Jump to content

Sheila Smart

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Sheila Smart

  1. John took the words out of my mouth It would make a good print as IMHO its very pleasing aesthetically speaking. Sheila
  2. It took four months from go to woe with just one image in the submission. Hate to think how long it would take for a submission of 100 images!
  3. I have withdrawn one of my earlier snaps and would like to replace it with one I took a couple of days back. Bridgeclimbers on Sydney Harbour Bridge with cloud backdrop
  4. I sometimes put my two cents on this forum - https://www.linkedin.com/groups?home=&gid=1541417&trk=anet_ug_hm if you are on LinkedIn. Bear in mind that its a public forum. Cheers Sheila
  5. Misty Sydney morning Poppies with Bridge backdrop
  6. You would be amazed at what type of images infringers will take. Without wishing to bore the regular forum members, I have one particular image (which, thankfully, I registered with the US Copyright Office almost three years ago) which has earned me a motza (and my US IP lawyer too!). It was a "snap" I took at a friend's swimming pool. It is definitely worth registering images but the problem is which ones? If I start to find particular images being infringed in the US, then I will register the image with the USCO. I cannot claim damages on pre-registration infringements but down the trac
  7. Mount Cook, New Zealand on a rare clear day Brugge street scene Sun setting over Seine at Les Andelys, France - had a great meal in the restaurant
  8. Last year, a up and coming photography site where photographers submitted images in the somewhat vain hope of licensing to buyers who actually found the site (in Sydney, Oz where I live) thought it would be an excellent idea to submit images to local newspapers gratis in order to get traffic to the site. The owner of the site was rightly howled down by pros and non-pros who did NOT think it was an excellent idea! They quickly withdrew the idea! Don't give away your work as it devalues ALL of our work.
  9. The following was only part of the tirade I received from her (I don't know who my "two friends" were, probably from the Copyright Infringement Group I belong to): You got your revenge, your two friends badgered, insulted and slandered me some more and instead of you doing something to compliment me as I did for you, by using that image on my page, you chose to try and ruin me and hurt my public image, thanks so much. Yet, here I am apologizing to you for a wrong I didn't knowingly commit, so out of return respect and as one artist to another, are you all willing to apologize to me for the
  10. What is not covered in this article is what happens if someone else uploads images which are not actually theirs? Thousands of my images appear on Facebook without my authorisation or permission and as Facebook strips metadata (which I thought was illegal), I cannot track the source of the original poster to send them a DMCA. When I find my images on FB, I go through the normal FB hoops to find the copyright DMCA page - they don't make it easy for some reason - and then send them a DMCA. To their credit, FB is quick to act on copyright infringement and then, of course, I get abuse from the
  11. I did a quick tot up of my pursuit of infringers since I registered one particular image (at Carolyn's suggestion) in November 2011. It worked out that one third of the settlements came via Carolyn Wright (Leslie Burns), one fifth from my Canadian attorney and the rest from my own efforts - it helps having a legal background and in the past working for the Canadian IP attorney in the seventies. So, yes it is worthwhile if you have the time and the image is registered.
  12. This is the inevitable result of supplying full size images when the client says they only wish to use it for, say, as above, a 1/8 page. Once they have downloaded the full size image they can pretty much do as they wish with it - for ever. This was discussed on this forum s couple of weeks ago. I realise that in the colour transparency days the clients might do the same, especially if the original, like mine were then, mostly medium and large format. However, libraries then also charged much higher fees and were very pro-active in chasing both licence infringements and 'lost' transparenci
  13. I just received a cheque today from Photoedit (another stock agency based in the US) for $67.50. My Sydney bank will deduct $30.00 from this princely sum and return the cheque (via airmail) to the States for clearing and I will receive the balance in about seven weeks! I emailed Photoedit (who appear to be in the last century in relation to uploading and payment systems) requesting they cancel the cheque and arrange either a direct debit or PayPal, both of which they advise they cannot do. They advised that it would cost them $45.00 to arrange a direct debit with their bank. I pay all my a
  14. A couple of years back, I was contacted by Chris Barton of Photographers Direct (PD) and he asked why I had cancelled a sale (the sale did not go as the client was having problems sending funds) but I was curious why Chris was interested as the prospective sale (according to my StatCounter) came directly from my own website and not PD. I also checked my StatCounter on Photodeck and there was no sign of anyone coming from PD. I advised Chris that the sale did not proceed and he was fine but then I contacted Photodeck and asked why this would have happened without any evidence of the link bet
  15. I have had no problems either buying or selling on eBay and no probs with PayPal (other than the usual scams which arrive in my email inbox occasionally which I just forward to spoof@paypal.com). I have never sold anything on Craig's List but a few months back, someone on Craig's List had put my website to back up their claim that the person was indeed a photographer who was looking for an assistant (according to the ad). I received a couple of emails from wary assistants who were just checking the veracity of the ad. I reported it to Craig's List and they removed the phony ad immediately.
  16. As has been mentioned many times by others on this forum, the problem with leaving my work on Alamy is that it will compete with my own pricing. Case in point - I recently was contacted via Photoshelter (btw, this was the very first nibble I have had on Photoshelter but I do not promote my PS site) by a web developer asking for a price on a particular image (which is exceedingly popular with infringers). I gave him a reasonable quote and then thought what happens if he finds the same image on Alamy which is undercutting me tenfold under this new pricing scheme? Fortunately, the image is un
  17. Hi Ed It's the Soho Arthouse at 138 Sullivan Street and its being exhibited between June 9 - 15 and Paulette says its open Tuesday to Saturday to between 1 - 5 pm. Cheers Sheila
  18. Thanks all. I decided to check out the New York Soho gallery (thanks fotoDogue) and long story short, they are displaying my work at their gallery from 9th to 15th June. I am also looking at local (ie Australian) galleries but I have yet to receive a response to my emails. The Soho gallery seems to be the only one I can find who specialises in "virtual" displays. I cannot locate any in the UK by Googling. So if anyone is in the vicinity of the gallery in SoHo, drop in and let me know how it looks. Unfortunately, I won't be able to attend the opening! Sheila
  19. I'm sorry but opt out of what? Is this some program? What am I missing? By "opt out", I mean leave Alamy entirely (I am not in any scheme to opt out of!) as I am soooooo tired of seeing my work and other Alamy photographers sold off for next to nothing and as soon as Alamy (or any other stock library) licenses my work for single figures for allegedly RM (and stock libraries seem to have conveniently forgotten there is a difference), I will leave what is now a sinking ship called stock libraries and divert my attention to direct licensing where images buyers will still license direct fr
  20. Yes it is totally insane and that is the reason I am seriously thinking of opting out completely! It is just not economic of any pro photographer to accept prices such as these.
  21. The major thing to take into account is that you need model releases if you wish to license them as RF. If you don't have releases, it's academic as Alamy will not license them as RF without them.
  • 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.