Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

15 Forum reputation = neutral

About PeterLL

  • Rank
    Forum newbie


  • Alamy URL
  • Images
  • Joined Alamy
    26 Nov 2002
  1. I have been following the threads with great interest over the last few days and, while I agree with the great majority of comments denigrating the cuts that are being made to our commission rates and the manner in which they were presented I personally think Alamy has bigger problems than just alienating it’s contributors. I have a modest collection of just over 12,000 images placed with Alamy which nonetheless represents a large investment in time and effort in getting them up and 2018 has been my best year in terms of pure numbers of sales - but not in terms of revenue earned. I have been a contributor since 2002 so have seen pretty much all the changes to our contract over the years. The drop to below 50% may well prove to be a cut-off point for me. However, I mentioned that I believe Alamy has bigger issues. The first of these is the sheer number of images now available, of which, again in my humble opinion, many are of relatively poor quality. Quality control of uploaded images seems to have become an afterthought. Added to this is the extremely poor and often inaccurate captioning and keywording of so many images. Photo buyers cannot be too impressed in having to wade through pages of images that have absolutely nothing to do with the subject they are researching and smacks of a level of amateurism that should not be present in a company that wants to see itself in the top tier of image suppliers. Then I ask myself how much research and development time and money has been spent on the ‘new initiatives’ we have recently seen, namely ‘what should I shoot’ and ‘my portfolio’ - should I mention the word amateurish again? I don’t believe for one minute that either of these initiatives will help me sell a single image license? Alamy seems to be encouraging more and more photographers to join the ranks, diluting the work of it’s existing photographers, and making licensing an image even more difficult, not because these people are supplying better images but because the best images for any given subject are now so difficult to find. If a new photographer is supplying better or unique images that’s great, more power to them, but please no newbies supplying yet more mediocre photography, again it comes back to a much higher standard of quality control. Maybe, by tightening the existing image stocks and improving image quality and keywording, of new submissions it would encourage more photo buyers to the site, who would be prepared to pay better prices for licenses because they don’t have to spend as much time finding what they want and subsequently Alamy’s bottom line would improve, or am I just being naive? I think not. As a professional photographer for nearly 40 years, covering major sports events for clients worldwide, including Olympics and world championships I have survived by supplying quality images and not rubbish! Finally, to return to the subject of the thread, professionals should not accept less that 50% for the use of their creative works. This being the very reason I choose Alamy as the place my images.
  • 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.