Jump to content

Newberry

Verified
  • Content Count

    41
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Newberry

  1. 30 minutes ago, MDM said:

    Live news access was removed for a lot of contributors who were not making news sales in spring of 2019 and it was necessary to request access again if that had happened. There was a change in the QC process more recently whereby uploads by contributors with excellent QC records go through much faster if not immediately so that is what has happened with your images. If the images have been tagged properly they go on visible sale as stock as soon as the database is updated (usually overnight UK time). Random checks still occur so there is no guarantee of passing immediately and I believe things have been slower during the pandemic lockdown.

     

    This is not the same as live news images which are sent out to newsdesks and agencies as soon as they go live and are more likely to be seen and sold as news than images that go on the system as stock. If you want live news access then you would need to contact the news team and explain why you need it. 

    Thanks MDM, that's helpful. I heard back from Alamy, and it turns out that there was a problem with my captioning last time I submitted live news, but I was granted access again.

  2. 13 minutes ago, sb photos said:

    Based upon the issue you reported I suspect you will need to contact Alamy, not a quick process during these times.

     

    Just out of interest, were you previously able to upload live news, or have you just been approved?

    I just emailed them. Yes, I have previously been able to upload live news.

    Weird thing is I remembered that last time I uploaded a regular stock photo, it was available for sale immediately after uploading if description/headline metadata was present (if not, it was available for sale as soon as I added info). So I just uploaded the live news photos that way.

    Has that been the case for awhile, that images go on sale immediately, instead of after the day or two approval process?

  3. The "Live News" section is grayed out for me, on the upload page on Alamy web site; the "Stock" and "Reportage/Archival" sections are working normally. Also, I don't see a "live news" folder when logging in via FTP (to newsupload.alamy.com). I am approved for live news contributions.

     

    Anyone know why that is?

  4. I've seen people mention "in perpetuity" licenses, but I don't see that option for one of my RM editorial photos (and I got an email from an editor who wants to use it, but without time limit). 

     

    When I choose editorial/editorial website/duration, I only see the 5 years option; am I missing something? Is that not available for RM?

     

    https://www.alamy.com/bruce-siewerth-former-theater-teacher-at-evanston-township-high-school-image229036237.html

  5. 3 hours ago, Dani Como said:

    Now it looks really good, greetings!
    Do You usually use a fish-eye lens? I've only got a 16mm on FF..

    I use a Canon 8-15mm at 12mm. 16 would work but much easier to shoot with wider lens. With my setup, I only need to shoot 4 shots around, and then I have a small nadir hole at bottom I need to patch. With 16mm you would need 5 or 6 images around, plus one tilted up I think. 

     

  6. 7 hours ago, geogphotos said:

    This has gone off at a tangent. 

     

    Where does the photographer stand when the cameras whirring around - dancing around out of the way? 

     

    Surely the only possible uses are web/digital so high res DSLR images not actually essential?

     

    360 panos are much better quality with DSLR/mirrorless cameras, where you shoot 4 or so photos around, standing behind the camera, and stitch. Single shot pano cameras tend to have flaws like serious chromatic aberration, lack of sharpness and dynamic range, stitching faults, etc. 

  7. 3 hours ago, Dani Como said:

    They are different from these, infact the prices here are higher:
    https://www.alamy.com/search/lightbox/3142072.html

     

    Yeah, one of my links was wrong; I do have photos in that group:

     

    https://www.alamy.com/360-degree-panoramic-view-of-pasadena-city-hall-california-image219619102.html

     

    Prices start at $399; $19 with the same image I had uploaded earlier. Guess I'll definitely be taking down the older images. 

  8. 33 minutes ago, Cryptoprocta said:

    Do you earn a higher percentage directly via Alamy? If so, why would  you delete them?

    Not sure about the royalties yet; presumably I would get a cut from 360Cities and Alamy for my 360s that Alamy sells via 360Cities. 

     

    The reasons for deleting the old ones: 1) they don't show as interactive 360s at this time, and 2) I assume it's not a good idea to have dupe images on Alamy?

  9. I have photos at 360Citites.com and at Alamy. Curious to see how this partnership goes, and in particular wondering what this means for those of us who have photos at both sites. 

     

    Here's the announcement at 360Cities:

    Quote

     

    I already had uploaded a few 360 photos to Alamy months ago, though they weren't interactive on Alamy before now. Now the same image is on Alamy via 360Cities.net, presented interactively. I guess I should delete the original upload? There will be more duplicates for me...

     

    Original Pasadena City Hall 360 upload.HRRJN2

     

    Same image, via 360Cities.net (interactive).  PN8EBA



     

  10. 15 hours ago, Colblimp said:

    I agree with what everyone has said, especially Richard in that our images shouldn't be used for free, etc.  However, how many of you will leave Alamy because of images being given away for free?  None!  My reaction to this is to simply work harder to make more sales and just accept the fact a tiny percentage of our pics will be used without payment.

    Yeah, I doubt many will leave based on this. Which stock agency has better terms? The sad reality is that there is a serious supply and demand imbalance with stock photography. 

     

    Not that we shouldn't gripe or push back on changes, but photographers are not strong negotiating position these days. 

    • Upvote 1
×
×
  • 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.