Jump to content

imageplotter

Verified
  • Content Count

    339
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by imageplotter

  1. Ditto. Image numbers up, sales volume up, revenue slowed considerably. I've adjusted accordingly. Neither stock nor news have ever been a dominant part of my overall photo business or revenue, but they were a reliable add-on, and enjoyable for some time. They no longer are, other types of photography are more profitable, enjoyable and more rewarding overall. They may carry more risks (dealing with clients directly is not always fun) I suppose that's how it goes, the trend is hard to ignore unless you put your blinkers on and pretend it's not happening. Shame, really. But life goes on. Elsewhere.
  2. Yes, as I mentioned before. Although it should be said that images (either by in-house togs, or in this case provided directly via the 'artists') are nearly always provided like that, by either the organisers, or organising PR company. That is certainly the case with most exhibitions at all of London's major museums, the same practice is also common for i.e. theatre and dance productions, major concerts, PR events etc. There are then, in addition, still press photocalls and previews where video media, agency staff and freelancers get the chance to take their own shots and file to news agencies or direct to the papers, but with context (the odd shot without may sneak in when you simply can't fit in an assistant, but it's rare and NEVER a whole set), plus, as I said, the caption would have each individual work mentioned. And they do find buyers, because they are often better or more interesting than the in-house pics. But I don't think WLPOTH did a photocall (as I mentioned, there are almost no images from any official photocalls from previous years to be found on alamy or its competitors). Some of the official photocalls are getting more and more difficult in any case, with some organisers setting ridiculous pre-conditions and contracts to be signed by all press togs as to where you can and can't file the images, and for what period of time. Often an own-goal for them, but that's another story altogether....
  3. Yes, but it's also important to stress that what we might 'want' to see as context isn't as relevant as what is required for copyright reasons or specified by the exhibititor. If they were taken at a photocall, then the PR company/exhibiting venue/artist's rep will often specify additional requirements (sometimes draconian, sometimes reasonable). Just having a black frame around a photo (which is even more tricky than a painting/other art work, as the photo can be lifted and illegally sold on as if it was a copyrighted original, rather than just an image of the work) would not be enough, and in some of these images, there is just a black frame. I don't know if there was a photocall for this one, I didn't attend it, but I suspect there wasn't - the low number of images available of that annual exhibition overall (not just on alamy) would suggest that there possibly wasn't one, especially given how heavily guarded the images are for preserving sales of NHM merchandise (books, postcards) of the exhibition and potentially the NHM in-house press pics sent out of the wider exhibition hall etc. And, as others pointed out, if these images were not from a press photocall but a regular exhibition visit, then NHM appear to not allow photography at all. (I tend to visit each year, and have certainly never taken any 'snaps' of the pics, not even with context. Can't remember what it states at the entrance but assume 'no photography' is right). The only images I have found in the press, upon brief search, are direct copies of the photos, accredited to each of the original photographers (artists) and likely sent out officially. I.e the Guardian has an online gallery of some of these from the 2019 exhibition. I didn't see any images by e.g. the PA, G***, AFP or any of the usual suspect wires who would usually be present at a press photocall alongside togs filing to alamy.
  4. No, it's not legit, imho. If those NHM pics were from a press photocall (possible, since they are dated 16th Oct) then they should still contain enough context, ie. assistant or visitors visible. (see for example, press pics of the Sony Photo Exibition images, which do have people in the images) Many of these images don't have much context, and don't even contain the name of artist (the actual wildlife photographer who created the image shown) nor the name of the picture in the caption, which would be in there if they had been genuine press images. I.e. this one http://tiny.cc/0gl0ez If you look through Alamy, you'll see that there are almost no WPOTH images in stock, for good reasons. Those few that are, are there as proper images, so may well have been placed there by the copyright holders.
  5. My capacity for 'sharing the joy' is very limited when my bottom line is hit. Strange, that.
  6. Ah, yes. Go Alamy. And to motivate us all, we'll give our directors a lovely massive pay rise, and you a lovely little cut in rates.
  7. I'm still waiting for 18 sales from May to clear, several of them live news sales. The reponse I received to my query was the usual standard email 'We're aware...'
  8. I find it a little strange that 87% of FFT's spend go to SBL. It wouldn't be my cause of choice to donate to, given my loss of income (not so good for my own urinary tract, to be honest). As you mention, the last research paper appears to have been published 2014. The research quoted for clinical trials and other research areas of focus (i.e. cancer immunotherapy) all seem more than a few years old. That doesn't reflect so well, imho.
  9. Yes, they probably should. Do the contributing agencies care? Nope. Do Alamy care? Not sure. I suspect these tons of images, particular those from the Chinese agencies, often pretty shots and fitting Alamy's 'stock and a bit of soft news weather decorative prettiness on the side' concept down to the tee. Taken in via news to further bolster stock numbers, nothing else. Just my view.
  10. It's best to store the tripod somewhere before going up the Shard, you won't be able to use it up there. If it's a travel tripod and fits in the cam bag, they usually let it through the airport style scanner in the bag, but not for use up there. Bring a black backing or better wear a black long-sleeve t-shirt, works a treat with the reflections there, which can be really bad depending on what your fellow visitors wear, stripes are particularly annoying. I used to go up there a lot for a few years with one of their annual passes but eventually got annoyed by the crowds at sunset. (black shirt also works well on the London Eye). For a reasonably undisturbed shot of the walkie talkie from the Shard, you can...umm...take it from the loos up there. No, I'm not kidding. The only place up there where you get one of the windows+view to yourself (although they can be dusty). Another nice, free semi-aerial view is from the Tate Modern Blavatnik Building viewing platform. Tate security are also not keen on tripods or lots of camera gear, but 1 bag with two bodies/lenses tucked in usually goes through ok. It can get crowded. Used to have good sunset views also, but the recent architectural marvels on its western side are now largely blocking that. The Sky Garden is lovely, if you're just one person you can often get in with a little wait without the pre-booked free tickets (which seem to book a long way in advance), but it's not guaranteed and at busy times they may tell you to come back and try again a few hours later if you haven't booked. The good thing is that un-ticketed, you can stay as long as you like (unless they have an event). It has reflections as well, but they're less tricky than the Shard's (depending on time of day/light). Plenty of tall buildings in the City and elsewhere also have fab views (friends who work in office towers blocks in handy), particularly the roof terrace bars, too many to list but there are plenty of listings online and on a warm summer's eve, most don't mind you taking a few shots if you consume a cocktail or three. Hyde Park Hilton's bar and resto also has lovely view, ditto places like Duck and Waffle ...but they all come with a hefty price tag of drinks/meal. Have a great day in London on Saturday. BTW. Trooping the Colour, EID Festival Trafalgar Square and the Naked Bike Ride are all on (and more)! 🙂 PS. Re London Eye - on a Saturday the queues are very long. Also, whichever time you go, if it's a sunny day, you'll be shooting directly into the sun on either the left or right side. And your fellow passengers can be a pain, many tourists are ruthless when it comes to sticking their selfie sticks absolutely everywhere and not moving an inch.
  11. 😂 True, they may have been ancient live news usages. Thing is - without the correct usage date range, I can't tell. Perhaps I unknowingly captured Jacob RM going past in his horse drawn carriage.
  12. Has everyone else just had editorial website usages dropping in with a start date 01 Jan 1900 and end date 01 Jan 1905? Of course there is a chance that the dusty Kodak Brownie in my grandfather's camera collection did produce some extraordinary shots, which are now finally being paid for (we all know that some publications like to take a flexible approach to reporting sales and Alamy payment terms). But I suspect it is more likely that this is a bug or error. Is it one specific publication/publisher?
  13. It does say that on my FileZilla as well, every time (I regularly update it, so don't think that is the issue). I must admit I just ignore it. The message doesn't seem to pop up with other FTP connections I file to, but it could just be a bug, not sure. Doesn't seem to have caused any issues so far. (as far as I can tell...)
  14. A lot of them now also attach a voice recording instead of written captions when they file through to the wire agencies. That's a nice, quick way (although not without pitfalls regarding names/spelling), but of course also then requires work on the agency side again, which isn't realistic with Alamy. The other thing is that it requires enough manpower agency-side to identify, follow and anticipate some of the less obvious, less predictable news events, especially in London, and it would require co-ordinating the available togs more on those breaking news stories that weren't in anyone's schedule at the start of the day. The larger agencies simply have that manpower.
  15. That's not true. Other, larger news pic agencies do provide a detailed by-pic-by-publication/client list of sales at the end of the month. And yes, some people do sell directly, and very successfully. But they tend to be the people who know the picture editors, they're often ex-staffers or have been in news photography for many year.
  16. I agree, although I wouldn't call it 'part of the fun'. Sifting through scraps of other people's detailed schedules for cookie crumbs (a little thanks to B. here, who let's me photograph his screen with 2 pages of his editor's 'notes for the day' occasionally) isn't fun. Unless you can afford to just do it for the fun. It encourages what I have always thought - that Alamy rely on hobbyists, 60+ enthusiasts, retirees and a guy in Wales with orange filters, plus a few pet owners. And then wonder why they're not getting timely, high qual 'news' images. The reality is that nobody can make any "decent" living off freelance news images alone, unless they also supply some of the larger agencies and wires on a freelance or day rate basis. Take away transportation cost, costly purchase of new field laptops every couple of years (and constant use of laptops in outdoor conditions, sitting on pavements or alternatively consuming in cafes 2-3 times a day don't do laptops any favours), software, much higher than average wear and tear (rain, cold, dust on frequent lens changes, resting on dirty surfaces, knocked about in protests and by other photographers) of 2-3 camera bodies and 4-5 lenses or more, spares, flashes, batteries and cards, wifi contract for filing, image storage devices, backpack upgrades, time to back up and update...not so cheap. All for a pittance that you are left with if you take off all those costs. Even those that are highly successful freelancers, which I am not, will have to admit that their 'salary' is laughable. Half a day of decent corporate shooting gets me more than if I had 2 front pages that day. Every day. Nuff said. I did find it interesting for a while to do news as a sideline in addition to other photography work, see things like the Downing Street press machine, events. But for such little money, I'd rather invest in winning more business in other pockets of photography. As I said, it's different if you're a hobbyist or retiree and do it for the kicks.
  17. To be fair to Alamy (and I often criticise) - they do feature in the pic-of-the-day galleries quite regularly, actually, given the size and geographic limitations of the agency. There are two in the Times Online gallery today, even if they're the cute-dog-and-sunset variety Alamy are famed for. (one's opinions on the ever-repeated use of the very same dogs/sunset location can differ, but they are feeding a demand, having created the demand in the first place) Although, given the choice, I'd rather take a small print over the online pic-of-day galleries (grateful for either, obvs), because online pays less. And half the time, the publications don't put the tog credit in. Frankly, it's barely worth it financially and will likely only get worse in the next few years. You cannot compare the reach, manpower and size of operation of the big wires like Reuters, PA, AFP, AP, or compete with them directly, especially not on breaking news. Unless you happen to be the only one there, they'll always win because their togs file directly from camera and often don't need to caption/edit the image prior to filing.
  18. The Times love doing this because they get expired live news cheap as chips.
  19. Go direct to the Sun and don't even think of giving a cut to agencies. 😂
  20. Oh no. 😭 My only hope of ever finding Times pics (since the Murdoch publications aren't on PressReader). But I can totally understand your decision, I probably won't say more than that publicly. And it must have been a lot of effort going though these papers and posting the results - many thanks for all your work, much appreciated!
  21. Ditto. My trust is lost. For the first few years, all my images were exclusive to Alamy, all my news images were exclusive, too. Foolish. It has been a learning curve, and I will never trust Alamy again.
×
×
  • 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.