Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by christian58

  1. I think youre a bit out of touch here or wrongly informed! that agency have more credit-sales, on-demand sales and extended license sales then anybody else on this globe! What you are refering to is their subscription-program. I personally clock in between 3-4K per month there, every single month. I personally would find it extremely interesting seeing an Alamy deal with that agency. Not to speak of a super-smart move.
  2. Nah! no matter what crap they come out with or which stupid telephone thingy. The dslr will always be around and used. We are talking stock, right. Outside the world of stock there is a whole world of commercial and assignment photography demanding far superior equipment ( well not editorial maybe )
  3. The S agency you are refering to means quantity! You have no chance what so ever unless you have at least, 1500 images in your port as a min. On the other hand, that S agency seems to be the only one selling plenty, not editorial but commercial stock.
  4. Good to hear from you Chris! Yeah, no agency is ever going to compete with client based work :-) Emailed ya by the way! The day we find an agency that can be trusted 100% will be the day hell freezes over (sorry Alamy). They all have too many agendas, shareholders and investors etc who want more and more of the pie! In fairness, most have been doing really well of late and that includes Alamy..... cheers Alamy, credit where credits due!! Agree! going good here as well and in all the RM, RF and micro. I can't complain. Even two outright copyright sales during November. Oh I can undersand micros, its a sort of pictures off the peg Casbah market mentality, fair enough we all know that. Trouble is that many traditional agencies have no option but to string along with that, lowering prices, royalties, etc or else they're in trouble, revenue wise that is. In the end its like a cut-price super market right across the board, well is already I suppose.
  5. Hi Duncan! the only way you are ever going to get a price justifying the usage or whatever, nowadays is what I posted in the other forum ( you know the one) is when a creative buyer scouts around for a client, might be exclusive-rights, copyright sales as the buyer I had looking for a pic to use in a world-wide logo-type. Why? simply because they have no option but to pay, no matter the cost, the pic must simply be exclusive, period. Also when you have ad-agency creatives, art-directors buying etc, money is seldom an object. A pal of mine, AD at O&M is right now looking for a stone statue of an old man draped in snow and is prepared to pay 5K for it. How about that??? he could most probably find that in any old agency BUT he wants the copyright, etc. In August I did a Land-rover shoot, latest Defender ( 15 year old client), the budget for the shoot was mega big, around, 50K, models, props, this, that and only a day shoot. This they don't mind paying for, same client I told a few month's earlier to use a stock-agency just for fill-out pics in an annual for a meager, $.70 per shot. He thought that was too expensive, HA! There is no way you can win, prices have just been slashed too much and going down and agencies are finding all sorts of ways to save payouts to contributors ( not alamy ) but the micros, one of the leading ones are pushing down higher royalty-members in the search-engine, another one is pushing subs-packages instead of credit-sales. Talk about some day, this will all backfire on them and we wake up on a Monday morning just to find they've gone out of business. all the best Duncan.
  6. Hi Robert! fancy meeting you, Brian and Geoff here! small world!. Robert! are there any better or worse agencies today?? I remember Mark-Getty coming over to London in 96, he stood there in fron of all of us and said " we are going to be the biggest, the best and house the most specialized images in the world!.. well they did actually,..... until the digital cameras and micro came around and that was the end of that. I have a digital file captured with an HD4 and the most sophisticated close-up equipent existing of a surgeon removing a small Glioma, thats a small brain-tumor btw. I thought I was the only one having this file, thought it was unique! and it was! some weeks back I am flicking through the medical pages of two leading micros and what do I see? same shot!! I couldn't believe it, just couldn't believe it. The moral of the story. All of todays leading agencies, may it be RM, RF, Micro or whatever, because of modern technique, copycats, this, that, can cater for anything and everything. I bet there are similars for every picture take. There is no such thing anymore as one agency better or more specialized then the other, not on the whole and buyers certainly are not going to waste any time scouting around. I have actually seen them settling for an inferior picture at the flick of a switch rather then keep looking. sadly, you can't beat them only joining them.
  7. Sorry mate but your post don't sound right, waking up one morning feeling bad and having bad concsiouns, fooling clients, etc and if micro was your starting platform, well then you can't have been too long in this game and if you been fooling clients??? well that means you've been putting identical RM shots on micro as well. Nah! I think you should have another pint and re-think, hehe! You signed a contract and its well and truly laid out there, all clauses, etc, besides, the main four big micro-agencies are NOT just strictly micro anymore they are Macro/Micro with as much credit-sales and Enhanced-licenses as any other RM agency. all the best matey!
  8. same here, I prefer f11, max f16. However in this case there are several reports from pro photographers that the 50DSr give a soft result, even giving the impression of being unsharp and on many various appertures. Might be something in it? Took a few pics this morning just as a test and yes, looking slightly soft but of course after processing, etc, its tack sharp. We are talking straight out of the camera, raw.
  9. Sorry Amril but this doesn't sound right I sometimes supply pictures from a HD5 with a giant 60MP Phaseone back, 4 times the size of my canon 50DSr and I have no problem. Reading the Canon guys who also bought this cam, sure some complain about a soft look but when viewed at 100% its then tack sharp. The 24-70 M1 is known for artifacts such as chroma, CA, distortion, etc, but I have never experienced the M1 giving a soft look. Although I have heard some say the other, the 50DS gives a sharper file out of the camera. Don't know really.
  10. None of them None of them None of them None of them!!!!!..... ....wasted time moaning on forums -- they took action!!!!!!!!!! Blimey Jeff! take it easy will ya! just look at your ECG cardiogram at the bottom of your post, its looking funny.
  11. Hehe! well whats wrong with that?? Tony was a photographer, Tony-Stone, Stan Kanney of the image-bank was a photographer, Mark Getty og GI, was an ex-photographer, Alberto of Pictor was a photographer, etc, etc. I have run my own humble stock outlet for over 15 years! almost all of todays newly founded agencies are run by computer-geeks! you prefer that?
  12. I love the old Cockney slang, sounds great, you want to go down the markets there, jeez talk about slang, sometimes its even hard to understand what they are talking about. I know what you mean, smaller agency. True! I have mentioned it some times before but I have my own digitalized little outfit, small, only some 90000 images and because its often sensiteve industrial imagery, I keep it offline and sell to a whole heap of regular clients, fill-in pics for annuals and things like that. Had it since 1998 and for each year its just getting better, the creative market right now is in fact booming, some agencies I work with are trebbling downloads etc. Even the top two, three Micros are selling creative content like crazy and I am not just talking subs here I'm talking Extended-licenses, credit-sales, etc. I mean Alamy is HUGE! no need to cull the collection but surely it can't be all that difficult for a search to promote good commercial creative material? Oh well, never mind, if they are on a winning formula just promoting editorial content then really, why should they change? no need I suppose. Now go down to the Pig and Whislte Pub, down by the Thames in east-end and have yourself a large Cockney Lager! hehe!
  13. I am shooting it myself! look! I also use a HD5 ( hasselblad) for commercial work, its the same there. Lenses!! don't take Canons word for it when it comes to optics, the ONLY lenses I have found suitable for the new DS Canons are Primes, fixed lenses, all the zoom, bar the 70-300L ( white one) gives in fact slight soft appearance. Downsizing is not a very good option either, it can cauese artifacts, haze, etc, depending on subject-matter. The DSr also lacks an aliasing-filter, which if unlucky can cause certain issues. You would in fact have been much better of getting the 5DMIII, perfect stock-camera! the new DS range 50MP cams are for high-end commercial, studio and landscape work, not really for stock as such, in which case most photographers will use medium-format anyway. These are strictly MP loaded cameras, nothing else. If possible I would change the DSr model to the other DS model, its much friendlier and slightly more forgiving with the optics. best. and enjoy your camera.
  14. Well that remaints to be seen Robert? if they really want to be in the front running they will simply have to not just improve the creative search but the whole section in fact. Got to give way to images of commercial value, thats where the revenue is, have always been. To constantly fall back on old editorial content will just keep it in limbo, status-quo, when the art is to move forward, upwards. This is my third attempt here, over a year back I left here simply because there was little if any interest in the creative section, media. Maybe things have changed a bit? don't know. I took my portfolio from here and stuck it in another outlet and of course it sold very well indeed. The late Stan Kanney, founder of the Image-Bank in the 80,s taught me something very useful. He said, its not just a matter of playing it safe with bona-fide sellers, anybody can do that, the entire art, is to be able to spot potentially good sellers. Big difference!
  15. Looking at the book covers, thats almost unbelievable! not just similars, but same pictures,
  16. Oh I agree completely! technology and the Internet. Look at the old days, Stones, Image-bank, Alamy. Picture buyer phones up and gives a brief, the editor goes to the trannie-shelves and picks out half a dozen trannies and sends them along to the client. Nice personal approach withe knowlegable people. All that has gone with the Internet! The digitala era comes along but whitout the Internet it wouldnt stand a chance. So now we have about a million contributors with little Dslrs running around dumping small ports just about everywhere. Funny thing but I know a small highly regarded agency, they are very expensive and still using the old approach in every way, they are small but flourishing, doing really good business. Just goes to show.
  17. I agree Bob, 100%. I am basically a dayrate photographer, working on commisions, etc have done for 25 years. I could never survive on an editorial day-rate, not a chance in hell but on a corporate/advertising day-rate I can happily survive ten times over. Same with stock-agencies. For reasonable to big money, you simply have to get in with designers, AD's and ad-agencies or else be starving, well not really but you know what I mean.
  18. There is a very simplae answer to all this. When the supply oustrips the demand ( which we all know is happening) we are in trouble and yes, oversupply! as another poster pointed out. When everyone who picks up a camera fancies thyemselves as a photographer, weekend-warriors, happy snappers all just dumping some images here and there it all adds up to this. Of course agencies will accept! they are not stupid, they know that millions of images are valuable assets, so why not! I would! However, we are all quilty, we are all supplying images to a whole string of agencies, very often the same images, we are ourselves aiding to oversaturation, etc, etc. We made our beds! now we have to lie in them. Tisk, tisk!
  19. I have a PPL, ( private pilot license). flying on a commission in the North sea, shooting one giant oil-rig, possibly the biggest in the world. All of a sudden there are these giant whales surfacing beneath us, incredible sights! I asked my pal to take over and started to shoot like mad. I am far from a wildlife photographer but of all the pics I took in the panic, at least I got a dozen sharp ones, one classic with the giant tale-fin splashing down in the water. This happend in February and it was freezing cold and I mean freezing. The experience alone, well I never forget it!
  20. Does that solve the dust problem? Alan Also copying slides using a camera would not solve the dust problem so that is a bit of a diversion really. According to this article on ScanDig (http://www.filmscanner.info/en/Kodachrome.html, Digital ICE Professional works (came with the Nikon Coolscan 9000) as has been mentioned above. The scanner is no longer made and prices for 2nd hand ones are pretty outrageous. ScanDig do the scanning for fairly reasonable prices but are based in Germany. Prices in the UK are generally very high but this one seems reasonable from a quick browse (http://www.a1scan.co.uk/prices.htm), Yes but I was also refering to true drum-scanning, that would solve the dust problem. The Imacon is a decent compromize between coolscan and drum and most of the time it solves the problems. Of course, proper drum scan is the best option and rather expensive.
  21. Nikon scanner won't cut it for professional use. With Kodachrome I use a Drum-scanner with the phaseone software or the Imacon software. I found that to be the only way, especially with Kodachrome 25 and 64.
  22. So zooms are good? we get paid for zooms? if not, why is it good?
  23. Wim! I hate to say it but thats not good revenue at all, not even close to a mid-tier micro. You have a port of 2000 images! should be lots and lots more.Then again these RM/RF agencies ( bar one) have sort of stopped in their tracks, not up to date with the new trendy style of agencies.
  24. Last year I left and deleted my port with two agencies ( 4300. pics portfolio ) and one distributor. Since then my revenues have increased with at least 15-20%. Of course, I don't know if that is a direct result of leaving agencies but still, strange coincidence.
  • 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.