Phil Robinson

Prague. Over-photographed and now almost ruined by tourism and KFC expansion, but still perhaps my favourite.

Sorry, pressed quote instead of edit.

I do a lot of statues and I always clean them up when possible. Things that look permanent - like dents, holes, imperfections - I leave because they are part of the statue. But anything temporary that might not be there on a different day, or after a rainstorm, is fair game. Anyone doing a story about bird mess on statues would probably want to illustrate it with a REALLY bad example that would be impossible to Photoshop anyway.

I covered the Commonwealth games Baton Relay. Is that sport or news about a sporting event? Can't remember which I put it as in the end.

The $6.55 should just pay for another punnet of strawberries!

+1

I had one of those - it was Mail online.

I tend to put everything as 'requires PR / haven't got one' for anything man-made and identifiable. In other words, if there's the slightest possibility that someone could see it and say 'that's mine' or 'I made that'. I make an exception for ancient Roman coins that I own, but that's about it. Erring on the side of caution, I know, and I hope I'm not losing hundreds of sales as a result.

Shame Novel Use is phased out - you could have bought one of your own images for a dollar and collected $75.50

The last magazine cover I had was $600 - that was to France.

I find the old version really useful. It's much better if you have a lot of similar images and you want to do some cutting and pasting of captions or keywords. I also find the 'is it a cutout?' feature useful. Not because it is in any way relevant, but because I like to check captions and keywords twice. I do them once to get them on sale then, maybe a couple of weeks later, I take another look by selecting the "on sale but needs more details" option. I then go through them again, ticking the 'cut out or not' button, to show ME that I have finished.

Once again the irritating little 'Chat Now' thing is obscuring data and I can't do anything to get rid of or even move it. Yes, I can do a quick subtraction and work the number it's covering up but it's that irritating little blob that I really want to subtract. Is it just me?

As long as they don't have another change in six months to 'Get a life' (speaking as a forum roughage merchant)

As Geoff suggested above, after months of no NU sales, last week I suddenly got 17 in two days, all of which had had sold before. It certainly looked like some sort of accounting exercise, though there have been no announcements and in the Additional Revenue Options section, it seems to be still available to opt into.

33 sales, but 17 of them were NU. At the other end of the scale, 7 of them were above $90 so a reasonable month, but not enough to pay the mortgage. Lucky I haven't got one.

The graph does look depressing, and is very similar to mine, but remember, it's only May. Well, June.

Not editing, possibly filtering.

I'd say the more information available in graphs, the better. The 'most useful' varies from person to person. See above. The most interesting, if not important, stat for me is the earnings per image. Seeing a 10% rise in income is all very well, but misleading if you've doubled your portfolio in that time. Having said that, it's also been the most depressing stat recently. After five years of consistent earnings per image, almost to the penny, in the last year it has almost halved. My net income has remained almost unchanged, but I've grown my image collection by about 50%. Of course, i

When I click on the Book Covers category, 'concept' appears in the search box and the 'portrait' format filter appears as ticked. Maybe that's what makes a good book cover - a vertical concept.

Similar problem for me but the other way round. The figure shows 17 more sales than I've actually had this month. Interestingly, 17 is the number of NU sales that have come through. It a bit ironic if they count double! I still like the new look - it needs a couple of glitches sorted out.

Lets hope the new distributor is more reliable. Brazil used to be a good source of sales, if not payments.

I had 2 to Brazil yesterday, which surprised me. Neither of them had sold to Brazil before. It seems either Alamy have a new distributor there or the old one has paid up what they owed and is being used again. (Probably the former, as the old unpaid sales remain unpaid, at least for now).

The first one is a variety of peony, or paeony, but no idea which type. The second seems to be a kind of nettle, though not a common British stinging nettle, due to those thorny parts on the stem. I'm pretty sure its the nettle family though.

This morning they have shown up on the sales report as "Novel Use scheme2" Son of Novel Use? Novel Use, the Sequel? ....and this morning, three more already.

I'd agree - the graph is a bit misleading as it is. It's 'right' in the sense that it shows valid data, but it isn't really what most contributors want to know.