Jump to content

Bill Brooks

Verified
  • Content Count

    1,308
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

899 Forum reputation = excellent

3 Followers

About Bill Brooks

  • Rank
    Forum regular

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Toronto
  • Interests
    Photography, Outdoors, Hiking, Travel, Reading, Philosophy, Shoveling Trouble

Alamy

  • Alamy URL
    https://www.alamy.com/contrib-browse.asp?cid={F0453AA0-D41A-421F-B4D6-F125791B632D}&name=Bill+Brooks
  • Images
    14490
  • Joined Alamy
    03 May 2004

Recent Profile Visitors

2,280 profile views
  1. D21AEM editorial royalty free $$ at exclusive to Alamy 50% commission. I took a Bigfoot series as a joke when bored in 2012. The series sold quickly and just keeps selling and selling. Some joker made the giant footprints before I stumbled on them. Maybe they are made by the real Bigfoot. Who knows?
  2. MizBrown be careful of camera weight. My walk around Canon full frame outfit weighs 12.2 pounds. The weight gets in my way after 2-3 hours of walking. So I am thinking of buying a lightweight walk around Sony a6400 with a full frame equivalent 24-105 zoom lens to use instead of my Sony DSCRX100 version 1, and sometimes instead of my heavy Canon outfit. The DSCRX100 is the right light weight, but often has too much depth of field for my purposes. No perfect, one fits all solution, I guess.
  3. Good subject matter, you have an eye, but sometimes your backgrounds detract. Use depth of field to make your subject matter sharp, and the background out of focus. If a object is not moving, then I will take multiple images from the same angle with f openings from wide open to closed down. That would be F2.8-F11 on full frame. I then select the ideal image with the ideal depth of field when processing on the computer. If the subject is moving around, like in a casual quick portrait, then preset a f opening to render everything from the ears to the tip of the nose in focus, with the background out of focus. On a full frame semi telephoto shot that would be F 5.6 when focused on the eyes. To include costume in focus as well as face then F8. If F8 renders a background, like a wall with a distracting pattern too sharp, then ask your subject to move closer to you and away from the wall. The wall is still in the image but now it is out of focus. For instance an author portrait taken in their study. You do not want to be able to read the titles of the books in the background. Move the author out from behind the desk into the centre of the room so the head and shoulders are sharp but the books in the library are soft enough to provide atmosphere suggesting occupation, but not sharp enough to interfere with the author. If you are shooting news, and do not have that level of control, then pre visualize as best you can before the action happens. You want to hit that sweet spot where your subject is in focus with the subject outline carefully delineated, but the background is thrown out of focus enough that it does not detract from the subject.
  4. Nope, here is what a friend, who is moving all of his JETTY exclusive rf over to exclusive Alamy rf, said to me recently. "Bill (J)ETTY is exclusive rf Images and pays 20 shitty percent on a sale but there is so much subscription clients that sales are like a buck 20. It’s sickening." It seems that we are in the midst of a great migration.
  5. If you are using a colour calibrator puck on your monitor screen, like the spyder, it should also set the whites, blacks, and mid points, (brightness). There would be no need to set the screen for brightness independently of the colour calibration by the puck. Looking at your images they seem to be OK except I would have more shadow detail. This may just be a matter of my taste. Did the dark prints image contain a lot of shadow detail? Like a night scene? Once you colour calibrate the monitor never ever change the brightness of the screen. On the mac under system preferences, Monitor, Display, leave setting alone. Under Color should be the color look up table created by your colour calibration puck. Under Night Shift, settings should be entirely OFF. The microsoft OS probably has similiar settings. If you are making prints the print image you send to the printer should have less dynamic range than an image that looks good on your monitor. The blacks should be less black and the whites less white. A piece of paper does not have as great a dynamic range as a monitor. When it comes to prints I am out of my depth here, so maybe someone else could chip in. I hope they chip in, because I am thinking of getting some prints done myself. THANKS SFL
  6. That is the big problem with the industry today. Non exclusive multiple conflicting sales of the same image means that the high priced exclusive sales cease to exist. Stock agencies used to service advertising clients with exclusive print needs and willing to pay for it. That is a market no stock agency is servicing today. Today the only way to ensure exclusivity is to buy exclusive from Alamy or hire a photographer on assignment. Maybe Alamy can reintroduce the clients to image exclusivity.
  7. Very useful phone booths, I used to leap into them in a single bound to change identity.
  8. Read this this weekend, and thought back to the too good to be true opinions on this thread. https://petapixel.com/2019/03/01/people-call-my-photos-fake-but-theyre-not/ Here is a guaranteed absolutely true no fakery image of mine, taken while waiting for take off at Heathrow last week. https://www.alamy.com/concept-of-drone-flying-dangerously-too-close-to-a-commercial-aircraft-this-is-a-combination-of-two-images-image238565722.html?pv=1&stamp=2&imageid=EFD64697-894D-46A6-8AF8-CA34EDE42C88&p=8620&n=0&orientation=0&pn=1&searchtype=12&IsFromSearch=1&srch=foo%3dbar%26st%3d12%26pn%3d1%26ps%3d100%26sortby%3d2%26resultview%3dsortbyPopular%26npgs%3d0%26qt%3d%26qt_raw%3d%26lic%3d3%26mr%3d0%26pr%3d0%26ot%3d0%26creative%3d%26ag%3d0%26hc%3d0%26pc%3d%26blackwhite%3d%26cutout%3d%26tbar%3d0%26et%3d0x000000000000000000000%26vp%3d0%26loc%3d0%26imgt%3d0%26dtfr%3d%26dtto%3d%26size%3d0xFF%26archive%3d1%26groupid%3d%26pseudoid%3d%26a%3d%26cdid%3d%26cdsrt%3d%26name%3dbill-brooks%26qn%3d%26apalib%3d%26apalic%3d%26lightbox%3d%26gname%3d%26gtype%3d%26xstx%3d0%26simid%3d%26saveQry%3d%26editorial%3d1%26nu%3d%26t%3d%26edoptin%3d%26customgeoip%3d%26cap%3d1%26cid%3d3EE5EG5PK3YZCQBJVSZ4DE7ZQ6TLVPTA26FXEQ9DTVA4EB7GN2GTE9BCFBLNKAN5%26vd%3d0%26lb%3d%26fi%3d2%26edrf%3d0%26ispremium%3d1%26flip%3d0%26pl%3d
  9. To pick up on Chuck's thought. Maybe Alamy will now use the, exclusive to Alamy, part of the Alamy collection to negotiate higher license fees for exclusive images. The non exclusive to Alamy images could be Alamy priced low like the MS they actually are. Create two Alamy collections. One low priced MS, and one higher priced exclusive. This pricing approach would fit in with Alamy's high touch bespoke service, yet retain a low priced MS alternative if the client insisted on it.
  10. RT3H07 Took a spaceflight on a klingon battle cruiser last week, the view of sunrise was spectacular.
  11. PDBHG4 Feb 28 Non exclusive to Alamy at 40% because I cannot guarantee Alamy exclusivity for a quick copy of an artwork on display in a museum Personal use calculator price.
  12. F32PPB $$ Royalty-free exclusive to Alamy at 50% commission Sepia tone added in processing to give subject a more historic look. Folly in city park, near my residence, thereby saving on travel costs.
  13. E6BWJ0 exclusive Royalty-free $$ Alamy direct sale at 50% royalty. Country: Worldwide Usage: Magazines and books, Use in a magazine article (print, digital, electronic), 2,500 circulation, worldwide for 5 years (excludes advertising) Sold on Feb 26 with two more days to go in a good month. I stuck my lens between the bars in the White House fence in the late 1980's. I doubt if I could take this image today, due to the increased security around the White House.
  14. For the photographer I agree RF is RF and can be non exclusive on multiple agencies. Why not, unless there are financial incentives to to the photographer to make their images exclusive RF to one agency? Regarding exclusivity, one of the tier1 microstock agencies is running an advertising campaign with the slogan "Its not stock, its (insert name of tier1 microstock agency here)" So you can see the thinking of the tier1 microstock agency about making their collection unique, and a possible indication of the future regarding image exclusivity. Image exclusivity is not only a way of making their collection unique, but also a way to deprive competing agencies of image content. If you are going the non exclusive RF microstock route, you should not have the same image as RM on Alamy, and as RF on a microstock site. So you could change over exclusive Alamy RM images to non exclusive Alamy RF if you are going to put those same images on a microstock site. Years ago I was with another agency, that sold my identical non exclusive RF images at the same time as Alamy. The other agency told me that they had a new policy because they were relaunching their RF division. I would have to take my non exclusive RF off of Alamy, and make my RF exclusive to the other agency, if I wanted to continue with them for my RF images. My exclusive RM images on that agency were not involved in the new policy. There was no immediate financial incentive to do so, so I declined the other agencies offer, removed my RF images from the other agency, and left my RF images on Alamy. Ironically the other agency then proceeded to put their relaunched RF division on Alamy and other places. Selling images through the other agency on Alamy I would have received only 24% of the sale of their relaunched RF images on Alamy, compared to the 60% I was receiving from Alamy at the time. The times they are a changing. In the future I think stock agencies will offer an extra financial incentive for RF exclusive. Either a financial incentive, or a lot of arm twisting.
  15. Wow. Fantastic. These guys have the creative eye, in spite of the technical problems of shooting underwater. Photography put to its best use. How could anyone not be concerned about the environment after lookin at these images? The image of the Ray by Nicholas Samaras takes my breath away. Which could be a problem considering the location.
×
×
  • 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.