Jump to content

photocatseyes

Verified
  • Content Count

    27
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by photocatseyes

  1. 50/50 IS a good deal. What is NOT a good deal is if we get half of $5 dollars, or half of $1.65... And waiting a year to get to $50 since it needs to be cleared is far from a good deal...
  2. @dustydingo I don't have a clear cut answer, all your points are very valid. The problem is bigger for small sellers. I can imagine that if one is a big and regular seller the problem not really arises as those probably do have monthly payouts. I think regular is the keyword.
  3. If the customer pays in the beginning of the month and the pay out date is the next month as they only have one pay out date in the month. That whole month is intrest for Alamy. Might not be much if the amount is 50 dollar, but if you take all those small payments in the big pool, it amounts to a big sum. If the customer paid but you are not at $50, for beginning and low selling photographers, it can take months before the cleared funds do get paid...
  4. Indeed... I have far more time spend waiting on money than getting money. Right now, I am 19 cents low of getting paid, but am 7 dollar over the pay out amount, yet it has not been cleared. And that takes till a buyer paying, which can easily take another two months. We truly get the short end of the stick in everything. I bet all those unpaid pennies or thousands of dollars bring in good intrest for Alamy...
  5. As regard being loyal to Alamy to the point of making quality fresh images, I stopped going out of my way to do that a long time ago, just the occasional shoot if it comes my way. It's no longer worth the effort for the merger rewards. Elsewhere, I've just received royalty payments of over £3,000 net for just 6 images, that's a years worth of sales here. Now do you understand? Edited 3 hours ago by Tony Yes, I understand. I wished I could for once have sales for 3000 dollar. I also hear it when you say that going truly out of your way to shoot for Alamy is not worth it anymore, or so it seems. Not when you get paid $1.65 or $3 for an image. We sadly enough do not get 50% or more from our images. Over the last year my payment was far closer to 20-30% by the time distribution and distributor have gotten the lion share of my work. Totally discouraging...
  6. This is a minor step in the good direction. Raining on your parade though with the fact that so many photographs are sold for under 3 dollar and less. In fact, Alamy advertises in a lot of spaces that the going rate is 50/50, while over the last four years I believe I have never recieved 50 percent of the sale. And with the Distributor scheme the balance has even tilted worse for the photographers. In the long run, nobody is truly happy with the low sale prices.
  7. OK, you now have officially lost me... :o((( It now looks as if people with no legal knowledge/small print knowledge could be hurt really bad. Guess it is time for most of us to start thinking seriously about all this...
  8. Converting images from other-agency-non-exclusive to Alamy-exclusive-50/50? Do you know every historic license of those images? Nope Can you report them to Alamy? Nope Will that prevent a buyer who licenses under Alamy-exclusive & later learns of a previous, competing or non-competing usage, from suing YOU??? (because contract puts 100% legal onus on YOU) Most likely: Nope Can I add Shite? Why do I feel suddenly very dumb and stupid? We photographers work so hard, only trying to make a bit of money, we invested heavily in gear and getting to grips with knowledge, yet it feels like we are often pulling the short end of the straw...
  9. Thank you Kevin and the others. I did get an email already, but you are probably right that we will get a small print email in January. With a language that I so struggle with, and not having the means to ask a layer to look into it. Which we probably all should do. I will remember to look in April of 2019 to opt out. Truly sad that the main reason that agencies make money - the photographers - seem to be the lowest point of attention...
  10. Skyscraperfan: When I joined in 2008 the payout line was 300 dollars. As a beginner stock photographer it took months and months to reach that 300 dollar. I will definitely look now to opt out of the distribution scheme... I am sure though that there is a caveat to that too..., for the contributor. Sigh. Jeff Greenberg: I can't even get through the small print, way too complicated for my simple photographers brain. I am sure that Alamy is covered all the way, while all the nasty stuff comes down to photographers. Companies buying lots of photographs from Alamy get a discount, but the discount is taken out of contributor's pay. Or so it seems. That is what my single braincell seems to notice. I am loosing courage real fast now...
  11. Sorry Jeff, I forgot to put the post public. I think you should be able to see the link now with the image...
  12. What is wrong with this picture? Alamy makes a sale of 5.45 dollar for one of my images. Which is in itself a joke already. From that 5.45 dollar 1.63 (30%) goes to the Alamy DistriBUTION Commission, 40 % goes to DistriBUTOR Commission, the photographer gets : $1.64. Do we really need to keep working like that? On top of it all, I do not get paid in January because I have only $49.83 cleared, one needs 50 dollars to get paid. That means I do not get paid before I sell another photograph or get cleared when whoever bought my photograph for five dollars pays. Alamy has the money, the buyer who got my picture for five dollars is good. The photographer's payment is moved forward to another month ... or two... What a bloomin disgrace... And then the ceo announces another cut in photographers pay... Nice Alamy, very nice... I thought the going rate was 60-40, to become 70-30. While if you look at the included account oversight it is NOW already 70-30. That means after February I might get nothing anymore for my photographs... I am sure I will get a reply to my email to Alamy with more poppycock... If it were not so sad we would be laughing tears.https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10216174176100182&set=a.1083581742827&type=3&theater
  13. You are right SShep, I had never seen that before. But ok, the problem is that if they do search for Catherine Lucas they do find those 20 and none of my 2900... Unless you do go to the advanced search field. Which is very annoying... Would that for instance mean that if you search for sheep you get all your pics because sheep has sshep partially? Just kidding, sort of... I am not too strong with the do's and dont's of search engines, so with my simple brain I would think that if I type in the photographers name I also get the photographers work, and not all the other irrelevant search subjects. I will in the future always put my name and username in the tags to be sure... Thank you for your valuable and smart noticing of what was really happening. ;o)))
  14. Thanks Mr Chapman, I will consider this. I had never thought about adding my name to the keywords. I probably could also go back to the link provided by Alamy themselves... Thanks. I know how to tackle this now!
  15. Thanks Spacecadet. Is there a way to avoid hers coming up in my search? Is it possible to pick another search name or a double search name i.e Catherine Lucas Photocatseyes ???? That works... But then it is kind of annoying that people have to click the advanced search to find me... I want the one click way! ;o)))
  16. Hello, slight problem here. Whenever I search for my name Catherine Lucas the search comes up with another Catherine Lucas who has 20 images online. I have over 2900 images online. People who want to search on my name do not find me. What is the best solution to change my search parameters for my name and would I have to change all 2700 images separately? Is it possibile to use the word photocatseyes as search for my images instead of my personal name? Any suggestions? I would be grateful for any insight. Thanks in advance
  17. Well, as an occassional seller, I'd rather pay a small percentage to get my money than to see my money stand on Alamy's bank account for months in a row. On the other hand, if I would be a high seller, and I would have a 200 sale profit every month, I would not mind to pay a certain percentage to get it to me, because a small fee would not hurt as much. It's all relative. I think it should not be a hard thing to accomplish to give people an opt in or out and let them decide at what threshold they want to get paid, 100 or 200, or for that matter 300 if they don't need the money. I have always found it a shame that small sellers who really could use the money can't get it because they just don't sell enough. Common sense people, common sense... And boy would I like to be one of the big sellers. It's as if some of the big selling commenters on these forums like to belittle and offend the small sellers. Everybody wants to sell, that's why we are working for Alamy. And we all want our money as soon as possible... Especially in times like today, where all the little bits help. I have no clue whether my american husband will get a pay check in fourteen days, so the 139 dollar that has been on Alamy's bank account will get us two weeks of food... that is if I could get to it. Just sayin.
  18. I am an existing paypal user and as I said in my first post in this topic, the charge for the reciever is 3 percent. I am worried because Alamy seems to be getting more and more money but the photographers get less and less. To me it seems as if photographers are really at the wrong end of the stick without a real choice. Sure, we can stop uploading, we can choose another agent. Alamy will not suffer short time, we will, as photographers. We seem to have far more duties then rights... Alamy is one of those companies with a management that does not understand the first and best rule of economics: Happy cows give more milk.
  19. I knew I was going to be glad with a dead sparrow. I for one am one of those people who sell occassionally, so for me the lower level of payout is welcome. That is until I saw that I will have to pay extra to get paid via paypal... I do pay paypal already 3 percent on getting my money, and Alamy is already getting a big chunk of my sold photograph, which they got money for almost immediately BTW. My money has been stashed in their account for months now (139 dollar - can't live of it but it's nice to have) so I thought it was wonderful that I was finally going to see it... Now I reread the mail and it starts in November 2013, which will probably mean that I will get my 139 dollar in december, minus the 3 percent for Paypal and the charge that Alamy charges me... Hopefully that won't be 138 dollar or I might have to pay them actually... It's very hard to be motivated to keep posting between QC and the waiting time of our money. Sigh... The water in the end always runs to the see doesn't it... There I was, happy for five minutes at the thought of finally getting some payment, untill I realised that it will be another two months before it is in my account... Sigh again. ;o(((
  20. Thank you so much Betty for your insights. Yes, the D800 is heavy, and I also have the battery grip on it. I do like heavy camera's, they give me some extra support to handhold. Funny enough I often have more blur when shooting with smaller camera's then with the big ones. I had a look at your image and it does look wonderful. It makes you wonder at times why we DO actually take our heavy guns out there... Who knows, maybe I even could have had better results with my iphone... ;o)) This subject was out of my league though, it's not that often that I shoot in such dark circumstances and want to keep the perfect atmosphere as is, without wanting to add flash and tripod to the equation. I sincerely hoped that they would have come out better. It's a lesson learned. I had the 50mm on, 1.8, a very very good lens. My equipment was OK, maybe I overcredited the camera a little, thinking that with a beast like it I could not go wrong. Well I did obviously. An experience to learn from. And hey, I can still use the pics for a personal memento book. It's worth thinking about a small spy camera. Thank you for the advice. I appreciate your words.
  21. Indeed, thin skin and long toes.... I shall move on now. Best thing to do. Wise idea to separate own feelings from QC...
  22. OK, OK... This whole thread can be stopped now because MDM is right: they don't fit the Alamy model. Guess I will go back to the other shots of the trip and forget about Steins... I have read all the comments and suggestions, and taken them in. And I do care about what people write. But can I at the same time still be totally bummed because the pics did not come out good enough for Alamy? And I do know that I have only one person to blame for that: me. Why is it that when someone is looking for some kind of comfort about rejection, there's always a pope or 3 that needs to rub salt in the open wound by stating to the poster that the pics were indeed crappy and lousy... To finish the rub in with "Alamy is always right". Maybe I am just naive, the forum might not be the right place to find such comfort. All I wanted to do was share with fellow photographers and to have a sound board. I shall now retreat in my cave and lick my pride wounds... It just sucks so much to be rejected. DogOnIt.
  23. Thanks for all the input guys. I guess what I needed was the fact that more people get it... Why I shot without tripod and with existing light conditions. My point is that some photographs DO do have a story, even if they are not a hundred percent seen on hundred percent. Most of you cheered me up. Except for Dave who had to rub my nose in the dirt Inside the cabins there is hardly any place to put a tripod in the first place. There seems to always be one co photographer who has to say something that is no constructive feedback at all. Even if the pics are indeed not good enough for Alamy, I still have my memories and I know that the pics can reach a public. Dave, why I am complaining is that technical merit is taken over the story of a possible flawed (not bad) picture. What if Alamy CQ had gotten the iconic images from the landing on the beaches of Normandy by Robert Capa... They would have rejected them... Right??? Does it mean that his pics don't have a story and are worthless? Maybe a possible buyer would be willing to pay 400 dollar for one off my Steins pics. I can dream right? Now I will never know... Both Alamy and myself loose on this. I in the same breath do need to add that I am in no way to compare with Robert Capa. Still, it would have been nice to see the Stein pics in my portfolio, all the more because the day after I was there, the family decided to stop keeping the museum open. Now I need to find another source to try to do something with the pics... I am just totally bummed that they were indeed rejected.
  24. http://photocatseyes.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/SteinsWebGallery/index.html Is where the photographs are. I had a huge discussion with QC this morning because we all know it: scrutinize at 100 percent is the norm. I took those photographs on a recent trip (last week) to New Mexico and Arizona, in 107 degrees, inside without flash because I wanted to shoot with available light to emphasize the atmosphere of the place. Which is dark and gritty with a very magical light. Tripods are not allowed in most public places and I will certainly not log one around in 107 degrees... So I knew that I was going to need some extra luck and a bit of common sense from Quality Control. Of course, they did scrutinize them on 100 percent, and of course, they did not pass. To say I am peeved is the least. I KNOW that the pics need 100 percent viewing for quality control, as we all do. But is it really too much to ask to get this batch in as is, with available light shots and as I see them in my photographic mind? I wonder if the people who do use pics of ghost towns really look at them like we and Alamy do... I worked for a newspaper for 15 years and never, ever, never saw one photo editor look at the pics they wanted in at a 100 percent. Stock is nearly dead, and it is gasping even more for breath in situations like these... Am I the only one to disagree totally with Alamy's QC team in this particular case? Shall I go kill myself? Also, the pics are shot with a Nikon D800, and I find that the machine performs magically well in low light conditions... I was so happy with these pics untill I talked to QC... Now see if this post gets to the forum...
×
×
  • 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.