specifies that the agency pays at after 30 days provided the threshold is met and in which currency. I still don't have a relevant provision. For risk sharing, I guess that's a specific feature of Alamy, since I haven't come across with anything similar with other agencies. Is this possible only for a distributor sales channel under Additional revenue options section of the Dashboard? Exactly what I did before posting here and exactly what they replied (chasing the client). Quite demotivating, I must admit. Not only the sales are very rare and not always for a price as much higher as on microstocks, but you also may end up being hand-cuffed by the end-customer willingness to pay.
  20. Your assuming that this issue affects everyone equally overall. Not necessarily the case. If someone shoots New York scenes exclusively, and never shoots in York, Maine or York, England or anywhere else where there's a York, they're not getting dinged,
  21. Considering it is the first image searching "York Harbor Beach"" i guess it has not been affected
  22. I get really weird combos, but it's the buyers who really matter.
  23. I've been banging on about this for ten years. The real mystery is why Alamy buyers don't complain about their results. Maybe they blame us thinking we're spamming a lot, but you'd think they wouldn't be happy about that either.
  24. but it's a problem for everyone. so in the end it should even out. My "Mosaic Wall" in "Berlin" gets hits on Berlin Wall
  25. The question is, does it just rank lower in a search for New York, or does it get ranked lower in all searches because it has a low CTR because it appears in too many unrelated searches?
  26. I guess for most the feeling is that it's equal for everyone. Also, since your image will never be zoomed on a New York search, it should stop appearing in the search. I truly think the algorithm is the key.
  1. Load more activity
  • 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.