Jump to content

alphaomega

Verified
  • Content Count

    44
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

19 Forum reputation = neutral

About alphaomega

  • Rank
    Forum newbie

Alamy

  • Alamy URL
    https://www.alamy.com/contrib-browse.asp?cid={248DAF6C-0CB4-4448-BBAB-24BDB9F3706A}&name=John+Peter
  • Images
    10260
  • Joined Alamy
    05 Dec 2003
  1. I have also seen a fall in zooms, but not sure how much of an indication that would be. A reduction in sales would be a better indication. As I recall it, the zooms used for placement of images come from a select number of trusted Alamy customers only, to prevent contributers from going in and zooming their images to improve placement. The majority of my sales are from 'non zoomed' images, but I simply refuse to believe that the purchasers did not zoom in on the image before purchase. They just do not get registered because they are not in the 'trusted pool'.
  2. I wish I knew how to get Alamy to pass a 'gloomy' image without their 'lacking definition' or whatever description they can conjure up. Here is a real problem for me. I dare not submit an image that is not sharp with good definition. I have seen a couple of rejections in the past where I could not fathom why. Have not had a rejection for years. Maybe I am too critical? I don't want a rejection by 'testing' the border between pass and reject. Proud of my three stars. All images have a date taken and some buyers are actually looking for historic images. I have only deleted duplicates uploaded by mistake. I have again uploaded some old images where I have used the PS haze filter, but left the old images in case a buyer actually wanted the mist or haze. You never know. Buyers are often looking to specifically illustrate something and the 'arty' image is not necessarily what they are looking for. I still think I have an awful lot to learn after 16 years at Alamy as very much a part timer. This is definitely a numbers game. I am certain I have missed a lot of picture opportunities because of my vision of wanting 'good looking' images.
  3. Thanks for your comments above. I think that M. Chapman correctly highlights the kind of issues that put me off Luminar. The four points are key to me. You cannot submit images to Alamy which show fringing or CA. I am also concerned about the lack of effective colormanagement and lens profiles.
  4. Thank you for your reply Colin. There is a hype just now about Aurora competing with LR. I think that there is too much emphasis on exaggreating colours. Not my cup of tea. I have read about a lot of satisfaction with DxO. Actually I am happy with Adobe Cloud technally and find their lens corrections acceptable. Between luminance and colour corrections in Camera RAW I am able to control noise so I think I will just stay with Adobe Cloud for the time being. I think that even the new version of Aurora is not for me. I might look seriously at DxO if Adobe increase their prices again in January.
  5. With the impending 40% left after all the hard work I thought I could save money long term by switching from Adobe Cloud monthly to Skylum new issue with 10% off or less that £50. Looked good but concerned about the lack of lens profiles and suggestions that the colour management is a bit strong i.e. exaggerated colours. I tend to shoot raw and some of my lenses definitely need a lens profile, which are all covered in Camera RAW. Skylum certainly looks attractive, but I do not think that the perspective aspects are as well cared for as in LR/PS. I am not keen on strong colours as I tend to do images that look 'realistic'. Anyone with experience of both products who would care to comment?
  6. So here it is https://www.sony.co.uk/electronics/cyber-shot-compact-cameras/dsc-hx99/specifications#features Sony's new compact camera with a tiny sensor, 8.82mm across, and able to do the 'impossible' as per the specifications. It even has RAW output. I wonder if Adobe will bother. I would love such a camera for a 'walk about' if a longer reach is required than my RX100M3 can achieve. I guess Alamy's immediate response will by Njet, Nein, not in our backyard. Will be interesting to see full size images when they become available. At some point Alamy will probably have to retreat to 'if they pass our quality control' pose. I never imagined, when I started with Alamy, that the quality available with say an RX100 and one inch sensor would ever happen.
  7. I was puzzled by this statement below, where comments are not permitted (Sorry about the double-quote. Not intentional. Can't amend) I have not seen anything posted by the now departed CEO and wonder what is behind this. I am constantly being asked to fill in a questionnaire and I really do not have much to say other than with 145 million images available for sale the prime consideration for me is an increase of the customer base world wide so that those of us who have a decent number of images available on Alamy get a higher ratio of sales to total uploaded. I am not convinced that the addition of millions of extra images, many of which are probably just repeats of what is already available, will do anything other than making selection more complicated for buyers. Filling any gaps and increase active buyers would seem to me to be the way forward.
  8. Interesting discussion. I thought about buying it as it would make my "camera load" easier reducing from two A6000 with 10-18, 16-50 and 55-210 to A6000 with 10-18 F4 and RX100M6 I already have the RX100M3 I have for casual use just in case something turned up. Two things put me against the "upgrade". The RX100M6 from a EU source dealer is £1,149 ($1462). Not a realistic price as far as I am concerned. The RX100 series produce good results easily passing Alamy QC, but the camera is fiddly and the viewfinder small compared with the A6000. Also I have two RX100M1 both with the lens half in/out and not usable. Won't pay for repair as I need a viewfinder. My RX100M3 just been repaired by Sony for £117. The lower lens shutter blade refused to work. So I will stay with what I have got and just use the RX100M3 as a walk about. Hopefully it will last longer that way.
  9. As most contributors know, Alamy will not allow images taken by smartphones. I wonder when this ban will be lifted. I have a feeling that this Sony sensor could make a difference. I can imagine that based on the specification below, a 17Mb image made by this sensor in a well designes smartphone surely will pass inspection unless Alamy remain against smartphones on principle. https://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sony-releases-stacked-cmos-image-sensor-for-smartphones-with-industrys-highest-48-effective-megapixels/
  10. I vaguely recall that Alamy a long time ago pronounced that only a select group of users had their zooms recorded. this was to prevent contributors from going in and zooming their images to get a better rank placement. I think that the zooms have an influence on your ranking. That will partially explain the variation on zoom ratios. If your image has not been prior zoomed then this could be because the person buying the image is not one of the select few being counted.
  11. There is just one problem for Nikon compared with Sony and Canon. They don't make their own sensors. Here is a bit from sonyalpharumors.com https://www.sonyalpharumors.com/pictures-of-d850-internal-cmos-sensor-clearly-shows-its-made-by-sony/ Top Nikon camera with a verified Sony sensor. Doubt if Sony will make a superior sensor for Nikon although I understand that Sony's fab division is separate from the Digital Imaging division. So if Nikon could design a better sensor then Sony might justs make it as long as Sony's own patents are not infringed. They are truly late with Sony having the DSC 10 and 100 series as well as A6000 series and A7/A9 full frame cameras. Everybody is now making lenses for the Sony full frame cameras. How can Nikon actually better the A7 Mk3 and the A9? Maybe a more ergonomic body, but is that enough? What is the point of offering mostly full size lenses with an adapter (at least to start with) when there are now so many lenses dedicated to the E mount? Nikon is not a giant company with endless resources. The future could be tough for them. Sony/Fuji/Pana are not going to stand still. Where is Canon on this?
  12. That is what I surmised was happening to my sales when I started this particular thread. I am evaluating the risks of simply removing this restriction. I think I will ask Alamy if they have any cases of contributors being pursued for images with no model and property releases indicated, but without the 'editorial use only' box ticked. It is encouraging to learn that some of you are carrying on with that format.
  13. Had a quick look at the Contract before reading through the whole thing (28 pages). 1.5 clearly states " You accept that you are solely and exclusively responsible for all Images that you submit and for all data that you store on Alamy’s servers. You acknowledge that Alamy does not and cannot review all Images uploaded and is not responsible for the Images. Where Alamy makes available Images this should be considered only as a courtesy and does not limit your responsibility for the Images." So, essentially they will pass any legal approach received straight to the photographer. It would be interesting to know if there are instances of contributors having been sued by the publisher trying to pass on the buck.
  14. Thanks for your replies so far. I am toying with the idea of removing the restriction on 'editorial only', but I need to re-read the agreement with Alamy first to see what liability that puts on me in this context.
  15. With the introduction of the optional 'editorial only' box I went for it across all images earlier this year. Since then I have seen a measurable reduction in sales. I suspect that images were previously sold for commercial purposes despite me showning no releases for people or property. Basically I do not want any problems with my images being sold for commercial purposes in case anyone objects and a court case or other claims are launched. I actually do not care what they are used for as long as I don't get into trouble as a result thereof. Although I am behind first the user and then Alamy I suspect they will try and pass the buck to me if the 'editorial use' box has not been ticked. Anyone with the same issue and how are you handling it? I would be keen to know. On the one hand I want to maximise sales, but not at the risk og being sued. I am an amateur without insurance for these kinds of problems.
×
×
  • 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.