Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

51 Forum reputation = neutral

About Homy

  • Rank
    Forum newbie

Profile Information

  • Gender


  • Alamy URL
  • Images
  • Joined Alamy
    29 Dec 2014

Recent Profile Visitors

694 profile views
  1. But they have answered on the first page. They need our money to invest in and improve their website and marketing resources. Apparently 261,976,344 images aren't enough so they need to reach every human being on the planet with more ads. Maybe they also want to launch a space program so they can reach the aliens and make them to contribute with some extraterrestrial images from the galaxies far far away, to go where no photo agency has gone before... "How can Alamy justify earning more from a sale than the photographer? Our core rate for direct sales continues to be 40
  2. Please link the videos to your text so the huge thumbnails don't appear and make this long thread even harder to read and scroll through. It's starting to look like a music video thread. Thanks! (not your fault but the thumbnails get so huge in this forum compared to other places) Edit: Not that I care about the red arrows but in case you misunderstood me I have nothing against you giving tribute to your friends. I'm just speaking from a user friendly point of view for the readers since several videos appeared after each other at once.
  3. Yes, I know you quoted Alamy but wasn't sure what you were aiming at. Yes, true about the different distributors but my numbers are based on the Swedish distributors whom I mainly sell to.
  4. Thanks but what do you mean by that? In my case it's on 70/30 basis and will be 88/12. At best 76/24 if I manage to earn $250.
  5. Damn, you're right. Another nail in the coffin! In the new contract it says Alamy 80% - You 20% so I thought Alamy would split the 80% between them and the distributor but it says "For Content sales via our Distributors after deduction of Distributor fee or commission". Before Alamy took 30%, the distributor 40% and I 30%. Assuming the distributor still takes 40% it means Alamy will take 48% of the original price and I get only 12%!! 18% deduction from 30% to 12% is a 60% income loss!!!
  6. Then you're lucky. I have sold several music images and got 30% of the price because I sell mostly through distributors. Now with the new contract I will get only 20%. Funny thing is that I have mostly sold to Swedish media (where I live) and could get much more if I could sell directly to them but I have to go through Alamy since the Swedish agencies I have applied for have rejected me. They don't want hobby photographers but keep buying my images here.
  7. Unfortunately this happens often and Alamy is fine with it. This and the new contract is so discouraging and makes it harder each time to trust Alamy. I'm in the exact same situation and haven't got a satisfying answer yet. My image was published three months before the license date and Alamy just says "We can’t backdate licence’s, therefore you may sometimes see that there is a licence but the date is a little later than the use". It really shouldn’t be my concern as contributor/photographer how they manage the licenses and whether they can backdate them or not. My only concern is
  8. The article was published on May 19, just 5 days ago. It can sometimes take several months before the purchase shows up and even longer to get paid. It's frustrating but you have to be patient. Sorry i just saw that it was published last year.
  9. Yeah, what's this nonsense about? I tried to contact a person about a license renewal after a previous mail on April 2 and also got this message. 😠
  10. 60-80% cut from photographers with small revenue, like me? And people complain about Apple taking 30% from the developers on App Store. At least Apple changed their cut to 15% for small developers. Here Alamy is doing exact the opposite, increasing their cut from 60% to 80% for hobby photographers. 80% vs 15% says a lot about the company. This is exactly why I feel more discouraged each year from uploading photos. All the hard work just to give 80% of it to Alamy? No thanks! You don't get much help either. I have an image that was published 4 months earlier than the sale date but A
  11. Yes, that's what I mean. As I said they have actually purchased the same image twice with the same description so maybe the other purchase is for those two online articles but in that case it's strange that the license is again for "One use in a single editorial article used within the print and digital versions of a single publication including archive rights for the lifetime of the article." and not for 5 years as it usually is. Other news articles that use my images have a license for 5 years , not on day. The renewal regards the first article with the crane image.
  12. I think you're misunderstanding. This is the newspaper article called "Strictly bum dancing" and newspapers are digitalized for online reading for the subscribers or library visitors. The archive rights is for that purpose. The two articles I have linked to are not the same article in the newspaper. The license is for "One use in a single editorial article used within the print and digital versions of a single publication including archive rights for the lifetime of the article." So as I understand the license is for the article called "Strictly bum dancing" in the paper, online or
  13. Thanks but as it says it's for archive rights, not publishing online as they have: "Digital usage includes archive rights for the lifetime of the article." You don't have to assume they're not using the image. As you can see in the link the article with my crane image is still online and active.
  • 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.