Jump to content

Lorenz

Verified
  • Content Count

    9
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Forum reputation = neutral

About Lorenz

  • Rank
    Forum newbie

Alamy

  • Alamy URL
    http://www.alamy.com/contrib-browse.asp?cid={CA0D5C95-C84F-4E80-B58E-6E596D86962D}&name=Lorenzo+Sala
  • Images
    319
  • Joined Alamy
    28 Sep 2015
  1. Many thanks to everyone who share his experiences on the topic! It provides a sound glimpse about what one could expect with RF and RM images here. ..So sales for RF are present, although in any case a small percentage of RF/RM images are sold and it seems that a big portfolio (in order of the thousands) is a must to see some revenue..
  2. I was looking at your images, and assuming you are used to selling on microstock agencies, your images with people's hands have to have releases to sell as RF on Alamy. And when filling in the "How many People" option in Manage Images, you have to count parts of people, not just recognizable people. So your the images you have with hands need to be changed to RM and marked as having 1 person in the photo. Only Alamy can do that, so you need to contact Member Services and they will change them to RM for you. Jill (who accidentally posted this in the wrong thread so is moving it to the correct one now) Thank you I'll fix that asap!
  3. Thank you Adam;) ..I do plan to build a mixed portfolio of RF and RM. I've always done mainly RF. Your words are encouraging
  4. Hi, I'd like to ask about sales of RF pictures here on Alamy, if some contributor would kindly share his experience, just to have a small generic insight. Are there some sales with RF images? Do someone have mixed RM and RF portfolio and can tell differences in number of sales related to different licenses?
  5. Personally I find the three boxes very useful for ordering and prioritising keywords. For instance, if I have an image of someplace with a blue sky I will leave the keywords blue sky in comprehensive because I wouldn't want that image to come up in a search for blue sky alone but I would want it to come up in a search for someplace blue sky. With respect Lorenz, you have only 10 images on line so have very little experience here and I would suggest that you save your ideas until you have a better understanding of how things work rather than just trying to take shortcuts. As has been said, the three boxes give us an advantage over the agencies and lazy contributors so my vote is to keep them. The only change I would make is to have a drag and drop facility. Pearl Thank you Pearl I appreciate what you suggest. I'm indeed a new contributor here, and yes maybe also a lazy one ...at the moment I have 150 images on sale but the number on the left here in the forum shows just ten, maybe it will update correctly with time.. However I'd like to say I'm not taking shotcuts I'm just indicating an area that could get positive upgrades, and the discussion is taking this direction it seems. So my ideas are worth of being expressed at any time I desire, as well as yours. Cheers.
  6. Yes DHill!, why not make it an option to select relevant keywords? I guess you're depicting something like that. The two sistems may stay together and the single contributor could decide to put some keywords in the first 'relevant' box, or with a drop down menu. So basically a small change could be to make not mandatory to split the keywords in sections. Would it make everyone happy?
  7. How would it save A LOT of time? Regardless of the number of sections into which keywords are placed, you're still going to have the same number of letters typed, the only extra time is tabbing or moving cursor to next section . . . Plus Martin's point. EDIT: Martin from Sweden in this case :-) dd Sure I'd spend the same time typing keywords before uploading. But it's easy to see why what I ask would save time...because now we have to chose the relevant keywords for each image, while all you need is a procedure as fast and simple as possible. As pointed out by Martin Wilson, most agencies use one keyword section and it works fine. All of you that are in favor of the three step system have good reasons and stress the point of a relevant keywording that matches the images as it should. But my hypotesis is that it is not necessary to have a time consuming procedure split in three section of keywords to reach that result. Maybe an innovation in Alamy management of keywords and search engine could be considered.
  8. Hi! I'd like to suggest this little big improvement in the keyword management section, though maybe I'm not new in asking this: it would be great if keywords where just one section, not split over three parts. That would save A LOT of time, and the process of managing images would be less tedious. Thanks Alamy staff for your care, L.S.
×
×
  • 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.