Jump to content

Sheila Smart

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Sheila Smart

  1. I agree with DD that Aussies like to claim Kiwis (bless 'em) when they become famous and its rarely reciprocated but at least the Aussie cricket team  is more or less Australian unlike the English cricket team:


    Eoin Morgan - Irish

    Boyd Rankin - Irish

    Kevin Pieterson - South African

    Jonathan Trott - South African

    Matt Prior - South African

    Ben Stokes - Kiwi


    Nuff said (and wait for the sledging!) 




    • Upvote 1
  2. I still haven't had any sales through Artflakes, so I've more or less stopped uploading. FAA is much more productive and user-friendly IME.


    Speaking of Berlin, I believe that last year two Berliners bought prints thru my FAA website, so I guess they weren't concerned about high shipping costs..



    "First we take Manhattan, then we take Berlin..."

    -Leonard Cohen

    I have never quite understood that line from Cohen!  By coincidence, I have just sold a poster to a German buyer last week via Artflakes for 10 euros, my first sale there since I joined about six months ago.  

  3. Many thanks to John and Sheila,  


    With 5 stars going to the ever reliable Sheila for the link, also hoping you are avoiding the heat.


    Paul :).


    Hi Paul


    Sydney has avoided the heat so far which cannot be said for Adelaide which had temps in the mid 40s C a few days ago.  For the first time since Christmas Day, we had some rain which hopefully will ease the scores of bushfires burning in the south west of NSW. 

  4. hi, new to the whole stock world,


    and have read some posts about non payments etc.


    you mention google search by image, are there other ways you more experienced users try and find out if your images have been used without permission?



    Google Search by Image is in a class of its own.  Tineye does search the web but on a much smaller scale and they rarely, if ever, update their index to remove images which are no longer appearing on the various sites. 

  5. Folks, why are we using terms like "infringers" and "non-payers?" THIS IS IMAGE THEFT! What about reporting them to law enforcement and suing them? As long as they don't have to pay any consequences, they won't change. Also, how about mentioning this type of image theft on twitter when it is found. Hashtag the name of the thief - #The Mirror - or whoever it is and let their viewers know that the publication engages in image theft!!! Until we take bigger steps, nothing new will happen.


    We all feel strongly about this subject and both Linda and I pursue infringers on a daily basis, either ourselves or via our IP lawyers but...putting a name to an "image theft" on a public site like Twitter is asking for a law suit especially if one finds that they have actually paid for the image but the various agencies are tardy in reporting same.  Linda is using the softly, softly, catchee monkey approach by attempting to contact the source directly.  Last year I found one of my images on a book cover and long story short, I found that the publisher had licensed the image and had paid the stock library but the library had "neglected" to advise me some nine months later.  The library in question ended up paying me 100% rather than take their usual commission.  By the way, this was NOT Alamy.  If it were not for Google Search by Image, I would have been none the wiser and the agency would have been 350 euros better off. 


    For a library with tens of millions as long as they get the sale it does not matter who the contributor is. For Alamy their concern will be to ensure that the most salable pictures are displayed first, so new stuff is neither here nor there except in the New tab.


    Martin, for some reason your comment is viewed by one sad, anonymous tosser as so outrageous that they gave you a red arrow . . . sheesh . . .


    Fixed with a greenie.




    Actually, I make a point of negating uncalled for red arrows so those "sad, anonymous tossers" will eventually give up or have the courage to out themselves!

    • Upvote 4
  7. One year is still inexcusable in my opinion.  Perhaps one should pop into a newsagent and pick up a copy of The Times and suggest to them that you will pay for it when you feel like it, say twelve months time, as you have so many other items to pay for and will get around to it some time soon.  I have never understood this slack attitude of newspapers who demand instant images but then have group memory loss about actually paying for them.  A shake up from Alamy management is long overdue.  

    • Upvote 7
  8. For the first time ever, I was THAT close to giving a red arrow to Jan's first post but as Jan has taken the "road to Damascus", I welcome her to the forum.  Unfortunately, like others have already advised, in my opinion she has missed the boat as far as "stock photography" is concerned.  Uploading images which are sharp, well exposed and no dust bunnies and using good gear is the easy bit!  Obtaining fair and reasonable prices for images is the hard part.  



    • Upvote 2
  9. I received the same but I have just advised them again that all of my restrictions (worldwide, editorial, editorial websites) will remain because I would rather not license my work for next to nothing.  As they refused to let me know how much the client was going to pay for a restricted image should I remove the restrictions, I told them that the restriction stays.  I probably "lost" about ten bucks!  



  10. I search one particular image on a daily basis with Google because it gets infringed so much (and it is registered with the USCO thanks to Carolyn Wright's suggestion) but I have also found that if I add a couple of letters to the search box (if there is text in the box), I get a great deal more results.  This particular image usually gets around 100 results but if I add "pd" to the search box after "children swimming underwater", I get approximately 460 results.  I have no idea why the difference.


    Before anyone asks, I added "pd" because the metadata of the original image had "pd" imbedded as it related to Photographers Direct and it was a way of identifying the image for uploading from my hard drive. I kept finding the image metadata on the Net as "kids underwater for PD" and so I thought I would see if Google also picked up metadata.  Sounds complicated I know!



  11. "Selfie" originally emanated from Australia which has a somewhat quaint (for want of a better word!) habit of adding "ie"  to common words such as barbie (barbecue), Chrissie pressie (Christmas present), pollie (politician), tradie (tradesmen) etc etc.  When I first arrived here 40 years ago, it drove me crazy but after a time, I found myself shortening words too. It's slack of course but reflects the laid back lifestyle of Aussies - there you go, there's another one!


    Sheila (yeah, I have to live with that name too!)



  12. Apologies if members have heard this before but...if I had licensed an image as RF to a paper manufacturer which appeared on tissue boxes here in Australia for five years, I would have been $8,000 worse off!  My rule of thumb for those who don't know which to choose is this:  If you feel that the image has the possibility of being renewed time and time again on a project, then choose RM.  If you feel its going to be a one off, then probably RF.  That said, I only license RM.    



  • 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.