M.Chapman

I've been using some Apeman 16MP 1080P trail cameras to catch footage of hedgehogs in the garden. But image quality is pretty rubbish, especially at night (lots of noise). Would definitely be interested in something better. Mark

Crikey!! Not sure why Paypal have branched out in that direction, they'll be offering Lotto tickets next. I wonder what fees they take on every transaction? Mark

e.g. Not imposing a badly worded contract with unreasonable terms on long term contributors Not reducing contributor's commission when re-invoicing Although Alamy may still be seeing a high level of uploads and a minuscule % of images removed or taken to non-exclusive status after the contract change, what Alamy can't see is how many new images are now being submitted elsewhere by long term Alamy contributors. Time will tell whether Alamy have made the right business decisions. I hope they have because I've made a significant investment in time and energy contributing im

cashier checkout operator checkout staff checkout worker sales staff shop worker retail staff shelf stacker shelf stocker sales advisor

For me personally, 90% of my images were Alamy exclusive, so the effect on me, and others like me, is significant. But that's offset by a massive increase in the number of sales being achieved on those sites. I look forward to seeing some results, and have not yet switched more images to non-exclusive because of this "opportunity". Perhaps you will be able to update us on progress in due course, as it's the only reason I've not swapped already all my images to non-exclusive. So why oh why did Alamy remove a key incentive for us

And yet, when Emily (from PA) produced her video update, she assured us that there were no plans to change commission rates. Some inconsistency here? Mark

Did anyone visit the Alamy stand? Any useful information gained? Mark

IMHO Commission rate should be calculated based on Licence start date. These special "use now, declare later" deals that Alamy has agreed are nothing to do with us. Mark

Alamy this is disgraceful! It's bad enough that retrospective first time licences for usages before the new contract came into force only attract the latest commission rates. But to do the same thing if a sale, which was invoiced before the new contract came into force, is refunded and then reinvoiced is outrageous. May I suggest any contributor who agrees emails Emily Shelley at md@alamy.com Mark

Lousy month here so far too. A personal use for a milk cool box on doorstep, then refunded the next day. Alamy may say the customer thought they were buying the physical item and then realised their mistake. I've already added "PHOTOGRAPH!!" into my caption of a photo of a tube of ointment which suffered this PU sale refund several times and it hasn't happened since. I've also had sales on eBay where it's clear the buyer hasn't read the description, just saw the picture and hit "Buy it Now"... Duh.... Mark

Yes, I've no idea why Alamy bothered to patent this. IMHO it's a waste of time and money to patent a "hidden" algorithm. Firstly it tells competitors how your system works, and secondly it's difficult to enforce (because it's hard to diagnose if a competitor has then copied the exact method) without starting legal action against them. Much better to simply keep such algorithms secret and retain evidence that the algorithm was invented and used by your organisation from a particular date (so nobody who files a patent later can stop you using it). Mark

There are actually some patent filings that give an insight into the (possible) way Alamy's algorithm works. https://worldwide.espacenet.com/patent/search/family/034508882/publication/GB2424091A?q=Alamy search results Obviously there's no guarantee that's the way the current algorithm works. But there appear to be some similarities in behaviour. Mark

It's interesting. I'd found the "trick" of adding a new network location to get a fresh set of settings, but dismissed it because your Firefox was working. Anyway the important thing is you're now up and running. Mark

That agrees exactly with what I've seen (the rule of 19). The only additional factor I've seen is that previously zoomed images will get promoted in the results if the same search string is used again. But even then the rule of 19 is still applied. NB. Alamy can, and do, change their algorithm from time to time. Mark

I haven't contributed anything to Alamy since the contract change. I've been submitting to a POD site instead. I'm still waiting to see if I get any (or even hear of any) infringement revenue being generated by Alamy exclusive images. If not I'll be swapping my largely exclusive collection on Alamy to non-exclusive. Mark