Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by geogphotos

  1. You are talking about micro stock sites and RF images. I agree with your comment above about how Alamy allows individuals to make decisions. That is what is happening. There is no 'right or wrong' here. Just different decisions. If it were a practical problem something would have changed.
  2. Possibly you have been reading what is said on RF agencies. I do know that some are very fussy about releases, property, logos, people - but that is because RF by definition is being made available for any and all uses into the future. Not saying anything at all about whether an image has property or people, and making clear that there are no releases, I think does not create any risk because it is not stating anything about the suitability of that image for commercial use. Since I don't know the intended use how can I take any responsibility over it? All I am doing is providing the relevant information for the decision maker. I am very relieved that the old Alamy system has gone where you constantly had to make decisions about whether the image contained anything that required a release.
  3. In 2012 I made a decision to counter falling Alamy income by submitting non-exclusively elsewhere. It worked, for example, if in the past I'd expect to get $1000 a month, I was able to get two lots of approx $500. If one agency was down, the other was quite likely up. Then, of course, Alamy dropped the commission rate by 20% on non-exclusive image sales. I now regularly get 200-230 sales a month in total and all I can say is that I'd need double that to live on it. It is a couple of $ on average per sale with MUCH lower fees at the other place. Looking at the numbers I don't see how this can be made to work in the long term because the competition is going to keep increasing and fees continue to fall.
  4. My view is that the user can see if there are people or property and if I show that I do not have releases the rest is down to them. I use the 'editorial only' button only when I definitely want to restrict usage to editorial, for example, when I have permission to photograph in a museum and have told them the pics will be not used in advertising.
  5. This information is all 'optional'. I tend not to do anything in there except for the exclusive tag which is set by default. If an image does not have releases then it is down to the user to decide how they use it. On the few occasions I actually have a release then I will say so. I did go through and mark all pics of graffiti and modern paintings as 'editorial only' but wouldn't be surprised if I have missed some - I used the search function to find these. From my perspective there just isn't enough time to be ticking all these boxes - I don't even get around to doing Supertags very often.
  6. Look I am not trying to be a goodie-two-shoes and I can't claim to be squeaky clean but..... Alamy does put the onus on contributors to only upload what they have permission for. I guess we are all playing bit of a game here including Alamy.
  7. These days I quite often send an email explaining what I do, who I am, that I live locally ( whatever) how I'd like to take photos for editorial use globally through agencies such as Alamy and GI, which would give them free publicity in books/mags/newspapers, that I don't use flash or a tripod, do not need any special treatment, will pay and enter just like any other visitor. I can't say that it always works but then again when it does I know that I won't be wasting my time. Small museums run by volunteers are generally more than happy to give permission. For example: Many thanks for your email We always encourage photographs around the museum so you are very welcome to come on a day we are open and take photos within the visitor areas No problem with publicising, you can use them for your own purposes Hope that helps Look forward to seeing you at the museum
  8. Helter Skelter inside Norwich Cathedral
  9. Total sales is the gross value - how much clients have paid for your images in total before any deductions. Balance carried forward is the amount that you are waiting to be paid - it includes invoices that have been paid and those that haven't yet been paid/cleared to Alamy Cleared balance shows invoices that have been paid to Alamy, the money is now cleared and ready for payment next month.
  10. You see what having a little moan does? Just had a quick check before popping up to the Sorrel Horse for a pint or four. BRBKT4 sold for $270
  11. What can you say. 3 sales so far today. 100 or so more and I might be able to make a living.
  12. Exclusivity is not necessary for Alamy's business model. Over the last 15 or so years they have hoovered up as many images as they could get hold of from wherever they could find them on the basis that their customers want encyclopaedic coverage in one place. In the past they didn't even care if images were RF or RF micro elsewhere - they could be RM on Alamy. Okay they changed those rules eventually. All Alamy has wanted is more and more pictures. The entire business model has been about piling up more and more images no matter where they come from without any thought about anything else. In my view it seems that charging contributors for non-exclusive content is opportunism and nothing else. Combine that with the short tenure of the CEO Andy Harding recruited from Mothercare and it doesn't seem great. Why didn't he stay? Why did James West have to come back from whatever else he was interested in ( the failure of Manything)? Of course we all want to love Alamy but they do make it hard. It is always such a one way relationship. No loyalty, no reward. You are just a contributor and are not genuinely valued.
  13. Doesn't the buyer just say something like: 'If you sting me on this one that I can't find anywhere else be in no doubt that when I can I will shop elsewhere' or 'This is what I usually pay and if you can match it I will stop looking for an alternative'. But if Alamy is using exclusivity to leverage fees then we really do need to be told that.
  14. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afghan_cameleers_in_Australia The "Afghans" or "Ghans" were camel drivers who worked in Outback Australia from the 1860s to the 1930s. They included Pashtun, Baloch, Sindhi ethnic groups from south-central Asia (present-day Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan), others from the Punjabi, Kashmir and Rajasthan regions of the Indian subcontinent, as well as from Egypt, Persia and Turkey.
  15. Edo I think that the sculpture of sleeping homeless person is Christ - notice the cuts in the feet: Jesus the Homeless, is a bronze sculpture by Canadian sculptor Timothy Schmalz There's about 100 copies around the world. I have the Madrid one. Here is the wikipedia page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homeless_Jesus Is this 'your' one "In April 2019 a statue was installed in the Gardens of Church of Our Lady and Saint Nicholas, Liverpool"?
  16. No doubt there are a few exceptions to what I am about to write but I think that for most people it is true. An opinion that's all. It is not possible to make stock photography into a stand alone sustainable business by being solely exclusive with Alamy. Having said that - Alamy is fine as a hobby business, as a supplementary income, and as something to add er...focus... to a person's interest in photography. Several contributors have commented that this exclusivity thing has actually driven them away to become more non-exclusive. What is worrying is that the commission change was never presented as being part of a business plan but only as an opportunity for Alamy to take more money from us to help company finances. Then in response to a big outcry they worked the numbers and found that they could afford to keep 50% for exclusive images. But what is the strategy? Why should exclusivity boost sales?
  17. Going back a good few years talking to a the owner of a small specialist agency she told me that they stopped their exclusivity submission requirement because they found that so many of their photographers simply lied - even going to the extent of hiding behind false identities - so it ends up being meaningless trying to assure clients. As this business gets tougher and tougher and agencies squeeze more and more I can't imagine that the situation regarding honesty has got any better.
  18. I think that what a lot of us find galling is that there is no actual advantage to being exclusive to Alamy apart from their arbitrary decision to reduce commission from 50% to 40% for those which are non-exclusive. Image buyers are not even made aware which images are exclusive so presumably Alamy don't feel that it actually matters to them. But yes if your images are only on Alamy you should certainly tick the right boxes. There was some vague mention that this loss of 20% would allow Alamy to fund something or other which would work out as a benefit - but who knows what that was all about, sounded like flannel to me.
  19. The tag 'no people' seems to work okay.
  20. Thanks for the confirmations John.
  21. Last one. Is this yarrow Achillea millefolium?
  • 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.