Jump to content

Marianne

Verified
  • Content Count

    1,392
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Marianne

  1. Yikes: Actually three posted times. I used the back button and guess it messed things up. Great theme by the way and some awesome images.
  2. Two from NYC ... ... and one halfway across the pond - Reykjavik:
  3. I was freaked out to find some of my images of Hillary Clinton on alt-right sites during the election, with obviously unfavorable content. That's the real downside of stock. I also found good sellers on those freebie sites. It's so frustrating.
  4. So after I changed the captions of three of my images to include the exact search phrase "Cape Cod lighthouse" in the caption, they are now all on page 1 instead of pages 3 and 4. In two of them, I made "Cape Cod lighthouse" a super tag. In one, I did not add it as a super tag and that image is now highest up on the page, though it was lowest on page 4 before. I changed the pseudonym of one of my images from my highest ranked pseudo to the lowest ranked one, without making any other changes, and it is still on page 4, hasn't moved at all. (That pseudo, "MAC Photos" - my initials are MAC - was a big mistake because it is impossible to search for, since it brings up references to the Apple Photo app - it has been highly ranked so I've been removing photos a few at a time, then I get another sale and the rank goes up further since it's got so few photos). Guessing this is a good time to retire it since the algorithms have certainly changed.
  5. I did a search for Cape Cod lighthouse since I have several images taken and uploaded between 2008 and 2016 that fit the search. I found that most of my images seemed to fall between pages three and nine (in a Creative search, I realized after I'd done all the scrolling - when I got to page 9 I stopped). Interestingly, those from my best-ranking pseudo that have been licensed 2-3+ times were further down than some that were never licensed. Some had the three words in the caption and some didn't but that didn't seem to influence their placement either. I studied about 22 of them and could not find any patterns to explain where they ended up. Some had duplicate tags and super tags but even that doesn't explain the order. I went back in and selectively added super tags to a few (deleted duplicate tags in some and not in others) and changed the captions of a couple so the words "Cape Cod lighthouse" are in order. I also moved some to different pseudos. I will await an update of the search engine to see if anything changes. I think at this point I should concentrate on uploading and keywording new work and leave my legacy images as is. I went in and did a ton of super-tagging earlier this year and deleted lots of duplicate keywords. Not sure it's worthwhile working on older images until the search engine stabilizes. I agree that the discoverability index will lead to spamming and it seems like a big mistake. I'm also disappointed that images with super tags such as "New England" will still end up in searches for "England." Kinda defeats the purpose of super tags.
  6. Quote from tarsierspectral - No, I write the words ALAMY in the ISBN field Guess I misunderstood what you wrote initially - Thanks for clearing that up! Another greenie for being so responsive and polite - answering my initial question and explaining what you meant by "writing Alamy" LOL. Appreciated. Thanks too Alex for your answer & explanation (more greenies), and to all of you who tried to help. So many forums get bogged down with negativity and I have to say the people on this one do a much better job of being helpful and staying mostly positive than most.
  7. Never seen such instructions on their website nor when I file the claim. I have not idea what .mht archive file is. When I file the claim the only thing they ask for is 3 ISBN numbers for UK publications. I write Alamy for ISBN numbers and that's it. Only one time they asked me to send them a list of sales (I've been claiming for the past 4 years). Here is what the e-mail from them said last year: "If you could send through those sales that you are claiming for (so UK only licenses), we will review it and then let you know if we can accept it". The didn't ask me for some .mht file. I created my own file with the UK and Worldwide sales from the sales report and got a confirmation that all was accepted. EDIT to add: this has nothing to do with the 10% pot (Bold in original post added) Are you saying that Alamy gave you the ISBN numbers of your sales?
  8. When you are preparing your DACS claim and your image has been used in both hardcover and paperback books with different ISBN numbers, do you count each as a separate use or as one use? I've been counting them as one, but I think I'm wrong. With the deadline approaching hope someone can help. Thanks!
  9. When I have RF images that were licensed to the UK, if they are iQ sales they have info but for all of them I do a reverse image search and I also search by my name on the amazon UK site for books. Recently, I started using Pixsy and they found some more uses for me that qualify. But a lot of my RF images can't be found. Since I have licensed images directly and via other sites for UK books and magazines, so far I'm doing it myself. Re Tax Withholding: If you're in the US, the form you need to file with the IRS which they then send to HM Revenue and Customs costs $85 and has to be filed anew every year. I was going to do it the first year I collected from DACS but when I realized the cost, I figured that I should see how much I collected first figuring it wouldn't be over $425, the break-even point. So far it's cheaper to pay the 20% than file. Looking forward to the day when it's worth filing to get the tax back. EDIT: Actually I was wrong about the RF sale I alluded to earlier, it was for a different image. The image in the book hasn't been invoiced yet. It would be so nice if we knew where our work was going - and even nicer if the publishers self-billed properly. I found a re-use of two of my RM images in searching for DACS, and that's where RM is definitely preferable to RF.
  10. Mine shows Jan 25 on the main dashboard and Jan 27 in Alamy Measures too. I'm on the new IM. Guess it will take a while for everything to be up to date. My views also seem to be down significantly, zooms a bit down, though the most important measure - sales - is good. We'll just have to see how it all works out I guess. There have been other times under the old system where it didn't update for a few days. It'll catch up eventually. You can always check your Balance of account tab to see any sales not showing yet on the dashboard.
  11. I got 93 images when I clicked on the term today. I thought it might be that your search showed "Creative" rather than "Relevant" but mine defaulted to "Creative" too. I'm in the US. Maybe the photographer has them with a German agency and they are restricted on Alamy? Although I thought those restrictions were done away with under the new system, I'm assuming that something like that could still be done through CR - or Alamy could be a distributor for the agency whose photographer took them? EDIT: Didn't see your last post - so what is the answer?
  12. Enjoyed your blog Julie - you had an excellent year!
  13. One less sale than 2015, with gross revenue down by $120 from images licensed, however, when I add in the $$ collected by Alamy for infringements, etc., then revenue is nearly dead even. I only added about 200 images this year and deleted about 70-100, and may well delete about 50 or so of last year's News images I added as I don't see them working for secondary sales now that the US presidential election is over. Average license: $68.05 >25% of my sales were $100 or over, and only one was under $19.99. Already have 2 sales this month and some infringement forms to fill out for Alamy to go after, as well as a large backlog of images to process and upload, so hopeful that 2017 will be better.
  14. I had two so far this year (2017) - both seem like reasonable personal use images - and they were made Jan 1 and Jan 2 while most of the world was off from work. Don't love the amount if of the first sale if someone is making a big print, but if they're using the second on personal greeting cards (fireworks which makes sense for a just-in-time New Year's card), not too bad. Both are huge files however, and way too big for the $19.99 price tag. Still, nice to have 2 sales, albeit small ones, already this year. Maybe it'll start a trend and I'll get one sale a day
  15. Tough competition - lots of great images - I don't envy your having to narrow them down. Happy New Year!
  16. Merry Christmas and Happy New Year! Nice to give people a break this time of year. Thanks for the head's up.
  17. If you want to have an inexpensive macro, both Nikon and I believe Canon make screw on diopters that screw on like a filter over the lens. They magnify what you are looking at and let you get closer using lens quality glass and work quite well. Not quite as well as a real macro but I have some online here. I believe they are 52mm size so you'd need to see what size filter your camera takes (if it takes one) and then get a step up or step down adapter for it to fit if the filter size is close to 52mm. I've used my Nikon 4T and 2 on my Nikon 50mm, my macro 105mm and my 35mm lenses (the filter size is different than the lens mm - those all take a 52mm filter) and also on my Olympus lenses using appropriate step up/stepdown rings. It looks like Nikon also makes a 5T and 6T with a 62mm filter size. There are other Nikons in the series they don't mention like the 2 but here's some info: http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/Nikon-Tseries-closeup-lenses-68725 This was using a legacy 50mm Nikon lens on my old Nikon D70 years ago before I got a dedicated macro: And this was last year on my inexpensive Olympus 40-150mm lens with a step up filter using my Olympus OMD-E1: I'm going to be getting a dedicated macro for the Olympus and also upgrading to the pro 40-150 lens once I sell my Nikon equipment, but I like those little screw on lenses when I am out hiking with my camera and my back isn't up to carrying a lot of kit. Bring your camera with you to a reputable camera store and ask them about these lenses and try them to see if they work for your camera (does it allow a screw on filter?) Also, each lens is for a different focal distance (e.g. 35-50mm or over 100mm) so that's something to consider too. Don't know anything about the Sony but if it takes a filter around 52mm or 62mm you might enjoy getting one of these. Or call B&H or Adorama and ask them. I think they allow returns in 15 days.
  18. It's going to be a lot harder to do it yourself with these changes. Especially for those of us not in the UK. I know one of my images was in Garden World magazine some years back since someone on the forum found it. Would anyone of you UK folks be able to find out the ISBN number of that magazine and let me know either here or by PM? Much appreciated! I found a lot of my book images but for UK magazines it's going to be really tough.
  19. And my husband at the Grand Canyon. Just uploaded this and had to wait for it to be available. When I searched for it for the contest realized I hadn't put it up sooner so thanks for this contest topic NYCat! We only had a few hours there. I really want to go back and spend a couple of days there. No photo can ever do it justice - one of those places that is even more amazing than you imagine. As a beach lover I never expected to fall in love with Arizona and its desert climate. We spent 6 days in Arizona in total and it's my #1 choice as a place to retire to.
×
×
  • 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.