Jump to content

Colin Woods

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

444 Forum reputation = good


About Colin Woods

  • Rank
    Forum regular

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Quebec City
  • Interests
    Travel, reading (classic fiction and WW1/WW2/cold war history), heavy metal, scale aircraft modelling, chess, wine


  • Alamy URL
  • Images
  • Joined Alamy
    16 Nov 2005

Recent Profile Visitors

2,176 profile views
  1. Now that is a really exceptional photo. Great choice to go monochrome as well.
  2. Yes, this is really good. Well seen and executed.
  3. Way too paranoid. If you read on the forum a bit you will see that lots of people have problems with upload speed - me included. Try FTP instead - its super fast.
  4. This happens to us all, but a tightly edited portfolio remains a better bet.
  5. Me too, and am curious as my DACS deals with UK publications only. We'll see.
  6. You have some good images (I like the B&W poplar trees), but one thing I see is that you have a lot of similar images. On the first page there are all those shots of the wisteria flowers. They aren't different enough from each other to merit their place in a tightly edited portfolio. Same with the yellow fish. Just pick the best few and delete the rest. Similars hurt you because they hut your CTR. If you have just two images of, for example, the wisteria flowers and a searcher clicks on one then your CTR for that image was 50%, which will give your portfolio a boost. If you have 20 similars and the same searcher clicks on the same one, then you CTR is way lower. As CTR is a component of your Alamy Rank (which is where in a search your images appear) its best to avoid ways of getting a lower CTR. Also I see that the images of Honfleur and the La Cambe war cemetery are very underexposed. Most of the underexposed photos have a bright spot in them, like a sunlit cloud. Is your camera on spot meter? I say this as I have occasionally left my camera on spot meter and the results can look like this (or the opposite where the whole image is wildly overexposed). They are dark to the point of looking like almost black squares as thumbnails, and I can't imagine an editor choosing them over your competition. A good rule is to search Alamy for the same subject and have a look at the competition. Ask yourself honestly "Why would an editor pick mine rather than these". If you can't find a good reason, its probably not worth uploading.
  7. Is it your browser? I dragged and dropped my three above in Chrome/Mac OS.
  8. Three from me, though I am far from being a sport photographer My son mountain biking - eyes fixed on the next obstacle, perfect attack position. Dad's got his work cut out keeping up now the lad rides a 24" bike. Paragliding in the Chartreuse near Grenoble in France. Kitesurfing on the runway at Berlin's Tempelhof airfield.
  9. I agree. These posts about the discoverability bar are almost weekly, is it not plain enough that it is encouraging people to stuff keywords. For every person that asks here, how many are unaware that they are setting out at an immediate disadvantage because of this 'feature'. and to the OP - I have 17500 images online of which 385 are with good discoverability. Like Phil, I am OK with that.
  10. I don't think any agency will give you that information. If they do then all you have to do is phone the client yourself and negotiate with them. No business is going to give you the means to cut their services.
  11. Yes, absolutely. Keyword what you see in the image - what, where, when, who, why, how and any 'emotional' keywords like calm, happy, fun, etc. Adding keywords just to get green is about the worst thing you can do as it means that your images will appear in more searches, including searches on your less relevant keywords. A part of your Alamy rank (ie on which page you appear in a search) is the ratio of clicks on an image (ie when a searcher clicks the photo to see it in more detail) to zooms (ie when it appears on the page as the result of a search). So if you appear on lots of search results but almost never get clicked your ratio will go down and so will the chances of a sale. Its high time that Alamy realised the worthlessness of Discoverability and the amount of confusion it causes, and dumped it. I personally think Alamy are going for a bit of social media credibility , but Alamy is not a social media site. The Discoverability bar is your enemy.
  12. You have to remember that this is a professional supplier of images, not Flickr or 500px. The arty type captions will get you nowhere. The Babbling Forest Brook, for example. Where is it (country, state/province, region, national park name). Your photo P6ACN0 is another example. It is near the Annapurnas, but it is separated from them by the Kali Gandaki. Which peak is it (its the gorgeous Dhaulagiri, one of my favourite mountains up there with the elegant Aiguille Verte and les Grandes Jorasses), which face (its the yet-unclimbed south face). You have to get these details in, and you have to get them right. Its very easy to spend ages searching the internet to find these details, but you have to do it. There is an insider's secret though - the forum here is full of very experienced and knowledgable people. If you are not sure of the details of something then post an image here and ask and you will get full and detailed information. You have a good portfolio, don't let it go un-noticed by not putting in the less interesting but nevertheless vitally important work of accurate captioning and keywording. You caption should always be in a complete sentence and describe who, what, where, when, why and how.
  13. Before you spend too much time scanning Bill, reading this forum thread is very informative. In fact, I bought the little Nikon ES-1 slide copier which screws onto my macro (60mm) and take photos of my slides. Its very quick and the results are excellent. So much so that my scanner will be going on sale when I get around to it.
  14. On Alamy's Galactic Journey lightbox they recently put up https://www.alamy.com/search/lightbox/3398782.html?utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=Social&utm_content=lightbox there is one in the top row that is one of Hubble's most iconic photos. It says NASA in the caption but is claimed by a photographer, as are all those that appear in Similar Stock Images when you click that photo. Even if they are public domain this is just infringement - I believe that NASA insist that you link back to their Hubble site as a credit. Here is the line from Hubbblesite's copyright page If the credit line for an image lists STScI as the source, the image may be freely used as in the public domain So no, you aren't allowed to just put your name on it and sell it.
  • 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.