Jump to content

Paul Mayall

Verified
  • Content Count

    324
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Paul Mayall

  1. I have used DxO from version 5 up to the current Pro 10, there have been improvements over the years, however i have found like most software one has to be careful not to let these programs take over, DxO as good as it is, can do just that.. I also use LR 4, I find LR easier to adjust images with more control than DxO, i would say from my experience that LR is slightly better. Hope this helps, Paul.
  2. I have over 700 images on and around our local tourist area more than anybody else including other agencies, and like Dougie i have to go looking through a few pages before i start seeing my images, one would think that having the majority of images on a certain subject he or she would be on the 1st page. Is it possible to win the Alamy Game? i think only if you are a contributing agency, as a photographer you will be doing well if you get a place. Paul.
  3. It is a fact that many have problems with Alamy QC, i also have my fair share, however if a batch is failed i don't worry about it as the very same images are being accepted elsewhere and licensed, we must remember that Alamy try to have a 100% hit rate of technically high quality material that is how they work. Personally i think they are over doing it as i am sure faults would only be noticed if the faulty images were published at 100%. So for those who struggle just check a little closer before submitting, and if a batch fails it is no train smash, just get on with life, there is more to living than Alamy QC. Paul.
  4. It would seem that Photoclaim will not work with Macrostock or Microstock images, therefore images on Alamy would not qualify. I think this will be a general problem for most wanting to use Photoclaim as most agencies and suppliers are involved with Macrostock and Microstock in some form.
  5. I have been waiting for a claim from 2 months ago, no word from Alamy as yet. Currently waiting for Photclaim to answer some questions. I will post anything that may be positive.
  6. I am currently looking at Photoclaim, all seems good at first however reading between the lines it would seem that they put your claim to a attorney where the infringement has taken place, then the attorney charges fees to the photographer for his /her efforts then a further 35% is deducted from the amount received from the claim. Please correct me if i am wrong, however this is how i read into it. Years ago i was with Imagerights, unfortunately most were take downs, claims were to small to chase, or out of their durisdiction. Yes i am also looking for another service to chase infringements that cost the infringers and not me. Paul.
  7. Just another expensive toy to tempt the unsuspecting photographer into thinking that it will take oustanding saleable images because it has the Leica badge and it costs so much. Not for this old dog, been there done that over the years. My cheap Lumix shoots good enough quality for stock sales, leaving money in the bank. Sorry Leica you won't be getting my money for your latest offering. Paul.
  8. I have recently downloaded a trial version of Piccure image software. It seems to correct sharpness in a very good way without artifacts, i have contacted their support with a problem, so far they have not come back, this could be a sign not to license the product. My question to the forum; is anybody here using or had experience with this software and what are your thoughts? Thank's Paul.
  9. As nice as it would be to have such a camera as a walk around, i think that 24-600mm would be stretching QC, and not only here with Alamy. I am still searching for real field test reviews and final comments with no luck so far, IQ is the most important aspect, however AF speed / noise issues / degree of sharpness at the long end and lack of light fall off etc, have to be good. If the G3X meets professional QC expectations then Canon has a winner, if only as a carry around, time will tell.
  10. I have been searching for reviews test etc on the G3X, so far nothing has made me hungry for this camera, the 24 to 600mm is impressive for what would be a nice carry around, so far to my knowledge there is no software that supports the G3X apart from Canon's own, e.g. DXO has nothing as yet. I feel it is a financial risk at the moment for Alamy stock shooting because it is not on the accepted list. The big against for me is the lack of viewfinder, and paying a 3rd of the price of the camera for the EVF is over the top, i also cannot imagine hand holding at 600mm looking at the display screen and getting a sharp image. My recommendation would be to wait for real world field reviews before taking the plunge, hopefully You Tube will have something in the near future. Paul.
  11. I have only 1 waiting that Alamy contacted me about, it's early days and these claims can take a very long time. Question; are you exclusive to Alamy? otherwise sending infringed images that may have been licensed or (stolen) from other sources might be rejected by Alamy, then again if the images are infringed i would think Alamy could chase them no matter where they came from as most are stolen from the internet as copy and paste. " of course the infringed image would have to be on the Alamy site" Paul.
  12. This is where we are forced to ask over the top fees from the infringes to get the lawyers interested. I would be happy to get the normal fee from a infringe, unfortunately these people know that when they refuse to pay your fee assuming it is under say $500 dollars a lawyer won't touch it, hence they get away with it. Therefore photographers cannot afford to be reasonable and ask for $35 and threatening if you don't pay i will seek legal action and increase the fee to $1000, correct me if i am wrong, once a fee is set it cannot be increased. Paul.
  13. Not sure if i should answer Allan on this one, as i might seem to be daft! Here goes, yes it was a genuine question, now should i have a red face. And thanks to all others who offered their input on this topic. Paul.
  14. Thanks Jason, sorry i cannot find a link to AFAIK, can you supply the link? Thanks, Paul.
  15. Dave, can you tell me if they charged you $50 for a claim that did not come to anything. Thanks, Paul.
  16. Is anybody here using Imagerights free account to chase up infringes, i see where they charge $50 to chase a infringes plus 50% of recovery if successful. Any feedback on this will be appreciated. Paul.
  17. I am impressed with some of the sales ratios here, my measly less than 1% seems very poor in comparing to others, i understand that many suppliers work better for some photographers than others, also topics and where you are shooting, i am starting to feel that i am in the wrong stable, however 9000 plus images and many more to upload i guess i will just keep slaving on in hope of a turnaround. Paul.
  18. Thank you Phillipe, ( "Dear Huppeldepup, I noticed one of my pictures (which you find as attachment) on your webpage www...............com (see screenshot). Could you please tell me where you bought the reproduction rights because I cannot trace any invoice regarding such a sale, not by me directly, nor by any of my agents." ) i may use this or something like it. Cheers, Paul.
  19. Yes Philippe i am a member of Bildkunst, and fully paid member of Verdi, not sure if they can help with a UK infringment but it won't hurt to ask, but 1st i must be sure that the image in question has not been licensed, just waiting on a couple of partners to respond. Thanks, Paul.
  20. For the past 4 weeks i have been chasing a possible infringement of 1 of my images, the infringer in the U.K. answered my 1st mail within 2 days asking for more details of which i then gave url screenshot e.t.c., since then they will not reply, what can i do, i gave them a deadline stating that i will pass it on to others, the deadline has now come and gone. My problem is that the image may have been licensed legally, the last thing i need is to pay a lawyer to find this out, how would you go about it? Thanks to all, Paul.
  21. Buyers like all of us shop around, we all like a good price and bargains when we can get them, sometime though we are forced to pay a higher prices for items that are not easily found, it's the same with picture buyers, when they cannot find what they want in the big archival supermarkets where prices are reasonable and often bargains to be had, the buyers then turn directly to photographers and specialized archives where they will pay the extra cash for what they need, hence (splashing the cash) Well that is my take on it anyway! Paul.
  22. Nothing technical here, just a question, is QC working today bank holiday 25 May or better still has anybody passed QC today? Thanks, Paul.
  23. You are rite dustydingo, it was not from a lawyer, i stand corrected. The question now is where do we stand and are we all in danger of such letters from ImageProtect. I would think that these threatening letters would only apply when a photographer has entered into exclusive contracts with suppliers or signed over his or her rights. Sometime i wish we had a copyright legal eagle on the forum. Paul.
  24. There is money around, i have recently licensed cover images ( elsewhere ) between 250 and 350 Euro, so it is possible. Paul.
×
×
  • 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.