Jump to content

Phil Robinson

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Phil Robinson

  1. I've just checked a couple of screenshop pics of mine - eg lastminute.com - and that address is intact in the caption and keywords.
  2. Looking at two of his images, they give the photographer "Jeff Greenberg 2 of 6" and "Jeff Greenberg 5 of 6". I'm guessing he uses 6.
  3. It's basically swings and roundabouts. Some years ago I tried putting all my zoomed/sold images in one pseudo. That ended up near the top of page one, the other was relegated to the last page. That meant the minority of my images (the "best") got viewed more and the others (the ones that hadn't been sold/zoomed YET) hardly ever got seen. I gave up on that and now divide my images according to subject matter. I find it works much better for me. My studio images have remained near the top of page one for a few years, Travel images around the middle somewhere, nature lower down and new sport and news images still finding their level. The truth is I find keywording some subjects a lot easier than others. Ranking is largely about how good you are at keywords and I find it much easier doing studio shots of coins, medals, lumps of rock and banknotes than outdoor shots including all sorts of people, architecture, abstract concepts, weather conditions etc. The ranks of my relative pseudos reflect this. Whatever short-term benefit you get from the new pseudo having a median rank will disappear after the first reshuffle. I think it's important to distinguish between long-term and short-term benefits from playing the pseudo game - this is a long-term business, as we all know. (PS - If I knew which where my 'good' images, I wouldn't bother uploading the others. I find it safest to leave that up to the buyers).
  4. "The images are here with: Google images That's a bit much for me to report. wim" Great work Wim - I'll use that trick more often in future
  5. http://dktripplanner.com/ They do Barcelona (see below) and several other cities. A39X65 Richard Bryant C0BYDH Kevin George BNJXW7 and: Thomas Lehne DA32HF Jon Bower Spain AXJ25P Gregory Wrona DJ3XGA Stefano Politi Markovina D67166 Stefano Politi Markovina CPCMA3 Teithiwr I have one of mine on there via Alamy, plus three others through another agent. It will interesting to see how the fees compare. Interestingly that other agent has also sold some to them via Alamy - glad I'm not signed up to their distribution scheme. They also do London, Istanbul, Paris, Los Angeles, New York, Rome, San Frasncisco, Tokyo and Washington (Prague and Rio coming 'soon'). If you've covered those area - and if you sell via Superstock - it might be worth a look.
  6. Saleswise this is my best month for ages (numbers, not necessarily £££) and zooms are OK. Averaging two sales a day over the last two weeks. But the last 12 months have not been great - hopefully getting back to 2012 levels...
  7. Unless "looking a bit 1970s" is a new reason for failing QC, I don't see the problem.
  8. I've been doing a lot of that recently [DNB4AC, DP34XH, DM1HFF] and I mark them all as illustrations. The more important question is will they sell?
  9. Too bad. Sorry to see you go - but I think I know where to find you. See you there.
  10. I know they can sell, theoretically, as soon as they are uploaded - it was the reporting date that surprised me. Newspapers usually take months.
  11. This one wasn't live news - but at $24.24 it looks a bit newspaperschemy. Only in net revenue so far - I'll find out more details tomorrow.
  12. I've just had a sale reported from an image I uploaded on the 12th December 2013. From the subject and the price I suspect it is a newspaper. Is this a record?
  13. Many thanks for your replies. The website is down at the moment to frozen power stations or something, but I will certainly get onto them. Some of the infringers are bloggers but there are a few gold bullion dealers in there too - should be worth a try. The message when trying to access the website now says "security certificate expired". It's all looking good.
  14. Interesting, Ed. Thanks. I too was expecting more from their amazing search engine. You'd think it would be at least as good as Google image search, or why bother with it? I have found dozens of my photos being used but, like you, have never had a report from them. I have read good things here about them from some people. I'll reserve judgement...... One thing I am wondering about is the $50 fee for each case. If they take 50% of what's left as well, I'm wondering if it's worth bothering. Anyone else?
  15. Hello there I'd like to hear from anyone with experience of dealing with ImageRights for pursuing copyright infringements - I know you're out there. I have found multiple copies of my images on the web, from all over the world, from blogs to commercial sites. The so-called search engine they speak of has found nothing since I joined and I am planning to contact them with a long list of infringements I've found. Do I send them every example and let them sort them out? I know chasing blogs is a waste of time but sometimes there is a fine line between a blog and a commercial operation. And do they only deal with businesses in the US? I have found some from South Africa and Europe. I have the basic (free) package. Am I going to lose most of what they recover in commission? Any help would be very gratefully received. Thanks in advance Phil
  16. I also think it was an odd decision to wind up your business, but presumably, if you sold it, you must have a fair amount of start-up capital. What you need in this business is time. Pictures you take now might start to provide actual income in 6 months to a year. Get some good enough equipment (it doesn't have to be top of the range, but it must be quality) and be prepared to spend a lot of time taking a lot of photos before you see any return. It'll be difficult to make any decisions about how well you are doing before the middle of next year. (and treat any advice from anyone with fewer than 18,000 pics with caution) Good luck.
  17. If the business still relied on film, we'd still be earning the fees we got 10 years ago.
  18. After a really poor few months, if not most of the year, December was actually the best month for quite a while. I hope it's a trend.
  19. Mine have been there since the 21st - no reason to think I've failed. It's just Christmas. I hope.
  20. I've added about 4,000 this year. I calculate the earnings per image using an average image count for the year (15,000) as obviously recently-added images haven't had the opportunity to sell yet. The fall is partly due to the increase in Alamy's cut, of course, but the rest of it seems to be a general decline in fees. I have had almost exactly the same number of sales this year as last (9 fewer) despite the large increase in portfolio. I have had quite a few sales from images added this year - largely to newspapers, and we all know what their prices are doing - so it means my existing stock of photos performed much worse than the last few years. The income per image had been almost identical for the previous three years. As I said, this year down 50%. I picked the wrong year to go full-time. (If anyone knows of a job vacancy for a multi-lingual, guitar-playing ex-librarian with teaching experience and juggling skills, please get in touch).
  • 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.