Jump to content

wilkopix

Verified
  • Content Count

    69
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by wilkopix

  1. The new method is 'Save a Copy' just below the 'Save As' option. It was forced onto Adobe by the latest Apple updates apparently.
  2. If you have a bunch of DX lenses already maybe get the D7500 or a secondhand D500. If you go FX the 28-300mm lens is a great all round lens. Not the the lightest lens but certainly saves weight by not having to carry too much else with you. I'd agree with others here, the D600 /610 is a great camera. There are also some quite good deals on secondhand D800 /810s too. I don't think bigger images make better sales on Alamy (well, certainly not for me) .. my photos sell just as well that were taken with a D200 sixteen years ago as some of my current photos taken with a 50mpx camera.
  3. Yep, me too! Suddenly my cleared amount has dropped ... anyone contacted Alamy yet to find out what has happened?
  4. I've just had a PU this month for $ 9.58 ... some really low ball sales this month so far. It's a worrying trend especially as the commission is dropping too.
  5. The chasing is being done by Permission Machine on behalf of Alamy. I really can't see there being much money in it for them when images sell for so little. It usually takes around 50 hours to bring a case to court and with the uplift usually awarded between 2-6 times the normal license fee, its just not financially viable for most infringements. I'm sure it will just be a few emails asking politely to pay up. Better to be non exclusive and do the chasing yourself if Alamy aren't going to.
  6. The Sky Replacement tool in Photoshop is very useful and I can fully understand why Ed is using it on those images. There are a lot of tweaks that can be made with it to match colours etc with the sliders in the dialog box. Once done a lot more can be altered by opening up the layers. You can blur the sky with Gaussian Blur to suit the original image and you can go into the mask and go over the edges of the subject with the brush tool (using white or black depending on the mask) set the blending option to 'opacity' with a very low flow and clean up the edges. Remember to set the opac
  7. Agreed ... I doubt Alamy will bother to explain further. Hard to tell your contributors that a 10-20% increase in profits - by doing nothing, looks good to the board members and shareholders. Great for share dividends and staff bonuses though. Maybe they should invest a little more in their contributors, they are after all what has made Alamy unique in a competitive market place. This latest contract change and rate cut appears by the number of pages on this forum to have been one step too far for many of us loyal and many long term contributors. The goodwill, trust and warm fuzzy
  8. Have you emailed for an explanation? I'm about to .. More of us should probably ask directly (or Alamy please feel free to give us an explanation on the forum). I very much doubt they will change their minds but it would be good to hear why especially as they claimed they had no plans to cut the commission to photographers. I'll be concentrating on my commissioned photography rather than shooting for Alamy.
  9. I've always wondered about this dubious conversion, frequently from Sterling to Dollars and back to Sterling with a 2.5% spot rate conversion .. looks horribly like another deduction from the photographer that goes to Alamy. Maybe if they read forum posts they might care to explain it and why it is necessary for all transactions and not just those in foreign currencies. Thanks for doing the maths Paul, that really is an awful return on our work!
  10. There is now no reason to stay exclusive. Lots of good reasons to go non exclusive. 1. You can put your images with as many outlets as you want to help make up the 20% loss that Alamy are now taking from you. 2. If you sell direct it stops Alamy contacting your client before informing you.
  11. I agree with every word you say. Why are they alienating the loyal, long term and engaged suppliers? As you rightly say it makes no commercial sense. They are actively pushing us to go non exclusive to avoid any conflict with our direct clients and so we can now supply other outlets to make up the shortfall that Alamy have taken from our commission. A bitter pill to swallow especially when the likes of you and I have been loyally supplying Alamy for nearly 20 years each! Simple answer if Alamy are actually listening or have any care for those who supply them
  12. Nope .. absolutely no incentive for anyone to stay exclusive with the drop in commission and the risk of them approaching legitimate direct clients without consulting the photographer first. We may as well farm out our photos to each and every outlet possible to try and make up the loss. After eighteen years of supplying Alamy, of which 99% of my photos were exclusive to them I have no choice but to go non exclusive. It makes no difference with the commission structure now anyway. I'll probably take a break from supplying Alamy. It's no longer the same company that I on
  13. That's micro stock rates .. there are plenty of well established image libraries that are 50/50 split. The problem with Alamy it sort of falls between the two camps. It's promotional material that appears on Instagram, Twitter etc shows high end imagery which other agencies selling similar are working with their contributors on a 50/50 split (often RM). With the lower royalty split Alamy are going to lose the individual contributors supplying this type of material. They are also in danger of losing contributors who supply the type of images that other libraries don't cover as there
  14. Alamy say that they only have a small proportion of their collection as exclusive, so why remove the 50% split for those that remain exclusive? Financially it can't make much difference to the bottom line but it does give contributors some incentive to stay and/or not to spread their images to other libraries to try and make up the loss.
  15. Good point. Please reconsider the 50/50 split for those contributors who want to be exclusive.
  16. 100% agree. Still waiting to hear if they are going to change anything in the new contract to make it fairer to it's contributors. Their decision to cut the commission yet again seems very short sighted. As a supplier it will only lead to poorer and cheaper content produced quickly with the need to distribute it through several agencies to make it financially viable. If you read through Alamy's 'wants' list a lot of that can't be photographed on the hoof. It all comes at a quite a cost to the photographer. The 40-20% commission makes it impossible to recoup enough
  17. Sadly the comission is now either 40% or just 20% depending how much you sell. They have done away with the exclusive to Alamy 50% . No longer any incentive to remain exclusive (unless you sell $25,000 pa with them) ..
  18. 100% agree. The once cuddly, photographer friendly Alamy has completely gone with the new dodgy contract and stupidly low royalty rates. It's all about sharholders dividends not contributors. It's only going in one direction. Loads of reputable agencies out there with fair commissions and/or high sales. Easy enough for anyone interested to research where best to place your images. There is absolutely no incentive to stay exclusive to Alamy .. in fact lots of very good reasons not to, both legal and financial. Think like a business and how to maximise your return on investment an
  19. Last year they wanted to change the royalty structure but half backed down and offered 50% for exclusive content. Then said they had no plans to change it again. Many of us pulled work from other agencies to give Alamy the exclusivity. So in terms of time and lost revenue it's been a complete and utter waste. Obviously not a company to be trusted anymore .. still waiting to see what changes, if any they will make to the contract. They'll probably change that again in a year too.
  20. Absolutely .. Doesn't seem like a good business decision for Alamy. I've now gone totally non exclusive and busily uploading elsewhere (several with 50% split or premium collections with high sales volume). I'll probably be earning a lot more than the 20% I'll lose from Alamy. Seems a shame as I was very happy for Alamy be my main outlet and let me concentrate on my commissioned photography but 50% was my 'line in the sand' for exclusive material. Bit depressing really as I've been with them a long time and liked the 'family' feel of Alamy. Just shows how naive and stupid I've b
  21. I think you have very eloquently expressed how many of us feel.
  22. Maybe so .. but I'd much rather it not be legally ambiguous in the first place also so far no liability insurance will cover the legal cost to find out should they change their mind .. Plus Alamy seem to be quite happy to change their mind when it suits .. such as saying they had no plan to change royalties .. Let's see if they come up with something less ambiguous.
  23. Sadly that is so true. Also it doesn't actually matter what they say it means .. it's what is written in the contract that counts.
  24. You and me both! I very much doubt that any liability insurance will cover those areas mentioned in the new contract. I know mine doesn't. It would appear that Alamy now want a bigger slice of the pie (well most of the pie at 80% for those on Silver!) absolving themselves of all responsibility while leaving the contributor liable for other peoples actions. They have taken away any incentive to supply exclusive material, in fact it is now it is prudent to be non exclusive and spread your content to as many and varied agencies / libraries as possible to m
×
×
  • 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.