Jump to content

geogphotos

Verified+
  • Content Count

    5,874
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

4,657 Forum reputation = excellent

6 Followers

About geogphotos

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    www.geographyphotos.com

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Suffolk, England

Alamy

  • Alamy URL
    https://www.alamy.com/contrib-browse.asp?cid={95B42DF3-1E9B-4C8F-A843-DA54AD10C8AA}&name=ian+murray
  • Images
    76218
  • Joined Alamy
    19 Dec 2002

Recent Profile Visitors

10,255 profile views
  1. Sizewell Suffolk UK, view of a man walking through sand dunes near the Sizewell B nuclear power station on the Suffolk coast, England, UK. Contributor: Michael Brooks / Alamy Stock Photo Image ID: KYH959 https://www.theguardian.com/business/nils-pratley-on-finance/2022/jan/27/whats-plan-b-if-the-government-cant-attract-investors-willing-to-fund-sizewell-c
  2. Brian, You remind me that Bruce Livingstone who started it all with iStock used the pseudonym 'Bitter'. I don't think it was a random choice of name. He had attempted to be a stock photographer and failed. In frustration he started giving his images away for free for other web designers to use ( early 2000s), he encouraged others to do the same. This was all about those cool designers who were charging $$/$$$ for those many people who wanted a website back in c 2001 and who needed images for those sites. iStock was the 'designer's dirty little secret'. They could charg
  3. I have never been opposed to the idea of 'selling for pennies' ( within reason!) as long as the usage is in proportion to the fee. That is precisely what RM licensing is, by definition, all about. Alamy has been telling us that some new sales opportunities are in the pipeline. I would assume that most of that will be about low fees for small uses. I have no problem with that. My 'fixation' on micros has always been based on the licence rather than the fee. It was presented as tapping a new market - so why did the standard licence need to be for a 500,000 p
  4. Thanks for suggesting that work-around Malcolm. It works for me too.
  5. The last week or so I have been unable to log-in to the main Alamy site. The log-in dialogue screen appears for less than a second and then vanishes. I've been having to use Firefox which works straight away. Just wondering if it is just me or if this is more widespread. Thanks
  6. Just trying to understand your thinking. You say that change is inevitable and that we have no choice but to accept it and evolve. That you have been successful at doing that and must have accepted literally thousands and thousands of 10 cent fees. Actually, perhaps hundreds of thousands of such low fees. So why is it so terrible from your perspective when you get a few such fees from Alamy? Perhaps 4 cents is the future and we all need to do more evolving? 😄 But certainly quite happy to leave the discussion at this point.
  7. I thought that I sh**ted spotted that in time.....
  8. Yes, that is why it is sad that so many of these old collections get cherry-picked, broken up and separated from any context. The point you make is one that some academics made about the way Vivian Maier's work was subdivided and essentially treated just as a way of making money. What I mean is that keeping the rolls intact and being able to follow for links between them would show how she worked shot to shot, film to film, how her photography evolved etc.
  9. It's called change. Pocket change.😄 Apparently you can't stop it. A bit like farm labour losing out to tractors. I'm still puzzled why 10 cents is acceptable but 4 cents is upsetting you.
  10. So that overcomes the problem about how you show them to Alamy!
  11. Not wishing to contradict you but simply owning the originals does not give you copyright. Copyright lasts for 70 years after the death of the creator. That might well be the case here but obviously I haven't a clue about the circumstances of your pictures. I buy old Kodachrome slides from the 1950s and 1960s. I need to get written copyright transfer to me in order to be able to offer these images for stock. Unfortunately that is not always possible and I have a lot which are 'Orphan Works' - I don't know who the creator is/was, and even if I do I haven't got written proof of cop
  12. The first consideration is about copyright. In terms of hosting them what about Flickr or similar? Or a trial account at one of the image hosting sites - ask Alamy what they suggest. I have a photo shelter account so was able to use that.
  13. Even if true it hardly explains why those selling at micros should feel hard done by getting micro level fees at Alamy. After all you have willingly helped create such a market. As I explained I am also getting those sort of fees - and I have done the opposite of supporting micros by staying with RM and macros. If you are making five figures elsewhere it does rather beg the question.
  14. I have stopped uploading to the distributor I mentioned previously. I have resumed Alamy uploads and have been working like crazy to catch up with myself. We do have choice over who we supply. As I have mentioned before ( and I always get loads of red arrows) I am mystified by those who willingly support micro stock ( and therefore accept that business model) and then complain about similar fees at Alamy. Surely willingly helping sustain a business model based on low fees ........???
×
×
  • 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.