Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by giphotostock

  1. 8 hours ago, Ed Rooney said:

    I don't.


    Have I ever taken a great photo? That would not be for me to say.


    I feel that there is usually a large amount of serendipity in great images. But the photographers must put themselves in place to take them. 


    What I try to do is capture very good images. 





    I take utilitarian photographs that others are willing to use and ready to pay me for that privilege. I do not really ponder whether they are great or mediocre.


    • Upvote 3
  2. 9 hours ago, anna182016 said:

    Which sell the most at this moment? landscape, nature, architectural, Food photography weather it's editorial or not? Christmas is coming and it's coldy winter season


    Food is probably a better bet among your list.


    However, none of the genres you've listed are in the most-selling list. At this moment or in the past.


    Best-selling are and have been for many years: business, lifestyle, concepts.




    • Upvote 1
  3. Ours is 1.8 times more than last year.

    Incidentally, DACS amount is 20 times more than the net we have received from Alamy this year so far.

    The amount of tax withheld by the UK government is now large enough to bother jumping through the hoops to get it back (USA-based business here).

    We do license a lot to UK textbooks via a distributor. We probably find only ~20% of the uses...




  4. 9 hours ago, Betty LaRue said:

    The textbooks have mostly gone digital, so no more $300 licenses, something that was great. Now, if we’re lucky to get one, it’s more like $80.

    That is probably true for Alamy.


    US publishers still routinely pay $300-500 for new (ie not reuse) placements. UK publishers - more like $80-100. However, only specialist agencies can command these fees. This is because their model is to source unique images that are not (widely) available elsewhere. When publishers put pressure on the specialists (they do), they do not have much leverage there. Publishers do like to pay microstock prices, but you can't find specialist images on microstock sites.


    Alamy, being an everything and a non-exclusive library can not stand against the downward pressure. It has to cave in to sell.


    We've had our images sold to the same textbook title via Alamy and a specialist. Alamy left money on the table.



    • Like 1
  5. On 05/09/2021 at 00:49, Bryan said:


    You can program some of the buttons on the Sony a6500.  I hardly ever look at the menus now that I have the camera set to my liking, probably only to format the memory card.  The features that you need to use a lot are immediately to hand (or finger) e.g. exposure compensation, or in my case manual focal lens focal length for the in body shake reduction. Further, due to the excellent EVF, you don't have to take the camera away from your eye when making adjustments.


    I am a long term Canon DSLR user, 20D, 450D, 5D and I still have a Canon 5DII, but rarely use it now, and when I do, I struggle to remember how to use the thing. 


    Have to agree with Edo that the compactness of the smaller mirrorless models  introduces you to a new world of discreet photography.

    Bryan and the rest of the folks - thanks for your responses.

  6. For those of you using Sony RX cameras: how do you like the ergonomics of the buttons and the menus?


    I've been an Olympus and Canon user for many years. The buttons were totally intuitive on both.


    I bought a Sony NEX-6 when it came out. I hated it. The buttons and the menus were totally non-intuitive. Some critical settings took some fumbling around to find. Then I would quickly forget where they were, so next time I needed them, it was all the fumbling again...



  7. 2FK7XT0 "Security police in military vehicle control the movement of Uighur (Uyghur) people in their very own land - were anyone who is disliked or flagged by computers may be imprisoned in a detention camp or prison for unspecified crimes or duration."


    And the image shows a street intersection with one (what looks to be) police vehicle, stopped in the traffic? Your caption reads like propaganda, not a description of what is in the image. Not sure if that would help or hurt sales on Alamy.



  8. I think licenses per month per 1000 images is a very useful statistics, along with $ per image per year. Not so much to compare to other people, but to assess and, if necessary, change where one's efforts go.


    Case in point is our own statistics and how it affects what we do.


    Our Alamy portfolio is mostly documentary, aka shooting stock-worthy scenes in front of the lens on our walks, drives and travels.

    28 sales over the last 12 months from 2.5K images -> 0.9 sales per month per 1000 images


    Our "elsewhere" (not microstock) collection of market-focused, specialized, produced images:

    584 sales over the last 12 months from 5.6K images -> 8.7 sales per month per 1000 images.


    It makes it very clear where we should focus our future efforts.



    • Upvote 1
  9. In 2008 Alamy licensed one of our images to concierge.com, for one of the "very secondary" pages. Back then concierge.com was a travel web site by Conde Nast, which I think became Conde Nast Traveler, not the present-day concierge.com, which is selling hospitality software solutions.

    The license fee was $100.

    I remember feeling insulted by the amount, given the client's pockets and how popular (=number of eyes) the web site was.


    Fast forward 12 years. We just got a statement from an aggregator agency. There, there's a bunch of licenses from G. for 1 (one) cent ($0.01) each. Our commission is 50%. They round our commission up, so we do get a whole (!) cent per license. I think that sets the new low record. We'll have to write to the aggregator and politely ask what kinds of rights G. grants for 1 cent.


    How things have changed. :(



    • Sad 1
  10. On 31/03/2021 at 01:08, GeoffK said:

    Shoots could be a little more high key.


    Remember that business, concept and family are top genres.


    Style. Here's an example of your high key image: 2EE1RGF. Do the rest with the same lighting style. Specifically 2EE1RGF and others would sell 15 years ago, however by now microstock is full of "hands with warm coffee mug" shots.


    You seem to have some willing models. You could do more lifestyle shots, aka "ordinary-ooking but attractive people doing everyday things". It is another genre consistently in demand. To have saleable shots your models need to look less posed and you have to use better light, see above on high key. And yes, planning your shots, as Geoff mentioned.



  11. Of course, it is the main tool that drives shoots.

    The shoot list is a living document, currently 15 pages long. Line items get added when market research is done, then the list is re-arranged and prioritized. When specific line items are completed, they get deleted.

    There's a separate file with more detailed research for those line items that really need elaboration.


    PS All studio work, we have not done location shooting for years...

    • Like 1
    • Upvote 1
  12. On 01/07/2020 at 00:21, giphotostock said:

    40 "downloads" total. Average $3.65 per sale.

    There we some $0.10, but there was a large number of sales that were more than previous standard $0.33.

    If anybody still cares, here's the statistics for our images over at SS over the past 6 month, after the new commission structure was introduced.

    images: 50

    downloads: 229

    total net: $122


    These translate to:

    $0.53 net per download

    $20 net per month

    $4.9 net per image per year


    The last number is >20x of what Alamy brings. However, we do have very different images at Alamy (mostly "stock-worthy images we can shoot on our walks, drives, and travels") versus produced-for-a-market images at SS. Granted, the latter require more effort per image than the former, but not 20x more effort.


    As always, disclaimers: one-contributor results are not statistically representative, it depends on the specific images, and your mileage may vary.



    • Haha 3
    • Upvote 2
  13. Tawna,


    Sounds like you are licensing directly to your clients. That's great, so you know what your market is. Developing that market further is going to be the best use of your time.


    I think engaging in a conversation with them about their picture needs is going to be way more effective than chasing Alamy's list.


    Regarding picture needs in general, in the past I've found Getty's Creative guides and Visual trends to be a lot more useful than Alamy's list. These days I am my own creative guide.



  14. Studio shots of models on seamless.

    Blue background looks horrible. Generally colored and darker backgrounds were popular 20-30 years ago.

    Do the same but high key. That is, contemporary style is using a background that light, almost white, maybe even overblown highlights, but, importantly, somewhat graduated (non-uniform). Better yet, more in-demand style is some high-key, out-of-focus background that gives a hint of a location (ex, home, office, beach, cafe, park, city, etc) for context. In the studio you could use some out-of-focus props to achieve that "location" feel.



  15. 12 minutes ago, Kamira said:

    Could you give me a couple of examples of staged but unique photos? When I say every subject is saturated I obviously mean the concepts. Of course you can use models and take a photo of , for example, people getting a massage on a tropical beach (random example). Your models will be unique, their poses will be unique but the concept , which is what matters to the buyer, will be done a hundred times. It doesn't have to be done "exactly the same"


    The case with  "smart clothing" or the Nicaraguan sign language is different. That's indeed  a niche although a very specific one with a very small.market


    There's a videographer at another agency with lots of videos of space ships launching. That's also a niche. Or if you have privileged access to a particular industry. But how many people have that sort of access? That's completely independent of your photography skills or talent.

    For example, see below for how one very successful photographer produces his real estate shots:


    As a result, his images have what is called "high production value".


    Here's another example. Hans Halberstadt, a known photographer specializing in US military:


    Note the title for one of his galleries: "New production - Oct 2020"


    Your random example is indeed an example of a produced image, but in the over-saturated market. Thus, no, the random example is not going to sell that well.


    If "smart clothing" or "Nicaraguan sign language" are good markets (ie healthy demand and little supply) then go for it. I do not know if they are or they are not, I have not done the research.


    Regarding access, "how many people have that sort of access" is exactly the point. Somebody got that access, right? Getting (ie working out) access to restricted places could be very much part of the photographer's *business* skills and talent.


    This is the line of thought. How many people are going to just walk in into a craftsman shop and make a killer shot of him working? Do you have some friends whose brother's girlfriend knows a craftsman? Could you get an introduction and convince the craftsmen to do (produce) some shots, by, for example, trading photos for their time posing and signing model and property releases? Authentic-looking small business owners in their authentic-looking environments ARE in demand. Do you have a university nearby? It must have some scientists working in the labs? Science images ARE in demand.


    Specializing, researching markets, producing shots is not easy. However, in my experience, it is even more difficult to shoot, process, upload, keyword thousands of images only to sell at the rate of 1-2 per month for every 1000 images.



    • Like 2
  16. On 21/11/2020 at 04:13, Kamira said:

    But now every subject is saturated, even dining POV.

    Actually, taken at a face value, this statement is a very common myth. It may be true if you focus on a market overcrowded with suppliers, like documentary, travel, etc. Anything that "everyone else is shooting".


    However, if you specialize on something that is less crowded and go deep in your coverage of that specialized market, pretty soon you'd start discovering plenty of gaps. That is, shots that are in demand but in short or non-existing supply. Choose a niche, where you have any combination of special access, special knowledge, passion, props, photography technique.


    Further, and in addition, instead of recording reality that already exists in front of you, start producing shots. Set up your shots deliberately: choose a theme/concept/message/mood, pick a location, direct models (if any), choose appropriate props, lights, lenses, etc, etc. Now you've just created a new reality that did not exist before. What are the chances of someone else doing exactly the same? Thus now you have your very own unique shots.



  17. Something like this for stock, in order of demand:

    1. business

    2. lifestyle

    3. concepts


    10. travel

    11. documentary


    If you choose to do #11 aka walk around and document stock-worthy scenes in front of the lens, you'd get the corresponding and disappointing sales. Speaking from personal experience.



    • Like 1
    • Confused 1
    • 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.