spacecadet

Not at all. "Clarity" is just a slider in Lightroom. See above.

Of course the usual travel stuff isn't there- no trip to Split for a start. Not Alamy material, I don't think, but my first proper studio setup in ages for some still-life- natural forms, ivy on dead logs, lilies, and some light and shade in the forest. As seen on the "nature picture" thread. Take a look. I'll repeat one here. Lilies.

More than April's duck, but still not worth reporting. Average down to $20 gross. The next cheque I see after Thursday will probably be from Rishi Sunak.

Could be- try a slightly hotter oven?. It helps if it's well risen- a whole 24 hours- not sure but that might deal with the yeastiness as well. But the searing hot heavy frying pan/hot grill combo does work if you can manange not to burn it. The technique was in the Times on May 23rd. I tried the authentic pressing-out of the base method but it stuck to the table so I just rolled it as usual.

There were.

I would consider that a breach of trust far worse than the commission cut. All the work already done for nothing. It would also cost me about 80% of my sales.

Do you mean RM?

This thread needs a gee up! Lilies bought for a funeral. Flowers are not being donated to hospitals now so I got to bring them back home to photograph. It was me or the rabbits, apparently. Left in colour this time.

Yes it is. In fact I have an editorial restriction on my (incorrectly) RF images. But OP has specifically marked his unreleased images as RF, which no-one else seems to do. This must be something that has passed me by.

There has been a lot of discussion around licence types for unreleased images here over the years, and that's not my understanding or that of many long-term contributors here, but please yourself. I'll continue to stick to the contract. You've quoted from the buyer contract. I'm not going to quote from the contributor contract but correct annotation and full information are conditions. I still don't see many unreleased images marked as RF. I have precisely 16 out of over 10,000, and those only because they have sold so the licence type can't be changed. I put them up as RF incorrectly years ago. I'd need a very good reason to do things differently from contributors who have been submitting here for years.

Well, apparently most contributors seem to follow the rules because most unreleased images on Alamy are marked as RM- for one thing, incorrectly annotating images is a breach of contract- so you'll have to ask Alamy that question if you want to do otherwise. You may well do differently elsewhere, but that doesn't mean you can do the same on Alamy.

Because those are Alamy's rules. It's your responsibility to list correctly. If you don't you could be legally liable. It can't be prevented technically- you self-declare that an image doesn't need releases, so Alamy has no way of knowing if that's true. From the submission guidelines: "If images contain people or property they need to have the right releases to be sold for commercial use." https://www.alamy.com/contributor/how-to-sell-images/understanding-stock-image-licensing/?section=6

I've become a bit of a pizza god as well but yesterday tried the pseudo-Neapolitano "searing hot frying pan followed by hot grill" schtick and it worked quite well. You get a crispier base than doing it on a plate. I could fancy one of yours though.

You can't expect to have sales reported within weeks of joining, but in the long run another reason may be that your images are available on microstock sites. Why would anyone pay tens of dollars here when they can buy the same images for cents there? You're competing with yourself at a lower price point. Incidentally unreleased images shouldn't be listed as RF.

I'm sorry, but it isn't, not in British English anyway.