Jump to content

Scott

Verified
  • Content Count

    11
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Scott

  1. I used an Indian company called ScanCafe to scan 1800 35mm slides and 4x5 negatives to TIFF. That was in 2010. Was pleased with the pricing, quality, communication and speed. Was able to review the scanned images online and approve them before they shipped CDs (or DVDs) - dont remember. Perhaps they can deliver in different ways now. All in all...no issues what so ever. I see that they are still online.
  2. Spot on Jeff. There is no data to suggest that in exchange for exclusivity, a 50/50 split has any benefit to a contributor, Or, that an exclusive license would not eventually return a 9.99$ sort of sale price.... Some stated that they are okay with this sort of split for exclusivity trade-off, in which case you maintain status quo, until Alamy decides that a 30 / 70 or worse split is need to fund operations or goose a growth initiative...
  3. Exclusivity, for those who contribute to multiple agencies or libraries, would reduce the contributor’s diversity of revenue streams and thus subject the contributor to greater, future Alamy pricing power over them, correct? Exclusivity may work when there is a guaranteed benefit or return to the contributor for not only sold image licenses but also for unsold images that they have restricted from sale through other libraries or agencies. After all, who is clairvoyant and knows what images, marked as exclusive on Alamy, would ever sell on Alamy? Alamy's current way of working regarding exclusivity forces an all or none approach by contributors with the only benefit being associated to that one out of many thousands of images actually licensed as exclusive at the expense of restricting all other image sales anywhere else. Perhaps 70/30 split (in contributors favor) for sales of all licensed images marked as exclusive in the portfolio along with the expected, enhanced licensing fees if an image is sold as exclusive. For those images not marked as exclusive, a 50/50 split and normal licensing fees apply. So, in essence, contributors get additional benefit in the form of a higher split for making their images exclusive to Alamy, sold or unsold as exclusive. Why try to claw back to a 50/50 arrangement? James was proud to say that Alamy has no debt. But from the outside looking in, eschewing a decade long run of historically low interest rates, for example, is not using all the levers of business to grow the business and do all the novel things you want to do to disrupt his industry. Private equity placements? I'm sure you are doing this, but when you see Koch making a non-controlling 500MUSD investment, you wonder why not Alamy? My point here is bootstrapping operations and growth on the backs of contributors = slow growth - to eventually be a follower v. leader, a taker v. disrupter, and I'm sure that is not the vision James had starting up.
  4. In light of the commission cut, Alamy's disregard for contributor's time to curate image galleries, the lack of leveraging AIM functionality for image search and selection, and lack of understanding on how Alamy's investment and intentions translate in increased Alamy image sales v alternatives....I will also turn off visibility and not burn anymore cycles on this. Looked interesting at first but quickly recognized another a less than half-baked solution.
  5. I wonder why Alamy did not leverage existing Alamy Image Manager's "filter and search" functionality to filter for KWs and image attributes, then allow a selection of the returned images to be assigned to a new or existing portfolio page? Alamy, through AIM's mandatory and optional data fields would make a very good start to populating and managing these portfolios. So....perhaps Alamy can better integrate the filter and search features in AIM, add a few more attribute selections (primary, secondary category, location, time for example) for a much better solution than what is there today. Seems like there is potential duplication of the "search and selection" functionality. Another option....for those of us that use Jim Keir's Alamy - Lightroom bridge plug-in, perhaps there is an opportunity to use Lightroom's DAM features to filter and assign images in LR, then "set Alamy Metadata" export feature to the desired Alamy portfolio folder. That would be for Jim to assess feasibility of their API capabilities et al. That would be nice to have. Any thoughts Jim!? Scott
  6. Hi Ed, Was wondering how your RX100/3 did in low light inside of La Parroquia? I am looking for a compact, Alamy suitable camera. I usually shoot at ISO 3200 with my D5MkIII inside churches and found that to be my limit in terms of balancing noise and shutter speed. The Sony RX100/x seems to have high marks, overall. For sure San Miguel is a beautiful city. If you want to take some side trips have a look at historic Queretaro, just 45-60 minutes away. A very photogenic city as well with its large centro historico. Scott
  7. Hi. Another update on Jim's plugin....specifically the "Set Alamy Metadata" feature. With the AIM data conversion, like some of you, I was left with tags that were duplicated, had separated multiword tags, and left orphaned annotation marks. It was a real amalgam of data conversion errors to be sure. As reported, Jim has been fixing issues with the plugin to work better with AIM. Working with Jim and team, I am now able to upload (set Alamy data) my pre-AIM LR plugin tags and supertags in order to correct the issues stated above. For those that have used this plugin prior to AIM deployment, you will find that the plugin converts your Essential and Main Keywords to Supertags and Tags, respectively. And, your original annotations " " and / or [ ][ are now all converted to [ ] to designate a multiword tag. Not to worry, this annotation is stripped out upon setting Alamy metadata. As such, for those of you that followed previous Alamy guidance and annotated multiword keywords with [ ] and " ", you will find the ability to upload these unmolested tags back to Alamy, in the way you originally placed them. Again, this assumes you used the plugin prior to AIM and that you had your Essential and Main Keywords in the plugin (fetched from Alamy). I have tested on a 21 image batch and all seem to be working very well. Big thanks to Jim and team for working with me to clean up my Alamy keywords! This helps a lot. Regards, Scott P.S. The latest verion is 1.0.6188 released May 15, 2017
  8. Hi Marvin, Here are a few bits for you to consider regarding your original post. 1. Have a look at how the IRS classifies a hobby v. business. They may still see you as a hobby should you get audited and there goes your business expense deductions. 2. I don't believe you can deduct expenses for prior years when you were doing this for a hobby, unless perhaps you can restate (refile) prior years tax returns (professional help recommended). 3. Have a look at IRS Section 179 for options to fully deduct certain business expenses in the current tax year. 4. Marrianne posted a link to the IRS small business advice PDF. That was very helpful to me getting started and to ask good questions to an accountant. 5. Don't overlook things like IRA, SEP, SIMPLE, or SOLO401K type vehicles to defer taxes until retirement when your tax rates may be lower. 6. Health premium expenses may now be deductible and if you have an High Deductible Health Plan, your HSA contributions are tax free altogether. 7. Look at various options in structuring your new business (LLC, Sole Proprietorship, C, S corp. 8. I'm not an accountant just passing along some ideas to consider. 9. Recommend a first session with an accountant who works with small business, perhaps let them do your first years return, then DIY if you feel comfortable. Regards, Scott
  9. As others reported the plugin version 1.0.4852 had fixed the login issue but I am now getting a "500" error during the upload process. The error appears to be inconsistently thrown as well. First small test batch uploaded fine. Second batch failed at the last image. And this morning, the third batch failed immediately on the first image. I noticed too, that the OL number in LR metadata is not consistent with Alamy's track submissions page. The plug-in appears to not pickup the correct OL version assigned from Alamy when it logs in but instead uses a prior one. I don't believe the OL numbering is critical to the plugin's image matching algorithm however. If you use the OL number in LR metadata, you can change it to the correct number as the plugin does not lock that field down. Anyone else see this? Not sure of any adverse affects of a wrong OL number. More probably an artifact of the larger issue with the plugin. I heard back from Jim last week, but nothing since. Would be nice to get some feedback from him, perhaps on this forum. Scott
  10. Scott

    Manage Images

    Hi, In Manage Images, I would like to see larger thumbs, or at least have a choice of...small, med, large. Helps me to more quickly select pics for batch editing. Perhaps this is related or similar to Chris' request. Scott
×
×
  • 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.